Why Mukhtar Mai Matters

Re: # 65
jang
thanks for that information, no wonder i couldn`t find it on the map.

#61 by jang

Basically Romair has no idea of Pakistani political and social dynamics and he just keeps recycling ideas from 1960s. A few Feudal do influence some seats in Sindh and a few more in Southern Punjab. Most of the MNA or MPAs from Punjab, Sindh and NWFP are at best well off landowners. Over the last several years, seats have been added in the urban areas and as the urban population have increased over the years. If you understand Pakistani politics a little, you would know that elections do not guarantee influence in the government. Some feudal can win all the seats but they always rely on the army and the civil bureaucracy for crumbs.

The old days of feudal controlling things in their areas are gone now. The Pir of Pagara probably the richest Wadera(feudal) cannot win elections from his own area. In Sindh, most of the so-called feudal would lose elections if they are not in the PPP. So their election strength is in PPP and not vice versa. Some feudal are so much in debt that often you would find them begging bankers to get off their backs.
The problem is not feudal but the mindset that feudal promoted and people still following in those outdated traditions and customs.

The movement from the rural areas to urban areas in Pakistan is not as huge as it is in India. Sindhi have enough incomes from their land holdings that they don’t’ leave their ancestral villages and cities. Karachi is the magnet for the rural Pushtoon and educated Punjabis for various reasons.
The situation in Punjab is different where small towns and villages are growing in population and are truly urban areas now. (Yassar or Feroz would probably have more info on this.)

aslam, gurgaon is a once dusty outskirt of Delhi, now has become a hot destination of the new-rich IT folks. its kind of silicon valley of north-india.

(short post)

it is a folly to ascribe a major portion of the blame to the feudals

if you ask me i will blame any ill in pakistan to the occupying army

---

(long post)

occupying army


…give me any problem in paksitan and i will give you a two word answer…occupying army…try me :)

to blame the feudals only is beating the dead camel while pretending it is alive

over on the sajil board (incest and underage ward’s sexual abuse) romair was gingerly heading in the right direction when he mentioned that and other related issues from the perch of law and order

* the occupying army is the root of all evil in pakistan
* the occupying army is the current God, Mohammed and the Caliphs all rolled into one…ok Ram, Guru Nanak, Krishna, Budda…Jesus….did i miss anyone?...insert your favourite diety here ......

* the occupying army….ok enough…some of you are irritated by repeated mention of it …so won’t mention it again in this thread …but on the odd chance that some new readers are not sure where i am coming from …( the other query ...where am going is also speculative at best) i will explain:

on the eight day…biblical reference for the unbelievers;)…He pointed at the faujis and said…you manage…

…as the world knows by now, they have made a holy mess of it!…enough is enough say foes and friends alike…send them back to barracks under full civilian control like happens in most civilized countries…(certain politicians in the beltway who have a penchant for talking about democracy but dealing with autocrats, k(h)akistocrats, ailing oligarchs, monarchs, and small time tin-pots excepted)

ok, back to why i think they are the root of all evil in Pakistan...as long as they are remotely close to power:

* they will not let any national institutions flourish
* there will be no independent judiciary
* there will be no independent civil service
* there will be no accountability – external or internal
* nobody will be answerable to the public
* no orderly political institutions would evolve
* jungle raj will prevail under army raj

…i have to mention india ...sorry if it gets anybody’s goat…both countries got their independence at the same time…while we may argue if it is more democratic or less when compared to other countries…nobody can deny that is largely a democratic set-up with functioning institutions….where the ordinary citizens exercise power to throw out their state or national governments every so many years...while there is rampant corruption…the big difference is when push comes to shove the ordinary citizen is heard…it may take longer for him to be heard….but he is heard…compared to Pakistan …everyone feels there is more law and order there …briefly….they are stumbling toward the ideal goal...life, liberty, freedom, pursuit of happiness, freedom from persecution…

whereas

pakistan is regressing…the faujis are forever looking to increase their share of the pie…in their zeal they have overthrown common sense...they forget that if there is no country there won’t be no army’…they are a law unto themselves…there is no law for the ordinary citizenry…

