The rigid and myopic application of constitution’s articles 62 and 63 to determine the suitability of candidates for contesting this year’s elections has gone too far. While Pakistan is awash with endemic violence, unremitting abuse and infringement of every moral, social and religious injunction, paradoxically a strict religious, unrealistic and fanciful ethical criterion is being imposed on the aspirant candidates. Let the voters decide who the best candidate for them is.

The ongoing practice is ridiculous and indeed farcical. In 21st century and in a modern world, our election system wants religious robots to take part in elections. The faith should be confined to the individual level and have minimum role in state affairs. Civil societies are the hallmarks of the modern states and these, in a way excel, the rights given even by religions.

Are we turning Pakistan into a rigid and intolerant theocracy by sizing up the candidates as religiously suitable and morally as infallible as angels are believed to be? From where do the returning officers draw their rights for judging the conduct of others? Returning officers should not have the mandate to probe the religious or private credentials of the candidates.

Conduct and religious attachment are subjective issues and can be viewed and interpreted in multifarious ways. It is utterly impossible to pronounce someone as being pious, truthful and immune from sins or moral lapses. It is equally irrelevant, unnecessary and difficult to dub someone as wicked and morally bankrupt with varying degrees.

An individual supposed to be pious in my view could be devil for another person. So better abandon these frivolous benchmarks and vague hoaxes of ideology of Pakistan and infringement of constitution. It would be much desirable if articles 62 and 63 are set aside and later expunged from the statute book. These are recipes for a perennial ideological conflict that would dent Pakistan as a modern, progressive nation state.

Religions largely suppress the individual liberties, fundamental human rights and foster sectarian bad blood. The civil societies give vent to the inalienable rights provided within the framework of a modern secular and democratic state.

In Pakistan, there is a persistent refrain on making Pakistan as an Islamic state but even the most ultra-conservative government of General Ziaul-Haq could not achieve this goal because of the inherent contradictions between the features of a modern state and the orthodox nature of the religion.

Since any religion is bound to degenerate and split into sectarianism and denominations, the state that is essentially a secular institution cannot function properly and peacefully because of the internecine feuding between various faiths. In a theocracy or in a state that calls itself a religious state or the custodian of particular faith and religion, the religious and sectarian harmony is not possible as we can see in Pakistan.

It is foregone, that notwithstanding the Islamic teachings about equality and justice, a majority sect seldom treats the adherents of minority sects on an equal footing. Rather the minority sects are persecuted and intimidated as heretics and infidels. This is happening in various Islamic countries.

Secondly, it is important to understand that the institution of democracy is the gift or product of modern society and civilization. Democracy essentially is secular in nature and empowers the masses without their ethnic, racial, religious, social or financial status. In Islam a head of state is both the custodian of faith and the ruler. He can be a monarch, an autocrat or a ruthless dictator (as the Umayyad, Abbasids, Ottoman caliphs were).
In democracy power lies with the people of a state. In theocracy or in a religious state it can rest with even an individual if he is the staunch proponent of a certain faith. There is no such thing as a religious democracy because the religious codes do not provide any system of elections on the principle of one man one vote for the entire population.

A democratic head of state is more concerned with the welfare of the state and its people and not of a particular sect or religion. The modern nation states are essentially secular and not strictly religious. Historically, religious dispensation has always been a monarchy or autocracy. The hereditary right to caliphate as claimed by Hazrat Ali after the demise of the prophet of Islam cannot be termed as democratic.

A democratic dispensation and the religious political system are heterogeneous towards each other and therefore even the Islamic states like Malaysia and Indonesia have to liberalize their societies despite having Islam as their official religion. Malaysia, Indonesia and Turkey are the appropriate models of an Islamic state where secularism and Islam converge. There is ethnic, sectarian and communal peace in those societies.

Religion urges the humans to believe for heaven or hell. Human nature is devious and obeys when punishment or reward is imminent and in sight. A political system or society cannot remain stable in face of an unremitting ideological conflict going on between the sects within Islam?

It would be a landmark feat if the Islamic scholars can Islamize democracy or democratize Islam. While the state has clear-cut laws and covenants and possesses the administrative apparatus to enforce them, the bulk of religious injunctions are contradictory, confusing, rigid and out of sync with the momentous changes in human societies.

Is it possible that there can be a reconciliation and compromise between the Islamic clerics and democracy? In a country which since its inception has remained in the throes of faith based- extremism, bigotry, sectarian and communalism, the most pressing need is to bring about a consensus and truce between the warring sects.

The most crying urgency is to evolve a consensual code of Islamic faith between Sunnis and Shias so that the state and the society don’t suffer due to their mutual doctrinal rivalry and ensuing bloodshed.

As such the only rational way-out is to adopt the twin panacea of secularism and democracy that would allow every sect and denomination and rich and poor to practice their own faith without trading the accusations of heresy.
The perception of secularism doesn’t necessarily mean negation or elimination of religion. It simply means tolerance and coexistence in matter of difference of religious beliefs and opinions. It is foregone that Pakistan as a theocracy or a country with a religious label cannot move forward and would always be trapped in a self-destructive ideological conflict. The devastation of Baghdad by Mongol hordes in 13th century is a testifying tragedy to the Shia Sunni animosity towards each other.

While acknowledging the distasteful fact that the ideological gulf between two main Islamic sects cannot be bridged, these must be legally bound to coexist and tolerate each other. As far political power is concerned, Pakistan has to decide once and for all that the war of conflicting beliefs should not be allowed to enter the political corridors.

The other forms of religious extremism and fanaticism also need to be forcefully curbed. The religion should be confined within the personal and at best group contours. That is the only viable, practical and rational solution to the religious bad blood that breeds violence and hinders smooth functioning of state and society.

The State and society have got to be secular and truly democratic for prosperity and advancement and for Pakistan to enter the fold of modern states. At the same time Pakistan, like Turkey, Malaysia and Indonesia, can retain its Islamic identity. In a nutshell, Islam, secularism, and democracy should go hand in hand in Pakistan.

It is, therefore, incumbent upon the Islamic theologians and scholars to explore a way to integrate religion with democracy in order to serve the imperatives of a modern society. The religion would best serve its pristine purpose of worshipping God, observing rituals and instilling morality if it is confined to the personal, individual or group levels. The underlying theme of all religions is morality, righteousness and obedience to God if left to private domain.

The writer is a senior journalist and a former diplomat


http://www.thefrontierpost.com/category/40/

Democracy in Pakistan is yet a dream that has not been allowed to materialise in letter and in spirit. It is a ray of hope that appears on the dark political horizon just for a short time; it quickly vanishes when the dictators, thanks to the incompetence of politicians to manage the affairs of the state, come on the scene.

