Cinematic invasions
Dawn Editorial
Friday, 05 Nov, 2010
IT is a formula that supposedly proves our patriotism and protects our sense of a distinct Pakistani culture. So what if it leaves critical questions unanswered? Members of the National Assembly on Wednesday reiterated the old position on the power of Indian films to corrupt the minds of Pakistan’s youth.
One MNA pointed out that Pakistani “children are now incorporating Indian [read Hindi] words … in normal conversations”. The culture minister had his answer ready: Indian films are shown in theatres in Pakistan to keep alive the cinema culture in the country.
If only the minister had greater means at his disposal to keep cinematic traditions going. And if only our sensitive lawmakers could come up with a better response to the ‘problem’ they have identified. Those who are keeping the cinema alive in Pakistan still make the rather expensive visit to cinema houses, mostly to watch films produced in India by Indians.
Indian films were not allowed to run in Pakistani theatres until it became abundantly clear that an overwhelming majority of cine-goers had turned their backs on whatever was being made in Pakistan in the name of cinema.
Simply put, they did not opt for what they did not like. The same applies to the CD market where otherwise entertainment-starved Pakistanis appear to be exercising their right to choose freely. Certainly the MNAs’ concerns are shared by a large number of their compatriots.
But the best response in this situation would be to invest in local films and give people another option. Whether we call it ‘sapna’ or ‘khwab’, in the end what matters is how free the people are to dream their dreams and what facilities they have to turn these into reality and, every once in a while, see them transferred onto celluloid.
------------------
Iraq’s terror wave
Dawn Editorial
Friday, 05 Nov, 2010
A NEW wave of terror and the rise in casualties have added to the uncertainty about Iraq’s post-war political set-up. Astonishing as it sounds, the warring politicians have not been able to form a government some seven months after the March election.
The attack on the Chaldean church on Sunday in Baghdad was brutal, leaving 50 dead and over 100 injured. Two days later, six car-bomb blasts across Baghdad’s Shia districts killed and injured over 300. The killers at the church were reported by survivors to be speaking non-Iraqi Arabic, and Al Qaeda claimed responsibility for the carnage.
Whether the assailants were foreigners or not is of less importance; what is more worrisome is the rise in terrorism, while a politically stable government is nowhere in sight.
Regrettably, Iraqi politicians have disappointed their voters and Iraq’s well-wishers abroad. It is true the March 7 elections gave no clear majority to any political bloc.
But that does not mean that those who sit in parliament should be utterly indifferent to their people’s sufferings and fail to realise the consequences of a country without representative government. Prime Minister Nouri Maliki continues to govern as head of a minority government, because Ayad Allawi’s Iraqi National Movement, which secured the highest number of seats, has refused to sit with him.
The Kurdish parties, too, have not confirmed reports that they are willing to work with the Maliki-led bloc. The Maliki government has also declined Saudi Arabia’s offer to help in government formation, thus perpetuating the political status quo in which matters seem to be slipping out of the state’s hands.
An indication of the parliamentarians’ self-aggrandisement is their decision to increase their salaries and allowances to $22,500 a month, even though they have worked only for 20 minutes since the general election. Foreign business wants to invest in Iraq, and for the first time in 20 years a foreign airliner landed in Baghdad on Monday.
Yet the country’s internal scene inspires little confidence among investors because the politicians have yet to prove that they can work democracy and give the Iraqi people peace and progress.
Unclear stance
Dawn Editorial
Friday, 05 Nov, 2010
CONCERN about the effects of the price spiral as well as a possible realignment of political forces in Islamabad may have prompted the Muttahida Qaumi Movement to adopt a harder stance in parliament. Members of the MQM, which is part of the ruling coalition at the centre and in Sindh, walked out of the National Assembly on Wednesday to protest the hike in petroleum prices.
The party said it would boycott the house proceedings till its ‘demands’ were met. The MQM’s senators also marched out of the upper house for the same reasons while there was a walkout during the Sindh Assembly session as well.
Fissures in the coalition have been growing. Aside from spiralling prices, which the MQM knows will not go down well with its largely middle-class vote bank, the party also has reservations about the way the law and order situation in Karachi is being handled. Interior Minister Rehman Malik met party chief Altaf Hussain in London, where Mr Hussain delivered a litany of complaints to the minister.
One of the MQM’s key grievances is that its voice is not being heard within the coalition. A change in the political calculus at the national level must also be considered to understand the current impasse. There is a sense that something is brewing in Islamabad and the MQM may be preparing to jump ship if it feels that sticking with the PPP may no longer be politically propitious.
The PPP has made recent overtures to the PML-Q which forms the third largest bloc in the National Assembly and could come to the PPP’s rescue should the MQM leave the coalition. At the same time feelers are being exchanged between the PML-N and the Q-League, once considered an arch-enemy.
As before, the MQM may be pacified by the PPP leadership and all will be right. But in the long run this situation is not sustainable. Although coalition governments are difficult ships to steer the world over, Pakistan’s situation is particularly odd. It is strange for a coalition partner to stage walkouts and boycotts and threaten to quit the government, and yet to retain plum ministerial posts in both the federal and Sindh cabinets. The MQM should take a clear line about which boat it wants to sail in.
Ultimately, all players — including the PPP — must realise that political wheeling and dealing and using boycotts and walkouts as instruments of policy is a double-edged sword. While these may bring short-term benefits, if the parties concentrate too much on the power game and pay no attention to good governance, democracy will be the biggest loser.