…this needs to be looked at more closely…

…on books pakistan has all the laws it needs to exist as a civil society…mostly good…some bad ones…the people…or the judiciary is not empowered and independent enough to knock down the bad one…the legislature is cowed and manipulated…(remember saima sarwar imran?...) ...when justice is denied what do you thnk ordinary citizen can do>,,,the options are to take law into their own hands…or to approach the dons in their turf for remedial justice…the bugtis, the mqm etc. often provide justice by default to the ordinary citizens…

..and this is with the full blessings of the army raj….( i promised you i won’t use that phrase in this post)…along with these petty warlords the army also uses mafia to rule…

…if you want I can develop this even more….but i better end this here…the army has to go back to the barracks under full civilian control…and let the civilians resume their long trial and run for a viable political system beneficial for the populace without army interference

Romair and others

Feudalism as a social and economic system as practiced in pakistan is the problem, not large land holdings, there are larger land holdings in the US, Australia even Britain, where farming is regarded as an industry with management, employees and casual workers etc.

It would be very difficult to replicate the Mirpur and Jehlum model, because of their unique position with regard to army recruitment and migration to England. Mirpur is far from egalitarian, there are some fabulously rich families there, as an Indian journalist recently observed it has massive sprawling bungalows, making those in Guraon look like servant quarters.

BTW where is Gurgaon never heard of the place before

anil #59: ``Mobilizing public opnion through the effective use of community leader (organ / media) is so important.``

There is only one way to fix this problem, in Pakistan (or anywhere). Take the land away from the people who own so much land. There is no other way. It doesn`t matter if the land owners are good or bad, or progressive or regressive, etc., they are part of a system, which allows them the luxury of literally getting away with murder.

Perhaps there is nothing wrong with owning a lot of agricultural land, like ranchers. If I buy 25,000 acres of land in Manitoba and raise horses there, I am not a feudal. However, if there are tens of villages on that land, and I own those villages (and hence the villagers, also), I am a feudal.

The only institution which can take away the land is the govt. It can simply pass laws, making it impossible to own that much land, and making it impossible to hide the ownership of that land (by giving it to relatives, etc.). It can then buy the land (or forcefully take it) and give it to the tillers and small farmers, who work there.

Once that is done, the problem is solved.

This has actually happened in parts of Pakistan. Specifically in Punjab. Punjab is, I believe, mostly non-feudal. It is rural. All of Potohar is rural and poor, but not feudal. Kashmir is rural and poor, but not feudal. The lands belong to the people who till them.

My family is amongst the wealthier members of our surrouding villages. Some of my cousins/uncles etc. participate in local elections. To get votes they have to go door to door and ask the villagers for votes. Or appeal to them, through baradri relationships, etc. They cannot force them to vote, for them. Because they don`t own the village. If they owned the villages, like feudals, they wouldn`t even have to campaign..........

However, the govt. cannot take the land away from the feudals, because the feudals, themselves, are the govt. PPP and PML are both hardcore feudal parties, and they dominate politics. In many, if not most cases, one relative is in one party, and another is in the other. They are all related to each other.......

The Army could have easily done it. However, it didn`t do it either, including Musharraf. In fact, Ayub and Zia`s next generation actually joined the feudals. Gohar Ayub sits at the center of, perhaps the most powerful political family nexus in Pakistan, which has relatives married into every power group - from feudals to businessmen, to military to NGOs. One relative who almost became the COAS, instead of Musharraf..........

The third option is a peasant revolution. Which seems to be what you are suggesting. However, such revolutions will start in the cities. But the cityfolk in Pakistan are generally ok. They have traditionally been better off than the cityfolk, probably, in most of South Asia (including India) in terms of living standard. They don`t really want a revolution. And the peasants in the feudal lands, cannot rise up against the landowner, who is also their MNA, and whose relative is the police inspector of the area, and who party is running the govt.

