Many of us had seen this coming but the aftermath of the Supreme Court disqualification of the Sharif brothers and the imposition of governor’s rule in Punjab is still too fearful to contemplate with any sense of equanimity. And the pity is that this explosive distraction in our lives has come at a time when there is so much else that this country should earnestly be doing to warrant its well-being and even survival. Do we, collectively, suffer from some kind of a death wish?
Almost one year after the induction of the present government, what really have we achieved in terms of an impact on the lives of the ordinary people? Instead, one great resource that we had at this time one year ago – hope – has not only been thrown away but has been replaced with dark misgivings about the future. There is even an apprehension that the present drift could lead to bloodshed and anarchy.
Our people, already afflicted with numerous deprivations, have now to cope with the awesome emotional burden of extreme uncertainty. One doctrine of necessity in such circumstances is their yearning for some order and peace. In ‘Democracy in America’, Alex de Tocqueville, so long ago, wrote about what happens to a people beset with anxiety: “The taste for public tranquillity then becomes a blind passion, and the citizens are liable to conceive a most inordinate devotion to order”. What this means is very obvious. Swat is also an example, where the government’s apparent surrender is welcomed by the locals for the sake of peace.
If there is hope, people will be willing to wade through any dark patch and suffer hardships. In fact, hope in the future is the seed for change, including revolutionary change. How the hope that the lawyers’ movement had cultivated in our hearts was brutally suppressed is the real tragedy of our present crisis. We had initially expected to gain, as the outcome of a movement that was also a celebration of the freedom of the media and the involvement of the civil society, a shift in our public affairs towards morality and principles.
In that sense, the crisis of Pakistan is not merely political or economic. In its essence, it is moral and social. We need justice and fair play. Politicians anywhere are viewed with some suspicion but they cannot survive without building a measure of trust and credibility in the eyes of the people. We know how any revelation of a serious misdemeanour or wrongdoing on the part of politicians and public officials can destroy their career in any respectable democracy.
Our democracy, in spite of the lessons that we should learn from repeated military interventions, is refusing to grow. Every time an election is held and civilian rule is introduced, there is expectation that a new beginning will be possible. Last year, the stage was set for such a new beginning. But a number of fateful deviations – and our essential lack of freedom – has led us to more of the same in a vicious replay of the nineties.
Hence, look at where we have arrived as the month of March, with its proverbial intimations of disorder, begins. We need not have waited for the ides of March. Incidentally, this reference, with its sense of foreboding, is from Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar”. It would be instructive for us to read it again, if only to understand how the Roman mobs had swayed the events in an ancient time. Ah, but we seem to be still living in ancient times.
Talking about hope, and about trust and morality, will be totally out of place in the midst of developments that have followed the events of Wednesday. If horse-trading – the lota business – has been the most sinful and detestable business in our politics, a high percentage increase in this exercise has been promised by the announcement of President Asif Ali Zardari that the next chief minister of Punjab would be from the Pakistan People’s Party. Where are the numbers, for God’s sake?
At the outset, I said that this upheaval has distracted our attention from some very crucial issues. Our present struggle against religious extremism comes readily to mind. Our need for good governance, something akin to life-saving drugs for a patient lying in intensive care, is critical. Look at how the shuffling of the bureaucratic cards in the provincial administration has played havoc with the simple task of running the administration on a day to day basis. In a larger context, vital sectors like education and health have to be neglected. At the same time that there is this impression of hectic activity on the streets and in the corridors of power, we are in effect standing still.
The US-Pakistan-Afghanistan talks in Washington, constituting a part in the American review of its policy towards this region, have just ended. It was not a good sign for the present political crisis in our country to overlap with these deliberations. We can imagine what picture of Pakistan will have emerged in these talks. Or was this just another footnote in the formulations that have been made about Pakistan being the most dangerous country in the world?
According to published reports, US lawmakers, think-tank experts and officials have warned that Pakistan is on the verge of an economic meltdown and a possible political disintegration. One wonders how Richard Holbrooke’s professorial mind would cope with all this confusion and complexity. The US special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan had made his visit to Pakistan prior to the talks in Washington to “listen and learn the ground realities in this critically important country”. He may still have a lot to learn about how we run our country in times of grave emergencies.
It is not easy to predict how this confrontation between the Nawaz League and the Zardari PPP will evolve in the immediate context and how it will conclude. As I said, today is only the first day of March and the Long March of the lawyers is less than two weeks away. Perhaps it was to subvert the lawyers’ protest that Zardari conceived of this grand plan to remove a government that would have supported the lawyers. With the governor’s rule in place, the lawyers would confront an adversary in the main arena of their struggle.
But many things can happen between now and the launching of the Long March. Meanwhile, the entire edifice of justice seems to have crumbled. We have a tragic history of how judgments made in our higher courts, usually in the service of the rulers of the time, have led us into wilderness. Where will the present crisis take us? Unfortunately, we don’t know where we are going.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Coming Out on the Streets
On Friday, addressing a charged rally of his supporters in Lahore, Nawaz Sharif took another step ahead in his confrontational campaign against President Asif Ali Zardari and exhorted the people to come out on the streets. This unfurling of the banner of rebellion was manifestly meant to garner popular support for the lawyers’ long march and the sit-in in Islamabad later this month. But the stage for this fateful encounter was set by the Supreme Court’s decision to disqualify the Sharif brothers and by the imposition of governor’s rule in Punjab.
The sense of national crisis has deepened this week. The terrorist attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore, particularly because of that spectacular lapse in security, has sent a fearsome message to the world about the present government’s ability to govern. It allowed the top US diplomat in Kabul to assert that Pakistan now poses a bigger security problem for the rest of the world than Afghanistan. What greater affront could there be for a nuclear-armed country that considers itself a major player in the region?
Then, there was a bomb attack on the mausoleum of Rahman Baba in Peshawar in the small hours of Thursday. Unfortunately, the real significance of this outrage was somehow camouflaged by more flaming headlines, though a number of sombre interpretations of what this means have appeared in the English language press. Rahman Baba, of course, was a 17th century mystic poet revered by the Pashtuns. That Pashtun jihadists would mount an attack on a beloved symbol of Pashtun identity says a lot about the rising tide of Talibanisation that our rulers, with all their pious intentions, are failing to contain.
Meanwhile, terrorist activities across the affected belt in the northern areas have continued in spite of the peace deals that have been made. On Saturday, there was another terrorist attack in Peshawar in which a number of policemen were killed. There is increasing evidence that the militants are becoming more confident and more resourceful. There is also a sectarian dimension in their primitive pursuit of power. People everywhere are feeling more insecure and uncertain about the future.
And it is against this ominous backdrop that the political confrontation is becoming more antagonistic. Speeches made by Shahbaz Sharif and Nawaz Sharif in Friday’s rally tend to certify that a point of no return has been reached, though hectic efforts for reconciliation are underway by provincial leaders who have a vested interest in the present arrangement. Considering Asif Zardari’s rigid stance on the pivotal issue of the restoration of Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, it is hard to imagine how they can pacify a rebellious Nawaz Sharif in these climactic moments when the die is cast. Some seasoned analysts can hear the approaching sound of army boots.
Hence, the next few days will be crucial. Pakistan has already been pushed to the edge of the precipice. The entire world is anxious about our fate, also because it would have global implications. Americans have obviously played a critical role in the shaping and execution of our national policies. What will – and can – they do at this time when they are in the midst of a strategic review of their policy relating to Afghanistan and Pakistan? Speaking at a meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Brussels, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has reportedly said that Pakistan is facing a serious internal security threat. This she said with reference to the attack on Sri Lankan cricket team, calling it an “eerie replica” of the Mumbai attacks. How about the other toxic ingredients of the crisis of Pakistan?
