A Safe Haven for Lawlessness By Mushtaq Rajpar: New Age Islam's Selection, 01 February 2018
New Age Islam Edit Bureau
01 February 2018
• A Safe Haven for Lawlessness
By Mushtaq Rajpar
• Afghanistan Imbroglio
By Reema Shaukat
• Are We Encircled?
By Tariq Khalil
• Vanishing Road to an Israeli-Palestinian Deal
By David Ignatius
• Afghanistan: Perilous Accusation
By Dr Zafar Nawaz Jaspal
• The Web of Disinformation
By I.A. Rehman
• The Gandhi In Our Midst
By Vazira Fazila-Yacoobali Zamindar
• Can Pakistan Make History?
By Ahsan Iqbal
Compiled By New Age Islam Edit Bureau
-----
A Safe Haven for Lawlessness
By Mushtaq Rajpar
February 1, 2018
The Sindh Information Department recently issued an invite to the media to cover a press conference of a member of the Sindh Assembly who, along with his younger brother, has been accused of killing a union council chairman, his son and a district councillor in Dadu.
Through this move, the PPP-led provincial government proved that it cannot adopt a neutral stance in a conflict in one of its main constituencies in Sindh. It seems to have decided to stand by the accused instead of throwing its weight behind the victim – who also belongs to the PPP. The Sindh government’s posture has sent the wrong message .
In the aftermath such incidents, why do people have to take to the streets and demand justice? What have the state and its institutions done to address their concerns? Why has Sindh become such a lawless society where the elected representatives of the ruling party get killed and little or no action is taken against their murderers?
We are dealing with two problems in the province that complements each other. The first problem emanates from the outdated tribal Sardari system in Sindh. The second issue involves the governance system of an elected government that serves the interests of powerful Sardars and their party men. This arrangement makes the system of governance akin to a union of Pirs, Syeds, Sardars, Nawabs And Mirs.
The adversity faced by the powerless segments of society is the outcome of a system that promotes tribalism and is heavily influenced by sardars and nawabs. This system is a legacy of the British Empire, adopted and maintained in the post-colonial state of Pakistan. All of us know that the British created a loyal political class and showered titles and means of production, mainly agricultural land, on them. This political class shared power with the British over their subjects. This socioeconomic structure continues to haunt our consciousness and breeds a economic, political and social divide in many parts of Sindh.
Pakistan’s mainstream political parties have served as safe havens for this class and put a democratic stamp on their hold over politics and society. Successive military governments have also used them to gain political legitimacy. Such elements always needed these elite groups – in some cases even the neo-feudals – to serve as the base for their power. This is not just a trend within the PPP. Even the PML-N, the PML-Q and the PML-F have provided protection to this political class. As a result, powerful Sardars continue to eliminate their opponents within their tribes and political constituencies.
Sindh needs a new and organised political force to achieve a just and peaceful society. Civil society activists and representatives from various political parties should be lauded for protesting in Mehar against the triple murder in Dadu. Only the desire for political expediency can explain the inaction of the Sindh government and the police in arresting the culprits.
People have repeatedly expressed their anger and frustration over growing spate of lawlessness in Sindh. In January alone, many incidents of citizens being murdered have been reported across the province. Recently, two traders were gunned down in Mithi, a city with a strong PPP support base.
At this stage, people have joined hands to protest against these killings because they fear that their individual efforts will not put an end to the injustice inflicted upon them by the powerful classes.
The murder of five more people has once again raised questions over the Sindh police department’s actions as they fail to act and arrest the killers. A few years back, the Sindh police were credited for eliminating kidnappings from the province.
However, the recent spell of violence in the province has dented its credibility. With a raise of Rs8 billion, the Sindh government allocated Rs92 billion for law and order in its provincial budget – the second largest share in the budget after education. Although Sindh has a police force with 109,117 officers and a 24,247-strong force of the Rangers, peace and justice seem to be distant dreams for its people.
People have asked why we need district administrative structures if they remain unmoved by attacks on innocent citizens. They have also asked why deputy commissioners and SSPs, who are steeped in the hierarchies of a colonial mindset, are of little benefit to the people. They want to know what their job is other than to avail protocols and luxuries. It seems that no one has taught these officials how to serve the people.
Sindh’s society has been plagued by the tyranny of the feudal class, which has gone unchallenged for decades. The conscientious citizens of Sindh are realising that the power of these groups springs from the silence, inaction and disunity of the powerless. This is what creates tyrants. Politics, which should liberate society and people, is at their service. It has become a vanguard to their interests. Those civil society activists who took to the streets in Mehar last week wanted to break the silence against this oppression and demand justice.
