Democracy in Pakistan: The Missing Link?

By democracy, we usually mean a government elected / selected by people and if necessary, kicked-out / destroyed by the people. Both of these actions need certain rules and regulations to avoid anarchy. Unfortunately Pakistani civilians need to undertand that stability is prime for the people. If they fail to deliver on that, army will be the plan B.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Generals at bay

Feb 15th 2001 | LAHORE

From The Economist print edition

AFTER over two years of relative oblivion in self-imposed exile, Benazir Bhutto, a former prime minister of Pakistan, has jumped on to the front pages of the country’s newspapers. She has done so, as it happens, on the basis of a report in a British newspaper. The report claims that the former government of Nawaz Sharif leaned on some judges to convict Miss Bhutto and her husband, Asif Zardari, for corruption in 1999. The evidence for this is said to be in the form of taped conversations between senior government officials and a judge at Miss Bhutto’s trial. The tapes were made by a member of Pakistani intelligence who decamped to London and has now, so the story goes, been pricked by conscience.

Miss Bhutto’s footprints seem to be all over the story. After her conviction in 1999, she claimed that she had not had a fair trial. But the Supreme Court routinely postponed hearing her petition for one reason or another. Last December, when Mr Sharif was exiled to Saudi Arabia by the present military government of General Pervez Musharraf, Miss Bhutto sensed a political vacuum in the country and considered returning to Pakistan and taking on the generals.

The Musharraf regime said it would arrest her if she set foot in Pakistan and dig up more evidence of her corrupt activities. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court announced that it would hear her 1999 petition on February 26th. This led pundits to speculate that the military regime, having got rid of one prime minister, was gearing up to finish off another. But the tapes have compromised the judiciary, whose credibility is already low after decades of battering by generals and politicians. The Supreme Court will be under pressure to acquit Miss Bhutto or order a lengthy retrial which would give her lawyers a chance to air her grievances.

This may be just the beginning of General Musharraf’s troubles. Disgruntled opponents of the regime have asked the Supreme Court to strike down an “accountability” law under which hundreds of politicians and bureaucrats have been imprisoned or sidelined from politics. Lawyers’ organisations across the country have banded together to announce a national strike on February 27th, demanding an early restoration of civilian rule. And the Alliance for the Restoration of Democracy—comprising supporters of Miss Bhutto and Mr Sharif, along with several other parties—is planning a demonstration on March 23rd, Pakistan Day.

Worse, the religious parties are beginning to suspect that General Musharraf may not be too kindly disposed towards them, despite his reliance on religious militants to fuel the insurgency in Kashmir against India. The government is worried by a sectarian conflict that has claimed dozens of lives. It is embarrassed by outpourings on alleged blasphemy and immorality. Last month, bearded mobs burnt down the offices of the Frontier Post, a Peshawar newspaper that had inadvertently printed a blasphemous letter. Last week, the home minister, Moinuddin Haider, a retired general, was in Afghanistan, asking the Taliban regime not to provide sanctuary to “religious terrorists” from Pakistan. Extremists are now accusing the generals of acting at the behest of “super-Satan America”. An exaggeration, surely.

The following article exposes the malaise that has set in the political system of Pakistan (with the full cooperation of all agencies of the state). However, there still remains hope, for as long as such incidents keep getting exposed, there remains a chance for redemption:

The Friday Times, Editorial by Najam Sethi, Feb. 15, 2001

The Sunday Times of London has recently published a story that damns politicians and state institutions alike in Pakistan. The report suggests that an official of the Intelligence Bureau was ordered in 1998 by the head of the Accountability Bureau, Mr Saif ur Rehman, to tap the telephones of Justice Abdul Qayyum of the Lahore High Court (illegal order by politicians, illegal implementation by IB). The IB official later pocketed the tapes and decamped to London, eventually handing them over to the British newspaper. If true, the conversations between Justice Qayyum and Saif ur Rehman, Khalid Anwar (then law minister), Mrs Abdul Qayyum and others are fascinating because they reveal the political bankruptcy of the system and those who are elected or nominated to make it work.

The tapes suggest that Justice Qayyum was bullied by the then prime minister Nawaz Sharif and his minions into convicting former prime minister Benazir Bhutto and her spouse Asif Zardari for corruption in 1998. This means that - irrespective of the substantial evidence laid against the two accused - the trial wasn`t conducted entirely in a free or fair manner as required by law. Ms Bhutto shrieked as much during and after the trial but critics, including TFT, dismissed her allegations against Justice Qayyum as inconceivable. Hence when the review petition comes up for hearing before the Supreme Court on February 26, the court will be hard put to choose between acquitting the couple or ordering a fresh trial. If it clings to a third option - upholding the verdict - it risks being tarred by the same brush.

The role played by each of the actors merits comment. Nawaz Sharif ordered Saif ur Rehman to bug the judge and Mr Rehman had no qualms in barking compliance to the head of the IB who did likewise to his subordinate staff. Everyone acted illegally down the chain of command. Mr Rehman, in particular, stands out like a sore thumb. He is earlier known to have boasted that the ``judges were in his pocket``. Apparently, Mr Sharif also leaned on the then chief justice of the Lahore High Court, Justice Rashid Aziz, to advise Justice Qayyum to do the needful or else. The Supreme Judicial Council needs to take a careful look at this allegation.

The law minister, Khalid Anwar, acted in a deplorable manner. What is wrong with asking a judge to hurry up, he asks. Nothing, if this is done in open court and in a transparent fashion. But it is immoral it if it is done amidst dire threats brandished by officials at the Prime Minister`s behest. Mr Anwar also claims that his government never authorised the IB to wire-tap the judges. Nonsense, says former chief justice Sajjad Ali Shah, who reports that when a bug was discovered on his phone, Mr Anwar advised him not to make an issue of it. We might also recall that this is the same gent who, as President Farooq Leghari`s council in 1996-97 in the Bhutto dismissal case before the Supreme Court, cited phone tapping of judges by the Bhutto regime as a major justification for her government`s ouster.

Finally, there is the judge in the dock. By all accounts, a most competent and learned man, indeed one on whom undue reliance has been thrust by politicians and judges alike in politically sensitive or legally complex cases. But the tapes have compromised his position. He could try and ride out the vicious gossip or he could call it a day and quietly fade away. If he chooses the first route, the law would require him to face the Supreme Judicial Council and explain his situation.

One last matter. The timing of the revelations - just before the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear Benazir Bhutto`s review petition - and the dubious role of the IB Deputy Director (how has he suddenly acquired a conscience?) is thought to cast doubts about the veracity of the tapes and the allegations flowing from them. Not so. The tapes are authentic enough. If they weren`t, every one of the alleged culprits would have tripped over the others to sue the Sunday Times for millions of pounds in criminal defamation and the judges involved would have hauled up everyone in sight for gross contempt of court.

Nor should it matter whether the spook in question received a hefty cheque or a promise of some lucrative posting in the future for allowing his conscience to get the better of him. The fact is that Ms Bhutto has cunningly exploited the counter-evidence at her disposal for maximum effect like a true politician who may be down but refuses to be out.

This case could have far-reaching repercussions. It might give Ms Bhutto a new lease of life. It might stiffen the resolve of lawyers and politicians to agitate for democratic revival and accountability. And it might embolden the judiciary to redeem itself by standing up a little bit to the government.

An interesting account of how a delicate balance between the President and the Government have been reached in India over the years:

http://www.indiaserver.com/thehindu/stories/05162523.htm

In response to krashid (Reply # 623)
Dear K:

Yes, Seyyed Vali Reza Nasr wrote a book on Maulana Mawdudi in 1996: Mawdudi and the Making of Islamic Revivalism. His next book will be published by the middle of this year. It is called “The Islamic Leviathan : State Power and Islam in Malaysia and Pakistan.”

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

BAhmed

Looks like you are right. Syed vali Reza Nasr.

I think he has also written one more book related to Pakistan. But I may be imagining.

In response to krashid (Reply # 621)

Dear K:

I think, you have confused Seyyed Vali Reza with Seyyed Hossein Nasr. They both are good scholars. Syed Vali Reza had published a book on the Jamaat in 1994 (entitled The Vanguard of the Islamic Revolution : The Jamaat-i-Islami of Pakistan).

Pakistani politics requires a lot of toleration. Intolerant and oppressive solutions are not good for the health of Pakistan, whether or not their origin lies in the Jamaat or any so-called progressive/liberal party.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

BAhmed #618

There is a very interesting Research book on Jamat-e-Islami by some NASR (Hussain or something like that) where he stressess that Jamat-e-Islami by involving itself in democratic politics has been forced to do struggle in democratic framework

or to say it another way that Jamat-e-Islami has matured over time as far as democratic struggle is concerned.