There is periodic intervention of dictatorship, followed by a strange type of government that is neither dictatorship nor democracy. Thus, it is always inefficient, weak and corrupt, which does not have the power to deliver what democracy stands for.

The sad part of the story is that Pakistanis have been betrayed several times in the name of democracy. Dictators have intervened on the pretext of cleaning the mess created by the politicians to let democracy flourish. While the politicians seek power by making big claims of serving the cause of democracy. In reality, they have served no one - neither people nor democracy. Instead they have feathered well their own nests at the cost of the people.

The people, on their part, have constantly struggled for change, but unfortunately nothing has changed; every time old wines come in new bottles.
During the 65-year political history of Pakistan, they have witnessed four dictators, 11 Presidents, 18 Prime Ministers and several versions of the constitution; yet their dream did not come true.

True democracy stands for a government in which the people’s will prevails. It stands for justice, equality, accountability and transparency. It ensures the rule of law and supremacy of the constitution. It paves the way for good governance, which in return gives the people peace, progress and prosperity. If a system of government lacks these basic features, then it is not a democracy, but a mockery of democracy.

The best example is the PPP-led coalition government that ended on March 16. It came into power in 2008 after the people’s historic struggle - the judiciary’s strong resistance and the media’s hysterical campaign against the then President Pervez Musharraf. The people had given to PPP a mandate with great expectation. But in return, it gave them nothing, except rampant corruption, deteriorating economy, acute energy shortage and poor law and order situation. It is unfortunate, indeed, that the PPP failed to learn from past mistakes and repeated them. In 2008, it got an opportunity to make history, but it did not avail it.

It is not just in the case of PPP. The other political parties whenever in power have also betrayed the people’s trust.

Having said that, it is important to add that PML-N, undoubtedly, showed political maturity while playing the role of the opposition that led to the continuation of democracy in whatever form it exists. Nawaz Sharif’s political maturity and Shahbaz Sharif’s excellent administrative skills seems to be the PML-N’s greatest assets, which may help democracy to succeed in Pakistan in the future.

In the name of democracy the stage is being set for the 2013 elections. Karl Marx’s defined it as a process in which "the oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them.” If the people of Pakistan want to prove Marx wrong and if they want to stop the recurrence of dictatorship and sham democracy, then they have to select the right person for the right job.

Indeed, this could be the only opportunity; if the people avail it with sound judgment and bold decisions, then spring is not far away. But if they fail this time, then, perhaps, there will be an eternal democratic winter that will do them immense harm. The ball is in the people’s court; wake up and change the destiny of the country by voting for the right candidates.

The writer is former youth parliamentarian from Fata. Email: ahmadwaziri@hotmail.com

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...inions/columns

Democracy is known for its revenge. In the year 2008, it struck in two places to take its revenge. It struck in America to crush the race "barrier" and installing in the White House the first-ever non-white President in US history. Democracy also struck in Pakistan with elections in February 2008 after two years of stormy civil and judicial strife ousting a dictator and the ignominy of his eight-year rule. The revenge it took in Pakistan was different from the one it took in America. In Pakistan, it installed a foreign-brokered NRO-based regime that had neither the will nor the ability to lead the country from those eight years of dictatorship into genuine democracy.

After five years of an NRO-based civilian rule, neither democracy took roots in our country nor did the people experience any socio-economic upturn. Instead, they found themselves stuck at the crossroads of another critical juncture suffering the worst ever governance crisis of their history. The country has drifted deeper into an abysmal political chaos and economic uncertainty. The common man’s life could not be more miserable with uncontrolled food and energy shortages, unabated violence and countrywide lawlessness.

Our economy is in shambles with no trust or credibility among world's lenders and investors. Meanwhile, the looters, plunderers, profiteers, murderers and killers could not have a safer haven anywhere else in the world. No other country is familiar with the practice of forgiving as a matter of rule the elite loan-defaulters, fake degree holders and the known highly placed plunderers of the national exchequer. In our benighted land, the culture of "power and privilege" and urge for greed is thriving on patronage, graft, bribery, extortion, nepotism, cronyism, influence-peddling, fraud and embezzlement.

Whether we accept or not, we are today high on the global radar screen for all the wrong reasons. Regrettably, terrorism and extremism are our sole identity now. No doubt, we have been the victim of this twin menace ever since our geopolitics made Pakistan the pivotal frontline of the two protracted Afghan wars. There is a cumulative historic perspective to this crisis, but, in essence, it is the legacy of two long spells of military rule in our country, 11 years of General Ziaul Haq and nine years of General Pervez Musharraf. And both were the blue-eyed boys of the West.

Last five years, however, could not be a drearier picture of governmental helplessness in the face of terrorism-led violence. Thanks to our incompetent and externally vulnerable rulership, we have been kept engaged on multiple external as well as domestic fronts. Now that the whole world is looking at the post-2014 scenario for peace in Afghanistan, our political leadership remains without any strategic vision to bring peace to our own country. Their strategic skills and scheming ingenuities were all devoted to devising self-serving intrigues and power-driven deals in collusion with foreign powers. The notorious Memogate was a classic example of their self-centred ‘strategic vision.’

Last year, we witnessed another scandal in what was no less than a double barrel attack on the country’s judiciary and media, the two pillars of the state which for our people were the last hope to save the country from the looters and plunderers sitting in privileged positions and elected houses whose only agenda is to further reinforce their own political power. It was a conspiracy to smear the image of the two pillars of the state and undermine their role in strengthening the rule of law in the country. The insidious attempt may not have succeeded in its ultimate objective, but it did create ripples in the public faith in the credibility of the two saviours of the country’s future.

Now if we look at the sequence of events since after the "prodigal" sons of our politics returned to the political centre-stage through the last elections, it is a dismal scenario. Our corrupt rulers seem to be masters in circumventing democratic and constitutional norms. As one links the loose ends in the recent caretaker selection drama, the last three constitutional amendments seem to have been ingeniously designed with the sole purpose of influencing the forthcoming election outcome. With no one trusting the outgoing regime, a unique but highly questionable process was devised for selecting the interim Prime Minister and provincial Chief Ministers to supervise the elections.

This whole process was deceitfully engineered to ensure their political power and incumbency of the high public offices remained intact. Nowhere in the world are governments appointed by an arbitrarily appointed group of five individuals most of whom are known to carry partisan affiliations. There couldn’t even be a bigger farce of democracy. This is the worst form of kleptocracy in which the government exists only to aggrandize the personal wealth and political power of the privileged few.

