Vinod2070
BANNED
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2007
- Messages
- 10,552
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
That is always the case. The local bandits and unruly elements always take advantage of anarchy.
Taliban has `huge' presence in Pakistan: Zardari
- Thread starter BanglaBhoot
- Start date
That is always the case. The local bandits and unruly elements always take advantage of anarchy.
Flintlock
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2007
- Messages
- 6,176
- Reaction score
- 0
Yes, Punjabis are being forced to grow their beards. You're right.
If people continue to live in denial, then perhaps that day is not too far.
roadrunner
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2007
- Messages
- 5,696
- Reaction score
- 0
This word "denial" seems to be a favourite amongst the scholars of Hindutva now. Is that what they teach you nowadays?
Well carry on. But you'll find bigger problems in your red belt
Well carry on. But you'll find bigger problems in your red belt
Flintlock
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2007
- Messages
- 6,176
- Reaction score
- 0
A nation in denial
Khalid Hasan
Some well-heeled woman in Lahore took to the streets this week, daintily holding candles, while bright-eyed young men made up the rear — all in honour of the Iraqi journalist Muntazir al-Zaidi, who lobbed his shoes at President Bush. The NWFP assembly passed a resolution and a nation, already in denial as to direct or indirect responsibility for Mumbai, found one more reason to rejoice. There is no doubt that the pulpit-thumping clerics that day were proclaiming yet another victory for Islam and predicting that it was only a matter of time before Muslims ruled the world.
Welcome to Pakistan, the self-declared Fortress of Islam where the mosques may be full on Fridays but where everyone cheats everyone and for justice one is advised to return to the times of Haroon-ur-Rashid or Jahangir.
Praising the Iraqi journalist for hurling shoes at President Bush, a spokesman for the Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan (TTP), which the government says is banned, promised that the Taliban would take all possible steps for the release of al-Zaidi: “The TTP will do all it can to secure the release of Muntazir al-Zaidi and to get hold of the historic shoes.” Maulvi Omar told reporters by telephone from an undisclosed location that al-Zaidi has become the hero of the entire Muslim world.
As a journalist, I have reservations about the Iraqi journalist’s action. A working journalist is permitted close physical proximity to presidents and prime ministers in order for him to perform his professional duties. He must not misuse that privilege or employ it to push his personal or political agenda. Therefore, regardless of what al-Zaidi or the rest of us think of President Bush and his policies, what the man did was wrong.
He abused and betrayed the trust that had been placed in him. Journalists should use their pens and their cameras, not their shoes, to express themselves. Thanks to al-Zaidi, in future, all journalists on assignment will be subjected to far greater scrutiny and background checks than they face today. In other words, al-Zaidi performed a great disservice to the profession, violating its ethics. I have read thousands of words written on the incident by Pakistani journalists, but none has questioned the ethics of al-Zaidi’s action.
Need I add that I have opposed the Iraq War openly from the start, and in a meeting with the then Secretary of State Colin Powell, I clearly expressed my views about the war that was then in the offing without mincing my words. Anyone who wants confirmation only needs to ask Richard Boucher next time he is in Pakistan, which, given his record, should be any day after Christmas. Boucher was present at the meeting, being the Department spokesman.
A bright young Pakistani who came here to attend university and who recently returned to Pakistan to live and work has sent me a message that deserves to be shared. BQ, which is how I will identify him, writes:
“I had no idea the country had regressed so much. Everywhere you look, people are depressed, angry, cynical, and they all complain non-stop about the government, even when it is not justified. I am just so disappointed that I don’t have words to explain it. It seems that even divine intervention is not going to save us now! It is not impossible elsewhere in the world to find fair, middle of the road news being presented objectively when it comes to major sources of information. Regretfully, this is not true of Pakistan. If one leaves the English press aside, it is too painful to even read anything in the Urdu press. It seems there is a race on to see who can win at not being objective. Is the Urdu press only staffed by people who are unable to separate their own nationalist or religious feelings from their obligation to be neutral? This is not journalism.”
