Pakistan under its Ethnic Shadows

ahmedzai/rozaiba: bhutto was worse than ethnocentric. he was bhuttocentric.

Can Pakistan survive as a viable nation if it cannot come up with a satisfactory answer to ``Pakistan ka matlab kya?`` I don`t know. It`s a difficult question.

Difficult because it offers everyone a possibility to answer it, leading to thousands of different interpretations. Somewhere in the discussion thread, someone said that we should forget the idea of coming up with an ideology of Pakistan as it was an exercise in futility: Pakistan exists, and we should just accept it as a country with certain identifiable boundaries. I agree with the view, but to an extent.

Any nation state needs a reason to justify its existence. Those of us who have studied in Pakistan know well that the reasons given to us in our Pak-Studies classes were Islam and a Muslim nation. But, as we know, this interpretation has led to many problems, not the least of which is the fact that everyone has a different tilt on what it means to be Islamic or a Muslim nation.

I propose something less controversial: Pakistan`s ideology should rest on a struggle for freedom (always a good one when defining nations). The people of India, tired or living under Colonial oppression, rose to fight off the foreign invader then, as the Muslim and Hindu nations of India sought fit to govern themselves in different manners (the ``Indians`` chose secularism while the some of the Muslims chose to have their affairs governed within the tenants of Islam). Here, however, the ideology splits with the received notion of Islam as the sole reason for independence. The stress on this interpretation should be that the peoples of India (to quote Churchill describing the England and the US, ``great peoples divided by a common language) sought independence first.

The independence sought was for freedom of expression (remember our ``Freedom Fighters`` going to jail), for freedom of trade (most of what was produced was shipped to Europe while the labor class in India received nothing in return), freedom of life (the Colonial English ruled like feudal masters) and so on.

By defining the reasons for independence in these, for lack of a better word, secular terms, this interpretation removes the possibility of religiously motivated interpretations of ideology. Moreover, the ideology focuses on individual rights which, to this day, have been denied to the citizens of Pakistan by its State.

Regards,
Rafay Alam

rozaiba at # 84:

``ZAB was an ethno-centric leader? Where did you come up with that half-brained statement? I thought in the mid-70`s election he won 90 or so seats from Punjab. One can accuse Bhutto of many wrongs he did. Being `ethno-centric` is questionable. ``

I agree with you. Calling ZAB an ethno-centric leader is a gross exagerration. He was able to win votes from Sindh and Punjab heartland, because in his speeches he was able to talk their language and of their cultural icons. It is well documented that he used to prolifically quote verses of Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai, Shahbaz Qalander, Waris Shah and Bullay Shah.

However, he was not able to relate to Pakhtoons, because the latter are most pan-Islamists of Pakistani ethnic groups and do not subscribe to the sufi Islam. ZAB was not able to garner any love from Pakhtoons simply because he was not able to relate to them.

Godot:

``HisExcellency, Adnan_Rafiq, Rozaiba

You guys are like the patient who refuses to acknowledge his illness, knowing little that, if left untreated, the illness will kill him. ``

And your arguments are like a pretensious placebo. There is no basis, there is no justification for them and so nothing positive can come out of them. As HisExcellency says, it`s garbage in, garbage out. This often happens when rationale applied is superficial.

I would reconsider your arguments if I were to find any substantial number of people complaining that the `lack of definition` of Pakistan is the `ailment`. Here`s the catch though Godot: Those people have to be living in Pakistan!

Lack of a process of empowerment (of which democracy is a large part) IS the illness. Those who deny this are the ones who are ill.

ZAB was an ethno-centric leader? Where did you come up with that half-brained statement? I thought in the mid-70`s election he won 90 or so seats from Punjab. One can accuse Bhutto of many wrongs he did. Being `ethno-centric` is questionable.

Godot #73 Actually we can debate it right here on your board:

I have already presented my basic point: i.e. nationality - any nationality - is not important. It is a mere incidence of birth. What is important is values. One needs to be clear on some basic values, and one needs to consciously try to abide by them.

This is a simple proposition, and I assume not many people would debate it in principle. What is striking, and where i think many people would find themselves running into trouble, are the implications of this proposition.

