What's new

THE NATION'S FUTURE

I don't think Islam is the only binding cord for Pakistan, it is one of them, but it would hardly be enough were it not for a sense of "Pakistaniat". It is quite similar to the "Hindu culture" that, while not the predominant bond, is nonetheless an aspect of India.
Ethnicities are not the problem - people always argue that categorizing ourselves as "Pashtun, Punjabi, Sindhi, Baluchi etc. is bad, but what else could you do? You cannot make someone forget their language and customs, and therefore a Baluchi will always be distinct form a Pashtun and a Punjabi from a Sindhi.
Each culture is of extreme importance, it cannot be allowed to waste and die. The combination of these cultures is what makes up Pakistan, and our unity comes from sharing a national interest, religion and the ability to be more from the "sum of our parts".
The bane of any multi-ethnic nation isn't identification on the basis of ethnicity, but the perception that certain ethnicities do not have complete say in running their affairs and are being ignored on the road to prosperity. These doubts can only be removed if you delegate a large degree of autonomy to the provinces along with an equitable sharing of resources. On the latter Pakistan has struck a decent balance, the former is where most of the ethnic discord arises.
Extensive provincial autonomy, not diluting ethnicity and culture, is the solution.
AM, i'm not saying get rid of culture and ethnicities. that would be impossible. Allah put us races and tribes so that we may recognize each other, it beautifies islam because of the variety of different ethnicities all living in harmony.

however, forming a nation along the basis of these few ethnicities hasn't done any good for us. looking back at our history, i say it is a curse. islam teaches us that nationalism, or the favouring and appreciation of one's race or ethnicity, only divides us. islam can keep us all in line, even if it is only the kalima considering the theological differences with sects.

even in balochistan, the govt. has taken measures to benefit the balochi people. only balochi people can vote and run in elections in balochistan. yet, it is still a hot spot for evil designs and foreign hands. sindhi movement and pashtunistan, although not gaining much ground, have been areas of foreign interest. we are extremely vulnerable to these problems and yet we've had the cure all along.

pakistan is a very special place, being that it fits perfectly well into the hadith fortelling the rise of the muslim world amidst fitna and hardship. an army of muslims will conquer all of hind and when they come back with its rulers in chains they will find another army of muslims that will emerge from khurasaan (border of iran-afghanistan/pakistan) that will be undefeatable until they reach baitul maqdis.

as anyone can see, pakistan is conveniently located between these two locations. it's anyone's guess that pakistan will contribute to these movements in the future. some people may ridicule the uniting of muslims and formation of khilafah. it's true that our nations are in no position to do so. however, the muslims people are now more than ever ready for inquilaab. even if a muslim drinks, commits adultery, and commits acts we consider to be unimaginable, he or she are still all for islam.:) they will be more than willing to stand up and defend the honour of Prophet Salullahu Alaihi Wa Salam.

nothing is impossible if we all have a vision. we only have to do something to make it a reality.
 
.
Dear Agno
I totally agree with you . Nation is an idea based on ethics or human goodness . ethics is the basis on which any society flourishes . it has a simple rule .. "behave with me in the same way which you want me to behave with you " this rules keeps the society intact . however when societies starts living is narrow moralities , based on selfish religions or foolish ideologies of autocracy they clash with ethics and this leads to either collapse of societies and nations or they become stagnant .

Pakistan had a golden opportunity which they missed because of their obsession of India.it will take time for them to clean the mess of extremism and then rebuild the psyche of a nation .A nation based on its faith on humanity beyond any narrow definition of religions or race . someone has to make ppl understand that religion is a personal faith and is judged by the behavior and achievement of its followers and not by its spread .
 
.
Assad:

When I look back at history, what I see is that there has been too much central control. Whether the perception of "discrimination against the smaller ethnic groups/provinces" is accurate or not, the fact remains that because of strong central control there has been a handy whipping boy available for individuals to utilize when it comes to explaining the shortfalls of their region.

