Not coming after all
January 24th, 2012
Like any publicity hound with a healthy sense of self-regard, Mansoor Ijaz could have kept his will-he-or-won’t-he charade going indefinitely. For the rest of us it is time to admit that he will not be coming to Pakistan to testify in the very case that he ignited with one newspaper column and kept fanning with daily media appearances. Finally, after weeks of bluffs and counter-offers, Mr Ijaz’s lawyer said that he and his client aren’t satisfied that security arrangements for Ijaz are sufficient as a result of which, he won’t be appearing before the judicial commission investigating the memogate case. As a US citizen, Mr Ijaz has every right to absent himself from Pakistani legal proceedings. But to continue making statements that will never face judicial scrutiny but place the government at risk is highly irresponsible at best.
Part of Mr Ijaz’s reasoning for declining to come to Pakistan is that the government has been harassing him for his decision to testify before the judicial commission. But the PPP has a solid line of argument against him. If he is appearing before the judicial commission, goes the PPP reasoning, then why can he not appear in front of a parliamentary panel investigating the same matter? For him to cherry-pick which commission he would like to speak to and which he would rather avoid, raises questions about his credibility. Now that he won’t be appearing in Pakistan at all, perhaps it is time to discount his many media statements since they will no longer be receiving the official scrutiny that they deserve. It is also worth noting that Mr Ijaz’s concerns about his personal security are overblown. The government assured him of foolproof security and with the military in his corner, the chances of any harm coming to him are miniscule. The prime minister simply said that Mr Ijaz would not be given the same level of security as that given to a visiting head of state which is a fair argument. Quite clearly, those who thought that Mr Ijaz was an attention-seeker who would not visit Pakistan will have their perceptions strengthened by his decision because their argument will be that the issue of security is a mere pretext. While the commission will now decide whether Mr Ijaz’s testimony will be recorded overseas, the fact that he has refused to come to Pakistan itself casts doubt on the integrity of any such communication from him.
Dogs of war
January 24th, 2012
The sight must be a horrific one. Every Sunday afternoon, at an open ground near the town of Mirpur in Azad Kashmir, dozens of dogs try to maul or tear each other to death — cheered on by their owners and a crowd of hundreds of onlookers. The ‘winners’ receive trophies and prizes; those who have bet on the animals collect their winnings. Some dogs die; others are badly injured or perhaps maimed for life. The macho show of brutality using creatures that have no voice — according to a report in this newspaper — is organised and patronised essentially by British nationals of Pakistani origin, with the dogs brought in for the ‘contest’ from across Punjab and Kashmir. It is uncertain quite what pleasure spectators get from watching the dogs take chunks of flesh from each other, accompanied no doubt by the yelping that comes with pain, but it seems a large number of persons take pleasure from the ‘entertainment’ put on before them.
Dog fighting is of course illegal in Britain, the home of many of the owners of the unfortunate canines. What few realise, including the local authorities in Mirpur — and other parts of the country where such contests take place — is that it is also illegal under Pakistani law. But animal welfare societies which function here, lack the necessary funds to take action or even lodge a serious protest. For the same reason, ‘sports’ such as bear-baiting or camel fighting also continue, despite laws to ban them and campaigns launched by international NGOs. The entire display, the laughing, the clapping and the cheering which accompanies it demonstrates our lack of humanity; our basic lack of civilisation. The law in this regard, of course, needs to be upheld. But any law will work only if there is an awareness and a realisation that such acts of cruelty amount to a barbarism we simply do not want to see continue in our society. Some way must then be found to uphold the law and bring the terrible Sunday spectacle to an end as swiftly as possible.
A failed coup
January 24th, 2012
Like Pakistan, Bangladesh has had a surplus of army generals who think that they are better suited to run the country than the civilians voted in to do the job and frequently act on that impulse. In its 40 years since independence, Bangladesh has suffered through three army coups and many mutinies. Most recently, a military caretaker government ruled the country for two years before Sheikh Hasina came into power as prime minister. What makes the recent coup attempt — revealed by the army leadership last week — so different is that the plotters were mid-level army officers, inspired by religious zeal and not top generals lusting after power. What is ominous about this coup attempt is the religious motivations that reportedly fuelled it. In recent years, Bangladesh has been plagued by extremism and groups like Hizbut Tahrir have gained a following. These groups are strongly and violently opposed to the secular government of Sheikh Hasina.
But the tussle in Bangladesh is not as simple as a secularists-versus-conservatives battle. The military will always be a wild card for reasons that might sound familiar to Pakistanis. The generals hold the view that Hasina’s party, the Awami League and the main opposition party, the Bangladesh National Party, are both hopelessly corrupt and frequently use that as an excuse for their meddling. Some 800 soldiers are still awaiting trial for their role in an earlier mutiny, which has led to tension between the civilians and the anti-democracy military establishment. The Awami League has also made many enemies by targeting mainstream Islamic parties like the Jamaat-e-Islami. But this new alliance between the religious parties and elements within the army may be the most toxic possible combination. Fuelled by their sense of mission and armed to the teeth, their rise can spell nothing but trouble for Bangladesh. One coup attempt may have been averted but more are likely in the future. Democracy in Bangladesh, it seems, has so many enemies that it is hanging by a thread.