Related post: Restoration of NATO supplies: Let’s blame Zardari and Gilani!

طواف کوئے ملامت

نذیر ناجی

دل پھر طواف کوئے ملامت کو جائے ہے۔ ہمارے سیاسی حکمران بار بار چوٹ کھانے اور رسوا ہونے کے بعد بھی سبق نہیں سیکھ سکتے۔

مشرقی پاکستان کا سارا کھیل یحییٰ ٹولے نے کھیلا۔ مگر جنرلوں کے روایتی کارندوں نے سارا الزام ذوالفقار علی بھٹو پر دھر دیا۔ یہ جانتے بوجھتے ہوئے کہ بھٹو صاحب کے پاس نہ کوئی سرکاری محکمہ تھا۔ نہ کوئی انتظامی اختیار تھا اور نہ وہ افواج پاکستان کو حکم جاری کر سکتے تھے۔ لیکن توتے آج تک یہی کہتے ہیں کہ مشرقی پاکستان بھٹو صاحب کی وجہ سے علیحدہ ہوا اور بعض بقراط تو یہ دلیل بھی دیتے ہیں کہ بھٹو صاحب نائب وزیراعظم کی حیثیت سے بااختیار تھے۔ ایسی دھوکہ دہی کے لئے انتہائی درجے کی بدنیتی درکار ہوتی ہے۔ کیونکہ بھٹو صاحب کو جب نائب وزیراعظم بنایا گیا تو مشرقی پاکستان پر بھارتی افواج کا عملاً قبضہ ہو چکا تھا۔ اسوقت بھٹو صاحب تو کیا‘ پاکستان کی پوری فوجی قیادت زمینی حالات بدلنے کی صلاحیت کھو چکی تھی۔ بھٹو صاحب کچھ کر ہی نہیں سکتے تھے۔ اس کے باوجود آج بھی ان کا دامن داغدار کرنے کی کوشش ہوتی رہتی ہے۔

کارگل پر ذلت آمیز ایڈونچر کا فیصلہ مشرف ٹولے نے کیا اور جب ان کے حکم پر کارگل کے مورچوں پر قبضہ کرنے والے جنگجوؤں کو گھیر لیا گیا‘ وہ ایک ایک دانے کو ترسنے لگے اور بھوک سے لاچار ہو کر گھاس کھانے پر مجبور ہو گئے‘ تو پرویزمشرف نوازشریف کے پاس مدد کے لئے پہنچا۔ وزیراعظم اپنی ذمہ داریوں کا احساس کرتے ہوئے سب کے گناہ بھول کر‘ پاکستان کو جنگ اور ہزیمت سے بچانے کے لئے امریکی جانے پر تیار ہو گئے اور پرویزمشرف کی بے چینی اور خوفزدگی کا یہ عالم تھا کہ وہ لاہور پہنچ کر ایئرپورٹ پر پھر نوازشریف سے ملے اور ان سے التجا کی کہ وہ کسی بھی قیمت پر انہیں بھارتی حملے سے بچائیں۔ نوازشریف نے صدر کلنٹن کی مدد سے بھارت کو آمادہ کیا کہ وہ اپنے گھیرے میں آئے ہوئے جنگجوؤں کو واپسی کا راستہ مہیا کر دے۔ گھیرے میں آئے ہوئے جنگجو مقررہ مدت کے اندر واپس نہ آ سکے تو پانچ دن کی مزید مہلت مانگی گئی۔ نوازشریف نے وہ مہلت سعودی سفیر متعینہ واشنگٹن کے ذریعے صدر کلنٹن سے بذریعہ فون حاصل کی۔ تب کہیں جا کر مشرف کے بھیجے ہوئے جنگجوؤں کو واپس آنے کا موقعہ ملا۔ مگر جیسے ہی حالات قابو میں آئے‘ مشرف ٹولے نے کہنا شروع کر دیا کہ کارگل کی کارروائی نوازشریف کے حکم سے کی گئی اور ایسا کرنے سے پہلے انہیں پوری بریفنگ دی گئی تھی۔ نوازشریف کی ذمہ داری محض اتنی تھی کہ بطور وزیراعظم یہ کام ان کے دور میں ہوا۔ حقیقت میں ان کو پوری طرح بے خبر رکھ کران سے چوری کیا گیا تھا۔

بینظیربھٹو شہید کا اختیار خارجہ امور میں نہ ہونے کے برابر تھا۔ مرزااسلم بیگ زندہ ہیں اگر وہ دیانتداری سے جواب دیں تو انہیں تسلیم کرنا پڑے گا کہ قومی اسمبلی میں اکثریت حاصل کر لینے کے باوجود بینظیر شہید کو اقتدار منتقل نہیں کیا جا رہا تھا۔ اسلم بیگ نے دونوں میاں بیوی کو اپنے گھر پہ طلب کیا۔ انہیں کچھ دیر انتظارگاہ میں بٹھا کر اپنی انا کی تسکین کی اور پھر ان سے ملاقات کر کے وہ شرطین ان کے سامنے رکھیں جن کے تحت انہیں اقتدار میں آنے کی اجازت دی جا سکتی تھی۔ بی بی شہید کو نہ صرف شرطیں تسلیم کرنا پڑیں بلکہ امور خارجہ سے اپنی لاتعلقی کا یقین دلانے کے لئے اسٹیبلشمنٹ کے نمائندے صاحبزادہ یعقوب علی خان کو بطور وزیرخارجہ قبول کرنا پڑا‘ جوفوجی حکمرانوں کی پسندیدہ شخصیت تھے۔ اس دور کی خارجہ پالیسی میں جتنے بھی غلط کام ہوئے‘ ان کا ذمہ دار بینظیرشہید کو ٹھہرایا گیا۔ حالانکہ خارجہ پالیسی پر ان کا کوئی اختیار نہیں ۔افغانستان میں طالبان کو داخل کرنے کا منصوبہ آئی ایس آئی نے تیار کیا۔ مگر اسٹیبلشمنٹ کے ایجنٹ آج بھی انہیں مادر طالبان کہہ کر یہ ثابت کرنے کی کوشش کرتے ہیں کہ افغانستان پر طالبان کے قبضے کا منصوبہ بی بی شہید نے تیار کیا تھا۔ حقیقت یہ ہے کہ منصوبے کو زیرعمل لا کر بی بی شہید کے نام پر تمام حکومتی ذرائع ان کی مدد کے لئے استعمال کئے گئے۔ یہ اور بات ہے کہ بعد میں سیاسی ضروریات کے تحت بینظیر کو یہ الزام اپنے سر لینا پڑا۔