For the time being, the focus rests on the lawyers’ long march that will start from Quetta and Karachi on March 12 and will culminate in Islamabad on March 16. It is in this context that Nawaz Sharif has asked the people to stage a revolution by coming out on the streets. Will a massive show of popular force be possible in this protest? Apparently, if the march is not stopped through violent means, it will be massive because the people are fully conscious of the moral and democratic validity of the lawyers’ cause. But there has also been a tradition of governments in power to suppress popular agitation with brutal force.
In fact, memories of May 12, 2007, cannot be erased from our minds. That bloodbath in Karachi should stand out in the history of how a popular movement is sought to be crushed by despotic rulers. Ah, the irony here is that the Pakistan Peoples Party workers on that day were on the side of Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry. Look at where they are now. But the betrayal that the party’s supporters have suffered is one more instance of the catastrophic derelictions of Pakistan’s politics.
Coming back to the appeal for street demonstrations, one should realise that Pakistan can be truly liberated if this is possible. Irrespective of whether they do it to support Nawaz Sharif’s politics or to concentrate solely on the vindication of the lawyers’ demand for the restoration of November 2, 2008, judiciary, their active participation in politics can change this country and make a new beginning possible. Unfortunately, the tendency of our rulers and leading politicians to revert to their past behaviour and shameless deceptions has undermined the very potential for democratic dispensation in Pakistan.
We desperately need to make a new beginning, with adequate deference to moral and democratic principles. It was in this respect that the courage demonstrated by Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry in this month two years ago and the response it got from the independent media and the civil society was an immeasurably precious gift to our polity. Yes, he had taken an oath on PCO before that. Yes, he may have committed indiscretions in his career. But people do change. There are innumerable examples in history of how great heroes and respected martyrs were initially on the other side.
After all, our lives are shaped by circumstances and by conscious decisions that we make in a time of crisis. Let me quote Thomas Paine one more time: “These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldiers and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country.” How is this crisis trying our souls? Yes, the issue of Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry has somewhat been confused by our feelings towards politicians and parties that have taken their positions. But we need to think about this entire issue in the light of what we think is right. And once we have taken our decision, we should have the courage of our convictions even if it demands our active participation in a street demonstration. The threats that we face in this challenge are far less than the threat our country faces at this time.
The sense of national crisis has deepened this week. The terrorist attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore, particularly because of that spectacular lapse in security, has sent a fearsome message to the world about the present government’s ability to govern. It allowed the top US diplomat in Kabul to assert that Pakistan now poses a bigger security problem for the rest of the world than Afghanistan. What greater affront could there be for a nuclear-armed country that considers itself a major player in the region?
Then, there was a bomb attack on the mausoleum of Rahman Baba in Peshawar in the small hours of Thursday. Unfortunately, the real significance of this outrage was somehow camouflaged by more flaming headlines, though a number of sombre interpretations of what this means have appeared in the English language press. Rahman Baba, of course, was a 17th century mystic poet revered by the Pashtuns. That Pashtun jihadists would mount an attack on a beloved symbol of Pashtun identity says a lot about the rising tide of Talibanisation that our rulers, with all their pious intentions, are failing to contain.
Meanwhile, terrorist activities across the affected belt in the northern areas have continued in spite of the peace deals that have been made. On Saturday, there was another terrorist attack in Peshawar in which a number of policemen were killed. There is increasing evidence that the militants are becoming more confident and more resourceful. There is also a sectarian dimension in their primitive pursuit of power. People everywhere are feeling more insecure and uncertain about the future.
And it is against this ominous backdrop that the political confrontation is becoming more antagonistic. Speeches made by Shahbaz Sharif and Nawaz Sharif in Friday’s rally tend to certify that a point of no return has been reached, though hectic efforts for reconciliation are underway by provincial leaders who have a vested interest in the present arrangement. Considering Asif Zardari’s rigid stance on the pivotal issue of the restoration of Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, it is hard to imagine how they can pacify a rebellious Nawaz Sharif in these climactic moments when the die is cast. Some seasoned analysts can hear the approaching sound of army boots.
Hence, the next few days will be crucial. Pakistan has already been pushed to the edge of the precipice. The entire world is anxious about our fate, also because it would have global implications. Americans have obviously played a critical role in the shaping and execution of our national policies. What will – and can – they do at this time when they are in the midst of a strategic review of their policy relating to Afghanistan and Pakistan? Speaking at a meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Brussels, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has reportedly said that Pakistan is facing a serious internal security threat. This she said with reference to the attack on Sri Lankan cricket team, calling it an “eerie replica” of the Mumbai attacks. How about the other toxic ingredients of the crisis of Pakistan?
For the time being, the focus rests on the lawyers’ long march that will start from Quetta and Karachi on March 12 and will culminate in Islamabad on March 16. It is in this context that Nawaz Sharif has asked the people to stage a revolution by coming out on the streets. Will a massive show of popular force be possible in this protest? Apparently, if the march is not stopped through violent means, it will be massive because the people are fully conscious of the moral and democratic validity of the lawyers’ cause. But there has also been a tradition of governments in power to suppress popular agitation with brutal force.
In fact, memories of May 12, 2007, cannot be erased from our minds. That bloodbath in Karachi should stand out in the history of how a popular movement is sought to be crushed by despotic rulers. Ah, the irony here is that the Pakistan Peoples Party workers on that day were on the side of Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry. Look at where they are now. But the betrayal that the party’s supporters have suffered is one more instance of the catastrophic derelictions of Pakistan’s politics.
Coming back to the appeal for street demonstrations, one should realise that Pakistan can be truly liberated if this is possible. Irrespective of whether they do it to support Nawaz Sharif’s politics or to concentrate solely on the vindication of the lawyers’ demand for the restoration of November 2, 2008, judiciary, their active participation in politics can change this country and make a new beginning possible. Unfortunately, the tendency of our rulers and leading politicians to revert to their past behaviour and shameless deceptions has undermined the very potential for democratic dispensation in Pakistan.
We desperately need to make a new beginning, with adequate deference to moral and democratic principles. It was in this respect that the courage demonstrated by Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry in this month two years ago and the response it got from the independent media and the civil society was an immeasurably precious gift to our polity. Yes, he had taken an oath on PCO before that. Yes, he may have committed indiscretions in his career. But people do change. There are innumerable examples in history of how great heroes and respected martyrs were initially on the other side.
After all, our lives are shaped by circumstances and by conscious decisions that we make in a time of crisis. Let me quote Thomas Paine one more time: “These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldiers and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country.” How is this crisis trying our souls? Yes, the issue of Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry has somewhat been confused by our feelings towards politicians and parties that have taken their positions. But we need to think about this entire issue in the light of what we think is right. And once we have taken our decision, we should have the courage of our convictions even if it demands our active participation in a street demonstration. The threats that we face in this challenge are far less than the threat our country faces at this time.
Intimations of Insanity
When President Asif Ali Zardari pounced upon Geo News on Friday – ominously, Friday the thirteenth – the writing on the wall became luminous. And the immediate resignation of Information Minister Sherry Rehman, an exemplary move that deserves appreciation, became another sign of rising disarray in the corridors of power. Very street smart our present rulers may be but they seem to lack the higher intelligence to understand that a war against the media is simply not winnable, not in these times.
It has been said that Pakistan has been changed by Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s defiance on March 9, 2007, and the consequent movement by the lawyers. In fact, it is the emergence of the independent television news channels that has changed this country because these channels, with Geo in the lead, inspired a new coalition of hope two years ago with the active participation of the lawyers and civil society.
Now, it should be instructive to figure out why Geo has provoked the ire of Asif Zardari. In many ways, it is an action replay of what General Pervez Musharraf had done to Geo in November 2007. But Musharraf at that time was in total control and his nasty attack on the channel led to a severe financial loss. Still, we know who has prevailed and how Geo was vindicated, gaining in its stature and credibility. We can say that Geo has also changed. This is certified by the passion with which it has supported the cause of justice and morality in the context of the lawyers’ movement.