A petition has already been moved in the Supreme Court challenging the authority given under 20th Amendment to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) to nominate the federal and provincial caretaker setups in the event of Assemblies failing to do so. This authority under Article 9(3) of Article 224-A of the constitution is repugnant to the constitution itself because the National Assembly has neither the jurisdiction to abdicate or delegate its authority to the ECP. The petition also makes serious allegations of ‘partiality’ against the ECP.

Initial handling of the scrutiny, the most important element of ensuring implementation of Articles 62 and 63, has been far from satisfactory. It exposed serious planning and decision-making deficiencies in the Commission. With adequately briefed and trained returning officers, the scrutiny process could have made more meaningful and all the hullabaloo and comic scenes could have been avoided. The need for non-selective enforcement of the constitutional eligibility criteria is indispensable. Instead of testing the candidate’s general knowledge, the real scrutiny should have focused on the known and proven cases of constitutional ineligibility.

Apparently, the vacillating ECP did take one good decision. On a suggestion received from the civil society, it announced the addition of a blank box marked ‘None of the Above’ on the ballot paper giving voters a democratic free choice to reject the entire slate of candidates in his or her constituency.
This democratic provision known as NOTA would, indeed, have been a big revolutionary step in freeing the country by ballot of the same old tried and tested corrupt politicians and their rotten ‘status quo’. Regrettably, the ECP did not have the courage to stand by its decision and promptly withdrew it when some ill-advised media persons attacked it.

As for our caretakers, they know their only mandate is to oversee the holding of a free, fair and transparent election. They are not there to take major decisions or even to reverse previous government’s policies and projects. At this stage, they shouldn’t even be talking of personal hang-ups like Basant or other cultural festivals. These matters would be best left to the new elected governments. The caretakers should be focusing on providing interim relief to the people suffering worst hardship in terms of security, law and order, price control, regular supply of food and fuel and curtailing of loadshedding hours.
They shouldn’t also be seen moving around in official motorcades fulfilling their social chores or attending ribbon-cutting functions and wedding ceremonies.
In this chaos and confusion, we also find a recycled dictator abruptly floated back in our turbulent political waters. Everyone knows who launched him and with what purpose. If anything, the judiciary should take notice of the increasing interference from outside in Pakistan’s domestic affairs. Having ruled NRO as an illegality, the Supreme Court must issue a ruling against any fresh similar attempts involving foreign powers, including our neighbourly kingdoms, sheikhdoms and sultanates playing as their Trojan horses. One of these ‘brotherly’ states is also a permanent sanctuary for our high-profile fugitive absconders. Already, two of them, a former Federal Minister and an Ogra Chief, in defiance of judicial orders, are enjoying its regal hospitality.

The writer is a former foreign secretary. Email: shamshad2001@hotmail.com

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...inions/columns

In my earlier write up, in these columns, I indicated, in general terms, the process of democratic evolution taking place in Pakistan. In the present article I will try to specify the route being adopted by this process.

I contended in the previous piece that the outgoing coalition government, led by PPP, had been corrupt as well as inefficient. I also contended, on the other hand, that the legislations done by that government include some of the landmark constitutional amendments, having far reaching positive consequences with regard to promotion of democratic ideals in the country.

An efficient and corruption free dispensation that fails to bring legislation in line with the requirements of the time is not the answer. Similarly a corrupt and inefficient government with plethora of good legislations to their credit would also not meet the requirement.

The study of voting pattern of our feudal society, with an appallingly low literacy profile, reveals that concepts like good legislations hardly figure out with the electorate in Pakistan. Governance, good or bad, too is not a deciding factor for the simple reason that, so far, governance graph of all the governing political parties had been identically poor. Governance may become a criterion after an outfit dispenses good governance during their tenure, at least, once in our democratic history.

Unattended evolutionary processes of ideas and concepts usually take far longer to produce a finished item than such processes being under strict scrutiny of human consciousness. With regard to democratic evolution, scrutiny would require to place certain perimeters to define the path of such evolution. In a democratic arena it is here that the legislation assumes its critical role.

Pakistan’s constitution of 1973 provided ample guidance for a democratic practice. Unfortunately we again hit the blind alley after General Zia’s martial law suspended that constitution. After the death of General Zia the country again reverted to a democratic experience. For a decade the country went through a haphazard democratic experience. The same haphazardness remained the guiding phenomenon during 2008 general elections.

A coalition government, led by PPP, the single largest party in the national assembly, however could emerge from the general confusion. To analyze the governance of the coalition for the last five years, we must take a breather to reflect on the coalition partners generally and the vanguard leadership of PPP particularly.

The junior coalition partners like the Pakistan Muslim League Qaid-I-Azam (PMLQ), the Mutahida Qomi Movement (MQM) and the Awami National Party (ANP) etc did not join the coalition for the love of any ideology or the program. They joined the PPP band wagon, simply, to benefit financially and to safeguard their ethnic party interests.

Analysis of main coalition partner, that is, PPP merits a little greater detail. During the first tenure of PPP after General Zia ul Haq’s death, Asaf Ali Zardari (AAZ) dominated the tenure. Despite Benazir Bhutto’s feeble resistance, Zardari kept going at the rampage to collect kickbacks and commissions and quite appropriately earned the name of Mr ten percent the world over. Being devoid of any intellectual wealth and with a feudal background, he was obsessed with the idea that it was only material wealth behind greatness of men.

The musical chair between PMLN and PPP continued for a decade. The corruption index of both these parties remained consistently at par. After the assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December 2007, AAZ assumed the total control of the party. With the backdrop of the bruises that the PPP leadership sustained due to odd circumstances and exile, AAZ continued his corruption spree. The government functionaries, including the two prime ministers, were given a free hand to “make hay while the sun shines”. The obvious consequence was that the element of governance remained at the backburner.

PPP being a party of leftist orientations, though remained inefficient and financially corrupt, but relentlessly went for positive legislations that ultimately suited and secured the democratic process. The people of Pakistan are expected to go through a general election on May 11, with all its formalities being done up in a text book manner and for this achievement we are indebted to the constitutional legislations evolved by PPP’s coalition government. Future historian will stand beholden to the authors of these legislations that helped to shorten the route to democracy. Had these legislations not been in place, the people of Pakistan would have kept harping in a haphazard fashion like the past, indefinitely.

Now we are faced with a million dollar question as to what is going to be the voting pattern like, in the coming general elections. Before advancing a specific answer to this question, analysis of all possible considerations of the voter must be carefully done.

In a democratic dispensation the foremost consideration should be good governance. In our case this consideration does not come in to play because throughout the democratic eras in Pakistan the governance factor has been equally miserable during all the governments.

The other potent factor is the feudal and ethnic bonds with low literacy. This factor holds good in rural areas in the classic sense. In the urban areas this factor assumes different facets from place to place, depending upon the ethnic and sectarian bonds of the area.

