Exorcising dictators’ ghosts

Where do dictators go when their time’s up? Some get executed; such as the Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceausescu who, along with his wife, was shot dead by a firing squad in the 80s. Some retire after a successful tenure of coup d’état like Turkey’s Kenan Evren, who is now being held accountable for his deeds. Some have to be forced to retire like General Pervez Musharraf who was offered a quid pro quo deal: safe exit in exchange for a resignation. The fact that he stashed away enough money to live a lavish life in Dubai is a moot point.

A few manage to escape to Saudi Arabia where they buy their own groceries making awkward rounds in superstores with their shopping carts, like Ugandan dictator Idi Amin. Some, like African dictator Jean-Bedel Bokassa, are fortunate enough to migrate to France where they buy luxury houses and spend their days lazily strolling down the Avenue des Champs-Elysees, dreaming of the good old days. Some, like General Qaddafi, live as dictators and die as dictators.

Truth be told, a dictator’s fall precedes the downfall of the country that he once dictated. Look at Africa, Uganda, Romania, Egypt and Pakistan. Some autocrats leave behind such legacies that even at a time of civilian rule, their ghosts continue to haunt us. Hence, we must cleanse our countries from negative spirits by exorcising them.

In Pakistan, such an attempt has been launched by the name of the Mehran Bank Scandal. This scandal focuses on Pakistan’s military, which overstepped its role (as always) and interfered in Pakistan’s politics in 1990 by supporting the Islami Jamhoori Ittehad to ensure a dismal defeat for the Pakistan Peoples Party. A sum of 350 to 400 million rupees was distributed to various political figures ranging from Abida Hussain (strangely she is now a PPP leader) to Nawaz Sharif (interestingly, who now voices an anti-establishment rhetoric), Pir Pagara and Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi. Pagara and Jatoi are no longer alive to give their side of the story, but even those living today, refuse to talk.

The main accused in the scandal are General (r) Aslam Beg and former ISI Chief Lieutenant General (r) Asad Durrani, who under the gracious auspices of President Ghulam Ishaq Khan, took up the task of wooing PPP opponents with hard cash. Like always, the media is hell-bent upon chasing after those who supposedly took the money, rather than focusing on who distributed some of it, while pocketing most of it themselves. The military brass, who else? They snaffled a hefty sum of 140 million rupees. How’s that for an additional figure to add to the sovereign state’s defence budget?

The petition filed by Air Marshal (r) Asghar Khan, after being put on the backburner for almost 16 years, is now back in court. It’s interesting to see Generals Beg and Durrani reveal their dark side. The former president of Mehran Bank, Younis Habib has, meanwhile admitted to providing them with the said amount – all in the name of the country’s greater good – and tendered an unconditional apology for his role in the act. General Beg however, is not asking for forgiveness. Instead, he is lauding the court for helping him achieve his hat-trick for appearing before the court.

Unfortunately for Beg, his smugness didn’t impress the chief justice much. Thankfully for the general, Akram Sheikh came to his rescue just in time. First, Mansoor Ijaz; now having to manage the general’s ego, Sheikh has a daunting task ahead. General Durrani, meanwhile, has filed an affidavit that does not contradict anything said by Younis Habib. No mean feat since he was the DG ISI when this act was being played out. Additionally, Durrani, in his affidavit, disclosed the involvement of the head of the military intelligence in disbursing funds to politicians. The plot thickens.

But the question is simple. What can be the implications of such exposés? I asked Asghar Khan’s lawyer, Salman Akram Raja, who replied with a question: “Are scalps of punished generals and politicians necessary? Can the exposure already made not be reported as the event itself?”

According to Raja, if the media links the success of this case with immediate successful prosecution of army officers and politicians then it might feel let down. “We should look to inject public morality into our political discourse, says Raja before adding: “Politicians on the take should be scorned as election frauds, puppets on a string.”

In Pakistan, the eclipse of the power of generals has diminished somewhat in the last few years. The military establishment – over the last four years – has played smart. For a change, the Pakistani ‘dictator’ has not been a uniformed general laden with guns and tanks. This time round, energies have been focused on mobilising a powerful web of loyal journalists and politicians, who in turn, dedicate their lives to undermining the present civilian government. If only wishes were horses, this government would have been ousted via a television show in its first few months, or more recently, been swept away in the tsunami of change. By no means would I want to take credit away from the present government which has done enough on its own to destabilise itself. But it is still an elected government and it must be ousted in a democratic way.

That is one lesson that our establishment refuses to learn. If it’s not a dictator taking over our country’s affairs, it is the tyrannical thought that drives this country into a state of abyss. The media must see the Mehrangate scam as an opportunity to demand an end to the pervasive role of our intelligence agencies in Balochistan, and get answers to simple queries like why some persons go missing. Questions must not start and end with why money was distributed back in 1990, but we must talk about the military’s role at present and the limits that need to be imposed. Raja is keen to point out that “court proceedings are cathartic rhetorical events and that they can help change the national mood.”

