Part 1:
Part 2:
Part 3:
Part 4:
Monday 28 February 2011
Sunday 27 February 2011
A Davis for Balochistan
This Column published in The News on Sunday, 27 Feb 2010 under the title "When will we look their way?". They not only changed the title but also edited a portion. Below is the complete, un-edited version of the column.
Riding a motorbike one fine afternoon in Lahore, on January 27, 22-year-old Faizan Haider and 26-year-old Faheem Shamshad breathed their last. Ten bullets fired from a 9mm Glock pistol handed them their death warrant.
Nothing could have prevented all that broke loose in the aftermath. Kudos to Lahore police – for once on time – a Raymond Davis was handcuffed and taken into custody. It had to be the color of his skin because almost everyone on Qurtaba Chowk saw him commit the crime. There were 47 witnesses – a rare commodity in Pakistan. Flashback to the Shershah Market episode in Karachi: nine self-professed suspects, not a single willing eyewitness.
The same day as Davis was whisked away by police officials – amid much television fanfare – two lifeless bodies were found in the Panjgor area of Balochistan. One of the victims, Abid Rasool Baksh was only 17 years old, the other, Nasir Dagarzai, 18. They were reportedly kidnapped from an Internet Cafe in Hub.
Next morning, Pakistanis woke up with anti-US fever. Some very influential groups got out on the streets of Karachi, Lahore, Islamabad – across Pakistan – to burn effigies of the 'tyrant', and scream their lungs out against American atrocities. By the third day, it was justice they were crying for; by the fourth, there was a call for barter with the US – Afia do, Raymond lo!
Meanwhile, in London, a relatively small number of people started gathering in Aldwych, braving the cold winter morning. In a calm but forceful protest, these people stood against the senseless killings in Balochistan. Back in Pakistan, we continued to ignite a self-proclaimed war against the US; slogans were pasted across Lahore reading: “Justice for Faheem and Faizan! Hang Davis! Amreeka murdahbad!” With love, Jamat-u-Dawah.
Worldwide, media publications gave out one distress signal after another on Balochistan, while the Pakistani media only picked up international stories mentioning Davis. When it was discovered that some US newspapers deliberately held back the true identity of Davis, our journalistic ethics were rocked to the core. Meanwhile, outside the Karachi Press Club a makeshift shrine full of haunting pictures of missing persons started to house protesters crying out for attention on Balochistan. But media houses, newspapers et al ignored Balochistan. Ethics anyone?
Contrary to what we may or may not report, atrocities in Balochistan continue. And not a single protest has been recorded for those being shot and dumped for unknown reasons, by faceless, nameless killers. Come February 1st and most of us were mulling over Davis’ diplomatic status. In Balochistan, more bodies were being found. Baluch singer, Ali Jan Issazai, who was allegedly picked up by agencies from a hotel in Quetta a month earlier, was found dead in Khuzdar. Not a whimper from those frothing at the mouth with hatred for Davis. Two days later three more bodies were found in Khuzdar. The victims were identified as Hamid Issazai, Lal Khan Sumalani and Mir Khan Sumalani. We were still too caught up in the Davis saga to notice.
Support grew for Faheem, Faizan and Ubaid-ur-Rehman, with everyone – from the federal and the Punjab government to television anchors and religious parties – vying for justice. Meanwhile, in Balochistan, children of a lesser God were buried with torture marks and bullet wounds. In most cases, the bodies were not even sent for an autopsy; no FIR was registered and no challan was issued.
The trend of young boys being picked up is common in most parts of Balochistan. One such instance can be dated back to October last year. 17-year-old Jamal Baluch was picked up by unknown men only to be recovered a few days later – fortunately, not dead but paralyzed and unable to remember even his own name.
Jamal and many others mysteriously disappear only to be found as lifeless bodies bearing torture marks or marred with bullets, dumped in some levies-controlled area of the province. According to Amnesty International, at least 90 Baloch activists, teachers, journalists and lawyers have either disappeared or been murdered in the last four months in Balochistan. Amnesty claims “most victims were abducted by uniformed Frontier Corps soldiers in the presence of others.” But unlike those available to testify against Davis, the ‘others’ in this scenario keep a low profile. Justice may come easy in Lahore. And witnesses too. Not in Balochistan.
