Pakistan: Life in the time of intolerance

[Zakk]

A look back at how pak society has changed

Posted on January 21, 2011
WEB SPECIAL *
PAKISTAN
The media has misinformed Pakistani society

By Shahid Husain
http://www.tehelka.com/channels/People/people_main.asp

The author is special correspondent of the Karachi-based publication, The News

I remember a cartoon by the great Zaidi in the late 1960s published in a leading Urdu newspaper. It showed a man entering a small restaurant named Café Gulshan during the fasting period as a ghazal from Faiz Ahmed Faiz played in the background: “Chale bhi aao ke gulshan ka karobaar chale” (Come, it’s business as usual).

The cartoon clearly indicated that the people of Pakistan lived in a liberal society where nobody bothered if someone was not fasting. Religion was a personal thing and people of every hue lived together in peace. Children would play in lanes outside their houses till late and doors remained opened for them. There was no danger of theft. Kids often returned home very late and locked the door. Sometimes they would even forget to lock it. Women clad in burqa, wearing jewellery, would return home from weddings late at night without any fear of being looted at gunpoint. In fact, there were few guns in those days.

Muslims, Christians, Hindus and Parsees would mingle in festivals and in times of grief. There were intermarriages. In Saddar, the heart of the Karachi, Christian women clad in skirts were seen shopping or going to office — and nobody harassed them.

Then things started changing.

The mass upsurge in 1968-69, essentially led by left-wing National Students Federation (NSF) forced military dictator (late) General Ayub Khan to announce that he would not contest the next elections. It was a great victory for liberal and democratic forces in Pakistan. However, the civil and military bureaucracy had other schemes in mind. It was not ready to succumb so easily.

It’s true that the 1970 elections were free and fair. After a long time, people voted on the basis of adult franchise and the notorious “One Unit” system that deprived former East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) of its due rights was abolished but military generals thought that none of the major parties, viz the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) led by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the Awami League (AL) led by Sheikh Mujeeb-ur-Rehman and the National Awami Party (NAP) led by Khan Abdul Wali Khan would be able to muster enough support to form a government single-handedly.

This did not happen. Sheikh Mujib-ur-Rehman swept the elections in the then East Pakistan while the PPP emerged victorious in Punjab and Sindh and NAP in North West Frontier Province (now Khyber Pukhtoonkhua) and Balochistan.

Ahead of the 1970 General Election, the right-wing Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) took out a huge procession under the name of Shaukat-e-Islam and coined the term “Nazaria-e-Pakistan”. It was Pakistani ideology, unheard of prior to the election. JI, very well organised, and showing its teeth.

The results of the 1970 election were such that Sheikh Mujib could have formed a coalition government at the Centre as well in partnership with NAP and some small parties. This was not acceptable to the military junta and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. Bhutto announced that his party had won the election in the ‘bastion of power’, i.e. Punjab, from where the major chunk of the army had been recruited since colonial times. He also raised the slogan of “Idhar hum, udhar tum”, which meant the PPP would rule the country in the western part of Pakistan while AL would rule the eastern wing. There was chaos.

A military operation was unleashed in former East Pakistan with the then Chief of the Army Staff General Tikka Khan declaring he wanted land, not people. In the meantime, India entered into a “peace and friendship” treaty with the former Soviet Union and strengthened its position. I vividly remember that as a student activist I was sent to Peshawar in 1971 to meet NAP leader Ajmal Khatak, probably in September-October, carrying a bunch of pamphlets that denounced military operation.

Bhutto had come to attend the meeting clandestinely and was eager to meet Khan Abdul Wali Khan but the latter refused to meet him and instead went to his ancestral village Wali Bagh. However, probably on persuasion by his party leaders, he returned to Peshawar and met Bhutto. On his return, he told a very shocking story: “Wali Khan is dead, Ajmal Khattak is dead, trade union leader Aizaz Nazir is dead, but the then general secretary of Sindh National Students Federation Mir Thebo is alive and will bear witness to my statement.” According to Wali Khan, Bhutto said the army was stuck in former East Pakistan and it was time that Khan starts agitation in NWFP and Balochistan, while Bhutto would begin his agitation in Punjab and Sindh to topple Yahya Khan’s government. Khan refused and stated that Bhutto himself had declared the presence of three forces in Pakistan — the Army, the PPP and the AL. And since the AL had been crushed, Bhutto himself should go ahead. Then Khan left for London.

Pakistan lost its eastern wing. It was a great loss to the liberal and enlightened forces of Pakistan since East Bengal was far more conscious historically and culturally. Again in the late 1970s, it was Bhutto who in order to appease the mullahs, declared Ahmedis as non-Muslims, banned liquor and declared Friday a holiday. The mullahs, a miniscule population, started asserting themselves. The Afghan War brought deadly weapons and drugs and the very social fabric of Pakistan society was broken.