We should give them a benefit of doubt.

(The period when Jamat got corrupted is Zia period when Jamat got a massive funding in the name of Afghan Jihad)

In response to krashid (Reply # 619)
Dear K:

A democratic polity needs to be based on sound and authentic knowledge. The issue of identity is linked strongly with the allocation of national resources. I know that the Mohajir’s have been systematically discriminated during the past forty-years or so. But, this understanding needs to be substantiated with facts. Otherwise, it cannot be treated more than hearsay and/or a limited personal experience.

Your comment about the migration of the Mohajirs has some weight. Migration to foreign lands, however, cannot be explained only in terms of discrimination at home. How about similar trend in other ethnic communities?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

BAhmed #615

Practically speaking Mohajirs are a seperate identity. (however we deny it). But they should consider themselves as part of Sind without necessarily sacrificing their identity.

Patriotism I was referring to in the context of East Pakistan when Mohajir wholeheartedly supported the massacre of Bengalis in the name of patriotism and would not talk about co-operation with UNPATRIOTIC SINDHIS.

As far as his corruption and co-optation before. He has collaborated with Army and ISI before with the full backing of Mohajirs to the detriment of rights of smaller nationalities and democracy (narrow ethnicity).

I don`t have a figure for the quality or quantity of Mohajirs. But considering my surroundings and relatives I think so. Massive emigration of Mohajir to other lands for opportunity also is an indicator for this. If they would have equivalent opprtunity at home why would they do it.

I agree with last part of your post that it is mutual co-operation and competition among deprived people which is desired.

Do it alone means fighting the status quo.

J I ON THE CURRENT MILITARY REGIME

It is generally believed that JI has a lot of following among the fauji jawans and relatively junior officers. Qazi H. Ahmad appears to be a pro-Army politician.

Why Qazi H. Ahmad has taken the following stand? Is this an attempt to reiforce his support base in the army? Is this a product of the need to revitalize the morale of the faujies and to provide a safe exit to the army (and to alleviate the adverse affects of the Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report and Benazir Bhutto’s recent attacks on the role of the military)?

Ahmad wants the military to go back to the barracks. What is his position about the political role of the military through the National Security Council, demilitarism, and a significant reduction in the proportion of national wealth spent on the military?

Sincerely, Bilal ahmad

``Army`s integrity at stake: Qazi
By Our Staff Reporter

LAHORE — Jama’at-i-Islami Ameer Qazi Hussain Ahmad has said that the integrity and honour of Pak Army has been put at stake by its deployment on the tasks other than its real functions.

“It is being done only to protect the interests of a few persons,” he added.

Addressing a central working committee meeting of the National Labour Federation at Mansoora on Monday, he said that the government, which took over to strengthen the crippled economy, had become an instrument to further deteriorate the economy which had put the country’s solidarity at risk.

Qazi said that the large-scale retrenchment of workers from the government departments and closure of industries had increased unemployment at an alarming rate.

The law and order situation in the country was also not satisfactory which was also bringing a bad name to the Army.

He said the solution of all those lay in the immediate withdrawal of Army. He said that the Jama’at was opposed to all kinds of oppression and it would continue to perform that task`` (The Nation, January 23, 2001).

In response to krashid (Reply # 616)
Dear K:

Your statement: “While Altaf was guiding the Mohajir nation before, he took them out of Islamic and Pakistani patritism . . . propagated by our ruling elite. (And that was the only positive aspect of his struggle).

My reply: So, the Mohajirs are a “nation.” Does this mean that the Mohajirs should also have a state (i.e., a nation-state) of their own? If yes, how viable would be such a state? If no, what is your conception of a political community?

Is “patritism” actually “patriotism”? If later, what is your take on patriotism? How about a sense of belonging/attachment? Please explain your position a little more clearly.

Your statement: “Now he is out of control and I don`t think will be able to take the position Army would like to give him (rubber stamp). So he has no choice but to take a pro people stand.”

My response: You may be right. But, power corrupts people. Was he ever corrupted or coopted before?

Your statement: “Mr. Mahesar is right regarding some Mohajirs in high position. But he is forgetting that they are taking care of their immediate family and majority of Mohajirs are going down into a deep down spiral.”

My response: What proportion of the Mohajirs occupy high positions? Would they maintain this situation during the next 10, 25, or say 50 years?

Do Mohajirs dominate only in a few large cities – namely, Karachi, Hyderabad, and Sukkur? How about Larkana, Jacobabad, Nawabshah, Thatta, Badin, Tando Adam, Tando Allahyar, Mirpur Khas, Rohri, Gambat, Tando Mohammad Khan, Shikarpur, Matiari and a host of other small towns? Is there any published and reliable information? What happened to the quota system? Did it not help the rural part of Sindh?

Your statement: “I hope Altaf continues in his new found path. And if Mohajirs have to do it alone, they will do it alone.”

My response: There exists a complementarity between urban and rural Sindh. The future of Sindh lies in both cooperation and competition (not in unnecessary and bloody confrontation) within and without. You said: Do it alone? What?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

BAhmed#615

While Altaf was guiding the Mohajir nation before, he took them out of Islamic and Pakistani patritism bull sh-it propagated by our ruling elite. (And that was the only positive aspect of his struggle).

Now he is out of control and I don`t think will be able to take the position Army would like to give him (rubber stamp). So he has no choice but to take a pro people stand.

Mr. Mahesar is right regarding some Mohajirs in high position. But he is forgetting that they are taking care of their immediate family and majority of Mohajirs are going down into a deep down spiral.

I hope Altaf continues in his new found path. And if Mohajirs have to do it alone, they will do it alone.

IDENTITY, AUTHENTICITY AND DEMOCRACY

In an ealier post (Reply # 613), I raised the question of identity and reproduced a letter which refered to the following letter of Mustafa Mahesar. Mahesar welcomes Altaf`s move to call himself a Sindhi, but doubts the authenticity of his rhetoric. He also makes claims which need to be substantiated. But, how? Remember Roohi Allah Ditta also made similar claims about the Mohajirs in Islamabad. Can liberal democracy help resolve such difficulties?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad


Dawn, Letter, January 16, 2000
``Altaf`s lip service

INSTEAD of issuing statements of goodwill and making insipid addresses targeting the Sindhi audience, Altaf Hussain should ask his community, of which he claims to be the sole spokesman and leader, to cooperate with us: they are not. All the top royalties and offices of the government and the state, the media, the development and financial institutions, the industry and the educational institutions are manned and managed by the people of his community. Why is it so that the students of the interior cannot get admission to Karachi University? The Mohajirs came to our land, Sindh, because they found riches in it, but nothing has been given back to us.

If the Punjabi and Pathan settlers send their money to their respective provinces, the Mohajirs send it to Australia, England, Canada and the USA. And, finally, why is it so that Mr Altaf speaks like a statesman but acts like a petty trade union leader who is always ready to make a bargain with the management? We, the Sindhis, welcome his word but fear his deed.

MUSTAFA MAHESAR, Karachi``

Ahmed B#613

Do you think problem of minorities can be solved in the framework of Pakistan. Don`t you see the putting of Atomic Bomb (meaning army) to the heads of people.

Can our army afford to fight its own people.

If they have not yet forgotten Bengal or probably remember after the release of HRCR, they should stop playing their game and give minorities their long due rights.

Seeing the long history of Pakistan and particularly what is happening recently I have no trust in GOP for this. Probably time for AK47 is not far, as I am viewing it.

Sher Ki Eik Din Ki Zindagi Geedar Ki Sau Sala Zindagi Se Bahtar Hai.

DEMOCRACY AND NATIONAL IDENTITY

Like democracy, the meaning of national identity needs to be adequately discussed in Pakistan. If there could be ethnic Sindhis (Sindhi-speaking Sindhis) and Urdu-speaking Sindhis, then why can’t we have Sindhi-Pakistanis, Punjabi–Pakistanis, Baluch-Pakistanis, Pakhtoon-Pakistanis? Is it also possible that some people may prefer to call themselves as Pakistani-Pakistanis, nonhyphenated Pakistanis, or (just) Pakistanis?

If some Pakistanis were somehow rewarded for their subnational place-based identities, what incentives did it provide to those who did not fall in this category of rewarded individuals and who had historically identified themselves as nothing but Pakistani.

