Zardari phobia and hostile col-anchors

=

For years at least some of our anchors have claimed that the Mehsud militants are backed by foreign enemies of Pakistan. But neither the war in Waziristan nor the terrorist attacks in Rawalpindi have received the kind of attention that befits them. For the overzealous TV anchors, the real issue is how to embarrass President Zardari. Some of them claim they have the establishments backing in doing so. (Source)

Abbas Athar requests everyone to pray for the swift recovery of those col-anchors (pro-Taliban or pro-establishment) who are currently suffering from Zardari phobia.

In the words of Sadiq Saleem:
Those striving for a Constitutional knockout of President Zardari need to reconsider whether they will accomplish anything even if they succeed. The first consequence of such a knockout would be to give the PPP and the Bhutto-Zardari family the mantle of victimhood once again. After the initial grumbling is over, the People’s Party will most likely rally round the family that has given the greatest sacrifices for it. Even if Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani becomes part of the knockout plan, which is highly unlikely, he would be reduced to the same position as Farooq Leghari was within months of his action against Benazir Bhutto in 1996.

If the fingerprints of the establishment are found in President Zardari’s decapitation, as the anti-Zardari anchors and columnists claim, it would revive in all likelihood the anti-establishment polarization that the military sought to end by withdrawing from politics after the eclipse of General Pervez Musharraf. In any case, why should the establishment become part of an anti-Zardari game plan if all it would do is bring Mr Nawaz Sharif to power?

The issue of civil-military relations will certainly not be resolved to the establishments satisfaction because if Mr. Nawaz Sharif rises to power with the weakening of a Zardari-led PPP then he is unlikely to be more deferential to GHQ.

Since the unfortunate era of General Ziaul Haq the Pakistani establishment has had a pro-Jihad faction that operates politically through the media and various political actors. These people did not respect General Asif Nawaz, General Abdul Waheed, or General Jehangir Karamat. General Pervez Musharraf pleased them by championing adventurism in Kargil but lost their backing in the post-9/11 context. Now, too, it is not General Ashfaq Kayani who wants an army (or establishment) role in politics. It is the beneficiaries of Jihad Inc., including the many media figures beholden to the Jihadis, who want to shoot at a liberal government using the establishments shoulder.

If Pakistan will gain nothing from upsetting the applecart, why are some people so insistent on continuing to distract the nation from fighting terrorism and from sympathizing with terrorist victims? Why not allow the Parliament to decide matters even if it is with a single vote? Why don’t the TV anchors ask Imran Khan how he can judge the government’s actions and claim to speak for the people without being elected? Why is every initiative of PML-N a media initiative and never brought to the elected chambers? Is it not the purpose of democracy to find a way to get past issues instead of getting bogged down by them?

The media, especially its electronic manifestation, seems like a bunch of quacks (fake doctors) that keep generating campaign after campaign against someone they dislike (President Zardari). It is time the people fight back and say let there be some sanity in the country. Let priorities be priorities.

"Media Terminators" in Pakistan
By Tahir Sarwar Mir


Col-anchors will never raise the following issues (courtesy "revolution"):

Where are CJ Iftikhar Chauhary's famous suo moto actions?
Why is Amina Masood Janjua still standing outside Supreme Court Building?
Why no one got punished for November 3 and May 12 actions?
Why No suo moto against foreign interventions in Islamabad streets?