موجودہ اتحادی حکومت تو ماضی کی تمام منتخب حکومتوں سے زیادہ مجبور اور بے بس ہے۔ اس حکومت کا تو صدر مملکت بھی آئی ایس آئی کے ایک افسر کے سامنے بے بس ہے۔ صدر کے احکامات کو آسانی سے نظرانداز کر دیا جاتا ہے اور بعد میں آئین کی مکمل بحالی کے بعد جب وزیراعظم نے طاقت کے مراکز میں اثر و رسوخ حاصل کر لیا‘ تو وہ ایوان صدر سے آنے والی فائلوں کو بھی نظرانداز کرنے لگے۔ موجودہ حکومت کو بھارت اور امریکہ کے ساتھ تعلقات میں جو کچھ بھی کرنا پڑا‘ اس کی ہدایات فوجی قیادت کی طرف سے دی گئیں۔ البتہ اسے مشاورت کے عمل کا حصہ قرار دیا گیا۔ طریقہ کار یہ تھا کہ ہر اہم فیصلے کے موقع پرپارلیمانی لیڈروں کا اجلاس طلب کیا جاتا۔ اس میں فوجی قیادت اپنا نقطہ نظر پیش کرتی۔ مگر یہ نقطہ نظر درحقیقت فوجی قیادت کی طرف سے جاری کئے گئے فرمان کی طرح ہوتا‘ جس پر میٹنگ میں موجود تمام سیاسی لیڈروں کو مہرتصدیق ثبت کرنا ہوتی۔ جتنے لیڈر بھی ایسی میٹنگوں سے باہر آ کر دلیرانہ بیانات دیتے رہے ہیں‘ ان میں سے میٹنگ کے اندر کسی نے بھی فوج کے ادنیٰ افسر کے ساتھ بھی اختلاف رائے نہیں کیا تھا اور چیف آف آرمی سٹاف کی باتیں تو وہ غور کے ساتھ ہی نہیں سنتے تھے بلکہ ان کی باتیں سننے کے لئے مودب ہو کر بیٹھ جاتے تھے۔ نیٹوکی سپلائی لائن بند کرکے فیصلے پر فوجی قیادت نے پارلیمنٹ سے حسب معمول مہرتصدیق لگوائی اور کہا یہ گیا کہ یہ پارلیمنٹ کا فیصلہ ہے۔ پارلیمنٹ کے فیصلوں پر عملدرآمد کی ذمہ داری وزیراعظم پر ہوتی ہے۔ لیکن جب شدید امریکی دباؤ پر نیٹو کی سپلائی لائن کھولنے کا سوال پیدا ہوا‘ تو وزیراعظم کے پر کاٹے جا چکے تھے۔ اپوزیشن انہیں وزیراعظم تسلیم کرنے سے انکار کر چکی تھی۔ وہ خودلندن کے دورے پر تھے کہ ایساف اور افغان فوج کے کمانڈر پاکستان آئے۔ ہماری فوجی قیادت کے ساتھ ان کے مذاکرات ہوئے اور ان مذاکرات میں طے پا گیا کہ نیٹو کی سپلائی لائن کھول دی جائے گی۔ جس کے بدلے میں امریکہ کچھ مراعات پیش کرے گا۔ لیکن پارلیمانی قرارداد میں عائد کردہ دو شرطیں یعنی سلالہ کے سانحہ پر امریکہ کی طرف سے معافی اور ڈرون حملے بند کرنے کا اعلان بالکل ہی خاطر میں نہیں لائی گئیں۔ امریکہ سلالہ کے سانحہ پر جو کچھ بھی کہے گا‘ اس میں معافی کا لفظ ہرگز استعمال نہیں ہو گا اور نہ ہی ڈرون حملے بند کرنے کا اعلان کیا جائے گا۔ زیادہ سے زیادہ یہ کہہ دیا جائے گا کہ آئندہ ڈرون حملے کرتے وقت پاکستان سے مشاورت کی جائے گی۔ لیکن حکومت کو پھر سے نام نہاد عوامی مخالفت پر مبنی تنقید سننے کے لئے تیار ہو جانا چاہیے۔ حیرت کی بات یہ ہے کہ حکومت میں فوجی قیادت سے یہ کہنے کی جرات بھی نہیں کہ آپ نے جس طرح پابندی کی قرارداد منظور کرائی ہے‘ اسی طرح نیٹو کی سپلائی لائن کھولنے کے فیصلے پر بھی پارلیمنٹ کی حمایت کا بندوبست کیا جائے۔ یہ فیصلہ کرنے کی ذمہ داری صرف حکومت پر ڈالی گئی‘ تو اپوزیشن چشم زدن میں اس کا ذمہ دار حکومت کو ٹھہرا دے گی۔ انتخابی سال شروع ہے۔ ساری اپوزیشن کی طرف سے یہ الزام کورس کی شکل میں دہرایا اور گایا جانے لگے گا کہ حکومت نے قومی مفادات کا سودا کر لیا۔ ہو سکتا ہے تحریک بھی چلا دی جائے‘ جو یقینا حکومت کے خلاف ہو گی اور اس طرح وہ ناکردہ گناہ کی سزا بھگتنے پر مجبور ہو جائے گی۔مگر منتخب حکومتوں کو یہاں اسی طرح کے حالات کا سامنا کرنا پڑتا ہے۔ نیم جاں اقتدار کے عادی سیاستدان محض حکمرانی کی تہمت کے بدلے ہر الزام اٹھانے کو تیار ہو جاتے ہیں۔ اب کے پھر وہی ہونے جا رہا ہے۔

دل پھر طواف کوئے ملامت کو جائے ہے
پندار کا صنم کدہ ویراں کئے ہوئے

Source: Jang

It is an interrelated world. Here are seemingly four unrelated news that you might have caught.

US Army is the World’s largest Employer  

Hafiz Saeed bounty increased to $10 Million

More than 100 Pakistan Army soldiers feared dead in the Avalanche Siachen

President Zardari visits India, and meets the Indian Prime Minister

Lets Unravel these shall we?

One of the effects of the second World War on the United States was the economic boon that came due to increase in weapons sales and technological advancements made during the war. Effectively, all the western Allies fought with American Weaponry, this lead to US economy,that  suffering from the depression of 1930s, regaining and prospering. Since then America has enjoyed status of a super power. US continues to invested in weapon technology, and has some of the largest weapons  companies in the world. Pakistan and India are both large clients.

The news about Pentagon being the largest employer in the world, merely confirms that the US weapons and war industry is so intrinsically linked to US economy.

World is however facing a greater problem, that is the climate change and rising water levels. Pakistan and India are in the thick of it. We see the Maldives in the Indian Ocean are sinking and Himalayas are melting. The Latter  has a direct effect on both India and Pakistan, both agricultural based economies. Already, the deadlock has been as much as about the water, as it is about people of Kashmir, and with melting Himalayas, this is only going to aggravate, unless we start to formulate some sort of understanding and a common plan to tackle the impending crisis.

This brings us to the 100 soldiers that are feared to have died in the Siachen Avalanche. Increased Avalanche activity is directly related to climate change and see also this abstract of a scientific thesis  

Thus it is certainly advantageous that President Zardari and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh are meeting in the shadow of that event. There has been continuous confidence building measures in the last year or so, between the two countries, in order to create an atmosphere of amenability. It is hoped that recent tragedy would expedite the measures, so as we can go back and President Asif Zardari and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh could finish off what Late Benazir Bhutto Shaheed, and Rajiv Gandhi were on verge of completing on Siachen. 

And that is where Hafiz Saeed comes in. While it is true that US has played a role in normalising of the role between Pakistan and India, and they realise that for India to continue to be US’s customer and for Pakistan to be able to divert its full resources on eastern Borders. They need the ‘hot’ Pakistan and India border to become cool, and the relations to normalise to an extent.

However, as stated earlier, it is in US’s struggling economy’s interest that two of its clients still maintain large armies and large weapons cache. They just don’t want them to use it. It is perhaps not by a coincidence that Hafiz Saeed’s bounty was increased to a $10 million, and it had the desired results. Many in India want justice for 26/11 and this reminded them of the incident again. This of course sours the relations a bit, and keeps that doubt in back of the mind of both countries. The fear of being betrayed is going to keep making both countries to invest in buying weapons, and not on their social services.

Fear and doubt are much more potent force than rationalism and optimism, yet there is hope that it would be latter that would emerge. This is how we always start our negotiations with our permanent neighbors, with hope.

 

Over 200 polio cases were officially reported during 2011, and this year in 2012, it is going to be even worse despite some precautionary measures are being taken. There are so many factors contributing towards the rise in polio cases in Pakistan, for example widespread corruption on the organisational level, poor planning, lack of public awareness campaigns, religious mindset, illiteracy, etc. I was surprised to find that among all these factors, the religious mindset is topping the list to hamper the polio eradication programme. Various research groups of epidemiologists believe that religious opposition by Muslim fundamentalists is a major factor in the failure of immunisation programmes against polio in Nigeria, Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The religious conflict in the tribal areas of Pakistan is one of the biggest hindrances towards effective polio vaccinations. Epidemiologists have detected transmission of wild poliovirus from polio-endemic districts in Afghanistan, most of which are located in the southern region of the country bordering Pakistan. This transmission has resulted in new cases of polio in previously polio-free districts. The local Taliban have issued ‘fatwas’ (religious edicts) denouncing vaccination as an American ploy to sterilize Muslims. Another common superstition spread by extremists is that vaccination is an attempt to avert the will of Allah. The Taliban have assassinated vaccination officials, including Abdul Ghani Marwat, who was the head of the government’s vaccination campaign in Bajaur Agency in the Pakistani tribal areas. It deeply troubles me to inform that over the past year, several kidnappings and beatings of vaccinators have been reported.

This is the picture depicted by various research groups of epidemiologists that why Pakistan is safe heavens for polio virus, it is not wrong to say that more or less same factors are also responsible for making Pakistan’s tribal areas safe heavens for Al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorists.

Now come to another part of this sorry saga. Some sections of Pakistani media are propagating baseless rumors that CIA fake polio vaccination campaign is the sole cause of spreading polio in country. Interestingly, none other than Pakistani media highlighted and spread false rumors about  CIA polio vaccination campaign and in this way it created panic in Pakistan. Story is very simple, An brave civilian named Dr. Shakil Afridi booked on treason charges for allegedly fake polio vaccination campaign to find hideouts of world’s most deadliest terrorist OBL. He was arrested on may 22, 2011, exactly twenty days after OBL killing by American Navy SEALs.

Since OBL killing on may 2, 2011, there were unending widespread rumors been propagated by media that Dr. Shakil Afridi had conducted fake Oral Polio Vaccination(OPV) to take DNA samples to hit his specific target that was OBL. These false rumors made negative impact on polio eradication program in Pakistan. Since may, 2011 to date around 200 cases have been reported in country. People of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and other parts of the country refused to administer drops to their children after these reports.

Allegations of fake polio vaccination; are no more than an illusion, because this myth is far from scientific basis. WHO’s special envoy on global polio eradication and primary healthcare, Dr Hussain A. Gezari
is of the view that alleged fake immunisation conducted by Dr Shakil Afridi had nothing to do with polio campaigns as DNA cannot be collected orally.

Let me make it clear that Dr. Shakil Afridi had conducted actual vaccination campaign. He served the nation. Some sections of society and media was deliberately highlighting this issue to hamper polio vaccination campaign. They were not serving the nation they were playing their negative role. Infact they were accomplice to crime in spreading polio virus and polio cases in Pakistan. It is surprising to me that those forces, who were playing thier nefarious role in spreading polio virus in our country, they have gone scot free. And prisoner of conscience ‘Dr. Shakil Afridi’ is under cunstody of secret agencies on account for helping to trace whereabouts of OBL. as far as (OPV) oral polio vaccination is concerned, DNA samples cannot be collected, He might have conducted some sort of another immunization campaign in which injectables are used. Whatsoever it was, but Dr. Shakil Afridi did great job for humanity. He is brave and courageous man who put his life in danger to capture world’s number one terrorist OBL.