The tribal chieftains who were created by the British Empire and sustained by the post-colonial state, continue to play havoc with the lives of innocent citizens. While the British Raj may have ended, the rule of this political class has not. Through its inaction over the recent killings in the province, the PPP appears to be asking for a revolt in Sindh.
Source: thenews.com.pk/print/275436-a-safe-haven-for-lawlessness
----
Afghanistan Imbroglio
By Reema Shaukat
February 01, 2018
THE year 2018 started with the bloodshed in the waning Afghanistan. The first month of the year has brought huge catastrophe to the country through different blasts. It is very painful to see the neighbouring country in such a turmoil where loss of innocent souls is because of wrong policies of international players and domestic precariousness. Within a short span of time different attacks occurred in the country creating much disturbance among masses and highlighting the failure of security apparatus. In one of first suicide attack which jolted Kabul caused death of 13 people and IS claimed the responsibility for the attack. Few days later, Taliban stormed the Intercontinental Hotel in a planned militant’s assault. The gunmen kept the staff hostage for more than 12 hours and fight continued with the target killing of foreigners in the hotel. Later the Afghan security forces cleared the complex attack venue. Visitors of the hotel already declared the security of the hotel insufficient and therefore it became an easy target for assault by the Taliban. Then an organization Save the Children office in Eastern Jalalabad was attacked killing at least five people and forced the organization to stop its working on urgent basis. IS claimed the responsibility of its attack on foreign funded charity organization.
Amid the high security alert issued for the Kabul and rest of Afghanistan, militants were again successful in lodging more assaults. On 28th of January, an explosives-packed ambulance blew up in a crowded area of Kabul killing at least 95 people and wounding 158 others causing one of the biggest blasts to rock the war-torn city in recent years. The blast happened in an area where several high-profile organisations, including the European Union, have offices. The Taliban used social media to claim responsibility for this attack, which comes exactly a week after its insurgents stormed Kabul’s landmark Intercontinental hotel. The bedlam and bloodshed continued with a latest attack on Afghan Military Academy, where Islamic State claimed the responsibility of attack killed eleven soldiers.
Apparently, both Taliban and Islamic State have escalated their attacks in Afghanistan. This brings new USA’s more aggressive strategy for Afghanistan under spotlight. The attacks definitely have increased pressure on President Ashraf Ghani and his US allies, who have time and again supported US policies and hoped that this new, more aggressive military strategy is successful in getting back Taliban insurgents from major provincial hubs. After the series of attacks and apparent tussle between Afghan insurgents and fate makers of Afghanistan, President Trump refused the idea of negotiations. Trump announced that “I don’t see any talking taking place. I don’t think we’re prepared to talk right now. It’s a whole different fight over there. They’re killing people left and right. Innocent people are being killed left and right. When you see what they’re doing and the atrocities that they’re committing, and killing their own people, and those people are women and children, it is horrible. We don’t want to talk to the Taliban. We’re going to finish what we have to finish, what nobody else has been able to finish, we’re going to be able to do it”.
President Trump’s statement appears as a hard core narrative for Afghanistan imbroglio. The country which is fighting with civil discord, frenzied social, political and economic situation has become an epicentre for power exercising by many transnational and indigenous thespians. Different analysts and policy makers now opine that to get out of Afghan quagmire, only dialogue and peace talks are the wise option. As the country has suffered enough because of wrong policies of world power and use of force and military might wasn’t able to bring the desired results for eradication of militancy in Afghanistan and restoring peace. Pakistan suffered most as the battle ground for war against terrorism was different but the aftershocks were more deadly than the tremors. Pakistan successfully tackled the menace of terrorism from its soil and defeated foreign interventions. However, in case of Afghanistan regime’s infrastructure is made up of Unity government. There are no doubts about Afghan government’s sincerity and efforts for bringing the desired peace and stability in Afghanistan; however the increased subversive activities of Taliban and other extremists groups have mesmerized the Afghan security apparatus, if the trend continued, there could be serious repercussions for the Afghan government.
The attached hopes of Afghan people with the present Unity government for settling the political, security and economic condition of Afghanistan is still a mirage. US strategy of sending more troops, increasing aerial strikes and practicing more harsh and aggressive policies apparently seem a failure. Pushing Taliban and insurgents for peace will never work out as they themselves have different approach towards Afghanistan mayhem. To have a win-win outcome, Afghanistan political domain has to come forward and approach different regional powers like Pakistan, China and Russia for peace initiatives. Not to forget the loopholes in previous peace processes, future strategies should be chalked out wisely.