It is this commitment that the present rulers, who have unashamedly betrayed the pledges made by their martyred leader and by themselves, cannot stomach. Indeed, Geo’s forceful and innovative portrayal of the real issues that underline the present crisis has exposed the dark machinations of the present leadership of the Pakistan People’s Party. To be fair to this leadership, it had either to correct its course or lunge at its critics.
We can see what this leadership has chosen to do. Friday’s action against Geo has come in the wake of a brutal countrywide suppression of the long march. The manner in which the law enforcement agencies and the bureaucracy have collaborated in this evil design is an indication that the existing system of our governance has become insane and its continuation can destroy this country.
We have all seen on our television sets how the police have dealt with the lawyers and the political and civil society activists who assert nothing more sinister than their right to peacefully demonstrate. As a journalist, I have been witness to this administrative monstrosity for four decades. The sadistic manner in which the policemen, often in plain clothes, beat and humiliate respectable protesters is not just a violation of fundamental human rights or constitutional guarantees. It reflects the sick mentality of the high functionaries who preside over these acts of infamy.
When I say that the lawyers’ movement and the electronic media have changed Pakistan, I should concede that there are some segments of our polity that are refusing to change. It is the persistence of this despotic tendency that could declare Pakistan as a failed state. Yes, we were deluded into thinking that after the elections of February last year, a new era of democratic dispensation would dawn. At least the terrifying loss of Benazir Bhutto should have prompted her somewhat dubious inheritors to learn some lessons from our tragic history. No one had any expectation of what has happened in the last few days.
There are numerous clips of the leaders of the present arrangement proclaiming their democratic credentials and promising that no impediments would be placed in the holding of a peaceful long march. They would repeatedly endorse the right of the people to assemble and to protest peacefully. It was truly sickening to listen to a number of PPP ministers in television talk shows – and their presence there was mandatory – to invoke the history and the character of their party.
We know about that adage that all revolutions sometime devour their own children. Our democratic ‘revolution’ threatens to devour the party that had led this essentially hopeful transition. There has been some concern among liberals that the lawyers’ movement is being hijacked by the right wing. This is not the central issue. What is more crucial in the present circumstances is that the PPP has been hijacked by Asif Zardari and his cronies.
There is nothing in the gamut of human emotions that hurts more than the betrayal of someone you have deeply loved. A very large number of ardent supporters of the PPP now have the same feeling. One of them is social activist Tahira Abdulla, who was arrested from her Islamabad residence and then released after the intervention of Sherry Rehman and some other PPP leaders. But the treatment meted out to a person of her dedication and integrity would remain an example of how this government is running amok.
A more tragic incident took place in Peshawar when the police broke into the house of Musarrat Hilali and she got her leg fractured in the terror created by the policemen. Musarrat is vice-chairperson of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan for NWFP and is a highly respected lawyer known for her work for the poor and the underprivileged. If distinguished and precious individuals like her can be treated in this manner, what can ordinary citizens expect from our heartless and immoral rulers? As an aside, what has happened to our ANP friends and why have they condoned brutal suppression of the long march in the province where they lead the coalition?
What they have done to impede the long march needs to be properly analysed. Irrespective of the obvious admission of defeat on the part of the rulers that this violent suppression represents, there are serious implications here about the future of democracy in this country. In a wider context, such initiatives would undermine the very potential of our society to renew itself and to allow the citizens to have a meaningful sense of belonging to their country.
We must also not forget that this has happened against the backdrop of rising religious militancy and social disequilibrium. The gift of hope that the lawyers’ movement and last year’s elections had given us is being trampled under the feet of civilian despots. We may not expect our present rulers to comprehend the significance of what they are doing. But are the Americans, who are openly involved in attempts to resolve this crisis, also oblivious to the social and political consequences of this government’s brutality and its vicious suppression of the human rights of the people of Pakistan?
It has been said that Pakistan has been changed by Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry’s defiance on March 9, 2007, and the consequent movement by the lawyers. In fact, it is the emergence of the independent television news channels that has changed this country because these channels, with Geo in the lead, inspired a new coalition of hope two years ago with the active participation of the lawyers and civil society.
Now, it should be instructive to figure out why Geo has provoked the ire of Asif Zardari. In many ways, it is an action replay of what General Pervez Musharraf had done to Geo in November 2007. But Musharraf at that time was in total control and his nasty attack on the channel led to a severe financial loss. Still, we know who has prevailed and how Geo was vindicated, gaining in its stature and credibility. We can say that Geo has also changed. This is certified by the passion with which it has supported the cause of justice and morality in the context of the lawyers’ movement.
It is this commitment that the present rulers, who have unashamedly betrayed the pledges made by their martyred leader and by themselves, cannot stomach. Indeed, Geo’s forceful and innovative portrayal of the real issues that underline the present crisis has exposed the dark machinations of the present leadership of the Pakistan People’s Party. To be fair to this leadership, it had either to correct its course or lunge at its critics.
We can see what this leadership has chosen to do. Friday’s action against Geo has come in the wake of a brutal countrywide suppression of the long march. The manner in which the law enforcement agencies and the bureaucracy have collaborated in this evil design is an indication that the existing system of our governance has become insane and its continuation can destroy this country.
We have all seen on our television sets how the police have dealt with the lawyers and the political and civil society activists who assert nothing more sinister than their right to peacefully demonstrate. As a journalist, I have been witness to this administrative monstrosity for four decades. The sadistic manner in which the policemen, often in plain clothes, beat and humiliate respectable protesters is not just a violation of fundamental human rights or constitutional guarantees. It reflects the sick mentality of the high functionaries who preside over these acts of infamy.
When I say that the lawyers’ movement and the electronic media have changed Pakistan, I should concede that there are some segments of our polity that are refusing to change. It is the persistence of this despotic tendency that could declare Pakistan as a failed state. Yes, we were deluded into thinking that after the elections of February last year, a new era of democratic dispensation would dawn. At least the terrifying loss of Benazir Bhutto should have prompted her somewhat dubious inheritors to learn some lessons from our tragic history. No one had any expectation of what has happened in the last few days.
There are numerous clips of the leaders of the present arrangement proclaiming their democratic credentials and promising that no impediments would be placed in the holding of a peaceful long march. They would repeatedly endorse the right of the people to assemble and to protest peacefully. It was truly sickening to listen to a number of PPP ministers in television talk shows – and their presence there was mandatory – to invoke the history and the character of their party.
We know about that adage that all revolutions sometime devour their own children. Our democratic ‘revolution’ threatens to devour the party that had led this essentially hopeful transition. There has been some concern among liberals that the lawyers’ movement is being hijacked by the right wing. This is not the central issue. What is more crucial in the present circumstances is that the PPP has been hijacked by Asif Zardari and his cronies.
There is nothing in the gamut of human emotions that hurts more than the betrayal of someone you have deeply loved. A very large number of ardent supporters of the PPP now have the same feeling. One of them is social activist Tahira Abdulla, who was arrested from her Islamabad residence and then released after the intervention of Sherry Rehman and some other PPP leaders. But the treatment meted out to a person of her dedication and integrity would remain an example of how this government is running amok.
A more tragic incident took place in Peshawar when the police broke into the house of Musarrat Hilali and she got her leg fractured in the terror created by the policemen. Musarrat is vice-chairperson of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan for NWFP and is a highly respected lawyer known for her work for the poor and the underprivileged. If distinguished and precious individuals like her can be treated in this manner, what can ordinary citizens expect from our heartless and immoral rulers? As an aside, what has happened to our ANP friends and why have they condoned brutal suppression of the long march in the province where they lead the coalition?
What they have done to impede the long march needs to be properly analysed. Irrespective of the obvious admission of defeat on the part of the rulers that this violent suppression represents, there are serious implications here about the future of democracy in this country. In a wider context, such initiatives would undermine the very potential of our society to renew itself and to allow the citizens to have a meaningful sense of belonging to their country.
