I am in full agreement with Dr. Ahmad. Both of these people have been in power for years and have nothing to show for it. Bhutto and, to a much lesser extent but no less complicit, Sharif are both untrustworthy with corruption rife in their respective governments. Musharraf is quite simply a dictator. To argue that perhaps, for now, his brand of rule is necessary to keep rogue elements in check is short-sighted to say the least and dangerous. The Pakistanis are quite capable of ruling themselves without the outside interferences of the West, India or anyone else for that matter. To stifle the say of the people (the way I see a Musharraf-Bhutto ticket ultimately doing) will only backfire and cause resentment leading to even more of these rogue elements popping up. The Musharraf-Bhutto ticket, in short, will really only fan the fires already raging in and around Pakistan.

Samir, Philadelphia, PA

Any deal by the discredited Benazir Bhutto and Gen Musharraf on Kashmir are not acceptable. Also these deals are not worth paper, as the next one will disown it!

In India, very few trust Pakistan and its rulers. The bitterness between Pakistan and India has reached "point of no return"!

We will wait for this failed state to disintegrate on its own due to the support for Islamic extremism and terrorism all over the world! Either this Pakistan or rest of non-Muslim nations.
Regards,

Krishna R. Kumar, Udupi, India

Another call for a **return** to democracy in Pakistan. The country has had very little *democracy* since it's creation, if you wish a return to it's normal form of goverment or at least it's prevailing form then it will need to stay the way it is.

Just how long do you think Bhutto or Nawiz would last against the fundlementlists without Musharrif and the Army? I know it's fashionable to cheer for the *down trodden*, but these down trodden want control of a country with Nuclear bombs and the means to deliver them. They have already shown that they hold pragmitists like Bhutto as people to be killed in the coming Islamic fundi revolution. Not only would India be in grave danger, so would countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

Considering how he started, Musharrif hasn't been as awful as most before him(including Bhutto's father), he isn't corrupt and does have Pakistans interests at heart. Full democracy can wait for a bit more stability.

Joshua, London, UK

I disagree, Musharraf & PPP (BB) would be able to resolve the militants issue, The people of country of Pakistan is worried and concern that people are getting killed by their own people. We are witnessing at Iraq, Kashmir & Afghanistan. Muslims of the world are suffering by the regime behind Indian lobby & Jewish lobby. The Taliban are suffering, because of Bin Laden protection, Pakistan is under targeted because of 9/11,& there is no correlation. The Indian are benefited, economically & as well militry/ defense, Pakistan is running proxy war on wrong front since the Regan’s era, without economical progress compare to India. The only solution is to come up on table talk and resolve the US/UK concern for all, without Killing. The amounts of money USA/UK are spending should be utilized for their people.

shawn, Boston, USA

I am at a loss to understand what has led Maddox to propose that either Bhutto or Musharraf can deliver on disputed Kashmir or in Afghanistan. Bhutto has been at the helm of affairs twice while Musharraf has ruled unopposed for eight year now. If nothing was done in those years, what has changed now that will suggest that the border issue is any closer to be resolved by either of them. The coming together of the two is merely a convenient arrangement for two corrupt personalities to stay in or attain power. Nothing could be furthest from the truth than to suggest that any good will come out of the collusion between the two.

Dr. Sayed S. Ahmad, Troy, , Michigan, USA

Pakistani nuclear weapons have greatly changed the relationship between Pakistan and the West. Now, the overriding concern of American foreign policy is to keep those weapons away from Islamic radicals and heroin traffickers. We will embrace any scoundrel who seems willing and able to do this, regardless of the effect on Pakistani society--and even if the long-term effect is to inflame Pakistani public opinion against us. The world has become a much more dangerous place.

Arthur Wilton, Newport Beach, California

Maybe Bhutto and Musharaff should get married. This will legitimise any deal as it will be done in the traditional way of tribal alliances.

Shahji, London, UK

Pakistan under Musharraf presidency can not control Waziristan or the border areas with Afghanistan. There has to be a political solution which can only be achieved by a freely democratic elected government in Pakistan. There can never be a free election in Pakistan under Musharraf's presidency.
A caretaker government has to be setup to hold election under an independent election commision in consultation with the opposition parties, other wise the war against terrorism will continue indefinitly.
These goals can be achieved by the backing of People of Pakistan, it can not be done by the Pakistan army alone.
Sooner this matter is realised by foreign countries who support Musharraf, better it is for both sides. The army under a civillian rule can very well do the necessary job they are assigned, it will carry public support as well.

Naeem Syed, Toronto, Canada

Seems quite a weak argument to me. Where is the evidence that Bhutto would help engineer a border agreement? And if the Supreme Court rules in favour of Musharraf's election victory and hands him another five-year term, then Bhutto's hand will not be any stronger. It will be the end result that counts, not the process and certainly not the delay. And if the SC rules against Musharraf, and he is removed from power - then who is Bhutto going to forge a deal with?

Colombe, London, UK

Since mid '50s,the "Doctrine of Necessity"has been the guiding light of a subservient Pakistani judiciary and Western powers in their relationship with Pakistan.In the process,the political process has been stifled and democracy disallowed a chance in the unfortunate country.Military rule was helpful in executing pacts like CENTO (Baghdad Pact)and SEATO,Afghan Jihad and the War against Terrorism.With popular will rejected,Pakistan has lost its Eastern half,the bulk of its scarce resources(including interest bearing loans)are continuously appropraited by the Military,and a democratic social welfare state has been converted into a quasi theocratic,national security dictatorship.A vibrant liberal society is embracing obscurantism,sectaianism and religious militancy.If the current arrangement continues,these traits will become stronger.I doubt if Benazir can cope with these if she joins up with Musharraf in his dictatorship.Only a free democracy can build up the strength to turn the tide.

Afzal A. Neseem, LIncoln, Nebraska

Musharraf was not the architect of the incursion over the border with India - no border exists. Musharraf and Benazir have no letigimacy of agreeing a deal on Kashmir - neither of them will be able to carry the deal - Musharraf can't in Waziristan and Benazir can't carry the army. The US is badly misguided with this dream ticket. It will lead to more trouble.

Shaffiq Mahmood, Halifax, UK