There is poverty and corruption everywhere in Pakistan, in Punjab as well, but people will only see that poverty in their own neighborhood, and the politicians will whine about not being able to do anything since the Feds have control.

The other issue is that you cannot really "change" how people view their nation - as a Muslim nation, or as a nation of Pakistanis. That change occurs naturally, as people of all hues and creeds enjoy the benefits of being part of a union.
 
.
Agno,

I agree that ‘Pakistaniat’ is also a binding force after Islam but IMO whenever ethnicities divide us it is Islam and after that Pakistaniat which stops us from fighting and make us realize that we are one.

Since India is a secular country and they have Indian nationalism which binds them but in Pakistan unfortunately there is not much nationalism so what do we have? Off course we only have Islam which reminds us not to fight and after that it is Pakistan.
 
.
There are two clear issues here. Religion and ethincity.There is little doubt that religion plays an extremely important role in everyones's every day life. Since the begining, religion has been an instrument of persecution of the non believers. This happened against Christians and Jews since Greco-Roman times and between Catholics and Protestants, Shias and Sunnis, Hindus and Sikhs, Muslims and Sikhs and Hindus and Muslims. This conflict continues to this day as in Northern Ireland and very recently in Gujrat and Iraq. (For simplicity I am treating sects as religion as well).

Ethinicity is determined mainly by language and by colour of the skin,
but in Indian context by caste as well. Thus language riots and attacks on low caste villages in India; fight between Pashtoons and Muhajirs and between Sindhis and non Sindhis in Pakistan, Kurd and Turks and Pashtoon & Northern Alliance in Afghanistan are all manifestations of this reality. Even in the US there was a conflict between black and whites. Except in the case of India, all other conflicts have been between the followers of the same religion. So what is there to done?

One of the earliest examples of the solution was found in Switzerland. Following the Catholic and Protestant riots in Europe; non Catholic parts of France and Italy & some parts of Germany combined together to bring about a confedration. The provice is called 'Canton' and it is a lot smaller than province in Pakistan or states in India.

IMO, solution to Pakistan's problems is decentralization and divison of provinces into smaller homogeneous regions. For exmaple Punjab could divided into 3 or 4 units, Pothwar, Central Punjab, Saraiki etc. Sindh into Khairpur, Hyaderabad / Badin and Karachi etc. Similarly NWFP into Hindko, Pasthoon and Fata, Baluchistan into Kalat, Makran, Pashtoon and Quetta. All provinces should be semi-independent such as states in US and in India. Centre to have responsibility for Defence, Foreign Policy, Currency & Foreign Exchange and interprovincial resources such as Water & Power, Aviation and Railways.

Admittedly this appears too far fetched at this stage, but I dont see any other way out the current instability and ethnic rivalry. I am aghast at the comments about Punjabis by some Pashtoon workers and even educated Sindhi and Baluchis. Centrifugal forces are getting stronger by the day and the ethnic difference is being exploited by vested interests including the mullahs such as some parts of the NWFP who always manage to sight the moon earlier than any other part of Pakistan.

Despite the split of original Pakistan, any one who still believes that religion alone can hold Pakistan together is being naive.
 
.
I don't think Islam is the only binding cord for Pakistan, it is one of them, but it would hardly be enough were it not for a sense of "Pakistaniat". It is quite similar to the "Hindu culture" that, while not the predominant bond, is nonetheless an aspect of India.

Ethnicities are not the problem - people always argue that categorizing ourselves as "Pashtun, Punjabi, Sindhi, Baluchi etc. is bad, but what else could you do? You cannot make someone forget their language and customs, and therefore a Baluchi will always be distinct form a Pashtun and a Punjabi from a Sindhi.

Each culture is of extreme importance, it cannot be allowed to waste and die. The combination of these cultures is what makes up Pakistan, and our unity comes from sharing a national interest, religion and the ability to be more from the "sum of our parts".