We must also not forget that this has happened against the backdrop of rising religious militancy and social disequilibrium. The gift of hope that the lawyers’ movement and last year’s elections had given us is being trampled under the feet of civilian despots. We may not expect our present rulers to comprehend the significance of what they are doing. But are the Americans, who are openly involved in attempts to resolve this crisis, also oblivious to the social and political consequences of this government’s brutality and its vicious suppression of the human rights of the people of Pakistan?
To live our dreams
Unlikely though it may seem, an American president has sought to weave the interests and aspirations of Pakistan’s people into his country’s grim encounter with the terrorist elements that operate in our tribal belt. When President Barack Obama unveiled his country’s new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan on Friday, there was a general sense of approval from the official circles. We surely did not respond to him in the same cynical way that Bush would always provoke. And Obama’s pronunciation of Pakistan is so much better.
So, how does this relate to the assertion made by so many of our political leaders and media critics that Pakistan has unwisely plugged itself into a war that is exclusively America’s? Incidentally, on the same day – a nine-hour time difference notwithstanding – that Obama was addressing the world in Washington D.C. we had a terrifying suicide attack on a mosque on Peshawar-Torkham Highway, killing more than 75 ‘namazis’ and injuring more than one hundred.
Saturday’s newspapers, thus, had a choice in deciding their banner headlines. We did not need this reminder of what suicide bombers are doing to us and not just in the regions that border Afghanistan. The very thought that a Friday congregation that included security personnel would be the target of a terrorist is unbearable. But we have, unfortunately, been witness to a string of such mind-boggling atrocities.
As for what Obama has said about Pakistan, leaving aside his pronouncements about the situation in Afghanistan and the measures that America is initiating on that front, let me quote these words: “The people of Pakistan want the same things that we want: an end to terror, access to basic services, the opportunity to live their dreams, and the security that can only come with the rule of law”.
In a sense, there is nothing profound in this observation. These aspirations have always been present to us and have been repeatedly expressed at different levels. The real issue is: what are we doing about it? Obama also said: “Make no mistake: Al Qaeda and its extremist allies are a cancer that risks killing Pakistan from within.” Well, this point may be a little harder to digest for many of us. Yet, the fact that our polity is afflicted with predicaments that have put our survival at stake is incontrovertible.
Indeed, the cancer of religious extremism and terrorism is not the only disease with which we suffer. Our crises are manifold. To be able to understand these crises and to devise a proper strategy to deal with them is the big challenge. Yes, the inspiring victory of the lawyers’ movement, with its somewhat ambivalent political and ‘ideological’ undertones, has provided us with a silver lining in these dark times. But the challenges that we face are surging like a storm and our capacity to deal with them, irrespective of the waywardness of the present government, seems very limited.
Again, the American example of how it reviewed its strategy relating to its war against terrorism in this region can be instructive. Whether or not this new strategy explores any new grounds or projects any creative ideas, the point is that the exercise was thorough and painstaking. Conclusions were drawn from an intensive debate that involved high functionaries and area experts and think tanks. When have we been so serious and sincere about an issue that we need to resolve?
I have drifted in this direction because initially I was aiming to write my column on an apparently minor incident, an incident that should not surprise us in terms of our knowledge of what is almost a matter of routine in our society. And what is that incident?
On Thursday, a Geo reporting team, along with a team of the Board of Secondary Education, Karachi, raided an unauthorised examination centre where students were found cheating in their Matric examination with the help of their teachers and parents.
You would say: what is so surprising about it because we have always known that this happens, and at all levels of our educational system. Our provincial governments, education being their domain, have known about it. Our educational authorities, even when not directly involved, have always condoned this practice. (Do I need to mention the case of the daughter of a former chief justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in this context?) Finally, the parents seem to be widely implicated in this practice. Should one call it unIslamic, like suicide bombings?
Well, these and similar practices that betray our lack of morality and principles do constitute a kind of suicide bombing. What we are killing are not human beings, with blood splashed all over. We are killing their minds and their dreams. We are killing the future of this country. If this continues, even the billions that we can get from the Americans and the west and even the armed forces that we can bolster with the latest technologies will not matter.
So, the big question is: what can our governments achieve in terms of our larger strategic goals when they do not appear to be able to provide basic education to all our children and conduct examinations that are honest and credible? We know how coercive our governments can be when, for instance, they want to prevent the lawyers or the civil society activist to stage a peaceful demonstration. We know about the incredible power that some political outfits have acquired to deal with their adversaries. But nobody has the ability or will to stop cheating in our examinations.
Obviously, they don’t genuinely understand the priorities of a nation that is struggling for its survival. Every one talks about education being a high priority. Or health. Or employment. What it is like on the ground is so heartbreaking that perhaps it is their defence against insanity that they don’t want to look at it. This may be one reason our high functionaries keep the windows of their shining Land Cruisers shaded.
This is not to question the commitment of a large number of citizens who, either in their official or private capacities, are striving to improve the delivery of educational and health services. We do have, in our society, an impetus for change and social renewal. That is why the lawyers’ movement was a watershed in our lives. It was founded on morality and on the concept of rule of law. By the way, even the Charter of Democracy talks about the induction of merit in our system.
To conclude, let me repeat my lament about the de-intellectualisation of the Pakistani society. We are not building our moral and intellectual resources to be able to even begin our journey for progress and prosperity. Our economic crisis may be averted with generous foreign assistance, but what about this intellectual meltdown?
So, how does this relate to the assertion made by so many of our political leaders and media critics that Pakistan has unwisely plugged itself into a war that is exclusively America’s? Incidentally, on the same day – a nine-hour time difference notwithstanding – that Obama was addressing the world in Washington D.C. we had a terrifying suicide attack on a mosque on Peshawar-Torkham Highway, killing more than 75 ‘namazis’ and injuring more than one hundred.
Saturday’s newspapers, thus, had a choice in deciding their banner headlines. We did not need this reminder of what suicide bombers are doing to us and not just in the regions that border Afghanistan. The very thought that a Friday congregation that included security personnel would be the target of a terrorist is unbearable. But we have, unfortunately, been witness to a string of such mind-boggling atrocities.
As for what Obama has said about Pakistan, leaving aside his pronouncements about the situation in Afghanistan and the measures that America is initiating on that front, let me quote these words: “The people of Pakistan want the same things that we want: an end to terror, access to basic services, the opportunity to live their dreams, and the security that can only come with the rule of law”.
In a sense, there is nothing profound in this observation. These aspirations have always been present to us and have been repeatedly expressed at different levels. The real issue is: what are we doing about it? Obama also said: “Make no mistake: Al Qaeda and its extremist allies are a cancer that risks killing Pakistan from within.” Well, this point may be a little harder to digest for many of us. Yet, the fact that our polity is afflicted with predicaments that have put our survival at stake is incontrovertible.
Indeed, the cancer of religious extremism and terrorism is not the only disease with which we suffer. Our crises are manifold. To be able to understand these crises and to devise a proper strategy to deal with them is the big challenge. Yes, the inspiring victory of the lawyers’ movement, with its somewhat ambivalent political and ‘ideological’ undertones, has provided us with a silver lining in these dark times. But the challenges that we face are surging like a storm and our capacity to deal with them, irrespective of the waywardness of the present government, seems very limited.
Again, the American example of how it reviewed its strategy relating to its war against terrorism in this region can be instructive. Whether or not this new strategy explores any new grounds or projects any creative ideas, the point is that the exercise was thorough and painstaking. Conclusions were drawn from an intensive debate that involved high functionaries and area experts and think tanks. When have we been so serious and sincere about an issue that we need to resolve?
I have drifted in this direction because initially I was aiming to write my column on an apparently minor incident, an incident that should not surprise us in terms of our knowledge of what is almost a matter of routine in our society. And what is that incident?