BQ goes on, “It is both tragic and comical that the Urdu press, political pundits, social, military, and other so-called analysts constantly appearing on every private TV channel are stuck in the past. It seems everyone is one-dimensional. Nobody seems to get above the most superficial and weirdest possible analysis, namely that India, Israel and America are conspiring to harm Pakistan. Apparently, these countries have nothing else to do.
“Every society has its conspiracy theorists. Every society has people who write and say things that are not only wrong, but that make the average citizen nervous, but they don’t get to appear on major TV channels and they definitely don’t get to write daily columns in major newspapers, except in Pakistan, where it seems that almost everyone associated with the Urdu press lacks the ability to be objective, fair or balanced.
“For example, these so-called super-patriotic experts have discovered that Pakistan is the ‘Fortress of Islam’ and that everyone, including Pakistan’s neighbours, are scared of Pakistan’s nuclear technology and are conspiring against us, and by extension, against Islam. In other words, everyone is against Pakistan, because Pakistan has the atomic bomb. But worry not, they proclaim, these forces of evil will never be able to do harm us because of our ‘bum’. The layers of conspiracy get thicker and thicker and the irony is that most people buy into it, conveniently forgetting that the Soviet Union had the most sophisticated nuclear arsenal and yet, despite being a superpower, it broke up.”
BQ, writing amid power breakdowns, is not done yet. “There is no question that there are forces working to destabilise Pakistan, but these forces are not external. These are people inside Pakistan: they are the Taliban and the Islamists that Pakistan itself created and funded and now, the monsters have gone rogue. Ironically, after every suicide bombing in Pakistan, the media start suggesting that terrorist it was the work of the CIA, Mossad and, of course, RAW. Instead of tackling the country’s dire internal problems of water, sewerage, electricity, gas, petrol, pollution, unemployment, fundamentalism and the ethnic divide, we huff and puff about India, Israel and America. Instead of fixing our own country, we criticise others. Instead of taking responsibility for our failures, we look for scapegoats.”
I hope BQ is feeling better having got all this off his chest.
As for Mumbai, not only the nation but the government is now in almost total denial.
President Zardari said on Wednesday that there is still no firm proof that the gunmen came from Pakistan. There is still no conclusive evidence to substantiate the claim that the attacks were orchestrated from Pakistani soil, he added. Foreign Minister Qureshi says the “charitable” activities of Jama’at-ud Dawa will not be banned. In other words, Pakistan will disregard Security Council sanctions. And Qureshi was supposed to be among the enlightened ones of this regime.
Khalid Hasan is Daily Times’ US-based correspondent. His e-mail is khasan2@cox.net
A nation in denial :
Khalid Hasan
Some well-heeled woman in Lahore took to the streets this week, daintily holding candles, while bright-eyed young men made up the rear — all in honour of the Iraqi journalist Muntazir al-Zaidi, who lobbed his shoes at President Bush. The NWFP assembly passed a resolution and a nation, already in denial as to direct or indirect responsibility for Mumbai, found one more reason to rejoice. There is no doubt that the pulpit-thumping clerics that day were proclaiming yet another victory for Islam and predicting that it was only a matter of time before Muslims ruled the world.
Welcome to Pakistan, the self-declared Fortress of Islam where the mosques may be full on Fridays but where everyone cheats everyone and for justice one is advised to return to the times of Haroon-ur-Rashid or Jahangir.
Praising the Iraqi journalist for hurling shoes at President Bush, a spokesman for the Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan (TTP), which the government says is banned, promised that the Taliban would take all possible steps for the release of al-Zaidi: “The TTP will do all it can to secure the release of Muntazir al-Zaidi and to get hold of the historic shoes.” Maulvi Omar told reporters by telephone from an undisclosed location that al-Zaidi has become the hero of the entire Muslim world.