The bane of any multi-ethnic nation isn't identification on the basis of ethnicity, but the perception that certain ethnicities do not have complete say in running their affairs and are being ignored on the road to prosperity. These doubts can only be removed if you delegate a large degree of autonomy to the provinces along with an equitable sharing of resources. On the latter Pakistan has struck a decent balance, the former is where most of the ethnic discord arises.

Extensive provincial autonomy, not diluting ethnicity and culture, is the solution.

AGNO!

It is the cultural divide that keep all of us Muslims apart!

Cultures are not Important, the religion is! No two cultures can be co-related in this world until and unless on the basis of religion.

As per Islam if a society is based and run then you shall see that their will be no difference between the thinking and attitude of people belonging to different regions of the World or within a Country(as provincial divide).

As for the provincial divide in Pakistan, i do agree that Extensive provincial autonomy, can be a solution to certain issues within our society but will also create a distance among the people which will eventually weaken our National ideology!
 
.
There are two clear issues here. Religion and ethincity.There is little doubt that religion plays an extremely important role in everyones's every day life. Since the begining, religion has been an instrument of persecution of the non believers. This happened against Christians and Jews since Greco-Roman times and between Catholics and Protestants, Shias and Sunnis, Hindus and Sikhs, Muslims and Sikhs and Hindus and Muslims. This conflict continues to this day as in Northern Ireland and very recently in Gujrat and Iraq. (For simplicity I am treating sects as religion as well).

Ethinicity is determined mainly by language and by colour of the skin,
but in Indian context by caste as well. Thus language riots and attacks on low caste villages in India; fight between Pashtoons and Muhajirs and between Sindhis and non Sindhis in Pakistan, Kurd and Turks and Pashtoon & Northern Alliance in Afghanistan are all manifestations of this reality. Even in the US there was a conflict between black and whites. Except in the case of India, all other conflicts have been between the followers of the same religion. So what is there to done?

One of the earliest examples of the solution was found in Switzerland. Following the Catholic and Protestant riots in Europe; non Catholic parts of France and Italy & some parts of Germany combined together to bring about a confedration. The provice is called 'Canton' and it is a lot smaller than province in Pakistan or states in India.

IMO, solution to Pakistan's problems is decentralization and divison of provinces into smaller homogeneous regions. For exmaple Punjab could divided into 3 or 4 units, Pothwar, Central Punjab, Saraiki etc. Sindh into Khairpur, Hyaderabad / Badin and Karachi etc. Similarly NWFP into Hindko, Pasthoon and Fata, Baluchistan into Kalat, Makran, Pashtoon and Quetta. All provinces should be semi-independent such as states in US and in India. Centre to have responsibility for Defence, Foreign Policy, Currency & Foreign Exchange and interprovincial resources such as Water & Power, Aviation and Railways.

Admittedly this appears too far fetched at this stage, but I dont see any other way out the current instability and ethnic rivalry. I am aghast at the comments about Punjabis by some Pashtoon workers and even educated Sindhi and Baluchis. Centrifugal forces are getting stronger by the day and the ethnic difference is being exploited by vested interests including the mullahs such as some parts of the NWFP who always manage to sight the moon earlier than any other part of Pakistan.

Despite the split of original Pakistan, any one who still believes that religion alone can hold Pakistan together is being naive.

Yes provincial autonomy is necessary but it doesn’t eliminate the need of Islam. I have said it before that Islam stops us from fighting I mean we don’t have extreme nationalistic sentiments so why not use our strong point to keep our country united? At the same time there must be remedies for injustice and discrimination like provincial autonomy and I m a great advocate of provincial autonomy but it is only a method and it is Islam which teaches us to remove injustice that’s why we are thinking about provincial autonomy.
 
