Dear Omar,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. The mood in Pakistan, itself, sounds no less gloomy. In the last couple of days, more than one Pakistani columnist has rued the fact that "Field Marshal" Ayub Khan's heirs seem to be still in charge. It is certainly not good news that a non-elected body, responsible to no one but itself, gets to dictate terms on the nation. Worse still, "Field Marshal" Ayub Khan and his heirs seem to have always managed to gain foreign sponsorship to bolster their positions. Here are 3 Pakistani columns published in the last 2 days:
http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=101792
Daily Star, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Who rules Pakistan?
By M.B. Naqvi
[M.B. Naqvi is a leading Pakistani columnist]
A seemingly minor incident was reported by India's Hindu newspaper. It said that in a surprise move Lt. General Ahmed Shuja Pasha, the Director General of Inter Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI) indicated that the three Indian military attaches of the army, navy and air force could come and have a cup of tea in his office. This was a surprise move because protocol-wise such requests are made, and in the case of India, seldom listened to. The three went there on July 3.
What went on in the conversation is not fu lly known. According to the Hindu of July 23 General Pasha suggested, i.e. demanded, that in the next round of Indo-Pakistan dialogue ISI should be given a seat. For, after all, Pakistan's India policy and much else is dominated, if not conducted, by ISI. He could have said that the entire orientation of Pakistan foreign policy is governed by the Pakistani army, the main talking arm being the ISI. The cornerstone of Pakistan's foreign policy is relations with the US. As a corollary, what goes on in Afghanistan has been ISI's remit.
The importance of the army in Pakistan is shown by its budget structure. As a minister said recently, over 80 percent of Pakistan's budget is exhausted by just two items; defence and debt servicing. The reality is somewhat more than this bald statement. Internal security as such is also within the four walls of the army's duties-cum-privileges.
Indian authorities were pulled in two different directions by this demand. Realism would seem to suggest that there was substance in what General Pasha said. Why not give ISI a seat in the Indo-Pakistan dialogue? But the whole ethos of India's political system is against it. In this respect, although there is some erosion at the edges, the Indian army is largely subordinate to the government.
No government is ever so foolish as not to take the views of the military high command as an input in their decision-making. But presence of an army general in inter-governmental talks would be a violation of the ethos of Indian politics. One does not know what the final decision of the Indians will be, but one will be mighty surprised if India accedes to this demand.
But what Shuja Pasha was saying is a reality insofar as Pakistan is concerned. Pakistan has had a recognised term for its government during the 1990s -- troika. At that time, it simply meant that three persons count: the army chief, the president and the prime minister. But that system was the reality behind formal democracy. But what obtains today would require a new dimension to the troika. Now it has remained three: the Pentagon in Washington, President Zardari and the Army Chief General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani. The poor prime minister has been neither here nor there in real power terms, though he tries from time to time to assert himself and proclaim that he is the chief executive of the country. The very fact that he has to proclaim it shows that there are widespread doubts about it.
Some would be amazed by the inclusion of a foreign government's agency, no matter how powerful it is. One includes it because of the extensive role that it is now playing in Pakistan. No week passes when a top general of the American army or Nato forces is not visiting Islamabad. They all come basically to meet the army chief and to get a briefing from him, and to brief him regarding what is needed. America's role is not simply intrusive, it is also decisive. The military of fensives in FATA and Malakand show that the American word is paramount.
As for President Asif Ali Zardari, he is truly in command of the National Assembly as well as many other organisations of the state like the Senate and the Sindh Assembly. The reason for it is that he is also the party chief of the Pakistan People's Party; which he controls tightly. All the PPP deputies in various Assemblies take their orders from him. Thus, he has come to acquire a crippling control over the Senate and National Assembly. In NWFP and Punjab the PPP is a junior partner of a coalition that does not wish to remain a coalition. But the president wants the unwilling coalition to stay in Punjab. Therefore it stays in Punjab, NWFP and Balochistan; in Sindh it does not matter because the PPP is in the majority, though it has taken other parties as coalition partners to give substance to its refrain of reconciliation meant for ensuring a share in power in the other three provinces.
Insofar as the army chief is concerned, it is unnecessary to emphasise that his word counts, and it is sought in any difficult situation. The government of Pakistan has handed over the entire national security question to the army; army agencies control much else. In any crisis, such as the one on March 15 when the lawyers' rally had swelled to impossible proportions, the army chief, probably on Pentagon's advice, forced Zardari to surrender and do as the lawyers' movement leaders said -- to r estore all the sacked judges without any conditions.