His services rendered for humanity will be remembered forever.

I would like to suggest to the democratic government that Dr. Shakil afridi should be released and there should be praise for him for his great work, because some sections media and society have exaggerated this baseless issue and now it is proving to hamper polio eradicating program in Pakistan. Government needs to declare Dr. Shakil Afridi as ‘prisoner of conscience’ without any delay to end this controversy, a stigma attached with Polio vaccination campaign. Civilian government must not accept pressure of  military establishment over this issue.

************

Pakistan’s modernity: Between military and militancy

There is a new kind of literature on Pakistan in the market which claims to present an alternative view of the country, a view that is more positive and talks of the huge potential of the Pakistani state to become a success story on par with the emerging economies of the world. Instead of focusing on religious radicalism, the war on terror, the problematic politics or the excessively powerful military, the new works highlight the progressive, liberal and democratic tendencies of the state and society. One of the key arguments presented in the new literature is that given some structural changes in politics, especially by replacing the traditional elite with the growing middle class, the country can be turned into a success story. The emphasis, thus, is on empowerment of the middle class, greater urbanisation, political order and economic development. This is the formula for socio- political and socio-economic modernity.

This essay examines the above notion and argues instead that this peculiar formula for modernity is deeply flawed. The empowerment of the middle class or economic progress does not automatically translate into liberal progressive modernity mainly due to the nature of the state.

The bulk of the ruling elite no longer comprises traditional feudal-landowners but is instead of middle class and even lower middle class background
Pakistan’s modernity, I argue, is structured along two axes: neo-liberal nationalism and right-wing radical nationalism. While the neo-liberal nationalism axis depicts an authoritarian and top-down model of economic and political development marked with the expansion of a national security-obsessed middle class and ruling elite, the right-wing radical nationalism axis denotes the growth of religious radicalism and militancy as symbols of geopolitical modernity and anti-imperialism. The terms – military and militancy – are both used here in symbolic terms. While military denotes all forms of authoritarian behaviour, militancy refers to all the shades ranging from latent radicalism to extremism and religious fascism which will also be referred to here as jihadism. I also argue that liberalism is one of the many consequences of modernity, but not the only one. The meeting point of both trajectories has resulted in turning Pakistan into a hybrid-theocratic state which encapsulates a mix of economic neo-liberalism, pockets of social liberalism, formal theocracy and larger spaces experiencing informal theocracy.

The neoliberal-nationalism axis:

The new or alternative view literature is represented by three works: (a) Maleeha Lodhi’s Pakistan: Beyond ‘The Crisis State’ (2011), (b) Anatol Lieven’s Pakistan: A Hard Country (2011), and (c) Javed Jabbar’s Pakistan – Unique Origins; Unique Destiny? (2011).

What is common in these books is a propensity to consider modernity as a “rational or social operation that is culture-neutral” (Taylor 1995: 25) which means looking at modernity purely in material terms and as a goal that can be fulfilled through good neo-liberal policies.

There are two angles of such scholarship: (a) take the emphasis away for any weakness or failure of the state from the civil and military bureaucracy to the political elite that is also considered the traditional elite, and (b) present an alternative formula for the country’s progress through improving governance and transferring power to the middle class. This indicates a fair amount of heating up of the inner conflict between the traditional elite and those that aspire to and are taking place of the old elite.

The ethnic differences are not viewed as positive diversity but as part of the traditional-elitist political framework which must be replaced with another that proposes top-down nationalism to attain progress
Significance of armed forces: According to this type of literature, an alternative but successful Pakistan can be created by fulfilling certain sociopolitical conditions and honouring the right agents of change such as the urban middle class largely represented by the state bureaucracy, especially the military. All the three works highlight the significance of the armed forces as an organisation with an unquestioned reputation, especially in comparison with other players such as the politicians. This is not simple propagandist literature, but the type which is arguing for a structural sociopolitical shift – movement of power from the traditional elite to the emerging middle class.

Although modernity has several dimensions, the concept of modernity envisioned by this set of authors has a strong neo-liberal flavour that espouses economic progress as a key indicator of modernity, which, in turn, requires political order and building up of a strong and centralised national-identity that seems to be missing at the moment. These authors envision a modern Pakistan as economically progressive, ideologically secular-liberal, increasingly urbanised with a fairly strong industrial and technical base. The greatness of the state is not evaluated through political and social progress or lack of it but from mundane material aspects such as the size of the country being the sixth largest country in the world.

The latest prescription for progress also calls for strengthening of the nation state and deepening a sense of nationalism. Therefore, it is necessary to downplay all such elements such as ethnicity and sectarianism that might weaken the nation state project. It is not as if the formula is not being adhered to by the state machinery which likes to minimize the emphasis on ethnic politics and downplay sectarian differences. The state bureaucracy, especially the military, even uses brutal force to curb ethnic differences as is obvious from the case of Baluchistan.

The ethnic differences are not viewed as positive diversity but as part of the traditional-elitist political framework which must be replaced with another that proposes top-down nationalism to attain progress.

The fact that Pakistan is the sixth largest country in the world has begun to figure in the statist literature. But a centralised national identity is even more important, hence, the emphasis on defining and streamlining what the former information minister Javed Jabbar calls Pakistaniat which is a set of positive attributes of a committed Pakistani citizen. But most important, Pakistaniat is about a sense of homogeneous nationalism. These characteristics such as resilience in the face of adversity, feeling concern in the face of national humiliation, sense of pride in being a Pakistani are some of the 57 characteristics that in the eyes of the former information minister, Javed Jabbar, constitute positive characteristics of “Pakistaniat” and will guarantee the country’s development. Intriguingly, the author also includes respect for religious and ethnic minorities as one of the prominent characteristics of Pakistani nationalism which is a misrepresentation of facts or figment of his imagination. Given the attacks on religious, sectarian and ethnic minorities that have increased in the past couple of decades, Jabbar’s assertion is more of propaganda and pretense rather than a fact.

While the state tends to use coercion, it has also tried other means such as generating a new national narrative and build institutional mechanisms to rope in dissidents towards this narrative.

However, these factors have to be matched with two essential drivers for change: the nationalist-urbanised middle class and the military.

Progressive nationalist middle class: The alternative view literature completely discards the traditional elite as the engine of progress. Progress, it is believed, can only be brought about by the burgeoning middle class.

Deobandi and Wahabi Islam, as opposed to Sufi and Barelvi Islam, have textual basis and offer a form of modernity
The bulk of the rural middle class represents medium-sized (less than 100 acres) farmers and the burgeoning trader-merchant class that live in towns small cities that have cropped up from villages and depend on the agrarian economy. The urban middle class, on the other hand, comprises trader-merchants, small business and professional class belonging to various vocational groups in intermediate cities and large cities. The middle class also includes the bulk of the state bureaucracy such as civil servants and military.

The urban upper-middle class, on the other hand, represents the intermediate class that will eventually become the upper class and it comprises the echelons of the burgeoning media, the elite of the civil and military bureaucracies, the top leadership of the judiciary and the legal community, the non-governmental organisation (NGO) sector and professional expatriate Pakistanis that are keen to build their influence in their home country by remaining central to its politics.

The underlying assumption is that the empowerment of this socio-economic class is bound to bring liberalism and progress to the country.

There are four issues with such formulation. First, it suffers from serious lack of clarity in defining the socio-economic origins of the ruling elite. We get an impression as if the ruling elite comprises mainly of landowners or entrepreneurs. The reality is that the bulk of the ruling elite no longer comprises traditional feudal-landowners but is instead of middle class and even lower middle class background.

Second, these authors tend to borrow a Marxian political formulation without understanding its historical linkages. The entire debate of middle class and progress is essentially borrowed from western history that is not necessarily applicable to most developing countries where the bulk of the middle class is not liberal or politically progressive.

Third, there is a problematic suggestion that middle class is liberal, secular and progressive that can guarantee Pakistan’s internal political and economic integrity. Such notion does not take into account the fact that in a pre-capitalist culture like Pakistan’s, the middle class is intellectually an extension of the ruling elite.

Fourth, it artificially links political development with economic progress. In fact, democratic norms and politics can be ignored for ensuring a top-down economic progress that is best attained through military bureaucratic dictatorial regimes.

Finally, political development is not directly linked with economic development and the focus of the middle class is the latter not the former. Moreover, this class has always supported and benefited from authoritarianism.

The middle class needs attention due to its ideological leanings which are conservative, pro-authoritarian and increasingly latent-radical. The bulk of the emerging rural or even urban middle class is not socially or politically liberal. The same can be said of the middle class in major cities. The urban middle and upper middle class both have an inclination towards authoritarianism and even latent religious radicalism. Most recently, new political movements denoted by urban- based political parties, such as the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (the justice party) run by the former cricketer Imran Khan, espouse wrangling political control through the army’s help. The other two pillars of the middle class, that is, the media and the legal community (including the judiciary), both have authoritarian, centre-right nationalist and even latent radical perspectives.