.
There are two clear issues here. Religion and ethincity.There is little doubt that religion plays an extremely important role in everyones's every day life. Since the begining, religion has been an instrument of persecution of the non believers. This happened against Christians and Jews since Greco-Roman times and between Catholics and Protestants, Shias and Sunnis, Hindus and Sikhs, Muslims and Sikhs and Hindus and Muslims. This conflict continues to this day as in Northern Ireland and very recently in Gujrat and Iraq. (For simplicity I am treating sects as religion as well).

Ethinicity is determined mainly by language and by colour of the skin,
but in Indian context by caste as well. Thus language riots and attacks on low caste villages in India; fight between Pashtoons and Muhajirs and between Sindhis and non Sindhis in Pakistan, Kurd and Turks and Pashtoon & Northern Alliance in Afghanistan are all manifestations of this reality. Even in the US there was a conflict between black and whites. Except in the case of India, all other conflicts have been between the followers of the same religion. So what is there to done?

One of the earliest examples of the solution was found in Switzerland. Following the Catholic and Protestant riots in Europe; non Catholic parts of France and Italy & some parts of Germany combined together to bring about a confedration. The provice is called 'Canton' and it is a lot smaller than province in Pakistan or states in India.

IMO, solution to Pakistan's problems is decentralization and divison of provinces into smaller homogeneous regions. For exmaple Punjab could divided into 3 or 4 units, Pothwar, Central Punjab, Saraiki etc. Sindh into Khairpur, Hyaderabad / Badin and Karachi etc. Similarly NWFP into Hindko, Pasthoon and Fata, Baluchistan into Kalat, Makran, Pashtoon and Quetta. All provinces should be semi-independent such as states in US and in India. Centre to have responsibility for Defence, Foreign Policy, Currency & Foreign Exchange and interprovincial resources such as Water & Power, Aviation and Railways.

Admittedly this appears too far fetched at this stage, but I dont see any other way out the current instability and ethnic rivalry. I am aghast at the comments about Punjabis by some Pashtoon workers and even educated Sindhi and Baluchis. Centrifugal forces are getting stronger by the day and the ethnic difference is being exploited by vested interests including the mullahs such as some parts of the NWFP who always manage to sight the moon earlier than any other part of Pakistan.

Despite the split of original Pakistan, any one who still believes that religion alone can hold Pakistan together is being naive.
i don't think proposing that religion can hold pakistan together is being naive. actually, that's why people made sacrifices for pakistan, so that they may have an islamic state where they could live with their muslim brethren therein.

No one is saying that we should keep a centralized govt. , the constitution sets the path for provincial autonomy. Yet, we need to set forth for ourselves "inquilaab". The people of Pakistan are going through a change in their lifestyles.

In the 1960's or 70's, military personnel would find it "weird" for anyone sporting a beard or any sunnah pertaining to physical appearances. Now it's becoming part of the norm in society. I'm certain that this idea of unity in Islam can bring people of all the provinces together, most notably balochi.

Cultural and ethnic differences have been a curse in our past and still are today. Why do I mention balochi's? It's because they are supposedly a fiercly independent people with a totally different lifestyle. They simply refuse to accept themselves as "pakistani".

However, islam abhors nationalism and favours muslims, regardless of ethnic boundaries, acting in unison and synchronisation. It is totally unacceptable to have pride on account of one's race, lineage, or ethnicity. When we have the "ilaaj" or "cure" to our chronic disease within our homeland, why not put it into use? there are no side-effects, no drowsiness, nothing but pure effect.

The ISI used it to their advantage in the soviet/afghan jihad and it proved to turn out to be "effective". the CIA and MI6 invited arabs, pakistani's, egyptians living in saudi arabia, UK, and the US under the banner of jihad. the ISI "collected" people from all provinces including people from Bangladesh(yes, grand mufti Rafi Usmani does clarify that).

Back to the point, we can rid of ourselves of these differences and finally act as one people. Ever since 1947, there have been two idealogical states based on religion, Pakistan and Israel. Both are supposed to be secular, but in reality are semi-secular. Both have nuclear weapons and have powerful militaries. I say to myself sometimes, "doesn't it strike anyone that this could possibly mean something from Allah?"