It was against a similar backdrop that the Punjab Governor Salman Taseer was brutally murdered by one of his bodyguards on 4 January 2011. Brought up in a liberal environment, Taseer was the son of Mohammad Deen Taseer, the founding member of the Progressive Writers’ Association and a scholar of high calibre. He had the courage to visit Asia Bibi in jail along with his family. Sadly for him, his own party backed out due to pressure from the mullahs.

Sherry Rehman, the PPP legislator who presented a private bill in the National Assembly to bring out some amendments in blasphemy law is also in danger. Her party has no guts to defend her. A liberal by thought, Rehman is a former editor of The Herald.

Instead of condemning the brutal murder of Taseer, the PPP government has announced that his murder was political in nature. Ironically, the murderer is being showered with praise by the right wing. It was only the Muthaidda Qaumi Movement (MQM), the third largest party in Pakistan that countered JI and other mullahs by bringing out huge rallies in Karachi and disassociating with the government. Prime Minister Gilani had to persuade them to come back.

Who are the liberals in Pakistan? The vast majority of silent spectators, who have been taken hostage by a minuscule group of mullahs that have taken the state and the people hostage because they are better organised and have guns. Ironically, they made hay during the despotic rule of General Ziaul Haq and even today are supported financially and otherwise by fundamentalist Middle Eastern states. Two-time prime minister and leader of Pakistan Muslim League, Nawaz Sharif cries himself hoarse against corruption and poses as a democrat, but he was unable to deliver when he was at the helm of affairs. Instead, he proudly claims it was in his tenure that Pakistan succeeded in making a nuclear bomb. As if a bomb will bring solace to the vast majority that is finding it difficult to survive due to rampant inflation.

Imran Khan, the charismatic cricketer of yesteryears, but is without a constituency, is being portrayed by the media, especially the electronic media, as a hero while President Asif Ali Zardari with his tainted background is being portrayed as the main culprit. Ironically, it is the media that is playing the game. Media tycoons are not ready to pay taxes and privately claim they will now decide who will be the president of Pakistan. Anchorpersons, most of them with no journalistic background, are ridiculing Zardari, Musharraf and other liberals and are not unabashedly displaying brutal violence by the Taliban on TV screens irrespective of the fact that children also watch them.

Suddenly, they have all become “patriotic” and “anti-imperialist”. Their heroism, however, is orchestrated by intelligence agencies. A country that cannot even make its budget without the assistance of the IMF and the World Bank (and this has been said by ex-finance minister Shaukat Tareen on record) has been challenging the Kerry-Lugar Bill! It is all a farce. Clinton made it clear in an interview given to TV that it was Pakistan, which requested economic assistance from the US and was free to refuse that assistance.

There has been speculation by some TV channels that hawks in Pakistan army were very ‘anxious’. Interestingly, the tirade is against Zardari, who had the courage to sign an agreement on the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline despite US displeasure. The ‘great game’ is being played on a higher plane and in a new context. But the so-called democratic leadership of the PML(N) is totally aloof from what is going on. In a way, it was the electronic media that should be held responsible for the brutal murder of Salman Taseer.

It is really a sad commentary that Taseer, who comes from a liberal and academic background, should have been ditched by his own party. In all likelihood, Zardari will complete his tenure as President because beggars can’t be choosers. The US wants a civilian government in Pakistan, howsoever tainted. Bilawal Bhutto very aptly said in London that a Muslim can’t even think of blasphemy, nay even the minorities in Pakistan, living in constant fear, can’t think of blasphemy. Issues of property and land grabbing often devour innocent people on charges of blasphemy and “karo-kari”.

“Intolerance of the other opinion or dissent is the root cause of most of the violence plaguing our society,” said BM Kutty, a veteran Marxist and political secretary of Mir Ghous Bux Bizenjo, Pakistan’s stalwart nationalist leader who played a vital role in constitution-making in 1973 and whose government was dismissed in Balochistan by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto on clumsy charges. “Whatever Salman Taseer did was in accordance with the UN Charter that has been ratified by Pakistan and in accordance with the constitution of Pakistan,” said Tauseef Ahmed Khan, professor at Karachi’s Urdu University and a political analyst.

[ravage]

Re: Pakistan: Life in the time of intolerance

Good read Zakk. An article by Nasim Zehra focused more on the debacle of Sherry’s efforts to amend the law

Analysis and chronology of recent moves to amend the controversial, man-made ‘blasphemy laws’ of Pakistan
By Nasim Zehra
Feb 3, 2011

The new aspect to Prime Minister’s announcement was that he had consulted Sherry Rehman and she had agreed to withdraw her Bill. As Sherry’s statement posted here indicates, this was the PM’s unilateral decision.

Sherry Rehman has also explained, such a move was unnecessary since the Bill was not even tabled. She also points out that while many parliamentarians were told about the bill beforehand, key people in the party had assured her they would support it especially if media built some consensus.

