Mediaboss Marketing

Head of PPP Media Cell

Party will not be over and, in fact, will remain in the saddle if the prime minister is pleased to accord favourable consideration to the Oppositions only demand put forward recently. Opposition Leader Syed Khursheed Shah, while addressing the joint press conference on behalf of the Opposition parties in Islamabad, has suggested the viable way out (resignation) to the prime minister to save the country from the probable horrendous aftermaths of the brewing political crisis. It will also ensure the continuity of the democratic system representing all the stakeholders and indeed win win situation. It is a fair demand under the circumstances to pre-empt ugly political turmoil that the country cannot withstand due to multiple challenges it is already confronted with. In case of inaction on his part, the resultant sharp political division -- wrought with dangers to democracy and indeed to the federation -- may not be averted. Unfortunately, the prime minister has decided to dig in heels and vowed not to resign no matter what. It means the stage is set for the long haul containing the potential of collective political redundancy during the unforeseeable future. This must not revisit Pakistans political horizon. The big political minds are expected to exhibit the spirit of statesmanship and stop well short of blundering into a disaster. The people of Pakistan are looking up to them. They must not be frustrated. They had enough of dictatorships and tyrannical rulers in the past those bequeathed nothing but inflicted numerous indignities and humiliations on the nation.

Democratic politics is politics of pluralism in essence. Insistence of imposition of self- righteousness is anathema to its spirit. In democracy and in its best democratic practices, the spirit of accommodation and tolerance are the underpinnings for its development on sustainable basis. It may be pointed out that the combined Opposition parties have convinced the PTI to climb down from its demand for immediate holding of elections. The PTI seemingly also agreed not to insist on the disqualification of host of Sharif family members and other stalwarts of the PML-N including the incumbent finance minister. This flexibility may be appreciated and reciprocated by the PML-N leadership in equal measure. The top leadership may review its decision and consider seriously reaching out to the Opposition parties to find a common ground to more forward positively and objectively. The misplaced concept of invincibility may give space to objectivity and rationality with a tinge of pragmatism.

Opposition leader Syed Khursheed Shah deserves kudos for rallying around the rest of the opposition parties on the stated position of the PPP to deal with the political crisis that had surfaced after the submission of the JIT report in the Supreme Court. The PPP had taken the principled stand opposing the holding of snap elections because the party wanted the incumbent assemblies to complete their constitutional tenure and elections should be held in 2018. The rest of the Opposition parties also deserve appreciation for demonstrating sense of immense responsibility in formulating the collective demand of the resignation of the prime minister and refrain from insisting on other demands. It may be recalled the PPPs leadership had already synchronized its stance before the meeting of Opposition parties on the same lines to ensure the continuity of democratic system as its only top most priority. It made sense because the incumbent prime minister had lost the locus standi after the joint investigation report of the (JIT) because the countrys chief executives constitutional office cannot bear the burden of the persona devoid of the moral and legal authority.

Unfortunately, the overt and covert hype created by the Muslim League-N ministers and leaders against the JIT was indicative of their belief of fighting the lost battle the Party is over, Their tirade against the members of JIT with lot of sound and fury signified nothing but their sheer trepidation anticipating the end of the road. The report submitted probing the allegations of money laundering trail, and the ownership of expensive London property, tax evasion and forgery by the family in particular seemed difficult to rebut in the face of evidences reportedly supported by forensic underpinnings. The loin had been caged in. It may be more dignified and befitting on his part if the writing on the wall is read correctly to face the consequences. He may watch and defend his case with grace in the court room instead of sitting in the Prime Minister House pacing back and forth.

Ironically, he is having the taste of his own medicine. The prime minister may recall his juggernaut in lawyers outfit when he filed a petition in the Supreme Court against the PPP government in Memogate scandal praying for the dismissal of the PPP government led by Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani. His move, notwithstanding his written commitment not to endeavour to destabilise the incumbent government as enshrined in the Charter of Democracy (COD) signed in May 2006, was mind blowing and indeed betrayal. It was his sheer political opportunism. Now, he is in a closed alley. He has to face the emerging situation upfront with requisite courage keeping in view the bitter ground realities those cannot be glossed over by adding more smoke or defiance.