Unfortunately, Muslims have not done anything that is in the best interests of the Ummah as compared to Jews. Sometimes i even envy the people of Jewish faith, they have acted soley for the purpose of their state. Their state was born through war, they've personally catered their defense needs with impressive R&D base, they created the finest of intelligence agencies, they've even created their own form of martial arts. Why can't we do that? Are we so corrupt we can't even think of the future of the generations to come? Why can't we achieve the impossible?

Pakistan should be welcoming to all Muslims, not only Muslims that fall in the category of punjabi, afghani, kashmiri, northern indian, sindhi, or balochi. i'm sure we will have an influx of immigrants in the future from different regions of the world. if anyone could remember, we've had muslim refugees from Burma who escaped religious persecution. this is the "true" essence and beauty of pakistan, this is what it really should stand for.
 
.
Yes provincial autonomy is necessary but it doesn’t eliminate the need of Islam. I have said it before that Islam stops us from fighting I mean we don’t have extreme nationalistic sentiments so why not use our strong point to keep our country united? At the same time there must be remedies for injustice and discrimination like provincial autonomy and I m a great advocate of provincial autonomy but it is only a method and it is Islam which teaches us to remove injustice that’s why we are thinking about provincial autonomy.

Hon Salman,

Think I failed to make my point. I have not said that Pakistan should turn secular or we shouldn't use Islam to keep the country together. But I disagree that Islam keeps us from fighting and Pakistan can be held together thru Islam.

Either you deliberately chose to ignore the facts or are too much blinded by passion. When it comes to ethnicity or tribal rivalry, religion has very little influence. To quote actual examples:

1. Please read all previous history. Except at the the very outset, a very large number of fights have been among the muslims. The fight between Hazrat Ayesha ( RA) and Hazrat Ali ( RA). Later the fight bewteen Hazrat Ali(RA) and Muwayia. Karbalaa and the killing of Hazart Abdullah ibne Zubair inside the Kaaba by Hajjaj bin Yousaf. (He is the same Hajjaj who was uncle of Mohammed bin Qassim)

2. All thru the middle ages, there have been fights between the varius muslim rulers and muslim armies. What happened in East Pakistan/Bangla Desh and Pakistan Army? Do you think that Northern Alliance; main enemy of Taliban; were non muslims? You have totally ignored Saddam Hussein's invasion of Iran and of Kuwait, you dont think Kuwaities ( Sunnies) or Iranis are muslim either. Suppose you also think that either PA or Lal Masjid mob were not muslims neither was Akbar Bugti. Has Islam stopped suicide bombers from killing innocent muslims in Pakistan?

I am also a born muslim, only that my age has taught me to be cynical about any misconceptions about the influence of religion on the behaviour of nations and on individuals. My personal experience (not necessarily a criterian for judging others) found outwardly religious people to be mostly hypocrites and ruthless. This has made me anti mullah. I am not secular, neither I am against Islam but I am against exploiting people in the name of Islam. I firmly believe that in Pakistan's case; once we have obtained a country on the basis of Islam; religion is no longer sufficient to keep the different ethic groups together. Sooner we recognize this fact, better we would be able to solve our country's problems.

I have nothing more to add on this subject.
 
.
[QUOTE=AgNoStIc MuSliM;148555

Ethnicities are not the problem - people always argue that categorizing ourselves as "Pashtun, Punjabi, Sindhi, Baluchi etc. is bad, but what else could you do? You cannot make someone forget their language and customs, and therefore a Baluchi will always be distinct form a Pashtun and a Punjabi from a Sindhi.

Each culture is of extreme importance, it cannot be allowed to waste and die. The combination of these cultures is what makes up Pakistan, and our unity comes from sharing a national interest, religion and the ability to be more from the "sum of our parts".

Well if the state didnot want people to forget their language, then why was there such pressure on people of bengal which led to their independence.

