Archive for the '2007' Category

The Thinkable Has Happened!

Understanding Pakistan Project Team November 5th, 2007

Reporting from the site of London Protest.

This 2:53 pm UK Time. I am sitting right now in front of the Pakistani Embassy in where the protest is going on. There are about 200+ people here. A while back a gentleman was singing a very beautiful “nazm”"Aisay dustoor ko mein nahin ma’anta” and the rest of the crowd was chanting with him. Local leaders are addressing the gathering. There is great sense of excitement. However, I am also thinking that somehow this is inadequate. We need to do more. When we talk about the people of Pakistan and on behalf of people of Pakistan, I keep on thinking as to where those people are? The majority of 160 million or so Pakistanis are still silent, as always.

No matter what we do here, and what we say, Pakistan will not get democracy unles Pakistanis–a vast majority of us–demand democracy. Where are the people???

As the imformation blockade continues in Pakistan, thoughts are racing through my mind at the speed of light. I will try to pen more of my thoughts on this blog in the coming days. Ahmad Faraz has written the following about my country…

Meri bustee say paray bhi meray dushmun hongay    (There might be my enemies away from my land…)

Per yahan kub koi aghyaar ka lushkar utra                   (But when did a foreign army invade here….)

A’ashna haath hi aksur meri janab lupkay                       (It always familiar hands that attacked me…)

Meray seenay mein humaisha mera khunjar utra…        (It was always my own knife that tore through my chest…)

I leave you with Faiz’s famous poem “Hum Daikhain Gay” and its video depiction adopted from Adil Najam’s All Things Pakistan that comes to mind as a very apt representation of the present circumstances…

WPvideo 1.10

Signing off Now.

Athar Osama

P.S. I have a confession to make to UPP audience. I’ve been kept away from UPP for the last month or so because of some domestic issues. I intend to return to our Story of Pakistan as soon as I can–hopefully within a week or so. The battle for constitutional rights of Pakistanis must go on and is never ending. Our country needs us today more than ever before.

Section 144 on Our Patriotism? It’s Time to Reflect and Strategize

Understanding Pakistan Project Team November 4th, 2007

By: Athar Osama

Pakistanis are joining hands to protest the recent actions of the Military Regime. They’re defying section 144 in Pakistan and holding protests in front of Pakistani Embassies around the world. This is all very necessary, but is also perhaps inadequate. Not only are our numbers inadequate but what we’re trying to do now is perhaps too little, too late.

What are we–the educated Pakistanis–to do? How are we to bring other Pakistanis along? Where are all the Pakistanis, in whose name we are demanding the restoration of democracy? These are questions that confuse us all and beg a thoughtful consideration. For example:

- What is the real cause of this emergency - Judicial activism or religious extremism?

- How should Pakistanis abroad react? Should we call attention of our host governments towards situation in Pakistan? Should we force them to take sides even at a detriment to Pakistan, as a whole?

- What can we do, other than protesting, in the short, medium, and long-run to promote democracy and constitutional rule in Pakistan?

- Can majority of the Pakistanis shed aside their differences and agree on a single point agenda for their country?

- How do we engage with the political leadership of our country? How do we, using the principles of Understanding Pakistan Project or others, engage with other Pakistanis?

A journey of thousand years begins with the first step and we must start taking our first steps now.

I believe that we need to go farther than we’ve ever gone before. The present crisis demands this. If we don’t act today, we may not get an opportunity to act for a decade.

I’ve often said that the parha-likha professionals of Pakistan–all of us–would have to throw away our complacency and get into the political field.

Understanding Pakistan Project is proposing a series of informal coffee meetings/chats to discuss the situation and strategize. This could, if the group agrees, launch one or more Understanding Pakistan Activism Committees that would attempt to take on the challenging of doing something — rather than merely reflecting.

The inaugural meeting is being held at a Convenient Starbucks in Central London on the coming Saturday (To be Announced to those who RSVP). Similar Meetings are planned in KHI, LHR, ISB in a couple of weeks (again RSVP here).

Please visit the event website on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=7161796721) and RSVP if you’re interested in attending or holding a similar event in your own locality. Please also consider passing on this information to others around you.

Come join us, hear and be heard, and join hands with others to begin the necessary process of grass roots political reform in Pakistan.

If there ever was time for action, it is now and here.