As a journalist, I have reservations about the Iraqi journalist’s action. A working journalist is permitted close physical proximity to presidents and prime ministers in order for him to perform his professional duties. He must not misuse that privilege or employ it to push his personal or political agenda. Therefore, regardless of what al-Zaidi or the rest of us think of President Bush and his policies, what the man did was wrong.
He abused and betrayed the trust that had been placed in him. Journalists should use their pens and their cameras, not their shoes, to express themselves. Thanks to al-Zaidi, in future, all journalists on assignment will be subjected to far greater scrutiny and background checks than they face today. In other words, al-Zaidi performed a great disservice to the profession, violating its ethics. I have read thousands of words written on the incident by Pakistani journalists, but none has questioned the ethics of al-Zaidi’s action.
Need I add that I have opposed the Iraq War openly from the start, and in a meeting with the then Secretary of State Colin Powell, I clearly expressed my views about the war that was then in the offing without mincing my words. Anyone who wants confirmation only needs to ask Richard Boucher next time he is in Pakistan, which, given his record, should be any day after Christmas. Boucher was present at the meeting, being the Department spokesman.
A bright young Pakistani who came here to attend university and who recently returned to Pakistan to live and work has sent me a message that deserves to be shared. BQ, which is how I will identify him, writes:
“I had no idea the country had regressed so much. Everywhere you look, people are depressed, angry, cynical, and they all complain non-stop about the government, even when it is not justified. I am just so disappointed that I don’t have words to explain it. It seems that even divine intervention is not going to save us now! It is not impossible elsewhere in the world to find fair, middle of the road news being presented objectively when it comes to major sources of information. Regretfully, this is not true of Pakistan. If one leaves the English press aside, it is too painful to even read anything in the Urdu press. It seems there is a race on to see who can win at not being objective. Is the Urdu press only staffed by people who are unable to separate their own nationalist or religious feelings from their obligation to be neutral? This is not journalism.”
BQ goes on, “It is both tragic and comical that the Urdu press, political pundits, social, military, and other so-called analysts constantly appearing on every private TV channel are stuck in the past. It seems everyone is one-dimensional. Nobody seems to get above the most superficial and weirdest possible analysis, namely that India, Israel and America are conspiring to harm Pakistan. Apparently, these countries have nothing else to do.
“Every society has its conspiracy theorists. Every society has people who write and say things that are not only wrong, but that make the average citizen nervous, but they don’t get to appear on major TV channels and they definitely don’t get to write daily columns in major newspapers, except in Pakistan, where it seems that almost everyone associated with the Urdu press lacks the ability to be objective, fair or balanced.
“For example, these so-called super-patriotic experts have discovered that Pakistan is the ‘Fortress of Islam’ and that everyone, including Pakistan’s neighbours, are scared of Pakistan’s nuclear technology and are conspiring against us, and by extension, against Islam. In other words, everyone is against Pakistan, because Pakistan has the atomic bomb. But worry not, they proclaim, these forces of evil will never be able to do harm us because of our ‘bum’. The layers of conspiracy get thicker and thicker and the irony is that most people buy into it, conveniently forgetting that the Soviet Union had the most sophisticated nuclear arsenal and yet, despite being a superpower, it broke up.”
BQ, writing amid power breakdowns, is not done yet. “There is no question that there are forces working to destabilise Pakistan, but these forces are not external. These are people inside Pakistan: they are the Taliban and the Islamists that Pakistan itself created and funded and now, the monsters have gone rogue. Ironically, after every suicide bombing in Pakistan, the media start suggesting that terrorist it was the work of the CIA, Mossad and, of course, RAW. Instead of tackling the country’s dire internal problems of water, sewerage, electricity, gas, petrol, pollution, unemployment, fundamentalism and the ethnic divide, we huff and puff about India, Israel and America. Instead of fixing our own country, we criticise others. Instead of taking responsibility for our failures, we look for scapegoats.”
