April 15, 2012
By:Aziz-ud-Din Ahmad

HRCP’s yearly reports keep the public informed on the state of the human rights in Pakistan. The conclusions are based on field research and are supported by facts, figures and visuals. The present report which was published a few weeks back records the progress made and goals missed during 2011. Studied along with the earlier reports covering the years 2008, 2009 and 2010 important conclusions can be made about the record of the elected government.

First, the successes achieved. The last four years were marked by greater freedom of assembly, expression, and movement. A new law on industrial relations freed the trade unions from some of the curbs imposed on industrial labour. The 18th Amendment passed in 2010 acknowledged three more rights to the citizens: right to education, information and to fair trial.

The same year the Commission of Enquiry on Missing Persons cited the intelligence agencies’ role in enforced disappearances. For the first time, the SC issued notices to the agencies’ heads. In 2011, with the ratification of a key child rights instrument, all core international treaties related to human rights stood endorsed by Islamabad. The progress recorded over the last four years strengthens the view that even the worst democracy is better than a military rule, be it direct or indirect.

There still remains, however, a formidable list of consistent failures. Both in the case of the international instruments and domestic legislation regarding crucial rights, no attempt was made to evolve an implementation mechanism. The 18th Amendment recognises free and compulsory education as a right of the children between age 5 to 16. What one sees happening on the ground is the opposite. In the fiscal year 2010-11, the government reduced the education development budget to Rs 9.2 billion compared to Rs 11.3 billion in 2009-10. On Friday UNICEF Pakistan Representative Dan Rohrmann told media that around 20 million children in Pakistan, including an estimated 7.3 million of primary school age, are not in school.

Involuntary disappearances continue to take place. Earlier those taken away were kept in illegal confinement, sometime for years. Now there are complaints of extrajudicial killings of those kidnapped by the agencies. Another consistent failure is Karachi where incidents of target killings have peaked year after year since 1988 and lawlessness took a toll of 1,715 victims in sudden flare ups of violence in 2011 alone.

Given that criminal mafias enjoy increasing political patronage, the report grimly states, “Weapons, and reliance on criminal elements has become such a feature of the political scene that only those having these tools would be able to contest the next elections in Karachi.” The Election Commission and the government should pay heed to the observation.

Despite considering itself an enlightened party, the PPP looked the other way in 2008 elections when women were not allowed to vote in certain constituencies through an understanding between the local elders and the political parties. The complaints have continued during the subsequent by-elections.

There is a persistent failure in ensuring people’s representation at the grass roots level. It is ironic that while local bodies elections are regularly held under military rulers, elected governments usually shun them.

Suppression and oppression of minorities and of all those whose beliefs differed from those of the extremists continues as before. Prominent among the incidents is the attack on the Christian community in Gojra in 2009, the Ahmadi killings in Lahore in 2010, the killing of Salmaan Taseer and Shahbaz Bhatti in 2011, and attacks on Shia religious processions and forced conversions of Christian girls throughout this period. Despite claims of providing protection to the minorities, the government has failed to stop the abduction of Hindus for ransom in Balochistan and Sindh.

The HRCP report raises vital questions that need to be debated. Foremost is the question about the expanding role of the Supreme Court and its possible impact on the judiciary’s relations with the executive and parliament. Hasn’t the SC put more on its plate than it can chew? Can the SC simultaneously function as an ombudsman’s office, an administrative court, an anti-corruption tribunal, as a supreme investigation agency, as the sole defender of not only the constitution but also of public morality besides doing its normal duties?

The report criticises a section of the media for promoting extremist agendas. The media suggested through insinuations that Taseer had committed blasphemy by criticising the blasphemy law and deserved to be dealt with as a blasphemer. The media also suffers from self-censorship as instead of reporting in an unbiased and responsible manner on major issues confronting Pakistan, the media often prefers to stay quiet. Has this not happened in the case of Balochistan and attacks on minorities?

The writer is a former academic and a political analyst.
-Pakistan Today

April 16, 2012
By Shahid Javed Burki

One answer to the question ‘how and why nations fail?’ comes from the authors of a powerful new book Why nations fail, that has become the talk of the development community. In it the authors — James Robinson, a political scientist teaching at Harvard University and Daron Acemoglu, an economist teaching at MIT — suggest that for a number of poor and struggling countries, the future looks grim. In most developing societies what they call “extractive institutions” dominate the landscape and prevent the emergence of “inclusive institutions” without which development cannot and will not occur. Should we apply this idea to today’s Pakistan?

Pakistan has been shaped by ideas. Some of these were developed by those within the society. Some were borrowed from abroad. The two-nation theory evolved from the thinking of Muhammad Iqbal and Muhammad Ali Jinnah. The idea behind it was simple but powerful. These two leaders of the Muslims in British India were convinced that their community will not get a fair deal from a political system that was dominated by the Hindus. They argued for the creation of a separate homeland for the Muslims in which they will they will be able to lead their lives according to their beliefs.