In any case, the media and the legal community have exhibited authoritarian tendencies with an interest in acquiring unquestioned power, a behaviour that the traditional elite is accused of.

The military: The country’s six-lakh strong military and its extended families, which include retired personnel and their kith and kin, are critical to the presentation of a progressive-modern Pakistan narrative. There are several reasons for this. First, the military is considered as an institutional representation of middle class ethos. The assertion is that the military is neither authoritarian nor a detriment to political development. It only intervenes to protect the state from internal and external threat. Moreover, unlike the traditional elite, which establishes a patron- age system of politics and is essentially authoritarian, the military, being a representative of middle class values, encourages the establishment of sustainable democracy.

Since the military has brute force, which is so critical to Pakistan’s praetorian politics, the middle class views the armed forces as critical for change.

Third, due to the character of the military being middle class it is seen as a source of political and economic modernity in the country. According to the new narrative, not only is the current army chief Kayani progressive, he is also liberal with great concern for strengthening democracy.

The military prefers a strong president, especially when the army chief himself is the president or when the office- bearer is a favourite of the armed forces. However, it is the second time in the country’s history that the president is not of the army’s choosing and the service was unable to remove President Asif Ali Zardari due to his ability to compromise and negotiate space for himself. Some analysts believe that this balancing act will result in prolongation of the civilian government, which, in turn, will result in strengthening of the democratic system.

According to an expert of Pakistan’s civil-military relations, Saeed Shafqat, the accommodating behaviour of the army top brass has encouraged the civilian leadership to respond positively and give an extension to the army chief, which Shafqat presents, as an example of elite accommodation (“Praetorians and the People”, in Maleeha Lodhi (ed.), Pakistan beyond the Crisis State, 2011).

There are three problems with Shafqat’s formula. First, he wrongly assumes that such accommodation is unprecedented. In fact, a glance at Marxian literature in Pakistan, especially the works of authors like Hamza Alavi indicate a partnership between the ruling elite and the civil-military bureaucracy in the country that dates back to the early days of the state. The army has historically used crisis to replace unfriendly political leaders with others considered loyal. Thus, the elite accommodation existed even under the seemingly liberal dispensation of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto during the 1960s and the 1970s.

Second, he does not ask the basic question if a major shift in civil-military balance could happen without a major transformation of the rules of the games regarding civil-military balance. What may actually appear as accommodation is based on some tactical adjustment of the military taking charge of some areas while leaving the less important issues for the civilian government.

Third, what Shafqat calls elite negotiation is essentially an adjustment between the two power poles in the country – military and civil – to protect overall elite interests. Such an adjustment does not in any way indicate a fundamental shift in the political system and structure or a movement away from authoritarian rule.

Supporting the middle class narrative helps the military in remaining relevant to the country’s politics and establishing its own image as being above board. It uses the corruption of the politicians and its own image as a representative of the middle class to influence national psychology. This is part of the exercise of establishing intellectual control of the people.

The right-wing radical-nationalism axis:

There is an increasing non-liberal trend in the country which follows two inter-related trajectories: (a) latent militant radicalism that is found mainly amongst the poor and the lower middle classes (but does not preclude the middle class), and (b) latent radicalism found amongst the middle class, the upper middle class and (to a certain extent) the upper class as well.

Latent militant radicalism can be defined as a tendency towards adopting violence as means to suppress people of opposing religious ideology. Latent radicalism is defined as the inability to imagine the “other” that is defined on the basis of religious dogmatic differences. Although representing a class divide, the two trends feed on each other and on the modernity debate as well.

First, the state presents these trends not as a regressive behaviour, but as an indicator of growing anti-imperialism and anti-neo-colonialism in the society. Such an argument is even made by elements who once represented the liberal left. Today, some believe that the Taliban must be tolerated as they are the only bulwark against American hegemony. The political right, which is a bulk of the parties today including the mainstream political parties, has an element that is sympathetic to the militant and latent militant radical elements in the society and view the war on terror as a foreign conspiracy. Such belief has created a certain amount of psychological confusion and infested the society with conspiracy theories in which Pakistan emerges as a victim of American expansionist designs.

There are quite a few urban and educated people who stand up to defend Afia Siddiqui, an Al Qaida member, or support Mumtaz Qadri, a religious bigot and the killer of the Punjab governor Salman Taseer. This is not a result of any confusion but an extension of the victimhood discourse that then allows people to target the native “other” who is viewed as an agent of the imperialist force.

Second, there is an increasing societal ownership of the radical discourse, especially at the level of the middle and upper-middle classes. For instance, one of the emerging icons is a rabid televangelist Zaid Hamid, who preaches hatred of the US and India, rejects democracy and propagates the establishment of an Islamic caliphate. Another popular character is the former cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan who approves of the tribal system for adjudication and is known for his links with the religious right parties.

Such support indicates an increasing acceptance of right-wing politics as an alternative to the existing political parties that are viewed as lackeys of imperial power, the US. It is a fact that Pakistan’s nationalism today has a deeper shade of ideological right, which is now being legitimised, through a new scholarly discourse that presents radical and religious forces as part of the native culture. In doing so, the new narrative even provides justification for jihadi outfits and jihadism.

New face of Pakistani modernity? The growing number of Pakistani postmodernist scholars such as Humaira Iqtidar, Kamran Asdar Ali, Saba Mehmood, Amina Jillani and many others in western and elite Pakistani universities are now proposing the religious right-wing forces as the new face of Muslim and Pakistani modernity. Iqtidar, a UK-based Pakistani anthropologist has argued in her book Secularising Islamists that forces such as Jamaat-e-Islami and Jamaat-ud-Dawa have a secularising influence over the society. Others such as Mehmood and Jillani present Islamists as the new face of feminism in Pakistan and the Muslim world in general. They are similar and different from the modernists of the early days who advocated inclusion of religion in politics from the perspective of keeping the state away from turning into a theocracy. The traditional modernists (1960s and 1970s) believed that religion should remain fundamental to the state but should be kept in a most liberal form. The post- modernists, on the other hand, are of the view that radical elements should be allowed to pursue their agenda that would eventually result in the religious right toning down its rhetoric and become more inclusive. There is a definite effort to legitimise both the political and religious right which makes the mix of Lieven-Lodhi-Jabbar and postmodernist scholars’ narrative a dangerous brew. While the former present nationalist right-wing military authoritarianism as representing the face of progressive-nation-statist-modernity, the latter highlights the same for the religious radical forces.

Third, the growing radicalism is part of the evolving politics and psychology of the middle class. A general perception created about militants and radical forces in Pakistan is that they belong to the poor and the disgruntled strata of society. If poverty indeed were the key driver, the volume of violence would have been much greater especially in areas that were identified as highly food insecure. In fact, the recruitment for jihad is from areas which are relatively food secure such as south and central Punjab. Poverty becomes a driver only when combined with other factors such as weakening of the traditional power structure, weakness or absence of the state in occupying the space, and the relative strengthening of the militant structure. In Pakistan’s case, the rise in militancy is directly linked with state support, be it from the military or provincial governments.

The various militant outfits recruit their foot soldiers from amongst the poorest segments of the population, but these are not the only ones recruited for jihad. Over the years, jihadi outfits have exhibited a propensity to recruit capable youth who are literate or semi-literate. It is also mainly the middle class that is eager to give donations to the militant outfits and madrassas.

The expansion of jihadism in Pakistan, in certain respects, rep- resents the breakdown of the feudal system which many would consider as a socially modernising development. The absence of an alternative force and discourse has favoured radical forces more than anything else.

Impact of Urbanisation: Another influence pertains to the growing urbanisation in the country. The fact that Pakistan is moving very rapidly towards urbanisation as a result of which almost 50% of population is projected to be urban by 2030. It not only influences the mode of production, but also alters cultural norms. For instance, the social and economic structures have an impact on psychological, intellectual and even spiritual needs. Pakistan’s foremost social scientist Hamza Alavi believed that Barelvi and Sufi Islam, which denotes “peasant’s religion”, would become less relevant with growing urbanisation, particularly sophistication in modes of production. Deobandi and Wahabi Islam, as opposed to Sufi and Barelvi Islam, have textual basis and offer a form of modernity. Allama Mohammad Iqbal, the poet-philosopher of Pakistan, also recognised this factor. While Sufi shrines will continue to attract people, they will fail to fulfill the spiritual and intellectuals needs of those marching towards some form of material progress.

The militants benefit from the rise in Deobandism-Wahabism since it enhances the ideological pool from which they can recruit fighters at will.

But the most noticeable development pertains to the impact of Deobandism-Wahabism on Barelvi religious norms that face the pressure of competing for political and ideological space. The Barelvi clerics and organisations seem under pressure to generate a popular discourse that matches the Deobandi ideology. This behaviour is most obvious from the Barelvi reaction to the blasphemy issue.

The fact of the matter is that the Sufi-Barelvi ideology has gradually lost ground, as it could not play the role in creating an ideology needed by the state to fight its foreign battles.

Those that represent the Sufi culture have failed to develop an alternative narrative which is needed to counter extremism.

