A Long Night’s Odyssey

F. R. Khan,

There is always the possibility of hope; of redemption; of salvation; but most importantly of liberty.

In analogy, I speak of a person who is now living. That person someday will die. A crucial cause of his/her demise will be his/her refusal to come to terms with his/her will to live.

We as a nation, Pakistan, are not hopeless. We will only die a collective death as a people if we give up on the hope, the will, to live and shall surrender our `khudi` or transcendental ego to an illusory demon, a soothsayer, within us. Let`s not, never, surrender. Let`s will to live and to transcend.

``khudi ko kar bulund itna ke har taqdeer se pehlay,
Khuda bunday se yeh poochay: bata teri raza kya hai.`` - Sir Allama Muhammad Iqbal

Peace!

Would the real Pakistanis, please stand up..

Are there any real Pakistanis at the chowk?

Seriously, it will be refreshing to hear from someone actually living in Pakistan!

It seems to me that Chowk is a place for the ``mahajirs``, and before all of you start YELLING at me, I am referring to ``Desis``, majority of them anyway, to voice their often stale views.

Realize that talk is cheap, and it seems people are more concerned about getting their ``pagri`` up high than anything else.

Do something constructive, please.

Some suggestions:

If you are concerned about lack of education in Pakistan, help educate at least one Pakistani child. Remember $1

BAhmed #159

The point is not whether Bhutto should be hanged or not.

The point is was the process fair.

The decision was a split decision with 3:2 or 4:3 but to get the ``CORRECT DECISION`` few of the judges have been relaced during trial.

It was a political murder not of Bhutto but the rights of people of Pakistan.

I still think Zia was Sandhurst trained, if my memory serves me right. (But does it matter if he trained from Lalukhet)

shankar #169: I am a great fan of jawans/non-officer group (of any country). Having sat with them, eaten with them etc., I have nothing but the utmost respect for them. I have always wondered whether people who criticize the behavior of soldiers/armies etc., in their actions against potent civilian uprisings, have any idea what it is like to suppress guirella warfare. The amount of psychological pressure is unexplainable. The sanest of people can go nuts.

This, of course, does not mean that soldiers who do carry out atrocities against civilians (be it rape, killing, or anything else) should not be punished. They definitely should be punished, by all means. However, the political leaders, the military commanders, and the civilian population whom these soldiers are an extension of, are equally to blame. The civilian populations are the biggest cheerleaders (or at best sit quitely) of the soldiers when they are deployed against uprisings. However, once the gurrella groups/freedom fighters, after great losses, overcome the soldiers, the same people who sent the soldiers into action, become the soldiers` biggest critics, without sharing the blame.

The above happened to the American soldiers in Vietnam, it happened to the Pakistani soldiers in Bangladesh, and I think in a few years it will happen to the Indian soldiers who are currently in Kashmir. The soldiers are definitely to blame, but so are the civilian citizens sending them into battle with subtle or open approval.

Umairr, Farangi_Kush,

Nice thoughts about the ordinary jawans. If there are human rights atrocities, their military & civilian commanders should be held responsible. In guerella warfare, sometimes its impossible to know who a civilian is & innocent people die.

However, I think a jawan should be held responsible if he rapes a woman.

An uncle of mine was in the Navy. He rose to become a submarine commander at a very young age. Even then he used to envy merchant marines because people much younger & less qualified than he would be making a lot more money. After he retired he became captain of a merchant ship. Eventhough he makes much more money, he misses & yearns to back in the Navy. Merchant sailors dont jump & salute him or docily obey him when he barks an order.

Farangi_Kush #167: ``Oath,pride,sense of honour,and dignity does not allow a soldier to cry out loud & open.``

Nicely said. I definitely agree with this. In a wartime situation against civilian gurriella fighters, soldiers are in a lose-lose situation. If they carry out the orders of the politicians and their own commanders, they are blamed by civilians for human rights abuses. If they do not carry out the orders, they can be tried by court martial (which during war can lead to a death penalty). If they resign or refuse to fight during war, they can be court-martialled, as well. This is why I blame the whole nation, and not just armies, for actions against its own civilians.

``Hope you found this post by me a bit ``Different`` .``

Yes, this post is definitely different than your normal posts. Either that, or you have unconsciously started to convert me to your line of thinking :-)

Umairr:

Most of the civilians have a very plasticine notion of a soldier`s or,more accurately a sipahee`s life.

It is NOT tinsel town and it is NOT t.v footage.

I do not have a direct experience as a soldier,but I have been privy to and confidante of many a rank & file.They uncovered their emotional wounds and bleeding hearts to me.Now these are the ones who knew a thing or two.Most are so enraptured by `duty` and `honor` that even a critical thought is anathema to them.