In the idle banter that ensues, Interior Minister, Rehman Malik smells a rat in Afghanistan. Federal Minister Raza Rabbani admits that the Balochistan situation is 'unfortunately out of control,' however, he asserts that agencies have no role in the kidnappings. The agencies echo the same stance in the Supreme Court. More than eight thousand Balochis have gone missing since 2000. Odd. Families of victims are twice damned. They are not provided with any information regarding their loved ones and if they highlight their plight, they are threatened with dire consequences.
So, who holds the key to correct information? I believe the truth lies with the same people who have the answers on Davis, Faheem and Faizan. And I don’t mean The Washington Post. Is the Balochistan crisis the effect of a proxy war between the US and China? Or is it the Russian menace? Or the Taliban? Or India? For those who believe proxy wars are the real cause, it’s time to look in the mirror and try to recognize the face of those who started this trend in the region. In the past, Baloch separatists were the enemy, now moderate Baloch nationalists are the target.
The discovery of two mutilated bodies belonging to members of Baloch National Movement and Baloch Republican Party have once again, agitated the muffled Baloch voice that is divided over complete independence from Pakistan and more political autonomy and some control over its resources within the existing structure.
If Pakistani media, its religious right, and security establishment-backed analysts feel a moral obligation towards highlighting the atrocities committed by one American in Lahore, why are they silent on the Balochistan crisis? Are Baloch not Pakistani or Muslim enough to warrant their attention? Baloch families are the sole protestors recording an outstanding 205 days of hunger strike. How many more days will it take for us - media, civil society, and sloganeering crowds - to look their way?
Riding a motorbike one fine afternoon in Lahore, on January 27, 22-year-old Faizan Haider and 26-year-old Faheem Shamshad breathed their last. Ten bullets fired from a 9mm Glock pistol handed them their death warrant.
Nothing could have prevented all that broke loose in the aftermath. Kudos to Lahore police – for once on time – a Raymond Davis was handcuffed and taken into custody. It had to be the color of his skin because almost everyone on Qurtaba Chowk saw him commit the crime. There were 47 witnesses – a rare commodity in Pakistan. Flashback to the Shershah Market episode in Karachi: nine self-professed suspects, not a single willing eyewitness.
The same day as Davis was whisked away by police officials – amid much television fanfare – two lifeless bodies were found in the Panjgor area of Balochistan. One of the victims, Abid Rasool Baksh was only 17 years old, the other, Nasir Dagarzai, 18. They were reportedly kidnapped from an Internet Cafe in Hub.
Next morning, Pakistanis woke up with anti-US fever. Some very influential groups got out on the streets of Karachi, Lahore, Islamabad – across Pakistan – to burn effigies of the 'tyrant', and scream their lungs out against American atrocities. By the third day, it was justice they were crying for; by the fourth, there was a call for barter with the US – Afia do, Raymond lo!
Meanwhile, in London, a relatively small number of people started gathering in Aldwych, braving the cold winter morning. In a calm but forceful protest, these people stood against the senseless killings in Balochistan. Back in Pakistan, we continued to ignite a self-proclaimed war against the US; slogans were pasted across Lahore reading: “Justice for Faheem and Faizan! Hang Davis! Amreeka murdahbad!” With love, Jamat-u-Dawah.
Worldwide, media publications gave out one distress signal after another on Balochistan, while the Pakistani media only picked up international stories mentioning Davis. When it was discovered that some US newspapers deliberately held back the true identity of Davis, our journalistic ethics were rocked to the core. Meanwhile, outside the Karachi Press Club a makeshift shrine full of haunting pictures of missing persons started to house protesters crying out for attention on Balochistan. But media houses, newspapers et al ignored Balochistan. Ethics anyone?
