Inside the glass house

NEW YORK - How credible is a world leader's judgment when he publicly embraces a universally-acknowledged military dictator as "truly somebody who believes in democracy"? Last week President George W. Bush virtually went into raptures over the Pakistani President when he said that Pervez Musharraf hasn't crossed any legitimate boundaries to be deemed a political outcast -- even as the US is aggressively engaged in converting the world into a huge multi-party democracy.

In a TV interview, Bush said that Musharraf hasn't "crossed the line". "As a matter of fact, I don't think he will cross any lines. We didn't necessarily agree with his decision to impose emergency rule, and hopefully he'll get rid of the rule."

Bush's endorsement of Musharraf is no better than his ecstatic support for successive Iraqi leaders, as well as his support for beleaguered Afghan President Hamid Karzai, whose survival is due, not to the will of the people, but because of the protection he gets from a phalanx of body guards and mercenaries, courtesy of the United States.

After meeting with the Russian President about six years ago, Bush famously said he saw something in common with Vladimir Putin, with whom he could share democratic values. "I was able to get a sense of his soul, a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country," Bush said back in 2001.

But six years later, Bush's judgment has come under fire as Putin has cracked down on the judiciary and the media, and has jettisoned the rule of law-- much to the disappointment of the US. As Russia moves away from multi-party democracy, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was quoted as saying: "It is important that Russia make clear to the world that it is intent on strengthening the rule of law, strengthening the role of an independent judiciary, permitting a free and independent press to flourish. These are all the basics of democracy." But Putin has no such plans.

Bush's support for the increasingly authoritarian regime of Musharraf has also drawn stinging criticism from several US Congressmen.

Perhaps the sharpest reaction came from presidential aspirant Senator Joe Biden — chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a potential Secretary of State in a Democratic administration — whose response was laced with political sarcasm.

"What exactly would it take for the president (Bush) to conclude Musharraf has crossed the line? Suspend the constitution? Impose emergency law? Beat and jail his political opponents and human rights activists?" Biden asked. "He's already done all that. If the president sees Musharraf as a democrat, he must be wearing the same glasses he had on when he looked in Vladimir Putin's soul," he added. Biden was dead on target.

Musharraf is virtually holding the US for ransom primarily due to two reasons. The Pakistani President has been viewed by the Bush administration as a "loyal ally" in the US-led global war against terrorism. If it pushes Musharraf to the edge, the US loses a trusted ally, notwithstanding his ineffectiveness in curbing terrorism in his own backyard. Never mind the rest of the world.

Secondly, Musharraf has guaranteed the safety of his arsenal of nuclear weapons as long as he is in power. But if Musharraf is ousted, the nukes may be up for grabs. In such an unlikely event, the US has to have contingency plans to ensure the "security" of Pakistan's nuclear weapons.

Or, in the alternative, fall back on the Israelis, described as the world's nuclear policemen, to take out the nuclear facilities, as they did with Iraq in the 1980s. Or as they did last month -- attack a potential nuclear facility in Syria. Meanwhile, a pliant Supreme Court ruled last week on the legitimacy of Musharraf's presidency for another five-year term. But if it does materialise, Musharraf is expected to shed his military uniform and become a civilian president. The former Supreme Court, which was expected to deny legitimacy to Musharraf, was disbanded for obvious reasons.

But all this has not played well with the 53-member Commonwealth which last week suspended Pakistan's membership, at a ministerial meeting in Uganda. The suspension will be lifted if and when Pakistan returns to democracy, including the holding of free elections and an end to emergency rule.

This is the second time that Pakistan has been temporarily drummed out of the Commonwealth. Under similar circumstances years ago, both Zimbabwe and Fiji were also suspended from the Commonwealth either for military rule or for subverting democracy.

It's Bush-Mush democracy, stupid