Source: pakobserver.net/afghanistan-imbroglio/
-----
Are We Encircled?
By Tariq Khalil
February 01, 2018
JAMES Mattis unfolded new US Defence strategy (NSS) countering China and Russia speaking at John Hopkins University. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu visit to Delhi, any Israeli PM in last 15 years. Ironically Ashraf Ghani was there so was Reportedly Mehmood Achakzai (not confirmed). It is opening of a new game in the region and globally. US is escalating same time it activities in Afghanistan, and increase expenditure on new weapons systems. Note point is there is a shift from war against terrorism to global strategic reorientation .The focus is major strategy shift of global game. What Trump policy portray in future conflict there is every possibility of use of force. It is indeed dangerous for world peace. Whereas Chinese response is more diplomatic and to resolve issues through peaceful means
The increase in Taliban attacks in Afghanistan and recent attack on intercontinental Kabul and Afghan Military Academy indicate a new surge in Afghanistan by Taliban. It will increase further pressures on Pakistan. Already Afghan spy agency is claiming Pakistan’s hand. No surprise Raw itself is the Architect to malign Pakistan. We will see more and increase in Indian violations on LOC. Recent attack and now on the working Boundary is certainly a pointer for the events to come. TTP will increase activity in Pakistan especially in Balochistan. It is all-indicative of a nexus emerging where the strategic targets will be CPEC and check Pakistan shift towards China and Russia. The new policy articulates the central theme the new threat emerging economically, militarily and politically is China and Russia. The Russian threat as perceived by USA is Military and thus both threaten the Dominance of USA globally. It places emphasis on India to counter regionally thus shifting the emphasis from South East Asia to South Asia. In this scenario Pakistan tilt towards China, Russia and CPEC is to be checked. For the these aims USA has to stay in Afghanistan.
Acting Secretary of Atate visit and again in pressurising Pakistan to follow US line all speak of the scene emerging fraught with dangers Regionally and globally. Link it with Indian Army Chief threats and financial pressures being created through WB and IMF slipping rupee down, should be taken seriously . What are we doing to counter these ominous moves is questionable. Unfortunately latest posture of MNS if I am not there a la East Pakistan like situation could develop is an extremely dangerous statement. Unfortunately neither our Opposition nor other Parliament parties have acted on a serious note. Parties are squabbling on non issues whereas the governance is losing its grip. This is what our enemies plan is. Create fissures in the Society and attack when the vulnerability occur.
In this milieu Pakistan’s response is conventional and stereotype. Internally and externally we have to take some considered steps. Growing power of Indian Navy in Indian Ocean and beyond has to be countered as with Gwadar coming up, in between another port beside Karachi and Port Qasim the Coastal road Karachi Gwadar running along, the exposure has vastly increased. Pakistan Navy has to have deep-sea offensive capability. So is the artillery and armour capability matter a lot. We must develop fast acting Combat Groups with this punch not only to counter swift conventional attacks as part of cold start doctrine but supported by Air and Navy around coastal belt. As mentioned above our Eastern coastal areas are especially vulnerable to landings as part of cold start and thus speak of the requirements of offensive punch to Navy. Sea surveillance and monitoring call aerials surveillance capability enhancement.
Coupled with this our diplomacy has to be par excellent in Washington and globally. The present set of Staff in US failed to address and hob-nob with very elements who are working against the interests of Pakistan. We must understand how Govt function in US and impact of lobbying firm in policy formulation in different tiers. Nevertheless Pakistan should try to keep good relationships with US. In international affairs there is no such thing to cut of relationship. Pakistan has many ways to convey its point of view. Pakistan must develop a strategic balance between all three powers.
Source: pakobserver.net/are-we-encircled/
-----
Vanishing Road to an Israeli-Palestinian Deal
By David Ignatius
February 01, 2018
VERED Ben-Saadon says she and her husband felt a sense of biblical mission to cultivate “part of the land of Israel” when they founded their winery here at a settlement about 30 miles north of Jerusalem. And she appears to have no intention of leaving, regardless of what peace negotiators may say. “The two-state solution is not relevant anymore,” she says, answering questions as she offers visitors glasses of the gewurztraminer and cabernet sauvignon she and her husband have produced at their Tura Winery here. She hopes President Trump will come visit their settlement one day.
