Please back off, Benazir! re: H P

I generally agree with your analysis, except that:

a) Unlike ZAB, BB didn't evoke the same distrust from the army especially in her second term. She appointed ex-faujis as her Interior Minister and Punjab governor. Many ex-faujis flocked to the PPP although the majority still preferred PML(N).

b) Supreme Court's decisions to restore Nawaz and remove BB was not dictated by the army. Nawaz "bought" the judges prompting BB to coin the term "chamak" i.e. glitter (of gold) to describe the decision. Justice Nasim Hassan Shah's name figure prominently among the recipients of chamak.

c) The army may considers BB a dominant personality but it doesn't fear her as much as it fears Nawaz. BB is more amenable to preserving the balance of power, than Nawaz who tried to impose one-man rule on the judiciary, army, parliament and press in his last stint.

Beginning of an End Nawaz's return will bolster the Opposition, but it won't dislodge Mushy because PML is in Ch.Shujaat's pocket, and Ch.Shujaat is in Mushy's pocket. Traditionally, the PML has always sided with the Government.

Only PPP and Supreme Court can upset Mushy's cart. The former might strike a deal with him, so it all boils down to getting past the Supreme Court.

The \'poor\' Neighbour {{Amid all the hoopla surrounding the 60th anniversary of Indian independence, almost nothing has been heard from Pakistan, which turns 60 today}}

Bill, no offense but that is plain stupid!

There was actually a grand Pakistan Day parade in London followed by a well-attended concert in which several Pakistani musicians including Ali Zafar, Najam Shiraz and Hadiqa Kiyani mesmerized audiences with patriotic and pop numbers. There were of course celebrations across Pakistan, but this London celebration was all the more epochal because this is where British citizens of Pakistani descent blew up the underground in July 2005. Many whites turned out in great numbers to show their solidarity with the real Pakistan. The entire ceremony was televised live on Geo TV.

Next time, please take your blinkers off before writing gibberish like this.

Preventing More Lal Masjids re: PM #457

You hit the nail on the head. The 1940 Lahore Resolution was more a rejection of Union of India, than an assertion of Federation of Pakistan. The resolution envisioned Muslim ``states`` in Muslim-majority areas. It was only after 1947, that the idea of Federal Republic crystallized. The constitutions of 1956 and 1962 attempted to strengthen this idea with some success.

However, given the sheer distance between the two wings, economic imbalances and ethnic makeup (West Pakistan was multi-ethnic, East Pakistan was Bengali), the federation idea was not working out.

The East Pakistan issue was a constitutional problem, not an ideological one.

Mujib wanted a confederation, but West Pakistan rejected that idea because that would hamper the integration between Punjab, NWFP, Sindh and Baluchistan. West Pakistan wanted a federation, but Mujib rejected it because it failed to address East Pakistan`s myriad problems. There is no way Pakistan could have functioned with Mujib`s idea of two currencies, two state banks, etc.

The only solution to this problem was to let East Pakistan break away. Doing this through a constitutional amendment, instead of a bloody civil war would have been better. Indira Gandhi escalated the inevitable, and in the process turned Pakistan into a permanent enemy on India`s western border. In due course, even Bangladesh has turned hostile toward India because of ideological differences. Ironically, Bengali politican Jyoti Basu had warned Indira about this in 1970.

Preventing More Lal Masjids re: dost-mittar #266

People give far too much credit to Zia than he deserves. The architect of Islamist mood was the visionary Saudi King Faisal who slapped an oil embargo on America, when America intervened on Israel`s behalf after Egyptian and Syrian forces routed Israeli troops in less than 2 days of Yom Kippur war. Faisal`s oil embargo hit the Americans hard and he became the symbolic Amir-ul-Momineen (Commander of the Faithful) of Sunni islamists around the world. Petrodollars began to pour into coiffers of Islamist parties in Turkey and Pakistan. This money was channeled down to student wings of these parties who fought pitched battles with secular student unions. The same petrodollars were used to gather large crowds in the Nizam-e-Mustafa movement launched against PM Bhutto in 1977. There are allegations of CIA using the Islamist mood to destabilize Bhutto (and punish him for the nuclear program).