Contrary to what we may or may not report, atrocities in Balochistan continue. And not a single protest has been recorded for those being shot and dumped for unknown reasons, by faceless, nameless killers. Come February 1st and most of us were mulling over Davis’ diplomatic status. In Balochistan, more bodies were being found. Baluch singer, Ali Jan Issazai, who was allegedly picked up by agencies from a hotel in Quetta a month earlier, was found dead in Khuzdar. Not a whimper from those frothing at the mouth with hatred for Davis. Two days later three more bodies were found in Khuzdar. The victims were identified as Hamid Issazai, Lal Khan Sumalani and Mir Khan Sumalani. We were still too caught up in the Davis saga to notice.
Support grew for Faheem, Faizan and Ubaid-ur-Rehman, with everyone – from the federal and the Punjab government to television anchors and religious parties – vying for justice. Meanwhile, in Balochistan, children of a lesser God were buried with torture marks and bullet wounds. In most cases, the bodies were not even sent for an autopsy; no FIR was registered and no challan was issued.
The trend of young boys being picked up is common in most parts of Balochistan. One such instance can be dated back to October last year. 17-year-old Jamal Baluch was picked up by unknown men only to be recovered a few days later – fortunately, not dead but paralyzed and unable to remember even his own name.
Jamal and many others mysteriously disappear only to be found as lifeless bodies bearing torture marks or marred with bullets, dumped in some levies-controlled area of the province. According to Amnesty International, at least 90 Baloch activists, teachers, journalists and lawyers have either disappeared or been murdered in the last four months in Balochistan. Amnesty claims “most victims were abducted by uniformed Frontier Corps soldiers in the presence of others.” But unlike those available to testify against Davis, the ‘others’ in this scenario keep a low profile. Justice may come easy in Lahore. And witnesses too. Not in Balochistan.
In the idle banter that ensues, Interior Minister, Rehman Malik smells a rat in Afghanistan. Federal Minister Raza Rabbani admits that the Balochistan situation is 'unfortunately out of control,' however, he asserts that agencies have no role in the kidnappings. The agencies echo the same stance in the Supreme Court. More than eight thousand Balochis have gone missing since 2000. Odd. Families of victims are twice damned. They are not provided with any information regarding their loved ones and if they highlight their plight, they are threatened with dire consequences.
So, who holds the key to correct information? I believe the truth lies with the same people who have the answers on Davis, Faheem and Faizan. And I don’t mean The Washington Post. Is the Balochistan crisis the effect of a proxy war between the US and China? Or is it the Russian menace? Or the Taliban? Or India? For those who believe proxy wars are the real cause, it’s time to look in the mirror and try to recognize the face of those who started this trend in the region. In the past, Baloch separatists were the enemy, now moderate Baloch nationalists are the target.
The discovery of two mutilated bodies belonging to members of Baloch National Movement and Baloch Republican Party have once again, agitated the muffled Baloch voice that is divided over complete independence from Pakistan and more political autonomy and some control over its resources within the existing structure.
If Pakistani media, its religious right, and security establishment-backed analysts feel a moral obligation towards highlighting the atrocities committed by one American in Lahore, why are they silent on the Balochistan crisis? Are Baloch not Pakistani or Muslim enough to warrant their attention? Baloch families are the sole protestors recording an outstanding 205 days of hunger strike. How many more days will it take for us - media, civil society, and sloganeering crowds - to look their way?
Wednesday 23 February 2011
Tuesday 22 February 2011
Monday 21 February 2011
Sunday 20 February 2011
Monday 14 February 2011
The Knights of our Times
Farhatullah Babar, the Presidency’s crier, comes to the centre of the capital to make an announcement: “Hear Ye! Hear Ye! Three years after ‘King’ Zardari pulled his ‘Excalibur’ out of the stone, he is, for the first time, calling all his knights, his most beloved, his most faithful to convene at the round table!”
President Zardari has finally decided to share – not his wealth – but the problems that face Pakistan currently, from its economic woes to that man called Raymond Davis. And he is beckoning all his knights – preferably in their shining armour – to help re-conquer his kingdom.
Camelot was King Arthur’s kingdom, one he inherited by a stroke of luck. Tradition has it that Merlin, the magician, had placed a sword in a stone, saying that whoever drew it out would be king. The sword was yanked out by Arthur.