I would be interested in your thoughts on this basic point i make. ylh and adnan have also commented on this aspect, and you may wish to check their posts below as well. here are a few questions that one could wrestle with: what are these values? why are they important? how good a job does the pakistan education system and society do in imparting these values (and the answer is not necessarily negative)? what can one do as an individual to promote these values? and how would the strengthening of these values do more for pakistanis than virtually anything else including money?

#76 by nakhok

++
The King`s party (PML-Quisling) floated by the military has its own share of Mr. Bank Defaults (the Chaudhris of Gujrat, for example).
++

Thanks for raising this important and valid point.

Political exigencies required Musharraf to ally with a powerful politicians. Since the Chaudhries have a lot of clout within the Muslim League, they provided the ideal proverbial ``axe`` to cut Nawaz Sharif down to size.

Musharraf lost moral high ground after ``dry-cleaning`` the corrupt Chaudhries. This also turned the Accountability process into a joke. Benazir capitalized on this blunder in the October 2002 election. This is one of the reasons why PPP`s tally increased from 18 in Election`97 to 62 in Election`2002. In fact, in a hard-hitting editorial in TFT, Najam Sethi wrote that ``before summer of 2002, Musharraf was honest and fair. After summer of 2002, Musharraf is not fair any more. Its only a matter of time when he will also cease to be honest``.

IMHO, the only way Musharraf can do some damage-control is by keeping strict tabs on the corrupt people he has ``dry-cleaned``. He should especially keep them away from the Finance, Commerce and Energy ministries. These 3 ministries are the ``cash-cows`` in Pakistan and must be protected at all costs.

To avoid embarassment on the sham Accountability process and deal with Chaudhries, Musharraf has also changed tracks since Oct 2002. Now he doesn`t talk about Accountability that often. Instead he touts economic reforms as his achievement.

#73 by godot

++
HisExcellency, Adnan_Rafiq, Rozaiba

You guys are like the patient who refuses to acknowledge his illness, knowing little that, if left untreated, the illness will kill him.
++

Does this illness have a name? Or any symptoms? Apparently you are not defending your views and just extrapolating from outdated notions such as:

1. [... when the Balochi inhabitants of the country`s southwestern desert venture elsewhere in Pakistan, they say they are going to Hindustan... ]

2. [ With its each ethnic group feeling that it is getting the short end of the stick from the Center... ]

3. [ This “idea” may exist on paper, in the minds of a handful of “Pakistanis,” at diplmatic missions around the globe and at the UN; but it does not exist in reality, in the minds of its “citizens,” as the above quote from the Balochis shows. ]

4. [ The Center in Pakistan has not satisfied is five major ethnic groups and has failed to instill the notion of a “Pakistani” in the general populace of its various ethnic groups ]


Do you notice something here? These are all value judgements. You are using your flawed opinions to draw flawed conclusions. As they say, garbage in, garbage out. This will not fly.

Please tell us what evidence/facts do you have to support the 4 assertions above??

With due respect, it is you who needs to wake up and smell the coffee. I have lived for 3 years in Dera Ghazi Khan. This small dusty town is in the only district in Pakistan that borders all 4 provinces. During these years I came in close contact with Baluchis living in the Loralai district, Sindhis living in Kashmore district, and Pashtuns of Dera Ismail Khan since I was also working for ``The News`` daily during these years.

I found loads of poverty, water problems, illiteracy and female health problems... but no trace of resentment toward the central government, Punjabis, or the Army. These people have lived as neighbors for centuries. Even if they are culturally different, because of intermarriages, social interaction and strong religious bond, they associate with each other very well. In fact, the Baluchi fears his rival Baluchi clansmen more than the Punjabis/Pashtuns.

There is no doubt a poverty crisis in Baluchistan and interior Sindh. The identity crisis, on the other hand, exists only in your own mind.