The Ben-Saadon family has built a thriving business, with wine production growing from 1,200 bottles a year in 2003 to 100,000 bottles last year. The Tura website says their presence fulfils a prophecy from the Book of Jeremiah: “Yet again shall you plant vineyards on the mountains of Samaria.” Here in these rocky hills, you sense the collision between competing narratives about the Israeli-Palestinian problem: The Ben-Saadons believe this is Israel; the Arabs in the village just to the east surely think it’s Palestine. You come away with a conviction that the “ultimate deal,” as Trump calls his still-fuzzy vision of a peace agreement, isn’t going to happen. It’s too late, the parties are too dug into their positions, and there simply may not be enough land available for a viable Palestinian state.
The visit with the Ben-Saadons was the most visceral moment in a tour of the West Bank organised by the Institute for National Security Studies, a think tank holding its annual conference in Tel Aviv this week. Our guide was Danny Tirza, a retired army colonel who for years was the chief mapmaker for Israeli negotiators, and who plotted the path of the separation wall that divides Israeli and Palestinian areas around Jerusalem. The eight-hour tour offered a brief dose of ground truth about problems that have gone unresolved since Israel captured the West Bank in the 1967 war. I’d love to be wrong about the prospects for negotiations. Many Israeli speakers at the INSS conference argued that Israel’s survival as a Jewish democratic state requires a two-state solution. But the momentum is moving in the other direction, and the Trump administration’s gauzy talk of a deal has been undermined by its own actions.
The space for compromise seems to be vanishing: After Trump’s decision in December to shelve long-standing US policy and move the US Embassy to Jerusalem, Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat warned: “The two-state solution is over.” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud Party in December endorsed a non-binding resolution urging annexation of parts of the West Bank and unlimited construction of settlements. Settlements may be the hardest problem on negotiators’ agendas, because the issue arouses such intense passions. According to a Haaretz investigation last year, more than 380,000 settlers now live in the West Bank (excluding East Jerusalem), over 40 percent of them outside major blocs. Even a two-state advocate such as Avi Gabbay, the leader of the opposition Labour Party, told me that “evacuation [of settlers] back to Israel is something that Israeli society cannot bear.”
Our tour stopped at Ariel, one of the larger settlements. It has the look of a well-scrubbed suburban town, perched atop a hillside. The settlement boasts a brand new “Mega Or” shopping mall and 45 factories in an adjacent industrial park. There’s even an Ariel University, drawing about 15,000 students. Mayor Eli Shaviro told us that the permanent population of Ariel is now about 25,000, but he hopes it will grow to 100,000 within the next five to 10 years. “We don’t foresee a negotiated settlement with the Arabs. That’s just the way it is,” he says. His goal for now is “coexistence,” which he says is improved by 3,000 Palestinians working at the industrial park, at wages four to five times what they could make in Palestinian areas.
Earlier, just north of Jerusalem, we had gazed toward the Shuafat Palestinian refugee camp, bounded below by the separation wall. It’s called a “camp,” but it’s actually a cluster of grim-looking apartment buildings whose residents are descendants of Palestinians who fled Israel after the 1948 war. I visited Shuafat in 1982, and I recall it even then as a sad, sullen place whose residents dreamed of homes to which they would never return. A checkpoint for Palestinians to enter such areas was marked with a forbidding sign installed by the army: “The entrance for Israeli citizens is forbidden. Dangerous to your lives.” I fear the route to peace is obstructed, too.
Source: pakobserver.net/vanishing-road-israeli-palestinian-deal/
-----
Afghanistan: Perilous Accusation
By Dr Zafar Nawaz Jaspal
February 01, 2018
PRESIDENT Ashraf Ghani led National Unity Government and Trump administration have been scapegoating Pakistan, instead of critically examining the causes of increasing violence in the urban centres of the country and chalking out a realistic strategy for averting violence in Afghanistan. They simply accuse Pakistan for harbouring and supporting the Afghan Taliban for diverting the attention of the victims and also for concealing the incompetence of the Afghan National Security Forces. Whereas; the people of Afghanistan blame the Unity Government especially the American trained Afghan security forces. Islamabad is worried about the increasing role of New Delhi in Kabul. It is convinced that India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) with the connivance of Afghanistan National Directorate of Security (NDS) is providing both financial and material support to Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) for conducting terrorist acts inside of Pakistan. Neither American forces nor Afghan law enforcement agencies are erasing the safe heavens of TTP located in eastern Afghanistan.