With a bit of luck, and a sympathy vote bank to boot, the Presidency is Zardari’s. As Merlin’s magic made Arthur king, Zardari was gifted the reigns of the PPP and eventually, this country, by the magic of a will. In the same way that many before Arthur tried to pull out the sword but to no avail; Musharraf’s ouster was attempted by many, but Zardari saw it to fruition.
The call for a round table conference brings to mind the 13 noble knights of Arthur’s round table. In the desi version, King Zardari is a leader of different sorts and his knights an eclectic band of leaders.
King Arthur’s closest ally, friend and confidant was Lancelot. Just like Fazlur- Rehman, he was the first knight to join the round table. Rehman Sahab – known for his swaying towards the ‘ruling’ elite - was the first to join the Zardari camp. Lancelot was seen as the most chivalrous knight, but he also caused the most trouble and eventually led to the downfall of Camelot. Like Lancelot, Maulana never fails in gentleness – it takes an innocent question like why people refer to him as Maulana Diesel to lose his cool! Lancelot was also very willing to help “others”.
Maulana is helpful in various ways. He was an ally of the Musharraf regime even when he was the leader of the opposition. Similarly, Maulana started off as a staunch coalition partner for Zardari but is now leading the religious right against the government. History has it that a mystical figure’s fostering and caring made Lancelot became one of history’s greatest knights. The mysterious elements of our establishment have harboured Maulana for so long that there is little doubt that he will live to be the greatest ‘knight’ of Pakistan. Lancelot was good friends with his co-knight, Sir Gawain, who I believe may hold some semblance to our prime minister.
Traditionally, Gawain is the principal hero and the exemplar of courtesy and chivalry but it is Lancelot who always takes center stage – stealing the limelight from other knights. Maulana Sahab always knows how to gain importance – he was the only knight to have the honour of dining with King Zardari before the round table event! Whereas, Lancelot was the eternal troublemaker, Arthur had Sir Bedivere to fall back on. Bedivere was the most loyal of Arthur’s men and was with him till the very end. Where allies and partners have disappointed King Zardari, Asfandyar Wali Khan has remained his most ardent supporter, helping Zardari gain some credit with an operation in Swat and Malakand. But the best knight proved to be Sir Galahad. All knights were asked to perform the ritual pulling out a sword from stone. Only Galahad was able to, proving that he came in closest to Arthur. Mian Nawaz Sharif can hold some similarity to Sir Galahad – only he can pull the plug on Zardari!
In history, the round table has immense importance. A round table has no head – implying that everyone who sits around it has equal status. King Arthur created this table to prevent quarrels among his knights, none of whom would accept a lower status than the other. King Zardari’s problem is the fact that he wants his knights around him at the round table but still wants to maintain his position as head. However, he doesn’t realise that the table may be his, but its head has always been occupied by someone else. Be it the West, or our powerful establishment, they have always maintained the head position and will continue doing so unless the knights at the round table become one. Some of our knights invited to the round table are heroes and champions of a just cause. However, jealousy, envy and the desire to topple Zardari as head of the table might distract them.
Leaders become only as powerful as the country they rule. It’s not personal gain, wealth or vendetta that makes them true knights. It is the strength that they draw from their people that earns them a place in history. The people of this ‘kingdom’ need true leadership – someone who can swim against the tide, take tough decisions that may not necessarily go down well in their own constituencies.
The knights of our times have failed so far. Only two per cent of Pakistanis pay tax – and that figure is not going to change unless RGST and agricultural tax are imposed. We need visionaries who change the destiny of our people, not those who bow before pressure groups. The religious right should be confronted; what is it about the blasphemy law that compels them to protest? What is it about them that a prime minister with a a two-third majority, or even one who enjoys a unanimous vote of confidence, bends over backwards to satisfy those with a three per cent vote bank. What does it say about your leadership when you are bullied by non-state actors?
And what kind of leaders can’t dare to question why they must always give up a majority share of their budget every year to the most powerful – no questions asked, no explanations required. And what kind of people’s representative looks to the West for their cues?
The idea of the round table is epic. It took petty rivalry, a villainous traitor and grave misunderstandings to break the harmony of this group. It could very well happen that the round table that Zardari has called will make no impact. We are all sceptical about Zardari’s motives – and rightly so – and doubtful of his knights too. But history is often about defying the sceptics.