On Thursday, a Geo reporting team, along with a team of the Board of Secondary Education, Karachi, raided an unauthorised examination centre where students were found cheating in their Matric examination with the help of their teachers and parents.
You would say: what is so surprising about it because we have always known that this happens, and at all levels of our educational system. Our provincial governments, education being their domain, have known about it. Our educational authorities, even when not directly involved, have always condoned this practice. (Do I need to mention the case of the daughter of a former chief justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in this context?) Finally, the parents seem to be widely implicated in this practice. Should one call it unIslamic, like suicide bombings?
Well, these and similar practices that betray our lack of morality and principles do constitute a kind of suicide bombing. What we are killing are not human beings, with blood splashed all over. We are killing their minds and their dreams. We are killing the future of this country. If this continues, even the billions that we can get from the Americans and the west and even the armed forces that we can bolster with the latest technologies will not matter.
So, the big question is: what can our governments achieve in terms of our larger strategic goals when they do not appear to be able to provide basic education to all our children and conduct examinations that are honest and credible? We know how coercive our governments can be when, for instance, they want to prevent the lawyers or the civil society activist to stage a peaceful demonstration. We know about the incredible power that some political outfits have acquired to deal with their adversaries. But nobody has the ability or will to stop cheating in our examinations.
Obviously, they don’t genuinely understand the priorities of a nation that is struggling for its survival. Every one talks about education being a high priority. Or health. Or employment. What it is like on the ground is so heartbreaking that perhaps it is their defence against insanity that they don’t want to look at it. This may be one reason our high functionaries keep the windows of their shining Land Cruisers shaded.
This is not to question the commitment of a large number of citizens who, either in their official or private capacities, are striving to improve the delivery of educational and health services. We do have, in our society, an impetus for change and social renewal. That is why the lawyers’ movement was a watershed in our lives. It was founded on morality and on the concept of rule of law. By the way, even the Charter of Democracy talks about the induction of merit in our system.
To conclude, let me repeat my lament about the de-intellectualisation of the Pakistani society. We are not building our moral and intellectual resources to be able to even begin our journey for progress and prosperity. Our economic crisis may be averted with generous foreign assistance, but what about this intellectual meltdown?
What’s going on?
With the pace of events suddenly picking up, April so far has been a real roller coaster. That mood of elation at the end of March, after the vindication of the long march, has quickly evaporated. It is now becoming hard to focus attention on any one aspect of the issues that are whirling around. Putting things in a proper perspective is becoming difficult. What seems obvious, though, is that almost all our ruling ideas are under attack. And, in an existential sense, our rulers do not seem to be able to find a way out, round, or through this cluster of crises.
For sometime, it appeared that the grainy video of a girl being flogged in public somewhere in Swat was an appropriate point of reference to underline the most crucial challenge that we confront as a country and as a society. I was in Lahore to attend the council meeting of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and was able to attend the rally that was held on April 4 to protest against an atrocity that symbolises the spirit of Talibanisation, a process that the establishment has somehow connived in protecting.
Now, the debate that was prompted by the emergence of the video was also very instructive. I do not have the space here to recount all the points that were made by elements that are spread across our political spectrum. It is not surprising that there are people who would seek to pooh-pooh the reality of the incident or to circuitously justify the punishment. A really tragic dimension of all this is the prevaricating attitude of our comrades in the Awami National Party, who lead the administration in the Frontier.
There is, however, no doubt that society is being hopelessly divided and perhaps the Taliban constitute a useful dividing line. Responses to the Swat video, irrespective of when and how it was made, could have enabled the ordinary citizens to sort out their feelings and thoughts about the surge of the Taliban. Of course, we know about the more brutal acts that are committed by the militants and the videos of which they themselves circulate – videos that no television channel would dare to show to their audience.
Unfortunately, this drawing of a clear line between those who have sympathy for religious extremism and others who aspire for a liberal and a democratic polity has become difficult because of varying perceptions about the role that the United States is playing in its/our war against terrorism. The drone attacks are consistently cited by many as an explanation for much of what the Taliban are doing – as if these attacks are mounted by the innocent people or the security personnel who are killed in terror attacks in various parts of the country.
Hence, it may be pertinent that the nation’s attention has shifted to our enigmatic dealings with Washington in the wake of the visit to Islamabad by Obama administration emissaries, Richard Holbrooke and Adm. Mike Mullen. What happened in their negotiations with our top functionaries became as critical as their pronouncements in New Delhi that they later visited. Analysts and commentators are nearly unanimous in their description of the present state of Pakistan-US ties. There is little doubt that these ties are now at their lowest ebb. For once, the trust deficit has been publicly acknowledged from both sides.
One disturbing feature of this relationship is that Holbrooke made this remark in his New Delhi press conference on Wednesday: “Leadership is absolutely vital and India plays a critical role in that regard. We cannot settle Afghanistan and many other world problems without India’s full involvement”. Pakistan has rejected this assertion and said that all states are equally important in efforts to resolve regional matters.
There are some other crucial manifestations of this new stance of the US administration, including conditions that are included in the bill moved in the House of Representatives to provide $ 1.5 billion annual assistance to Pakistan for a period of five years. One clause requires Pakistan “not to support any person or group that conducts violence, sabotage, or other activities meant to instil fear or terror in India”.
What does all this mean? Well, another crucial issue exploded on Thursday when the murder of three Baloch nationalist leaders, whose decomposed bodies were recovered in Turbat the previous evening. Quetta and other parts of Balochistan erupted into violence and there were demonstrations also in Karachi. A number of Baloch leaders made very strong statements about their loss of faith in the very idea of Pakistan. Protests over the killing of the Baloch leaders are continuing.
Another major cause for concern is the arrest of 11 Pakistanis in unusual daylight counter-terrorism raids across northwestern England. Actually, they arrested 12 persons and all but one of them were Pakistanis and it led to Britain and Pakistan trading accusations about fighting terrorism. Prime Minister Gordon Brown was quoted as saying that two-thirds of the terror plots investigated in Britain originated from Pakistan.
Meanwhile, terror attacks continued in the country. Questions were raised about the validity of the Swat peace accord after Maulana Sufi Muhammd wound up his peace camp in Swat and shifted to a place near Batkhela in Malakand Agency, saying that peace could not be restored unless President Asif Zardari signed the Nizam-e-Adl Regulation.
During this weekend, Islamabad and Rawalpindi were under threat of terrorist attacks and a warning given by intelligence organisations to the Interior Ministry said that “anything can happen anytime anywhere”. This warning necessitated stringent security measures and hundreds of suspicious people were detained during a crackdown in and around the two cities on Friday. One Taliban commander reportedly said that “the day is not far when Islamabad will be in the hands of the mujahideen”.
With all these critical developments taking place at different levels, the violence that took place at the Arts Council in Karachi on Wednesday may not be considered very important. But the cancellation of the second Shanakht Festival after vandalism by the workers of the Pakistan People’s Party is something that stirs serious thoughts about our ’shanakht’ – identity. The five-day festival, meant to present theatre, art and photography-related events, was really well conceived. It aimed to promote a sense of belonging to the country with popular participation in artistic and cultural activities.
What happened was that the exhibition included a painting that was clearly offensive to the supporters of the PPP. In the first place, it was manifestly an act of poor editorial judgment on the part of the organisers. They later admitted their mistake and offered apology. But the issue did not necessarily have to result in such violence and the cancellation of the entire festival. It only shows that in these times of anxiety and depression, situations can easily get out of hand.
For sometime, it appeared that the grainy video of a girl being flogged in public somewhere in Swat was an appropriate point of reference to underline the most crucial challenge that we confront as a country and as a society. I was in Lahore to attend the council meeting of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and was able to attend the rally that was held on April 4 to protest against an atrocity that symbolises the spirit of Talibanisation, a process that the establishment has somehow connived in protecting.