Pakistan Zinadabad

Presidential Elections Special: Not Motivated by Politics

Understanding Pakistan Project Team October 2nd, 2007

Guest Post By: Advocate Muneer A. Malik

[Editor’s Note: This article was written by Mr. Muneer A. Malik in the heydays of the Presidential Reference against CJP. Its context, therefore, is different from the current Presidential Elections. However, given the fact that the Lawyers’ Movement has now extended to the Presidential Election, some of the arguments here are worth revisiting, especially, that there is nothing political or–depending upon how you see it–everything political about this movement. Mr. Malik basically argues, and rightly so, that the country’s politics and the fate of its Constitution are too precious to be left for others to decide and that everyone of us “has a dog in this fight”…]
THE reference against the Chief Justice has placed government spokesmen in a tricky spot. Early on, they realised that a direct attack against the Chief Justice would be imprudent. It would contradict their stated position that the president had simply put certain material about the Chief Justice before the Supreme Judicial Council for assessment and determination, and that the government was entirely neutral in the matter. How then would the government go on the offensive?

It was Information Minister Muhammad Ali Durrani, that fearless defender of downtrodden dictatorships, who arrived at an ingenious solution. Why not target the lawyers instead? After all, the whole fuss had been created by the bar associations (albeit fuelled by the media). If the legal community could somehow be discredited, the media would lose interest and the opposition parties would get distracted by other issues.

Unfortunately, the resultant government-generated propaganda aimed at discrediting the legal community has been blindly adopted by some in the ostensibly independent media. Even reputed columnists of this paper have chosen to attack the acts of the protesting advocates rather than the cause of these protests.

While devoting all its energy to the single-minded defence of the Chief Justice, the legal community neglected to explain its own actions to the public and left itself open to attack. This article aims at remedying that failure.

The first charge against the bar associations is that they have unduly politicised an issue that should, more properly, be a subject of pure constitutional and judicial debate. Let there be no doubt on this score; our struggle is political to the core.Our struggle is about the independence of the judiciary and the preservation of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. These are not arcane legal issues to be dryly debated in closed courtrooms. They are issues that affect the lives of every single Pakistani.

Continue Reading »

Presidential Elections Special: Prospects of Return to Real Democracy

Understanding Pakistan Project Team October 2nd, 2007

Guest Post By: Syed Sharfuddin

ON the issue of Pakistan’s democracy and whether it is still in transition, there are three distinct views. The view from the GHQ is that democracy is a form of government necessary to run a country, but when the country is about to become a failed state then democracy takes a backseat. What comes first is the survival of the country and its ability to serve its citizens.

No one can argue with this reasoning except that it has been raised too often and supported only by one institution. The question we should be asking instead is: can democracy guarantee Pakistan’s strength and development or does it need to be tailored to first ensure Pakistan’s integrity and stability?

The second view is held by the political parties, especially those which are not in government or have not been able to form a government due to the failure of their negotiations with the military. Their view is that Pakistan has never been a democracy in the real sense of the word. Whenever a prime minister tried to act independently and in accordance with the Constitution, he or she was sent home packing. More significantly, the exit of such prime ministers was managed not through an election but by other means.

The third view is a middle ground between these two extremes and acknowledges that there has been steady progress in the restoration of democracy in Pakistan since the military took over the country in October 1999 — but that this is not enough. If Pakistan is to continue to make progress on the road to democracy, a lot more must be done such as establishing the complete supremacy of elected institutions over the institutions of state, symbolised by separation of the two offices held by the president.

Continue Reading »

Wardi Special: A History of Failure - The Rise and Fall of the Military “Experiment” in Pakistan

Athar Osama September 23rd, 2007

By: Athar Osama

pk16-generals.jpgIn October 1999, when General Musharraf came to power in a coup and declared himself the Chief Executive of the country, he was met by a silent nod of approval by his 150 million compatriots. He charted a six point agenda that included broad-based accountability of those who had plundered the country’s wealth and political reforms that would rid the country of the shackles of “professional” politicians–which many of us, ordinary citizens, thought was a euphemism for a mix of political and land-reforms aimed at weakening, if not eliminating, the hold of feudal and family dynasties from the country.

I, for one, like many of my compatriots was willing to give the General a chance. The resolve that Musharraf showed upfront won him kudos and inspired a hope–a very naive hope, though–that when the General finishes his Supreme Court mandated 3-year tenure, Pakistan would be in a much better position to develop true sustainable democracy than before.

Then something predictable–something that I had not foreseen then–happened. Musharraf regime took a course that is far too similar to the 2 or 3 (depending upon how you see it) military regimes in the past. It is important to look at and understand this general pattern because I think it makes a very important point that many of us, Pakistanis, have not fully understood and assimilated.