In the area of economics in which Pakistan had initially few thinkers of its own, there was a great deal of borrowing of ideas from the world outside. In the 1950s and the 1960s, economists believed that countries remained poor because they lacked capital. The solution was to augment their meager domestic savings by providing them cheap money. This led to the adoption of plans by the world’s rich nations to transfer 0.7 per cent of their total incomes to poor countries as aid every year. The rich also set up institutions such as the International Development Association, IDA, as an affiliate of the World Bank to provide concessional assistance to poor countries that lacked creditworthiness to tap the financial markets. This approach to development resulted in creating dependence of the poor on the rich.

Pakistan’s geography made it possible for those who dominated politics to trade it off with foreign flows of capital. In taking that route they made the country a slave of those who had the money to give. There were growth spurts in the 1960s under General Ayub Khan, in the 1980s under General Ziaul Haq and in the early 2000s under General Pervez Musharraf. The high rates of growth became possible since easy money became available from the United States in return for supporting the latter’s strategic interests in the area in which Pakistan occupied an important place. The fact that this always happened under military rule is easy to explain. Army rulers could turn Pakistan around without worrying about peoples’ reaction.

This dependence on cheap foreign capital for promoting development did not always work and inevitably resulted in academics asking an important question: Does aid matter? The answer was that most of the time aid-induced development benefitted the rich and the “extractive institutions” rather than the poor. This was certainly the case in Pakistan. In the 1980s and the 1990s, a consensus developed that countries remained poor because of poor economic policies. This emphasis on policies led to the development of a framework that came to be called the ‘Washington Consensus’. It encouraged the developing world to pull the state back from managing the economy and to open domestic markets to both domestic and foreign players. Once, again Pakistan was at the forefront of allowing this idea to shape thinking on development. It was the Musharraf government under the influence of a banker who had worked in a foreign institution all his life that jumped on the ‘Consensus’ bandwagon with predictable results — a high rate of economic growth, increase in income inequality, domination of a few over the institutions of governance.

The situation did not change with the change of regime when the military was replaced by an elected civilian administration. Under the watch of the people’s elected representatives the economy slumped, the incidence of poverty increased, consumption by the rich grew but that by the poor declined, foreign aid declined and pressure on foreign reserves increased. There were negative developments on the political and social fronts as well. Karachi exploded with ethnic violence, the incidence of urban crime increased, while the quality of governance deteriorated. The country appears to be heading for a disaster. With these developments, Pakistan is sometimes called the world’s most dangerous place; sometimes a fragile state; and sometimes it is seen as a failing state. Why did this happen as the country was moving towards the establishment of a democratic system of governance? There was the belief that a democratic system was better at inclusive economic development by which economists mean the pattern of economic growth that provides for the poor and the disadvantaged. Why was that not happening in Pakistan?

Enter Messrs Robinson and Acemoglu to provide an explanation that is relevant not only for Pakistan but for dozens of similarly placed countries. They argue that there is a strong correlation between politics and economics. Causality can run in both directions. In open and democratic systems most changes occur following elections but elections don’t necessarily produce the institutions that provide for inclusive economic development. In the cultures dominated by narrow elites elections strengthen their position. The result is that instead of producing “inclusive” institutions, they develop “extractive” institutions. The latter type of institutions extract from the economy as well as society, for the benefit of the elites. The poor and the less privileged are left out in the cold. This is precisely what has happened in Pakistan in recent years. The making of policy is dominated by those who are committed to serving their own interests, not caring for the society at large. Such an institutional structure can be self-perpetuating and will ultimately lead to social, political and economic chaos. This is how nations fail. We seem to be moving towards that situation.

The Express Tribune

April 18, 2012
Anwar Parveen,
Exclusive Article

Majority of us are worried on how to overcome our problems and make ourselves credible and strong. There are slogans and statements from the leadership and increase in sufferings for the common people. The law and order situation, price hike, economic downfall and facing the ups and downs in relationships with other countries. Above all the negative propaganda being launched is also affecting our mindsets in one way or other. Good governance is not an easy task. But we have to take a start to overcome the difficulties. First of all we have to fight our laziness to ‘wait and see’ and then act. Time is never reversed. Opportunities once lost may be gone forever. There is a need that we have an action oriented thinking on what and how to take certain steps to address various issues one by one. It also needs a national policy on all the basic issues, to be implemented and followed. If we take an example of education which is the basic right of every child, then proper reforms are needed. Education should be free for all, and free does not mean that it loses its value. That is again a problem with us if something is free it is taken for granted not as a blessing or opportunity. In other countries it is taken as a responsibility of the state to be utilized as a responsible citizen.

When it comes to good governance why examples are given of the Western countries? They also have problems but they have taken care of the basic needs of the people. Why they spend their weekly pay freely and are not bothered about the future, because they know that the state is going to look after them. Basic education is free for all. Children are provided free transport and all other facilities at state expense. There is no discrimination and everyone has equal opportunities. Teachers are well paid. They also fulfill their responsibility as a national duty and as a good human being. They wear simple clothes and come with their bags full of teaching material and plans for their classroom. They spend their time in teaching and avoid any distractions. After retirement they get pension and other senior citizen benefits. This is where the difference lies.