Now, the debate that was prompted by the emergence of the video was also very instructive. I do not have the space here to recount all the points that were made by elements that are spread across our political spectrum. It is not surprising that there are people who would seek to pooh-pooh the reality of the incident or to circuitously justify the punishment. A really tragic dimension of all this is the prevaricating attitude of our comrades in the Awami National Party, who lead the administration in the Frontier.
There is, however, no doubt that society is being hopelessly divided and perhaps the Taliban constitute a useful dividing line. Responses to the Swat video, irrespective of when and how it was made, could have enabled the ordinary citizens to sort out their feelings and thoughts about the surge of the Taliban. Of course, we know about the more brutal acts that are committed by the militants and the videos of which they themselves circulate – videos that no television channel would dare to show to their audience.
Unfortunately, this drawing of a clear line between those who have sympathy for religious extremism and others who aspire for a liberal and a democratic polity has become difficult because of varying perceptions about the role that the United States is playing in its/our war against terrorism. The drone attacks are consistently cited by many as an explanation for much of what the Taliban are doing – as if these attacks are mounted by the innocent people or the security personnel who are killed in terror attacks in various parts of the country.
Hence, it may be pertinent that the nation’s attention has shifted to our enigmatic dealings with Washington in the wake of the visit to Islamabad by Obama administration emissaries, Richard Holbrooke and Adm. Mike Mullen. What happened in their negotiations with our top functionaries became as critical as their pronouncements in New Delhi that they later visited. Analysts and commentators are nearly unanimous in their description of the present state of Pakistan-US ties. There is little doubt that these ties are now at their lowest ebb. For once, the trust deficit has been publicly acknowledged from both sides.
One disturbing feature of this relationship is that Holbrooke made this remark in his New Delhi press conference on Wednesday: “Leadership is absolutely vital and India plays a critical role in that regard. We cannot settle Afghanistan and many other world problems without India’s full involvement”. Pakistan has rejected this assertion and said that all states are equally important in efforts to resolve regional matters.
There are some other crucial manifestations of this new stance of the US administration, including conditions that are included in the bill moved in the House of Representatives to provide $ 1.5 billion annual assistance to Pakistan for a period of five years. One clause requires Pakistan “not to support any person or group that conducts violence, sabotage, or other activities meant to instil fear or terror in India”.
What does all this mean? Well, another crucial issue exploded on Thursday when the murder of three Baloch nationalist leaders, whose decomposed bodies were recovered in Turbat the previous evening. Quetta and other parts of Balochistan erupted into violence and there were demonstrations also in Karachi. A number of Baloch leaders made very strong statements about their loss of faith in the very idea of Pakistan. Protests over the killing of the Baloch leaders are continuing.
Another major cause for concern is the arrest of 11 Pakistanis in unusual daylight counter-terrorism raids across northwestern England. Actually, they arrested 12 persons and all but one of them were Pakistanis and it led to Britain and Pakistan trading accusations about fighting terrorism. Prime Minister Gordon Brown was quoted as saying that two-thirds of the terror plots investigated in Britain originated from Pakistan.
Meanwhile, terror attacks continued in the country. Questions were raised about the validity of the Swat peace accord after Maulana Sufi Muhammd wound up his peace camp in Swat and shifted to a place near Batkhela in Malakand Agency, saying that peace could not be restored unless President Asif Zardari signed the Nizam-e-Adl Regulation.
During this weekend, Islamabad and Rawalpindi were under threat of terrorist attacks and a warning given by intelligence organisations to the Interior Ministry said that “anything can happen anytime anywhere”. This warning necessitated stringent security measures and hundreds of suspicious people were detained during a crackdown in and around the two cities on Friday. One Taliban commander reportedly said that “the day is not far when Islamabad will be in the hands of the mujahideen”.
With all these critical developments taking place at different levels, the violence that took place at the Arts Council in Karachi on Wednesday may not be considered very important. But the cancellation of the second Shanakht Festival after vandalism by the workers of the Pakistan People’s Party is something that stirs serious thoughts about our ’shanakht’ – identity. The five-day festival, meant to present theatre, art and photography-related events, was really well conceived. It aimed to promote a sense of belonging to the country with popular participation in artistic and cultural activities.
What happened was that the exhibition included a painting that was clearly offensive to the supporters of the PPP. In the first place, it was manifestly an act of poor editorial judgment on the part of the organisers. They later admitted their mistake and offered apology. But the issue did not necessarily have to result in such violence and the cancellation of the entire festival. It only shows that in these times of anxiety and depression, situations can easily get out of hand.
Intimations of mortality
Vaguely I remember our late evening strolls in Saddar, breathless with hopes and dreams about our future. Once, we made this idiosyncratic resolve that “let’s us all become great people – and keep it a secret”. Another quirky suggestion was that we write our autobiographies in advance and live our lives accordingly.
This, of course, was a very long time ago. I am struggling to summon up that time in late fifties in Karachi when we began our journey as conscious adults. ‘We’ here is an allusion to a very small group of close friends, initially a nucleus of four, who, in a poetic sense, set out to change the world. What is remarkable is that throughout this journey of more than half a century, our intimate friendship and our youthful aspiration to change the world survived in a world of savage uncertainties.
It survived until Tuesday when Syed Mumtaz Saeed, our Shamman, died after being critically unwell for more than two weeks. Eliot had said that “in every parting, there is an image of death”. In this case, death figures as more than an image. It becomes a reality and close friends of Shamman who are tied together by memories of more than half a century can almost feel its breath on their neck. And how it concentrates your mind.
This, I should concede, is not the space suitable for projecting a personal loss. At the same time, I am conscious of the literary device of interpreting collective sorrows in the lives of particular individuals. Besides, the lives that we – our small group of friends – have lived since the early years of Pakistan do have some resonance in the overall affairs of the country. Our group was always intellectually alive to social and political developments. Shamman was more of a thinker than the rest of us and ultimately more of a doer because of what he was able to achieve as a teacher, an expert in administrative sciences and as a writer.
As I have said, this is not the occasion to illuminate the life of a friend, though he richly deserves a proper obituary. Coincidentally, Dr Mohammad Sarwar, a dear family friend, also died on Tuesday. The two funerals were taken out at the same time and they were buried in the same section of the vast Defence graveyard, partly sharing their mourners. Now, Dr Sarwar was the leader of the 1953 students’ movement in Karachi, a watershed event in some respects. His contribution to the initial stirrings of the democratic left is substantial.
My memories of Shamman and of Dr Sarwar converge in that somewhat inspirational period when so many young people were infused with social and political commitment and were willing to organise themselves and come out to agitate in defence of their socialistic ideas. I can recall the Karachi of the late fifties and then of the martial law of Ayub Khan. College and university students of Lahore, I am sure, had their share of similar awakening. The point to stress is that the progressive movement of students at that time had its intellectual underpinning.
We now know what has come out of those passionate beginnings. But when I think, in the immediate context, of Shamman and Dr Sarwar, I feel rather redeemed by the fact that most of those early warriors for social change remained faithful to their ideas and to their values. There are many, many names. To quote just one name, Dr Adibul Hasan Rizvi was a prominent leader in that left-wing students’ movement. Here was a band of social activists that later made some significant contributions to our society without forsaking ethical and intellectual values. This is eminently so about our small group and the bondage extends to our wives and to our children.
As an aside, I also think of how Karachi has changed during all these years. In sixties, Shamman and the rest of us were brought up on books that we read in and borrowed from the British Council and on Hollywood movies that we watched in Saddar cinemas. We were not able to go to the coffee house as frequently as we wanted, because of financial constraints, but we did cherish the evenings we were able to spend in that literary environment.
My regret is that the living memories of that period when we were young and contending with our many deprivations are slipping into oblivion. Yes, this is how it has always been. But nostalgia becomes a constant companion of ageing people like us and when we juxtapose our foggy remembrance of the past with the coarse realities of the present, it is hard not to “pine for what is not”.
