Crisis of the State.....
A couple of weeks back when I started writing this post, I thought I will start my next post with the speculation that it has been arranged that wardiwala does not have the required numbers to be elected from the present assemblies. But events of the last few weeks have been so swift and have such profound implications that I have dropped the idea.
But the pace at which events are taking place, though expected, has brought some serious issues to the fore. And so today I will be touching a lot of things (and will try to keep them brief).
Lal Masjid operation has brought us as a nation to a point to which we were destined, for everything we do comes to fore. Out security apparatus raised this militant brand of Islam (so much so that the extremist elements have penetrated within the apparatus to the extent that it is hard to differentiate) to further their interests without realizing that anyone who has muscle will demand his share of power sooner or later. People, having faith in the extremist ideology, saw this welcoming collaboration by the security apparatus as an opportunity to increase their influence and firepower and have now reached a stage where they are ready to lay their claim on the whole pie. Just when this operation proves once more that military mind is unable to think rationally and plan (East Pakistan, Siachen, Kargil, drugs, land mafias and the list goes on and on and on), it also brings to the for a few questions that we need to answer as a nation. Below are raised a few questions that I think each one of us should try answering to him honestly.
1. Realistically speaking, Lal Masjid or no Lal Masjid, 9/11 or no 9/11, wasn’t it inevitable that a network of 1 million plus trained militants, with support of almost 2 million (brainwashed) madrassah students and other religious elements and having connections spread all around the region, were to lay their claim on the whole pie? Isn’t this claim an ambition emerging of the sheer muscle and firepower rather than the events?
2. Isn’t it true that religious lobby has always been known for its violent tactics? Isn’t it true that Jamiyat was the first student union that brought firearms to campuses? Isn’t it true that any agitation involving religious parties has always been violent while mostly the political agitation remains peaceful here? Isn’t it true unlike the political forces of Pakistan, these people believe in imposing their agenda through the barrel of the gun (with only exception of MQM maybe)?
3. Isn’t it true that just when grievances of Balochs are much more severe than the religious lobby (and I really doubt if they have any grievance – in Pakistan any Muslim can practice his religion as per his liking – the problem with them is they want others to follow what they believe in through the barrel of the gun), the warfare of BLA is many times more civilized and has no exploitative tools like suicide bombing (something that is basically emotional and psychological exploitation of the bomber himself and thus a sin of worst degree)?
4. Why haven’t we ever heard a leader of radical/religious group/party blowing him in a suicide attack? Why is it always some illiterate chap or a man with traumatic psychological history? If this is a road to heaven, why don’t the leaders lay a claim on heaven through it?
5. Given that delay in operation on Lal Masjid can be disputed, what option did the state ultimately have for fixing the situation?
6. Isn’t it true that, all, both Ghazi and Aziz demanded in the end was a safe passage for them alone? And thus does that justify putting lives of many at risk?
7. Which state can tolerate such challenges to its writ? Where were these pseudo intellectuals of media when the Saudi forces killed them in Haram?
8. Isn’t it true that the operation, when it finally took place, was on the pressure of Chinese Government? So why falsely propagate that it was toeing the US line?
9. Isn’t it true that the subsequent attacks on Chinese all across Pakistan was an acknowledgement of the fact that this lobby is going to take our best friends head on for their claims on power? And whom are we deceiving by looking for a foreign hand in these attacks? Weren’t they pure and simple revenge attacks?
10. Isn’t it true that this lobby fears general elections and a popular liberal government because it fears that unlike Mush baba’s cosmetic dealing with the menace of extremism such government will tackle the threat seriously and effectively? Maulana Fazal ur Rehman has said it time and again that if PPP is given power, country will disintegrate (i.e. we will wage a civil war if someone challenges us; even if it is against a popular, democratic government).
11. Isn’t it true that this genuine tackling of extremism is the biggest fear in the intelligence echelons these days and thus the steps like formation of APDM etc? Isn’t this APDM rebirth of PNA and IJI (alliance about which it has been established beyond doubt were formed by ISI to block peoples’ forces and to enhance the agenda of establishment)?
12. Isn’t it true that for these forces, the judiciary will be independent till it gives decisions in their favor and will become “a tool of oppressor” when it gives verdicts against them (no matter how just)? Haven’t we seen it in the speech of Fazal Ur Rehman’s speech at APC?
13. Isn’t it true that these Islamists have no interest in the system or the state and thus their actions are aimed at furthering their vision of a theocracy?