I hope BQ is feeling better having got all this off his chest.
As for Mumbai, not only the nation but the government is now in almost total denial.
President Zardari said on Wednesday that there is still no firm proof that the gunmen came from Pakistan. There is still no conclusive evidence to substantiate the claim that the attacks were orchestrated from Pakistani soil, he added. Foreign Minister Qureshi says the “charitable” activities of Jama’at-ud Dawa will not be banned. In other words, Pakistan will disregard Security Council sanctions. And Qureshi was supposed to be among the enlightened ones of this regime.
Khalid Hasan is Daily Times’ US-based correspondent. His e-mail is khasan2@cox.net
A nation in denial :
Vinod2070
BANNED
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2007
- Messages
- 10,552
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
This word "denial" seems to be a favourite amongst the scholars of Hindutva now. Is that what they teach you nowadays?
Well carry on. But you'll find bigger problems in your red belt
Well it seems to be common word all across the world when it comes to Pakistan.
Your president says so:
Could he possibly be referring to you? Did he see the Mumbai and "Ancient Pakistan" threads here?
Check any Pkaistani opinion peace and you will see the same word being used.
Try the link:
Pakistan + denial - Google Search
and see 1.634 million results!
So it's not just "Hindutva scholars" you see!
foofighter
BANNED
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2009
- Messages
- 108
- Reaction score
- 0
LOL!. Just like typing "failure" and clicking "I'm feeling lucky" directs you dicretly to George Bush's website.
I see more sense than ignorance, in Zardari.
BanglaBhoot
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8,839
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
Zardari warns of widening Taliban threat
By Farhan Bokhari in Islamabad and Reuters in Kabul
Published: February 15 2009 19:51 | Last updated: February 15 2009 19:51
Asif Ali Zardari, Pakistans president, has warned that the threat to the country from Taliban militants now extends far beyond the areas along the Afghan border which have long been the focus of Pakistani and US anti-insurgency efforts.
[The Taliban] do have a presence in huge amounts of land in our side. Yes, that is the fact, Mr Zardari told CBS, the US broadcaster, in an interview. Its been happening over time and its happened out of denial. Everybody was in denial.
The admission came as Richard Holbrooke, Barack Obamas envoy to Afghanistan-Pakistan, met Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, in Kabul.
The Obama administration has pledged to review policy towards the region and Mr Holbrooke said on Sunday that Afghanistan would take part in the exercise. An Afghan delegation headed by the foreign minister will travel to Washington to give its input, Mr Karzai told reporters.
Mr Holbrooke said Mr Obama, president, wanted to make Afghanistan a priority and either Mr Holbrooke or one of his deputies would visit Kabul at least once a month. The Obama administration is considering sending up to 25,000 more troops to the country, but also increasing spending on development aid to undercut the growing insurgency.
But relations between the Obama administration and Mr Karzai, once the darling of the Bush administration, have grown tense. Mr Obama last week said Karzais government was very detached from its people, while the Afghan president has complained about the accidental killing of Afghans by international troops. The United Nations has said 455 civilians were killed in air strikes last year.
Writing in the Washington Post on Sunday, Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff, said regaining the Afghan peoples trust of would be an important part of the Obama administrations review.
In the end, all that matters is that, despite our best efforts, sometimes we take the very lives we are trying to protect. You cannot defeat an insurgency this way, he wrote. A review would include military, economic, political, diplomatic and informational approaches to regaining that trust.
On Saturday, air strikes by US drone aircraft on a suspected militant site in the Pakistan-Afghan border region killed 27 people.
Rustam Shah Mohmand, Pakistans former ambassador to Afghanistan, warned that the use of drones had alienated much of the population in Pakistans north-west frontier province, which borders Afghanistan. For ordinary people, the question is, whose side is their government on? Is it on their side or somebody elses side? Mr Mohmand said.