Sadly, the contents of the bill were never laid before the House. More people would then have known that the proposed amendments had to do with procedural changes that prevented misuse of the law.

What is truly ironical is that the same statement in which the PM announced the withdrawal of the Bill, he invited the various parties to come and discuss how to prevent misuse of the law – which is largely what Sherry Rehman’s proposed amendment bill is about.

How the government has handled this issue is not about an individual, of course, the fact remains that it was Sherry Rehman who piloted the initial Bill alongside initial government moves to amend it; later, the religio-political parties demanded withdrawal of her un-tabled Bill, and made this point a symbol of their victory. Therefore, some facts around Sherry Rehman’s moves need to be stated.

1. While human rights groups have been working on the misuse of blasphemy law for years, it was when the PPP led government announced a Committee to amend the laws that Ms Rehman tabled her bill. She shared it with all party leaders, and made it a point to inform the Chief Whip of the Government of her plans – and he did not ask her to hold off for a while. She consulted with several lawyers about the bill and did not submit it in secret. The proposed amendment created a wave of awareness that has finally led everyone (including the Council of Islamic Ideology, CII) to concede that changes are required to end and tackle its misuse. Even the religious parties have taken this position of reform repeatedly in various forums. All this contradicts the claims of those who now hold the view that the introduction of this bill was an ill-timed move.

2. The government blundered along making contradictory moves and statements on the issue of amending the blasphemy law ever since Aasia bibi’s conviction. They set up a Committee to review it and created a parliamentary subcommittee headed by Nafisa Shah. But with the first whiff of criticism by other groups, the Law Minister announced that amendment will take place “only over my dead body”! And so went the saga. On one hand the Punjab Governor criticised the law and lobbied for Aasia’s presidential pardon, on the other, the Law Minister and even the Interior Minister made statements countering their own government’s attempts. Instead of ironing out these stark contradictions, the departure of JUI from the coalition convinced the government that backtracking on the amendment would buy it survival security. Hence Sherry Rehman’s bill was not a victim of bad timing but in fact a victim of PPP’s bad politics.

3. Every backtracking move by the government emboldened those who equated amendment of the man-made law with ‘blasphemy’. Parties like PTI, PML-N and PML-Q have become actively engaged in street protests organised by the ‘religious right’ that are shadow boxing with imaginary blasphemers. Such farcical politics has few parallels, to which the government’s trajectory of contradictions and retreat made no mean contribution.

4. In pursuit of what the government believes to be its survival mode politics, the government and the party has practically abandoned Sherry Rehman. They have provided her some security outside her house but no government ministers have spoken in the parliament criticising the death threats against her. Almost no one has spoken for her at other public forums either. The government has not opted to be part of her defence in the Lahore High Court where there is a case demanding she be debarred. She is also involved, unsupported by the PPP, in trying to defend herself in a blasphemy case in Multan.

5. The big names of the legal community who led the lawyers’ movement have seem to have opted for selective commitment to rule of law by not taking a clear cut position to stand by Sherry Rehman — barring exceptions like Salman Raja and Hina Jillani. Should they not come forward to defend Sherry Rehman in the LHC and the Multan courts, as someone calling for the amendments to the blasphemy laws, to ensure that justice is upheld?

6.Against the backdrop of increasing cases of blasphemy being registered – against a student, a doctor and a DG khan imam and his son – Sherry Rehman stands vindicated on both the call for amendment and the timing of the call. She seems to have had a better political sense where it came to the dangers of ‘playing it safe’ and for opting for sheer expediency.

The government’s blundering over amending article 295 of the PPC will qualify as a textbook example of how ostensibly expedient politics takes nations down the road to hell. I pray that we are proven wrong but it seems that time will testify that led by the short-sighted politics of the PPP and of other parliamentary parties, Pakistan’s politics and State have weakened the essence and values of Islam, undermined parliamentary politics and strengthened the constituency of those who want to see Pakistan turn into a Republic of Fear. Such a heavy price to pay for political blundering and opportunism.

[1947]

Re: Pakistan: Life in the time of intolerance

Good times how I wish they would come back.

[hanibal]

Re: Pakistan: Life in the time of intolerance

Great read, and then what these societies did?

what we are reaping today is reaction of the actions taken by these very people who didn't make right decisions to keep the momentum going and/or to further improve things for coming generations.

The problems which we are facing didn't came up in one day, or it was not sprayed by some aliens... it is time for us to fix the basics so that next generations could live in better times

[Med911]

Re: Pakistan: Life in the time of intolerance

Crazy country Pakistan is..

[Nussairee]

Re: Pakistan: Life in the time of intolerance

...The vast majority of silent spectators, who have been taken hostage by a minuscule group of mullahs that have taken the state and the people hostage because they are better organised and have guns....

so true.....its jungly & mayhem at present in Pakistan!