Realistically, Kabul writ in Afghanistan has gradually been shrinking. Afghan Taliban and Daesh (Islamic State)—a non-state actor—fighters are successfully conducting their operations not only in the peripheral areas of Afghanistan, but they are also attacking sensitive cum protected enclaves located within the fortified major cities of Afghanistan. Indeed, Afghan Taliban devastating attacks on two consecutive weekends in Kabul, even before the start of a fighting spring season, have shocked the people of Afghanistan in particular and international community in general.
Increase in the lethal attacks during January 2018, reveals that adding of a few thousands American troops have no impact on the violent activities of the anti-government forces in Afghanistan. During the recent weeks, Afghan Taliban and Islamic State groups conducted four devastating attacks in Kabul. These attacks exposed the inability of the Afghan security forces and their trainers. It also manifests that upsurge in troops and air strikes (3, 554 air strikes used against the Taliban in 2017, which is nearly three times the 1,337 dropped in 2016) are having destructive repercussions for the people of Afghanistan.
Although, President Donald Trump announced on August 21, 2017, that American forces ensure unconditional victory in Afghanistan, yet defeating Afghan Taliban through military means seem difficult. Afghan Taliban enjoys popular support because they are part of Afghanistan’s societal and ‘political fabric’. In addition, the alarming reality is that despite the presence of American led NATO troops in Afghanistan, the Daesh has been increasing its hold in the country. Many analysts opine that Daesh in Afghanistan benefits from the mistrust between Islamabad and Washington.
The Daesh sanctuaries in Afghanistan are perilous for the regional security. Therefore, both Russian and Chinese have expressed their serious concerns over the increasing numbers of the radicalised militants. Russians seem convinced that without engaging Afghan Taliban, the Unity Government cannot combat the menace of Daesh effectively. Whereas; Americans are not prepared to engage Afghan Taliban in a dialogue process. On January 29, 2018, American media reported that President Donald Trump was weighing an option to send more troops to Afghanistan. Conversely, Taliban are inflexible in their demand about the foreign troops complete withdrawal from Afghanistan. Professor Marvin Weinbaum, a former official in the State Department, rightly concluded: “Once the U.S. is out, then the Taliban, without stating it, will go — whether it’s a matter of months or a year — to scoring a military victory.”
Realistically, the United States is gradually losing its control, instead of winning in Afghanistan. The influence of United States in the neighbouring countries, especially Pakistan is shrinking due to its convoluted global policy, the rapid transformation in global politics and the realignment in alliances at the international and regional strategic chessboard. Therefore, the American security analysts are expressing their apprehensions over the Washington’s Afghanistan policy.
The increasing anarchy in Afghanistan is alarming for the neighbours of the country. The spill over of ungovernable Afghanistan is perilous for Pakistan. Therefore, peaceful Afghanistan is in the interest of Pakistan. Unfortunately, Islamabad’s peace endeavours are not acceptable to both the Unity Government and Trump Administration. The divergence over modalities of restoring peace in the country, obviously, is in the advantage of both Afghan Taliban and Daesh. Hence, it’s imperative that Kabul, Islamabad and Washington revisit their strategies and cooperate with one another for the sake of security and stability in Afghanistan.
To conclude, blaming and shifting responsibility on one another do not replace the prevalent internal anarchy with public order in Afghanistan. Without the writ of the government, the country continues to be a safe haven for the transnational terrorist groups. Thus, instead of blaming one another, the stakeholders sincerely cooperate for restoring political stability in Afghanistan.
Source: pakobserver.net/afghanistan-perilous-accusation/
-----
The Web of Disinformation
By I.A. Rehman
February 01, 2018
THE Supreme Court’s probe into some reports about the Zainab rape-murder case has drawn attention to the havoc that the increasing reliance on disinformation has been causing in Pakistan. Any effort to identify the factors contributing to this unwelcome situation must begin with an examination of the government’s role in promoting the art of disinformation.
Everybody is aware of Pakistan being censured by international finance bodies for fudging its accounts. Nothing seems to have been done when the World Bank stopped accepting the statistics offered by Pakistan, except for swallowing the insult. Four years ago, the then finance minister was caught quoting the wrong growth figures and nothing could persuade him to recant.
The statements our representatives have been making at UN forums have embarrassed informed citizens more than once. Claims of reforms having been carried out and institutions being created have been made with disregard for the truth. Sometimes the government merely announces its intention to do something good and after some time the report-writers assume (wrongly) that what was intended must have been done.