14. Haven’t we read Iranian revolution when the movement started and kindled by the liberal left was hijacked by extremist right for it was the only resistance force on ground that had arms? Isn’t it the case with us? And doesn’t that make a smooth transition from military rule to civilian rule all the more essential?
15. For those of us well informed, isn’t it true that our intelligence agencies are filled with elements who support extremism, enforcing their brand of Islam on others, and militancy? Isn’t it true that there have been at least 10 coup attempts by such elements not against the ruler but against the system and the state since the fall of Zia?
16. Just when media claims itself to be the 4th pillar of the state (and rightly so) why some in media use this pillar of state to defend and justify the anti-state activities? (Debating them is one thing and making a marsiya of it is quite another)
17. Are we ready for an Islamists’ takeover?
18. Who will be the leader of this Islamist government? If Fazal thinks he can be, he must remember the power that flows from the barrel of the gun remains with those holding the gun. Unlike Iran, we don’t even have any indigenous leadership. Isn’t it true that the undisputed leader for such Islamist arrangement can only be Mullah Omer or Osama Bin Laden. Even the czars of our security apparatus will be marginalized in such situation for it is the conqueror that calls shots.
18. Isn’t the attack on armed forces in Frontier an indicator that the junior partners of the “strategic security vision” are now demanding being the senior partners? Is it acceptable to Army?
19. Can’t we decide for once that the will of people should prevail and so should their right to practice religion as per their will and not the kind dictated by the barrel of the gun?
20. Isn’t it true that the crisis is not of killing of innocent women and children in Lal Masjid, its consequences, and its responsible, but is of whether a handful be allowed to impose their will on others through force?
21. Can’t we accept and acknowledge that the efforts to combat extremism have been half hearted and Mr. Musharaf himself contributed to this mess for his petty self interests? And isn’t it true that both his military and political base were heavily dominated by the sympathizers of Islamization for one reason or the other?
22. Isn’t it true that a powerful nexus of security apparatus supporting radicals has helped the formation of APDM to block the way of genuine political forces through general elections? If elections could be rigged in past to facilitate IJI, same can be done now. And isn’t the creation of APDM with Nawaz at its center a stick and carrot to Musharaf that if you give in and join us, we can abandon Nawaz else we are capable of destroying you?
23. Is Benazir’s “alleged record” that worse than the actual record of MMA? If yes, what has she done till now that is worse than what Mullahs did and are doing? If no then where went Nawaz’s “so said” principled position? (And who could forget those glittering faces on leaving Pakistan and arrival at Jeddah). Why is he numb and silence over statements of his Maulana Buddy to reelect Musharaf in uniform? Isn’t it an assurance from the same quarters who nurtured him and raised him and protected him in 80s and 90s? Why with these visible signs, the journalists supporting his stand call themselves and him principled?
24. For both Nawaz Sharif and Imran Khan, just when MQM’s fascist tendencies is a big issue (and rightly so), why haven’t they uttered a single word against fascism of religious extremists in frontier (including letters to girls schools and disenfranchising women)? Imran Khan even tries justifying it calling it a custom. CRAP CRAP!!! Fascism is imposing your will and ideology on the other through force. SIMPLE. FULL STOP.
25. For Pakistan Army, isn’t it evident through the suicide attacks on security forces what radicals want? Will they give in even when Government and society adheres to all their demands and let them decide our course? Wouldn’t they demand even more then? Is Army willing to tolerate this? Or is putting the house in order for a genuine civilian rule with protection of basic human rights (and that includes right to interpret the religion and practice as per one’s own conviction) and wholehearted and sincere backing of Armed Forces and Bureaucracy a saner way? In my humble opinion, latter is definitely the better way for the society and the state. And even for Army nothing will be left if these extremists run a wild but a lot can be saved if Army decides to side the forces of liberation and democracy.
26. In a country where a Prime Minister was killed by the state apparatus through judiciary (and his party still holds the largest following in the country), the mainstream of that movement never chanted violent revenge, neither did anyone try justifying the use of violence as a consequence of that injustice, where 50 people were killed on the roads of Karachi on May 12th, yet no one chanted for a violent revenge and neither tried justifying injustice as a cause for initiating counter-violence (and many dead were Pathans too – so don’t mention their customs), why is a section of media trying to justify the violence following Lal Masjid incident a cause of injustice? (Just when maulana Aziz’s case and the whole matter is with courts and courts have never been freer than before). Isn’t it simple that just because Mullah holds gun everything is justified for him? And isn’t it a dangerous trend that will push other forces in this country towards armament in retaliation if things worsen? If mainstream parties wouldn’t do it, other clusters will start emerging.