Zia, the servile son of a middle class maulvi, was promoted out of turn as Army Chief. Saddled with powers, he had no scruples in dismissing his boss and hanging him. With Bhutto gone, Zia looked around for a political constituency and found Mullahs were his best bet. They had street power but lacked the strength to win elections. So he could control them easily. Hence began the military-mullah relationship.

It is important to note that Islamist parties had already destabilized Bhutto govt, before Zia stepped in. Islamists used Zia to get rid of Bhutto. Zia only obliged them later by enacting a few so-called Islamic laws through presidential ordinances.



re: PM #289

{{Has the MMA itself identified these as key objectives?}}

Yes, these objectives have been listed in clause 23 of the Hasba Bill presented by MMA in the NWFP assembly. Complete draft is available at the following link: http://www.dawn.com/2005/07/16/nat18.htm


re: tahmed32 #359

Reasons #1 and #2 from your list were raised by the federation`s lawyer in Supreme Court as well. The Hasba bill ``could`` result in a parallel judicial system. But if I understand your position correctly, you`ll accept this bill if MMA amends it to bring the office of Mohtasib within the ambit of judicial system, right?? Perhaps the Mohtasib can be a special judge of High Court, instead of an officer appointed by the CM.

My response to your 3rd reason is that if we are unwilling to accept the role of a priestly public official, we should ban religious parties and prevent them from contesting elections. It doesn`t make sense to allow them to contest the polls, and then expect them not to assume (or create new) public offices if they emerge victorious.

In general, I find your stance is consistent with the principles of democracy and political pluralism. You are not anti-Shariah per se, but just anti-dictatorship which is a reasonable position.

Preventing More Lal Masjids tahmed32 #253

{{Which definition is implied when maulvis refer to sharia laws?}}

We can refer to the Hasba Bill to answer this question. Earlier shariah bills were either introduced by military dictators, or were petered down versions enacted by elected governments. Hasba Bill is the first Shariah bill introduced by Islamists in a legislative body.

The process (as defined in this draft) is not arbitrary, at least on paper. A Mohtasib shall be appointed by NWFP governor on the CM`s advice for a period of 4 years. Two qualifications are required: a degree issued by a religious institute recognized by the NWFP govt, and Intermediate educational degree (e.g. FA/FSc).

Mohtasib has the powers of a judicial magistrate and can send a written notice to a public official or department if its activities are repugnant to Islamic values (defined in clause 23). A 6-member team (Provisional Advisory Council) comprising 2 ulema, 2 senior lawyers and two grade-20 govt officers shall assist the Mohtasib.

The respondent has 30 days to send a written reply. Mohtasib shall collect evidence and affidavits, and may initiate action (with assistance of NWFP Police if necessary) against the respondent if the offense is proven. Respondent can appeal Mohtasib`s decision in the Peshawer High Court within 30 days.

The Islamic values that Mohtasib is expected to promulgate include abolition of beggary, ban on dowry, adherance to morality in public places, discourage extravagance at marriage functions, discourage entertainment shows at Iftar time in Ramadhan, discourage child labor, speed up civil cases in courts, discourage sectarianism, discourage taweez and peer culture, prevent artificial price hikes, eliminate corruption, etc.

The Hasba bill does not appear to contradict the constitution in both content and process. The respondent has right of appeal and powers of Mohtasib are clearly defined.

Preventing More Lal Masjids tahmed32 #143

It would be wrong to compare Hudood & Blasphemy laws to Lal Masjid vigilantism. Lal Masjid vigilantism is a recent phenomenon of the late 1990s, especially after the erudite Maulana Abdullah died. His son Abdur Rashid Ghazi was more an opportunist than a religious scholar.

