Pak media welcomes decision against Emergency

ISLAMABAD: The decision by Pakistan's military leader not to impose a state of emergency was broadly welcomed on Friday with calls for elections and stepped-up operations against militants in border regions.   

Newspaper editorials attacked emergency rule as being against the interests of the nation and called on the government of President Pervez Musharraf to secure a public mandate via the ballot box to tackle existing problems from a position of strength. 
  
"The threats facing the nation are grave, and only a government armed with a mandate from the people -- a mandate secured through a fair and free election -- can stem the tide of extremism and meet the threats to Pakistan's sovereignty from many quarters," said Dawn newspaper.   

Musharraf on Thursday decided against declaring a state of emergency after mulling it over with advisers for two days amid what senior government ministers had said were "internal and external threats".   

Sources close to the president said on Thursday his decision to reject the advice of political allies on imposing emergency rule was based on his commitment to elections that are slated for early next year.   

President George W. Bush on Thursday added to US pressure on Musharraf by calling on him to hold elections and deal more forcefully with Al-Qaeda and Taliban militants who use Pakistan as a base for operations.   

Washington has accused Islamabad of not doing enough to cull militants in the mountain regions bordering Afghanistan and Pakistan, and unilateral strikes have been threatened.   

The News said that Musharraf's only motive for declaring an emergency would have been to shore up his shaky presidency, and added there was no moral basis for such a move.   

"Even a lay observer can tell that the real motive behind imposing the emergency would be to give the president some breathing space and to fend off any legal challenge to his plans for re-electing himself," the newspaper said.   

"The decision to impose an emergency in the country cannot be justified on any ground -- moral, legal or constitutional, and would only serve to destabilise the country," it added.   

Emergency rule, it said, "certainly cannot and should not be imposed to suit an individual's agenda -- which in this case amounts to being re-elected president".   

"Scary" was how Dawn described the rumblings that an emergency would be declared. 

Such a move "could prove dangerous for the state and strengthen those very forces and political elements the government is afraid of," it said.   

"Better sense prevailed," said The Nation, headlining an editorial that said a state of emergency "would not only have met with resistance but also proved to be a recipe for disaster".   

It could have provoked conflict with a newly confident judiciary, the newspaper said. "The courts keen to assert their independence could have either struck down the action or declared void the suspension of fundamental rights," it said.   

Musharraf has been facing a raft of problems including widespread anger over his attempt, since overturned by the courts, to suspend the country's chief justice -- a move critics saw as an attempt to consolidate his grip on power.   

Mass protests over the attempted suspension, mounting criticism over his government's handling of militants along the Afghan border and efforts by rivals to come back from exile to contest the election have put him under fire.   

"It is not clear in what way the emergency will enhance the military-led government's ability to meet these challenges more effectively," said Dawn.    

With all power concentrated in the hands of the generals, it said, "in what precise and practical way can the imposition of emergency come the rescue of a regime perceived to be beleaguered?"