I think there is only one group that the feudals are afraid of. And that is the maulvi politicians. This goes against the generic Chowk hatred of maulvis. But the maulvis are the only group in Pakistan that represents the poor class. And has put farmers and mosque imams (both poor classes) into the Assemblies. And the maulvis appeal to a force that the peasants are more scared of than their feudal, i.e. God. In fact, in Baluchistan, the maulvis have defeated quite a few tribal leaders...........

But the maulvis have their own negative baggage...............

It will take someone with the popularity and credibility and political skill of Jinnah to sort out the powerful feudal politicians of PPP and PML. Maybe Imran Khan could be that person.........Though his party has been quite unsuccessful, since it is primarily run by progressive urbanites, with no political base in landowning areas...........

Romair,

You have many times railed against the ``feudals``. What i have failed to understand is how exactly they boss-over or supress their fiefdomes. I mean, UP and Bihar are very backwards, but any bhaiyya with a will to ride a train without ticket makes a bee-line to a city or panjab (where agricultural labor demand is high). And that is why you have a Samajwadi Party MLAs (a UP-Bihar based parety) even from bombay/maharashtra legislature, and Mayawati campaigned in maharashtra..far from her power base.

From what i understand is that pakistani urban areas, a lot of panjab, and offcourse kashmir are flourishing and prosperous. How can the feudals keep his folks from leaving him to earn from urban gold-rush?

What exactly do these feudals do (besides getting elected, whenever the few elections do happen) to opress the ``masses``?

Mukhtar mai is one small blow to the corruption (moral too) of the Paksatani society. Before her case, such crimes were committed without shame or consequence. Her case won`t eliminate future oppressions, but it has brought change.

The pakisatanis have shot themselve in the foot with such kanjarpana. In the eyes of the world, it is another example of their barbarity and they don`t have any sympathy or support for thier cause in the world arena.

Romair, Sridhar (# Various)

I know traditions, religions and even law have been used by perpetrators of crimes to justify, be it lynching in the South, be it Sati in India, be it honor killing in Jordan or Pakistan. This is undeniably true for me. However, my emphasis is more on the powerplay, and that players power base needs to be understood (supported or confronted).

Mukhtar Mai was powerless, until media and support organizations stepped in. That is where victims power comes from. Tribals, Fuedal, and politicians (reading Romair about MNAs in Fuedal pockets) get their power from status quo to keep 1,000 villagers silent and spectator to instill fear if nothing else. They also get their power from the nexus with each other.

South Asia has a history of changing such power equations to gain independence from the British. Gandhi did it for India. Jinnah did it for Pakistan. Both did it on a larger scale and took a longer time. Gandhi used the media and appeal that social practices, and religion have on people to successfully create mass movement. I think Jinnah used something similar to empower his supporters with a mission. Empowering mother, wife, sisters and daughters of silent and approving 1,000 spectator villagers will instill courage in these silent spectators. May be even the support of liberal mullahs might be needed as they have a hold on the belief system of these villagers.

A few years ago I had quoted an example on Chowk, and will repeat it here. I had a friend (a Hindu), who was a practicing cardiologist in the Bay Area. When she was a medical student in Bhopal, there was a lab. assistant who was a smart and intellegent muslim boy. She went with him to the muslim colony in Bhopal where he lived for the community medicine project. On their way back, according to her both were struck by the lack of education among young girls who were playing on the streets instead of being in the school. She suggested to the lab assistant that they should start an education program for these girls in the colony instead. The lab assistant expressed his skepticsm that the mullah of the neighborhood masjid and males would not allow it.