Today, as Musharraf seeks to have himself elected for a second term, it is useful to ask a question: Is military rule the solution to Pakistan’s problems? Is Musharraf any different than his predecessor generals? Answering these questions is critical to charting a new course of democracy in Pakistan for it will address and counter the argument at the very center of the ongoing political saga and the impending presidential elections in Pakistan. 
In this article, I would demonstrate, I hope, that military dictatorship in Pakistan’s context has repeatedly proved itself to be incapable of either providing sustainable and stable governance or for solving the country’s long-term problems.

Therefore, when military generals force the civilian rulers out on the pretext that the latter have played havoc with the governance in the country and that they, and only they, can set things right, that makes a seriously questionable claim given the experience of 33-year military rule in Pakistan.

I will argue that there is a clear “pattern of failure” associated with a military regime that can be divided into three phases.

In the first phase, the regime comes to power and seeks legitimacy for it by making promises of cleaning up the mess and announcing a reform agenda. By the time the second phase begins, the regime is losing steam, legitimacy has remained elusive, and demands for return to civil rule are beginning to appear. This leads to creating a civilian face for the regime. The third phase really sees the crumbling of the artificial civilian order and last-ditch attempts by the regime to hang onto power.   Continue Reading »

Wardi Special: The Presidential Election - An Appraisal

Understanding Pakistan Project Team September 23rd, 2007

Guest Post By: Justice (Retd.) Wajihuddin Ahmad

MUCH has been said and more is likely to be said about the implications and connotations of the constitutional provisions germane to the forthcoming presidential election. The purpose here is to highlight cognate aspects here.

The official version on the subject is simple. They say that, in accordance with Article 41(7) of the Constitution, the presidential term, upon relinquishment of the office of the chief executive by the present incumbent, began on November 16, 2002, and would end on November 15, 2007. Article 41(7), as substituted by the Legal Framework Order, 2002 (LFO), with its proviso inserted by the Constitution (Seventeenth Amendment) act, is as reproduced below:

“(7) The Chief Executive of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan

(a) shall relinquish the office of Chief Executive on such day as he may determine in accordance with the judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan of 12th May, 2000; and

(b) having received the democratic mandate to serve the nation as President of Pakistan for a period of five years shall, on relinquishing the office of the Chief Executive, notwithstanding anything contained in this Article or Article 43 or any other provision of the Constitution or any other law for the time being in force, assume the office of President of Pakistan forthwith and shall hold office for a term of five years under the Constitution, and Article 44 and other provisions of the Constitution shall apply accordingly:

Provided that Paragraph (d) of clause (1) of Article 63 shall become operative on and from the 31st day of December, 2003.”

These being the parameters of the current presidential term, the proponents of the official point of view rely on Article 41(4) of the Constitution to suggest that the ensuing presidential election having been postulated by the Constitution to be held not earlier than 60 days but not later than 30 days before the expiration of the term of the president in office, must take place within the narrow corridor of September 15, 2007, and October 15, 2007. Article 41(4) of the Constitution (continuing unchanged since the inception of the Constitution in 1973) is this:

“(4)Election to the office of President shall be held not earlier than sixty days and not later than thirty days before the expiration of the term of the President in office:

Provided that, if the election cannot be held within the period aforesaid because the National Assembly is dissolved, it shall be held within thirty days of the general election to the Assembly.”

Continue Reading »

Pakistan of 2007: What Would Have Quaid Wanted?

Understanding Pakistan Project Team September 11th, 2007

By: Athar Osama
 
pk-b4.jpgToday, Pakistan solemnly observe Quaid-e-Azam’s 58th death anniversary. I am taking on the challenge of writing this piece with great trepidition, but utmost sincerity, and would like to state upfront that I truely believe that all of us, Pakistanis, including myself, owe a mountain of debt and gratitude to Qauid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah for giving us our freedoms in this country we call our homeland. Having said that, though, I would also beg to venture a bit further to say that while it was our solemn duty to establish the Pakistan of Quaid’s dreams in 1947–for that was the Pakistan for which hundreds of millions rallied behind him and over a million of us died, it is perhaps time now to dispassionately re-evalute that aspiration and take a more realistic view of our circumstances.
 