Indeed, the ideas and the ideals that were nurtured by the young campaigners of those early years did not finally prevail, though the movement that was led by Bhutto in late sixties was very inspiring in its time. What has prevailed is now all around us. Just look at what is happening in not just the Malakand division but also in Lahore and in Peshawar. As I said last week, we cannot yet foresee the probable consequences of the humanitarian crisis of the internally displaced persons.
This week’s bomb blasts in Lahore and Peshawar have further underlined the rising threat to our society. A war is raging within our own boundaries, with heavy casualties. It was against this flaming backdrop that the anniversary of our nuclear explosion was celebrated on Thursday by a number of organisations. Apparently, the circumstances in which these celebrations were held have not chastened the very large number of patriots who see the nuclear device as the ultimate guarantee for our survival.
Our problem, perhaps, has always been our inability to be rational and realistic when it comes to defining our national security ideas. What our ruling ideas, a total negation of the aspirations of the committed youth of those early years, have wrought is exploding in our face. While crisis management is imperative, the time has come for our rulers to seriously rethink their fundamental policies. In this respect, one surely assumes that they are fully cognisant of the critical situation that exists on the ground.
To conclude, I have attempted to show how personal grief of a certain kind can blend into the tapestry of our collective involvements. In the January of 1960, more than forty-nine years ago, Shamman gave me a book, Boccaccio’s ‘Tales from the Decameron’ with this inscription: “Ghazi! Today you were born; and with you was born one of the finest of all universes. Give this universe of yours beauty and immortality; that demon TIME threatens. And if you are afraid of time, call me from the other universe which is Shamman”.
This, of course, was a very long time ago. I am struggling to summon up that time in late fifties in Karachi when we began our journey as conscious adults. ‘We’ here is an allusion to a very small group of close friends, initially a nucleus of four, who, in a poetic sense, set out to change the world. What is remarkable is that throughout this journey of more than half a century, our intimate friendship and our youthful aspiration to change the world survived in a world of savage uncertainties.
It survived until Tuesday when Syed Mumtaz Saeed, our Shamman, died after being critically unwell for more than two weeks. Eliot had said that “in every parting, there is an image of death”. In this case, death figures as more than an image. It becomes a reality and close friends of Shamman who are tied together by memories of more than half a century can almost feel its breath on their neck. And how it concentrates your mind.
This, I should concede, is not the space suitable for projecting a personal loss. At the same time, I am conscious of the literary device of interpreting collective sorrows in the lives of particular individuals. Besides, the lives that we – our small group of friends – have lived since the early years of Pakistan do have some resonance in the overall affairs of the country. Our group was always intellectually alive to social and political developments. Shamman was more of a thinker than the rest of us and ultimately more of a doer because of what he was able to achieve as a teacher, an expert in administrative sciences and as a writer.
As I have said, this is not the occasion to illuminate the life of a friend, though he richly deserves a proper obituary. Coincidentally, Dr Mohammad Sarwar, a dear family friend, also died on Tuesday. The two funerals were taken out at the same time and they were buried in the same section of the vast Defence graveyard, partly sharing their mourners. Now, Dr Sarwar was the leader of the 1953 students’ movement in Karachi, a watershed event in some respects. His contribution to the initial stirrings of the democratic left is substantial.
My memories of Shamman and of Dr Sarwar converge in that somewhat inspirational period when so many young people were infused with social and political commitment and were willing to organise themselves and come out to agitate in defence of their socialistic ideas. I can recall the Karachi of the late fifties and then of the martial law of Ayub Khan. College and university students of Lahore, I am sure, had their share of similar awakening. The point to stress is that the progressive movement of students at that time had its intellectual underpinning.
We now know what has come out of those passionate beginnings. But when I think, in the immediate context, of Shamman and Dr Sarwar, I feel rather redeemed by the fact that most of those early warriors for social change remained faithful to their ideas and to their values. There are many, many names. To quote just one name, Dr Adibul Hasan Rizvi was a prominent leader in that left-wing students’ movement. Here was a band of social activists that later made some significant contributions to our society without forsaking ethical and intellectual values. This is eminently so about our small group and the bondage extends to our wives and to our children.
As an aside, I also think of how Karachi has changed during all these years. In sixties, Shamman and the rest of us were brought up on books that we read in and borrowed from the British Council and on Hollywood movies that we watched in Saddar cinemas. We were not able to go to the coffee house as frequently as we wanted, because of financial constraints, but we did cherish the evenings we were able to spend in that literary environment.
My regret is that the living memories of that period when we were young and contending with our many deprivations are slipping into oblivion. Yes, this is how it has always been. But nostalgia becomes a constant companion of ageing people like us and when we juxtapose our foggy remembrance of the past with the coarse realities of the present, it is hard not to “pine for what is not”.
Indeed, the ideas and the ideals that were nurtured by the young campaigners of those early years did not finally prevail, though the movement that was led by Bhutto in late sixties was very inspiring in its time. What has prevailed is now all around us. Just look at what is happening in not just the Malakand division but also in Lahore and in Peshawar. As I said last week, we cannot yet foresee the probable consequences of the humanitarian crisis of the internally displaced persons.
This week’s bomb blasts in Lahore and Peshawar have further underlined the rising threat to our society. A war is raging within our own boundaries, with heavy casualties. It was against this flaming backdrop that the anniversary of our nuclear explosion was celebrated on Thursday by a number of organisations. Apparently, the circumstances in which these celebrations were held have not chastened the very large number of patriots who see the nuclear device as the ultimate guarantee for our survival.
Our problem, perhaps, has always been our inability to be rational and realistic when it comes to defining our national security ideas. What our ruling ideas, a total negation of the aspirations of the committed youth of those early years, have wrought is exploding in our face. While crisis management is imperative, the time has come for our rulers to seriously rethink their fundamental policies. In this respect, one surely assumes that they are fully cognisant of the critical situation that exists on the ground.
To conclude, I have attempted to show how personal grief of a certain kind can blend into the tapestry of our collective involvements. In the January of 1960, more than forty-nine years ago, Shamman gave me a book, Boccaccio’s ‘Tales from the Decameron’ with this inscription: “Ghazi! Today you were born; and with you was born one of the finest of all universes. Give this universe of yours beauty and immortality; that demon TIME threatens. And if you are afraid of time, call me from the other universe which is Shamman”.
To turn the corner
Let me begin with a confession: I sat through the live coverage of President Barack Obama’s address to the Muslim world on Thursday with rapt attention and felt convinced of his sincerity and good intentions. This, without any doubt, is a great initiative. Yes, considering the raw winds that are blowing across our troubled lands, the promise of ‘a new beginning’ is potentially breakable. But the spectacle of an American president saying what Obama did in Cairo was in itself a source of considerable delight.
So, what happens now? The point that one speech cannot make the difference has repeatedly been stressed. As it is, the wars that are fought in the minds of human beings do linger until some kind of a paradigm shift manifests itself with the acceptance of new realities and new ideas. What Obama’s remarkable speech prompts us to do in Pakistan is to carefully take stock of our relationship with and feelings towards not just the United States of America but also the phenomenon of Islamic militancy in all its manifestations.
This exercise would naturally confront us with some difficult questions about our national sense of direction and the challenges that have paved the way for our survival. It may be instructive, in this context, to review the entire exercise that was conducted by the Obama administration in formulating the ideas and the messages that are contained in Thursday’s historic oration. Indeed, an American commentator may even write a book on the making of this speech – and of Obama’s new policy towards Muslim countries. A separate study could review the massive operation that was conducted to promote and disseminate the speech.