Western diplomats said the drones were a means to attack in locations where access was difficult for troops. Some diplomats believe the drones operate with knowledge of Pakistani authorities. This a two- faced policy. Pakistan protests the drone in public but accepts their use in private, said one diplomat.
FT.com / Asia-Pacific / Pakistan - Zardari warns of widening Taliban threat
By Farhan Bokhari in Islamabad and Reuters in Kabul
Published: February 15 2009 19:51 | Last updated: February 15 2009 19:51
Asif Ali Zardari, Pakistans president, has warned that the threat to the country from Taliban militants now extends far beyond the areas along the Afghan border which have long been the focus of Pakistani and US anti-insurgency efforts.
[The Taliban] do have a presence in huge amounts of land in our side. Yes, that is the fact, Mr Zardari told CBS, the US broadcaster, in an interview. Its been happening over time and its happened out of denial. Everybody was in denial.
The admission came as Richard Holbrooke, Barack Obamas envoy to Afghanistan-Pakistan, met Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, in Kabul.
The Obama administration has pledged to review policy towards the region and Mr Holbrooke said on Sunday that Afghanistan would take part in the exercise. An Afghan delegation headed by the foreign minister will travel to Washington to give its input, Mr Karzai told reporters.
Mr Holbrooke said Mr Obama, president, wanted to make Afghanistan a priority and either Mr Holbrooke or one of his deputies would visit Kabul at least once a month. The Obama administration is considering sending up to 25,000 more troops to the country, but also increasing spending on development aid to undercut the growing insurgency.
But relations between the Obama administration and Mr Karzai, once the darling of the Bush administration, have grown tense. Mr Obama last week said Karzais government was very detached from its people, while the Afghan president has complained about the accidental killing of Afghans by international troops. The United Nations has said 455 civilians were killed in air strikes last year.
Writing in the Washington Post on Sunday, Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff, said regaining the Afghan peoples trust of would be an important part of the Obama administrations review.
In the end, all that matters is that, despite our best efforts, sometimes we take the very lives we are trying to protect. You cannot defeat an insurgency this way, he wrote. A review would include military, economic, political, diplomatic and informational approaches to regaining that trust.
On Saturday, air strikes by US drone aircraft on a suspected militant site in the Pakistan-Afghan border region killed 27 people.
Rustam Shah Mohmand, Pakistans former ambassador to Afghanistan, warned that the use of drones had alienated much of the population in Pakistans north-west frontier province, which borders Afghanistan. For ordinary people, the question is, whose side is their government on? Is it on their side or somebody elses side? Mr Mohmand said.
Western diplomats said the drones were a means to attack in locations where access was difficult for troops. Some diplomats believe the drones operate with knowledge of Pakistani authorities. This a two- faced policy. Pakistan protests the drone in public but accepts their use in private, said one diplomat.
FT.com / Asia-Pacific / Pakistan - Zardari warns of widening Taliban threat
iamunique
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2009
- Messages
- 77
- Reaction score
- 0
Such admissions are a ploy developed as a direct result of the recent international criticism/pressurization of Pakistan for the 26/11 Mumbai attacks. By making such statements the Pakistani Govt is trying to dissociate itself from the terrorist strikes being planned & executed from Pakistani soil. Next time there is an terrorist attack in India or elsewhere where the attackers are linked to Pakistan, the Pakistanis will say "Look, we have told you earlier that our country has been overrun by the Taliban. Taliban is carrying out the attacks not US. How can you blame US for attacks being carried out by the Taliban from areas under it's control?"
Thus, the world will be forced to live with a new aberration -- A dual-faced Pakistan (much like the photo in my avatar!). A great idea, a brilliant stroke of genius by Mr.Zardari or the ISI or whoever is in control in that country.