Oath,pride,sense of honour,and dignity does not allow a soldier to cry out loud & open.

One example:

A former hindu major told me about the 1962 NEFA war with China.(I just couldn`t believe it!)

He said the ordinary soldier did not even have snow-boots!First time this major saw snowboots was when he came to US.

The Seniors sent them on a mission with the distances calculated from a map which had the distance scale.The dumbos calculated it on the map

without realising that in a mountainous terrain one inch might not mean 50 miles!

I hope things are better in Pakistan.One thing I do know is that we dress & equip our sipahees better.

Same soldier told me,laughingly,that he saw action at the kutch border(65) and exchanged sporadic fire simply to consume ammunition to enable the seniors to send ``reports`` to politicians.Whenever there was a lull in fighting or cease-fire the soldiers from either side would cross-over and alleviate boredom & fatigue and exchange goods.Pakistanees,he said had excellent army gear and indians coveted even the trinkets.

The learning I aquire from the sod & soil kind,I find far too valuable than the clubs & gymkhanas(which were never alien land to me either.:))).

__________________________________________________

Hope you found this post by me a bit ``Different`` .

``Ho hulqua-e yaaraann tho baresham kee trah nurm

Ho jung kaa maidaan tho faulaad hai momin``

ALLAMA IQBAL

__________________________________________________

wassalaam

In response to Umairr (Reply # 165)
Dear Umair:

Your statement: “Just like cowards have no place in any military, similarly, people with weak conscious should not have any place in the judiciary.”

Comment: This is what we should wish for. In real world situations, cowardice and weakness manifest in a wide variety of shade in different contexts.

Your statement: “When a person becomes a pilot in the PAF, he accepts the fact that due to cheap equipment, his life will be in danger, quite a bit a more than it would be if he were flying in the Air Force of a wealthy country. When a person joins the Pakistan Army, he accepts the fact that he may be asked to risk his life at the personal whim of a corrupt politician. Same rule should be applied to the judges.”

Comment: I believe, the military establishment takes necessary safeguards to protect the lives of the military personnel from both internal and external sources. I also believe that sufficient protection is available to the judges during normal times. Of course, some risks are involved in every job. I do not support corruption of any sort.

Your statement: “Being a judge is the biggest responsibility in the country. You have stated that a judge may lose his job, if he gives a decision against a certain person.”

Comment: Yes, being a judge is a very important (if not the biggest) responsibility. I don’t know how corrupt are the judges today. I, however, do not believe that the judges were as powerless in the past as they seem to have become in the recent decades. This is a problem that requires serious public attention and research.

Your statement: “ A judge has no right to give an unethical decision, just because he feels threatened, or thinks he will lose his job.”

Comment: Ideally, I agree with you.

Your statement: “Even in the USA, the judges do receive a lot of threats; specifically in decisions involving mobsters. In such cases, they should either quit or give an honest decision.”

Comment: In the early 1930s, a judge in Iowa was taken away from the court to be lynched in the countryside by some depression-hit farmers. The life of the judge was luckily spared. All the persons involved in this real story were soon arrested in various parts of the country and none of them could escape necessary punishment. Do we have this kind of rule of law in contemporary Pakistan?

Your statement: “While I appreciate your legitimate criticisms of the Pakistan military (as I try to point out the illegitimate ones), I get the feeling you are quite zealous in your criticism of the military, while you are willing to justify wrong-doings carried out in the Pakistani society by other groups (like judges). This is quite a contradiction.

Comment: I don’t agree with your analysis. The difficulties created directly or indirectly by the military establishment are well-known. I don’t support the wrong-doings of the judges either. I believe that the process of accountability should not stop at the judges and/or the military personnel. Justice should be served (through a just court of law). The system of accountability should be as transparent as possible.

Your statement: “Believe me, no judge is ever under as much pressure as a soldier fighting a war, or even a soldier training for war. I know at least twenty soldiers personally (these are just the ones I know personally), who died while protecting Pakistan (either in war, or in peace) in the last ten years. I know quite a few who resigned (including myself) because they were unwilling to accept certain orders they believed to be incorrect. How many judges do you know personally, who have been killed in the last ten years, because they gave an ethical judgement? I would assume the figure is less than twenty.”