In the coming elections the two mainstream political parties, PMLN and PPP, have already been tried many times over in the past. As there is much ado about change; Imran Khan’s PTI presents an additional new factor. But Imran Khan lacks depth of vision as a leader. He is confused and changes his goal posts every now and then. The worst stigma about his party is that he has collected all the renegades from other political parties, most of who are either from feudal class or from the class of already tried crooks. He is thoroughly confused about his friends. At one time he woos Jamat e Islami(JI) and at other time Sh Rashid which is a tantamount to betting on the losing horses. Imran Khan has gathered quite a few electable people and is also spending lot of money on electioneering and is therefore likely to bag a few seats. But to expect a sweep or tsunami will amount to only day dreaming.

To evaluate the performance of the old main parties, PMLN and PPP, one has to take a breath and ponder. PPP has roots in all the federating units of Pakistan, which PMLN lacks. During all the previous elections PPP had been on the wrong side of the establishment. It is not fresh news that the establishment rigged all the previous elections to the disadvantage of PPP. This time around, thanks to the legislations done during the last five years, the elections are likely to be relatively free fair and transparent.

With the background of its (awami) common man’s appeal, their track record of guarding the interests of minorities, women empowerment, institution of Benazir Income Support Program, with no political detainees during their rule and conciliatory policy, the party is likely to emerge as the single largest party in the national assembly followed by PMLN as the runners up. PTI gets the third place or MQM hardly matters.

http://www.thefrontierpost.com/category/40/

The caretaker governments are now operating freely at both federal and provincial level. Their priority, of course, is to ensure timely, free and fair elections but that does not mean that they remain aloof from the governance problems faced by the country.

In fact they should have set the standards for the democratic governments to follow. The way they are governing the country is not different from their predecessors. They may be neutral, but they certainly are not competent. They may be honest but they lack the will to stop malpractices. The country is bleeding as profusely as ever that has accelerated instead of declining in the past two weeks. The load shedding has reached its peak in the history of the country in the month of April. One wonders what would happen in the next three summer months. Will the interim government hand over to the next elected government a more inefficient power sector? Is there no room to reform it in two months time? Should the things be allowed to drift towards a destructive path?

The Supreme Court and not the Sindh government is trying to control the law and order and eliminate "no go" areas in Karachi. Does the neutral caretaker government lack the political will to take steps that everyone knows would restore the confidence of the masses? Does the extortion mafia still control the strings of the Sindh caretaker government? It would be tragic if the Supreme Court is forced to issue an order against the caretaker government that is similar to one that it announced against the Raisani government in Balochistan. The court acting on the orders of the superior court it should be taken to task by the caretakers in Sindh.

The federal caretaker government is not acting neutrally as it changed the most competent Chief Secretary of the Punjab and replaced him with another bureaucrat. However, it withdrew orders of the former Punjab Chief Secretary about his posting on the same post in Sindh. While the bureaucracy in all the provinces is being reshuffled on the request of the Election Commission there is no widespread change in the bureaucratic set up of Sindh.

Meanwhile the scrutiny of papers of the candidates is proving a hard nut for them. However the returning officers who are well versed with basic principles of Islam limit their question to the candidates on Islam only. The main question is that whether the candidate is honest and tax compliant. Having no experience in financial affairs the returning officers are adopting a lax attitude on loan defaults, loans reschedules, or has the candidate defaulted for a year or two before applying for rescheduling of a loan a few months before the election. The honesty and the character of a candidate is most important in containing the corruption in the government to come. Bankers and legal experts have pointed out flaws in the Central Bank's regulatory system that facilitate defaulters in dodging the system and delay in declaring them defaulters and facilitates them to contest the May 11 elections.

A senior banker said some defaulters in view of the forthcoming election have entered into re-scheduling arrangement with banks/financial institutions entailing write-offs / waivers that would be passed after the settlement period. (For example, a defaulter entered into a settlement with a bank for payment of the defaulted amount within next two years on installment basis. Resultantly the bank will convert the status from "Default" to "Re-scheduled" that means he/she is regular now. And ultimate financial relief will be passed on him/her after two years i.e. after the upcoming election).

He said some of the banks / financial institutes may not report to the SBP few write-offs/waivers for variety of reasons e.g. intentionally or unintentionally a delay in passing write-offs / waivers entry in the books of account where after the same will be reported to the SBP / eCIB. Moreover, he added, corporate eCIB Formats don't show individual particulars of directors that may mislead the Election Commission officials. He said another flaw in the system is that the write-offs / waivers availed during the year 2000 will not reflect in their eCIB. The eCIB record is only available for the last 10 years.

A corporate lawyer said candidates may not disclose their present or past stakes in 'Business Entities' that availed write-offs / waivers to the Election Commission officials. He said some of the defaulters have very smartly disengaged themselves from the Board of Directors of the defaulted companies prior to elections.

He said a number of the defaulters have taken refuge in the loopholes of the legal system to frustrate the recovery initiative of financial institutions. For example, 'Stay' granted to the defaulters on petty issues, long adjournments are given in the courts, some appeals are not being heard even after 2 or 3 years, as courts are over-burdened. Moreover he added judges well-versed in banking matters are limited in number, with frequent transfer of judges of banking courts during process of the recovery suits. He said beneficiaries of these flaws in banking laws are on both sides of the political divide.

Another legal expert said that legally the Sharif brothers are not defaulters. He said they owed the banks over Rs. 4 billion in 1999. He said they handed over their property allegedly of equivalent assets to the court and the banks who owed the money agreed to the arrangement. He said the courts were to auction that property and pay off the banks. "When the auction process was in progress one of the cousins of Sharifs filed an objection to the arrangement" he said, adding that the auction process got delayed. He said when decision on that objection was about to be announced some other relative of their family filed another objection.

He said that the litigations in this regard have dragged on till now. He said now the property handed over to the courts in 1999 is worth over Rs. 14 billion. He said if the property is auctioned today the banks would be entitled to the defaulted amount and maximum cost of the fund (this is the average profit the banks pay to their depositors which ranges from 3-4.5 per cent) "This would enable them to pocket an addition of Rs. 1-1.5 billion while the balance would have to be paid back to the original owners" he said adding that the delay in this instance might not have been intentional, but there is a flaw in the law that facilitates defaulters to delay the disposal of mortgaged properties. Meanwhile, there are cases of write offs pertaining to 2000 to 2008 of some well known political families. These names are documented as the commercial banks under Central Bank regulations are bound to give details about any loan write off in their annual reports. These details are given in annexure C of the annual reports of all banks in each of their annual reports. The cases of these write offs are pending in the Supreme Court of Pakistan. But the names include some renowned politicians including a former prime minister, former deputy prime minister, former speaker of the national assembly and many others.

http://www.weeklycuttingedge.com/

April 14, 2013
Khurshid Akhtar Khan


Democracy in Pakistan is like changing of socks. People keep choosing the same leaders. The leaders keep changing parties and positions for their own benefits, while the system remains unchanged. And so does the condition of the ordinary citizens.