The present state of affairs is not tenable and it has to settle down either way, but may not be in favour of the prime minister. It calls upon the ruling political leadership in particular to take bold political move to deflect the grim political scenario in the offing. His stepping down and replacing with his own Party leader may not affect the continuity of the political system and the state affairs will remain normal. A futuristic and pro-active thinking now on his part may mitigate the degree of umbrage inflicted by Panama Papers. It may also whether the storm without hurting the edifice of democratic dispensation to the utter frustration of those who are sitting on the fence with vengeance to enter in the corridors of power by hook and crook. Make no mistake. PML-N top leaderships procrastination in taking the political initiative may create the space for those who otherwise do not see their prospects of grabbing the reign of the country in the face of nations consensus on democracy.

According to the majority of views and news in the media, JIT report is a clear-cut indictment on the prime minister and his children that cannot be wished away. The prime ministers moral authority has been bitterly bruised as a result, and it is extremely difficult for him to run the affairs of the state with his tarnished image. The other political forces of the country may also facilitate him in taking the right decision in the largest interest of the democracy and the country because the confrontation may draw the situation closer to repeating the chequered political history of the country.

They are supposed to be matured people after going through the bitter experiences in the past. The politicians should prove their worth as the master of knowing the art of possible. God forbid, their failure will be the failure of democracy, and the future of the country will be embroiled in deep trouble. In that grim case, they will also stand nowhere as the ground from beneath their feet may be cut off resultantly for the unforeseeable future.

The PPP will never compromise on democracy. It played a leading role in saving democracy from those who were desperately waiting for the Third Umpire during the sit-in politics to escort them to the corridors of power. PPP spearheaded the campaign to put cold water on their pernicious plans against democracy and the country. For PPP, democracy is everything. PPP is bound to play the role of saving democracy in case of dangers. Its unequivocal commitment to democracy --- stemming from the martyrdoms of Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and Shaheed Benazir Bhutto including its workers -- is non-negotiable. PPP cannot afford to see the other side when dangers to democracy in various forms and manifestations are inching towards with tainted intentions. Its leadership is totally aware of the forces those tend to contemplate to drive from the rear and thus take the control of the driving seat. But, PPP is determined not only to resist and scuttle their perfidious designs but also expose their bare-knuckled world of politics.

Now, PPP considers that the stepping down of the prime minster is in the largest interest of the democracy. The PPP leadership has been urging the prime minister to lie low and nominate his substitute to get the air out of the sails of the anti-democratic forces those are active again to caste long shadow on the political future of the country and the federation. Those party leaders who have been advising the prime minister to hold his grounds no matter what may be loyal but they are surely not wise as they are paving the way to the political hell with good intentions. They are hostage of their poor judgment based on their state of denial of the currents and under-currents of the todays politics. Even, Javed Hashmi, his ardent well-wisher, has given the right advice at the right time urging the prime minister to step aside. He has also suggested couple of names of his possible successor. PML-N has comfortable majority in the House and retaining the Party government will not be problem at all. But, inordinate delay in moving the right direction may prove fatal for the future of democracy in this country.

The Party will be over then without a shred of doubt.

[emailprotected]

The rest is here:
PPP to never compromise on democracy - The News International

If one good thing has comeout ofDonald Trumps presidency,it is the increasing clarity about the current state of democracy in American and the countrys drift toward tyranny. The election of Trump wasa kind ofwake-up call for many Americanswho had become complacent or apatheticduring the Barack Obama years, and it generateda widespread sense that something is profoundly wrong with our democracy.

Not surprisingly, some aspectsof our political system have received a lot more attention (and blame) than other aspects.After last Novemberselection, for example,most Democrats were focusedprimarilyon the Electoral College. Thiswasto be expectedafter aRepublican candidate who lost the popular vote was elected presidentby that archaic and undemocraticinstitutionfor the second time in less than two decades.