Comment: I don’t wish untimely, unwarranted, or unnatural death for anyone. While death or loss of limb is a necessary part of the military profession, the challenges/risks for the judiciary are somewhat different. If accountability is one of the steps in the right direction, then the process of accountability should be extended to the judiciary as well as the military. The earlier, the better.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

bahmad #63: There is an old saying, if you can`t take the heat, step out of the kitchen (paraphrased). This is the rule that should be applied to the judges. When a person accepts a job, they accept all the risks associated with it. When a person becomes a pilot in the PAF, he accepts the fact that due to cheap equipment, his life will be in danger, quite a bit a more than it would be if he were flying in the Air Force of a wealthy country. When a person joins the Pakistan Army, he accepts the fact that he may be asked to risk his life at the personal whim of a corrupt politician. Same rule should be applied to the judges.

Being a judge is the biggest responsibility in the country. You have stated that a judge may lose his job, if he gives a decision against a certain person. This can generally only happen under a military regime, where the Constitution has been sidelined. However, even under those circumstances the judges can resign. In fact you have yourself given examples of judges who have resigned,

``Justice Dorab Patel was at least one such judge who wrote a dissenting note.``

``Remember, how easily a few Supreme court judges lost their jobs only recently because they did not want to take a new oath under the Provisional Constitutional Ordinance.``

So there are judges who have resigned when they felt they could not do their jobs honestly (although in the second case, some of the judges who resigned were the same ones who turned against their own Chief Justice). Unfortunately, there are too many who haven`t. Instead of showing sympathy with them, they should be criticized. A judge has no right to give an unethical decision, just because he feels threatened, or thinks he will lose his job. Just like cowards have no place in any military, similarly, people with weak conscious should not have any place in the judiciary. Even in the USA, the judges do receive a lot of threats; specifically in decisions involving mobsters. In such cases, they should either quit or give an honest decision. If they can do neither, then they are in the wrong profession.

While I appreciate your legitimate criticisms of the Pakistan military (as I try to point out the illegitimate ones), I get the feeling you are quite zealous in your criticism of the military, while you are willing to justify wrong-doings carried out in the Pakistani society by other groups (like judges). This is quite a contradiction. Believe me, no judge is ever under as much pressure as a soldier fighting a war, or even a soldier training for war. I know at least twenty soldiers personally (these are just the ones I know personally), who died while protecting Pakistan (either in war, or in peace) in the last ten years. I know quite a few who resigned (including myself) because they were unwilling to accept certain orders they believed to be incorrect. How many judges do you know personally, who have been killed in the last ten years, because they gave an ethical judgement? I would assume the figure is less than twenty.

There is absolutely no reason for a judge to give unethical decisions in Pakistan or anywhere else. These decisions involve the life and limb of the average Pakistani. It is about time the Pakistani judges developed some character.

In response to Umairr (Reply # 162)
Dear Umair:

In response to my conviction for not sharing the responsibility for genocide in erstwhile East Pakistan with the army and other state apparatus, you have shown your disappointment. I may be an arrogant person in this respect, but I cannot share your views. A cruel state is a cruel state, no ifs and buts are necessary.

Yes we are beneficiaries of Pakistan. There indeed are many Bangladeshis who were also beneficiaries of the goods and service provided in the Pakistani public sphere. In this sense, Mujeebur Rahman was also a beneficiary. But, the issue of enjoying good and services in the public sphere has nothing to do with the acts of extreme violence by the state against her own citizens, let alone any human being.

Umair, you have accepted the responsibility. You have every right to do so. However, it is your moral responsibility to ask the state of Pakistan to do the needful. In my case, the crisis of legitimacy still haunts me. Let me give you a simple example to add some concreteness to my abstract argument. A couple of months back, the Musharraf regime declared that it will publish the Hamoodur Rahman Report (in full) within a fortnight. Where is the report? Why it has not yet been published?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

In response to Umairr (Reply # 162)
Dear Umair:

Your statement: “. . . had the judiciary wanted to, it could have stopped the hanging. One thing I am quite sure of is that the judiciary in Pakistan is very cowardly.”

Comments: In an orderly democratic state, justice is served not because the judges are inherently honest and lion-hearted. Justice is served because the state protects them to perform their jobs honestly and fearlessly. The judges are empowered by the power of the state, while the state is empowered by the power of the people.

In a society where the state suffers from legitimacy crisis, one cannot expect the judiciary to serve justice. Can you guess, why?

In a country like Pakistan, it is extremely difficult for a judge to be honest and fearless without giving a lot of sacrifices. Remember, how easily a few Supreme court judges lost their jobs only recently because they did not want to take a new oath under the Provisional Constitutional Ordinance.