In the intervening 60 years, the reality of Pakistan’s politics and society has turned out to be everything but Quaid’s dream. We, as a nation and as people, have wandered around aimlessly looking for an identity and a raison detre for our existence and our quest to find our destiny has often been hijacked by unscruplous politicians, religious leaders, and miltiary dictators luring us with their own versions of Quaid’s dream. All political leaders–from the extreme right to the extreme left, from the theocrats to the democrats, from Islamists to the secularists–claim to be the custodians of Quaid’s Pakistan.
 
While nobody really knows what Quaid’s vision for Pakistan actually was for he said many things, on many occasions, and for many different audiences and it is easy to distort what he said to support one’s own version, we know one thing for sure. Quaid’s vision could not be all of what it is claimed to be at the same time. The struggle to interpret and re-interpret what Quaid may have said continues to this day… 
 

Continue Reading »

Religious Extremism in Our Midst: A Battle for Pakistan’s Soul?

Understanding Pakistan Project Team August 30th, 2007

By: Athar Osama

pk3-ds050326.jpgEver since the Lal Masjid Saga ended, there have been a large number of opinions and analyses of what went wrong and perhaps how to fix it. Different commentrators have termed the post-Lal-Masjid era as a manifestation of a society on a collision course with itself. It has been termed, repeatedly, in the media as a “Battle for Pakistan’s Soul”. It is not clear whether and what this battle is? Who is going to fight it? and How will it be fought? It is not even clear (here) what the soul of Pakistan actually is that we’re talking about? Understanding Pakistan covered the Lal Masjid story as it happened and supported an Online Petition (here) to determine the truth behind the circumstances and motives of what transpired during several months leading upto the Lal Masjid and during Operation Silence in July, 2007.

There is no doubt that Pakistan’s social, political, and religious fabric suffers from considerable and growing extremism. Lal Masjid was perhaps only one of the manifestations of that inner restlessness and discontent. It may not be the last. What are we doing to rid our country of religious extremism–or for that matter extremism of any kind? In this Understanding Pakistan Special on Relgious Extremism In Pakistan, we try to address some of the questions that confront us today and invite reader’s opinions on these issues.

  • Do we, Pakistanis, engage in a duplicity (or hypocracy) when we tell the West to better understand why Muslims hate them but do not ourselves make an attempt to understand why people within our own societies are turning into extremists and terrorists?
  • Is it the lack of a constitutional and political space–an opportunity to address all national issues, including whether Shariah be imposed in Pakistan, and in what shape and form–that is turning a large number amongst us into fanatics against the status-quo?
  • Is religious extremism a manifestation of poverty and economic circumstances? Would providing better–modern–education to children in schools rather than madressah’s solve the problem of religious extremism from our societies?
  • Is there any hope that religious extremists could be co-opted back into mainstream politics so that their grievances are addressed through a political process rather than extra-legal means?
  • Where do we see ourselves heading, 5, 10, 15 years from now, as a nation that is being pulled apart by at least two set of opposing forces–one that of religious extremists and the other secularists–both of whom want to take the country where (perhaps) majority of us don’t want to go?

pk13-41332644_kfc_ap_416.jpgThese are hard–very hard–questions. But one thing is certain that, sooner or later, we will have to address these questions for ourselves with utmost honesty and sincerity. In order to promote this debate, Understanding Pakistan is presenting four different viewpoints on this issue:

  • Ibn-e-Khuldun argues that it is the lack of political space to solve their issues that drives people to become extremists and terrorists
  • Don Belt, in a piece recently published in National Geographic, presents a variety “geographical” analysis of what’s wrong with Pakistan’s religious make-up
  • Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy presents a rather hopeless picture of the religious extremists and their political-moralistic agendas and stops just short of calling for the elimination of this “totalalitarian” force. 
  • Pew Global Attitudes Project looks at the issue of religious extremism as wider problem within the Muslim world than just Pakistan  

Regardless of how one sees it, we believe, that better understanding the phenomenon of religious extremism within our societies is critical to taking the first steps towards creating a society that is at peace with itself. What steps would be necessary to achieve those objectives? How would these be achieved? We believe that these questions have so far escaped a serious examination. Understanding Pakistan also launches a New Poll focusing on steps that might be necessary to fight religious extremism in Pakistan.

Please register your VOTE and drop us a COMMENT to tell us what you think and how you believe this Battle for Pakistan’s Soul must be fought? Religious extremism is a problem that is gradually but surely eating away at the fabric of our society. It is also something that we probably cannot and should not delay addressing any longer. Understanding Pakistan hopes to create an opportunity to have that conversation in the weeks and months to come.  

Next »