Hudood and Blasphemy laws are part of a Shariah movement that started much earlier in 1949. This was a political movement that enjoyed staunch support from many judges, parliamentarians, religious scholars and educationists. Before Zia`s advent, this movement succeeded in getting some of its laws (e.g. Finality of Prohethood, declaration of Friday as holiday, ban on alcohol in restaurants) enacted during the PPP rule in 1970s. The Nizam-e-Mustafa campaign (1977) launched by PNA was welcomed in Karachi, Lahore and Rawalpindi. Zia only capitalized in the Islamist mood, but didn`t actually create it. This was a global phenomenon that affected many countries e.g. Iran, Afghanistan, Algeria and Egypt during the 70s. Even after Zia`s death, the democratically elected parliament passed a Shariah Bill in 1991 which included the Hudood and Blasphemy laws.

I agree with your comments about accountability and supremacy of constitution. Let me add that a true democrat shall respect the constitution even if it contains Shariah provisions, as long as those provisions got inserted through the due democratic process of elections, parliamentary legislation and judicial review. I say this because many pseudo-democrats (like Bush & Blair) harp about democracy only
as long as their friends (e.g. PLO, Fouad Siniora, Rafiq Hariri) win elections.

Preventing More Lal Masjids Mr. Hoodbhoy:

Not confronting Lal Masjid administration until July 3rd was actually a wise decision on the govt`s part. Aunty Shamim was beaten up, Chinese massage therapists were abducted then released, a children`s library was occupied. But no loss of life occured. Maulana Abdur Rasheed Ghazi was hawkish one day, and mellow the next day. During negotiations with Chaudhry Shujaat from March till July, this man rarely spoke about Shariah imposition. Some of the demands he made in those talks were quite specific and not entirely unreasonable e.g. reconstruction of mosques that were demolished in Islamabad.

However, despite his posturing Ghazi failed to win the support of major political parties including MMA and leading religious scholars. Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry`s campaign dwarfed the Maulana`s stature for a few months. Some people even blamed Musharraf for propping up Ghazi, but recent developments have proven these allegations wrong.

There are also fundamental differences between Ghazi`s position on Shariah and that of MMA or conservative PML(Q) members. The latter are campaigning for the espousal of Shariah through elections and parliament. A Hasba or Shariah bill passed into law by the Parliament enjoys legitimacy and sanction of the people. Once passed into law, the civil bureaucracy would be tasked with its implementation, and the judiciary would be responsible for oversight. Unless you are a hardcore Islamophobe, there is really no reason to oppose a Shariah bill passed by the parliament, in a country where 95% of the population is Muslim anyway.

But Ghazi favors Mullah Umar-style Shariah imposed through force, circumventing the parliament, judiciary and civil bureaucracy. Ghazi`s Shariah has no penal codes, no legislation and no checks & balances. His Shariah is a vehicle of personal glory.

The killing of police personnel on July 3rd revealed Ghazi`s true intentions. With hindsight, we can conclude that this man was a clever tactician. He used the dialogue with govt to gain time, and prepare for the military operation. Perhaps he was being propped by foreign jihadis inside the mosque. By blowing hot and cold, he disguised his true intentions even from the govt for almost 3 months. And finally, he picked a fight with the govt when he thought the govt would be unable to respond because of floods in Baluchistan, the Justice Chaudhry challenge and pressure from political opponents gathered in London.

This time he miscalculated.

Lal Masjid is the story of one man`s unbridled quest for power. It is not representative of the average mosques or madrassas in Pakistan, which has neither the resources nor the temerity to fight the govt.

If we want to prevent more Lal Masjids, we need to ensure that mosques are run by either Auqaf Department or Wafaq-ul-Madaris, not by individuals. Maulanas should only be appointed as caretakers by these institutions.

Allama Iqbal- Is he still relevant? Yasser,

I think this discussion is incomplete without an analysis of Iqbal`s concept of Khudi. This concept is equally applicable to an individual as to a nation. In Asrar-e-Khudi, he has described the various stages of a person graduating to higher levels of self-realization and self-perfection. These stages suggest that the self-conscious and conscientious individual/nation is essentially an ``evolutionary`` creature.

This evolutionary nature of Khudi lends itself to application in democracy, governance, religious reconstruction. Because these are evolutionary in nature too.