The fact of the matter is that no national security state will become an iridescent democracy overnight. No judgment will help change the mindset of some self-righteous, ambitious generals. But Mehrangate may be the first solid step in exorcising the dictatorial demons that continue to plague democratic regimes. But exorcism is tricky; it will fail if the spirit manages to retreat to the nearest vacuum left by bad governance. It’s time (once again) for the civilian government to please stand up – not to your own political victimisation woes, (not more of that again, please) but to assert control and ensure civilian authority.

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.

Aadmi Ko Mayassar Nahi Insa Hona!

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.

Dil Tu Bacha Hai Jee!

You can leave your hat on!

We, in Pakistan, are odd schemers. While some have shifted their focus to the many possibilities that Mansoor Ijaz’s revelations may unleash, others are increasingly weary regarding his security arrangements. A few can already sense their bubble bursting and are doing what they can to make sure Ijaz makes that trip to Pakistan. Similarly, there are some who are putting all their energies into scaring off Mansoor Ijaz. The message is loud and clear: ‘You make this trip mister, and you’re going to be staying at Pakistan’s Hotel California – you can checkout anytime you like, but you can never leave!’ But there’s life beyond Mansoor Ijaz and we’ve got a lot more on our plate. Take our own security for instance.

Three lawyers were gunned down in Karachi on Wednesday, allegedly on sectarian grounds. While security officials remained cautious in pinning the blame on sectarian groups, lawyers across Pakistan went on strike. This was certainly an improvement over staging a sit-in outside the governor’s house, a practice recently witnessed in the case of slain scout Askari Raza. The body of Raza, amid a crowd of screaming protestors caught the attention of the media but not of the relevant authorities. Their demand to book the suspects identified as Raza’s killers fell on deaf ears. However, not everything in Pakistan gets a cold shoulder. The judicial commission investigating the Memogate affair kept its eyes and ears open for details on security arrangements for its protagonist, Mansoor Ijaz. Dear Mr Ijaz: sectarian killings are common in Pakistan. Although we hold national security issues in high regard, we have no security plans to safeguard our nationals. The fact that you are an American citizen may help, however the fact that you belong to a minority sect that is largely victimised in our part of the world, please enter at your own risk. The military’s security blanket may help, but then there are never any guarantees.

As Karachi crawled to normalcy after the lawyers’ killings, another three men were sprayed with bullets in Quetta. The dead included an inspector of the Federal Investigation Agency, a government employee and a television actor. Not a word of condemnation from the 17-member Parliamentary Committee set up by National Assembly Speaker Fehmida Mirza. The silence may have come as encouragement because more men were gunned down the next morning. This time, unknown assailants attacked a security check post in Sui leaving at least five security officers dead. But rather than expressing their dissatisfaction on the precarious security situation in Pakistan’s largest province, the Parliamentary Committee on National Security expressed their satisfaction over the arrangements made by the government to protect Mansoor Ijaz in the country.

If the situation in Karachi and Quetta wasn’t alarming enough, Punjab got even worse. Spurious drugs consumed by cardiac patients left at least three hundred in critical condition. While Punjab’s Health Department was deliberating a response, the number of patients affected by the contaminated drugs was rising. A few months ago it was the dengue virus that had engulfed the lives of hundreds of people in Punjab, owing to low platelets and white blood cell count. This time – with similar symptoms – the cause is faulty medicine. The PIC has thousands of people registered for free medicine and their negligence in this regard is nothing short of criminal. Chief Minister of Punjab, Shahbaz Sharif – also the acting health minister – has set up a committee to investigate the matter and promised a sum of five hundred thousand to each family of the deceased. Although Sharif may not have an immediate remedy for an endemic that his own health department’s negligence may have helped unleash, he has prescribed the best remedy for Mansoor Ijaz’s security. If the federal government does not provide security to Ijaz, the Punjab government will arrange for it. Seems like this may be one promise Sharif will stay true to (because he wants to). Shahbaz Sharif offered ‘adequate security’ if Ijaz chose to come to Lahore to record his statement in the Memogate scandal. He promised to take personal responsibility of Ijaz’s protection from the moment he lands to the second he departs. 

Sharif has, simultaneously, also extended an invitation to the judicial commission probing the controversial memo to come to Punjab to record Ijaz’s statement. Honorary members of the commission and Ijaz may choose to accept Sharif’s offer, provided that they are not suffering from cardiac ailments. If they are, they must bring their own medicine and just in case, also some mosquito repellent. There may still be a dengue mosquito lurking around somewhere.

And if Punjab is where Ijaz prefers to land, he must steer clear of Seemal Kamran. The Punjab Assembly minister of the PML-Q is one who believes in addressing issues by nipping them in the bud. Literally. Ms Kamran recently tabled a resolution demanding a complete ban on ‘objectionable musical concerts’ in all government and private educational institutions of the province. Imagine what she would think of a man who was lustily compering a wrestling match between two women!