In the same way medical facilities need to be free. Each person of the state if treated equally and provided help when needed, would be more comfortable to think and work effectively on his job. Most of us waste our time in socializing, watching TV or discussing issues which have no outcome. The same time can be utilized properly if we look around us and understand the problems faced by people. Nowadays, people living in the same house do not know the sufferings of each other because they do not listen and understand the feelings or problems of others.

Access to media and its openness instead of solving problems is also creating or least aggravate these. Simply giving news and awareness is not enough. Utilizing that awareness in a positive way is also important. Mostly the issues are portrayed in a negative way which develops negative feelings and adds to their disappointment. There should be a positive angle to issues related to everyday life and social system e.g. there are programmes on how crimes are committed, dramatizing the incidents and presented in a way that everyone including raw minds watch it with interest. But the consequences and punishment to the culprit is not shown. That leaves a vacuum. So in our overall life system negativity needs to be overcome with a positive focus on issues which have a direct or indirect affect on our lives.

We also face a dilemma when there is some change in our life. Instead of accepting it, we reject or resist it. Sudden changes are difficult to cope with. But it is again the responsibility of the leaders, media and the society to mentally prepare the nation to accept these and understand specially if some changes are for the betterment of the community.

Why in our everyday life we sometimes come across a chaos like situation. Instead of attacking or solving the problem we target the people, destroy our own national assets, and then regret that why has it happened? There is a requirement of an organized system at all levels so that proper evaluation and monitoring takes place and everyone knows what is happening.

A strong society is the one where everyone knows what is happening around. The problem we are facing today is thinking in isolation and forming perceptions based on the half-cooked stories of the media or other people around us. A good communication system in the family, community and society provides strength to overcome problems.

All of us today want to see Pakistan as a strong, credible and a prosperous country in future. We wish to have a leading role in the region. Our wish list includes an ideal environment and people living with honour and dignity. If we realize our strengths and weaknesses, understand and utilize our potential to overcome these, we can fulfill our responsibilities. Dreams of today may become realities of tomorrow.

The writer is a regular contributor to pkarticleshub.com

April 19, 2012
I.A Rehman

THE enemy within has been nibbling away at Pakistan’s vitals with vastly increased ferociousness and there is little evidence to suggest that the monster is being tamed.

The latest wave of sectarian violence in Gilgit-Baltistan has been going on for more than six weeks. On the last day of February, 18 people belonging to the territory were brutally shot dead after being forced out of buses in the Kohistan district of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa.

After the victims’ identity had been established with the help of their national identity cards they were lined up and gunned down by a firing squad whose members were wearing military uniforms. The grisly operation had obviously been planned well in advance and bore the stamp of professionalism. The authorities made some noise but failed to nab the killers and eventually took refuge under the excuse that the culprits had crossed over the national frontier.

They were proved wrong on April 3 when the monster of intolerance raised its head in Chilas. Again a large band of armed militants stopped several buses on the Karakoram Highway and picked out members of the Shia community for slaughtering.
This time the authorities chose to display their armed might. The army was called in and a nine-day long curfew was imposed.
Whether this had any effect on the perpetrators of the sectarian strife is not known; what is known is the unbearable hardship caused to the curfew-bound population.

Referring to the “terrible condition of the people of Gilgit-Baltistan”, a student wrote on April 15: “…[T]he two million people of Gilgit-Baltistan are hostages in the name of security for the last 12 days. The transport system was closed down from the first day and that has caused shortage of food. There is no medicine left in hospitals. They blocked the cellular services and that cut the links among relatives. We don’t know what is happening to them.

“The government has failed to maintain law and order. Instead of taking serious action it only makes statements. The trouble is within a five-kilometre area of Gilgit. Four forces were operating in the area — the FC, Gilgit-Baltistan Scouts, Rangers and the police. Now they have called in the army. No improvement yet. We are a peace-loving people. We want peace at any cost. For that we are ready to support the government and all law-enforcing agencies. At the same time we are human beings. We need food for our survival. We need medicines. We need your support.”

The young student’s cry of anguish is without art or labour and must carry greater weight than the empty rhetoric of professional politicians.

Now peace is reported to be returning to the trouble spots in Gilgit-Baltistan. But for how long? There is no use pretending that successive eruptions of sectarian violence in that territory are of local origin or are caused by stray incidents. The people of Gilgit-Baltistan have been the target of discrimination and oppression because their majority subscribes to the Shia faith. For this reason, they were denied elementary legal and political rights for decades.

Now their strategic location has become a source of their misery. The new breed of militant hard-liners is apparently determined to subdue the local population by any means, including a forced change in the territory’s demography. Thus, the sooner the government stops treating the periodic bloodletting in Gilgit-Baltistan as a routine law-and-order matter the better it will be.