Thus, the world will be forced to live with a new aberration -- A dual-faced Pakistan (much like the photo in my avatar!). A great idea, a brilliant stroke of genius by Mr.Zardari or the ISI or whoever is in control in that country.
roadrunner
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2007
- Messages
- 5,696
- Reaction score
- 0
Well it seems to be common word all across the world when it comes to Pakistan.
Your president says so:
Could he possibly be referring to you? Did he see the Mumbai and "Ancient Pakistan" threads here?
Check any Pkaistani opinion peace and you will see the same word being used.
Try the link:
Pakistan + denial - Google Search
and see 1.634 million results!
So it's not just "Hindutva scholars" you see!
Right, it's Hindutva scholard and Mr 10%. Like minded bunch of scholars you have there.
Patriot
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2008
- Messages
- 7,713
- Reaction score
- 0
Well it seems to be common word all across the world when it comes to Pakistan.
Your president says so:
Could he possibly be referring to you? Did he see the Mumbai and "Ancient Pakistan" threads here?
Check any Pkaistani opinion peace and you will see the same word being used.
Try the link:
Pakistan + denial - Google Search
and see 1.634 million results!
So it's not just "Hindutva scholars" you see!
Check this
India + denial - Google Search
India + Denial
Results 1 - 10 of about 3,390,000 for India + denial. (0.23 seconds)
3 Million + Results!
muse
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2006
- Messages
- 13,006
- Reaction score
- 0
A political review
Munir Attaullah
Having eschewed writing a political column for some months, the temptation to indulge in the favourite pastime of most Pakistanis speculating on the national political scene has got the better of me today. So, please forgive my two paisas worth of what some of you may well consider possibly partisan comment.
Start with an appraisal of where we stand today on what a few of us have long considered our number one national issue: dealing with our jihadi brigades. There are many hopeful indicators that, at last, we are headed in the right direction on this front, albeit glacially. These days, do we not hear less and less many of those staple specious arguments of yore that only ended up confusing the public?
I am thinking about idiocies such as let us first define terrorism; or it must be a foreign conspiracy, for no Muslim can kill other Muslims; or this is Americas war; or we need to first address root causes.
All these flimsy and escapist excuses long helped enshroud in a thick obscurantist mist our own Frankenstein-like creations and thus escape a possibly piercing public gaze and scrutiny. But, with the chickens once pampered and fattened as cannon fodder gradually coming home to royally and swaggeringly roost in our own backyard, I think it is now becoming clearer to everyone but the most obtuse what the real and only issue is: can the state allow armed groups to challenge its authority and monopoly of coercive power, and allow them to dictate policy?
If the issue is framed in such a fashion (which I am happy to note many more media pundits are now willing to do), and the answer to the question posed above is a resounding No, then let us applaud and support the President for being the first politician to have the courage political as well as physical for not pussyfooting around, and stating unambiguously what the only possible policy can be towards such groups: muzakirat, yes, and always, but only after they lay down arms, not before. Otherwise, they must and will forcibly be made to yield.
For, any other approach irreparably compromises and undermines the fundamental responsibility of the state for maintaining law and order. I am also happy to note that many other politicians have followed this lead provided by the President. But, Mr Sharif, where is the voice of you and your party when the government and our army needs all the reassuring political support it can get to bolster its resolve in doing for the nation the unpleasant task that desperately needs to be undertaken?
Oh! What a difference it would make to the armys prospects of success (and, therefore, to the countrys prospects for badly needed stability) if only the PMLN unambiguously threw its political weight behind the armys anti-insurgency campaign! But, Alas! That is not forthcoming. All the political energies of Mr Sharif and his party are concentrated elsewhere: to preserve at all cost their power base in the Punjab.
And the tactics (I cannot call it a strategy) they have adopted to this end prepare a populist base while simultaneously undermining the credibility of the PPP government are a body blow to an already fractious nation, at odds with itself, and beset with many a daunting problem that have little chance of being successfully tackled without a meaningful measure of desperately needed political stability.