27. Isn’t it true that we are living in very troubling times and what is needed more than anything else is a smooth transition of power? Have we debated the extent to which we are ready to compromise for a smooth transition in these troubling times? Or we will continue chanting idiosyncratic 12 lines that we remember (both Nawaz and Imran Khan – they answer every question through fix 10-12 pet lines as if someone has made a parrot learn them by heart – if you don’t believe me watch their last 10 interviews in one sitting)?
28. Why is it so that there is only one political party that is preparing for elections and is working to ensure they take place on time and are credible? Do the others know their fate and thus are running away?
29. Isn’t it true that many ordinary men (mostly middle class, formally educated – if you could call MA/BA education) on the street who were laughing at Maulvi Aziz and were opposed to Lal Masjid people throughout, became sympathetic to Ghazi when he died at the hand of State apparatus? Doesn’t that show that people think of state as them rather than us? Can we survive as a society, let alone state, if this trend prevails? Isn’t it the biggest crisis facing our state?
30. Isn’t it true that certain elements in the security apparatus, after Army and Security forces becoming targets of radicals, are trying to give it a sectarian touch by pointing to the sect of Interior Secretary and DG Rangers?
31. With all the talk of liberal fascism in the media by the journalists, who by the way are famous for their links to ISI, how come having liberal views amount to fascism? When have the liberals tried to impose their will on others? When have the liberals demanded beheading a man who is not clean-shaven or lashing a woman who wears veil? Having extreme opinions, having faith in them and being opinionated is an honest and noble thing. Your views could be liberal or fundamentalist, but you have no right forcing them on others. And fascism comes only when you force your view on others by force and this is what radicals are doing all along – not liberals.
Each one of us, the proud and privileged citizens of Pakistan, is in the court room of history. Each one of us and the choices we make matter. The law of natural justice prevails and truth unfolds and the history will give its verdict on us. It will happen in our lifetime. So make a decision that is a) well informed, b) well thought through, and c) honest. Don’t let your personal biases affect the objectivity of your thinking. For when the truth unfolds, you shouldn’t be ashamed in your own eyes and to your own conscience. There are not many choices. You either oppose it or you are a party to turning us into a state and society of Theocratic Fascism. Advocating neutrality is supporting fascism.
But the pace at which events are taking place, though expected, has brought some serious issues to the fore. And so today I will be touching a lot of things (and will try to keep them brief).
Lal Masjid operation has brought us as a nation to a point to which we were destined, for everything we do comes to fore. Out security apparatus raised this militant brand of Islam (so much so that the extremist elements have penetrated within the apparatus to the extent that it is hard to differentiate) to further their interests without realizing that anyone who has muscle will demand his share of power sooner or later. People, having faith in the extremist ideology, saw this welcoming collaboration by the security apparatus as an opportunity to increase their influence and firepower and have now reached a stage where they are ready to lay their claim on the whole pie. Just when this operation proves once more that military mind is unable to think rationally and plan (East Pakistan, Siachen, Kargil, drugs, land mafias and the list goes on and on and on), it also brings to the for a few questions that we need to answer as a nation. Below are raised a few questions that I think each one of us should try answering to him honestly.
1. Realistically speaking, Lal Masjid or no Lal Masjid, 9/11 or no 9/11, wasn’t it inevitable that a network of 1 million plus trained militants, with support of almost 2 million (brainwashed) madrassah students and other religious elements and having connections spread all around the region, were to lay their claim on the whole pie? Isn’t this claim an ambition emerging of the sheer muscle and firepower rather than the events?
2. Isn’t it true that religious lobby has always been known for its violent tactics? Isn’t it true that Jamiyat was the first student union that brought firearms to campuses? Isn’t it true that any agitation involving religious parties has always been violent while mostly the political agitation remains peaceful here? Isn’t it true unlike the political forces of Pakistan, these people believe in imposing their agenda through the barrel of the gun (with only exception of MQM maybe)?
3. Isn’t it true that just when grievances of Balochs are much more severe than the religious lobby (and I really doubt if they have any grievance – in Pakistan any Muslim can practice his religion as per his liking – the problem with them is they want others to follow what they believe in through the barrel of the gun), the warfare of BLA is many times more civilized and has no exploitative tools like suicide bombing (something that is basically emotional and psychological exploitation of the bomber himself and thus a sin of worst degree)?