For the first month or soafter the election, the Electoral College was probablythe most widely discussed issue regardingAmerican democracy. Some liberals even held out unrealistic hopes that the Electoral College would deny Trump the presidency. After that body made Trumps election official in December, attention shiftedto another major story: How the Russianshacked our election and underminedourdemocracy.

That popular phraseis somewhatmisleading, considering that there is no evidence that Russian hackers compromised vote counts or voter data. But there is little doubt that Russia sought to meddle in the 2016 election by hackingand releasing emails from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clintons campaign. This scandal has arguably said more, however, about the negligence of the DNC and the Clinton operation thanthe state of American democracy. The hack into Clinton campaign chair John Podestas computer, for example, apparently resulted from an embarrassingtypoby a Clinton aide,whoaccidentallytoldPodestathat a phishing email asking for his password was legitimate rather than illegitimate.

It is unfortunate, then, that the Russian interference asdisturbing as it is has ledmany liberals tosee Russia as the greatest threat to our democracy. According to a recent Pew Research Centersurvey, about 40 percent of Democrats nowbelieve that Russia is the greatest threat to the United States.This is troubling for a number of reasons, particularlybecause it distractsfrom more legitimate (and internal) threats to our democratic process, while giving the false impression thatAmericandemocracy wasin good shapebefore the Russkies came along andhacked our election.

Trumps victoryseemed to open many eyes to the fact that democracy is in trouble but on the other hand, the Russia scandalhas done moreto obscurethis reality than anything else. If anything it has led to the idealization of a deeply flawed and undemocratic political system, while renewing the myth of Americas commitment to democracy.

Of course, it is perhapsmisleading to say that the United States political system is flawed, as it was undemocratic by design. The founding fathers were notoriously waryof democracy, and as white landowning (and slave-owning) elites they deviseda political system that favored white (male) landowning elites. As historian Woody Holton explainsin his 2007 book, Unruly Americans and the Origins of the Constitution, the Constitution was essentially a responsetotoo muchdemocracy:

The wave of insurrections and threats that swept over the United States during the 1780s and more important, the [tax] relief legislation that the rebels managed to extract from lawmakers and local officials convinced many of the nations more prominent citizens that the time had come to launch a rebellion of their own.

The form of government that resulted from this rebellion was meantto, in the words ofthe Constitutions authors, secure the public good and private rights against the danger of [the majority], and at the same time preserve the spirit and the form of popular government. Deeply distrustful of the masses, the framers agreed that enlightened statesmen were alone fit to govern, and for the first century of the countrysexistence only white male property owners were eligible to vote in most states, andonly members of the House of Representatives were directly elected byvoters (until 1913, U.S. senators were elected by state legislatures). The Electoral College isa recurring reminder of this original hostility towarddemocracy.

It is worth remembering these undemocratic origins today, because after more than a century of progress and democratic reforms the country has reversed course in recent decades. Big money has flooded the political arena, voter suppression has been restored across the country, and gerrymandering has grown so extreme that politicians can almost literally choose their constituents (rather than voters choosing their representatives). All of this was made possible under the political system that our democracy-averse founders created more thantwo centuries ago.

Indeed,the most undemocratic branch of government has been responsible for much of this devastation. Over the past decade the Supreme Court has essentially legalized political bribery with rulings like Citizens United and McCutcheon v. FEC, whiledismantling important protectionsimplemented by the Voting Rights Act, resulting in asurge of voter suppressionlaws across the country.

Americas political system was designed to limit the political influence of the majority, which makesthis regression over the past few decadesunsurprising. Butthe framers also crafted a flexibledocument that couldbeaccommodated to times and events, as the first attorney general, Edmund Randolph, put it. As timeprogressed, democratic reforms were introduced andsocial movements transformed the countrysdeeply undemocratic government. What this means, of course, is that the currentdrift toward anoligarchic form of governmentcan be reversed but only when there are popular social movements that demand true democracy, as did popularmovements of the past.