Let me present a scenario. Suppose, I am a an honest and fearless Pakistani judge and I receive a threat that my daughter will be kidnaped and/or gang-raped if I don’t yield to a certain demand. What are my chances to become a coward and dishonest (depending upon who gives the threat)? Any guess?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

ahmadb #159: I have not studied the judgement on Bhutto`s hanging in great detail. I do know it was a split decision, and on split decisions people usually do not get hanged. So I cannot argue one way or the other whether he should have been hanged or not. However, had the judiciary wanted to, it could have stopped the hanging. One thing I am quite sure of is that the judiciary in Pakistan is very cowardly. You have stated,

``Nonetheless, without the support of the coercive state apparatus, judges are as powerless as most ordinary citizens of Pakistan.``

I do not agree with this. Judges in Pakistan are actually very powerful, specially under civilian regimes. They are given that power through the Constitution. The decisions they give, do get implemented. Unfortunately they are corruptible and are neither loyal to their colleagues and their institutions, nor to their profession.

There was nothing stopping the judges from giving a contempt of court decision against Nawaz Sharif. The whole country, including the military, would have supported such a decision. However, the judges turned against their own Chief Justice. You cannot blame the state appratus for this. NS did try to influence them, but they did not have to buckle under the influence. All the judges had to do was to stand by their Chief Justice. At most they would have had to resign. No one was holding a gun to their heads. Similarly when the Supreme Court was stormed, the judges could have given a decision against the stormers (they have given that decision now). But they proved cowardly. Once again, at most they would have had to resign.

Nawaz Sharif attempted to do the same thing in the Army, i.e. divide and conquer. Look what happened. All the corps commanders stood by their Chief. One may or may not agree with the current Martial Law, however one has to agree that the current Army high command (unlike the judicial high command) was neither corruptible, nor did it allow anyone to break its ranks. The judges, constitutionally, have far more power than the corps commanders, yet they always take the easy way out. It is a personal flaw in their character, and their institution. So they should be the first ones to be blamed. Honest and competent people can never be subversed and influenced by the state apparatus. Only weak and dishonest people can be.

``Why I cannot share the responsibility? Because, a state that cannot even ¡§normally¡¨ protect the fundamental rights and liberties of its citizens loses its legitimacy.``

I am a bit disappointed to read sentiments like this. If a poor person with no resources were to make such a statement, I would agree with him. You and I have both been the beneficiaries of Pakistan. It has provided us an education, and I assume a relatively good standard of living. Good enough to make it outside Pakistan. On the whole, the group of people who can make it outside Pakistan after getting a good education, cannot really complain about, ``normal`` protection. They have received all the amenities of life (perhaps at the expense of the poor in Pakistan). They may have had to struggle a great deal for it, but would they have made it to the USA and Canada, had Pakistan not given them the intial opportunity? These people are actually the people who constitute the State, and are the beneficiries of the State of Pakistan. If they do not take responsibility for the affairs of Pakistan, the who else will?

Everyone (including the political parties) in Pakistan can come up with a good argument on why they, in no way, can share the responsibility of what is happening, and has happened, in Pakistan. Unfortunately, very few people are willing to accept any responsibility. Most are busy cynically criticizing Pakistan, and passing the blame. I think all citizens of Pakistan (including myself) who have gained something from Pakistan (i.e. and education, food, childhood, identity, jobs, visas to go to North America, etc.) have to accept responsibility for what is happening in Pakistan, and what Pakistan has done. I certainly accept responsibility.

ali1 #155 If you are still reading this: You said that if the ``army split along Shia/Sunni and Brelvi/Wahabi lines and does not help the Mullahs in suppressing the Sindhis and mohajirs...``).

Your post was, to my mind, talking lightly about splits and divisions that - while hypothetical - would clearly cause great bloodshed and further misery to the long-suffering people of Pakistan. My post was written in anger at this statement. I did not seriously mean the word ``worthless`` and appreciate your not getting too upset about it, and am sure you are as troubled by the violence in Pakistan as we all are. Anyway, I wish you a long and happy life and good health.

Re: Bilal # 159

``...a state that cannot even “normally” protect the fundamental rights and liberties of its citizens loses its legitimacy.`` Bilal Ahmed

Well said, sir! I could not have said it better!!

Ciao!

In response to Umairr (Reply # 157)
Dear Umair:

Your response to krashid is basically reasonable. I may also write one soon. I, however, want to make a few points.

Bhutto’s hanging was indeed ordered by the Supreme Court. Remember it was a split decision. Justice Dorab Patel was at least one such judge who wrote a dissenting note. We also need to remember that our judicial system is neither impeccable nor influence-free. It is the same judicial system that failed to punish the Nawaz Sharif goons with all kind of evidence against them. It is the same judicial system that generally falls short of providing a good sense of direction to the state and people to make Pakistan a just society (and thus a just state). Nonetheless, without the support of the coercive state apparatus, judges are as powerless as most ordinary citizens of Pakistan. In fact, it is the combined effort of all state apparatuses that establishes law and order (not danda shahi) within a nation-state.