But let the PMLN which may well win power in the next election not be under any illusions of the legacy that awaits it if the army fails to overcome the insurgency. Armed groups tasting success through muzakirat do not then proceed to lay down arms. Instead, emboldened and strengthened, they simply up the ante of demands and further strengthen their grip on the area under their control. That is the road to an eventual Somalia or Afghanistan, dominated by local warlords.
Is that the sort of Pakistan the PMLN wants to rule over, where Mr Nawaz Sharif is little more than the warlord of the Punjab?
That the President has invested a great deal of political energy in building bridges is apparent even to a cynic. What has Mr Sharif done? Is he not at odds with the Q-League, the MQM, the ANP, and the PPP? Has he made any attempt to reassure that other entrenched power centre, the army and the establishment?
His repeated and fiery emotional calls to bring the ex-President to trial, the obligatory references to the Lal Masjid martyrs, and (at best) the ambiguous stance on army operations in the Frontier and our relations with the US win plaudits from the public. But is such a multiply divisive stance the way forward for a nation that desperately needs both substantial international support and to stop its own infighting?
Contrast Mr Zardaris low-key and eminently practical approach to politics (the Senate elections will further vindicate his thinking) with that of the Lion of the Punjab. By walking out of the coalition at the Centre, directly targeting the President with political venom, and aligning itself firmly with the lawyers, the PMLN had hoped to provoke a confrontation in the Punjab, and a similar walkout by the PPP from the provincial government, allowing Mr Sharif to consolidate his grip on the province.
But Mr Zardari failed to take the bait. There was no reaction to that fiery speech (Woh hum nahin thaey...) by Chaudhry Nisar (even though it is clear even to a moron who stuck it out, and who left under a deal), or Mr Sharifs repeated barbs on TV. And, apart from the odd belligerent statements by the Governor, the PPP simply studiously ignored the PMLN call to leave the provincial government. The result, apparent from many a subtle little pointer, is that Mr Sharif seems once again to be having second thoughts.
Such a style of politics speak and act first, think later; and, we do not wish to destabilise a fragile democracy but if our actions produce that result the fault lies with others is evident even in the partys support of the lawyers. Need I remind you of the repeated flip-flops of yes we will participate in the election, no we will not, yes we will...?
In the case of the Long March, such a we are with you but we are also not with you approach has manifested itself in the strange decision to participate in the march but not the dharna.
Why? If the cause is just, and is also the single biggest issue faced by the nation, as claimed, why not join the sit-in till the objective Parliament capitulates and restores the CJ is achieved?
The writer is a businessman. A selection of his columns is now available in book form. Visit munirattaullah.com
Munir Attaullah
Having eschewed writing a political column for some months, the temptation to indulge in the favourite pastime of most Pakistanis speculating on the national political scene has got the better of me today. So, please forgive my two paisas worth of what some of you may well consider possibly partisan comment.
Start with an appraisal of where we stand today on what a few of us have long considered our number one national issue: dealing with our jihadi brigades. There are many hopeful indicators that, at last, we are headed in the right direction on this front, albeit glacially. These days, do we not hear less and less many of those staple specious arguments of yore that only ended up confusing the public?
I am thinking about idiocies such as let us first define terrorism; or it must be a foreign conspiracy, for no Muslim can kill other Muslims; or this is Americas war; or we need to first address root causes.
All these flimsy and escapist excuses long helped enshroud in a thick obscurantist mist our own Frankenstein-like creations and thus escape a possibly piercing public gaze and scrutiny. But, with the chickens once pampered and fattened as cannon fodder gradually coming home to royally and swaggeringly roost in our own backyard, I think it is now becoming clearer to everyone but the most obtuse what the real and only issue is: can the state allow armed groups to challenge its authority and monopoly of coercive power, and allow them to dictate policy?