She persuaded the lab assistant to go back with her to talk to people in the community. Both went back, and as the lab assistant had said the mullah and some vocal males came out agaisnt the idea, made it clear that they did not want both of them in the community to do anything to disturb the status quo. The lab. assistant felt vindicated and she felt sad on their way back. My friend did not give up and asked the lab assistant to come with her one more time. This time she wanted to go during the mid day when all the males had gone to work, and wanted to talk to the most respected elderly lady in the community. The lab assistant took her there. She told me that when the mullah saw them coming again, he came over and simply stared at them, although they ignored him. Mullah`s male supporters were just not there so he could only stare at them, while they asked the old lady, if she could read or write? Obvisoulsy old lady answered that she could not. She then asked would like her grand daughters to grow up like her and not be able to read or write; or would she like them to be able read and write abe able to be in contact with their parents when they grow up?

The old lady`s answer was obvious, she not only wanted but became the champion and gave a space in her home to start the classes, and told the mullah off to never even come closer to these people if he did not want any trouble. She assured both of them that whenever they will come to teach, she would ensure all the safety and security for them. By the time my friend graduated from her medical college in Bhopal, this program had become a requirement for all medical students to participate.

There are atleast two ways - half full (my friend`s), and half empty (her lab. assistant`s) to look at situations, both are essential to find a pragmatic solution. Only people who are afraid to accept the change are the ones who live thru status quo. BTW, I did ask her if the mullah did anything laet. She told me, as I recall that later the mullah wanted to give a space in the masjid to start the school, because he (a power broker) did not want to loose his standing in the community. Mobilizing public opnion through the effective use of community leader (organ / media) is so important. I always remember, Dr. Anjali Pathak`s example in mind.

Anil Kapuria

Dionysus #54: ``Are you pulling our legs, Romair? Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan is one of the biggest landlords in Central and Northern Punjab and I don`t know for sure but I`m willing to bet Malik Meraj was no 10 acre farmer either.``

No I am not trying to pull anyone`s legs. Why would I be?

Aitezaz Ahsan is a family acquitance. Actually I don`t know what his extended family history is. Is it feudal? I will ask him, the next time I see him. However, there is nothing I have seen in his or his family that would indicate that he is a feudal. If he were, he wouldn`t be fighting his elections from Lahore, from where he generally loses to the PML (this time he won, because the PML was fractured). He would go to his feudal lands and fight the elections............

I also don`t know whether he is corrupt or honest. He was, by the way, the Vice President of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. But I do know that he is a true intellectual. I am highly impressed and somewhat inspired by his book titled, The Indus Saga. He is also one of the best lawyers in Pakistan.......

Mairaj Khalid, I don`t know. Never saw or met him. But from whatever I have read, he is a true politician, from lower middle to middle class of Pakistan. This is what politicians should be. And he has a very good reputation. I would really be surprised if he had any land, much less a large amount............

If PPP were led by Aitezaz Ahsans and Mairaj Khalids I would vote for them. They aren`t the only ones. The urban leadership of PPP seems quite balanced; at least the ones I know. Once again, I don`t know if they are honest or corrupt, but they are definitely progressive. The PPP manifesto is quite progressive also.

However, PPP has a huge problem. Their urban leadership is just a hood ornament. They are decoration pieces to add sophistication to the party. The real power lies with its feudal members. And that group is far more regressive than even the maulvis. And it is quite sad to see people like Aitezaz Ahsan come on TV, to defend the crimes and practices of the feudals; not to mention the corruption of Benazir and her husband..........

One would think that people like Mairaj Khalid and Aitezaz would have more of an ideological affinity with parties like Tehrik-e-Insaaf. I don`t know why they are still pushing the PPP`s feudal agenda, which only allows Bhuttos (and now Zaradaris) to come to the top...........It could be that they know this is the only way they can get elected...........

``I hate to shatter all you`re illusions, buddy, but the Mastoi tribesmen who raped this woman were NOT feudals. They were 10 acre subsistence farmers. This is whole episode is NOTHING to do with feudalism.``

It has everything to do with feudalism. It exists because of feudalism. The people who raped the woman did so within the boundary of a system, which is kept in place by the feudal/tribal system. And overseen by the feudals. It was not a normal rape, as would occur in, say, Toronto or Lahore. It was a judicial decision, given under a certain system.......