Unity comes from sharing a national interest, what national interest do we all have, and sharing a religion?

So those who do not share the religion of islam are not prt of the so called unity?.
 
.
Agnostic you say people joined pakistan voluntarily, would you say that was the case with balochistan?

would you agree that baloch were harassed threatened and killed to join the federation?.
 
.
Agnostic you say people joined pakistan voluntarily, would you say that was the case with balochistan?
would you agree that baloch were harassed threatened and killed to join the federation?.

Where did you get this from. Can you please provide some hard evidence that the Baloch were forced to join Pakistan?
 
.
Well if the state didnot want people to forget their language, then why was there such pressure on people of bengal which led to their independence.

Unity comes from sharing a national interest, what national interest do we all have, and sharing a religion?
Awaaz, this thread is on the future of Pakistan - our state today is the result of experimenting with different forms of government. I am not convinced that the people of East Pakistan were being forced to "forget and discard" their culture and language, any more than Punjabis, Sindhis, Baluchis or Pashtuns were.

Urdu was chosen as a national language, and it does not find home in any of Pakistan's native ethnic groups, and the idea theoretically made sense. But regardless, it was part of a process of developing a system in the country, and mistakes are made. The question is about moving ahead through "decentralization" and "provincial autonomy", and allowing each province to take responsibility for itself, and not allowing the politicians to use the canard of "Punjabi domination" or "establishment".

On "National Interest" - the national interest is to utilize the combined resources (human, natural, industrial) of Pakistan to bring about progress in the country, attempt to provide every Pakistani access to that prosperity and allow it to become an entity that can withstand internal and external challenges.

Why do you think the EU was created? Almost every nation is a "union of peoples" - union of Tribes, union of families, of races, of ethnicities of whatever. In Pakistan we have a ready made "union of peoples", with a system of governance in place - what needs to be done is tweaking that system to make it more effective and efficient.
So those who do not share the religion of islam are not prt of the so called unity?

Why do you say that? I certainly didn't. Every Citizen of Pakistan, regardless of ethnicity or religion should have right to the nation, and the ability to share in its prosperity. Do a majority of Pakistanis question Kenaria's dedication to playing for Pakistan? Did they question Youhanna's (when he was Christian) dedication for Pakistan? Other than the MMA bigots, did anyone question Justice Bhagwandas's qualification, as a non Muslim, to be the Chief Justice of the Pakistan Supreme Court? No!

That is also why we need to move beyond religion, because despite the Utopian (completely devoid of reality, to make it clearer) ideals of some on this board, I have experienced first hand the hate of some of my close relatives towards a particular sect - knowing full well that my father belonged to that sect. This is the truth about religion today, though perhaps not to that extreme always.

I am not arguing that we should discard it, or that we shouldn't look at it as a "commonality", but that religion cannot be the overarching "binding factor" of Pakistan.

Agnostic you say people joined pakistan voluntarily, would you say that was the case with balochistan?

would you agree that baloch were harassed threatened and killed to join the federation?.

I am saying that the Baloch wanted to join Pakistan voluntarily. Read AB Alam's book, "Baluchistan", to get an idea of the political developments that took place their before, and after, Independence.

I think that successive Pakistani governments misunderstood the strength of religion (like many on this board are right now) to argue for central control, and were afraid of "celebrating different cultures", and that led to mismanagement and perceptions of "Punjabi domination". But the decision to join, from the accounts I have read, seems to have been supported by a majority of the Baloch.

That book I mentioned explores the Khan of Kalat's actions and polices quite extensively, as well as his relationships with his own, the Bugti, Marri and other Sardar's, and how he had the support of very few of them. It also reprints quite a few of his and his delegates correspondences with the GoP, Jinnah, the British, and the Indians. Quite a two timing fellow with delusional aims of grandeur along the lines of the Middle East Royalty.
 