President Zardari has finally decided to share – not his wealth – but the problems that face Pakistan currently, from its economic woes to that man called Raymond Davis. And he is beckoning all his knights – preferably in their shining armour – to help re-conquer his kingdom.
Camelot was King Arthur’s kingdom, one he inherited by a stroke of luck. Tradition has it that Merlin, the magician, had placed a sword in a stone, saying that whoever drew it out would be king. The sword was yanked out by Arthur.
With a bit of luck, and a sympathy vote bank to boot, the Presidency is Zardari’s. As Merlin’s magic made Arthur king, Zardari was gifted the reigns of the PPP and eventually, this country, by the magic of a will. In the same way that many before Arthur tried to pull out the sword but to no avail; Musharraf’s ouster was attempted by many, but Zardari saw it to fruition.
The call for a round table conference brings to mind the 13 noble knights of Arthur’s round table. In the desi version, King Zardari is a leader of different sorts and his knights an eclectic band of leaders.
King Arthur’s closest ally, friend and confidant was Lancelot. Just like Fazlur- Rehman, he was the first knight to join the round table. Rehman Sahab – known for his swaying towards the ‘ruling’ elite - was the first to join the Zardari camp. Lancelot was seen as the most chivalrous knight, but he also caused the most trouble and eventually led to the downfall of Camelot. Like Lancelot, Maulana never fails in gentleness – it takes an innocent question like why people refer to him as Maulana Diesel to lose his cool! Lancelot was also very willing to help “others”.
Maulana is helpful in various ways. He was an ally of the Musharraf regime even when he was the leader of the opposition. Similarly, Maulana started off as a staunch coalition partner for Zardari but is now leading the religious right against the government. History has it that a mystical figure’s fostering and caring made Lancelot became one of history’s greatest knights. The mysterious elements of our establishment have harboured Maulana for so long that there is little doubt that he will live to be the greatest ‘knight’ of Pakistan. Lancelot was good friends with his co-knight, Sir Gawain, who I believe may hold some semblance to our prime minister.
Traditionally, Gawain is the principal hero and the exemplar of courtesy and chivalry but it is Lancelot who always takes center stage – stealing the limelight from other knights. Maulana Sahab always knows how to gain importance – he was the only knight to have the honour of dining with King Zardari before the round table event! Whereas, Lancelot was the eternal troublemaker, Arthur had Sir Bedivere to fall back on. Bedivere was the most loyal of Arthur’s men and was with him till the very end. Where allies and partners have disappointed King Zardari, Asfandyar Wali Khan has remained his most ardent supporter, helping Zardari gain some credit with an operation in Swat and Malakand. But the best knight proved to be Sir Galahad. All knights were asked to perform the ritual pulling out a sword from stone. Only Galahad was able to, proving that he came in closest to Arthur. Mian Nawaz Sharif can hold some similarity to Sir Galahad – only he can pull the plug on Zardari!
In history, the round table has immense importance. A round table has no head – implying that everyone who sits around it has equal status. King Arthur created this table to prevent quarrels among his knights, none of whom would accept a lower status than the other. King Zardari’s problem is the fact that he wants his knights around him at the round table but still wants to maintain his position as head. However, he doesn’t realise that the table may be his, but its head has always been occupied by someone else. Be it the West, or our powerful establishment, they have always maintained the head position and will continue doing so unless the knights at the round table become one. Some of our knights invited to the round table are heroes and champions of a just cause. However, jealousy, envy and the desire to topple Zardari as head of the table might distract them.
Leaders become only as powerful as the country they rule. It’s not personal gain, wealth or vendetta that makes them true knights. It is the strength that they draw from their people that earns them a place in history. The people of this ‘kingdom’ need true leadership – someone who can swim against the tide, take tough decisions that may not necessarily go down well in their own constituencies.
The knights of our times have failed so far. Only two per cent of Pakistanis pay tax – and that figure is not going to change unless RGST and agricultural tax are imposed. We need visionaries who change the destiny of our people, not those who bow before pressure groups. The religious right should be confronted; what is it about the blasphemy law that compels them to protest? What is it about them that a prime minister with a a two-third majority, or even one who enjoys a unanimous vote of confidence, bends over backwards to satisfy those with a three per cent vote bank. What does it say about your leadership when you are bullied by non-state actors?