An important point to consider: Did Bhutto deserve death penalty? Was the decision just?

I as, Bilal Ahmad, cannot share any blame for the East Pakistan debacle (and particularly the genocide). I think, the state of Pakistan was responsible for it. It should accept the responsibility (no ifs and buts) and ask for forgiveness. This is what I expect from a decent Pakistani state. The job of a state is to protect its citizens not kill them indiscriminately (or otherwise). Why I cannot share the responsibility? Because, a state that cannot even “normally” protect the fundamental rights and liberties of its citizens loses its legitimacy.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

krashid #157: Some inaccuracies in your reply:

``If that Sandhurst trained Zia can say that Constitution is a thirteen page book which he can tear anytime.``

To the best of my knowledge, Zia never went to Sandhurst. Ayub did, but not Zia.

``hanging of Bhutto``

Bhutto`s hanging was ordered by the Supreme Court of Pakistan. He was accused of ordering the murder of Kasuri, I believe. The Supreme Court judges did not have to give that decision. They could have resigned, had they desired.

``After seeing debacle of East Pakistan, hanging of Bhutto (with its attendant psychological effect) slaugthering of Sindhis and Baluchs. I have no faith in our barbaric army.``

The politicians of Pakistan, as well as the general population of Pakistan, supported all of the above. Everyone should share the blame. It is unfortunate that every group in Pakistan (including you) is very willing to blame other groups, without taking any blame for things themselves. As a Pakistani civilian, I take responsibility for everything you mentioned above. I hope you will take responsibility, also. 99% of the people in the current Pakistan military joined the military after 1971. How can you blame them for what went on in 1971. They were civilian teenagers and toddlers in 1971.

``Leaving the country in droves and letting all Taliban to kill each other.``

People migrate out of every third world country in droves. This has been true since times immemorial. A very very small % of the population of Pakistan falls under the category of, ``Taliban.`` In the last year, total religious killings (all sectarian, and not Taliban related) have been far less than the total people killed due to traffic accidents. One should not blow things out of proportion.

``You know that ultimately Atom bomb as other arsenals of Pakistan Army will be used against Pakistani Jahil and Anti-Islamic and anti-Patriotic people.``

Are you suggesting that the Pakistan Army will detonate an atomic bomb inside Pakistan? If you are then I am afraid you are willing to go to any length to malign someone with whom you disagree. Disagreements and criticism are fine, however they should be based on reality.

On the whole, my experience has been that the Pakistan military is still the most liberal and ethnically and religiously unified organization in Pakistan. One may like the military or dislike it, but the above fact remains true, either way. Don`t use Zia as a standard for everything. How many ethnic, sectarian, religious conflicts have you ever heard of in the military. Shias are living with Sunnis, Parsis are living Ahmedis, Muhajirs are living with Punjabis etc. quite comfortably in the military. Walk into any miltary installation, a PAF base, a Navy housing station, and you will find some of the most progressive women (wives and daughters of military members) in Pakistan. Ask anyone of these women and they will tell you they feel far more comfortable, safe and liberated socially living in the military environment than in the Pakistani civilian environment. How many rapes or sexual harrassment cases have ever occurred in military stations? Probably none, or almost none. These occur regularly in even the most elite civilian living areas.

``See how the God takes His wrath. With all power at his disposal, people cannot see his face. And people who pray for him are praying on a dogs ash or his only God knows.``

I do not approve of what Zia did as CMLA. However, assuming that you know what God`s intentions are in the way he takes people`s lives, in my opinion, is quite unethical. Many people who attain Shahadat in battle are killed in a manner in which there face cannot be recognized. In fact, the whole crew of the C-130 Zia was flying in died in that manner. According to your definition, they are evil as well.

``stop murdering their own innocent people every few years to show their BRAVERY.``

Could you point out how many people have been killed by this regime, by design, in the last year. Could you point out how many civilians have been killed by the Pakistan military in the past twenty years. However, I can think of quite a few who are killed by the police, and by their own relatives.

I would suggest that you transfer out of the 80s and into the current year. You are using past actions to justify your views about the present situation (without providing alternatives). Zia is not Musharraf, and Musharraf is not Zia. Should I hate every Punjabi, because of NS, or every Sindhi because of Bhutto. That would be racism.

Criticize the present, based on present day facts. Criticism for the sake of criticism may play to a cynical crowd, but it does not do any good to Pakistan.