.
On the issue of non-Muslims "sharing in the prosperity of pakistan", I am in complete favor of repealing the parts of the constitution that limit the office of the Prime Minister and President to Muslims.

I am also in complete favor of eliminating the phrases of "In the name of Allah" from the constitutional oaths administered to various office holders. These were inserted by Zia ul Haq.

Justice Bhagwandas (a Hindu) had to say "In the name of Allah" while taking his oath as a Chief Justice. How disgraceful.

However, one must also note that the US "pledge of Allegiance", that every US citizen must take, also includes the phrase "One nation under God", and one can argue that it is no different from what our oaths include. That does not mean that the US pledge is appropriate either, and there is indeed a national debate within the US as to whether it should be removed.

How wonderful if Pakistan actually beats the US to it.
 
.
Excellent article summing up Nawaz Era​

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—''Go, Nawaz, go!'' chanted the crowds. ''Remove Nawaz, save the country,'' shouted thousands of protesters in an anti-government rally march towards the provincial Parliament to demand the resignation of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.

Traditional opposition parties and hard-line Islamic groups joined the chorus including Watto, Imran Khan, Rao Sikander, Shah Mehmood, Chatta, Nawabzada Nasrullah, Aftab Sheikh and Tahir-ul-Qadri.

In another demonstration organized by Qazi Hussain Ahmad’s Jamaat-i-Islami Qazi declared, "Now Nawaz and Pakistan cannot go together. He will have to quit".

Qazi claimed that Sharif's tenure was the blackest of all periods and called for Jehad against his government. Imran Khan remarked, "Nawaz runs Pakistan like a Mughal-e-Azam. It’s a sham democracy. We are heading for anarchy.”

Late Mrs. Bhutto stated from London, “The government must resign paving way for fresh elections under a neutral set-up. The government has lost its political and moral legitimacy.”

Prime Minister Sharif played down the significance of the demonstrations in public saying they cannot reverse the huge majority that he won in the election in February 1997. The police was ordered to open fire at the opposition crowd and marchers showed reporters blood spots on their clothes and signs of beatings.

All this happened during a “democratically elected government” whose landslide mandate had a few parallels in the country’s history with perhaps the solitary exception of East Pakistan’s Mujibur Rehman in 1970.

A major flaw in the Pakistani electorate is its quickness to forgive and forget the faults of civilian rulers and quickly blame the military rulers for misfortunes befalling Pakistan.

While military rule might be considered dictatorship but the truth is that they have always replaced despotism “masquerading as democracy”. Every "democratic" leader in Pakistan thus far has been a tyrant and a manipulator of the magical word, only interested in consolidating power, amassing personal wealth and hoodwinking the public, least interested in tackling the real issues facing the populace.

Sharif’s second stint in power qualifies him to fall into this category. By the time he had completed his first year in office he had successfully damaged all established institutions of the country and set the stage of total autocratic reign indulging in personal corruption, and political megalomania.

This included repealing the president's constitutional power to dismiss governments, (13th Constitutional Amendment) bringing the parliament virtually under his thumb, (14th Constitutional Amendment) forcing the resignations of the chief justice of the supreme court (1997 Constitutional Crisis) and of an Army Chief, and cracking down on the press and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs).

The first important example of the tussle between the executive and the judiciary was the confrontation between the Chief Justice and the Prime Minister in 1997, when the Chief Justice held Sharif in contempt of court for using derogatory language against him and other judges. This episode was resolved in Sharif’s favour when he created a revolt in the Supreme Court that led to the Chief Justice’s resignation.

It was amusing to read the “tamer of the Judiciary” stating that his first order if he returns to power would be to restore the deposed judges and return an independent judiciary to the country.

Why did he not practice in power what he is preaching today or is he suffering from amnesia and doesn’t remember that he as PM unleashed his entire propaganda machinery to undermine the independence of the Judiciary?