Last but not least, this Pakistani-American with a boat-load of evidence must steer clear of the moral vigilantism of a certain TV show host with a reputation for stalking couples in parks. Though we know Ijaz prefers his entertainment in darkened rooms, this anchor may gather together a gaggle of women to condemn him on live television. Worse yet, she might corner him with his stripper of choice and scream: “shaadi karo, shaadi karo!”

But this particular anchor is clearly not the only one keeping an eye out for immoral acts. After all, the cry was raised by a group of good desi boys who recognised Ijaz and raised the moral alarm. Apparently it’s only okay for some people to look. We may not realise it yet, but there are larger problems staring us in the face. For all his foibles, Ijaz is removing the layers of our leaders’ hypocrisy. His demands for security and claims of having evidence proving complicity at the highest levels of government reveals a knowledge of the risks associated with any visit to Pakistan. He offers us the naked truth, but can we handle it?

We are odd strategists for sure. Possibly by the time Mansoor Ijaz’s truth is revealed, there may be more than just one man running for cover. Mansoor Ijaz may want to come in from the maelstrom, but he should keep his hat on, just in case.

Sirf Jamhooriat!

Ik Baloch Ki Diary Se!

Be Sabri Ya Be Khabri?

Truth be told

There’s been a startling moment in Pakistan’s foreign policy – a moment that not only crystallizes what this country is about but demonstrates the pitfalls of irregular combat in the age of terror. The moment was tragic and deliberate – a Nato air strike that left 24 Pakistani soldiers dead on a Pakistani base called Salala. Our time with the US has since been reset. America’s just beginning to see Pakistan’s newer tougher face but is it because we have understood the value of life? Not so.

Ten years and 45,000 deaths after it began, the war on terror still commands support at home and backing from abroad – mainly from the Obama administration. However, with rising scepticism on a national level and Pakistan’s questionable policy on drones, its sovereignty and aid, we find ourselves in the middle of a vigorous debate about where our country is headed. About time I’d say. The US war in Afghanistan has deeply affected Pakistan. Mere centimetres away from becoming a failed state itself, Pakistan is trying to disentangle itself from a failed war by raising a new slogan: ‘Give Peace A Chance.’

In other words, the Pakistan government will talk to the Taliban – those who wage jihad against their own people because they’re miffed at the US. I wonder what that means. Will we engage with them on an ideological level? Explaining why killing innocent Pakistanis in mosques, shops and schools is immoral – or will we plead with them to spare us? I don’t quite remember how we got it into our heads that jihad was inextricably linked to violence. Might it have something to do with the actual history and practices of the Taliban? Let’s face it: until and unless we abandon the false narrative of “jihad” as the necessary defence of a desperate land beleaguered by bad guys, we will be in serious danger.

Think the only danger for Pakistan is along its border with Afghanistan? Wrong. There’s a longstanding calamity that is waiting to erupt. If it does, the resulting conflict stands to be more devastating than Pakistan has ever known. The clock for this crisis started ticking in 1970. Balochistan: Pakistan’s aggrieved province. Pakistan’s forty percent where often dead, seldom alive; predominantly mutilated and bullet-riddled bodies of Baloch citizens resurface so frequently that its considered quite usual. What isn’t normal however is that no one wants to talk about it. There are no in-camera briefings within parliament to curb the crisis.

DG ISI doesn’t offer his resignation on not being able to detect ‘outside influence’ that leaves so many of his own people dead. The president doesn’t issue a statement on how he will tackle the extensive and lengthening grievances of the province. Senior journalists don’t burn the midnight oil investigating the reasons behind such atrocities. No man, known for his publicity stunts abroad, writes in the Financial Times to unveil the conspiracy – whether hatched in the presidency or elsewhere. Moreover, ambassadors are not summoned to Pakistan’s foreign office and asked for their opinion on how to view Balochistan. Instead, over a few cups of tea and an elaborate lunch, Pakistan’s future in another country is discussed. How to view Afghanistan is the question. Balochistan. Who cares? How’s that for priority?

Speaking of priorities, it seems that Pakistan’s myriad problems ranging from inflation, to lack of law and order have suddenly taken a back seat. There is only one problem that has Pakistan’s democracy and autocracy at loggerheads – Memogate.

Bless Mansoor Ijaz for being the one to distract this nation from real concerns. It started off with Husain Haqqani ‘dictating’ a memorandum that was delivered to the US government through Mansoor Ijaz, to save the democratic government from a potential army coup. It was later discovered that the military establishment was already rounding up Saudi support for a potential regime change. The debate – instead of focusing on Pakistan’s fledgling democracy and the risk it faces from its own military – has shifted to whether Mr Mansoor’s word will hold true against the new revelations made by General James Jones.