Unfortunately, Pakistan falls among those countries that have not accepted the end of the censorship era and the rise of transparent governance as the foremost ideal of a civilised polity. Islamabad’s love of news management and its tendency to prefer secrecy to openness are well known. It still enjoys blocking foreign news channels. The Constitution requires the president and the governors to report each year to their relevant legislatures the steps that have been taken over the preceding year to implement the Principles of Policy, a requirement consistently ignored. The Rules of Business require each federal ministry to publish an annual performance report. The reports are published, it is said, but the people are denied access to them.
Pakistan Falls among Those Countries That Have Not Accepted the End of the Censorship Era
The government dragged its feet for a decade to replace the freedom of information law with a mildly changed enactment. The provinces are not uniformly implementing their right to information laws. The Punjab government got so angry with its fairly efficient information commission that it has not reconstituted it, after the retirement of the first chairman and members.
Nobody can claim that the much-assailed system of press advice has been discontinued. Preventing information from reaching the people is considered one of the main functions of the government. A minister was relieved of his post for failing to stop the publication of a report.
The government was not content with developing its system of disinformation; it deemed it prudent to buy or co-opt newspersons to block information and thus strengthen the disinformation regime. And Gen Zia was not alone as a promoter of ‘envelope journalism’; he has had ignoble successors.
The result of putting so much premium on disinformation is that truthful news has became a commodity that can only be obtained illicitly on the black market. If a privileged information distributor told a newsperson that he could have a scoop for the asking the latter would not consider it necessary to check the correctness of the story before rushing to release it, and if he ran into trouble he might not be able to name his source.
For obvious reasons, the pressure is on newspersons to develop a code of conduct to avoid dealing in fake news and escape getting punished for it. The Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists has an excellent code that its members and office-bearers should read frequently. The organisations of broadcasters, proprietors and editions have their own codes and some have tried to write down more don’ts than the establishment might want. The best way to keep newspersons on the right path is to respect their right to information and freedom of expression both and trust them for following their own code, as no externally devised code is likely to work.
The problem with our TV channels is that they have multiplied at a fast rate on a rather narrow talent base. They do not have the resources to generate quality content needed to sustain 24/7 telecasts. There is not enough of positive activity in the country to fill the long hours of broadcast time. The audience has so thoroughly been hooked on sleazy stuff and tomfoolery in the name of political analysis that the good deeds done by some institutions and millions of honest workers and ordinary citizens do not sell and the morning transmissions are devoted to crime stories. Some of the owners find safety in staying on the right side of the establishment, or one part or another of it, while the others are scared of it. One feels like sympathising with anchorpersons who after disposing of their guests in their talk shows have to act as experts on other talk shows, and thus have their burden doubled.
In any case the government and TV channel owners both can reduce their problems by benefiting from the recommendations made by the commission comprising retired justice Nasir Aslam Zahid and Mr Javed Jabbar, some years ago, and which are available in an impressive-looking volume.
It is necessary to bury the regime of disinformation because if the people are fed on anything but the truth they will never be able to properly exercise their democratic rights, including electing the best possible representatives, the governments will not be guided by a true picture of the state of affairs and the world will keep on trying to guess what to believe about Pakistan and what to ignore.
The situation cannot be corrected through punitive measures alone, however impossible it may be to ignore the serious abuse of freedom of expression. Matters will improve if the government sheds its fear of transparency and starts sharing its decisions, plans and policies with parliamentarians and the people at large, preferably in Pakistan’s national languages.
Source: dawn.com/news/1386447/the-web-of-disinformation
-----
The Gandhi in Our Midst
By Vazira Fazila-Yacoobali Zamindar
February 01, 2018
ON Jan 31, 1948, Gandhi was assassinated by Nathuram Godse, a member of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, for ‘appeasing’ Muslims and for the suffering of Partition. Much has been written about Gandhi’s life and death, but what of the Gandhi in our midst?
I have an image of the gentle, towering figure of Bacha Khan assisting a frail Gandhi cross a very narrow and precarious bridge in Jehanabad, Bihar, in March 1947, as the two friends struggled to bring salve and rebuild communities in the aftermath of the terrible cycle of violence set in motion by the Great Calcutta Killings of August 1946.
Bacha Khan, as Abdul Ghaffar Khan was lovingly called, is an important anticolonial figure of the 20th century and his historical significance needs to be understood not merely from the narrow confines of a nationalist narrative, but rather as essential to our understanding of struggles for justice, methods for social and political transformation, and the ethics of living together with difference — all urgent as ever in our times as in his.