But Gilgit-Baltistan is not the only place where Pakistan’s worst enemy is seen in action. At the other end of the country, it is targeting the Hazara community of Quetta in what is looking more and more like a sectarian-motivated pogrom. Two dozen Hazara Shias were cut down within three days.

The victims have done everything possible to remind the government of its duty to protect them. They have curtailed their normal activities and have been disposing of their property at throwaway prices — this is perhaps one of the objectives of their tormentors. Here too the perpetrators of violence are believed to be the extremists from outside Balochistan who have set up regular militias with the purpose of challenging the existing order in Pakistan and the neighbouring countries.

This enemy can be seen elsewhere, too. In Karachi the, same hand is targeting Shia professionals. Recently, it displayed its handiwork in Chenab Nagar where it assumed the form of a few policemen. They tortured an innocent teacher to an extent that he could not survive. Torture to death in custody is quite common, but since the victim in this case was an Ahmedi citizen they lost all sense of human mercy.

Unfortunately, this enemy within has been allowed to grow stronger and stronger over the past many decades. The state tolerated him as an ally in its confrontation with the advocates of a democratic, egalitarian order. The military rulers nourished him and pampered him as a key figure in their strategy to conquer the land and the people of Pakistan over and over again. Now he is openly challenging the constitution and the laws of Pakistan and has established his monopoly as the sole interpreter of the official religion of the state.

At the moment, this enemy is targeting only the communities vulnerable because of their belief or the parties in power. But he will not spare the opposition parties either. The religio-political parties’ turn may come last of all but they too will fall under the axe. It is becoming increasingly clear that Pakistan can somehow scrape through the many crises it faces today but it will not be able to survive the drift towards a capitulation to the demons of religious intolerance.

The ubiquitous enemy we are talking about has certain advantages over the state gendarmes. He can easily melt away in any congregation. He is disarmingly modest, does not appear to be materially corrupt and the corruption of his mind is too subtle to be evident to ordinary citizens.

Also, unlike the mercenaries in state service, he believes in his mission and is keen to die for it. It will not be possible to defeat this enemy unless all parties and people of goodwill come together, sink their differences and establish all Pakistani citizens’ equal right to the freedom of belief. That is the only route of salvation and we do not have much time to cover it.
-Dawn

April 22, 2012
By Farhan Bokhari,

A tragic plane crash near Islamabad on Friday may have been caused by a range of factors from pilot error to weather conditions to technical fault. While it’s too early to explain exactly what brought down the Boeing 737 flown by Pakistan’s privately owned Bhoja Air which killed all 127 people on board, there is a much broader issue at stake. Pakistan has had previous terrible tragedies too, but people have found themselves eventually in the dark on what may have caused them.

In spite of a proliferation of privately owned TV channels along with fewer constraints on the flow of information via the internet, Pakistanis continue to suffer from a dearth of information on some key events.

While the country’s rulers ad nauseam remind the people of the arrival of a free democracy, they have failed to set in motion the framework in support of values central to the best traditions of political freedom. Being forthcoming on a tragedy such as the one that took place on Friday must be a litmus test for the extent to which Pakistan has indeed become a truly democratic state.

The Bhoja Air crash indeed marks the second time that the Pakistani capital has witnessed such a terrible tragedy in recent times. Less than two years ago, an ill-fated aircraft flown by the privately owned Air Blue crashed into the Margalla Hills overlooking Pakistan’s capital. A report indeed was prepared following that tragedy, though its findings remain far removed from the public eye. What caused that tragic disaster remains the subject of speculation ranging from poor visibility to the error of the pilot who may have been up the previous night.

For Pakistanis to become exactly aware of what lies behind tragedies that have caused a large scale loss of life, change for the better has to be led by the ruling structure. Other than issuing statements offering condolences, the country’s top leaders appear to have little interest in leading progressive change for the better.

Disaster management

Just as in times after previous large-scale tragedies such as the Air Blue disaster, there will likely be little effort by the parliament, for instance, to oversee a comprehensive investigation in the Bhoja Air affair. Suggestions that the airline may have been allowed to operate without meeting adequate safety standards must be thoroughly investigated. It is also vital that the findings must then be widely disseminated through the Pakistani media to ensure that the Pakistani public gets a full insight into exactly what may have caused the crash.

The lessons learnt from the tragedy then need to be applied to improve safety standards in ways that will improve the overall environment across Pakistan. In the aftermath of Friday’s tragedy, some across Pakistan called in to question the role of an agency like the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA). Based in Islamabad, the authority is a federal body which is responsible for reacting quickly to tragic events.

Yet its absence from the aftermath of Friday’s scene says much about the body itself. More importantly, it said a lot about the way Pakistan has come to be ruled by a deeply and increasingly controversial political class. Left to continue along their chosen path, the likes of President Asif Ali Zardari, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and the coterie of politicians they lead will just choose to remain surrounded by complacency. In advancing towards likely parliamentary elections within a year, key members of Pakistan’s political class may well be even more obsessed with their political future rather than the welfare of the country’s population.