No one is really concerned why Nawaz Sharif moved the Supreme Court on the issue, or whether ordering Husain Haqqani to be put on the ECL before even hearing him out was fair or not. Clearly, even when faced with the most important of issues, we usually keep ourselves occupied with the stupidest ones. Whether this will set the stage for the ouster of this government remains to be seen, but no one is addressing who could want the government out. If the memorandum was indeed penned to woo the admiral for the sake of democracy, why is there no word of support from the democratists in the government? Was the military planning on overthrowing the government or not? If the boys in uniform decide to remain mum – as is expected – why is the government silent? If indeed there was fear that this government was going to be sent off packing, why not say it. It’s now or never.

But even Memogate had its moment of rest. Pakistani actress Veena Malik posed on the cover of an Indian magazine in all her glory, sporting an “ISI” tattoo on her left arm. The Pakistani media was on the story pronto. From the proverbial mullah to the interior minister – it seemed everyone wanted to comment on this obscenity. Before we knew it, Veena’s act was pronounced un-Islamic – ‘100 lashes’ was one proscribed punishment while other respectable nationals filed a petition in court to revoke Veena’s nationality. If a woman who wilfully sheds her clothes needs an Islamic awakening, then what do women and young girls throughout Pakistan who are forced into doing the same deserve? In Fata, women IDPs were forced to have sex in return for a handful of rice. Meanwhile, in Sindh more than 300 women fell prey to karo-kari last year. Not a word from the religious or the “ghairatmand” of Pakistan. Women all over Pakistan are subjected to sexual abuse and our national integrity remains in place. Moreover, an active and thriving blue cinema industry in the country and regular visits to porn sites makes us a proud nation.

I don’t know whether to laugh or cry when Pakistanis defend honour by burying it six feet under. We want our sovereignty to be respected but don’t mind harbouring foreign terrorists. We want rule of law but we don’t hold accountable the people charged with upholding it. We want democracy but we cut dictators more slack. We want honesty but will pick and choose our own truth. Maybe then, we deserve what we get.

Mian Saheb, Aap Bhi?

White noise Lekin – on the other side

Just a few months ago, the consensus among instrumental leaders and influential thinkers was that operation Geronimo would unleash a wave of global issues and security concerns for Pakistan. Phase one of the response, it was assumed, would send some heads rolling, see some senior intelligence officials convicted for ignorance or compliance or worse, and include the breaking of all ties with the US over their utter disregard for our sovereignty. These were only some of the dire consequences expected by the experts. None of the above mentioned happened. 

What ensued then was entirely predictable: carefully orchestrated jingoistic outbursts, street protests and misguided patriotism. In Pakistan, this is the standard turn of events we witness each time there is an incursion by an overreaching state. By the time we get done with burning effigies of President Obama, stamping angrily on US flags and screaming our lungs out at the infidels – the worst has passed. The protests fade away, the anger subsides and the rest of the violence ends until next time. Moreover, we always find ourselves exactly as we are today: angry, regretful, vengeful and alone. 

Nato strikes on our border check posts are reason for our new-found anger against the US. General Kayani has upped the ante, threatening an aggressive and powerful response should such action be repeated. Meanwhile, a 23-year-old in Lahore was quoted by international news agencies as threatening Nato and the US thus: “If they do something like this again, we are going to turn Pakistan into their graveyard.” I wonder where we are going to find more room to bury dead men in Pakistan. Pakistan is already a graveyard to 40,000 of my people who died at the hands of extremists. Add to that 5000 of our brave soldiers – some who bore the bullet from an infidel’s gun, others who heard “Allah-o-Akbar” before shrapnel pierced their hearts. 

Pakistanis now have one more tragedy to mourn: the deaths of 24 men on November 26 in an unprovoked attack on two military border posts in Mohmand. The American response was too little too late. Chairman of the US military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey categorically stated that it was ‘not a deliberate’ attack. Barack Obama meanwhile, deliberately avoided apologising – proving that change is all well until it’s your job that’s on the line. Nato meanwhile, is in the process of reviewing all available evidence including radio traffic and gun tapes to determine what led to this atrocity. They’re still calling it an “accident”. Mind you, accidents can be condoled, not apologised for. Unless you count Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton’s ‘kind’ remarks in the aftermath of a very unkind action and Cameron Munter’s hollow words, there has been no significant acknowledgment of Nato forces’ “unintentional” blunder. 

Pakistan is hard pressed to respond strongly to this latest transgression. It has ordered the US to vacate Shamsi Airbase, blockaded Nato supplies through the Chaman and Khyber passes, and pulled out of the Bonn Conference. Pakistan’s moment of truth has arrived. We are alone. Russia, Iran, China, Turkey and the UAE have condemned the killings of Pakistani soldiers by the Nato forces. But words alone will not help Pakistan. China’s claims of respecting Pakistan’s territorial integrity fall on deaf ears. Our friendly neighbour may give us JF-17s but will it offer military support in the event of open war? Hardly. China’s energies are focused on its quest for economic, not military dominance. However, there is a subtle message for Pakistan: if the relationship with the US ever sours, China may rise to the occasion. From China, with love.