We should also be mindful of the fact that Obama must represent America’s national interests as well as its public opinion. A popularly elected leader does not enjoy the power of a dictator or a military ruler to arbitrarily execute a U-turn in his country’s policies. Yes, the electoral victory of Obama is a dazzling illustration of how a nation can rise to a higher level of maturity and fairness through democracy. Still, Obama is the legitimate personification of America and there are bound to be limits to how far he can satisfy the expectations of the different sections of opinion in the Muslim world, particularly when America is a country that many Muslims love to hate.
Now, it is all right for the Muslim world to expect America to erase the general perception that its ‘war against terror’ is a reflection of some kind of Islamophobia, though Obama has expunged this term from America’s diplomatic lexicon and there was no mention of the words ‘terrorism’ and ‘terrorists’ in his Cairo speech. But what does the Muslim world, or any specific Muslim country, propose to do to improve the global image of Muslims?
After all, when Obama announces his resolve to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world, the Muslims not only have to assess the validity of this resolution but to also carefully examine their thoughts and feelings on what kinds of relations they want to foster with the United States. This issue is of particular significance for us in Pakistan. And its complexity is deepened by the burden of history that we carry. What is incontrovertible is that the American influence impinges on so many aspects of our national and foreign affairs.
This means that we must do some serious thinking on how we want this relationship to evolve. The irony here is that at the popular level, there is great distrust about American intentions and designs in this region. And such perceptions become hard to change even when the dynamics of a situation is changing at a quick pace. I say this not just with reference to the new language that Obama has adopted to talk to the Muslims, raising high expectations for policy action. Our own military action in Malakand and the humanitarian crisis that this has spawned is bound to have an impact on what we think of the Taliban and on America’s role in our emerging crises.
This was a critical time for US special envoy Richard Holbrooke to visit Pakistan. He announced increased US assistance for the internally displaced people and also visited a camp. On Friday, concluding his three-day visit, he said that the Pakistan armed forces have “turned the corner” in the present military offensive, successfully clearing several areas. Holbrooke repeatedly underlined the dominant US share in humanitarian assistance given to Pakistan and seemed anxious for its appreciation by the people of Pakistan.
If we have genuinely turned the corner in our campaign against the Taliban, or militants, or ‘violent extremists’, many things are likely to change. However, terrorist attacks and suicide bombings have continued. Friday’s suicide attack on a Dir mosque, just before the afternoon prayers, is the latest reminder of the immense potential for violence in our society. Reports said that twelve children were included in the large number of fatalities – between 30 and 40.
Coming back to Obama’s Cairo speech, we will need some early evidence of how America now interacts with Muslim countries to reduce tensions and promote peace, particularly in the Middle-East. After ‘violent extremism’ that Obama chose as his first issue to confront, he gave priority to “the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world”. It was refreshing to see an American president asserting that the Palestinians “have suffered in pursuit of a homeland”. He added: “So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable”.
It is not possible in this space to review the entire speech that had quotations from the holy books of the three Abrahamic faiths. The essential message was that we should forget the past and try to understand an opposing view. This will be very difficult for us to do, given our emotional and intellectual proclivities. For instance, revenge is the overriding instinct in our tribal culture that some of us want to romanticize. Obama also spoke about women’s rights and in this area, too, we have serious problems to contend with.
Finally – and irrespective of whether we want to look at Obama’s address as a point of reference or not – we must think of making a new beginning in Pakistan. What seems necessary, to quote Obama, is “that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors”. Ah, but that would demand peace and tolerance and respect for dissident views. America should have nothing to do with how we build such an environment. And no amount of financial assistance or military hardware can help us in this struggle for Pakistan’s survival.
So, what happens now? The point that one speech cannot make the difference has repeatedly been stressed. As it is, the wars that are fought in the minds of human beings do linger until some kind of a paradigm shift manifests itself with the acceptance of new realities and new ideas. What Obama’s remarkable speech prompts us to do in Pakistan is to carefully take stock of our relationship with and feelings towards not just the United States of America but also the phenomenon of Islamic militancy in all its manifestations.
This exercise would naturally confront us with some difficult questions about our national sense of direction and the challenges that have paved the way for our survival. It may be instructive, in this context, to review the entire exercise that was conducted by the Obama administration in formulating the ideas and the messages that are contained in Thursday’s historic oration. Indeed, an American commentator may even write a book on the making of this speech – and of Obama’s new policy towards Muslim countries. A separate study could review the massive operation that was conducted to promote and disseminate the speech.
We should also be mindful of the fact that Obama must represent America’s national interests as well as its public opinion. A popularly elected leader does not enjoy the power of a dictator or a military ruler to arbitrarily execute a U-turn in his country’s policies. Yes, the electoral victory of Obama is a dazzling illustration of how a nation can rise to a higher level of maturity and fairness through democracy. Still, Obama is the legitimate personification of America and there are bound to be limits to how far he can satisfy the expectations of the different sections of opinion in the Muslim world, particularly when America is a country that many Muslims love to hate.
Now, it is all right for the Muslim world to expect America to erase the general perception that its ‘war against terror’ is a reflection of some kind of Islamophobia, though Obama has expunged this term from America’s diplomatic lexicon and there was no mention of the words ‘terrorism’ and ‘terrorists’ in his Cairo speech. But what does the Muslim world, or any specific Muslim country, propose to do to improve the global image of Muslims?
After all, when Obama announces his resolve to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world, the Muslims not only have to assess the validity of this resolution but to also carefully examine their thoughts and feelings on what kinds of relations they want to foster with the United States. This issue is of particular significance for us in Pakistan. And its complexity is deepened by the burden of history that we carry. What is incontrovertible is that the American influence impinges on so many aspects of our national and foreign affairs.
This means that we must do some serious thinking on how we want this relationship to evolve. The irony here is that at the popular level, there is great distrust about American intentions and designs in this region. And such perceptions become hard to change even when the dynamics of a situation is changing at a quick pace. I say this not just with reference to the new language that Obama has adopted to talk to the Muslims, raising high expectations for policy action. Our own military action in Malakand and the humanitarian crisis that this has spawned is bound to have an impact on what we think of the Taliban and on America’s role in our emerging crises.
This was a critical time for US special envoy Richard Holbrooke to visit Pakistan. He announced increased US assistance for the internally displaced people and also visited a camp. On Friday, concluding his three-day visit, he said that the Pakistan armed forces have “turned the corner” in the present military offensive, successfully clearing several areas. Holbrooke repeatedly underlined the dominant US share in humanitarian assistance given to Pakistan and seemed anxious for its appreciation by the people of Pakistan.
If we have genuinely turned the corner in our campaign against the Taliban, or militants, or ‘violent extremists’, many things are likely to change. However, terrorist attacks and suicide bombings have continued. Friday’s suicide attack on a Dir mosque, just before the afternoon prayers, is the latest reminder of the immense potential for violence in our society. Reports said that twelve children were included in the large number of fatalities – between 30 and 40.
Coming back to Obama’s Cairo speech, we will need some early evidence of how America now interacts with Muslim countries to reduce tensions and promote peace, particularly in the Middle-East. After ‘violent extremism’ that Obama chose as his first issue to confront, he gave priority to “the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world”. It was refreshing to see an American president asserting that the Palestinians “have suffered in pursuit of a homeland”. He added: “So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable”.
It is not possible in this space to review the entire speech that had quotations from the holy books of the three Abrahamic faiths. The essential message was that we should forget the past and try to understand an opposing view. This will be very difficult for us to do, given our emotional and intellectual proclivities. For instance, revenge is the overriding instinct in our tribal culture that some of us want to romanticize. Obama also spoke about women’s rights and in this area, too, we have serious problems to contend with.
Finally – and irrespective of whether we want to look at Obama’s address as a point of reference or not – we must think of making a new beginning in Pakistan. What seems necessary, to quote Obama, is “that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors”. Ah, but that would demand peace and tolerance and respect for dissident views. America should have nothing to do with how we build such an environment. And no amount of financial assistance or military hardware can help us in this struggle for Pakistan’s survival.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)