Conclusion:

Are these ideological forces relatively benign and will eventually get tamed by forces of capitalism, as suggested by Syed Vali Nasr? In his latest book on forces of fundamentalism in some of the Muslim countries Nasr has proposed that ultimately the fundamentalist forces will be tamed mainly because people do not want violence. However, such an analysis is based on a certain amount of naivety and simplicity in understanding various societies particularly Pakistan, which has already turned into a hybrid theocracy. This means that the country comprises small pockets of liberalism, small spaces where sharia law is formally enforced and larger spaces where it is informally implemented. This is not simply an issue of implementation of the sharia, but the use of force in various forms to restructure the power base and the ideological structure of the state. At a micro level, the use of force translates into cases like the torture of the Christian woman Aasiya Bibi who is jailed for blasphemy. Notwithstanding the veracity of the claim against her, the fact is that the state is unable to provide her some form of protection while she is incarcerated.16 Similarly, the state is increasingly less capable of providing protection to its citizens as the more violent forces dictate their ideology such as the case of the school in Rawalpindi where masked men entered and threatened the young girls who had not worn the hijab. The militants are, in fact, the neo-feudals who are gradually gaining the same kind of power that the traditional feudal-landowners used to have. This is not to suggest that all militants are above the law, but the fact is that the state has established a principle according to which some favoured militants are propelled to being above the law. Since the militant forces have both the power and authority of religion, it has become difficult to contest their power. Geopolitically, the militant forces and their ideological network have gathered influence due to their efficacy for the military-strategic objectives of the state. The militants have established a partnership with the security apparatus of the state, which also considers the partnership beneficiary in pursuance of its military-strategic goals. The Pakistani state has often been viewed by its military establishment as a fortress of Islam. Religion is also seen as a source for propelling the state’s influence in adjoining regions such as central Asia for which a partnership with militant forces is necessary.

The military’s new partnership is different from its older linkage with the traditional elite. The powerful establishment of the Pakistani state is in a process of reinventing itself because of which it seeks newer partnership and narrative. The emphasis on the power of the middle class that is audible in some of the recently written books that are sponsored by the establishment is meant to produce a new set of political stakeholders that can challenge the traditional and the old elite. Although the establishment, which is dominated by the military, has been central in creating the traditional elite as well, it is now eager to produce a new crop which has a more exciting narrative. The middle class is presented as an epitome of liberal-progressive Pakistan. However, it is an erroneous assumption to consider the middle class as liberal since the bulk of it seems to be ridden with latent radical tendencies are on the verge of it. Such an attitude will affect Pakistan internally before it has an impact on its external relations. In Pakistan the growth of the middle class accompanied with increasing urbanisation is an evolving socio- economic and sociopolitical phenomenon. While the liberal political forces have been receding in terms of providing a forceful narrative, the radical forces have been gaining momentum. Religion, which was made the logic for the creation of the state, has become an even more powerful tool that could be used to determine internal and external relations. The newer political stakeholders view the Taliban and other militants as forces that challenge neo-imperialism by the US and other western forces. Even some of the new scholarly discourse tends to legitimise the jihadis. The liberal-western elite, which dominated the state at the time of partition and even later, has gradually lost its legitimacy. Such developments are taking place in an environment where there is very little space for a liberal discourse. The liberal elements in the country that can liberalise the religious-political discourse and rescue it from the clutches of latent radicalism are few and far between. More important, it will take decades before a movement towards counter-radicalisation picks up speed. Meanwhile, any change that will happen will be through connivance with the security apparatus of the state which will remain relevant for any change in the political system for many years to come.

This is an abridged version of the paper which was published by Economic and Political Weekly, India earlier this year

The Jan 10 strike — and its follow-up two days later — were joint operations, a Pakistani security source based in the tribal areas told Reuters.

They made use of Pakistani “spotters” on the ground and demonstrated a level of coordination that both sides have sought to downplay since tensions erupted in January 2011 with the killing of two Pakistanis by a CIA contractor in Lahore.

“Our working relationship is a bit different from our political relationship,” the source told Reuters, requesting anonymity. “It’s more productive.”

U.S. and Pakistani sources told Reuters that the target of the Jan 10 attack was Aslam Awan, a Pakistani national from Abbottabad, the town where Osama bin Laden was killed last May by a U.S. commando team.

They said he was targeted in a strike by a U.S.-operated drone directed at what news reports said was a compound near the town of Miranshah in the border province of North Waziristan.

That strike broke an undeclared eight-week hiatus in attacks by the armed, unmanned drones that patrol the tribal areas and are a key weapon in U.S. President Barack Obama’s counter-terrorism strategy.

The sources described Awan, also known by the nom-de-guerre Abdullah Khorasani, as a significant figure in the remaining core leadership of al Qaeda, which U.S. officials say has been sharply reduced by the drone campaign. Most of the drone attacks are conducted as part of a clandestine CIA operation.

The Pakistani source, who helped target Awan, could not confirm that he was killed, but the U.S. official said he was. European officials said Awan had spent time in London and had ties to British extremists before returning to Pakistan.

The source, who says he runs a network of spotters primarily in North and South Waziristan, described for the first time how U.S.-Pakistani cooperation on strikes works, with his Pakistani agents keeping close tabs on suspected militants and building a pattern of their movements and associations.

“We run a network of human intelligence sources,” he said. “Separately, we monitor their cell and satellite phones.

“Thirdly, we run joint monitoring operations with our U.S. and UK friends,” he added, noting that cooperation with British intelligence was also extensive.

Pakistani and U.S. intelligence officers, using their own sources, hash out a joint “priority of targets lists” in regular face-to-face meetings, he said.

“Al Qaeda is our top priority,” he said.

He declined to say where the meetings take place.

Once a target is identified and “marked,” his network coordinates with drone operators on the U.S. side. He said the United States bases drones outside Kabul, likely at Bagram airfield about 25 miles north of the capital.

From spotting to firing a missile “hardly takes about two to three hours,” he said.

DRONE STRIKES A SORE POINT WITH PAKISTAN

It was impossible to verify the source’s claims and American experts, who decline to discuss the drone program, say the Pakistanis’ cooperation has been less helpful in the past.

U.S. officials have complained that when information on drone strikes was shared with the Pakistanis beforehand, the targets were often tipped off, allowing them to escape.

Drone strikes have been a sore point with the public and Pakistani politicians, who describe them as violations of sovereignty that produce unacceptable civilian casualties.

The last strike before January had been on Nov 16, 10 days before 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed in what NATO says was an inadvertent cross-border attack on a Pakistani border post.

That incident sent U.S.-Pakistan relations into the deepest crisis since Islamabad joined the U.S.-led war on militancy following the Sept 11, 2001 attacks. On Thursday, Pakistani foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar said ties were “on hold” while Pakistan completes a review of the alliance.

The United States sees Pakistan as critical to its efforts to wind down the war in Afghanistan, where U.S.-led NATO forces are battling a Taliban insurgency.

Some U.S. and Pakistani officials say that both sides are trying to improve ties. As part of this process, a U.S. official said, it is possible that some permanent changes could be made in the drone program which could slow the pace of attacks.

The security source said very few innocent people had been killed in the strikes. When a militant takes shelter in a house or compound which is then bombed, “the ones who are harboring him, they are equally responsible,” he said.

“When they stay at a host house, they (the hosts) obviously have sympathies for these guys.”

He denied that Pakistan helped target civilians.

“If … others say innocents have been targeted, it’s not true,” he said. “We never target civilians or innocents.”

The New America Foundation policy institute says that of 283 reported strikes from 2004 to Nov 16, 2011, between 1,717 and 2,680 people were killed. Between 293 and 471 were thought to be civilians — approximately 17 percent of those killed.

The Brookings Institution, however, says civilian deaths are high, reporting in 2009 that “for every militant killed, 10 or more civilians also died.” Pakistan’s interior minister, Rehman Malik, also said in April 2011 that “the majority of victims are innocent civilians.”

Still, despite its public stance, Pakistan has quietly supported the drone program since Obama ramped up air strikes when he took office in 2009 and even asked for more flights.

According to a U.S. State Department cable published by anti-secrecy organization WikiLeaks, Pakistan’s chief of army staff General Ashfaq Kayani in February 2008 asked Admiral William J. Fallon, then-commander of U.S. Central Command, for increased surveillance and round-the-clock drone coverage over North and South Waziristan.

The security source said Pakistan’s powerful spy agency, the Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence, also was supportive of the strikes, albeit privately.

Source: Reuters

Editor’s note: We strongly condemn brutal execution of 15 Pakistan army soldiers by a more radical and non-conforming group of the Taliban. In Pakistan army’s terminology, any group of Taliban which attacks Afghan and NATO officials and civilians is described as good Taliban while those groups which attack Pakistan army are described as bad Taliban. Today, the bad Taliban released a graphic video of how the 15 FC soldiers were killed in a most brutal manner.