The same horses are in the run again in the general elections to be held on May 11, 2013. Most have been in power before one or more number of times. Imran Khan has been a one-man band for years and the only one whom power has eluded during the last 16 years - though not for lack of trying.

His PTI appeared little more than a bunch of insignificant starry-eyed novices, a few absconders from the JI and other parties and another few of his affluent technocrat friends. The mammoth rally of November 2011 in Lahore changed everything.

Fortune has been smiling over him ever since. Numerous political heavyweights, intellectuals, celebrities, wealthy aspirants for political recognition and average people now stand in line to join his party. While the party’s membership swelled, its face also transformed from the party of the youth and fresh faces to the old tried hands hunting for the gold.
The PTI has become the wild card in the current elections. Having boycotted all elections since 2008, it has now entered the arena for the first time as a freshly invigorated party of substance. Its electability remains an unknown commodity. Predictions of the degree of its success are quite wild too.

Given normal circumstances, the pundits grant this party a token presence, perhaps, as a small block that will gain an edge of a certain bargaining power. No one is guessing the outcome if the promised tsunami does materialise and sweeps all that comes in its way (it can be 20 or 120 seats!).

This year promises to be a make or break for him, for sure. A further five years in the wilderness consequent upon an insignificant showing in 2013 may be too long to wait for the restless captain - with advanced age catching up.

On the other hand, the PML-N is oozing with confidence. It claims to possess better understanding of electoral politics. It has developed over the years an army of experienced workers linked with various bonds of loyalty like biradri, tried and tested organisational capability and inroads at the grassroots levels in their constituencies in the Punjab. Mian Nawaz Sharif has been quietly at work cobbling up alliances in the other three provinces to enable him to form a government at the centre - should he get a sizeable majority in the Punjab.

Meanwhile, Shahbaz Sharif had been busy setting record times in completing several development and infrastructural projects in the major cities of Punjab. To balance the youth factor beholden to the star value of Imran Khan, the untiring Chief Minister organised several events and schemes to attract the youth to PML-N during the last few years. In a comparative analysis of governance in the provinces, Punjab has been accredited by various surveys to being the better among the four. The PML-N as a political party is also shown to be leading in popularity polls and Nawaz Sharif as a national leader.

The PPP is disadvantaged by the incumbency factor that is further compounded by its poor record of governance. The economy has been allowed to slide to near bankruptcy by lack of attention and irresponsible expenditures. Electricity generation and distribution have been grossly mismanaged causing unbearable power shortages. A few political parties in power patronised armed groups and mafias resulting in a breakdown of law and order. These factors have a direct bearing on people’s daily lives and will overshadow the legislative reforms that Parliament introduced.

Many of the PPP stalwarts have jumped the ship they deem is sinking and have defected to other political parties. President Asif Zardari has relinquished his position of party Co-Chairman, ostensibly in compliance of the Lahore High Court ruling, and has so far abstained from running the party election campaign openly. Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, who inherited the Bhutto legacy, is underage to contest the elections and is wary of making grand public appearances due to security concerns. Consequently, the party presently stands headless.

The two former Prime Ministers entrusted to lead the electioneering are tainted and lack the charisma to enthuse people. Yet, the party has a large following of deep convictions among the lower strata that may not be visible, but has a habit of springing surprises. The electoral strength of the PPP may have weakened, but cannot be written off by any means.

The political party PML-Q, created by President Pervez Musharaf and nurtured as crutches for his decade-long rule, has disintegrated to a large extent. The remnants may be influential in their own right, but are a considerably less potent force in the reduced strength and may even disappear into oblivion. The regional parties like MQM, JUI and ANP that were components of the last government are striving hard to keep their previous vote bank intact. The extent of electability of the nationalist and other religious parties will be put to test in the elections. One only hopes they do well in the polls that is imperative for the regional cooperation and national solidarity.

All previous elections in our country have been manipulated one way or the other by the establishment that is the army and the bureaucracy - aided by the judiciary. This time, however, the roles are reversed. It is the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) fully supported by the judiciary that is calling the shots with the establishment quietly following the events. The outgoing government accomplished its last minute objectives (that their opponents term as pre-poll rigging) by doling out undeserved funds to their favourite constituents till the last moment of its rule. The caretaker governments installed in the centre and four provinces have all been nominated by them.

The caretakers have too much administrative work on their plates for which they had not done much homework. In the present scenario, it is unlikely that they will be able to influence the results in any way. If nothing untoward happens, the elections are expected to be the fairest in our history.

The cleansing process during the scrutiny of nomination papers of the candidates has almost fallen flat. The overzealous returning officers, who were neither issued clear and unambiguous directions, nor any uniform guidelines by the ECP, embarked on a disqualification spree. Most of the decisions taken by them amidst a great deal of confusion have already been reversed by higher tribunals. The credibility of the interim setup, particularly the ECP that commenced on a high moral ground, is thus already slipping. The clear indication is that the nation is desirous of change, but is not ready for it.

The writer is an engineer and an entrepreneur. Email: k.a.k786@hotmail.com

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...inions/columns

Election does not mean just stamping a piece of paper and thrusting it into the ballot box; election means far more. Since very after the creation of Pakistan, the politicians have been raising a great hue and cry that military dictators never let them do their work independently that is why they had never been able to deliver what was expected from them. But in the last five years the situation remained altogether different. The army remained all aloof from the political affairs and the political parties remained at liberty throughout the tenure. Some people say that the credit goes to the Army Chief General Kiyani while others are of the opinion that army as an institution was not in favour of repeating the experience of derailing the train of democracy ; though during all those five years, it happened so many times that 'democracy stricken' people gave SOS signal to the army. Now the ball is in the court of the people of Pakistan.

The 11th of May, 2013 would be a day when they would be free to paint their tomorrow with the colours of their own choice. Two things are very important in this regard; the first one is that on the Election Day, we must not limit ourselves to our homes; in the larger interest of the country, we will have to come out and go to the polling stations. Second important thing is the right choice of the candidate we vote for. If we cast our vote in favour of someone who had been involved in any kind of moral or financial corruption in the past, it means we are supporting, favouring and sheltering his corruption. The use of vote is a very sacred national responsibility and any careless approach and nonsense behaviour regarding this responsibility would result in a severe national loss.

For the promotion of democracy the fair, free and transparent election is compulsory in every democratic society and same is the case with Pakistan. But unfortunately in Pakistan, most of the people are not aware of the importance of vote. According to a survey, in spite of the facility of casting their votes through postal ballot system, most of the government servants who are deputed at the polling stations as presiding and polling officers on the Election Day, do not use their right of vote. Sixty percent of the people from the urban areas simply stay at home and enjoy the election process in the manner they enjoy a one-day cricket match. It is only the rural areas where the politicians succeed in dragging the voters out of their homes but these voters are never independent in use of their precious right of vote. They are always under the pressure of the feudal lords, their tribal heads and of the landowners whose lands they are cultivating. It is the responsibility of the media, the teachers and the religious scholars to educate them and make them understand the impact of their votes on the future of Pakistan. People must be conveyed the idea that vote is a national obligation and it should be cast sensibly only in favour of the political parties which surely and purely belong to Pakistan and aspire to work only in the interest of the country.

The people of Pakistan are lucky enough that under the guidance and command of Mr. Fakhruddin.G.Ibrahim, the Election Commission of Pakistan is making all possible efforts to hold fair, free and transparent elections. More fortunate is the fact that the Pakistan Army is providing resolute support for the completion of the electoral process. The provincial care-taker governments are also doing all their best possible to keep the electoral process above board. The impartiality of the Election Commission of Pakistan, the provincial care-taker governments and that of the Pakistan Army would pave the way to fair and transparent elections but all these efforts would go waste if the voters do not realize their responsibility.

It has also been in the media that some of the terrorist elements have threatened to disrupt the electoral process in Pakistan. According to a recent report published in various newspapers, a militant organization in North Waziristan Agency has distributed a hand-bill among the local people. This hand-bill has tried to convince them to reject the democratic process in FATA. The solitary aim of this propaganda seems to censure the process of elections in FATA and promote an atmosphere of mayhem and chaos. It seems that the leaders of the militant organizations are frightened of democratically elected people who would become a challenge and threat to their authority and supremacy. Moreover some of the foreign diplomats are also trying to influence this process of election by paying regular visits to the hi-ups of various political parties. Such foreign diplomats are constantly in contact with the political leaders who have authority of allocating party-tickets to different candidates. We as a nation must be aware of all such conspirators who are doing all their possible efforts to mar the election process and intend to create problems for us in the near future.

Democracy is the only solution to the problem of extremism and terrorism. We will have to join hands together to crush the forces which are eager to derail the process of democracy in Pakistan. The most important thing to be remembered is that our silence on the Election Day would not be less than a severe crime.

For the promotion of democracy the fair, free and transparent election is compulsory in every democratic society and same is the case with Pakistan. But unfortunately in Pakistan, most of the people are not aware of the importance of vote. According to a survey, in spite of the facility of casting their votes through postal ballot system, most of the government servants who are deputed at the polling stations as presiding and polling officers on the Election Day, do not use their right of vote. Sixty percent of the people from the urban areas simply stay at home and enjoy the election process in the manner they enjoy a one-day cricket match. It is only the rural areas where the politicians succeed in dragging the voters out of their homes but these voters are never independent in use of their precious right of vote. They are always under the pressure of the feudal lords, their tribal heads and of the landowners whose lands they are cultivating. It is the responsibility of the media, the teachers and the religious scholars to educate them and make them understand the impact of their votes on the future of Pakistan. People must be conveyed the idea that vote is a national obligation and it should be cast sensibly only in favour of the political parties which surely and purely belong to Pakistan and aspire to work only in the interest of the country. The people of Pakistan are lucky enough that under the guidance and command of Mr. Fakhruddin.G.Ibrahim, the Election Commission of Pakistan is making all possible efforts to hold fair, free and transparent elections. More fortunate is the fact that the Pakistan Army is providing resolute support for the completion of the electoral process. The provincial care-taker governments are also doing all their best possible to keep the electoral process above board. The impartiality of the Election Commission of Pakistan, the provincial care-taker governments and that of the Pakistan Army would pave the way to fair and transparent elections but all these efforts would go waste if the voters do not realize their responsibility. It has also been in the media that some of the terrorist elements have threatened to disrupt the electoral process in Pakistan. According to a recent report published in various newspapers, a militant organization in North Waziristan Agency has distributed a hand-bill among the local people.

http://www.thefrontierpost.com/category/40/

I.A. Rehman’s latest article published in Dawn on April 11, discusses the relative importance of individuals and systems in Pakistan, in the political context, and is appropriately titled ‘Individual vs the system.’

He claims, with some justification, that in Pakistan people relate the conditions prevailing in the country with the men on top, without giving due consideration to the fact that the ‘system’ may bear a lot of responsibility for the state of affairs, as also the class and institutional loyalty of the influential people around, with the result that the men on top may not have been in a position to alter the course on their own.

He gives a few examples to prove his case: like Ghulam Mohammad alone being blamed for subverting democracy while ignoring the anti-democratic alliance of civil and military bureaucracies. In a mild tone, somewhat condoning his acts which set a precedent for illegal and disastrous military takeovers, I.A. Rehman claims that as a representative of military, Ayub Khan had no choice but to hand over power to Gen. Yahya Khan, and that Yahya Khan does not bear sole responsibility for the separation of East Pakistan for which 24 years of poor governance had created the background. However, it the generals deserve to be condemned for illegal takeover of governments because the positions were not thrust on them, rather they grabbed these out of their lust for power, and in most cases, for the benefits these brought. We know Ayub Khan’s sons obtained early release from the army to pursue lucrative careers.

The writer is being a bit economical with facts relating to the separation of East Pakistan because while poor governance was common to both wings, the Bengalese were being mistreated in a big way, with their representation in the civilian administration, the military, as well as their share of national wealth and assets were kept dismally below what their population would justify. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s refusal to accept Sheikh Mujeeb-ur-Rahman’s mandate was also a contributing factor towards the final split.

He is quite right about the prevailing trend in Pakistan to look for saviours and it was this tendency, as well as the mess created by the civilian governments, that made people welcome various military dictators who always came with a promise to clean up the system, and did some good work initially but in the end, proved not much better than the civilian governments. Their worst crime was not to let the democratic systems take roots in Pakistan.

I.A. Rahman is right again when he says that ‘the idea of democracy was born out of the desire to protect the community against the excesses of its rulers, of which good men could be just as guilty as the bad ones,’ and that ‘the objective of the democratic movement everywhere has been the development of a system in which no single individual can become an absolute ruler and which possesses the instruments of keeping the custodians of power in check.’

The writer would seem to suggest that if given the choice of having good men on top or having a government with good systems and institutions, his preference would be for the latter because with good systems and institutions in place, the top man would be kept in check, enabling the government to function fairly efficiently. He therefore suggests that we should stop looking for and counting on saviours.

Personally, I do not like this classification of men as good and bad ones because this decision will get influenced by a persons own beliefs, even whims and fancies about what is virtuous and what is evil. I will put people in two categories i.e. those with integrity and capability, which qualities are essential to enable them to deliver, and others who lack these qualities.

I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that even for Pakistan, democracy is the best form of government but it has to be a functioning democracy, and not in name only, which is what we had whenever we got a so-called democratic dispensation. I also know that democracy needs time to grow and develop, but for that to happen, there has to be a move in the right direction, with each democratic setup being an improvement on the earlier one, but unfortunately in our case, we have found each government to be worse than its predecessor. So the self-cleansing process supposedly inherent in the democratic systems does not work at all in our case and has in fact become a self-dirtying process. The state of the country now as compared to what it was like five years back amply proves the point. The last few decades have been really devastating.

I remember, just after partition, we hardly had any industry in the part that now forms Pakistan as the region had previously been developed and maintained as a bread-basket for the un-divided India plus the recruiting ground for Her Majesty’s forces. However, the enterprising people then worked hard and established quite a few industries in the country. We had well-running railways plus Pakistan International Airlines which made people proud. As a matter of fact, this was PIA staff which established many of the Middle Eastern airlines but now PIA and railways are a disgrace. Instead of seeing new industrial units being established, we now hear of Pakistani industrial units re-locating to various countries, including Bangladesh and states in Africa. During the last five years, the national debt has doubled with nothing to show for it. So, the outlook is very depressing.

According to the writer ‘the objective of the democratic movement everywhere has been the development of a system in which no single individual can become an absolute ruler and which possesses the instruments of keeping the custodians of power in check.’ However, in our case, the story is the exact opposite. What we actually saw was the placement of weak, incapable person of dubious integrity as heads of national institutions so as to make these incapable of exercising any checks on important office holders, and to facilitate their corruption and personal enrichment. So, with the checks removed, the officials in important positions have in fact become dictators even though nominally holding democratic-sounding designations.
We do need sound systems and strong institutions to exercise proper checks and balance which are the basic ingredients of democracy, and we have also seen that these do not come about automatically through the operation of democracy but have to be introduced, developed and maintained by capable men and women of integrity. So, you see, in a case like ours, having capable men and women of integrity becomes a matter of survival because they are the ones who make or break systems and institutions. In a way, the writer admits this need when he says “The political discourse should therefore address the flaws in the system of governance rather than remain devoted to a fruitless search for angels.” Therefore, if we look for people with integrity, capability and an unblemished past, the exercise should not be dismissed as hero-worship or something: it is the need of the hour.

And a capable man of integrity at top can make one hell of a difference. He can improve even a rotten system and place it on sound foundations. We saw how Prime Minister Recep Teyyip Erdogan of Turkey turned around his country and also confined the military to its normal role, as against that of controlling the country. We also saw how President Mohammed Mursi of Egypt retired Field Marshal Mohamed Tantawi, the head of the country’s Supreme Military Council and Chief of Staff Sami Annan and also cancelled constitutional amendments giving the military wide powers, thus eliminating military control of the government.

So, you see, with the essential checks and balance being non-existent due to the absence of strong systems and institutions, we do need right people to run the country and to put it on the path to progress by building up sound systems and strong institutions.

Until we reach that stage, our need for men and women of exceptional capability and integrity will be much greater as compared to an established democracy where institutional checks and balances are in place and working, The type of characters we had in the past won’t do, especially in view of the grave problems and existential threats that the country is facing in all sectors. It is not hero-worshipped or something: it is just need of the times.


http://www.thefrontierpost.com/category/40/

Erasing Pakistan’s ideological foundations
By A. R. Jerral

Pakistan is a Muslim state created on the foundations of Islamic ideology. In the 1940s, the driving slogan behind the Pakistan Movement spelled out this direction unambiguously. The Objective Resolution, which is part of our constitution, clearly lays down the direction that this country ought to take. Yet, in the past 65 years, we have collectively failed to move in that direction. The nation has not been able to determine whether this is a wilful failure or intellectual lassitude that has not allowed us to take the projected path.

The Islamic political ideology and secularism are directly opposite systems; though Pakistan has never strictly adhered to it, yet it has kept its Islamic moorings intact. Our political system, nevertheless, is secular in essence, with some ideological dressings that gives us some satisfaction to claim that we are an Islamic State.
We have an Islamic Ideological Council (IIC) that is supposed to translate our laws and procedures in accordance with the country’s Islamic foundations, but it has not made much progress. In the vacuum that IIC has left, the forces of secularism are playing their part vigorously to transform Pakistan into a secular state.
The Islamic political and social ideology has emerged as the political enemy of the West since the fall of Communism. As Pakistan is the only state that emerged on the basis of the Islamic ideology it is the prime target of the secular forces; if Pakistan capitulates, it will become a prime example for the world that Islam as politico-social system is not tenable.
Our bureaucracy and academic intelligentsia is in the forefront of this effort. It is a generalised statement and can be objected to; but the recent attempt to remove the Islamic subjects from the schools’ syllabi strongly suggests that this could only have happened with the complete cooperation and assistance of the Education Department and those academics that are charged with the responsibility to frame the curriculum of schools and colleges.
The timings selected were critical; the interim setup was due that would be involved in the elections. The change was supposed to be implemented un-noticed; however, thanks to a vigilant journalist, who blew the whistle.
The West has branded Islam a radical and militant ideology; Islam has been accused of radical teachings inducing terroristic trends. The propaganda was intense enough to compel Pakistan to remove Quranic teachings from the school and college subjects.
I distinctly remember that Surah Tauba (Chapter 9) of the Holy Quran was removed from academic curriculum under the pressure exerted by these forces. In their perception, this chapter teaches violence; ironically, none of our religious scholars and the IIC objected to this removal.
The attempt this time was to remove all references to those national heroes, who led the path to independence. It seems that we are trying to gradually erase the names of those who got us the independence. Recently, there was a move to remove the name of Quaid-i-Azam from a university, now the name of Allama Iqbal is intended to be erased from the books. Erasing names and achievements of our national heroes from textbooks implies that we want the future generations to forget them and their ideals; perhaps, it will help to usher in secular ideas.
It is a subtle move. Indeed, the target is the young generation, who is impressionable and can be steered towards secular teachings by making changes in their course of study. These young people will provide the leadership of tomorrow in the country. With secular education, they will move away from the Islamic ideology, which impacts the politico-social and socio-economic collective activity.
Apparently, the secular forces want religion to be a personal and private matter, as is prevalent in the West. Gradually, this attitude results into a free society, where virtue and vice become indiscernible.
This time the target of subversion was selected with deep thought and our own people were selected to launch this onslaught. The secular forces have apt accomplices available here. Many of our academics are educated and trained in Western secular universities and most of them follow the same ideology.
The syllabi that they assemble have visible secular biases. A cursory look of Islamic subjects for class fifth to ten will amply demonstrate my contention. It appears that the Textbook Boards (TBBs) have no nationalistic guidelines.
The recent effort to subvert the ideological contents of the syllabi was not noticed by the authorities; however, the Chief Minister Punjab reacted on the report published in a newspaper. Besides, it is hurting to know that except one journalist no one, including our religious polity, raised any protest against this alteration of the syllabi; looks like the IIC is either ignorant or unconcerned. The Chief Minister did not know what his Education Ministry and TBB were doing.
Education has become a provincial subject, but this does not mean that there should be no check on the concerned authorities by the federal government.
Needless to say, education lays down the foundations on which a country’s survival depends. Those who make policies, determine the curriculum and conduct the education of the young generation should have proper guidance and supervision. The foundation of education must strengthen the ideological foundation so that national objectives can be achieved.
Our TBBs should be made to function under a proper education body; its officials must be properly guided about the evolution of the curriculum that reflects national aspirations; the syllabus developed should be vetted by a superior authority comprising people from different walks of life. This activity should not be left to secular academics alone.
This time Pakistan has warded off the attack, but efforts to subvert the basis of Pakistan’s creation will continue. There is need to develop a mechanism that will curb such attacks in future. The Chief Minister ordered an inquiry to fix the responsibility of this lapse; based on the findings of inquiry those who are responsible for playing with our national and Islamic moorings must be given exemplary punishment.

The writer is a retired brigadier.

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...al-foundations

__________________
"Nay! man is evidence against himself. Though he puts forth his excuses." Holy Qur'an (75:14-15)

Vaqar Ahmed


There is a general consensus in Pakistan that the country is heading in the wrong direction. The same perception exists outside Pakistan with the term “failed state” raising its ugly head more frequently in the international media. How does the country get out of the precarious situation it finds itself in today?

The solution offered by mainstream political parties and the civil society is that the continuation of the democratic process affords the best chance to the country. However, pose the same question to a man on the street and the answer could range from bringing back the army to lining up all the corrupt politicians and putting a bullet in them. Some other would maintain that the root of the all the trouble is economy, poor law and order and the scourge of terrorism.

Given that both military dictators and civilian rulers have betrayed the people of Pakistan time and again, it is surprising that there is not much talk of a mass uprising to destroy the prevalent power structure and replacing it with a system that is responsive to the needs of the populace. On the national level there is only one political party, the Awami Workers Party (AWP) that endorses bringing about a revolution in Pakistan. However, even this coalition of the fragments of the left-wing political groups has admitted that this is not the right time for revolutionary politics, and has thus, decided to participate in the election process by fielding a few candidates.

So, why is there no revolutionary movement in Pakistan?

The answers may be found in the history of anti-colonial movements in the subcontinent. There were only two major armed struggles in the undivided India against the British rule. First, the war of independence of 1857 that, some historians claim, was more of a mutiny than an organised and protracted struggle. After putting down the peril of the 1857 uprising, the British ruled in peace for nearly eight decades. This period of peace ended in 1942 when the Indian National Army led by Subhash Chander Bose, a communist intellectual, fought against the British rule with the support of the Axis powers. Another revolt took place in 1946 when the sailors of the Royal Indian Navy mutinied against their British officers.

Other anti colonial efforts like the “Quit India” movement were non-violent civil disobedience movements and not revolutionary struggles.

The Pakistan Movement itself was mainly a legal and constitutional battle. Mr. Jinnah was the ideal leader to spearhead this movement because of his expertise in constitutional law.

While these struggles did hasten the departure of the British from India, the primary reason was that in the aftermath of the Second World War, Britain was in no position to maintain its rule and had already accepted that quitting India was its best option.

Compared to the other movements of national liberation like Algeria, Nicaragua and Mozambique, the independence struggle in India was predominantly legal and constitutional with non-violent means used to put pressure on the coloniser. Also, there was little participation of the working class in the struggle. In contrast, the Algerian war of liberation that was fought from 1954 to 1962 was lead by FLN – a socialist organisation formed by the merger of smaller groups. While estimates vary, anywhere between a million and 1.5 million Algerians were killed in the eight years of the struggle. The population of Algeria was just 10 million in 1960 and it lost a staggering 10 per cent of its population in achieving independence.

Thus, when Pakistan was created it did not have any historical experience in revolutionary struggles. In Pakistan the only time there was a serious attempt at mobilising the working class to bring about a radical change was between 1968 and 1972 during the anti Ayub Khan movement led by the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP). A number of left groups that were influential in the working class became energised and played an important role in bringing PPP into power. This is where the left in Pakistan made a bad judgement and instead of continuing the struggle with the factory workers as vanguard, it stopped and pinned their hopes on PPP to bring about radical changes. It soon faced a rude awakening when PPP abandoned its socialist agenda, dismissed left-wing provincial governments in NWFP and Balochistan, arrested the left-leaning leaders and then slapped some with charges of treason. The left in Pakistan never recovered from this debacle.

Another malaise also crippled the left – its derivative nature resulted in uncritically following the dictates of direction taken by the two main communist centres of power – China and Russia. In 1971, when it should have condemned the military action in East Pakistan it supported the massacre simply because China (for its own strategic interests) was supporting the Pakistan army. Wars have historically provided the best opportunity for leftist revolutions. Russia is a case in point. The West Pakistani left missed an opportunity again and instead of gaining advantage from the weakness of the state alienated the left in East Pakistan.

Whatever juice remained in the left movement was squeezed out by the draconian policies of the military dictator General Zia-ul-Haq, and the demoralisation that followed the collapse of the Soviet Union. Currently, Pakistan’s left is the weakest it has been since 1947.

Today, the only struggle that can be remotely called revolutionary is the nationalist struggle of the Baloch. No national organisation of the left in the country has the ability to mobilise the downtrodden classes.

To prevent Pakistan’s headlong fall into an abyss, changes are needed at the grassroots level through a revolutionary movement. This is the responsibility of the left in Pakistan. The left must muster up its resources, organise itself, do a fresh analysis of what needs to be done and get ready to pick up the pieces again and rebuild a better country.



The author is an engineer turned part-time journalist who likes to hang out at unfashionable places like shrines, railway stations and bus stops.

http://dawn.com/2013/04/16/a-revolution-in-pakistan/