Who do you think protects these systems, and keeps them from collapsing? Whom do they benefit? Who gives protection to these tribesmen? Who sits at the top of these, ``tribes?`` Why don`t such systems and decisions exist in Kashmir or Jehlum, etc..............

You are completely incorrect about me, Romair, but we`ll leave my background for another day... at any rate, I`ve given some of your statements to some of my family members to read, and I must say they have had a good laugh out of them. For example, ``Letting them own the land``? That`s a good one.

Bina_Shah #43: ``Romair is talking about me.``

Why would I be talking about you? Are you from a landowning family, yourself? Your profile doesn`t seem to match that. I thought you were from an Urdu-speaking family in Karachi.......

My references, in general, are to some of my friends and acquitances who are the off-spring of feudal families, and go to schools like Aitchison (this is the main alma mater of Punjabi feudals). While their sisters go to Convents and Grammar schools. Then they go abroad to study. This is the general trend amongst most feudal and landowning political families. Quite a few of these acquintances visit this site.....and their views are generally in line with the views presented on this site. Which is good. However, they draw their economic and social strength from their large feudal landownings. And when they go to their lands, they ensure the feudal systems does not change, because, as a result of such a change, they will end up losing their lands and, thus, their economic and political standing..........

Some of them justify this system by stating that their own family does not indulge in panchayat-based gang-rapes etc. and does a lot of work for the villagers, i.e. they are, ``benevolent`` feudals. In some cases that is true. But they will never be in favor of dismantling this whole system, and letting their villagers and tillers free, by letting the tillers and peasants own the land, themselves..........

Re: # 54

Dionysus,

While Ch. Aitzaz does come from a rural land owning background... he is the farthest thing from a feudal lord... that I can assure you... Ch Aitzaz`s parents also dedicated themselves to the service of Pakistan ... and were removed from the usual feudal class...

As for late Malik Meraj Khalid sahab... his wife and my mother are really close friends ... and I`ve known his family for ages... he rose from an extremely humble background... and lived in abject poverty for years before making it through law school and making a name for himself... his family still lives in a modest house which they exchanged for their house in Laxmi Mansion... incidentally something I`ve been talking about in the media a lot.

Bhutto picked him up (as he picked up Aitzaz) as prodigal talent ... and both men served Bhutto well... while alive to his faults, but loyal to the core.

-YLH

#53 Romair ``In addition, many of the non-feudal urban leaders of these parties, like Aitezaz Ahsan, Mairaj, etc. are true intellectuals``

Are you pulling our legs, Romair? Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan is one of the biggest landlords in Central and Northern Punjab and I don`t know for sure but I`m willing to bet Malik Meraj was no 10 acre farmer either.





rsridhar ``Thanks for your long, thought-provoking post.
It is indeed a complicated situation.
Feudal system seems well-entrenched in Pakistan.
I still think a people`s democracy (the emphais is on the word people`s) would ultimately spell a death-knell for the feudal system in Pak. Let me explain how. ``

I hate to shatter all you`re illusions, buddy, but the Mastoi tribesmen who raped this woman were NOT feudals. They were 10 acre subsistence farmers. This is whole episode is NOTHING to do with feudalism. They were Mastoi Baluch and she was Gujjar. It was a tribal thing. Nothing more. If they tried to do this to her few miles north, in Sahiwal say, THEY were the ones who would`ve ended up getting raped by Mukhtar Mai`s clansmen.

Rsidhar #50: “How Pak is going to get to the point of having a ``true people`s democracy``? I have no clue.”

This is the million dollar question. This is the Catch-22. A true people’s democracy is the answer. No doubt. But how do you get to that stage?

There is a simple test one can use about Pakistan’s current political system, to find out whom it favors: Many people present the argument that election after election will eventually get rid of feudals’ hold on power. I disagree. I think election after election, under the current system, only strengthens their hold.