4. Why haven’t we ever heard a leader of radical/religious group/party blowing him in a suicide attack? Why is it always some illiterate chap or a man with traumatic psychological history? If this is a road to heaven, why don’t the leaders lay a claim on heaven through it?
5. Given that delay in operation on Lal Masjid can be disputed, what option did the state ultimately have for fixing the situation?
6. Isn’t it true that, all, both Ghazi and Aziz demanded in the end was a safe passage for them alone? And thus does that justify putting lives of many at risk?
7. Which state can tolerate such challenges to its writ? Where were these pseudo intellectuals of media when the Saudi forces killed them in Haram?
8. Isn’t it true that the operation, when it finally took place, was on the pressure of Chinese Government? So why falsely propagate that it was toeing the US line?
9. Isn’t it true that the subsequent attacks on Chinese all across Pakistan was an acknowledgement of the fact that this lobby is going to take our best friends head on for their claims on power? And whom are we deceiving by looking for a foreign hand in these attacks? Weren’t they pure and simple revenge attacks?
10. Isn’t it true that this lobby fears general elections and a popular liberal government because it fears that unlike Mush baba’s cosmetic dealing with the menace of extremism such government will tackle the threat seriously and effectively? Maulana Fazal ur Rehman has said it time and again that if PPP is given power, country will disintegrate (i.e. we will wage a civil war if someone challenges us; even if it is against a popular, democratic government).
11. Isn’t it true that this genuine tackling of extremism is the biggest fear in the intelligence echelons these days and thus the steps like formation of APDM etc? Isn’t this APDM rebirth of PNA and IJI (alliance about which it has been established beyond doubt were formed by ISI to block peoples’ forces and to enhance the agenda of establishment)?
12. Isn’t it true that for these forces, the judiciary will be independent till it gives decisions in their favor and will become “a tool of oppressor” when it gives verdicts against them (no matter how just)? Haven’t we seen it in the speech of Fazal Ur Rehman’s speech at APC?
13. Isn’t it true that these Islamists have no interest in the system or the state and thus their actions are aimed at furthering their vision of a theocracy?
14. Haven’t we read Iranian revolution when the movement started and kindled by the liberal left was hijacked by extremist right for it was the only resistance force on ground that had arms? Isn’t it the case with us? And doesn’t that make a smooth transition from military rule to civilian rule all the more essential?
15. For those of us well informed, isn’t it true that our intelligence agencies are filled with elements who support extremism, enforcing their brand of Islam on others, and militancy? Isn’t it true that there have been at least 10 coup attempts by such elements not against the ruler but against the system and the state since the fall of Zia?
16. Just when media claims itself to be the 4th pillar of the state (and rightly so) why some in media use this pillar of state to defend and justify the anti-state activities? (Debating them is one thing and making a marsiya of it is quite another)
17. Are we ready for an Islamists’ takeover?
18. Who will be the leader of this Islamist government? If Fazal thinks he can be, he must remember the power that flows from the barrel of the gun remains with those holding the gun. Unlike Iran, we don’t even have any indigenous leadership. Isn’t it true that the undisputed leader for such Islamist arrangement can only be Mullah Omer or Osama Bin Laden. Even the czars of our security apparatus will be marginalized in such situation for it is the conqueror that calls shots.
18. Isn’t the attack on armed forces in Frontier an indicator that the junior partners of the “strategic security vision” are now demanding being the senior partners? Is it acceptable to Army?
19. Can’t we decide for once that the will of people should prevail and so should their right to practice religion as per their will and not the kind dictated by the barrel of the gun?
20. Isn’t it true that the crisis is not of killing of innocent women and children in Lal Masjid, its consequences, and its responsible, but is of whether a handful be allowed to impose their will on others through force?
21. Can’t we accept and acknowledge that the efforts to combat extremism have been half hearted and Mr. Musharaf himself contributed to this mess for his petty self interests? And isn’t it true that both his military and political base were heavily dominated by the sympathizers of Islamization for one reason or the other?
22. Isn’t it true that a powerful nexus of security apparatus supporting radicals has helped the formation of APDM to block the way of genuine political forces through general elections? If elections could be rigged in past to facilitate IJI, same can be done now. And isn’t the creation of APDM with Nawaz at its center a stick and carrot to Musharaf that if you give in and join us, we can abandon Nawaz else we are capable of destroying you?