If we think about colonialism as a form of political and economic subjugation, it was also accompanied by the production of a whole body of knowledge that made this subjugation both possible and legitimate. The powerful anthropological construction of ‘warlike’ tribal Pathans, who only responded to bribery and brute force rather than reason, was used to justify the most extreme forms of collective violence carried out in British India, and the northwest was a testing ground (especially during the interwar period) for grotesque technologies of war that would have raised a hue and cry of inhumanity had they been carried out elsewhere.
In Friendship They Forged An Ethics Of Care And Dialogue.
By espousing nonviolence and mobilising one of the most successful nonviolent civil disobedience movements in the form of the Khudai Khidmatgars, Bacha Khan fundamentally challenged and unravelled this colonial understanding of Pathans.
The Khudai Khidmatgars are largely forgotten today or simply recounted as a huge exception in the militarised history of insurgency and counter-insurgency in the northwest. But were they a blip in the past? A small and irrelevant movement that stood up for, but a few moments, to the injustice and subjugation of the largest and most advanced military power of its time?
In his autobiography, translated into Urdu as Ap Biti, he recounts a conversation with Gandhi at his ashram where he asks Gandhi if he was surprised that the Khudai Khidmatgars, albeit the last to receive his training in nonviolence, had been the most disciplined and steadfast. The political theorist Uday Singh Mehta has pointed out that for Gandhi cultivating the “fighting spirit”, or the capacity for violence was essential to then actively renouncing it — nonviolence had to be a courageous choice, not a coward’s submission. Thus Gandhi replied to his friend that he was not surprised at all for nonviolence as unarmed resistance required at least as much courage as armed resistance and as such the Pathans had a long history of courage.
By aligning Pathan courage to nonviolence, Bacha Khan had countered the foundations of colonial knowledge and exposed the utter brutality and illegitimacy of colonial violence. By becoming ‘Frontier Gandhi’, Bacha Khan also brought the concerns of the frontier into the mainstream of Indian politics.
The sources of Bacha Khan’s ideas are numerous as are those of Gandhi’s, but their extraordinary friendship too deserves our attention, rather than something to be feared. In friendship they forged an ethics of care and dialogue across vast religious and cultural differences, and it is an ethics that could have arguably saved Mashal Khan’s life at the Bacha Khan University not so long ago.
When Bacha Khan died on Jan 20th, 1988, Peshawar came to a standstill, the streets of Peshawar were covered in red flags of the Awami National Party, and Bacha Khan’s body was laid in Jinnah Park so hundreds of thousands of his followers and well-wishers could pay their last respects. Gen Zia came to pay his respects, and Rajiv Gandhi, then prime minister of India, was given permission to fly in to Peshawar, and at the height of the Cold War, the Soviets and the Mujahideen held their peace as the Khyber Pass opened for the massive caravan that travelled from Peshawar to Jalalabad to lay him to rest there.
If we think of the national boundaries that were momentarily suspended for Bacha Khan, it may well allow us to not only recuperate his anti-coloniality, but also his humility, simplicity and openness to the world.
Source: dawn.com/news/1386444/the-gandhi-in-our-midst
----
Can Pakistan Make History?
By Ahsan Iqbal
February 1, 2018
There are two competing visions that are vying for Pakistan. One of these involves spreading chaos and instability in Pakistan, and has been championed by PTI Chairman Imran Khan and his proxies. The other is of a democratic, progressive, inclusive and stable Pakistan, which has been spelled out in the Pakistan Vision 2025 and espoused by Nawaz Sharif. The people of Pakistan have witnessed both visions which have been actively competing with each other over the last four-and-a-half years.
It is important to ask why Imran Khan has opted for the politics of chaos and instability. The reason is simple. After forming the provincial government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), the PTI chairman soon realised that governance and development are not his forte and his party can’t compete with the experienced PML-N in terms of delivery of public goods and development. Imran Khan took an easy but unfortunate option: disrupt the system so that the PML-N does not deliver on its development promises. Since 2014, Imran Khan, along with others like Dr Tahir ul Qadri, has been trying to create instability. The purpose of this is to not allow the PML-N to implement its manifesto and Vision 2025.
Imran Khan and his party were trying their best to keep Pakistan in political turmoil while the PML-N government was quietly channelling all its energies and efforts towards implementing its agenda of the 4Es (energy; economy; the elimination of extremism; and education) and the Pakistan Vision 2025.
There is no comparison between the PTI and the PML-N when it comes to the delivery of development initiatives. The biggest achievement of Imran Khan and his government in KP are that they organised the sit-in and lockdown at Islamabad. Despite the best efforts of the PTI and the PAT, the PML-N delivered on every socioeconomic front. In terms of big ticket items, the PML-N successfully addressed the energy, economy and security situation of Pakistan.
Energy shortage was a major crisis in 2013. Today, most parts of the country do not experience power blackouts. Our industries are getting uninterrupted power supply because the PML-N government has added more than 10,000 MW to the national grid. The economy was on the verge of default in 2013. Today, Pakistan has achieved macroeconomic stability and is growing by more than five percent – the highest increase over the last 10 years.
Infrastructural facilities were crumbling in 2013. But over the last four years, the PML-N government has successfully undertaken national-level infrastructural development projects all over the country. It has also turned the dream of CPEC into a reality.
The successful delivery of development is the reason why opposition parties, especially the PTI, are trying their best to disrupt the democratic process in the country. Even independent media outlets like The Economist have confirmed that the PML-N is most likely to win the next elections based on its performance.
The demand for early elections is another manifestation of the PTI’s disruptive politics. The party knows very well that general elections cannot take place until voter lists and delimitation of constituencies are finalised. Therefore, it is impossible to hold general elections before July 2018. So, the demand for early elections is a demand for a long-term caretaker setup that would exceed its constitutional mandate of 90 days.
How can any democrat support this idea? I would urge every Pakistani to ask what the purpose of disrupting the democratic system can be when general elections are only a few months away. If the PML-N government is so ‘unpopular’, why not wait and vote it out in July 2018 elections? Shouldn’t democratic voices in the media confront Imran Khan with these facts?
Never in Pakistan’s history have two successive constitutionally-elected parliaments finished their terms. Can Pakistan make history this time or will it repeat its past mistakes? This is a challenge, not only for the PML-N government but for the state. The complex geopolitical situation in our region and the continuation of CPEC requires that we maintain internal harmony, stability and solidarity in the country. Any disruption at this stage will be detrimental to our security and economic situation.
Pakistan needs democracy. This is a lesson we should have learned a long time ago. In the 1950s, Pakistan had a chance to lay the foundation of a democratic welfare state that was envisioned by Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Unfortunately, the 1950s were spent in the tussle between elected political leadership and the unelected civil-military bureaucracies.
In the 1960s, Pakistan had a chance to become an economic power in the region. Due to the non-representative character of Ayub Khan’s regime, it could not sustain high economic growth and conflicts emerged across regional and class lines. During the 1970s, we had a chance to forget our past mistakes and strengthen democracy in Pakistan. The political leadership of the country devised a constitution after a consensus and chalked out a roadmap for our future success: a constitutional parliamentary democracy. But the democratic process was halted due to the military coup of 1977.
In the 1980s, General Zia’s government was the darling of one of the superpowers of the world. During this period, Pakistan could have done what South Korea did: focus on economic development. Instead, we got involved in the geo-strategic war theatre and brought war and drugs to our homeland. In the 1990s, Pakistan was given another chance to not only consolidate democracy but to revive the economy. Under the leadership of Nawaz Sharif, the PML governments in the 1990s introduced economic reforms and initiated mega infrastructural projects to leapfrog the industrialisation process in Pakistan.
But Pervez Musharraf’s military coup brought us back to square one. The policy choices exercised by Musharraf once again pushed us into the geo-strategic war theatre. Because of short-sightedness on the policy horizon, no major energy or infrastructure project was undertaken by Musharraf’s government.
The restoration of the judiciary and the democracy movement was like a light at the end of the tunnel. The elected parliament restored the constitution in its true spirit via the 18th Amendment.
For the first time in Pakistan’s history, an elected government finished its term and transferred power to another elected government. This not only gave our nation hope, but also restored confidence in our democratic institutions. Over the last four years, the PML-N government has successfully addressed the energy, security and economic crises. CPEC has become a source of hope for a prosperous and industrialised Pakistan. We cannot let anyone spoil this golden opportunity by repeating past mistakes.
The old idea that we have failed to get rid of is our attempt to disrupt elected civilian governments. We need to understand that this spurs political instability and halts economic growth. No matter how good our economic policies are, if we cannot provide peace and political stability, they will not yield the desired results. Therefore, it is imperative that we maintain peace, political stability and continuity in our economic policies and avail lost opportunities. The choice is very clear: Pakistan can either make history or fall prey to its own history.
Source: thenews.com.pk/print/275434-can-pakistan-make-history
-----
URL: