Date: Tuesday, October 4th, 2016
A time for solidarity
The Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif, called an all-parties meeting on Monday, October 3, in a timely effort to gain cross-party unity at a time of national crisis. We support his move at the same time as wondering why parliament and a public debate were not more appropriate — but perhaps there were national security issues that could not be discussed in the public domain. No matter, political hostilities were suspended for the duration and parties that have sought the downfall of the PML-N government sat with it at the table as is right and proper at a time such as this. The meeting was convened to formulate a unanimous response to Indian actions in Occupied Kashmir and the ongoing and escalating tensions along the Line of Control (LoC).
The joint statement issued at the end was notable for the strength of its language, blunt and unequivocal, and its 19 points ranged the entire spectrum of Indo-Pakistan relations. It was jointly owned across the political spectrum, a signal that there was a willingness to espouse unity in the national interest.
Some points stand out — collective condemnation of Indian action over all aspects of the Kashmir issue, the Indian ‘scuttling’ of Saarc (a move it has long wanted to make), the threats to deploy the ‘water weapon’, a nod to the international community as to Indian action — perhaps a recognition that events of recent weeks have produced little more than a ringing silence internationally. The reconstitution of the National Security Committee of parliament in a coordinating role ought also to be warmly welcomed.
It is now for the diplomatic cohort to raise their game, for Pakistan to deploy its considerable resources and to begin to turn threat into opportunity. There were wise heads around the table, not all of them from the PML-N and if the PM really wants to capitalise on the event he will do well to utilise them, whatever their affiliation. At bottom, there was measured restraint, no sabres rattled or threats uttered and this is as it should be, because there really is strength in unity.
A widening split
August 12, 2016 may well be marked as the day on which the latent schisms within the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) began to tear it asunder. On that day the leader of the MQM based in London, Altaf Hussain, made a speech which incited his followers gathered in Karachi to violence, as well as making statements that were distinctly unpatriotic and offensive to the armed forces. It has proved to be a speech too far, and the party has been imploding in terms of its senior leadership ever since. Fortunately, the turmoil at the top has not thus far translated into turmoil on the streets, and the rank and file membership appear to be waiting and watching events, perhaps unsure of outcomes as Altaf Hussain has declared himself incommunicado.
What is clear enough though also of uncertain outcome is that the London and Pakistan leadership groups are not on the same page, and are not even working from the same playbook. The MQM-P is nominally led by Dr Farooq Sattar who has announced that he has been elevated to being the party’s convener. Not so says MQM-L which has said that his basic membership is revoked and that he has betrayed Altaf Hussain.
The sooner these unhappy matters are resolved the better for all concerned, but particularly the MQM ordinary members mostly in Karachi. They have voted the party in and have every right to expect that their elected representatives will discharge their duties appropriately, which means that the party has to have an active and effective leadership. Nothing is forever in politics as elsewhere in life, and for the MQM this is a period of transition. It was never going to be pretty or easy but the London connection was past its sell-by date as was arguably its absent leader who was increasingly out of touch with some uncomfortable realities, not least his own capacity and ability to lead in absentia. If Dr Sattar can bring order to the stage then so be it. The leaders in London are yesterday, and the MQM urgently needs to be today and tomorrow. We await developments.
Sindhi gains national status
Seventy years after the emergence of Pakistan and asround four decades after the creation of Bangladesh, Pakistan’s diversity of languages remains a contentious issue. The Sindh Assembly recently adopted a resolution to recognise Sindhi as a national language. Giving Sindhi a national status will allow it to be an optional subject in school curriculum across the country. This is a step in a direction that Pakistan should have long walked towards. People of all provinces have had respective demands to give their languages a national status. It is hoped that following the Sindh Assembly, other provincial assemblies will also raise this issue again and push the centre to recognise the legitimate space for regional languages.
In countless countries there is no national language. In India for instance, while the official languages of the federation are English and Hindi, each state has its own official language, with no language having a “national” status. But in Pakistan even debating the issue is seen as against national unity. It unfortunate that the citizens of Pakistan are deprived of studying the languages spoken in their country when in many schools, students have the opportunity to learn Arabic, French and other European languages. Urdu was adopted as the national language to unify the country, except that it was among the major contributing factors for the increasing feeling of discrimination faced by Bengalis. In fact, the International Mother Tongue Day is observed to mark this discrimination, where on February 22, 1952, the police killed Bengali students in Dhaka for protesting to include Bangla as a national language. Clearly, the approach of using Urdu as a tool to unify failed long ago.
The policy of maintaining Urdu supremacy is discriminatory, more so because it is the mother tongue of less than 10 per cent of Pakistan’s population. The demand to recognise provincial and regional languages is a legitimate one that should no longer be suppressed by declaring it a “sensitive” subject.
Published in The Express Tribune, October 4th, 2016.