23. Is Benazir’s “alleged record” that worse than the actual record of MMA? If yes, what has she done till now that is worse than what Mullahs did and are doing? If no then where went Nawaz’s “so said” principled position? (And who could forget those glittering faces on leaving Pakistan and arrival at Jeddah). Why is he numb and silence over statements of his Maulana Buddy to reelect Musharaf in uniform? Isn’t it an assurance from the same quarters who nurtured him and raised him and protected him in 80s and 90s? Why with these visible signs, the journalists supporting his stand call themselves and him principled?
24. For both Nawaz Sharif and Imran Khan, just when MQM’s fascist tendencies is a big issue (and rightly so), why haven’t they uttered a single word against fascism of religious extremists in frontier (including letters to girls schools and disenfranchising women)? Imran Khan even tries justifying it calling it a custom. CRAP CRAP!!! Fascism is imposing your will and ideology on the other through force. SIMPLE. FULL STOP.
25. For Pakistan Army, isn’t it evident through the suicide attacks on security forces what radicals want? Will they give in even when Government and society adheres to all their demands and let them decide our course? Wouldn’t they demand even more then? Is Army willing to tolerate this? Or is putting the house in order for a genuine civilian rule with protection of basic human rights (and that includes right to interpret the religion and practice as per one’s own conviction) and wholehearted and sincere backing of Armed Forces and Bureaucracy a saner way? In my humble opinion, latter is definitely the better way for the society and the state. And even for Army nothing will be left if these extremists run a wild but a lot can be saved if Army decides to side the forces of liberation and democracy.
26. In a country where a Prime Minister was killed by the state apparatus through judiciary (and his party still holds the largest following in the country), the mainstream of that movement never chanted violent revenge, neither did anyone try justifying the use of violence as a consequence of that injustice, where 50 people were killed on the roads of Karachi on May 12th, yet no one chanted for a violent revenge and neither tried justifying injustice as a cause for initiating counter-violence (and many dead were Pathans too – so don’t mention their customs), why is a section of media trying to justify the violence following Lal Masjid incident a cause of injustice? (Just when maulana Aziz’s case and the whole matter is with courts and courts have never been freer than before). Isn’t it simple that just because Mullah holds gun everything is justified for him? And isn’t it a dangerous trend that will push other forces in this country towards armament in retaliation if things worsen? If mainstream parties wouldn’t do it, other clusters will start emerging.
27. Isn’t it true that we are living in very troubling times and what is needed more than anything else is a smooth transition of power? Have we debated the extent to which we are ready to compromise for a smooth transition in these troubling times? Or we will continue chanting idiosyncratic 12 lines that we remember (both Nawaz and Imran Khan – they answer every question through fix 10-12 pet lines as if someone has made a parrot learn them by heart – if you don’t believe me watch their last 10 interviews in one sitting)?
28. Why is it so that there is only one political party that is preparing for elections and is working to ensure they take place on time and are credible? Do the others know their fate and thus are running away?
29. Isn’t it true that many ordinary men (mostly middle class, formally educated – if you could call MA/BA education) on the street who were laughing at Maulvi Aziz and were opposed to Lal Masjid people throughout, became sympathetic to Ghazi when he died at the hand of State apparatus? Doesn’t that show that people think of state as them rather than us? Can we survive as a society, let alone state, if this trend prevails? Isn’t it the biggest crisis facing our state?
30. Isn’t it true that certain elements in the security apparatus, after Army and Security forces becoming targets of radicals, are trying to give it a sectarian touch by pointing to the sect of Interior Secretary and DG Rangers?
31. With all the talk of liberal fascism in the media by the journalists, who by the way are famous for their links to ISI, how come having liberal views amount to fascism? When have the liberals tried to impose their will on others? When have the liberals demanded beheading a man who is not clean-shaven or lashing a woman who wears veil? Having extreme opinions, having faith in them and being opinionated is an honest and noble thing. Your views could be liberal or fundamentalist, but you have no right forcing them on others. And fascism comes only when you force your view on others by force and this is what radicals are doing all along – not liberals.
Each one of us, the proud and privileged citizens of Pakistan, is in the court room of history. Each one of us and the choices we make matter. The law of natural justice prevails and truth unfolds and the history will give its verdict on us. It will happen in our lifetime. So make a decision that is a) well informed, b) well thought through, and c) honest. Don’t let your personal biases affect the objectivity of your thinking. For when the truth unfolds, you shouldn’t be ashamed in your own eyes and to your own conscience. There are not many choices. You either oppose it or you are a party to turning us into a state and society of Theocratic Fascism. Advocating neutrality is supporting fascism.
Comments