Overall this episode has three important messages:

1. Pakistan army’s policy of nurturing, training and protecting Jihadi-sectarian assets has failed. The non-uniformed, unregimented Jihadi-sectarian beasts cannot be expected to follow the strategic and operational directions of Pakistan army commanders (including the ISI and MI commanders). The brainwashed Islamo-fascist mercenaries whose Jihadi-sectarian spirits have been galvanized through a radical Saudi-Salafi-Deobandi ideology cannot be expected to honour or follow Pakistan’s national laws and army regulations and directives;

2. The Jihadi-sectarian beasts (Taliban and their affiliates with amorphous and overlapping boundaries, e.g., Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (camouflaged as Ahle Sunnat Wal Jamaat ASWJ or Lashkar-e-Jhangvi LeJ), Jaish-e-Muhammad JeM etc) have little regard for humanity and Islam;

3. Pakistan’s pro-military establishment media, both right wingers in Urdu press and self-professed liberals in English press, have ignored or underplayed the brutal execution of Pakistani soldiers by the Taliban. The same people who were extremely noisy and aggressive after the NATO’s attack on Salala check-post have failed to condemn the Taliban’s brutality against Pakistan army and civilians (including Shias, Ahmadis, Christians, Barelvis etc). Instead, many of them are active proponents of talks and reconciliation with the Taliban. This not only shows their hypocrisy but also selective morality. (End note)

Some comments:

Razarumi Raza Rumi
Let’s talk about ..err peace..RT @etribune: #Taliban video highlights revenge on #Pakistan #military bit.ly/AcXv8v

needroos Nadir El-Edroos
Negotiations? How did that turn out -Taliban video highlights revenge on Pakistan military http://t.co/r14vARXS

NadeemfParacha Nadeem F. Paracha
Please stop drone attacks on these innocent patriots … dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2…

Oval54
The problem is that when Taliban or #AlQaeda kills Pak soldiers no one talks about it. Too many apologists bit.ly/yTkYYb

TarekFatah
A month since Taliban executed 15 Pakistani POWs, yet no outrage. Now watch the executions; perhaps.. bit.ly/yTkYYb

*******

Handcuffed, blindfolded and shot in the back of the head: Taliban releases horrific video of executions of 15 Pakistani soldiers
The paramilitary troops were abducted on December 23
‘God is greatest’ the Taliban yelled as they fired AK-47 rifles
Horrific video has been copied and distributed in street markets

By JILL REILLY

22nd January 2012

A video showing fifteen Pakistani soldiers being lined up and shot dead by a firing squad has been released by the Taliban.

The paramilitary troops were abducted on December 23 in what the terror group described as an operation to avenge the deaths of insurgents in Pakistan.

The release of the horrific video is intended to serve as a warning to Pakistan’s 600,000-member army, which has failed to break the back of the insurgents despite superior firepower and a series of offensives against their strongholds in mountain regions.

WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT

Disturbing footage: The paramilitary troops were abducted by Pakistan's Taliban on December 23 and in the video, they are shown to be handcuffed, blindfolded and lined up, before being shot at point-blank range.

The abducted soldiers were stood blindfolded, handcuffed to each other on a barren hilltop as one of their bearded Taliban captors held an AK-47 rifle and spoke with fury about revenge.

‘Twelve of our comrades were besieged and mercilessly martyred in the Khyber Agency (area),’ said the militant.

‘Our pious women were also targeted. To avenge those comrades, we will kill these men. We warn the government of Pakistan that if the killing of our friends is not halted, this will be the fate of you all.’

Before death, one of the men described how dozens of Taliban fighters stormed their fort in the northwestern Tank district and kidnapped the soldiers.

‘They attacked us with rockets, killed a sentry. One ran away. The Taliban entered the fort and captured us with our weapons,’ he said, sitting in rows with other soldiers with their arms folded and legs crossed in front of Taliban banners.

‘They tied our hands, put us in a Datsun and took us away.’

The video then shows the men standing quietly. Taliban chanting can be heard. ‘We will cross all limits to avenge your blood,’ it said, referring to fighters killed by Pakistani security forces.

One of the men shoves a clip into his assault rifle and fires a few rounds into the back of the heads of a few of the soldiers. ‘God is greatest,’ the Taliban yell.

Other fighters step up and take turns pumping bullets into the men, some wearing green military uniforms. Each time a soldier collapses, the man standing next to him is pulled in that direction by the handcuffs.

The Taliban and Pakistan’s military, one of the largest in the world, have entered exploratory peace talks that raised hopes that their conflict, which has killed thousands of people, could ease, or even end one day.

But the talks have faltered, a senior Pakistani security official told Reuters, and the video – copied to compact discs and distributed in street markets in areas near the porous border with Afghanistan – is likely to enrage the army.

Formed in 2007, the TTP is an umbrella group of Pakistani militant factions operating in Pakistan’s tribal areas.

Allied with the Afghan Taliban and al Qaeda, it pledged to overthrow the Pakistani government after the military started operations against militant groups.

It is blamed for many of the suicide bombings across the country and has carried out audacious attacks, including one on army headquarters near the capital Islamabad in 2009.

After the shooting ends in the video, the Taliban militants stare at the bodies slumped over on the earth.

‘If the killing of our friends is not stopped, this will be the fate of all infidel armies, God willing,’ says one militant.

Majeed Marwat, a commander of the Frontier Corps said morale among his men would always remain high despite such videos.

‘Our soldiers enlist because they want to sacrifice for the country. We are taking care of the families of the martyred soldiers,’ he told Reuters.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2090165/Taliban-releases-horrific-video-executions-15-Pakistani-soldiers.html

Video report

This Parliament has also passed more than 70 bills. Legislatively, this National Assembly has been one of the most proactive and efficient.

The 35-year-old legislator speaks about Pakistan’s Mexican standoff, and Parliament’s unsung feats.

Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani was served a contempt of court notice by the Supreme Court on Jan. 16. And, rejecting the government’s position, the Army considers Memogate to be a real issue. Do you believe Pakistani democracy is in danger?

The only solution to Pakistan’s problems is democracy and plenty of it. Participation in the electoral process by everyone—especially the young, and women—and uninterrupted democracy are critical requirements for the country’s long-term stability and economic growth. We need to keep the system going irrespective of who comes to power, even if it’s Nawaz Sharif.

How do you view the recent success of Imran Khan and his Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf?

Their Lahore rally [on Oct. 30] attracted a lot of people, who were curious to hear what Imran Khan had to say. Right now, they’re only attracting crowds. They have to convert their popularity into votes. Anyone who wants to participate in the electoral process should be given a fair chance, and PTI’s success in exciting potential, first-time voters is a good bellwether for Pakistani politics. The party they’re most likely to affect is the PMLN, then PMLQ, and then perhaps the PPP.

Is Memogate a cause of concern for you as a member of the ruling party?

This issue should not be allowed to derail the solid working relationship the government has had with the military. I don’t see this becoming a real threat, but it is a sensitive issue.

The current Parliament passed two constitutional amendments but is still derided as a “rubberstamp assembly.” Does the criticism have any validity?

This Parliament has also passed more than 70 bills. Legislatively, this National Assembly has been one of the most proactive and efficient. Compare this to the Punjab Assembly, where they’ve only made something like a dozen new laws over the last four years, with no private member’s bill being entertained. Prime Minister Gilani, Speaker Mirza, and the party whips have led Parliament well. I’ve personally worked on laws to clean up the civil service by enforcing merit and ensuring the declaration of assets, to penalize squatters, to make cyber bullying and harassment punishable crimes, to have telecom companies regulate the retail of phone numbers, to make new provinces, to have Parliament’s say in foreign policy.

Are other freshman legislators similarly charged about their responsibilities?

There are a lot of young parliamentarians, men and women, who are making a difference by proposing new legislation and introducing commitment in highly informed debates. These people have good ideas.

Source: News Week Pakistan

The Supreme Court of Pakistan (SC) has directed Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani to appear before it on Thursday to explain why contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated against him. The contempt charges emanate from Gilani not carrying out the court’s 2009 orders in the National Reconciliation Ordinance 2007 (NRO) case.

The NRO, 2007 had been signed and put into effect by the then military ruler of Pakistan, General Pervez Musharraf, and let over 8,000 people against whom a variety of cases—many concocted out of sheer political vengeance—were pending at various stages of the legal process off the hook. The most prominent beneficiaries of this reconciliation were late Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and her spouse, the current President Asif Ali Zardari. Besides, thousands from the ethnic political party Muttahida Qaumi Movement were given reprieve under the NRO making the party the largest beneficiary of the law.

The NRO was negotiated between Musharraf and the current army Chief, Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, who headed the notorious Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Bhutto. International players from the United Kingdom, the United States and perhaps the Gulf sheikhs are said to have guaranteed the deal, which paved the way for Bhutto’s return and indirectly of another former Primer Minister-in-exile Nawaz Sharif to Pakistan, and safe exit from the country, down the road, of Musharraf.

The restoration of the democratic dispensation that flowed from the much-maligned NRO also allowed Gilani, an elected Prime Minister, to first release the Judges of superior judiciary who were under house arrest and later restore them to their office. The restitution of these Judges, however, was not an easy task and ultimately required street protests by lawyers and opposition parties along with a facilitating nod/prod from General Kayani. This delay on part of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), notably Zardari, to allow the country’s Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry to resume office was perceived as an affront by the latter.