Caught in the midst of a hopeless situation, Pakistanis are right to resign themselves to more of the same under the country’s present ruling class. They must clamour hard to press for a regime change which simply doesn’t throw up new faces but indeed presents an improved quality of government. Ultimately, those who rule Pakistan will simply choose to quit the country if need be. But for Pakistan’s mainstream population, abandoning their country is just not a feasible choice.

Farhan Bokhari is a Pakistan-based commentator who writes on political and economic matters.
Source:Kahleej Times

Editorial By Najam Sethi



The adage that you can't judge a book by its cover is apparently not true in the case of Pakistan. Consider the following top ten recently published books on Pakistan: (1) Pakistan: Beyond the crisis state; (2) Playing with fire: Pakistan at war with itself. (3) The unraveling: Pakistan in the age of jihad; (4) Pakistan on the brink; (5) Pakistan: Eye of the storm; (6) Deadly Embrace: Pakistan, America and the future of global jihad; (7) Fatal Fault Lines: Pakistan, Islam and the West; (8) Pakistan: the most dangerous place in the world; (9) Pakistan Cauldron: conspiracy, assassination and instability; (9) Pakistan: The scorpion's tail; (10) Pakistan: terrorism ground zero. To top it all, The Future of Pakistan, which is a collection of essays by noted Pakistan-hands, makes bold to provoke the debate of "Whither" vs "Whether" Pakistan.

Pakistan is wracked by ten major crises. (1) Crisis of Economy - this is characterized by stagflation, dependency, resource scarcity and mass impoverishment. (2) Crisis of Education - this is characterized by the Madrassah challenge, jihad indoctrination, English-Urdu apartheid. (3) Crisis of Urbanisation - this is characterized by slum development, criminalization, ethnic warfare. (4) Crisis of Demography - this is characterized by a youth bulge, religious conservatism and class volatility. (5) Crisis of Foreign Policy - this is characterized by conflict, isolation and estrangement. (6) Crisis of terrorism and radicalization - this is characterized by Islamic extremism, violent sectarianism and ethnic separatism. (7) Crisis of Civil-Military Relations - this is characterized by military domination and civilian incapacity. (8) Crisis of Political System and Governance - this is characterized by corruption, incompetence and autocracy. (9) Crisis of Law and Order - this is characterized by state-organ failure and constitutional gridlock. (10) Crisis of Identity - this is characterized by tension between notions of Nation-State vs Pan-Islamism, being primarily Pakistani vs Muslim, and having South Asian vs Middle-Eastern roots.

The critical questions that need to be asked as factors shaping the future of Pakistan may therefore be noted. Will the National Security State based on an India-centricity that is defined, articulated and practiced by the prevalent military power continue to dominate the narrative of Pakistan as it has done for six decades with disastrous consequences? Will the blowback of civil war and foreign intervention in Afghanistan come to hurt and haunt Pakistan as a consequence of its regional policies and alliances? Will the Pakistan army's evolution as a home-spun, religio-political, anti-American entity hurt the national interest? Will the economy's stagnation and foreign-dependency deny the imperative of popular upward mobility and relatively equitable distribution of resources and incomes? Will India's gain and Pakistan's loss of American support in the future exacerbate the internal and external pains of Pakistan? Will Pakistan's internal political dynamics lead to gridlock, instability, anarchy and progressive state breakdown?

In this context, various future scenarios can be debated and discussed. Will Pakistan begin to look like Somalia where the state has collapsed and armed, ideological, ethnic, separatist, tribal and sectarian non-state actors have seized local power? Will Pakistan be Balkanized like Yugoslavia into warring states wracked by civil war and foreign intervention? Will Pakistan be ripe for the plucking by Islamic revolutionaries? Will Pakistan slide into a fourth military take-over? Will Pakistan grope towards some sort of liberal and constitutional democracy in which all organs of the state and civil society play their defined roles with relative stability and equilibrium? Or will Pakistan continue to "muddle along" for the next three decades as it has done for the last six decades and learn to cope with its problems without keeling over into state-collapse or war?

Most thinkers are inclined to bet on the 'muddling through" forecast only because they cannot build a "black swan" event of cataclysmic proportions and dire consequences into their equations. This could be a war with India precipitated by suicidal non-state actors in which nuclear weapons are eventually used. Or it could be global isolation coupled with economic sanctions as a consequence of Pakistan's isolationist and honour-bound domestic and foreign policies. Or it could be another attack on US soil by non-state actors whose footprints lead to Pakistan's urban or tribal areas. Any of these could exacerbate any of Pakistan's core crises and lead to scenarios of state collapse, or anarchy, or implosion, or Balkanisation or a military coup by Islamist officers.

If the long-term prognosis is unclear, the short term forecast, unfortunately, is not. US-Pak relations are not going to improve significantly. The economy will remain in the doldrums, foreign investment will be shy, and energy will be scarce. Governance will continue to be poor. The military will dominate foreign policy. If elections are held, coalition politics will come to prevail, with emphasis on regionalism, ethnicity and religious conservatism. In other words, there will be no paradigm change. The greater tragedy is that the next crop of political and military leaders is no better than the current one.

-FridayTimes

Nasim Ahmed


There seems to be no end to bad news - and more bad news. We had not got over the tragedy and agony of the Siachen avalanche that buried more than a hundred of our brave soldiers in a snowy grave when another bolt from the blue hit the nation in the shape of the Bhoja airline crash near Islamabad.And all the while killers have been busy both in Karachi and Quetta shooting innocent citizens on a daily basis without any check by the state.

Nobody seems to be in charge anywhere. The rant and bombast of Rahman Malik notwithstanding, the administrative machinery - from the level of the local SHO up to the minister and prime minister - seems to have broken down completely. There is no stopping the marauding murderous gangs who have a free run of the country from Khyber to Karachi to Quetta. The citizens of Karachi are being killed like flies, everyday, but nobody seems bothered. Chief Minister Qaim Ali Shah and Governor Sindh Dr. Ishrart-ul-Ebad, while wasting time distributing largesse and patronizing their political favourites, for over a week Lyari remained a scene of pitched battles between police and the criminal gangs holed up in their dens under the shadow of the so-called Aman Committees. In one day alone, 15 people were killed and the week's toll was over 50. Can a state in control allow such indiscriminate killing of innocent citizens by gangsters ruling their little fiefdoms under the patronage of members of the ruling clique?

On the other side, Hazaras are being continually targeted but the Balochistan government is unable to do anything about it. In Balochistan, unexplained killings, disappearances and kidnappings have become the order of the day. Baloch young men who have suffered brutalities at the hands of law enforcement agencies, in turn take it out on the Punjabi settlers. In the process a large number of teachers, doctors and peaceful professionals and businessmen have fallen victim to blind revenge killings.

The same administrative meltdown is visible in other parts of the country as well. In Gilgit-Baltistan, Shias are the helpless, hapless victims of target killers whom the local administration is unable to rein in. The spreading anarchy and chaos was best illustrated by the attack on the Bannu jail from where about 4,000 prisoners were sprung free without much resistance by the security staff. How could than 300 militants riding in about 50 vehicles and armed with lethal weapons pass through more than six security check-posts on the way undetected? Nor were the law-breakers intercepted on their way back, although the operation lasted for many hours and urgent calls for help must have gone out to security forces in the surrounding areas.

And there is no accountability at any level. No one seems to be answerable for what is happening in the country. The government has locked itself in an all-consuming institutional confrontation with the judiciary, challenging the latter's authority to establish the rule of law in the country and, ironically, describing its efforts to end corruption as a challenge to its democratic mandate. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The rule of law and the constitution can only put democracy on sounder footings, not weaken it.
But the PPP government thinks otherwise. It has gone out of its way to protect and promote the corrupt and the incompetent. There is a string of corruption cases before the courts involving the highest in the land. In any other country, government ministers tainted by allegations of corruption would resign to facilitate the course of justice. But here no efforts are spared to shield the corrupt from the prying eyes of the law and justice. Instead of distancing itself from the corrupt, the government, in fact, promotes them to higher positions in brazen defiance of the court orders. The elevation of Babar Awan, Khosa, Raja Pervez Ashraf and many others illustrates the point.

The Bhoja airline crash is symptomatic. The responsibility of the Civil Aviation Authority is yet to be established. But we know what fate the Karachi Steel, PIA, the Railways and many other state enterprises have met at the hands of political appointees. There is a general deterioration in all spheres of society and government, and no rescue efforts are under way.

The system is breaking down for the simple reason that for years the rulers have preferred political favouritism over the requirements of merit. The deserving and the talented are sidelined and political cronies and sycophants are rewarded and put in their place. Honest and competent officers who try to do their duty by the book are punished and transferred. The process which started years ago has reached its zenith under the present political dispensation.

Any hope for a change for the better must wait until the next elections. But merely replacing one party by another for a five-year stint in power will not change much unless we rise above party politics and learn to respect merit and the rule of law and constitution. This is the real challenge that we face today.

-CuttingEdge

April 30, 2012
By Khalid Munir

Soon after conquering Waziristan in 19th century, the British realised that instead of being rulers, they were the prisoners. Movement was with heavy escorts and had to be guarded by piqueting the route. Over a century later, it seems that nothing has changed. At least, that is the impression I got during my short stay at North Waziristan.
Questions about the inaction of the army are answered only by visiting the area. The terrain is mountainous and it is impossible to resort to the same tactics as those used in Kashmir because peaks are not mutually defended. As a result, wide gaps are left open between various posts making it impossible to stop movement across the border.
No one controls North Waziristan. The army has not exerted its power to take complete control of the agency due to justifiable reasons. The Taliban are divided between various groups and even their authority is eroding; locals ignored the warning given through pamphlets by Hafiz Gul Bahadur asking them not to work on the road being built by the Frontier Works Organisation.
Unless militants attack the troops, camps or check posts, no action is taken by the army. Movement from one place to another occurs in heavily armed convoys and that also only once a week for administrative requirements. Curfew has to be imposed from Bannu to Miranshah, Mirali, Razmak and Datta Khel during movements. Although piquets are in place to guard the convoys, five improvised explosive devices exploded during my travel to Miranshah causing casualties. Thus, movement has become a logistical and tactical exercise.

Uzbeks, Tajiks and Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) members have settled down in the Dawar areas mostly around Mirali. Miranshah has become an international city where nationals from all countries can be found. Due to fear of Taliban reprisal, intellectual gatherings are mostly restricted to electronic eavesdropping.

Maintaining peace has been left to the peace committee which moderates between the Taliban and the political administration. The army only reacts if it is attacked and that, too, only after political administration and the local Jirga agree on punitive action. Collective punishment is still resorted but on a much smaller scale.

Political administration has lost the control it once exercised in Fata. Unlike Islamabad and Lahore, locals are not against drone attacks due to their accuracy in hitting militant targets. It seems that the army and government have also reconciled with drone attacks and if other problems are solved with Nato, drone attacks will not remain an issue irrespective of what the All Parties Conference or parliament say.
With the return of internally displaced persons, incidents of militant attacks in South Waziristan have increased. In neighbouring agencies such as Kurram, Orakzai, and Tirah in Khyber, the situation is still not under control. Additional troops will have to be inducted by bringing in fresh troops from other parts of the country. However, most troops are deployed for internal security making them unavailable for border duty. Crossing points have to logically be near main routes but nothing stops the Taliban from crossing over from unconventional routes. Measures such as colouring fertilisers, which are now being following, will not be of much help.

With calls from Nato and the USA for action against the Haqqani network and keeping our own interest in mind, we will have to resort to a military operation. But for the time being, this is impossible to do.

The Express Tribune

April 30, 2012
By Shahid Javed Burki

Pakistan is attracting a great deal of academic and analytical interest. That is not surprising. Some have called it the most dangerous place on earth. The titles of a number of recent books on Pakistan throw light on the various aspects of a state and society in deep trouble. Anatole Lieven, in Pakistan: a hard country (2011), looks at the social and political structures of a country that, even six-and-a-half decades after achieving independence, is still engaged in the process of creating one nation out of many different people. The ‘hard’ in the book’s title has several meanings. To begin with, the country is not easy to understand. It is full of contradictions: modernisation versus extreme conservatism; asceticism versus love for the good things of life; a tradition of philanthropy versus little regard for the sufferings of the less advantaged; isolationism versus a deep desire to work with the world, in particular the West.

The ‘hard’ also refers to the fact that though torn by numerous conflicts that divide its people, the country keeps muddling through. It is a hard country to put down. What gives it resilience is the set of local loyalties that bind the citizens to the members of the political establishment that, in turn, meet the people’s basic needs and aspirations.

Maleeha Lodhi’s Pakistan beyond the crisis state (2011) is a rare book in the sense that its contributing authors are positive about the country’s future. They believe that the contemporary security challenges and long-term demographic pressures and energy shortages can be overcome if the country’s political establishment can muster the political will to undergo wide-ranging institutional and structural economic reforms. The authors look at what might emerge in the country once the difficulties it faces are overcome. At the end of a long tunnel through which the country is now passing, they see it emerging not very different from a number of other Asian states that have already produced high rates of sustainable GDP growth. They argue that Pakistan is capable of transitioning itself into a stable modern Islamic state, though bold reforms are necessary. The country can be reeled back from the brink of crisis.

According to Ahmed Rashid, the country is already on the brink. His latest book, Pakistan on the brink: the future of Pakistan, Afghanistan and the West (2012), adopts a tone even more somber than his earlier ones. His reading of the Pakistani situation is different from that of Lieven and those of the contributors to Lodhi’s volume. The former sees some resilience in the structure of the Pakistani society, while the latter believe that actions by the ruling establishment can not only save the situation from further deterioration, they can also move the country toward a better future. Rashid, however, is considerably less optimistic. He lays the blame equally on those who have ruled in the past and those who are ruling right now. “They take no responsibility for providing services to the public, while indulging in large-scale corruption. They allow an unprecedented economic meltdown to become worse by declining to carry out reforms or listening to international advice.”

Some of the analytical interest in Pakistan looks at the impact it is likely to have on the world if the crises it faces are not managed. According to Zahid Hussain’s The scorpion’s tail: the relentless rise of Islamic militancy and how it threatens America (2010), Pakistan carries a lot of poison stored in its body. Provoked, it will sting. Having delivered the poison it carries it may die, as scorpions are said to do once they have attacked, but its sting could prove to be fatal for its victim. Stephen Cohen’s The Future of Pakistan (2011), (which he has edited) does not believe, at least according to the volume’s editor, that the country has much of a future. But, in line with Zahid Hussain, the editor of this rather depressing volume suggests that this highly troubled South Asian nation will go a long way toward determining what the world looks ten years from now. They advise the world to watch Pakistan closely and prepare for the worst.

To this list of recently publishedbooks we should add the World Bank’s World Development Report, 2010 which comes with the subtitle, Conflict, Security and Development . While not entirely focused on the situation in Pakistan, It sees the country belonging to the category of what it calls “fragile states”. The Bank’s report has one powerful message: that there is enough evidence from around the globe to suggest that the fragility of the states it examines need not result in their failure. They can recover but will need to be kept on life support for years to come.

There is one thing common to all these analyses. They focus on many crises Pakistan currently faces. It is a perfect storm through which the country will have to navigate. Whether it can go through without capsizing will depend on how the Pakistani establishment is able to steer the state towards the safety of a shore. What will help those in command is to develop a better appreciation of the nature of the many crises they must deal with. They should also have some idea about the way the country dealt with crises in the past.

The Express Tribune

May 3, 2012
By D Asghar

It is almost laughable to hear many self-made ‘pundits’ and so-called ‘senior analysts’ opine on the recent conviction of the prime minister. Some are giving their statements on the supremacy of the law, and others are giving the nation lessons about standards of morality. What a bunch of very comical people. The above-listed reasons should adequately demonstrate why I abstain from the otherwise idiot of a box. Yes, even I made an exception, and succumbed to some of these great shows of ‘national significance’.

The news was being closely monitored and anticipated by the entire country. A short order by the apex court created such a long list of experts on everything. Oh my God! The only sane voices that I perhaps heard were from Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan and Ms Asma Jahangir. First, let us revisit 2009, when the National Reconciliation Order (NRO) was declared unconstitutional. If my memory serves me right, there were 800 plus beneficiaries of that infamous ordinance. The nation has been beaming in on one particular individual ever since, and about the rest no one knows or perhaps cares about. Why, what is their status?

Speaking of that one particular individual, the elected president of Pakistan, while in office he enjoys absolute immunity from any prosecution; hence, he is still the president. If this were not the case, he would have vacated the office back in 2009. One has to then ask a simple question, why waste useful time and positive energy on any argument when all and sundry had agreed on this issue in 2009. Ah, here comes the kicker. The president may not have the ‘absolute immunity’ in any cases against him outside Pakistan. This refers to an alleged Swiss account and perhaps the alleged sum that the president has supposedly stashed in that account.

If a leading newspaper of Pakistan is to be given any credence, the Swiss prosecutors closed the inquiry against the president of Pakistan in April 2008. The prime minister was asked by the Supreme Court to revive the inquiry against the president by writing to the Swiss prosecutors. The prime minister, according to his interpretation of the Constitution, refrained as he felt the presidential immunity trumped any such request.

So let us put this scenario in an objective line of thinking and see if this is really the crime, and about which the entire brouhaha is continuing. If the sitting president is immune to prosecution within Pakistan, then how can a request to a foreign nation to probe against him become constitutional? Very respectfully, in a society of laws, citizens — whether a commoner or a prime minister — have the right to question the constitutionality of the law. If the prime minister questioned the constitutionality of the law, by not initiating the probe overseas, he was found in contempt.

Barrister Ahsan’s plea has to be given some serious consideration. Ahsan’s argument is in essence a disagreement with the august court because it found the prime minister guilty on certain charges that were not part of his original indictment of February 2012. Secondly, he is absolutely on the mark when he argues that it is unprecedented to try or intend to try a sitting head of state in a domestic or foreign court. Ms Jahangir, a legal icon in her own right, has clearly stated that the honourable bench is in essence on trial here as well. The bench has to demonstrate its absolute impartiality and render decisions according to the Constitution of Pakistan.

The so-called pundits and analysts are hell bent on making this simple legal question of ‘rights and responsibilities’ into a so-called crisis of epic proportions. The ‘Armageddon’ of the law and the lawless. It is a shame that we have nightly opinion-makers who tend to give an absolutely unfair and biased take on this whole scenario. In any democratic system, all stakeholders tend to constantly struggle for their positions within the framework of the law. This is the beauty of a fair, unprejudiced and unbiased system.

Any convict has the right to an appeal and the prime minister is no exception. The loudmouth anchors and their panelists, who are giving the nation endless lectures on morality and moral grounds, ought to look at themselves very closely. The short order does not compel the prime minister to resign on any grounds — moral or legal. The process pertaining to his removal is explicitly defined within the constitution. To the political opportunists, one has to simply make a humble request. The elections are a few months down the road. Rather than wasting all their zeal and zest in manufacturing a so-called crisis, they should redirect their energies to their constituents. The nation needs a steady system of transfer of power, based on the will of the masses. The real judge of this government or any future ones is the 180 million people. Let them render their absolute and undeniable verdict.

The writer is a Pakistani-American mortgage banker. He blogs at http://dasghar.blogspot.com and can be reached at dasghar@aol.com He tweets at http://twitter.com/dasghar
-Daily Times