It was total surrender by Zardari because he was holding out against the restoration of the judges. What else lay behind his antipathy to the restoration of the judges is not known. Typically, it was the army chief who conveyed the government's decision at midnight to the lawyers' leader that the government had agreed to all their terms.
The democracy in Pakistan is fledgling at best. There are powerful vested interests such as the landed aristocracy. A vast majority of the members of the Assemblies are landed gentry; they do not pass any legislation that hurts big landlords, nor do they allow any taxes on themselves. Then there is the military; the government survives at the mercy of the army chief.
During the last 40 years three coups have taken place (one coup took place in 1950s when Pakistan was united). The army in Pakistan is definitely not a subordinate department of the government. At most, it can be said that it is coeval in political importance of the government on day-to-day basis but inheritantly stronger because it can throw any government into the dustbin anytime.
Pakistan's troubles are due to two factors. One, it has no political class that understands its problem and is efficient enough to lead the country out of its troubles, while its government knows how to spend without being ready to increase tax-GDP ratio, or lead the country to produce more e fficiently to cover the cost of imports. Efficiency in terms of cost, quality and packaging is not insisted upon.
On top of it all, the powers that be are dead set on running an arms races with India in all spheres -- nuclear weapons, missiles and conventional armaments. Islamabad is on a borrowing binge, but donors are tired of lending to what they say is a failing state. When and how will Pakistan change its ways?
======================================================================
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/16-its-decade-of-darkness-hs-05
DAWN, Karachi, Pakistan
Tue, 18 Aug, 2009 | Sha'aban 26, 1430
Zia’s decade of darkness
By Iqbal Ahmad Khan
ghazalakhan27@hotmail.com
The unenviable position of the most invidious of Pakistan’s rulers, among democrats and dictators alike, is occupied by Ziaul Haq, the dictator-general who died 21 years ago on Aug 17.
The outward display of humility and affection masked a duplicitous and vengeful personality. These were reflected in the retrogressive and punitive measures the general unleashed on the benighted nation during more than a decade20of unmitigated dictatorship.
Whether it was the knotty Article 58-2(b), the much-exploited blasphemy laws or the promotion of a misogynous mindset, Pakistan and Pakistanis continue to be haunted by Zia’s dark decade.
Ziaul Haq was a usurper. He overthrew an elected and arguably Pakistan’s most popular prime minister. As justification he cited danger of civil war as a possible consequence of an impasse in talks between the government and the opposition. This was a lie. It is now fully documented that by July 4, 1977, both protagonists — the PPP and the Pakistan National Alliance or PNA — had reached an agreement to be announced by the prime minister the next day. The general could not have been unaware of this development. His move was purely and simply a power-grab.
The second deception was his avowal of not having any political ambitions, his sole aim being to hold elections within three months in October 1977. But when it dawned upon him that the premier he had ousted continued to enjoy widespread public support, he, not for the first time, conveniently retracted on his promise. He announced that it was neither in the Quran, nor was it revealed to him to hold elections on Oct 18. The promised elections were postponed. The people were provided an insight into his real plans when he pronounced that the country could only be kept together by the armed forces and not by politicians. Obviously, the fact that barely=2 0six years ago Pakistan had disintegrated under the watch of a military junta did not seem to bother him.
The sinister general continued to dangle the election bait before the public, while proceeding simultaneously to transform Pakistan into an authoritarian, nay totalitarian state. The constitution was amended beyond recognition in a bid to further empower himself. The notorious Article 58-2(b) corrupted the parliamentary form of government by transforming it into a semi-presidential system. The president now had the power to dissolve the National Assembly. (This power was used to dismiss the prime minister in 1988 while he was on an official visit abroad.)
He arrogantly proclaimed that he was here to stay and would not allow anybody else to rise. So much for the humility and selflessness that some of his apologists were attributing to him. On April 4, 1979, amidst curses from the masses and condemnation from the international community he hanged the legitimately elected and the most accomplished of Pakistan’s prime ministers. Soon thereafter elections were cancelled and political parties banned.
Military courts, armed with massive powers by the chief martial law administrator, spread terror among the people. Political activists and journalists were incarcerated. Some were even flogged in consonance with the punitive punishments that martial law orders had prescribed.
Responding to criticism on the dismissal of certain journalists for demanding re storation of democracy, the general angrily shot back that the punishment was too lenient. They should have been hanged in order to teach others a lesson. The press was muzzled and students and trade unions banned. The right of habeas corpus was annulled for the first time in the history of Pakistan. The judiciary could no longer review the legality and constitutionality of executive decisions.