Zardari, on his part, was apprehensive of the judiciary’s past attitude towards the PPP and himself. After all, the same Judges seeking his blessings for restoration stood by and did nothing for a good decade when he was put through the wringer of lawsuits (several if not all fabricated). He was denied justice for way too long to easily forget the role of the Judges in his ordeal.

Bad blood has existed between Pakistani politicians and the judiciary for the better part of the country’s existence. In tussles between various power centers like the military and the civil bureaucracy on one side versus democratic and even quasi-democratic forces on the other, the judiciary has invariably sided with the former two. The Pakistani superior judiciary has been, to its dubious credit, legitimising military takeovers and abrogation of the Constitution.

The SC has validated multiple martial laws and granted protection to military usurpers under the garb of what it called the ‘doctrine of necessity’—a perverted concept defined by the second Chief Justice of Pakistan, Muhammad Munir, as “that which is not otherwise lawful, necessity makes lawful”. Justice Munir had also inducted two other mutations to the legal corpus that “the safety of the people is the supreme law” and “the safety of the State is the supreme law” thereby providing a judicial cover to the national security state paradigm.

Under Article 6 of the Constitution, such actions of the judiciary effectively were treasonous as they actively aided and abetted those who had subverted the Constitution. Even worse is the fact that the superior judiciary’s hands are stained with the blood of the country’s first elected Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, whose judicial murder was the result of connivance between military dictator Zia-ul-Haq and Judges aimed at eliminating Bhutto. Therein, lies the single-most important reason for the mistrust between the PPP and the SC.

Historically, courts have been the venue for prosecuting numerous other activists and politicians on treason allegations. They have ranged from Faiz Ahmed Faiz and Comrade Sajjad Zahir (Rawalpindi Conspiracy Case), Sheikh Mujib-ur-Rehman (Agartala Conspiracy Case), Afrasiab Khattak and Pashtun progressives (Malakand Conspiracy case), Wali Khan and Baloch nationalist leaders (Hyderabad Conspiracy Case) to Makhdoom Javed Hashmi in the recent past. And all this was done in the name of national security and fundamental rights—specifically the Right to Liberty— were made subservient to the security of the state as has been done by the SC in its order in the so-called Memogate case.

It is in this backdrop that one must see the present three-pronged assault on the incumbent democratic dispensation in Pakistan, which came to power in 2008. The military establishment, certain right-wing politicians and the judiciary have made common cause to oust the PPP and its allies. Large sections of the Pakistani media have served as very effective cheerleaders in this endeavour.

The military, which was ruling directly through General Musharraf, found it increasingly difficult to continue doing so for multiple reasons and was forced to allow at least a civilian veneer while wanting to rule from behind the scenes. The junta reluctantly signed the NRO with the PPP but was unhappy to let the latter rule even in name. Many observers believe that the military’s mistrust of Benazir Bhutto’s understanding with the West, especially the US, her critical views of jihadism as a tool of foreign policy and favouring civilian supremacy over the military might have contributed to her elimination.

No sooner did the PPP assume power, efforts to elbow it out started in earnest. The military flexed its muscle first in 2008-2009 during the so-called Biden-Lugar Bill (later Kerry-Lugar Berman Act) row, where the US, directly and indirectly, wanted to make its military aid to Pakistan conditional to the army’s respect for civilian supremacy. A later attempt by the PPP to bring the ISI under the MoD was also thwarted by the army. The military establishment considered the former Pakistani Ambassador to the US, Husain Haqqani, its enemy number one. To them, Haqqani—an avowed proponent of civilian supremacy—had undone years of efforts by the junta to convince the US that they are the only show in town. Haqqani had to be cut to size, and soon. The quasi-sting operation a la Memogate afforded such opportunity to not just get Haqqani but also to net his boss, President Zardari. But as noted before here, the days of a textbook coup d’état are long gone. A physical takeover by the army would have led to international isolation and domestic turmoil.

This is where the courts became invaluable to the military brass again. The Opposition did not have the numbers in Parliament to impeach Zardari, or vote out the Prime Minister and mobilise the street had not worked so far. If an adverse verdict could be obtained against Haqqani and thus Zardari, it would be a slam-dunk. While some initial negotiations between the PPP and the junta were underway that could have brought closure to the Memogate, the army was actually looking for scalps. It double-crossed the PPP and just as Haqqani arrived in Islamabad, his passport was snatched and he was confined first to the presidency and then the PM House in a virtual house arrest.

Preparations had already been made through opposition politician Mian Nawaz to move the court in the Memogate matter and a plethora of petitions was filed with the SC in the name of public interest and national security. Nawaz Sharif, who had drifted away from the military establishment over the years, was induced to do their dirty work once again presumably via a threat of establishment putting its weight behind Imran Khan—the new kid on the political block, who has chipped away on Sharif’s power base in Punjab.

The classic military nutcracker manoeuvre was applied via the NRO judgment and Memogate to squeeze the PPP. Unfortunately, the SC, contrary to its recent claims to have buried its ignoble past, obliged to serve as the pincer trapping the PPP. In both, the NRO and Memogate verdicts, the court has resorted to a lethal cocktail of Islamism, jingoism and national security rhetoric with fanfare going so far as to declare Gilani a liar and a dishonest man not just in temporal but the divine sense of the words.

At the time of writing this piece, the SC had ordered PM to appear in person and explain why he should not be charged with contempt of court. As the disqualification clauses of the Constitution stand, he has not committed contempt of court by defaming or ridiculing the judiciary (Article 63-1G) and is not guilty of any moral turpitude (literally meaning a criminal offence) for which he could be sentenced to at least two years in prison (Article 63-1F). So the SC has a limited option to nail him down on vaguely applied standards of morality, or some presumed violation of the sovereignty or national security.

However, the SC—whose own past conduct has been highly contemptuous of the rule of law, upholding the Constitution and recognising civilian supremacy—may find it extremely difficult to hold an elected Prime Minister with a parliamentary majority backing him in contempt. The Supreme Court and especially Chief Justice Chaudhry must not forget that the only institution and its members who have a role dirtier than the military establishment in destabilising civilian governments is the superior judiciary of Pakistan. They can hardly be the ones fit to cast the first stone.

Mohammad Taqi is a columnist for ‘Daily Times’, Pakistan. He can be reached at
mazdaki@me.com or via @mazdaki

Source: Tehelka

The memogate issue is a conspiracy orchestrated by the establishment against democratic institutions to regain the power to dictate the other state institutions and it is being helped by biased judiciary, irresponsible media & right wing political parties. The wife of former Pakistani ambassador Husain Haqqani, Farahnaz Ispahani rightly points out that the civilian government, elected president & former Pakistan’s ambassador Hussain Haqqani are not on trail, but in fact pluralism, democracy and civilian supramacy on trial in Pakistan

She writes, “The manner in which my husband, former Pakistani ambassador Husain Haqqani, is being treated in our homeland reflects the shrinking political space there for anyone who advocates positive relations with the West or stands up for religious-cultural tolerance and pluralism.”

The most powerful political force in Pakistan; the Military, with four bloodless coup; conspired against the people on several occasions by imposing martial laws and removing democratically elected governments, judicial murder of first elected prime minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto via Supreme Court & later killing of first woman prime minister Shaheed-e-Jamhoriat Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto, to it’s great credit. Now the same un-elected force is bent upon removing the duly elected government, by force unconstitutionally, and with the tacit support of judiciary on the pretext of an unsigned memo/ Khaghiz ka tukda. It was this institution that, on Wednesday, told the elected government that it should mind its language, or face “grave consequences” for the country.

The Economic Times report described this alliance the Pakistan Memo League; an alliance to oust yet another government in the country.

Pakistan’s leading opposition figure, Mian Nawaz Sharif, who has not learned from disastrous lessons of dictatorship. The most disturbing development is that he has decided to become a co-conspirator with the military establishment in yet another plot to dislodge a democratically-elected government. During his Turkey visit, he held a one-on-one meeting with Lt Gen Shuja Pasha in Istanbul in the last week of October wherein it was decided that the establishment and the opposition would work together to get rid of the PPP-led govt. And later he had a one-on-one meeting with the chief justice of Pakistan at his Murree residence and then he finally approached the Supreme Court. Some members of his Muslim league appear to have their own reservations against the former prime minister’s recent move and accuse him of conspiring against democratic regime. His party’s MNA Ayaz Amir openly criticized Mian sahib:

We have no doubt that the powerful Military is conspiring to make democratically elected Government as scapegoat along with Judiciary and Mian Nawaz Sharif as a co-conspirator.

Commenting on the memo issue, the Punjab Governor Sardar Latif Khosa said one cannot name the President, Army and Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) chiefs in a petition but they all accepted it because the petition was filed by Nawaz Sharif.

Meanwhile, the PPP is trying to draw democratic forces to its defence against the threat of the military establishment and a coup.

The prime minister of Pakistan Yousaf Raza Gilani has been talking to various political leaders and diplomats about potential threats to his administration and expressing fears that the army might stage a coup. The Express Tribune reported.

However, the PM House issued a flat out denial: “PM Gilani has not spoken to Thomson in this regard. The AP story is completely unfounded,” adding, “The democratic government, led by PM Gilani, draws its strength from the people of Pakistan – not from foreign powers.”

Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) former president & human rights activist Asma Jahangir says , “It appears that judges are playing the role of lawyers in the Memogate case, and the time will tell the nation that memo was mere a plain paper.”

“We want people’s government in the country, not the rule of Army and judiciary,”, She said.

The legal fraternity launched movement for the restoration of judiciary but the Judges wanted them back on their jobs only, she regretted.

She also said the Judges supposed that whatever they say was law but the law was written in the Constitution.

The memogate was not being probed by Judicial Commission but at a place in Rawalpindi. She added.

The following article written by Mohammed Hanif describes the biased role of establishment friendly media & so called ‘Azad Adliya’ as well as current situation clearly.

Pakistan’s army is using rumours where it once used force

As reports of a possible coup show, Pakistan’s army is as corrupt as the politicians from whom it wants to save the country

As the rumours of an impending coup circulated in Pakistan this week, an inquiry commission investigating the death of the journalist Saleem Shehzad submitted its report to the Pakistan government. The report has not been made public yet but members of the commission leaked to the press the only bit of information that mattered: the commission has fully absolved Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), the prime suspect in the torture and murder of Shehzad. Hours after his murder most of Shehzad’s colleagues and friends were convinced that it was an ISI job.

Another judicial commission is holding regular hearings to find out how Osama bin Laden managed to live near a military garrison in Abbottabad. Whatever this commission may or may not achieve, you don’t need to be an analyst to predict that it will absolve the army and its intelligence agencies of any culpability.

While a supreme court has been hearing, for years now, the cases of hundreds of missing persons, mostly Baloch activists who, their families allege, have been kidnapped by the military agencies. The bullet-riddled bodies of these activists keep appearing in the towns and villages of Balochistan almost every day. There is not a single bereaved family in the province that has any doubts about who is behind these killings. Yet, army officials, on the rare occasion they are asked, always throw up their hands in the air and say “Who, us?”

It was this institution that, on Wednesday, told the elected government that it should mind its language, or face “grave consequences” for the country.

This stand-off between the army and the government started over yet another investigation that the army is keen on. The army believes that President Zardari, through his ambassador in Washington, tried to lobby the US government to save himself from an alleged coup, after a memo emerged last October. The government denies it. The matter is in the court. Although the media is full of talk of sovereignty and honour once again, everybody seems to have missed the basic fact that in trying to save ourselves from a coup we have reached the brink of yet another coup.

Pakistan’s army has launched four coups and started and lost as many wars with India. Yet it still considers itself the sole arbiter of national interest and public morality. An army that’s not accountable to its own people is not a rare thing even in this day and age, but Pakistan’s army has the singular distinction of waging an almost continuous war against its own people and getting paid to do it. Pakistan’s army is as corrupt as the politicians from whom it wants to save the country. It’s just better at paperwork. If you are a politician in Pakistan you are likely to end up in a jail, or in exile, and in some cases hanged, or just bombed out of existence. If you are a general you are likely to spend your retirement years on a golf course paid by taxpayers, and own a holiday home in suburban Toronto. Pakistan’s president and prime minster may not be great leaders, but between them they have spent 15 years in jails, mostly under military rulers.

It’s easy for the army to give incompetent and corrupt politicians a bloody nose, but to come up with any remedies for an ailing country is another matter. And, lest we forget, it wasn’t the politicians who got this country into this fine mess.

The fact that instead of launching a coup the army has had to rely on rumours of a coup to deal with the government may be read as a sign that the Pakistan army is not as powerful – or shortsighted as it once was. But when it overthrew the last elected government, the then prime minister Nawaz Sharif had a two-thirds majority in parliament, and there was nobody clamouring for military rule. The army then stayed in power for nine years.

The classic garrison punishment for a new recruit is that he is asked to dig a hole in the ground. After the hole has been dug, you get a mound of earth which obviously looks unseemly in an otherwise spick and span training ground. Hence, very logically, the recruit is asked to dig another hole so that this earth can be disposed off. And then another and another till a time the recruit has learned his lesson. Pakistan’s army has turned this quaint little military routine into an elaborate ideology and transformed a promising country into a desolate land full of potholes.

پاکستان کا پودا گملے میں لگا نے کے بعد ہم بھول گۓ کہ اسکو ہم نے کشادہ زمین کے سینے میں منتقل کرنا ہے۔ اب اس پودے کینمی اور سانس رکنےلگی ہے۔ سورج کی روشنی بھی اب اسکے لۓ بیکار ہوتے جارہےہیں۔

پاکستان جو آدھی صدی سےگزرکر آدھی صدی کی کہانی بیان کرنے والا ہے، اس کے پاس کہنے کوکیا ہے؟ مرکز کے اختیارات اور صوبائ خود اختیاری سوال، پارلیمانی یا صدارتی نظام کی بحث، ریاست اور مذہب کے تعلق کی نوعیت، بار بار آیئین کی پامالی، اقساط میں خودکشی کرتی ہوئ جمہوریت، لمبی طویل فوجی بوٹوں کی چاپ، پاکستان کے ٹوٹ کر آدھا ہو جا نے کا نوحہ، نمائندہ رہنماؤں کی جلاوطنی، قائد عوام کا قتل، سڑکوں پر بہتا شہید جمہوریت کا خون، ایجنسیوں، بیوروکریسی اور اپوزیشن کی سازشیں، سیاسی اور مذہبی جماعتوں کے تضادات، عوام کا بے سمت ہجوم ۔ مگ افسوس ہم نے آج بھی کچھ نہیں سیکھا۔

ہمارا المیہ یہ ہے کہ ہمارے غیر نمائندہ ریاستی اداروں نے آ ج تک بین الاقوامی اصولوںاور بنیادی اقدارکی نفی کی ہے اور انسانی ذندگی کی عضمت کوپامال کیا ہے۔ اجتمای مفاد کی بجاۓ انفرادی مفاد کو سامنے رکھا ہے۔ جس سے ہمارے نظام کامجموی ڈھانچہ ریت کے ٹیلوں کی طرح بکھرتے بکھرتے صحرا بن چکا ہے، جہاں ہر طرف سراب نظر آتے ہیں۔

پاکستان کی تاریخ بحرانوں اور جرنیلوں کی تاریخ رہی ہے، جس میں ججوں اور جرنلسٹوں کا بطور آلہ کار ایک کلیدی کردار رہا ہے۔ ہر موڑ پر ایک نیا چیف مارشل لا ایڈمنسٹریٹر نۓ سائن بورڈ کے ساتھ کھڑا دکھائ دیتا ہے۔ جس میں کسی پر اسلامی جمہوریت، کسی پر بنیادی جمہوریت اور کسی پر حقیقی جمہوریت لکھاہواتھا۔

جمہوریت کے راستے سے ہٹانے والے ان سائن بورڈز کی منزل تباہی و بربادی کی گہری کھائ تھی ۔ ان غیر نمائندہ حکمرانوں نے جمہوریت کی نشو ونما روکنے کے لۓ سیاسی قیادت کو ہمیشہ گملوں میں رکھنے کی سازش کی ہے۔ اگر کسی سیاستدان نے اپنی جڑیں کشادہ زمیں میں منتقل کرنے کی کوشش کی ہے تو اسے نشان عبرت بنا دیا گیا ہے۔ قید وبند کی صعوبتیں، زہنی جسمانی اذیتیں اور شہادت اس کی قسمت میں لکھ دی گئ ہیں ہم آج بھی جمہویت کی تلاش میں ہیں۔ اور آج بھی خطرہ ہے کہ ہمیں منزل سے بھٹکا کراندھیرے راستے پر ڈالنے کی سازش ہورہی ہے۔ این ار او اور میمو اس سلسے کی کڑیاں ہیں۔

وزیرِاعظم یوسف رضا گیلانی نے قومی اسمبلی میں اپنے خطاب میں کہا کہ انیس سو ننانوے میں نواز شریف کی منتخب حکومت کا تختہ الٹنے کا ذکر کرتے ہوئے کہا کہ اس وقت بینظیر بھٹو نے ان سے کہا تھا کہ ’یہ سیج ہمارے لیے نہیں سجایا گیا اور یہاں نہ ہم آئیں گے اور نہ وہ (نواز شریف)‘۔

وزیرِ اعظم نے حزبِ اختلاف کو خبردار کرتے ہوئے کہا کہ ’ اگر اب بھی کوئی سیج سجایا گیا تو وہ نہ آپ کے لیے ہوگا نہ ہمارے لیے‘۔

جو معاشرے تبدیل ہونے کی صلاحیت اور قوت کھو دیتے ہیں وہ گناہگار ہوجاتے ہیں اور انسانی معاشرے کا سب سے بڑا گناہ ‘جمود’ ہے۔ فرخ خان پتافی اپنے ‘روزنامہ ایکسپریس’ میں شائع ہونے والے آرٹیکل ‘ہم نے کیا سیکھا؟’ میں یہ سوال کرنے کے ساتھ ساتھ یہ تجزیہ بھی دے رہے ہیں کہ ہماری فوج، عدالت، میڈیا اور سیاسی جماعتیں ماضی سے سیکھنے میں ناکام رہی ہیں۔