What kind of national policy do we have in Pakistan, if any?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

P.S. Do the following letters provide some insights?

Dawn, Letter, January 21, 2001
Pakistani identity
I was surprised and disappointed to read Mustafa Mahesar`s full of hatred letter 53 years after this beautiful country was created (Dawn Jan 16). I do not see any difference between Mr. Mahesar and Mr Altaf Hussain. Both of them have opted to identify themselves with a lesser identity - Mohajir / Sindhi - rather than see themselves as Pakistani.

KAMAL KHAN, Karachi

Dawn, Letter, January 21, 2001
Democracy and political parties

BEFORE me is Dawn dated 17th January, 2001, with Dateline Hyderabad by Mr Aziz Malik under the head line of ``Parties versus democracy`` in which the writer has discussed the issue of democracy within political parties of Pakistan with special reference to Jeay Sindh movement.

Having been associated with G.M. Syed and his movement for 30 years, I feel obliged to respond to some of the deliberations of Mr Malik.

Agreeing with the view that it should be the foremost requirement of a political party to have democracy within its own ranks before demanding democracy for the country, I would like to tell the writer and all the democracy-loving people that Jeay Sindh Mahaz is the only party of Sindh and one of the very few in Pakistan which throughout its existence of about a quarter century has upheld the democratic principles without any blemish and has not allowed the same to slip away at any time at any cost and on any excuse.

Even in 1995 when G.M. Syed left us and so many powers were bent upon breaking and destroying Jeay Sindh Mahaz we postponed the party`s biennial elections for only three months. And during 1992-93 military operation in Sindh when political activities were prohibited, we held our national congress session in Balochistan in very difficult conditions but did not allow democratic process to be hindered. Not only elections but all the decisions in Mahaz are taken by duly elected forums, a fact well known to all the knowledgeable people of Sindh.

However it is an irony that most people affiliated with the ``national press`` but working in Sindh have very little knowledge, about Sindh and its politics. When talking about ``splinter groups`` of Jeay Sindh one is expected to know that after the creation of Bangladesh when the slogan of Jeay Sindh was turned into a movement, G.M. Syed launched it from the platform of Jeay Sindh Mahaz which was set up in June 1972.

All the other groups mentioned by Mr Malik were created later, some of them even after the death of Syed, by one or the other leader to pursue their own line of action.

It is not only the nationalist movement of Sindh having different groups. Palestinians fighting a very hard and protracted war for the liberation of their homeland are working from about a dozen different platforms. Kashmir`s freedom struggle is going on through non-violent as well as violent means. Then what is the logic behind choosing Sindh`s nationalist movement for condemnation on the basis of grouping while others sailing in the same boat are praised?

ABDUL KHALIQUE JUNEJO, Chief Organizer Jeay Sindh Mahaz , Karachi

Militants kill three over J&K panchayat elections

JAMMU (AFP) - Militants opposed to panchayat elections in Jammu and Kashmir shot dead a woman and her two sons after they cast their ballots, police said on Friday.

A police spokesman said the woman and her sons aged 24 and 25 years were killed late Thursday night in their home in Panhed village of Rajouri district.

The three were killed because they defied a ban imposed by militants on voting in panchayat elections, the spokesman said.

The Hurriyat Conference has also called for a boycott of the polls - the first to be held for more than two decades.

Going by precedent, Kashmiris have abided such calls, whether they be parliamentary or state assembly polls.

Militants have been enforcing election boycotts in J&K since 1989

Ahmed B #604

I think our ruling elite has no power to bribe the people of Karachi anymore. (lack of funds, jobs etc)

Benazir and co acting as a spokesman of people to get some benefit for people are no longer acceptable to establishment and our ruling elite wants their touts in the form of various leaders who can calm the people and not independent personalities. Nor can we expect BB or NS to carry the banner where there is no chance of them being elected.

My thinking is that question of minorities needs to be tackled before we can talk of strong federation. And unity of minorities will definitely help gain some relief for them.(The establishment has no power even to bribe one minority. If they can take care of their constituency in North Punjab that will be a mammoth task for them)

BHUTTO VERSUS BHUTTO

A spokesman for the PPP (SB) said (it is not a quote):

“Through ARD, alliance, Benazir has actually demonstrated her understanding of democracy, which appears to be just a series of intrigues that would bring her back to the chair. . . .”

Comment: Ghinwa Bhutto, a Labanese-Pakistani and the leader of PPP (SB), seems to be opposed to the PPP. What are the prospect of her party to become a viable force in Sindh, let alone Pakistan? Dr. Mubashir Hasan is an active member of this party.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

P.S. Mumtaz Bhutto, a cousin of Benazir, has his own party. Are Pakistani tribes as divided as they appear? If yes, why? If no, why not?

In response to fairdinkum (Reply # 607)
Dear Fairdinkum:

Thanks for the link. The message is interesting, though not so well written. It reflects the desperation of Altaf and his compatriots

I suspect that the MQM was forced to issue such a politically-charged birthday statement to show its solidarity with other staunch Sindhi groups (such as the JSQM).

The anti-Punjabi (establishment) rhetoric may create some ethnic difficulties in Karachi.

It is unfortunately the nature of our dominant national/political discourse and the nature of dominant-subordinate social relations which, in my view, makes people issue such kind of statements.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

PS. Krashid, please join in the discussion... i have a lot of questions for you.

Bilal,

Please visit the following link:

This is Altaf Hussain`s message on G M Syed`s birthday... I don`t know what he is upto... is this just rehotric? Or is it finally MQM`s position as far as politics of Sindh is concerned? What`s cooking? I thought he was moving away from ethno-politics...

Altaf Hussain`s message on G M Syed`s birthday...

http://www.mqm.org/English-News/Jan-2001/ah-message-gmsyed.htm

MQM`s recent moves are somwhat strange, but predictable. MQM has joined hands with all newly established Governments - including that of NS and BB - only to part company within weeks... Altaf`s hasty actions have resulted in a lot of bloodshed in Karachi as the estranged governments of BB and NS used the might and power of Pakistani security forces to payback MQM for their non-cooperation... I think he needs to seriously re-think his strategy.... MQM has become like a person who sleeps around with every potential partner in the hope of finding a suitable mate.... this only brings hurt and frustration for MQM, and residents of Karachi end up paying a heavy price for Altaf`s follies...

More on your questions later...

Couple of interesting news items in today’s dawn

Legality of exile [of NS and Co] questioned

http://www.dawn.com/2001/01/19/top11.htm


CE asks officials to project country as modern Islamic state

http://www.dawn.com/2001/01/19/top15.htm

BENAZIR: THE ONLY BRIDGE?

Wajid Shamsul Hasan, a diehard PPP supporter/beneficiary, writes (Nation, January 19, 2001):

“Pakistan has in Benazir Bhutto material of a world leader who has an international standing, reputation and a vision capable of taking initiatives to meet the newer global challenges. It is time civil-military establishment gives up its Bhutto phobia and comes to terms with Benazir for a meaningful co-operation and partnership for the good of the country. She is perhaps the only leader of weight and substance who is sticking to the idea of a federal Pakistan. She defends federal Pakistan before leaders of smaller provinces who want a new setup as per the wording of the 1940 Lahore Resolution that mentions creation of independent autonomous states. She has conceded to possible readjustments (at an appropriate time) in the Constitution to meet their grievances without disturbing the federal concept.

Indeed, Benazir is fighting a battle to save federal Pakistan. If she were out, as per the scheme of things now in the process of her political elimination, the bridge that has kept the country together would not be there.”

Comment: Hasan was Pakistan High Commissioner to UK under Benazir government. Is he real, honest, and dedicated? What constitutional changes were made during her two regimes?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

In response to krashid (Reply # 603)
Dear K:

Your statement: “I think one the effects of breaking up of ARD will be that queen (BB) of Pakistan might have to delay her arrival for the people waiting for Messiah in her form. It will also help Musharraf in weakening the PPP.”

My response: It makes sense, though you need to provide some explanation. Do you think that Altaf has been bribed (in some form) by the current military regime? Maybe Altaf sees no point in joining an alliance that would once again lead to the status quo politics (making no significant difference as far as the dominant/subordinate relations are concerned). Is the PPP still the leading political party in Sindh? What are Musharraf’s political designs?

Your statement: “But on the other hand the stance taken by MQM (correct for the first time) will soften the hands of military on it. But it will also be very progressive for democratic movements in Pakistan, if the amity between Sindhis and Mohajirs increases. (And Mohajirs for the first time will start identifying themselves with oppressed people of Pakistan).”

My response: Why do you think this as a correct move? What is going on in Sindh and on the PONAM front? Solidarity between the weaker/dominated elements on a national level may force the local and regional elite to become more responsive.

Your statement: “I hope MQM becomes the platform for all oppressed people of Pakistan. The sincerity of MQM and Altaf will be evident if Sindhi people will be making their way into top echeleon of MQM.”

Your statement: MQM is perhaps the most organized political party in Pakistan (especially because it is still a movement). PONM needs MQM, and vice versa. Both parties agree for the need of a new Constitution. The issue of a new Constitution from the above (only) is not without some difficulties, though I also believe that a new Constitution is needed. Pakistan needs a high-powered (independent) Constitutional Commission.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Ahmed B# 599

I think one the effects of breaking up of ARD will be that queen (BB) of Pakistan might have to delay her arrival for the people waiting for Messiah in her form.

It will also help Musharraf in weakening the PPP.

But on the other hand the stance taken by MQM (correct for the first time) will soften the hands of military on it. But it will also be very progressive for democratic movements in Pakistan, if the amity between Sindhis and Mohajirs increases. (And Mohajirs for the first time will start identifying themselves with oppressed people of Pakistan).

I hope MQM becomes the platform for all oppressed people of Pakistan. The sincerity of MQM and Altaf will be evident if Sindhi people will be making their way into top echeleon of MQM.

re ahmadb #600:

Dear Bilal:

What`s wrong with being opinionated especially if those happen to be the right ones? :)

Jim Rogers has almost a cult following on Wall street for his often contrarian views on global investing. He was the first one to see the inflationary pressures building up in the US economy now. A little early perhaps but right nevertheless. He is definitely not an anthropologist or academic but his impressions should be considered as a good indicator of what a sophisticated investor sees when he looks at an economy/country. Rogers puts his money where his mouth his because unlike most other money managers he uses his own money for his global bets. Take him lightly at your own peril.

later

-sac

In response to shammi (Reply # 600)
Dear Shammi:

Thanks for the audio link! Although Pakistanis need to hear this video and think a little bit, I am convinced that little and partial knowledge is often too dangerous. This person is too opinionated, as I see him.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Pakistan audio

A travelling Wall Street Financier, frequent financial commentator on CNBC and business magazine, Jim Rogers, recently travelled the breadth of Pakistan by road. His impressions on the country:

http://www.millenniumadventure.com/content/audio/rams/paki_24.ram

DEMOCRACY IN PAKISTAN: WHERE DOES THE MQM FIT IN?

According to the following news clipping (Nation, January 18, 2000), the MQM has quit the Alliance for the Restoration of Democracy in Pakistan. This piece needs to be analyzed critically based upon the 53 year long history of politics in Pakistan.

We need to ask:

(1) Why has the MQM decided to take such a stand? Is it motivated by a covert deal between the MQM and the military establishment (particularly General Musharraf and General Haider)? How is this decision linked with the MQM’s membership (?) in the PONAM?

(2) What would be the implication of this decision, and the MQM’s stand, on the politics of Sindh?

(3) How important is the MQM for the PML (N) and/or the PPP? Would these parties take some measures to mollify the MQM’s position and, thus, gain support?

(4) Why are the ANP and the PPP so much bent upon protecting a constitution that has been virtually desecrated by the current military regime? Why is a new constitution so necessary?

(5) What is a federation/federalism? Is this concept contest-free? Are there more than one discourses? If yes, how do they differ and why?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

“MQM quits ARD
From Our Correspondent

KARACHI –The Muttahida Qaumi Movement has quit the ARD after the latter’s leadership and its member parties rejected their demands for a new Constitution Commission, to determine the responsible for extra-judicial killings and apology from PML (N) and PPP on the killings of MQM’s workers.

The Altaf-led party had demanded of ARD to struggle for a new Constituent Assembly under a new Constitution in which four provinces should have equal representation.
Talking to The Nation, Sheikh Liaquat Hussain, Parliamentary Party leader of MQM, explained that his party never demanded confederation. Rather, we demand the federal system under which the centre has only three portfolios: Foreign, Currency and Defence.
To a question, he said that Quaid-i-Azam also had talked of such federation. He referred that father of the nation being the president of the Constituent Assembly addressed the assembly in 1948 and elaborated the concept of such federation.
He said that they do not believe in 1973 Constitution but they want a new Constitution to be formulated in accordance with the 1940 Resolution. MQM wants implementation in the spirit of that historic Resolution.

‘Under present Constitution, Punjab has majority in the Parliament of 217 members with its 115 members. The smaller provinces cannot be satisfied with present arrangements’, he explained.

He said that MQM had demanded the constitution of a Commission to determine the action against those responsible for the extra-judicial killings of its workers during PPP and PML (N) governments and ascertain those police, rangers and establishment’s people involved in such cases.

Sheikh said that neither ARD accepted the demand for new Constitution nor the PPP and PML (N) apologised for extra-judicial killings so we would not continue with them.
It is relevant to add here that ARD Chief, Nawabzada Nasrullah Khan has said that MQM had signed the joint declaration of ARD in which MQM, like other component parties, also had pledged to the people of Pakistan to uphold the supremacy of the 1973 Constitution.
However, Shaikh Liaquat Hussain, clarified in exclusive chat with this reporter that Aftab Sheikh signed the declaration in good faith and it was not though that they would hoodwink us.

Interestingly, the differences between ARD and MQM have sparked off a new war of words. Javed Hashmi of PML (N) alleged that MQM was trying to avoid its participation in the movement to be launched by the ARD against the government. PPP alleged that MQM had reached a covert deal with the military government so it was looking for pretexts to abandon the ARD.

MQM leaders accused ARD of having been establishment’s ploy. Tariq Javed expressed concern on dubbing those as anti-state elements who demanded provincial autonomy. MQM also criticised Asfandyar Wali for his opposition to MQM’s demands.”

Pakistan leader pressured to introduce Islamic system

January 17, 2001

MUNARA, Pakistan (AP) -- A group led by retired army officers is threatening to establish its own Islamic state within Pakistan unless the nation`s military government introduces Islamic rule within weeks.

The call for an Islamic system in the mostly Muslim nation comes from Akram Awan, who says 300,000 people have sworn allegiance to Tanzeem-ul-Ikhwan, the organization he leads from a mosque 150 kilometers (90 miles) south of Islamabad.

``We believe very deeply in Islam and in the need for an Islamic system in Pakistan. This is our jihad,`` or holy war, Awan told The Associated Press in an interview Tuesday at the mosque in Munara.

Unlike other religious groups in Pakistan, Tanzeem-ul-Ikhwan is made up largely of former members of the army, which seized control of the country in a bloodless coup in October 1999.

At a public meeting of his followers last week, Awan said the group will enforce its version of Islam in an area he is threatening to chalk out if Pakistan is not made an Islamic state by March 7.

Awan said Tuesday that the military government of Gen. Pervez Musharraf will be unable to prevent the move.

``They know it`s not an easy thing to stop me. We are the army,`` Awan said. ``It is a fact that those in the army are our children, our grandchildren, our nephews.``

Asked for comment, the office of Pakistan`s religious affairs minister, Mahmood Qazi, said Qazi met with Awan last week after he delivered the ultimatum and told him the government wants to move toward Islamic rule.

There are signs the military government is already doing so. For example, the army announced this month that it would outlaw interest payments charged by banks and lending institutions as of July 1 in keeping with Islamic teachings.

In a show of power in December, tens of thousands of men gathered outside Awan`s headquarters during the holy month of Ramadan, living in tents and preparing to march on the capital. They were to be armed only with prayer beads and copies of the Quran.

Awan called off the march at the last minute after a meeting with Moinuddin Haider, Pakistan`s interior minister and a retired general, who he said pledged to move Pakistan toward Islamic rule.

``They promised us then that there would be an Islamic system in Pakistan,`` Awan said. ``We won`t compromise and we won`t play politics. They have to deliver on their promise.``

Sac #594

If you give anti democratic tirade without giving an alternative (We do not live in Utopia), it will be useless.

RIGHT TO EXIST/RIGHT TO JUSTICE

In the following letter to the Editor, Sabeen Jatoi calls for justice in the case of the murder of her father, allegedly at the hands of the police. How long should such a case take to decide? Why the public prosecutor is not attending the case/court proceedings? Does anybody know more about this case? Comments welcome.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Ashiq Jatoi`s murder case

IT has been a little more than a year since the present rulers proclaimed themselves as saviours` of this nation. But life for most Pakistanis is still the same. The political culture is the same, it is just the faces that are different.

The reasons for this cynicism are diverse. I shall take examples that concern me to illustrate my point. The police murdered my father Ashiq Hussain Jatoi on the 20th of September 1996. My confidence in law enforcers of this country is zero. Far from offering protection, they actually threaten most people.

The present rulers make tall claims about accountability and reform. Why then has one of the main accused, despite being accused in a pending murder trial, been appointed to work on police reforms at the `Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Cell` located in the Chief Executive`s Secretariat? Ironic that we are asked to pay taxes and offer support so that persons despite being accused of murder occupy high office and enjoy cushy jobs at our expense.

The public prosecutor has stopped attending hearings of the 70 Clifton case with the result that the case cannot proceed. His subordinate is absent from the hearings as well and on occasion arrives after the allocated time has passed. Whether it is lack of will, courage or honesty that motivates his lack of interest is not clear. The trial judge, who is fed up with this, has placed a reference to this effect in the High Court.

I have come to realize that justice is a luxury in Pakistan; I have studied law and it pains me to realize that my faith in the judiciary of my country hangs by a thin thread. I resent the fact that I have to write to `important` people constantly all the while `asking` for a fair trial. It is not like I am begging them to pervert the course of justice or do me some special favour. And despite all the efforts, four years after the crime was committed the trial is still pending.

What difference does it make to me who is ruling Pakistan, an elected civilian or a man in uniform? All I care about is who has the integrity to believe in justice and the courage to follow through his beliefs.

I believe that my father and our family deserve justice. Perhaps this is an isolated personal example, but a single example just like a single life lost is one too many.

SABEEN JATOI, Karachi

In response to sac (Reply # 495)
Dear sac:

This is a very good idea. May be you could send me a draft of your article at bahmad@home.com for my initial comments.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Dear Bilal/PM:

I`ll pen down my anti-democracy tirade in the form of an article as soon as time permits. I`ll try and give some of the sources as the professor desires.

later

-sac

PUBLIC DISCOURSE

In the following letter to the editor (Dawn, January 15, 2001), a Pakistani citizen has expressed views which provide support to democracy and for the need to engage in a public discourse and a struggle. Thanks Tahir Basharat Cheema.

– Bilal Ahmad

“Public debate on vital issues

IT is very common in Pakistan to watch grand inaugurations of projects, which are nearly always in direct conflict with national goals and aspirations and are not needed at all.

Actually, these are the true images of the people in power and are taken up purely to satiate specific requirements and nothing else. As soon as the next government is heralded in, these are correctly but belatedly dubbed mala-fide and corrupt.

Then the new people in power quickly proceed to demolish the very foundations of the same and no effort, is made to re-engineer any of these to suit the actual needs of that particular day. Thereafter, the same charade starts once again in fashion and style, only to fall in disgrace very soon.

As a consequence, billions of state funds have gone down the drain, for which no one has been held responsible or been taken to task. Prime examples would be the cooperative banks of the fifties, the basic democracies edifice of the sixties, the nationalization of the seventies, the so-called Islamization and the Nai Roshni Schools of the eighties and the utopian yellow cab and motorway projects of the nineties.

The present government has also chipped in with its devolution plan. However, there is no doubt that any scheme of things which has not been debated threadbare will never make a permanent mark, but will squander public funds.

It is not understood as to why no one learns the lessons of history and why public opinion is never considered. Similarly, dissent - a democratic right of all citizens - is wrongly considered as disobedience, disloyalty and something to be disregarded altogether. Why can`t we believe in debate and consensus. Is it because of a flaw in our national character or because of the fact that leadership is always lacking?

TAHIR BASHARAT CHEEMA, Lahore”

MINORITIES AND ELECTIONS

Omar Asghar Khan is a minister in General Musharraf`s cabinet. His letter to the editor suggests that minorities are not eligible for the posts of nazims and naib nazims. It also suggests that the question of joint/separate electorate will receive some attention by the decision-makers. Comments welcome

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

The News, Letter, January 13, 2001
``Clarification
Omar Asghar Khan

This is with reference to my interview published in ``The News`` on Sunday, January 7, 2001. In the interview, it has been inadvertently reported that many minority representatives have been elected as Nazims and Naib Nazims in the first round of local bodies elections held in 18 districts on December 31, 2000. The factual position is that some minority members have been elected as councilors where nominations were made by minority members against seats reserved for minorities. The demand of joint electorates and concerns over the system of separate electorates have been noted and these will be considered for elections to the Provincial and National Assemblies.

Islamabad``

Below is a description of an attempt to overturn the Raj-era Official Secrets Act of India (presumably still the law in Pakistan, as well) by the poorest of the poor at the local government level, and the efforts by the bureaucracy to thwart the effort. The battle has now been truly joined, and in the end I have no doubt that the Official Secrets Act will become history...

THE POOR WANT ANSWERS

Jan 11th 2001 | RAJSAMAND

From The Economist print edition

“THE TREASURE”, a comic play in one act, opened for a single matinée in Rajsamand last month. The players were activists and peasants from nearby villages, costumed in their usual turbans and saris. The theatre was the main street of this town in a drought-stricken district of Rajasthan in northern India. The plot: the capture of India’s wealth by a corrupt trio—a politician, a bureaucrat and a policeman. The point: the right to information is not merely a slogan for journalists but a matter of life and death for the poor.

The play is produced by a group called the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS), which translates as the Association for the Empowerment of Workers and Peasants. It practically invented India’s growing right-to-information movement. Its agitation has already led to new laws in Rajasthan to open up government and inspired similar initiatives in other states. The central government is planning to rewrite the Raj-era Official Secrets Act, which still governs the public’s access to government data. “The idea is so seminal, we are sometimes awed by its implications,” says Aruna Roy, an ex-civil servant who is the best known of the two dozen people who constitute the MKSS’s “collective” decision-making body. She compares the movement to India’s struggle to free itself from British rule.

In this region, the comparison does not seem boastful. In drought years, four-fifths of the young men migrate in search of work. Many people who stay depend on government jobs to see them through the end of winter to the beginning of the next monsoon. Sometimes, though, the promised jobs do not materialise. Or the wages are lower than they are supposed to be. Some public works are built flimsily, or not at all. When people talk about famine, they think of corruption.

The MKSS stumbled on that connection in the mid-1990s, while campaigning for payment of minimum wages. Although it has made openness a national cause, its genius has been to rally villagers to challenge their own local governments on the issue. Gram panchayats—councils representing clusters of villages—ought to be the most accountable unit of government because they are closest to the people. Yet each is headed by a sarpanch who spends up to 100,000 rupees ($2,100), some of it on booze for prospective constituents, to be elected to a job that pays 400 rupees a month. So the balance has to come from diverting public money.

In and around Rajsamand district, the MKSS is the sarpanch’s nightmare. It has held a series of public hearings where villagers discover from official documents the discrepancies between what is due to them and what has actually been delivered. One, for five gram panchayats in January 1998, revealed misappropriations of at least 100,000 rupees in each. At some, officials have volunteered to return the money. After a 53-day sit-in in Jaipur, the state capital, in 1997 the MKSS won the right for citizens to obtain photocopies of panchayat records within four days.

Its battle in Janawad, south-west of Rajsamand, shows both the power of openness and of the resistance to it. In accordance with MKSS-inspired rules, the panchayat painted on the walls of its village hall an account of works done in the previous five years. It did not take villagers long to realise that much of the fresco was fiction. In 1998, for example, 80,000 rupees were supposedly spent on renovating Janawad’s dispensary. The nurse who lives beside it says no work was done. “If this board hadn’t come up, all would have been lost in papers,” says another local.

But the effort to get copies of those papers, now backed by the state bureaucracy, has so far taken nine months, not four days. Janawad’s administration recently won a court order to stay the release of documents, but the MKSS hopes the order will be rescinded this month. When The Economist attempted to speak to Janawad’s (now ex-) sarpanch, he excused himself, citing sudden news of an illness in his family.

Unlike most good-government campaigns, which rely on co-operation and consensus, the MKSS’s campaign mobilises the humblest people, encourages them to think of their interests rather than of traditional loyalties to caste or kin and invites the antagonism of officials. Its methods make it possible for women, illiterates and lower-caste people to assert an authority over government that for most has been merely a distant abstraction.

MKSSers live their egalitarian beliefs. The collective’s ten salaried members are an unlikely team of polished English-speakers, such as Mrs Roy, and local folk. Mrs Roy and several others live communally in a compound consisting of a few mud huts and one sturdier office. All receive Rajasthan’s minimum wage of 60 rupees a day.

Success is raising awkward issues. The MKSS, which describes itself as a “non-party political formation”, is coming under pressure to enter electoral politics. It has fielded three candidates for sarpanch so far (two won), and is wondering whether to enter elections on a larger scale and for higher office. Would that sharpen the MKSS’s campaign, or try the collective’s egalitarianism and test its ethics?

SPACES OF FREEDOM

Gulzar Wazir, a Pakistani citizen, has an interesting suggestion for the development of a culture of democracy (by building spaces of freedom of speech) in Pakistan. Can Pakistan afford such a freedom? Would the ruling elite be able to digest it?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

The News, Letter, December 12, 2001
``Freedom of expression
Gulzar Wazir

There is a park in London called Hyde park which is famous for the freedom of expression allowed in its premises. Virtually any person can express his/her opinion, whatever it may be. Looking at the chaotic conditions prevailing in our country, such parks are needed in all the major cities of Pakistan. People should be allowed to say anything against the police, judiciary, clergy, army, politicians, terrorists, defaulters or whosoever it may be. I am sure that this exercise will provide a big relief to the pent-up feelings of the people.

Peshawar``

JOINT/SEPARATE ELECTORATE

In the United States, African-Americans waged a long struggle against a policy of “separate but equal.” In South Africa, the black majority also struggled against the discriminatory policy of apartheid? In Pakistan, there is a state policy of segregation on the basis of religion as far as electoral politics is concerned. Why should there be joint/separate electorates on any basis?

May be the minorities want it? If so, why some religious groups boycotted the last local body elections? Are there some minority group who support joint electorate? What was the position of Justice Cornelius in this matter? Who should decide such matters?

The following letter presents one side of the picture. I will soon try to provide additional information on this issue.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Dawn, Letter, August 25, 2000
“Electoral apartheid

This refers to the article, `Why this electoral apartheid?` by Kunwar Idris (Dawn Aug 21). The writer has drawn a striking comparison between South Africa during Apartheid and contemporary Pakistan. I fail to fathom the logic of those advocating the retention of separate electorate, a system that has only served to widen the gulf between the Muslims and those belonging to other faiths in this state. What we, actually, continue to conveniently forget is that if Pakistan needs anything desperately today it is the unity in diversity. Division on religious lines has doubtless weakened us substantially. Recent announcement by the Chief Executive regarding the continuance of separate electorates has, moreover, come as a disappointment for many. The writer very aptly argues that just token representation on the basis of separate electorates will not end the oppression and alienation of the minorities as is being presumed in government circles. It has been almost a decade and a half that this obviously discriminatory system of electorate was put in place. This experiment further fragmented the society. That is why patriotic elements, human rights organizations and, above all, minorities that have felt marginalized ever since, have been consistently clamouring for its abolition. Moving as we are, now, towards some form of democratic dispensation, it is time that the government realizes the significance of reintroducing the joint electorate system. Later, civilian governments may not have the guts to bring about such a change. In view of this it is important that the government reviews its recent decision and reintroduces the joint electorate system.

– AFTAB AHMED SAHTO, Karachi”

Re: Ahmadb #586

I think I concur with the good Professor. A 40something % turnout is not a sign of regime illegitimacy per se. By this criteria, as Prof. Ahmad has pointed out, all US governments are illegitimate. I think that the low-voter turnout is more on the lines of voter-fatigue: no matter how many times they go to the polls, no government improves their lot. I`ll remind you that polls held just before the 1993 elections gave the Moeen Qureishi caretaker government an 80% approval rating AND expressed a wish that he would scrap elections and stay on in power for two years to set things aright.

Given such poll results and the dancing in the streets that accompanied the coup itself, its clear that a rank-ordering of the Pakistani people`s priorities would not give us elections, democracy, freedom of speech at the very top. It would give us law and order, an improvement in public services, economic growth (i.e., jobs), and punishing the corrupt. Now, you can well argue that the PM regime has fallen far short of these goals as well, but thats a different criticism.

As far as separate electorates goes, this was not a new invention of the current government`s. We`ve had them as far back as I can remember, i.e., Zia days. Probably they predate that as well. Perhaps Prof. Bilal can help us out there? Have we ever had combined electorates? If so, when were they eliminated?

However, reelecting PML, PPP hacks is another issue. In Pakistan the vote goes along biradari/ethnic lines, very premodern and not terribly enlightened of us. Perhaps the best thing to do is to forget elections and just hope for a competent administrator or two. Any of the old gora saabs want their job back?

re. sac #581

Dear sac,

But aren`t ALL theories/entities dealing with human behaviour `artificial constructs`-- their value lying in how closely they approximate reality/an ideal?

Surely, democracy and nation-state are not to be dismissed solely on these grounds?!?

regards,

PM

VOTER TURNOUT

In response to shammi (Reply # 585)
Dear Shammi:

Although Aparisim Ghosh’s opinion piece is informative, the voter turnout data is not sufficient to argue for the failure of the current Pakistan military regime (remember I am in principle an opponent of the dictatorial regimes).

In the 1996, US presidential election only 49 per cent of eligible voters actually turned out to vote (where 24 percent voted for Democrats, 20 percent voted for Republicans, and 5 percent voted for third party candidates).

This could be interpreted as if Bill Clinton actually represented only less than 25 percent of eligible voters. Source: http://www.turnout.org/

Now you could draw your own conclusion about the Pakistani situation. In my view, the voter turnout in the local bodies elections in Pakistan (18 districts only) was not too bad. A low turnout could be a result of several contingent factors.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

From CNN

Dictator`s Democracy

Pakistani voters send General Musharraf a message

By APARISIM GHOSH

January 10, 2001

Elections? Tell it to the marines, general. Pakistan`s first polls under dictator Pervez Musharraf have, predictably, turned out to be a farce. Last week`s local elections in a few scattered districts across the country were meant to be a first step in the return of democracy. But with less than 50% of voters showing up at the booths (about the same as in previous elections) it seemed a step backward, instead.

Clearly, voters were sending the dictator a message: without free choice, your ``election`` is no better than the rigged, corrupt polls of the past. They didn`t have free choice because the military regime banned political parties from contesting and, in seats reserved for minority communities, severely limited voters` options.

ASIA BUZZ

Subcontinental Drift: South Asian of the Year

...and why the heavyweights failed to make the grade

- Wednesday, December 27, 2000

Subcontinental Drift: Movers and Shakers

Your nominations for the South Asian of the Year

- Wednesday, December 6, 2000

Subcontinental Drift: Picking Winners

Name your own South Asian of the Year

- Wednesday, November 29, 2000

Subcontinental Drift: Queering the Pitch

Ending Indo-Pakistani cricketing ties is a mistake

- Wednesday, November 22, 2000

Subcontinental Drift: Musharraf`s Mind

The General has some pretty strange -- and dangerous -- notions

- Wednesday, October 25, 2000





ASIAWEEK

Intelligence

The story behind today`s news from the editors of Asiaweek

From Our Correspondent

Personal perspectives on the news





As is often the case in dictatorships, the curtailing of freedom was presented as a good thing for all concerned. In the months leading up to the polls, the local elections were billed as a new dawn for Pakistani democracy. By barring parties from contesting, the general said he was demolishing with a single blow the country`s deeply venal political establishment. Pakistanis, he promised, would welcome the chance to elect new, clean leaders.

Turns out most of the ``independents`` elected to local councils are former members of the Pakistan Muslim League and the Pakistan People`s Party. Voters, it seems, didn`t want any new, clean leaders.

No, seriously, the general obviously completely underestimated his people`s knowledge of electoral politics. The voter, he is now discovering, is fully conscious of the importance of political parties. This also gives the lie to the notion, championed by the regime`s apologists, that Pakistanis don`t understand (and therefore don`t need) the ``Western`` principles of democracy.

Musharraf`s spin doctors have pointed to low turnouts in previous elections to justify his October `99 coup. Their defense: the government he ousted was not really legitimate anyway, because the majority of Pakistanis didn`t vote in the polls that brought it to power. Well then, how legitimate are last week`s elections?

Not much -- and not at all for Pakistan`s minority communities. Under the new rules imposed by Musharraf, Christians, Hindus and Sikhs were not allowed to vote for Muslims, or vice versa. Less than 10% of the 962 seats reserved for non-Muslims were contested. Ditto half the 3,822 seats reserved for women. Here, too, Pakistani voters showed a much more sophisticated appreciation for democracy than the general expected: they rejected tokenism.

Hopefully, Musharraf will get the message from last week`s debacle and learn to give his countrymen more credit. If not, there`s worse to come. These elections were meant to be a dry run for national polls next year. If that was a dress rehearsal, then this critic`s verdict is: sack the director.

The army confronts only soft targets like the politicians because they have nominal following.

The madrissas can fight back,so live and let live

with them.

In response to sac (Reply # 581)
Dear Sac:

You argue that Pakistan is unnecessarily trying to pursue two different artificial constructs: (1) Nation state; and (2) Democracy. You also contend that both of these constructs are “heavily discredited in practical discourse.” Please explain your use of “artificial” and “practical” in “artificial constructs” and “practical discourse” respectively. Also explain me, who has discredited nation-state and democracy?

I have asked you pointed questions. Please give pointed answers. Such that I and other readers should be able to adequately understand your critique. May be there are some aspects of your argument that I, at least, agree with you.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

re PM #578 and bahmed #580:

Dear PM/Bilal:

I pointed out some sources in one of my earlier posts on this thread. Please take a look at some of them if you get a chance.

Pakistan is guilty of trying to pursue two different artificial constructs. (i) Nation state.

(ii) Democracy. My contention is that both of them are heavily discredited in practical discourse. The erstwhile professor(and most idealistic folks out there) would have us believe that what Pakistan needs is more democracy to cure it of its present ailments. You also wonder along the same lines-whether there is something that can be done to bring Pakistan out of its present crisis in governance.

I would be the last person to admit that I have any solutions. But if I don`t have any solutions that does not mean I can`t point out the fallacies inherent in pursuing the same path that have led countless others into intractable nothingness. Self-sufficiency is just not possible in today`s day and age. Pakistan is not a Bhutan and the theory of comparitive advantage is way too powerful!! China cut itself off in the bginning of the century and historians are left to muse what might have been had it not. So is there no hope for Pakistan? Unfortunately I believe so(sorry Professor). Pakistan in its present shape has as much chance of surviving as Clinton has of remaining celibate for the rest of his life. An artificial entity with a completely unconsciable elite will sooner or later meet its fate at the hands of the law of increasing entropy. Out of that disorder maybe hope will be reborn.

Dear Bilal:

My thoughts are definitely influenced by what I read,hear and observe. However as mentioned in my earlier posts, I am not an academic and I don`t follow the standard regimen of quote and enhance followed in academic discourse. You may choose to ignore my posts(selectively I hope) on that ground. I`ll understand.

later

-sac

From the Washington Times, Jan 10, 2001

Extremists attract students

Arslan Malik

Located in the northwestern Pakistani town of Akora Khattak is an Islamic seminary which boasts among its alumni virtually the entire leadership of the Taliban, the oppressive Islamist group that controls most of neighboring Afghanistan. The seminary, run by former Pakistani Senator Sami-ul-Haq, currently has about 3,000 young male students from Pakistan and elsewhere who are being indoctrinated with a militant version of extremist Islam that incites them to take up jihad, Islamic holy war against non-Muslims.

Although it stands apart for its notable alumni, the seminary at Akora Khattak is just one example of the thousands of seminaries, referred to as madrassas, that have burgeoned all over Pakistan in the last few decades. Many of these madrassas, in preparation for jihad, are either arming the students themselves or graduating them to militarized training camps. More disturbingly, a symbiosis has developed between these seminaries and Pakistan`s rulers which is a threat to regional as well as international security. Since radical Islam is of vital concern to the U.S. national interest, American policy-makers should focus their efforts on containing these madrassas.

Until the 1970s, there were less than 1,000 madrassas in Pakistan and they were dedicated primarily to the formal instruction of Islamic theology. The decade-long Soviet occupation of Afghanistan starting in 1979 changed this as U.S. policy-makers and their Pakistani allies, convinced that a religious opposition would be well-suited to fight the ``godless communists,`` set out to use the seminaries as prep schools for anti-Soviet insurgents. With arms from the United States, support from the Inter-Services Intelligence(ISI), the Pakistani intelligence agency, and funding from Islamist sources abroad, the madrassas evolved into indoctrination and guerrilla training camps. In no time, they sprang up throughout the country. By 1988 there were 2,891 madrassas in Pakistan.

Despite the Soviet pullout a year later and the end of U.S. involvement, the madrassas have continued to expand over the last decade. According to a recent issue of the Pakistani newspaper Ausaf, over 6,000 madrassas exist in Pakistan today, each producing hundreds of battle-ready alumni yearly. The primary reason that madrassas have continued to grow is their support by successive Pakistani governments, including the present one under General Pervaiz Musharraf. Although a few government officials are sympathetic towards the madrassas because of their religious views, many see them more practically as rendering the country a host of services.

Indeed, the madrassas do the government a favor by functioning as social welfare institutions that house and feed many of the restless youths that would otherwise not be provided for in the poverty-stricken country. This is a surefire way of creating a cadre of people loyal to the madrassas, intent on bringing Islamist rule, like that in Afghanistan, to Pakistan – a dangerous prospect for the world`s latest nuclear power.

The government also supports the madrassas because they help it fight archenemy India. Seminarians, in many cases, form the bulk of extremist religious organizations, such as the Lashkar-e-Tayebba, that alongside separatists are combating Indian forces in Kashmir. This further provokes India and keeps the two regional nuclear powers precariously close to the specter of war.

The seminarians also aid Pakistan in retaining leverage over Afghanistan by constantly filling Taliban ranks — and thus in turn bolstering the repressive regime. For instance, 200 seminarians joined the Taliban just last year.

During his trip to South Asia in March, President Clinton, in alluding to Islamic extremists, urged Pakistan ``to intensify its efforts to defeat those who inflict terror.`` In recent months the government there has made apparent strides towards clamping down on madrassas by ordering their registration and calling for a standardized curriculum free of jihad indoctrination. However, given the government`s vested interest, any such efforts are unlikely to be serious.

Containing the madrassas is left to U.S. policy-makers who remain concerned with both security in South Asia as well as the Taliban menace. Because an armed or political confrontation with the seminaries is certain to incite a militant backlash, the ideal way to handle them would be to deprive them of their funding which primarily comes from abroad. For instance, it is widely known that various interests within Saudi Arabia are filling the coffers of these madrassas with the goal of influencing them with their rigid brand of Islam, referred to as Wahabbism. In this case, the United States should try to work with its Saudi allies in reining in all such backers.

This would be a significant step in curbing the problem of Islamic extremism, especially given the fact that in recent years hundreds of students have been coming to these madrassas from as far away as Chechnya and the Philippines with the promise of fomenting trouble outside South Asia as well.

The rising threat of these Pakistani seminaries is in part due to myopic U.S. policy-makers who helped militarize them in the Cold War`s last chapter. It is now up to the successors of those policy-makers to restrain these seminaries. Otherwise, these madrassas are certain to forge a vast and cohesive network of extremists trained to wreak terror internationally that is unparalleled — a grim prospect for the free world.

Arslan Malik is a writer, living in New York.

In response to sac (Reply # 571)
Dear sac:

You must be wondering why I did not reply back. First, and foremost, your arguments need to be rephrased a little more clearly. Second, I would like to know if your arguements are your own. If your own, please substantiate each argument. If they are derived, then kindly identify the sources.

There are all kinds of arguments made by people belonging to various schools of thought (and with different ideologies, scholastic backgrounds, and worldviews) in different contexts.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

PM,

Was it me? :) I know... life, at times, is not such a dynamic experience though. But mate, no worries!

re. #171

sac,

Very insightful musings. Now, excuse me if this sounds dumb, but WHAT do you see as a solution, if any, to Pakistan`s crises in governance?

I understand the thrust of your thesis to be that nation-states, straddled by corporate behemoths, cannot offer individuals freedom anymore. Would, then, one solution be for a nation to go in the direction of greater self-sufficieny rather than play the Global Market game? Do you see corporate hegemony as necessary outcome of democracies?

PLease understand that these are completely honest questions. I would be interested in answers. Could you point to some books?

regards,

PM



fairdinkum: ``for those who are unfortunate enough to have seen it at work with their own eyes....there is very little hope.``

And not so long ago, I was told by a certain someone to ``don`t give up hope`` :-)

PROGRESSIVE AGENDA: A CHALLENGE FOR INTELLIGENTSIA?