The election of Donald Trump has instilled a new sense of urgency in people to act, and the Trump administration is rightfully seen as an existential threat to our democracy. (The administrations recent formation of a voter fraud commission, led by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, whom the ACLU hascalledthe king of voter suppression, is further proof of this threat.) But a lot of this energyhas been wasted on fruitless and self-indulgentendeavors, such as the quixotic effort to recruit Hamilton electors to refuseTrump the presidencyor callsto impeach the presidentfor his unproven acts oftreason.

In the era of Trump, it is more important than ever to think critically, and to recognize that Donald Trump is not the causeof our ailing democracy, but a symptom of it. Trumps impeachment or resignation, taken in isolation, would do little to reverse our slide intotyranny. As the Russia scandal continues to pick up steam with thelatest bombshellon Donald Trump Jr.s potentially unlawful meetingwith a Russian lawyer,it is worth rememberingthat American billionaire donors and corporate lobbyistsare still a much greater threat to our democracy than Russian hackers.

Visit link:
American democracy is in big trouble but Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump aren't to blame - Salon

Alexey Sergienko with his artwork. The Republicans will be more desperate than ever to retain their power. If the Democrats win just one chamber, the landscape will be transformed. Photograph: Olga Maltseva/AFP/Getty

In November next year the UnitedStates will hold its midterm elections. Every seat in the House of Representatives, and a third of the seats in the Senate, will be up for grabs. For the Democratic party the elections represent a desperately anticipated opportunity to break the Republicans complete control of the federal government. If historical midterm trends and the votingpatterns of recent special elections hold up, Democrats have a fighting chance of winning back the House, and an outsideshot at the Senate.

The Republicans will be more desperate than ever to retain their power. If the Democrats win just one chamber, the political landscape will be transformed. In addition to blocking the GOPs legislative agenda, Democrats will forcefully scrutinise Russias interference with the 2016 elections and investigate President Trumps remarkable commercialisation of his office. Impeachment of the Republican president will become a real possibility. Everything depends on the wishes of the American voters in 2018.

Or does it? There is a third, even more momentous scenario: another Russian cyber-offensive sways the outcome of a US election in accordance with the wishes of Russia, not American voters. What is being done to prevent this?

After emails revealed that Russian actors colluded with Donald Trump Jr in June 2016 as part of Russia and its governments support for Mr Trump, it is clearer than ever that the Russian active measures cyber-warfare and campaigns of propaganda and disinformation seriously affected the 2016 elections. Fake news and bogus comments were disseminated on news and social media platforms, and cyber-attacks were used to tactically leak internal Democratic party communications. The voting systems of at least 39 states were penetrated by hackers.

There is no evidence (maybe because no voting machines have been examined) that the hackers changed vote tallies. The US may not be so lucky in 2018. According to the congressional testimony of the cyber-security expert Alex Halderman, Americas enemies could quite feasibly tamper with the voting apparatus to invisibly cause any candidate to win. The American intelligence community asserts that Russia, given its success in 2016, will almost certainly be back, perhaps more aggressively andpotently than ever.

On Thursday the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee wrote to its Republican counterpart, the NRCC, requesting a joint effort to protect the 2018 elections from cyber-attacks. It also asked the committee to give a steadfast commitment that it will refrain from the use of any stolen or altered documents or strategic information as part of any past or potential future hack on our committee or campaigns. The NRCC has yet to respond.

In more normal times the Russian national security threat would elicit an immediate bipartisan response. Proportionate sanctions would be imposed and maintained as a punishment and deterrent. Steps would be taken to secure and audit voting machinery and voter registration bases, with paper ballots introduced if necessary. Relevant intelligence would be collected and coordinated by federal and state authorities united by a desire to protect American voters.

But these are abnormal times. Republicans have just voted to defund the election assistance commission, the federal agency responsible for electoral security; and, whether in Washington or in stategovernments, they have done nothing to suggest that they view hostile election interference as apressing and serious problem.

Republicans have just voted to defund the election assistance commission, the agency responsible for electoral security

Then theres Donald Trump, the Republican president. He recently tweeted that Russian interference was all a big Dem HOAX!, and at last weeks G20 meeting he accepted Vladimir Putins assertion that Russia hadnt meddled with the US election. At the same meeting, the parties agreed to set up a US-Russian unit to guard against election hacking a proposal so counterintuitive that even Republican senators have ridiculed it, for now.