Despite the comprehensive use of force to quell dissent, the question of legitimacy continued to stalk the regime. It was decided to give an ideological underpinning to Zia’s authoritative rule. In messianic mould the general told BBC that God had entrusted him with the mission to bring Islamic order to Pakistan. A referendum asking the people whether they supported Islamisation resulted in an embarrassing 10 per cent turnout. The ban on political parties was kept intact.
Islam, it was claimed, did not provide either for political parties or for western democracy. The Council of Islamic Ideology was entrusted with the task of preparing a blueprint for an Islamic ideological state. Primitive punishments including amputation of limbs, public lashings and stoning to death were promulgated. Blasphemy laws were introduced which have since become an exploitative instrument in the hands of militants and extremists to manipulate public sentiment and to target minorities.
A raft of retrogressive measures was directed at women. The evidence of two women was made equal to that of one man and the amount of compensation payable for a murdered woman was half that for a murdered man. Women appearing on TV were required to cover their heads and female dancing on TV was prohibited. The regime’s sinister plan involved the establishment of a theocratic-authoritarian state where Gen Zia backed by the military would reign supreme over a fearful populace. It was completely at variance with Quaid’s vision of Pakistan, which was neither theocratic nor authoritarian.
This then is Gen Ziaul Haq’s dark legacy. Lack of space does not permit a chronicle of his foreign policy failures. The roots of all major problems facing Pakistan today lie in Gen Zia’s dark era. To name only a few — the habitual interference of the armed forces in civilian affairs, weakening of state institutions, democracy deficit, rise of intolerance and militant extremism, sectarianism, problems of the Afghan refugees, drugs and the Kalashnikov culture and perennial constitutional problems. To roll all this back is the unenviable task of the present democratically elected government.
======================================================================
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/columnists/14-let-the-dice-fall-889-zj-01
D AWN, Karachi, Pakistan
Tue, 18 Aug, 2009 | Sha'aban 26, 1430
Let the dice fall
By Kamran Shafi
kshafi1@yahoo.co.uk
So then, his denials notwithstanding, H.E. Mark Lyall Grant was in Islamabad the Beautiful to ‘build bridges between Asif Zardari, Nawaz Sharif and Ashfaq Kayani’ in a bid to avert a ‘crisis’ over Gen Musharraf’s possible trial under Article 6.
Well, well, well: what the devil does the British government have to do with whether the former military ruler is tried under the laws of Pakistan or not? Far more than that, were the remains of Master Cromwell not dug out of his grave and hanged for treason even though he had been well and truly dead for at least three years?
Let me say, here and now, that whilst I stand against the death penalty in every case, it is extremely critical that a general of an army whose brass hats consider Pakistan their inherited fiefdom, is tried, and hopefully convicted for rebellion against an elected government, and sentenced to a term in prison like any other person who has violated the law.
What is so special about an army general anyway, that Musharraf’s trial will cause a ‘crisis’? Let us immediately recall the tribulations of an elected president and prime minister by the name of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who was treated most shabbily and most disgracefully not only in jail, but also during his appearances in the court of Maulvi Mushtaq who was avowedly Bhutto’s enemy for being passed over for promotion. Let us not forget that when Bhutto one day complained that he did not have confidence in Maulvi Mushtaq, he shouted at him to ‘Stand up, and keep standing!’ When Bhutto protested, Maulvi Mushtaq again roared: ‘Remove his chair’ and added words to the effect: ‘You are no longer president or prime minister; if you do not shut up I have the authority to have you whipped in jail!’ Let us remember that Bhutto was made to stand throughout the proceedings of that day. So, why should we care that Musharraf is a former COAS, and how the army (always read ‘high command’ or ‘brass hats’ whenever I invoke the name of the army for what do the junior ranks have to do with their crimes?) will take it. Let the generals take it as they will, for they must learn once and for all that they are merely sub-department heads of yet another department of the government.
My advice to the Commando will be to come back to the country and face the music like a man. He has badmouthed ZAB much, and far too frequently when he ruled the roost, once going to the extent of calling him ‘the worst thing to have happened to Pakistan’! Well, let us see if he is half the man that Bhutto was.
Let’s not forget the tribulations of another elected prime m inister, Nawaz Sharif, who was thrown out of office by the army acting at the behest of the Commando and his rufaqaa and then, quite disgracefully, locked up in Attock Fort before being taken in shackles and chains to Karachi to stand trial for that so-called hijacking which many today say was a fraud played out by the ‘agencies’ to provide grounds for the removal of a constitutional government.