Husain Naqi is one of the leading political commentators in Pakistan. Please see his opinion piece: “Establishment and role of civil society” (The Nation, January 9, 2001). I find the following remarks apt and insightful. Is this common sense?

(1) We have a “weak civil society” in Pakistan (so, we need to build it).

(2) The present military regime is too soft on the so-called Jihadi zealots.

(3) Police FIR’s (First Information Reports) for sedition and/or inciting for mutiny have been registered against some but not others.

(4) The reigning establishment is suffering from fatigue and this offers possibilities for the civil society to strengthen itself.

(5) Democratic struggle, and its direction, needs to be steered by genuinely patriotic, liberal and progressive intelligentsia.

(6) Any effort for democratic mobilization must be based on a “programme that could move and motivate the people to struggle for their economic, social, and political and cultural rights in an organized manner.

(7) The politicians must be compelled to adopt programs for citizenship and human rights and liberties through an organized and peaceful mass movement. And the political paries need to commit to participatory democratic change for the betterment of the largest number.

(8) Jamaat-i-Islami’s latest move to support PPP and PML (N) is an effort to gain a foothold in urban Sindh.

(9) The change sought by the Alliance for the Restoration of Democracy (ARD) would “hardly hurt status quo.”

(10) There is no political basis of the PPP’s wishful thinking (daydreaming) to revive populist appeal for Benazir Bhutto, if and when she lands again on the Pakistani soil.

(11) The effort of the JI to develop an alliance with the PPP and the PML (N) is a ploy to reproduce military dominated status quo.

Final note: Naqi is silent about Asghar Khan, Imran Khan, Farooq Leghari, Mumtaz Bhutto, and few others. Why? Do they matter? Comments welcome.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

AUTONOMY AND CONSTITUTION

I was a bit confused about Mumtaz Bhutto’s opposition of the MQM. The following news clipping clarifies the picture somewhat partially. Why some parties want a new constitution?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Frontier Post, January 5, 2001
MQM likely to quit Alliance for Restoration of Democracy

ISLAMABAD (Online) - MQM is likely to quit the Alliance for Restoration of Democracy (ARD) soon, as ARD chief Nawabzada Nasrullah Khan has refused to support its demands of rewriting a new constitution and giving full autonomy to all the provinces.
ARD sources told Online Thursday that veteran leader has made it clear that Pakistan was a federation in which federating units could enjoy autonomy guaranteed in unanimously adopted constitution of 1973.
He flatly refused to support demands aimed at turning federation of Pakistan into confederation and giving free hand to any component party of the alliance to use its platform for its anti-federation activities.
Nawabzada has reiterated that the ARD alliance strongly believes in a strong and united federation.
Nawabzada has also reminded the MQM that 1973 constitution was a sacred document and ARD parties could not support any demand of rewriting a new constitution, as country could not afford adoption of yet another constitution.
On the other hand MQM leader Altaf Hussain has asserted that Pakistan was creation of the Muslim majority provinces of the Sub Continent , therefore provinces should be given complete autonomy in accordance with 1940’s historic resolution.
Altaf is pressing the ARD to support his demand of making a new constitution ensuring complete autonomy for provinces.
Sources further said that the PPP and PML largest components of the ARD alliance have also dismissed the demand of the MQM regarding tendering an unconditional apology for what MQM said “ extra-judicial killing” of its workers during previous PPP and PML governments.
In a last bid to keep the MQM in the fold of the ARD, Nawabzada Nasrullah Khan had constituted a grand reconciliation committee comprising Asfandyar Wali Khan chief of Awami National Party, Makhdoom Amin Fahim Vice Chairman PPP, ex Chief Minister Sindh and PPP leader Syed Qaim Ali Shah, former Sindh Governor and PML leader Mamnoon Hussain and other leaders of ARD parties.
These leaders of the ARD parties met Aftab Shaikh, Mrs Nasrin Jalil Sh.
Liaquat Hussain and other MQM leaders at their nine zero headquarters.
Talks however failed and did not yield any fruit as neither Nawabzada agreed to support the demand of new constitution and complete autonomy for provinces nor the PPP and PML agreed to tender any apology for extra-judicial killing of MQM workers.
Both parties have made it clear that only those terrorists were killed at the hand of law enforcing agencies during their previous governments who had taken law into their hands.
After failure of talks, MQM is likely to part its ways from the ARD at any time, sources concluded.”

DEMAND FOR A NEW CONSTITUTION

The Baluchistan National Party will soon start a movement for a new national/federal Constitution. Would other members of the PONM support such a movement? How about the MQM? Is the PONM currently a member of the ARD? I think, the ANP (a member of PONM) is opposed to the idea of a new constitution.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Dawn, January 8, 2001
``BNP to launch movement for new constitution
By Our Correspondent

QUETTA, Jan 7: The Balochistan National Party (Mengal) has decided to launch a movement for framing a new constitution under which all federating units will enjoy equal powers and representation at all levels.

The decision was taken at a meeting of BNP Central Committee at the residence of former Balochistan chief minister, Sardar Akhtar Mengal on Saturday. This and other decisions were released at a news conference here on Sunday.

Explaining the important aspects of the decision, Sardar Mengal said his party would launch a democratic movement in a phased manner starting with holding protest meetings, taking out rallies and culminating in hunger strikes and obstructing the functioning of the government at all levels.

He said the PONM components are being consulted and a meeting of the component parties is expected on Jan 21 in which the final decision will be taken. However, the provincial components of PONM will be meeting in Quetta on Monday.

Sardar Mengal said that the Quetta meeting will virtually be a preparatory meeting for the Central PONM launching the agitation against the government for restoration of democracy. The former chief minister of Balochistan demanded free, fair and impartial elections for a constituent assembly framing a new constitution for the country in which all the big or small units would enjoy equal powers and representation.

The lengthy statement was read out by Malik Abdul Wali Kakar, the Acting President of Party. It condemned the holding of local council elections which amounted to trampling down whatever autonomy or powers were enjoyed by the provinces.

He said that the government has ignored the demands of the smaller federating units for equal powers and representation in state affairs. The old relations in regard to provincial powers were also changed by eliminating some of the districts and making adjustments in the boundaries of others, he said.

The BNP leaders thought that it was the beginning point to snatch all the powers from the provinces and concentrate and transfer the same to the central government.
The BNP criticized General Pervez Musharraf saying that the government was adopting questionable steps against the political parties and leaders which were polluting entire political atmosphere.

The Central Committee members were of the view that the government is engaged in plundering the resources of Balochistan, from oil and gas reserves to the vast coastal belt while the people are facing severe drought, hunger and poverty. At the same time, the BNP leader said, the Pakistan Coast Guards, civil armed forces, federally controlled militia have made the lives of common people miserable to an extent of committing excesses against them.

They criticised the appointment of a retired army officer as Pro-Vice-Chancellor for the University of Balochistan, instigating sectarian issues and controversies, torturing the people in police custody and keeping political activists in wrongful confinement.

``It is a preclude to a military operation in Balochistan again,`` Malik Abdul Wali Kakar feared.

He said that holding of local council elections was nothing but to deprive the provinces of their existing powers and authority. ``It amounts to subvert the constitution and change the character of parliamentary democratic set up with an autocratic presidential form of government,`` the Acting BNP President said.

In phases the powers of the provinces are being eroded which will culminate in winding up of the Federal system converting Pakistan into a unitary form of government, Mr Kakar said. He thought there was a possibility that the local councils could be used as an electoral college to elect General Musharraf as President of Pakistan.

The BNP Central Committee took a very tough stand against the abolition of four districts in Balochistan saying it is on the cards to abolish some more districts before the next phase of local elections. It criticised these steps and warned the governor to desist from making fundamental changes in boundaries of districts which were approved and passed by the provincial assembly.

The BNP claimed massive embezzlement of funds meant for drought affected people claiming that the international aid agencies and organizations were not allowed to help the drought affected people in Balochistan
It also criticised the arrest of score of people, mostly political activists and torturing them for extracting confession. The BNP named Mir Abdul Nabi Bangulzai and Alam Pirkani who are allegedly being tortured and kept without trial for the past many months.

LB polls: The local council election in Kech District was a complete failure and the people`s response was disappointing for the government.

This was stated by Shakil Ahmed Baluch, a former MNA of the area and secretary-general of the Balochistan National Party. He was talking to newsmen at the Quetta Press Club.

He said that 80 per cent of the candidates have returned unopposed and there was no election in 26 union councils - out of 32.

The BNP leader said that elections were held merely in eight union councils of the Kech district where the turnout of the people was at its lowest.``