Jahan-e-taaza ki afkar-e-taaza se hai namood,
Ke Sang-o-Khisht se hotay nahin jahan paida

Endurance and unity are essential for self-actualization because Iqbal believed the Khudi of one individual reinforces the Khudi of others in society. When one person defies a military general for the sake of his principles, others in society also follow suit and thereby validate the defiance of the first person.

Allama Iqbal- Is he still relevant? Iqbal`s ambivalence toward democracy is understandable. The 1920s and 30s were traumatic for the democracies because of the Great Depression. Dictatorial regimes especially Germany and Japan witnessed unprecedented growth in industrial and military power during this period.

It seems Iqbal couldn`t make up his mind whether he preferred the freedoms of democracy to the economic efficiency of dictatorship, or vice versa. Perhaps if he had lived to see the end of WW2, this choice would have been easier to make for him.

Musharaff Finds a Way Out re: #5

Nawaz is outside the ring anyway. Benazir is poised for an election comeback (after a deal with Musharraf). Mullahs have NWFP in their grip. Chaudhries have both the PML and Punjab under their thumb. Altaf controls Karachi with the Mohajir card.

This bar-and-bench movement has broken old loyalties and created new ones. That means no PML-Q style biradiri politics. On top of that, it`s a middle class movement which belies MQM`s claim of representing the middle class. It`s also a democratic and secular movement, which divides PPP`s votebank.

All this movement needs is a new political party. It already has a figurehead and well-defined goals.

Musharaff Finds a Way Out re: #5 by tahmed32

{{#1 ``If this genie is not put back into the bottle, it will destroy not just Musharraf, but Benazir, Nawaz, Altaf and Mullahs as well. ``

and what`s wrong with that?}}

Nothing really.

Musharaff Finds a Way Out After batting sensibly for 45 overs, the govt party has played some rash strokes in the final 5 overs of its inning. Musharraf has inadvertantly unleashed Pakistan`s first middle class movement in 40 years by sacking the CJ. If this genie is not put back into the bottle, it will destroy not just Musharraf, but Benazir, Nawaz, Altaf and Mullahs as well.

Will reinstating the CJ stop this mass movement? That`s the million dollar question.

Fox off! Interviews conducted in selected parts of Karachi aren`t exactly the best way of gauging public opinion in a city with more than 10 million souls. The same question will evoke a different answer in Sohrab Goth shopping markets, than in Azizabad, Boat Basin and Malir.

Secondly, people are maturer than most generals and pseudo-intellectuals would like us to believe. The human mind is capable of receiving thousands of images/soundbytes every day, and deciding which ones to ``store`` and which ones to ``delete``.

Media should be allowed to cover the truth, even if the coverage appears raw and insensitive to a few. At least that prevents conspiracy theories and vicious rumours from spreading.

Eyewitness: Karachi, May 12, 2007 Beena,

The sentiments expressed in your article resonate with the views of all Pakistanis who believe in tolerance, political pluralism and democracy. Your article can only aggravate those sociopaths who believe in Mohajir particularism and are bereft of humanity or respect for democracy.

MQM`s already small constituency got smaller with this brazen display of fascism. This party is unworthy of power and I pray that no mainstream party ever form a coalition with MQM again, until the London-based perpetrators of 5/12 are brought to justice.

What Next After Karachi’s Carnage? rf786,

I don`t disagree with your comments about accepting the reality of rural-urban divide and the fact that more Pashtuns and Punjabis migrated into Sind and Baluchistan, than vice versa.

Racial slurs are no justification for ethnic politics, unless these slurs are an instrument of state policy. While there may be individuals who scorned Urdu-speaking people (and vice versa), there is no evidence of widespread discrimination by Punjabis or Pashtuns against Muhajirs. If Altaf took the cause of Muhajir nationalism in response to racial slurs, then he is essentially a reactionary leader, not a visionary one.

Can you expect a man to reduce the very ethnic tensions that brought him to power in the first place??

The use of violence by MQM against ANP and PPP may not be a mistake, as most interactors in Chowk believe. It is deliberate because it perpetuates ethnic divisions and keeps Muhajir voters locked in MQM`s votebank.