Let us also not forget that when Nawaz Sharif attempted to come back to Pakistan after being expressly allowed by the Supreme Court, he was treated most shamefully and was sent back to Saudi Arabia in disgraceful fashion. If the establishment, handmaiden to the generals and the ‘agencies,’ can behave so with democratically elected leaders why should the Commando be let off the hook?
Let us not forget too, that even the families of elected leaders were not spared by army dictators. A photograph of blood streaming down Begum Nusrat Bhutto’s forehead comes immediately to my anguished mind when she and Benazir were beaten out of a cricket match at the Gaddafi stadium because the crowd raised slogans in their honour. Was this the way to treat a former first lady and the then leader of Pakistan’s largest political party and her daughter?
There is another image too: of a car lifted aloft by a large fork-lifter for hours on end. In the car was another former elected prime minister’s wife, Begum Kulsoom Nawaz, who=2 0was leading a protest against her husband’s removal from office by the general.
So get off it, you Bonapartes and Rommels and Guderians, and learn to live like the rest of us very ordinary citizens of Pakistan. However, if you cannot, then consider taking over this country one more time. Given its state after nine years of the Commando’s ministrations, and using a crude colloquialism: ‘we will then see how much water you are in!’
Now that Musharraf is in deep trouble, there is increasing talk about truth and reconciliation ‘so that the country can move ahead.’ Whilst many of us have asked both in the written word and in TV appearances for just this for many years now, our suggestion was derisively dismissed by the Commando and his toadies because they were then in unbridled power. However, I am quite willing to lend my support to it, even now.
South Africa showed us how beautifully truth and reconciliation can happen, but it wasn’t easy. In atonement, white Afrikaaners, big beefy men, knelt and washed the feet of the mothers of their black victims. There are films of tens of people, black and white, wailing with grief at these reconciliation sessions, with Bishop Tutu, the head of the commission, weeping with them too.
Can we visualise similar scenes in this land of ours in the pursuit of truth and reconciliation? Probably not, for truth and reconciliation are for men, not sec ond-rate bullies.
Enough of pussy-footing; try the man (and his collaborators) and let the dice fall where they may. This country must go to a better place.
======================================================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Omarhuda@aol.com
To: K.Huda@alumni.ids.ac.uk; ms_abro@hotmail.com; ahuda@wisc.edu
Sent: Fri, Aug 14, 2009 12:22 am
Subject: Re: Situation in Pakistan - What I see coming
"situation in Pakistan has become tense now" ... coming from a aid / development worker ..
I am not surprised by this 'on the ground' report.
Pakistan died it first death in 1958 with a death knell to its democratic beginning - as a CIA sponsored coup permanently destroyed its civil institutions. Her next death came in 1971 - when its Military machine slaughtered 3 million Bengalis. The very justification of its birth as a "Muslim homeland" came to an abrupt end, as more than half of its people broke off to=2 0from Bangladesh.
We are now witnessing her last few days as a nation. Balochistan will go - amid much bloodshed. NWFP will break away and perhaps join Afghanistan. Killing of the Pashtuns have already begun - aided by what I call the "Obama Drones"!! Three million have become refugees. I saw a program on PBS where the Pak Military said of a destroyed Swat - "We destroyed their villages to 'save' them"!!!
What will remain of Pakistan, will be Punjab - just about big enough to provide the last vestiges of US military base. I heard in NPR today that they have started demonizing and threatening the Christian populace there. The sad thing is that the people of Pakistan I know still do not seem to realize that the country's death began - barely a decade after its birth - as it embraced servitude to the US foreign policy and & war machine, as its sole purpose as a country
I spent my best days of my youth in Pakistan - in school and in her Army - ending up as her POW in the 1971 war. I remember with fondness what it used to be. I cannot even recognize what it has turned out to be!
I have so many dear friends there - I feel bad for them and seek their forgiveness for stating what I do see coming.. Some of my dearest friends there are Christians - I worry for them. I will cry for them, but there will be little tears shed for the dead "Islamic Republic". I give her at most another year!
-- Omar
In a message dated 8/13/2009 10:19:12 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, K.Huda@alumni.ids.ac.uk writes:
This is just to let you know that situation in Pakistan has become tense now. In many parts of Balochistan, Balochs celebrated August 11 as their independence day and announced separation from Pakistan. However, the government of Pakistan has suppressed their movement with armed forces. Security has been on high alert and many criminals of Baloch Underworld don are being either killed or arrested. This has created much fear among the people here. You must also bear in mind that all the beneficiaries of our research are Baloch by origin, and the area from which i have to cross to reach the field is also occupied by Balochs. it's very difficult for me to visit field site during these day s. Let Aug 14 (independence day of Pakistan) pass, then will i tell you about the situation here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment