Sunday 26 February 2012

Dear Mr Brigadier...

Crime shows are all the rage nowadays. Minutiae of grizzly murders, lovers’ betrayals and rape are re-enacted. They are – to say the least – incongruous, poorly shot and use actors who don’t look the part. Not recommended for the faint-hearted. Add to that, some comic relief. Political satire, making use of actors who are made to look like their real-life counterparts, can send you into fits of laughter. Reality can be funny. However, if you lack a sense of humor, tune in to us: ‘agenda-driven’ talk show hosts.

The only thing all genres have in common are their limitations. Crime shows are all very well if they don’t re-enact extra-judicial killings, religious animosity and ‘jihadist’ ventures. Political satire is funny until they start mimicking the military brass. That will ensure a Pemra notice at best; whereas the worst possibility is to get shut down – as witnessed on November 3, 2007. Talk shows, meanwhile, must self-censor and maintain balance – read: stick up for the military. If you beg to differ, you will be dismissed as a CIA or Raw agent and that will put an end to your credibility, not to mention your patriotism too. Don’t even ask me what the connection between the two is. I’m still trying to figure it out myself.

Let me tell you a little story. I happened to make the acquaintance of a retired brigadier some years ago. He is a regular watcher of my show, along with other retired army officials. How do I know? Elementary, my dear Watson. When your mug appears on prime time on the highest rated channel in Pakistan, you can be sure that you’re being watched by the country’s high and mighty. Not the mightiest, but close. The brigadier appreciated my efforts during the Swat operation, sent me bravo messages when I spoke of enlightened moderation and expressed his dissatisfaction on my “mild” interviews with high-level politicians as well as foreign dignitaries. If I dared to acquire an aggressive stance while interviewing a uniformed man, I was “losing focus” and falling prey to “outside” influence.

My recent shows where I have questioned the military operation in Balochistan, and exposed the grief of the families of the “Adiala 11” (a term coined by Cyril Almeida), the messages carry a disgusted undertone. Here’s a preview: “You unfortunately have gravitated into an abyss called agenda journalism based on prefixed but removed from reality thoughts not even on convictions...” He doesn’t think very highly of politicians either: “Lying is second nature for them like drinking a glass of water; the trait you so strain to uncover...but are now being driven in it or by it; your pick. Whether it be the nuclear blasts or Kargil or the first ever attempt at internal coup within the army by a serving ISI chief, Ziauddin, who as a prize for this help was asked to take over as COAS just after making Musharraf the CJCSC two months before; it baffled everyone, no one could make sense of this action. So, despite Musharraf not being in the country of which they thought as the right timing; they misread the national resolve thus triggering a “COUNTER” coup within the Army, the rest is history...”

Yes sir! The rest is history. However, if I dare to disagree with you would you think my ‘narcissistic desire has seized my soul’ or that I suffer from a “below-average” mind? From where I see it, his highness, former chief of army staff General (r) Musharraf left Pakistan in a far more dismal state than it was on October 12 1999. When asked to decide between a rock and a hard place, he opted for both. Siding with the US then was for the greater good of Pakistan. When given the option of carrying on as president and possibly facing impeachment, or choosing to retire and play golf, he chose the latter. But the only unpatriotic selfish ones to choose life and freedom over the country’s well-being are Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif. Right.

Musharraf not only thought for himself but also others who could help prolong ‘himself’s’ reign on power. Enter: the NRO. An ordinance crafted by a foreign power, negotiated by the then DG ISI, implemented by the then chief of army staff that continues to make a mockery of democracy and malign politicians and the parliament that actually rejected it in the first place. That is history’s real dilemma. If you start narrating the NRO’s history from 2009, Zardari, PPP and other politicians emerge as villains, whereas if you go back and start from 2007 when this ordinance was promulgated and negotiated, the onus shifts to Musharraf and the then DG ISI.

Retired army officials expect journalists to forejudge civilians’ patriotism based on their decisions. However, a mere question regarding the strategy of the establishment deserves shunning.

Media is lauded when it grills the ‘bloody civilians’ over the slightest of mistakes they make in this placebo-governance. But when the same journalists pose questions to the powers-that-be, they are termed un-patriotic. If we are allowed to interrogate the losses of Pakistan Railways, discuss the damages incurred by PIA and expose the corruption in Steel Mills, shouldn’t we also be allowed to ask why our own army is conducting an operation in Balochistan? Why can we not question the wisdom of those who chose to use private jihadi organisations as a strategic tool? Why does questioning the establishments’ strategic decisions automatically put us on the payroll of the Jewish lobby or the CIA? What is the maximum a journalist can do? Ask questions. Regardless of how inane, the only one harmed in the process is the one who puts forth the question.

It is a fact that military establishments are powerful in many countries. But they are also answerable to the parliament, judiciary and the media. When needed, General Petraeus, Leon Penetta and McChrystal have been called before the congress and asked to explain themselves and their decisions. Mind you, these have been open hearings, not in-camera briefings.

You see, Mr Brigadier, the world is a difficult place to live in. One can’t bear authority without responsibility. If the establishment wants to maintain its holier-than-thou persona by calling the shots on decisions that drive this country, questions will be raised. And they will have to be answered – not by devout ‘fans’ of the military brass – but by the holy highnesses themselves.

Sunday 12 February 2012

Pakistan: A to Z – for dummies

As Pakistan wobbles between democracy and autocracy, modernity and a return to Zia’s era, balancing itself precariously amid cautious secularism and reckless repression, the world looks on. However, the world has no idea of how to view this country and how to interpret its actions. Reason: a clueless foreign press. I realised this when I came across some slightly ignorant foreign journalists on their recent sojourn to Pakistan. To help these unfortunate few, I decided to create an alphabetical list for Pakistan, a sort of political welcome guide for visiting journalists.

Let’s start from the first alphabet: ‘A’. Pakistan’s greatest challenges begin with this letter. Allah, Army and America. Islam in its entirety has been twisted for political gain in this country. Islamic parties – with hardly any support when it comes to the ballot box – play a significant role in policy-making. The emergence of the Difa-e-Pakistan Council is a case in point. With myriad groups and individuals joining hands against the threats posed by the US and India, this group promises its supporters – and there are many – to ‘ensure the integrity and sovereignty of Pakistan.’

‘A’ also stands for the army; Pakistan’s only alternate to corrupt governments. Pakistan’s army not only defends its people from outer threats but also has a firm hand on the inner dangers brought about by inept “civilian” governments. And for America: the proverbial bad guy. It’s always the ‘American war’ we end up fighting. A is also for Pakistan’s President, Asif Ali Zardari. Entering perhaps his last year in office, there are more and more paradoxes to sort through as the world tries to figure out this leader, who so eloquently speaks of making peace with his enemies but is marred with alleged corruption charges.

‘B’ in Pakistan stands for its forgotten province: Balochistan. Plagued with violence, human rights atrocities and sectarian violence, Balochistan offers many a ground for proxy wars. It is however, a forgotten tale that many do not wish to explore or mend. The fact that Pakistan’s agencies are also fighting an inner war with Baloch separatists, keeps the rest of Pakistan mum on the issue.

‘C’ is synonymous with the Chief Justice of Pakistan. A man who sparked a revolution in Pakistan’s history when he was removed from his position by General Musharraf in 2007 for daring to defy him. He is one man this nation hopes will give them justice.

‘D’ is for drones. For the US, by the US, of the US. Widely condemned by out-of-power Pakistan’s political parties and the ones in power seem powerless to change a goddamned thing. ‘E’ is for energy – which is scarce when needed and in abundance where it’s not required. Pakistan’s courts, it seems, are full of energy while parliament suffers from a lack of it. E is also for Elections – both energy and elections are running on a deadline!

‘F’ is for Fazlur Rehman. The leader of an Islamic party, the JUI-F, the man is a seasoned politician. He has a strong support base and the uncanny ability to swing with the ruling government even while sitting in opposition. He can fake it to make it. Maulana Sahib is changing colours once again...watch this one closely. ‘G’ for GHQ. If you’re pro, you’re sure to visit this place often. If not, you may be forced to visit this place often enough. H stands for our foreign policy. Husain Haqqani, Hussain Haroon, Hina Rabbani Khar and Hermes.

‘I for Imran Khan. He is the change Pakistanis have been yearning for. At least that’s what many of his supporters believe. One of the skills a relatively new politician like Khan possesses is being able to project more than one possibility about himself. One Khan is a visionary, who reframes Pakistan’s policy vis-à-vis with the US and another Khan – who chose Makhdoom Javed Hashmi as his vice chairman – wants to be respected by liberal democrats. He also has the toughness to dictate the dictators (or so he believes). No one knows which side of Khan will win eventually; but if he wins, he will have to reveal his real Imran Khan.

‘J’ for judge-mental. This country seems to be on a pendulum mode swaying between the judges and the mentally unstable. ‘K’ for K..k..k..k...Kayani. The chief of army staff is considered to be Pakistan’s most powerful man. Either you’re him, or you have to be on your ‘K’ for knees to please him.

‘L’ for law and order and legislative assemblies. One is non-existent, the other is spoken about abundantly but still remains a lost cause. ‘M’ for military, mullahs, media and missing persons. One you can’t criticise, one you dare not disapprove of, the other you may not condemn and one you must speak out in favour of. Warning: you just might go missing yourself.

‘N’ is for Nawaz Sharif, the NRO and the National Assembly – all three created by the very establishment that now openly denounces them. ‘O’ for Omar – Mullah Omar and Osama bin Laden. Oops, one was found to be living here for years...Oh God! Let the other one not be hiding here! ‘P’ for Pasha, ‘P’ for Pakistan and ‘P’ for patriotism. Enough said. ‘Q’ for Quetta Shura. Figment of imagination or reality?

‘R’ for Raiwind and Raisani. One, the ‘humble abode’ of Mian Nawaz Sharif, the other, the chief minister of volatile Balochistan. One is a big house: the other, is just a loud mouth! ‘S’ for sectarian killings and Saleem Shahzad. One’s killers cannot be nabbed, the former, don’t exist. ‘T’ for turncoats – their turnaround will turn the fate around of some parties. Eagerly awaited. No regrets, please.

‘U’ for Uncle Sam. It’s always you, Sam! We’re fixated on detecting Sam’s footprints even where our own imprints are obvious. ‘V’ for vendetta. Politics of vendetta. Like they say, “democracy is the best revenge.” ‘W’ for the World Trade Centre, the war on terror and the warriors of God. All which resulted in anarchy and chaos with Pakistan as its epicentre.

‘X’ for the xenophobia that we all suffer from. May it be our religion, our cast, our ethnicity, our language, our provincial boundaries or our fragile sovereignty. We refuse to live and let live and have no tolerance for difference of opinion. ‘Y’ for Yousuf Raza Gilani – why, oh why, Gilani?! Pun intended.

And that brings us to ‘Z’ – President Zardari. He’s the one running the country into a mess. Or so we’re told. He’s the power at the helm of all affairs. Or is he? ‘Z’ also reminds me of Zeus – the all-powerful Greek God famous for manoeuvring minor Greek gods like pawns. Zardari is just one of the players in the power game of this country. Who’s our Zeus is something I don’t need to explain. Not even to foreign journalists.