And what kind of leaders can’t dare to question why they must always give up a majority share of their budget every year to the most powerful – no questions asked, no explanations required. And what kind of people’s representative looks to the West for their cues?
The idea of the round table is epic. It took petty rivalry, a villainous traitor and grave misunderstandings to break the harmony of this group. It could very well happen that the round table that Zardari has called will make no impact. We are all sceptical about Zardari’s motives – and rightly so – and doubtful of his knights too. But history is often about defying the sceptics.
Sunday 6 February 2011
Tuesday 1 February 2011
News Unplugged
I have been in the journalism industry for the last 10 years, but am I a journalist? Can anyone deny that journalists have been used — often willingly — by dictators, democratic governments and the establishment. Each bit of news that we read in print or every current affairs programme that we watch could potentially be serving someone’s agenda.
Here’s an example. Currently, the Arab world is rocking. With revolt and protests. And the American media is going after the ‘real cause’: not the fruit seller who burnt himself alive, but the Arabic channel, Al-Jazeera. The number one channel in the Arab world understands the power of visuals. From the Tunisian fruit-seller burning to Ben Ali’s departure, it covered every protest, and carried each demonstration on-air. It almost turned the revolt in Tunisia to ‘Democracy in the Making.’ A noble cause indeed. But will Al-Jazeera now champion democracy in Qatar too? Maybe not. The rulers of Qatar fund them, and you don’t get on the wrong side of those who show you the money!
People rioting on streets is one thing; creating it into a real sensation is another. Al-Jazeera started endorsing the revolution in Tunisia with the wrong man – the leader of the Muslim brotherhood in Jordan. A group which claims that fundamental Islam is the key; and the armed forces are the only force capable of tackling chaos. Is this the kind of change newsmakers in Qatar have in mind? And Egypt has already been ‘Al Jazeera’d,’ so to speak. Even though the internet is down and phone lines are jammed, the channel continues to embarrass the US media with its detailed live stream coverage.
I don’t claim to know the solutions to the problems of the Arab world. However, when it comes closer to home, I’m getting sensitive. Media gurus in Pakistan are ranting on about the Tunisian change and almost encouraging, if not pushing for the same in our country.
Objective journalism is a myth today. Its whose line you tow that sets the course of this nation. And what a variety of tow-ers we have to choose from – screaming shouting women (not recommended for the faint hearted) to smirky men, to wannabe intellectuals to serious faced, read: seriously paid middle aged men who have tons of ‘experience’ to make up for lack of credibility! One anchor on a particular news channel decided to discuss the judiciary’s role in helping curb corruption. The recent casualty, Moonis Elahi was the topic of discussion. The anchor, forgetting the fact that this case is subjudice and any prediction could be counter-productive, proceeded to talk about his personal experience with Elahi. “He doesn’t appear to be a crook,” he said. Gut feeling takes precedence over facts.
I don’t want to dwell on how the media behaved after Salman Taseer’s assassination but what needs to be reiterated is that, by and large, most newsmakers in Pakistan push a right-wing agenda. Some journalists didn’t stop with the sad demise of Taseer, they continued to wage the holy war after his murder. A few even made the intentional or unintentional mistake of fabricating a story that Taseer and his daughter were pro-Ahmadi in order to stir sentiments. These are the same ‘journalists’ who think the 2005 earthquake was a result of excessive immoral voices reverberating from northern Pakistan. This is the same bunch of people who find it hard to take sides when a suicide bomber blows up in a shopping centre, a five star hotel or even a mosque. You might think that these journalists are people you would never listen to or agree with. But you could surprise yourself. These are your mainstream media gurus, spinning and spewing such facts in the middle of their “unbiased” analysis.
Journalists, senior anchors along with their ‘religious’ scholars and columnists rant on about how our society has been plagued by immorality. One believes the only reason we haven’t been able to develop as a nation is because our Prime Minister’s wife does not cover her head. The comparison was made in reference to the wife of Turkish Prime Minister who does wear a scarf.