Why do you think so many feudals in Pakistan are in politics? Go to any feudal area. The biggest feudal will be in PPP and the second biggest one will be in PML. Or vice-versa. Across the board. They obviously don’t get into it for public service. They get into it to specifically ensure that the current jagirdari system is not changed by the govt. To do that, they become the govt., themselves, through elections. This is why the biggest fighters for, “elections,” under the current system, in Pakistan are feudal and tribal leaders. Why would they fight for it, if election after election would reduce their power?

I would have to guess that the situation in India was different. India maybe rural. But not feudal. The reason Nehru was able to get rid of the landowners’ land, is perhaps, because India was not feudal enough, to begin with. By the time partition rolled around, India had a powerful urban class, which the areas of Pakistan lacked. In fact, Pakistan’s main urban class consisted of Muhajirs from India. Nehru was also the founder of the country, and had influence. Jinnah is the only urbanite in Pakistan’s history, who was able to take on the feudal landowners. But he died. If 66% of the elected assembly of India had been land-owning Nawabs, today, like in Pakistan, would they voluntarily get rid of their own lands?

For democracy to occur, the pre-requisites have to be there first. Historically, there has never been people’s democracy in feudal systems. It took the Europeans centuries to get rid of it. It took a civil war in the USA to lessen the power of the plantation owners……So it’s a chicken and egg Catch-22: For true democracy to occur, feudalism has to end. For feudalism to end true democracy has to occur.

I have noticed that most Pakistanis on this site, have completely urban relatively upper-middle to upper class upbringings. Their exposure is limited to Lahore, Karachi, Islamabad, etc. They have never lived in the remaining 66% non-urban Pakistan. So all their comments are based on assuming all of Pakistan is like the cities. Which is why, in my opinion, they are off-target.

Pakistani cities are pretty well looked after, by third world standards. They are relatively progressive. In the cities, election after elections will solve the problems. However, city politics in Pakistan is immaterial. The real power is in the rural and feudal lands, because that is where all the constituencies are, and where over 60% of Pakistanis still live. Leaders of PPP and PML present a progressive appearance in the cities, which attracts many of the youth; including many on this site. PPP is all for minority rites and women’s rites in Lahore. They are also secular and speak out against maulvis. This attracts the West, also. Their leaders, though feudal, have degrees from Oxford and Harvard (in case of people like Benazir, from both). Their kids write poetry in English, attend dance parties and are members of women’s rights groups and NGOs. In addition, many of the non-feudal urban leaders of these parties, like Aitezaz Ahsan, Mairaj, etc. are true intellectuals (however, the urban leaders are never allowed to reach the top of their parties).

But, these parties do all this, on the basis of their regressive jagirs in feudal Pakistan. I would have not known any of this, had I not had an opportunity to live in these areas. I would also have been a naïve supporter of PPP, or some similar party, assuming what they do in cities is what they do everywhere. But, if you do a statistical survey, you will notice that overwhelmingly wherever such gang-rapes and honor killings occur, the ruling MNA and MPA will be from PPP or PML (or a Baluchi tribal). Not only will he be the local elected politician, he will be the owner of the land or village where the event occurred…………There is no way such events can occur without their approval……….They don’t want to get rid of this sytem………….And they have and will continue to always win in any election, under the current system………

Re: # 51

Actually this might not be true...

Feudalism does not predate Islam within the ``Arab world`` and what is now called the Muslim world.... Islam came when the Arabs were in a stage of development primitive to the feudal period... and even the monarchial period...

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) created what can be adequately described as a confederation of tribes ... which later formed an empire. When the this confederation-turned-empire came into contact with Sassanids and the Byzantines, the empire adopted the more advanced form of government i.e. centralised monarchy ... it was only after monarchy took root and the power shifted over to the Abbassids did we see some of these ``feudal structures`` emerge... ``Feudalism`` was advancement from the ``divine right of rule`` idea.. and it became entrenched in Ottoman Period and the Mughal period.... onto the modern period.

So I reject this classification... feudalism does not predate Islam.

-YLH