He had no patience for independent judges and thought nothing of replacing those who disagreed with him and used the Supreme Court’s benches to take vengeance on opponents, to silence opposition leaders and to uphold his government’s decisions. The judges under political influence use to pass the judgment first and hear the witnesses later. Political workers in a premeditated attack, invaded the Supreme Court several times, with weapons, abused the judges, indulged in violence and forced the overthrow of the Chief Justice which not even Pakistan's previous rulers - civilians or dictators ever did.

Today he talks of “press freedom” which he tried to curb within “one month” of power by passing “the Registration of Printing Press and Publication Ordinance, 1997” which authorized magistrates and sub inspectors to initiate executive actions including the forfeiture of newspaper copies without the process of judicial review and restraint. The intolerance unleashed saw newspapermen not already silenced by tax investigations directly arrested and beaten and individual journalists harassed and intimidated.

Today Zia-ul-Haq’s protégé claims to be a “democracy campaigner” fighting for the constitution and the rule of law that he repeatedly trampled under his feet with draconian laws such as the Ehtesab Accountability Law, under which a number of prominent politicians and bureaucrats of the opposition party were arrested and detained. The Anti- terrorism Act or license to kill empowered the law enforcing agencies to kill a person on mere suspicion and to search houses and arrest people without a warrant. The law turned the country into a police state, violating the constitution and fundamental rights. Military courts were set up for the trial of civilians without lawful authority and human rights violations such as extra-judicial killings, staged encounters, deaths in police custody and floggings were rampant.

To buttress his power further and ensure undisputed and indefinite rule Sharif used Islam as means to an end, to establish a new Islamic order by imposing Shariat (15th Constitutional Amendment) which meant being crowned as Ameer-ul-Momineen empowered to enforce what he thought was right and prohibit what he considered was wrong in Islam, irrespective of what the constitution or any judgment of the courts said. Wasn’t that establishment of theocratic fascism? It was during Sharif’s tenure that Islamic laws were promulgated in the Malakand Division and Kohistan districts of Hazara Division, in 1999 The Ismaeli community of Chitral vigorously protested against the introduction of Islamic regulations.

On the economic front Sharif’s blunders were phenomenal. His government’s Ehtesab bureau suspended the operations of many foreign investors who had set up independent power plants (IPPs) to generate and supply much-needed electric power to the country. The reason cited was that the IPPs had been bribed by the previous Benazir government. The net effect of the government’s action against the IPP’s was to scare off potential foreign investors who preferred not to risk their own contracts being terminated at the whim of one or another government.

The government imposed a state of emergency after conducting its first nuclear tests. Fundamental rights were suspended in an apparent move aimed at freezing the foreign currency accounts of the people which further undermined domestic and foreign investor confidence. 13 billion dollars in the FCAs, including three billion dollars of overseas Pakistanis evaporated. The Supreme Court unanimously upheld the imposition of emergency. When the Lahore High Court declared void Section 2 of the Foreign Exchange (Temporary Restriction) Act, 1998, freezing foreign currency accounts and ordered their immediate restoration the court was told that the federal government had consumed all foreign currency deposits much before the May 28 nuclear explosions and the May 29 accounts freeze order. The fixation of an arbitrary exchange rate, the issuance of dollar bonds and the liquidation of FCAs as loan security were all intended to provide legal cover to its misappropriation and to evade its obligations.

Sharif claims he left a peaceful and progressive Pakistan. On the contrary he left Pakistan marred with political assassinations, religious discrimination, sectarian strife, bomb blasts and Talibinization. Pakistan’s Oppressed Nations Movement was formed in 1998 because of suppressed political anger against Punjab. Pakistan was plagued with financial scams, banks defaults, sugar and wheat scandals and fraudulent anti-debt drive of Karz Utaro, Mulk Sawaro. The public exchequer was robbed dry.

Pakistan was declared a failed state on the brink of economic collapse, surviving on a life- support system, gasping; while Sharif’s business empire abroad rose to new heights.

Nations future is safe with PAK army only!
 
.
Back
Top Bottom