If the issue is framed in such a fashion (which I am happy to note many more media pundits are now willing to do), and the answer to the question posed above is a resounding No, then let us applaud and support the President for being the first politician to have the courage political as well as physical for not pussyfooting around, and stating unambiguously what the only possible policy can be towards such groups: muzakirat, yes, and always, but only after they lay down arms, not before. Otherwise, they must and will forcibly be made to yield.
For, any other approach irreparably compromises and undermines the fundamental responsibility of the state for maintaining law and order. I am also happy to note that many other politicians have followed this lead provided by the President. But, Mr Sharif, where is the voice of you and your party when the government and our army needs all the reassuring political support it can get to bolster its resolve in doing for the nation the unpleasant task that desperately needs to be undertaken?
Oh! What a difference it would make to the armys prospects of success (and, therefore, to the countrys prospects for badly needed stability) if only the PMLN unambiguously threw its political weight behind the armys anti-insurgency campaign! But, Alas! That is not forthcoming. All the political energies of Mr Sharif and his party are concentrated elsewhere: to preserve at all cost their power base in the Punjab.
And the tactics (I cannot call it a strategy) they have adopted to this end prepare a populist base while simultaneously undermining the credibility of the PPP government are a body blow to an already fractious nation, at odds with itself, and beset with many a daunting problem that have little chance of being successfully tackled without a meaningful measure of desperately needed political stability.
But let the PMLN which may well win power in the next election not be under any illusions of the legacy that awaits it if the army fails to overcome the insurgency. Armed groups tasting success through muzakirat do not then proceed to lay down arms. Instead, emboldened and strengthened, they simply up the ante of demands and further strengthen their grip on the area under their control. That is the road to an eventual Somalia or Afghanistan, dominated by local warlords.
Is that the sort of Pakistan the PMLN wants to rule over, where Mr Nawaz Sharif is little more than the warlord of the Punjab?
That the President has invested a great deal of political energy in building bridges is apparent even to a cynic. What has Mr Sharif done? Is he not at odds with the Q-League, the MQM, the ANP, and the PPP? Has he made any attempt to reassure that other entrenched power centre, the army and the establishment?
His repeated and fiery emotional calls to bring the ex-President to trial, the obligatory references to the Lal Masjid martyrs, and (at best) the ambiguous stance on army operations in the Frontier and our relations with the US win plaudits from the public. But is such a multiply divisive stance the way forward for a nation that desperately needs both substantial international support and to stop its own infighting?
Contrast Mr Zardaris low-key and eminently practical approach to politics (the Senate elections will further vindicate his thinking) with that of the Lion of the Punjab. By walking out of the coalition at the Centre, directly targeting the President with political venom, and aligning itself firmly with the lawyers, the PMLN had hoped to provoke a confrontation in the Punjab, and a similar walkout by the PPP from the provincial government, allowing Mr Sharif to consolidate his grip on the province.
But Mr Zardari failed to take the bait. There was no reaction to that fiery speech (Woh hum nahin thaey...) by Chaudhry Nisar (even though it is clear even to a moron who stuck it out, and who left under a deal), or Mr Sharifs repeated barbs on TV. And, apart from the odd belligerent statements by the Governor, the PPP simply studiously ignored the PMLN call to leave the provincial government. The result, apparent from many a subtle little pointer, is that Mr Sharif seems once again to be having second thoughts.
Such a style of politics speak and act first, think later; and, we do not wish to destabilise a fragile democracy but if our actions produce that result the fault lies with others is evident even in the partys support of the lawyers. Need I remind you of the repeated flip-flops of yes we will participate in the election, no we will not, yes we will...?
In the case of the Long March, such a we are with you but we are also not with you approach has manifested itself in the strange decision to participate in the march but not the dharna.
Why? If the cause is just, and is also the single biggest issue faced by the nation, as claimed, why not join the sit-in till the objective Parliament capitulates and restores the CJ is achieved?
The writer is a businessman. A selection of his columns is now available in book form. Visit munirattaullah.com
Similar threads