The unstated reality here is that Russian meddling with US elections is a politic phrase. Russian meddling actually refers to Russia unlawfully participating in a US election on behalf of the Republicans. It should not be forgotten that almost a dozen Democratic House candidates were also attacked and damaged by Russian measures. Asking Republicans to stop this happening again is asking them to deprive themselves of a potentially crucial electoral ally.

It may be argued that this is all a bit too dark. Whereas many Republicans could more or less plausibly claim to have been unaware of the gravity of the 2016 attacks, that claim wouldnt work in 2018. They would be seen to have knowingly, indeed culpably, permitted the Russians to illegally assist them. That would not be politically tenable.

The problem is that political tenability is largely determined by the electoral victors; and the Republicans, if they are the beneficiaries of a rigged midterm vote, will have the authority to decide if their own power is tenable and if it isnt. This is a win-at-all-costs party that ruthlessly suppresses votes and gerrymanders districts; has brazenly stolen a supreme court seat; has set up an election integrity commission to combat the nonexistent problem of massive voter fraud; and (as were seeing in the attempted passage of the American health care act) has abandoned the basic norms of truthfulness and good faith in congressional cooperation, on which the American political system depends. If Russia is ready and willing to alter vote tallies in favour of the GOP, does anyone really believe that Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, Mike Pence or Donald Trump would voluntarily stop it?

The truth of the matter is that unless Republican politicians are pressured into taking prompt and effective defensive measures (paper ballots, for instance), we can look forward, in 2018, to a repetition of 2016. It will be the Democrats v the Republicans and an enormously well-funded battalion of foreign hackers and propagandists.

The beauty of this scenario, from a Republican point of view, is that collusion will not even be required. TheRussian offensive last year was a dry run for future offensives. Next time round, their assistance will arrive like manna from heaven, only more effectively.

Were a de facto GOP-Moscow alliance once again to win a national US election, the incentive to repeat and, if necessary, strengthen the formula in 2020 would be even more powerful. It goes without saying that Americas old experiment with democracy will, by this point, have come to a complete halt.

Read the original here:
Be wary: Trump and Putin could yet bring democracy to a halt - The Guardian

If this attempted coup was to give way to a true democracy Turkey needed to elucidate properly what happened on the night of 15 July. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoan speaks during a ceremony marking the last years failed coup. Photograph: AFP/Getty Images

Today marks the first anniversary of a heinous attempted coup in Turkey. A group of soldiers, belonging to Fethullah Glens network, led an attempt to overthrow Turkish democracy. The attempt foundered in the face of the resistance of our people and the overwhelming majority of the Turkish armed forces. There were 249 people who lost their lives in the events of 15 July. Elected representatives rushed to the parliament to defend our democracy. MPs from my party were at the forefront of this effort. I immediately condemned the coup attempt and instructed our members to defend the parliament. Government sources and media circulated my condemnation message all night so it was this unified stance that helped to secure the coups failure.

The next day could have been the start of a new and democratic era in Turkey. Instead, in the year since, Turkish democracy has given way to a near-dictatorial regime. Recep Tayyip Erdoan, the president, exploited the crisis to declare a state of emergency, led a purge against all oppositional voices and started ruling by decree.

If we want to eradicate the coups detat from Turkeys future what needs to be done is the very opposite. Coups do not take place in countries where democratic institutions are strong, where parliamentary supervision, judicial control and transparency provided by a free media prevent abuses of power and where there is a societal consensus against the use of violence to solve problems.

All these tenets of democracy have been severely weakened in Turkey over the past year. After an illegitimate referendum, held under the state of emergency and in breach of Turkish electoral laws and international standards, the ruling Justice and Development party (AKP) imposed a sui generis political system worthy of an authoritarian state, and bearing no resemblance to the presidential systems of democratic countries.

This system enables the president to appoint indirectly all judges and prosecutors. In any event, any judge who contradicts the government faces the risk of immediate removal and even arrest. Parliaments powers of supervision are seriously reduced. Even debating this becomes absurd as 12 MPs, including one from my party, are currently in prison. Similarly, since the declaration of the state of emergency, 150 journalists and numerous academics and public servants, in total more than 50,000 people, have been jailed.

Secondly, if this attempted coup was to give way to a true democracy Turkey needed to elucidate properly what happened on the night of 15 July. Unfortunately, our attempts at doing this have been blocked by the government. A parliamentary commission set up with this mandate could not question the chief of joint staff and the head of national intelligence. The limited information that we have is insufficient to pinpoint the true identity of those behind the attempted overthrow. Moreover, we also need to hold to account not only those who are criminally liable but also those who are politically responsible. We need to point out that almost all the generals who are currently in prison were promoted to that rank by the AKP. The ruling party supported the Glenist networks against their opponents, in government, in the bureaucracy and in business for years. They fell apart in 2012-13 not because of a conflict of principle, but because of a conflict of interest. The true history of 15 July cannot be written without this political background.

Finally, the government argues that it has been adopting these new measures to defend democracy. Imprisoning MPs, journalists, academics, judges or employing widespread torture is not a defence of democracy. Labelling at least half of your population as terrorist is not a defence of democracy. And concentrating power in the hands of one person without any checks or balances is an assault on the very notion of democracy.

See the original post here:
In the year since Turkey's failed coup, democracy has become near dictatorship - The Guardian

Aung San Suu Kyi may have won international acclaim for advocating human rights and democracy in her native Myanmar, but since becoming the countrys de facto leader 15 months ago, she has done little to protect the human rights of the stateless Rohingya Muslim minority there. Long a target of persecution, the countrys estimated 1 million Rohingya live mostly in the Rakhine state in impoverished villages. About 120,000 of them have ended up in wretched displaced persons camps.

Now, in another alarming move, Suu Kyis government has refused to allow a U.N. fact-finding team to come into the country to investigate reports of human rights abuses by security forces in Rakhine against the Rohingya. The decision to deny visas to members of the mission, established by the U.N.s Human Rights Council earlier this year, seems more in step with the repressive military regime that Myanmar used to be than the fledgling democracy it now prides itself on being. Suu Kyi and her government should immediately reverse course and let the U.N. human rights mission into the country to investigate.

The latest wave of violence started last fall after armed men, believed to be connected to a militant Rohyinga group, attacked border guard outposts on Oct. 9, killing nine police officers. In response, the Myanmar government instituted a massive crackdown in the area that included hundreds of arrests. Police officers and soldiers allegedly conducted a months-long campaign of terror, according to reports gathered by human rights groups and the United Nations, indiscriminately killing hundreds, raping and abusing women and children and burning down homes. As many as 90,000 Rohingya have fled their villages since last fall. Investigating all this is the goal of the fact-finding mission.

Human Rights Watch, an international advocacy group, has decried Myanmars refusal to grant visas. Even the Trump administration, so reticent to wade into human rights controversies that might cause political fallout, has called on the government of Myanmar also known as Burma to cooperate with the United Nations. The international community cannot overlook what is happening in Burma, said Nikki Haley, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations.

Suu Kyi and other government officials have dismissed the U.N. request, saying the government is doing its own investigation. Suu Kyi has steadfastly tried not to alienate those in the Buddhist-majority country who maintain that the Rohingya are in the country illegally. She has said that allowing in the U.N. team will only heighten tensions in Rakhine.

Actually, one sure way to raise tensions is for Myanmar to continue treating the Rohingya so badly (denying them access to healthcare and education as well as citizenship) that more of them become radicalized. In the last week, the government has opened Rakhine to a group of foreign journalists (with government escorts) and a human rights investigator for the United Nations (who is reportedly not touring all of Rakhine.) Thats good, but thats not enough. The government of Myanmar needs to allow the full U.N. fact-finding mission unfettered access to Rakhine to show that it has changed not only its leaders, but the way they govern as well.

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook.

Go here to read the rest:
If Myanmar really wants to be considered a democracy, it needs to ... - Los Angeles Times