Iran, our neighbour on the eastern border, has issued a joint statement of some 224 Iranian parliamentarians. However, encouragement to move decisively against the US does not translate into aid. Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz, custodian of the two Holy Mosques, the man who has topped Newsweek’s top 10 list of the most respected leaders in the world, has still not spoken in Pakistan’s favour. The UAE, meanwhile, arrived in Islamabad not to sympathise with Pakistan, but to intercede on behalf of the US. The UAE allegedly holds leasing rights for the Shamsi Airbase – on the surface to facilitate falcon-hunting for Arabs while sub-letting it to the Americans for their terrorist-hunting drones. While the UAE has deep historic ties with Pakistan, it also has a strategic relationship with the US that dates back to the 1990 invasion of Kuwait. The UAE keeps out of other countries’ internal affairs and believes in settling disputes by peaceful means. Will it turn aggressive towards the US? Don’t count on it. 

Turkey, along with fellow Nato members, including Germany and France, extended its condolences to Pakistan and supported the call for an impartial inquiry into the incident. Meanwhile, organisations such as the United Nations, the OIC and the European Union, revealed yet again, that they are ultimately impotent in the face of vested interests. 

For what it’s worth, Pakistan has earned the support of the Tehrik-e-Taliban (TTP). Echoing some of our political parties, they, too, are calling for an end to the alliance with the US, goading Pakistan to take revenge. However, almost as an afterthought, they clarify that this does not necessitate peace between the TTP and the GoP. So effectively alienate the US without any guarantee that the Taliban will ever come to the negotiating table. 

The US, meanwhile, is working hard at winning back Pakistan as an ally. Away from the watchful eye of the media, there are reports of back-door diplomacy at play. Pakistan’s long and troubled relationship with Washington has had at least one virtue: it has demonstrated that Pakistanis are paranoid about the American alliance for good reason. The US is impervious to the permanent hysteria of our hourly news cycle and street protests, un-swayed by public opinion a world away. Pakistan, on the other hand, may never let them in on its secret manoeuvres. Let’s face it: no one is buying into our strategic depth and we’re becoming embroiled in a crisis that keeps blowing up in our face. 

We cannot expect any one country or organisation to heal our every wound or to solve every major foreign policy crisis that we find ourselves faced with. The constant demands can be deafening. Yet what we need to do is to shut out the noise around us and concentrate on the essential: reverse our country’s image abroad and refresh its spirit at home. The silver lining? Pakistan’s own people haven’t turned against it. Yet.

Kya Mein Baagi Hoon?

Minority report

Blood, meat and hides marked the first day of Eid-ul-Azha in Pakistan. While most Muslims celebrated their holy festival by sacrificing animals, some decided to achieve new levels of faith by targeting Hindus in Shikarpur. Three doctors were shot dead in broad daylight in Chak Town, allegedly, after a conflict arose between the Bhayo tribe and the Hindu community over a dancing girl.

Prior to the murders, the issue had already captured the attention of the local elders and a jirga was to be convened after Eid. Threats were issued to the Hindu community and reported to the local police but to no avail. Why is it that the government machinery only comes into motion after a tragedy has unfolded? The president and prime minister have both condemned the murders and ordered an inquiry. The police have since been prompt in arresting many from the Bhayo tribe. As anybody in Pakistan will tell you, arrests don’t necessarily mean justice. This is not the only case of Hindus being discriminated against in Pakistan – Sindh, long known for the wisdom of renowned Sufis and saints, is now home to a whole new brand of faith.

This ghastly incident takes me back to another instance in Lahore last year, when two shrines of the minority Ahmadi sect were attacked, leaving more than 90 people dead. Threats to Ahmadis were ignored then too, and calls for greater government protection in the future fell on deaf ears.

A few months ago, Faisalabad was witness to brazen warnings on Ahmadis; pamphlets labelling members of the Ahmadi community “wajib-ul-qatal” were distributed comprising names and identities of Ahmadi industrialists, doctors and businessmen. Most recently, Ahmadi residents in Lahore’s Satellite Town have been asked to leave or face dire consequences. This because they have established their place of worship which is deemed ‘unconstitutional’ by some.

It surprises me that we have forgotten those very people who helped draft the resolution that gave us Pakistan. Mohammad Zafarullah Khan was an Ahmadi but it was he who drafted the Pakistan Resolution and represented the Muslim League’s view when it came to deciding the future boundaries between India and Pakistan. He also served as Pakistan’s first minister for foreign affairs. Jinnah with his liberal views chose men to represent his country on merit, not religion, caste or creed. Pakistan’s first law minister was a Hindu who had more faith in Jinnah’s liberal views than the Congress’ secular ones; hence he decided to stay in Pakistan. Mandal was supposed to draft the first constitution of Pakistan; however he never got around to staying here long enough to see that to fruition. He resigned from the cabinet due to the consistent persecution of Hindus in Pakistan and moved back to India shortly after Jinnah’s death.

Encouraging persecution of minorities in Pakistan allows intolerance to flourish and has created precisely the kind of second-class citizenry in Pakistan – with uncertain rights and prejudiced values – that the country’s democratic principles were expected to avoid. For 64 years the whole point has been to come to some sort of conclusion as to whether this Islamic Republic of Pakistan can accommodate minorities without threatening their person, faith and livelihood. The idea has been to remove ambiguities and knock off a predominant holier-than-thou attitude towards Christians, Hindus, Ahmadis and Parsis. That clarity was in part, intended for the welfare of the existing minorities, so they could break free from their trap of uncertainty and insecurity. With a secular party at the helm, was this too much to ask for?

As religious historian Karen Armstrong stated recently: “like art, religion is difficult to do well and is often done badly.” The way to experiencing art is through an artist’s eyes. Similarly, religion is usually judged by how it is followed. The secular Pakistan Peoples Party distanced its views from those of Maulvi Nawaz Sharif’s – the alleged closet Taliban. However, it was “Maulvi Sahib” who made his way to Chak town and personally conveyed his condolences to the bereaved Hindu families. It was Sharif who pleaded to the Hindu community not to leave Pakistan, not our “secular” ruling party or its equally “secular” allies, the ANP or the MQM.

Pakistan’s minority dilemma is complex because secularism and conservatism don’t go their separate ways, but come together. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was considered Pakistan’s most secular and liberal leader, however by adopting the Objectives Resolution in the 1973 constitution, he ended up empowering conservative forces.

Similarly, the man who promised Pakistan “enlightened moderation” also gave way to the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal. General (r) Pervez Musharraf’s regime gave more power to the maulvis than any other government in Pakistan. Claiming to be Pakistan’s ray of hope, Imran Khan too has disappointed his secular voters (and some party workers). In an interview with Indian journalist Karan Thapar, Khan said he realised the need to ban militant organisations however, when asked to take names, he refused. Khan said he knew the threat that looms large since the Governor of Punjab, Salmaan Taseer, was murdered and hence would not endanger his own life by taking names. And his motto is? You guessed it! Change.

However, it seems the most conservative leader has turned out to be the most secular. From his proposed policy of looking inward for a solution to the war on terror, to envisioning an open trade and better relations with India, Nawaz Sharif has ended up doing what the PPP has long promised. But there are still question marks on some of his party’s leaders harbouring relations with banned outfits and participating in their rallies. His own brother and chief minister of Punjab had previously pleaded with the Taliban not to attack Punjab because of their anti-US policy. As if the other three provinces are in complete disagreement with the views of the TTP and therefore deserve to die.

Persecution of minorities in Pakistan is on a steady rise. It’s not only non-Muslims who are under threat; the minority Muslim sects are also bearing its brunt. In the last two years, almost every important day in the Shiite calendar has been witness to attacks. There have also been attacks on religious shrines of Data Darbar, Abdullah Shah Ghazi and Baba Farid. Scholars who disavowed this form of brutal violence as un-Islamic were either martyred like Maulana Sarfaraz Naeemi and Maulana Hasan Jaan, or they had to flee the country.

Come to think of it, one way or the other, we are all minorities – Punjabis in Balochistan, Mohajirs in Punjab, Pashtuns in Sindh, Baloch in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa – we are all victims of this prejudice. Will we realise, in time, what we don’t condemn today for others could very well be our fate tomorrow.

My Name is Khan!

His name is Khan, Imran Khan

With the Pakistani media coverage a cacophonous standoff, and terms like neutrality vanishing from the airwaves, it seems like whatever opinion this journalist may embrace it’s bound to be disapproved of.

When my programmes echoed support for the Swat operation I was allegedly towing the establishment’s line. When I was critical of General Musharraf, it was Nawaz Sharif’s party that I was supporting. Raising questions on the conduct of our armed forces gained me the membership of the CIA-sponsored journalists’ club. Interestingly however when I criticise the PPP government, I am back on the generals’ payroll and also the Sharif’s! Monogamous, I’m so not. Taking sides against the Muttahida doesn’t necessarily slot me as a ‘paid’ journalist but the fear factor is deterrent enough.

Currently, it’s the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s president one is not allowed to assess critically. Those who maintain their journalistic responsibility to present both sides of a story are accused of being unpatriotic and funded by the opposition. The lines in Pakistani politics are very clearly drawn – one wonders where exactly Pakistan’s most famous son is positioned on this spectrum.

Electoral campaigns have never been this much fun. Shahbaz sang Jalib with such fervour that he brought tears to his own eyes. Altaf Hussain showed his softer side by singing the same Jalib verse albeit changing the words to reflect his new alliances. Khan chose to let others sing for him, inviting revolutionary bards like Shehzad Roy, Strings and the one-hit wonder, Shahzaman. Carefully choreographed, Khan’s rally was a success, proving that politics can be sexy.

For many, Khan is almost like a mystery wrapped in an enigma. But there are even more paradoxes in the attitude of the ruling government towards him. Emerging as an opposition party, it would seem plausible – given the political dynamics of Pakistan – for the government and its coalition partners to make some noise against Khan and his party. Punjab’s governor Sardar Latif Khosa granted the PTI the role of the “real” opposition, however neither he nor his party stand opposed to it. The Muttahida Qaumi Movement has obviously forgotten Khan’s jarring remarks against it at Karachi airport when he was not allowed to enter the city. In return, Khan has also conveniently forgotten the cases he had registered against Altaf Hussain in London.

Aside from entertainment, what did we, the public, get out of the PTI’s recent show of strength? Khan began by referring to the letter allegedly written by President Zardari to Admiral Mullen, in which he asked for protection from his army. Khan used the term “Apni army” with such incredulity that one wondered whether he had also been sharing space with Qaddafi in that pipe. So, for the sake of putting history right: Zulkiqar Ali Bhutto went to the gallows because his “own” army betrayed him. Years later, Benazir Bhutto was also shown the door by the Islami Jamhoori Ittehad – an alternate force formed by the ISI. Benazir Bhutto’s departure gave way to Nawaz Sharif – a man positioned by the military to create political balance in Pakistan (read: military’s preference). The same Nawaz Sharif was thrown off balance by his own army in 1999. For a civilian leader, it’s only your own army until the knife is in your back Mr Khan.

Pakistan’s most pressing issue is a lack of civil continuity and the space to work without the establishment dictating terms. That is what civil governments push for and that is when our own army intercedes. I would have liked to hear you mention that in your speech Mr Khan – as columnist Nadeem Paracha pointed out – there were more than just ‘facebook crowds’ attending.

Khan’s long deliberation over the war on terror is a case study in schizophrenia. Imran Khan wants to talk peace with extremists who have forcibly occupied a large area of Pakistani land to dictate their agenda. Khan also seeks to bring terrorists into the mainstream – if it was up to him, those who have killed more than 40,000 innocent people may be welcomed in parliament!

He aims to secure order by stopping drone attacks which he believes fuel militants’ revenge. If local terrorism is drone-driven, where were the drones in Swat? If there was a strike, the media clearly didn’t cover it. Pakistan’s vast coal reserves lie buried underground, their extraction halted as the Chinese have fled amid security fears. Law and order, however, is the least of Imran’s worries.

Neither a realist nor an idealist, Imran Khan has a split personality when it comes to foreign policy. He struck a nerve with many people when he spoke of his suggested solution for Kashmir: Khan will ask the Indian army to withdraw from Kashmir. Will he induce the Indian army to withdraw through diplomacy or will alternate pressure come into play?

India will obviously want a quid pro quo deal. And dare I ask, how will Khan make Pakistan live up to their side of the commitment. Khan will make sure that he halts army action in Balochistan. I wonder if he’s already posed the idea to General Pasha and/or General Kayani in one of their alleged secret meetings. If they have agreed then this is breaking news. If they haven’t, this news will be heartbreaking for those who took his words seriously.

Khan also promised to broaden the tax base when he comes into power. This, from the same man who opposed the value added tax? Khan declared Nawaz Sharif unfit to fight dengue. Sure, the Sharifs have failed in combating dengue but dare I ask – does Khan recall which single lab refused to lower its rates to 90 rupees to conduct dengue testing?

Reforming the notoriously corrupt police force is also on Khan’s agenda. He suggests popular votes to appoint SHOs so people can have no complaints. Again, Khan astounds. If elected leaders have public support and elicit no complaints, how is Khan able to rally such support from a nation “sick” of corrupt leadership?

Khan’s prescription for our ailing corruption was also just what the doctor ordered: declare all foreign assets or brace yourself for a civil disobedience movement. This when the country has a free judiciary and a law in place to tackle misappropriations and unaccountability. Why take to the streets when you can go to court?

Khan, however did not utter a single word regarding accountability within the military. How about asking for a declaration of the assets they have acquired during their tenure, or auditing the trillions that we have pumped into the armed forces in the last few decades?

Khan’s solo flight in ‘97 took off with his belief that he would secure himself the post of prime minister. That kept him engaged until General Musharraf’s coup d’etat. Khan supported the general till his referendum and later boycotted the 2008 elections. Khan’s pendulum-like swinging from one position to the other speaks volumes of his naivety and lack of understanding of Pakistan’s politics.

Khan thinks he can conquer it all with faith. However, faith alone cannot achieve the desired objectives. Even a World Cup win required more than Imran Khan’s inspirational captaincy like Wasim Akram’s fast bowling, the consistent batting of Javed Miandad and Inzamam-ul-Haq’s hard hits. Will men like Hamid Khan, Mian Azhar and Mehmood ur Rasheed help bring the cup home?

Zinda Rehnay Do!

Inquilab Angoothay Ke Neechay

Of holy cows and unholy alliances

The three musketeers are back together in the government. Or would you rather I call them idiots? Indeed, the rising anti-government discourse – and the explosion of anti-Zardari rhetoric from right-wingers – and among some conservatives, is well deserved. However, will this hysteria secure optimum result for the myriad problems confronting the country? Sadly, simplistic attacks on President Zardari and his government’s initiatives – or lack of – are an insult to the audience. Rather than engaging ourselves in substantive analysis and policy critique, we have all become easy prey for mindless debate.

Yes, President Zardari is smart. He plays well. He has his coalition partners exactly where he wants them. With him. The PML-Q – an uneasy alliance partner that was cleverly placed to replace the unpredictable MQM – is now a more permanent member of the PPP ‘coalition club’. But rules apply: the member must strengthen the ruling government in parliament and a seat-adjustment promise for the next elections.

In return the auspicious ‘PPP club’ must ensure Moonis Elahi’s freedom and make true on their promise of carving out lucrative ministries for the member’s greedy lot. Meanwhile, for the MQM, the membership fees has considerably been reduced while the fine has been paid by the PPP club itself: a state ministry or two, a ‘certain’ someone to be implicated and kept in custody (preferably forever) and of course, a large (read: largest) share in Karachi.

Analysts dismissed the PML-Q’s resignations act as nothing more than “political posturing”, while the MQM hoped people would buy their ever sellable mantra: of “rejoining the government in the national interest” of the country. For those who were hedging their bets on whether the MQM would make a comeback – the party has quit the coalition at least five times before – were richer Wednesday night. “Let us forget the past,” said Governor Dr Ishratul Ebad in a joint press conference moments after the news of MQM’s return dominated the airwaves. Yes, Mr Governor. Let us look beyond the target killings, which left hundreds of people dead and forget that there ever existed a man called Zulfikar Mirza. Let’s forge ahead on a path that was laid out in blood a short while ago. Let’s welcome another round of an unholy alliance.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court, in its verdict on Karachi implicates all political parties – the PPP, MQM, ANP, Sunni Tehrik and Jamat-e-Islami – of their involvement in criminal activities. They have been asked to expel all criminal elements from their parties’ rank and file. Other than making a few observations and recommendations, it seems that the Supreme Court has thrown the ball back into the government’s court.

Speaking of alliances, guess who the new kid on the block has allied with recently? Imran Khan’s new man: former governor of Punjab and ex-president of the PML-Q, Mian Mohammad Azhar. Are you rejoicing yet? Well, Khan obviously was ecstatic and made sure that his voice carried twice as far as he stood outside his house in Model Town, Lahore. “We will rid the country of corrupt politicians,” said Khan. Too bad that Khan’s recent disciple has been himself implicated in vote rigging scandals. But Azhar is a small drop in the big ocean where vote rigging is a right especially reserved for the security establishment. With their support, and Khan’s hypocrisy, the votes will be forthcoming.

Who cares if Imran Khan wears a liberal face for the rest of the world while he assumes a conservative demeanour for Pakistan? The fact that Khan campaigned for Musharraf’s referendum in 2002, and doesn’t seem to understand the basics of democracy is a moot point. Our naïve countrymen will still fall for his ghairatmand exterior, voting in a candidate known more for his exploits than his team spirit. Howzzat, Mr Khan? The people who flock to see Khan perform in rallies and support his sit-ins have little idea that running a country is far more complex than steering a cricket team towards victory. A fixed match, Mr Khan, is not fair play.

Our country’s higher-ups have strange bed-fellows to say the least. From the Haqqani’s “non-militant” wing to other terrorist and sectarian groups, one wonders how such alliances can bode well for the country, and simultaneously cause harm to external powers. However, with increasing sympathy for one side, another side is being alienated: the US. With threats to halt all aid to Pakistan and a tough exterior to boot, the Americans are asking for some straight answers. As is this nation, which has been silenced with a resolution that was generated at the All Parties Conference. And just when we were trying to understand our own failings, the lights went out. Literally. Herculean power breakdowns and gas shortage plunged this nation into another form of disarray, providing the opposition with a much welcome opening.

The friendly opposition decided to go for an image makeover. Violent protests and accusatory remarks became the order of the day. What started out as attacks on offices and grid stations of Pepco and Lesco developed into a fiery war of words between the ruling government and the PML-N. One spoke of inept attitude of the ruling elite for regular wage earners, while the other accused the first of not being able to rid Punjab of dengue.

Those who vowed to safeguard democracy now took to the streets to dismiss Zardari. That will help us overcome our power shortage for sure. The government is ignorant on how to avert the crisis for good, but it doesn’t seem like the opposition has a plan either. Nor did those who walked the extra mile behind Chaudhry Nisar. A principled stance always comes second to show of strength. The party that has recently been attacked by right-wingers on their friendly policy with India stance, now walked together towards the presidency.

Lastly, what is beginning to cause me great concern is our collective hysteria in response to the government’s lack of enterprise. Would our people be better or worse off under the agenda of directionless violent protests? I ask you.

APC Ke Shirkaa Ke Naam Khat