PAKISTAN

P assionate is this embrace of freedom
A uthentic in its vision of nationhood
K indness is the Indus, tears of happiness on a parched land
I nspiring the beauty of the snow capped Karakorams
S alient is the diversity, total appreciation a difficult task
T ested are the limits of a peoples` romance
A utographed by a new generation of Sufi mystics
N inetynine names of god on there lips

By

Ras H. Siddiqui

#74 by rsaxena

++
being muslim alone is not an identity without a culture associated with it...unless you think sharia is culture..
++

Language, literature, dress, value system and rituals make up the culture of a society. All ethnic groups of Pakistan have their own language, literature, dress, values and rituals despite being Muslims. We don`t ride camels in Pakistan. We don`t wear big white robes and black headgear like Arabs. We don`t speak Arabic. We don`t enjoy camel and horse races. We don`t have to.

You are perhaps not aware of Pakistani icons like Lal Shahbaz Qalandar, Bulleh Shah, Khushal Khattak, Sultan Bahoo, Madho Lal Hussain, Baba Fareed, Bahauddin Zakaria, Shah Shams and Data Ganj Bukhsh. None of these were Arab. Yet they all preached one form of Shariah or the other.

#59 by HisExcellency

++++
[military govt] is neither beholden to feudals, nor dependent on the business community for its survival. It therefore makes sense to delay restoration of full-democracy until the present economic reforms are complete.``
++++

Pakistan`s military dictatorship is anything but anti-feudal. That is why feudalism has survived, nay, thrived even though the military has been the unquestioned ruler of Pakistan (directly or behind civilian facades) continuously for at least the last quarter of a century.

President Pervez Musharraf, his army and the King`s party (PML-Quisling) that provides a civilian facade for the military dictatorship are all into perpetuating the feudal system. Here`s an excerpt from a recent article from the Musharraf zamana:

---

http://www.dawn.com/2003/03/20/op.htm#2

DAWN, Karachi, Pakistan
20 March 2003 Thursday 16 Muharram 1424

No land reforms any more!
By Sultan Ahmed

Ex-Prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto did not say so that openly, while sustaining feudalism in reality but Mir Zafarullah Jamali has said categorically there will be no land reforms under his government. .....

..... What that means is that feudalism is safe and sound in Pakistan, while it has vanished from the rest of South Asia, including India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. And that is almost inevitable when a landholder like Mir Zafarullah Jamali is the prime minister, Ali Mohammad Maher is chief minister of Sindh, Jam Yousuf is C.M. of Balochistan and Chaudhri Pervaiz Elahi is the C.M. of Punjab. .....

---

Dr. Hamid Hussain has written extensively on the fauji-feudal synergy in Defense Journal (Karachi) and Covert Action Quarterly (Washington DC). He was most perspicacious when he wrote:

``The system of allotting agricultural land to serving and retired military officers have ..... contributed to the wedding of senior army officers to landed interests and corresponding class commitment.``

In fact, as Dr. Hamid Hussain has pointed out, it is Pak military that now epitomizes the worst of feudalism:

``In Pakistan, preferential patronage and threat of coercion are the two principle instruments through which work is accomplished. This means that local government will provide prompt services to the lands of the Army officers. In the case of irrigation and
water supply, paved roads and timely provision of seeds, fertilizers and pesticides, preference is given to army officers` properties.``

And recent articles (by Pervez Hodobhoy, for example) on the Okara Military Farm has shown that the military is as determined as the ``best`` of the hereditary feudal lords to retain its feudal privileges.

How coercive the military can be to protect its corporate and feudal interests was amply illustrated in recent articles on the Okara Military Farm. Here`s something to mull over by anyone who might have have the illusion that the military feudals are more benign than the heriditary feudals:

---

The Friday Times, Lahore, Pakistan
August 15-21, 2003

EDITORIAL
Okara peasants, military and national interest
by Najam Sethi

..... the arrogance of the OMF (Okara Military Farms) can be gauged from the text of some letters written by senior officials to relatives of the allegedly offending tenants threatening them in clearly unlawful terms. We are in possession of two letters sent to the OMF ``employees``, dated Aug 26, 2002, and Jan 24, 2003, by the farm officer, a major. These show the mindset of the military authorities towards the Okara tenancy issue in particular and civil-military relations in general. In one of the letters, the major writes in English: ``It has come to our notice that your parents/relatives living in chaks of Mil Farms are involved in anti-state activities. You are directed to motivate your parents/relatives to desist from anti-state activities and to co-op with the Pakistan Army and Pakistan Rangers. If you will not do this for the state, appropriate disciplinary action will be taken against you.`` .....``

---

#59 by His Excellency

++++
The reputations of Asif Zardari (Mr.Ten-Percent) and Nawaz Sharif (Mr. Bank Default) made it very difficult to attract remittances and investment from Pakistanis living abroad.
++++

This is, at best, a red herring. The King`s party (PML-Quisling) floated by the military has its own share of Mr. Bank Defaults (the Chaudhris of Gujrat, for example).

Pakistan`s military, in general, and General Pervez Musharraf, in particular, have absolutely nothing against high percentagers. The King`s party (PML-Quisling) isn`t exactly known for the probity of its leaders.

The buck has always stopped at the GHQ for at least the last quarter of a century, if not since 1958. No one became a PM in Pakistan without the military`s acquiescence/sponsorship. Not even the military bothers to to hide that fact. The Generals openly brag abut the money disbursed to get the right PM ``elected``. The PM comes to power via the military and leaves the stage whenever the military kicks it out.

And when it comes to accepting percentages, the military itself has the highest stake by virtue of the power wielded by it.

Admiral Mansoor-ul-Haq for his French submarine deal or General Jehangir Karamat for his Ukranian submarine deal surely out-rank any Mr. Ten-Percent in the civilian sector.

Brigadier Aftab Siddiqui (Bilal Musharraf`s father-in-law) was hired at 2% profit for 25 years as ``consultant`` for Pindi-Peshawar Motorway (M-3) Project. He was also sold 12 sick units over 3 years!

---

http://www.satribune.com/archives/sep30_oct06_02/P1_bilalmusharraf.htm

South Asia Tribune
September 30 - October 6, 2002

Musharraf`s Close Relative Paid in Rs 7bn Motorway project
Special SAT Report

ISLAMABAD: The first solid proof of involvement of General Pervez Musharraf`s close relative, his son Bilal`s father in law, in a multi-billion rupee road construction contract, has come to light.

The proof was provided by the owner of the construction company, Husnain Construction, at a news conference at the M-3 Motorway site near Islamabad last week. Surprisingly it has remained buried without any discussion in the mainstream Pakistani media, although leading newspaper Dawn published portions of the incriminating statement on Sept 26 in a very subdued manner, hiding the disclosures under a positive statement by the National Highway Authority Chairman, Major General Farrukh Javed...........

---

http://www.dawn.com/2002/09/26/top17.htm

DAWN, Karachi, Pakistan
26 September 2002 Thursday 18 Rajab 1423

More motorways to be constructed: Tenders being issued
By Our Staff Reporter

.....Sheikh Yousaf, owner of Husnain Construction, which is the contractor for M-3, explained the phases for which his company passed for converting the M-3 project from the Built, Operate and Transfer (BOT) plan to the government funded project.

When asked as to how much his company had been helped by Brig Aftab Siddiqui (Rtd), father-in-law of Bilal Musharraf, he said the gentleman had worked with his company as a consultant.

Mr Yousaf said it was originally agreed that he would get two per cent of the profit from the project for 25 years, but since the project had been converted to a government funded plan, Aftab Siddiqui was no longer with his company. The cost of M-3 is Rs7 billion.

He, however, said Mr Siddiqui had been paid for the `services` which he rendered, but refused to give more details.

Everything was documented, and the payments to Mr Siddiqui had been made through cheques the copies of which had been provided to `` a number of government departments,`` he said. Then his son rushed to the stage and asked Mr Yousaf not to answer more queries on the subject.

Mr Yousaf said the company was heading the consortium of the Pakistani construction companies called PAMIC, and added that they were completing the project to show that the country had the expertise to construct the motorway.

He said it was the first contract of its kind which had no escalation clause.

When asked as to how many projects his company had fetched in the period of military government, he avoided giving straight answer, and said that whatever his company had got was on merit. He admitted that he had purchased about a dozen sick industrial units......

---

godot: [ ... You guys are like the patient who refuses to acknowledge his illness, knowing little that, if left untreated, the illness will kill him. ...]

No one`s denying the illness. But I think we have a tendency to exaggerate its seriousness. I don`t find your article insightful because although it paints a picture which is bleaker than it really is, it never offers any solutions or suggestions.

Also, myself being an expatriate, I tend to take the views of those who jumped ship long ago with a grain of salt.

P.S. Hope you don`t take it as a personal attack as I can relate to many of the other issues you have talked about on Chowk. Just don`t agree with this one. :)

Pakistan`s lack of cohesiveness is primarily because of the way the provincial units are treated by the Federation. The Pakistani federal structure is a mess, resource distribution is lopsided, favouring certain parts of certain provinces over others. You have an idealogy which discriminates against any expression of ethnic groups languages, and you have unwieldy provicnes which make little ethnic, administrative or geographic sense. you have a Punjabi majority in the lower house and a Pashtun pluraity in the upper house. This does not make for a a workable system. Too add to this you have masisve overcentralisation, in Islamabad, and a betrayal of all the promises made at the time of the `73 constitution, the abolition of the concurrent list and the separation of the executive from the judiciary.

In the end why do constituent units join a federal structure? Why should South India stay a part of a union in which they drag poorly developed corrupt Northern states with them? or Why would California and New york stay part of the US federation? Simple because they think they gain more out of it..than by staying separate...while almost all citizens of Pakistan accept Pakistans existence, many seem to be obsesed with the idea of a unitary state where none ever existed and otehrs believe they are being robbed of everything they hold dear by staying on in an Pakistan in it`s present form...

Manto, Romair, Urstruly

You are nationalists, not ethno-centric. And so am I. This is the common thread that binds us.


HisExcellency, Adnan_Rafiq, Rozaiba

You guys are like the patient who refuses to acknowledge his illness, knowing little that, if left untreated, the illness will kill him.


Manto, 1

No, Yasser, I’m not after an “ideology” to define Pakistan. As someone said: it’s there. Period.

I left Pakistan 30 years ago at a fairly young age. Growing up in Pakistan (Karachi) in the late 60s and early 70s, I never experienced ethnic polarization. Of course, I knew many children who belonged to different ethnic groups. But it never occurred to me, or to them, that we were anything other than Pakistanis. It was only at Chowk that I noticed the fierce ethno-centric polarization advocated by some, even at the cost of breaking up Pakistan. The readings in Western media and books only confirm my perception. I wrote this article to bring this issue out in open, which, in my opinion, is a taboo in Pakistan media.


PunjabiZulu, 2

I agree. It’s the Center in Pakistan that’s the problem.


Momekh, 6

So, in your opinion, declaring war on another country and bloodshed is the only way to unite Pakistan? But, wait, didn’t that happen in 1947, 1965, 1971...then why has this issue surfaced again?


SyedAhmed

I think you are the only one who understood and acknowledged what I said in the article. You very clearly see the problem, which is quite evident at Chowk. Thank you for your very good comments.




Tahmed, 11

I’d like to hear from you to answer you own question: ``What does it mean to be Pakistani?`` Perhaps you can write an article for Chowk highlighting your main arguments, then we can open a debate on it. I’d really like you to do that.



Dost Mittar, 37

It’s not the most Pakistanis I’m worried about. It’s the handful of educated demagogues who worry me, the demagogues who influence the illiterate masses with their demagogy.


The Rest of You...

Thank you so much for reading the article and your comments. Most of you pointed out that it is the lack of democracy that is the root cause of the ethnic problem in Pakistan. To me, a lack of democracy is not “the” cause it. If democracy is not led by a Nationalist Leader, but by an ethno-centric leader (such as ZA Bhutto or Nawaz Sharif) elected to the highest office, an “ethno-centric democracy” will not solve the ethnic problem but would heighten and exacerbate it.

re: hisIdiocy

{The people living in Pakistan have been Muslims for centuries.}

so?...being muslim alone is not an identity without a culture associated with it...unless you think sharia is culture...

an interesting news report here......could this be the REASON why mush-e-ruff banned terror-r-us groups from pakistan....


The headline screams
{
Synagogue rubble yields a passport

Officials in Turkey examine Pakistani document and find another body}

the report is available at KRT NEWS SERVICE website!