Turkey has developed and prospered because of a piece of fabric?! Another reasonably ‘liberal’ host on a mainstream news channel decided to become the judge of Pakistani actress Veena Malik’s character. While he played god, Ms. Malik sat on his show sticking up for herself against a cleric who was convinced of her shady character as he was about her beauty.
There are others who want to take up the issues of the common man. When some anchorpersons adorning expensive clothing and flashy jewellery talk about the scarcity of sugar, it’s cloying enough to give me cavities! And when other ‘responsible’ ones drone on endlessly about the governments corruption figures, you marvel at their math but wonder why they don’t raise questions regarding the impartiality of the judiciary or the role of the army?
We are not just held captive by ‘closet talibans’ or the pro-establishment conservatives – the so called ‘liberal fascists’ also hold us hostage. An English daily went to the extent of publishing a false story about a Fatwa being issued against a certain MNA by a popular mosque’s cleric in Karachi. They want justice for Taseer but at the cost of getting another individual targeted was not such a good idea – especially since the fatwa was never issued. Another advocate of freedom of expression - a Pakistan based media blog – went ahead and published another false fatwa by a Mufti who declared not just Mumtaz Qadri but leading journalists, clerics, lawyers and politicians who hailed Taseer’s assasination “Mufsideen fil arz”. The perpetrators he declared should be punished as provided in Surah Maida – i.e. execution or crucifixion or the cutting-off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile, or, as a last resort, hell.
But as with everything else the sorry state of journalism also has its saviours. Between the liberal vs. right wing divide exist well-intentioned moderates. The problem, however, is to find the right balance. But even these journalists don’t know which route to take. Pakistan is one of the worst countries for journalists - and the fear does not just emanate from its ‘troubled’ areas and extremists - one also needs to be weary of the state and non state actors operating within.
A clash in thinking or a different perspective from them and you could lose your life. Wali Khan Babar is a glaring example.
I cannot vouch for much except my own intentions but I get confused too. Should I do the easy thing? Bashing the government, calling for a Tunisia-like revolution or should I reason with myself. Yes, Pakistan has seen a man torch himself in close proximity of the Presidency and yes, we have the unhappy fruit peddlers too. But we are a democracy, not a police state. The people of Pakistan decided our fate, contrary to common belief, not the West.
We, as members of the powerful media, should hail the principles of free expression. People need to get real news, not what is fed to them. And candid debates about real issues, not propaganda. If the way to liberation goes through television networks, we must choose wisely. Instead of becoming loyal subjects, let’s focus on becoming citizens. The last call is yours. Vote with your remote!
Here’s an example. Currently, the Arab world is rocking. With revolt and protests. And the American media is going after the ‘real cause’: not the fruit seller who burnt himself alive, but the Arabic channel, Al-Jazeera. The number one channel in the Arab world understands the power of visuals. From the Tunisian fruit-seller burning to Ben Ali’s departure, it covered every protest, and carried each demonstration on-air. It almost turned the revolt in Tunisia to ‘Democracy in the Making.’ A noble cause indeed. But will Al-Jazeera now champion democracy in Qatar too? Maybe not. The rulers of Qatar fund them, and you don’t get on the wrong side of those who show you the money!
People rioting on streets is one thing; creating it into a real sensation is another. Al-Jazeera started endorsing the revolution in Tunisia with the wrong man – the leader of the Muslim brotherhood in Jordan. A group which claims that fundamental Islam is the key; and the armed forces are the only force capable of tackling chaos. Is this the kind of change newsmakers in Qatar have in mind? And Egypt has already been ‘Al Jazeera’d,’ so to speak. Even though the internet is down and phone lines are jammed, the channel continues to embarrass the US media with its detailed live stream coverage.
I don’t claim to know the solutions to the problems of the Arab world. However, when it comes closer to home, I’m getting sensitive. Media gurus in Pakistan are ranting on about the Tunisian change and almost encouraging, if not pushing for the same in our country.
Objective journalism is a myth today. Its whose line you tow that sets the course of this nation. And what a variety of tow-ers we have to choose from – screaming shouting women (not recommended for the faint hearted) to smirky men, to wannabe intellectuals to serious faced, read: seriously paid middle aged men who have tons of ‘experience’ to make up for lack of credibility! One anchor on a particular news channel decided to discuss the judiciary’s role in helping curb corruption. The recent casualty, Moonis Elahi was the topic of discussion. The anchor, forgetting the fact that this case is subjudice and any prediction could be counter-productive, proceeded to talk about his personal experience with Elahi. “He doesn’t appear to be a crook,” he said. Gut feeling takes precedence over facts.
I don’t want to dwell on how the media behaved after Salman Taseer’s assassination but what needs to be reiterated is that, by and large, most newsmakers in Pakistan push a right-wing agenda. Some journalists didn’t stop with the sad demise of Taseer, they continued to wage the holy war after his murder. A few even made the intentional or unintentional mistake of fabricating a story that Taseer and his daughter were pro-Ahmadi in order to stir sentiments. These are the same ‘journalists’ who think the 2005 earthquake was a result of excessive immoral voices reverberating from northern Pakistan. This is the same bunch of people who find it hard to take sides when a suicide bomber blows up in a shopping centre, a five star hotel or even a mosque. You might think that these journalists are people you would never listen to or agree with. But you could surprise yourself. These are your mainstream media gurus, spinning and spewing such facts in the middle of their “unbiased” analysis.
Journalists, senior anchors along with their ‘religious’ scholars and columnists rant on about how our society has been plagued by immorality. One believes the only reason we haven’t been able to develop as a nation is because our Prime Minister’s wife does not cover her head. The comparison was made in reference to the wife of Turkish Prime Minister who does wear a scarf.
Turkey has developed and prospered because of a piece of fabric?! Another reasonably ‘liberal’ host on a mainstream news channel decided to become the judge of Pakistani actress Veena Malik’s character. While he played god, Ms. Malik sat on his show sticking up for herself against a cleric who was convinced of her shady character as he was about her beauty.
There are others who want to take up the issues of the common man. When some anchorpersons adorning expensive clothing and flashy jewellery talk about the scarcity of sugar, it’s cloying enough to give me cavities! And when other ‘responsible’ ones drone on endlessly about the governments corruption figures, you marvel at their math but wonder why they don’t raise questions regarding the impartiality of the judiciary or the role of the army?
We are not just held captive by ‘closet talibans’ or the pro-establishment conservatives – the so called ‘liberal fascists’ also hold us hostage. An English daily went to the extent of publishing a false story about a Fatwa being issued against a certain MNA by a popular mosque’s cleric in Karachi. They want justice for Taseer but at the cost of getting another individual targeted was not such a good idea – especially since the fatwa was never issued. Another advocate of freedom of expression - a Pakistan based media blog – went ahead and published another false fatwa by a Mufti who declared not just Mumtaz Qadri but leading journalists, clerics, lawyers and politicians who hailed Taseer’s assasination “Mufsideen fil arz”. The perpetrators he declared should be punished as provided in Surah Maida – i.e. execution or crucifixion or the cutting-off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile, or, as a last resort, hell.
But as with everything else the sorry state of journalism also has its saviours. Between the liberal vs. right wing divide exist well-intentioned moderates. The problem, however, is to find the right balance. But even these journalists don’t know which route to take. Pakistan is one of the worst countries for journalists - and the fear does not just emanate from its ‘troubled’ areas and extremists - one also needs to be weary of the state and non state actors operating within.
A clash in thinking or a different perspective from them and you could lose your life. Wali Khan Babar is a glaring example.
I cannot vouch for much except my own intentions but I get confused too. Should I do the easy thing? Bashing the government, calling for a Tunisia-like revolution or should I reason with myself. Yes, Pakistan has seen a man torch himself in close proximity of the Presidency and yes, we have the unhappy fruit peddlers too. But we are a democracy, not a police state. The people of Pakistan decided our fate, contrary to common belief, not the West.
We, as members of the powerful media, should hail the principles of free expression. People need to get real news, not what is fed to them. And candid debates about real issues, not propaganda. If the way to liberation goes through television networks, we must choose wisely. Instead of becoming loyal subjects, let’s focus on becoming citizens. The last call is yours. Vote with your remote!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)