A breeding ground for Extremism

Pakistan’s predominantly right wing media’s hostile propaganda against politicians and misrepresentation of information serve as a breeding ground for extremist aberrations in the society.

Journalism is a gentleman’s profession, but here in Pakistan, newly born liberalized media seems to be working up mob hysteria especially against politicians and the democratically elected parliament. Media and its self-puritan anchors are continuously encouraging a pseudo-religious approach to politics and its hostile propaganda against democracy and against the West, which is very much suitable for extremist aberrations.

Mostly, TV talk show hosts and Ziaist brand analysts are seen to be duty bound to peddle anti American anti democracy conspiracy theories and bash parliamentarians. The right wing style media has been vociferously running stories of corruption, nepotism and malpractices of politicians and leaders in the parliament, and connect all these bogus stories to President Asif Ali Zardari.

Pakistan Peoples Party’s government is portrayed by the media as too deferential to the United States. Several anchor persons exhaust all their energies in presenting the prejudice of US against the Pakistani nation. Pakistani journalists who unconditionally support their establishment started the campaign against Kerry Lugar Bill and coalesced anti-Western politicians, and Muslim fundamentalists — implausibly claiming that Pakistan’s sovereignty was undermined and the country could end up as a U.S. neo-colony.

Corporate plutocratic media, as a sole grand savior of the nationalism, sovereignty and morality, seems to be fomenting instability and despondency in the society. It is imposing and thrusting hard line teaching, eulogizing dictatorship and count demerits of democracy. The stories have been written and presented to provide only one dimensional approach, world view and restrict the other independent thought process of readers/viewers. Turning a blind eye towards these obscurantists tendencies might prove costly to the nation.

Some talk shows have implicit sheer bias against the PPP government and parliament and they only counts it’s demerits, they are packed with illogical and fact-less stories of corruption and falsifying evidence on important democratic issues. – some TV anchors have launched vociferous campaign against PPP government exposing corruption of ruling politicians.

President Asif Ali Zardari has been the favorite punching bag for a media trial for the last 22 years, fake and baseless stories of him kidnapping an expatriate Pakistani and extorting money by planting a bomb on his leg to duty evasions, he has faced all. Not a single anchor has ever raised and highlight corruption and human cost during long military dictatorship. Why are corrupt army officials, judges and journalists beyond criticism in TV talk shows?

Alleged corruption from trafficking heroin to grabbing precious land; from taking kick-back on purchase of equipment (sub-marines included); how they have forgotten years of misrule by military dictators? Had they [Apex Court's Independent Judges] not taken oath under the PCO (a fake, illegal document), but no one is raising question of morality here? Why then, we concerned citizens wonder, media only discusses civilian corruption? All this reflects the undemocratic mindset prevailing in the media to demonize democracy and parliamentary institutions. In a way these talk shows erode trust in democracy.

Dictatorial regimes’ policies aimed at perpetuating their own power at the cost of national interest and disruption of democracy and political instability have already created huge system deficit. Owing to our media sadly, not very much democracy appreciative – and due to irresponsible reporting and journalism, we have become apolitical nation and people have been losing faith and confidence in the democratic system and normative governance. All the above mentioned journalistic odds are eclipsing the future of Pakistan as a vibrant nation. Even media on occasions provide imputes of publicity to the terrorist groups and extremist aberration. This trend further confuse the ordinary citizens. Therefore efforts to counter terrorism and check extremism are needed to put an end to the above mentioned problems and to bring the nation out of prevailing quagmire of confusion and chaos.

Although we are living in the age of media abundance but still we are facing informational dearth, as pure citizens related issues and real political debates seem to be missing or lacking in our talk show democracy. It’s just tug of war and main emphasis is on speculation and conspiracies rather than fact and democratic thought.

The media persons should adopt a highly detached and objective style, while informing readers and viewers about the significant phase of the story, they should neither take side nor condemn any politicians, sect or group. Rather one should document the facts objectively and then leaves it to the readers to judge the event and draw the conclusion. It should try to give a balanced rather a one sided or biased view against peoples parliament.

While extremist groups are primarily responsible for denying space for pluralistic thinking and limiting the scope for democratic development, some newspapers in Pakistan are themselves involved in promoting intolerance in society. TV channels were guilty of providing the oxygen of publicity to the extremist ideology and in a mad race for breaking news many channels reported events without verifying the facts and often exaggerated the events.

There are flawed assumptions and speculations – misuse of the religious, political and national narrative by the hosts is the leading cause of extremism in the society. These political actors want a clash between the executive, legislature and the judiciary for their own ulterior motives. However, the political forces which represent the people of Pakistan and the current holders of high offices in other institutions have shown maturity by not getting into the trap of these political actors.

In the ‘talk show democracy’, political actors are, through their illogical and fact-less narratives, irresponsibly spreading confusion, conservatism and instability. Mainstream Media Mind and it’s conspiracy theorists do not want to see parliament complete its term and are prompting blue eyed politicians of the establishment i.e Ch. Nisar Ali and Abid Sher Ali, who say that fake degrees can lead to midterm elections. It is a new wish and conspiracy of political actors.

Pakistan Peoples Party’s stated policy is very clear that, extremism, militants and terrorism in all forms and manifestations pose a grave danger to the stability and integrity of the nation. It’s manifesto in election 2008 clearly described that- democracy never wages terrorism. Dismantle militant groups that take hostages and impose their writ through force and terrorism and militancy will be vigorously confronted.

The unprecedented successes made by the PPP led democratic government in the war against terror – today fully acknowledged by the international community — is a direct result of the national political will and consensus that gave legitimacy and effective strength to the military operations in Swat, Bajaur and FATA. Pakistan Peoples Party’s government is fighting a decisive war against terrorism and we as a nation very much moving towards being a more rationale, humanist, tolerant and moderate society.

There appears to be a lack of vision and wisdom in media and its talk shows. Very little focus is on creating intellectual and physical structure to transform the society. Now they have become a norm with media and it’s anchorpersons, whose world view is very much narrow and they nothing but to promote undemocratic mindset and intolerance. Even the content and debate in talk shows fails to highlight popular maxim of treating the evils of democracy with more democracy on the contrary they eulogizing extremism and undemocratic point of view. although Pakistan has come a long way, in terms of responsibility the private media scene is still it’s embryonic stage. It should highlight and emphasis that federation must be strengthened through the process of democratic pluralism, social justice, cultural values and tolerance. Instead of hate speech there should be free responsible speech and media should build public consensus against extremism.

There is no effective citizen’s oriented responsible journalism to transform the citizens into active and effective citizens. The need of the hour is to modernize news process with more emphasizes upon developing humane, democratic and scientific approach among viewers and readers instead of stuffing them with hatred against politicians [real representative of peoples] and parliament. Only then we as a nation can develop our identity as a rationale nation that would ensure much needed peace and prosperity. Media needs to frame a code of conduct and strictly adhere to it and should build intellectual safeguards against extremism instead of becoming tool for its own economic and political promotion.

Pakistan Is Said to Pursue Foothold in Afghanistan

By JANE PERLEZ, ERIC SCHMITT and CARLOTTA GALL.

Published: June 24, 2010

This article is by Jane Perlez, Eric Schmitt and Carlotta Gall.

Orlin Wagner/Associated Press

Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the Pakistani Army chief, who has offered to broker a peace deal with the Taliban leadership.

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Pakistan is exploiting the troubled United States military effort in Afghanistan to drive home a political settlement with Afghanistan that would give Pakistan important influence there but is likely to undermine United States interests, Pakistani and American officials said.
The dismissal of Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal will almost certainly embolden the Pakistanis in their plan as they detect increasing American uncertainty, Pakistani officials said. The Pakistani Army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, preferred General McChrystal to his successor, Gen. David H. Petraeus, whom he considers more of a politician than a military strategist, said people who had spoken recently with General Kayani.
Pakistan is presenting itself as the new viable partner for Afghanistan to President Hamid Karzai, who has soured on the Americans. Pakistani officials say they can deliver the network of Sirajuddin Haqqani, an ally of Al Qaeda who runs a major part of the insurgency in Afghanistan, into a power-sharing arrangement.
In addition, Afghan officials say, the Pakistanis are pushing various other proxies, with General Kayani personally offering to broker a deal with the Taliban leadership.
Washington has watched with some nervousness as General Kayani and Pakistan’s spy chief, Lt. Gen. Ahmad Shuja Pasha, shuttle between Islamabad and Kabul, telling Mr. Karzai that they agree with his assessment that the United States cannot win in Afghanistan, and that a postwar Afghanistan should incorporate the Haqqani network, a longtime Pakistani asset. In a sign of the shift in momentum, the two Pakistani officials were next scheduled to visit Kabul on Monday, according to Afghan TV.
Despite General McChrystal’s 11 visits to General Kayani in Islamabad in the past year, the Pakistanis have not been altogether forthcoming on details of the conversations in the last two months, making the Pakistani moves even more worrisome for the United States, said an American official involved in the administration’s Afghanistan and Pakistan deliberations.
“They know this creates a bigger breach between us and Karzai,” the American official said.
Though encouraged by Washington, the thaw heightens the risk that the United States will find itself cut out of what amounts to a separate peace between the Afghans and Pakistanis, and one that does not necessarily guarantee Washington’s prime objective in the war: denying Al Qaeda a haven.
It also provides another indication of how Pakistan, ostensibly an American ally, has worked many opposing sides in the war to safeguard its ultimate interest in having an Afghanistan that is pliable and free of the influence of its main strategic obsession, its more powerful neighbor, India.
The Haqqani network has long been Pakistan’s crucial anti-India asset and has remained virtually untouched by Pakistani forces in their redoubt inside Pakistan, in the tribal areas on the Afghan border, even as the Americans have pressed Pakistan for an offensive against it.
General Kayani has resisted the American pleas, saying his troops are too busy fighting the Pakistani Taliban in other parts of the tribal areas.
But there have long been suspicions among Afghan, American and other Western officials that the Pakistanis were holding the Haqqanis in reserve for just such a moment, as a lever to shape the outcome of the war in its favor.
On repeated occasions, Pakistan has used the Haqqani fighters to hit Indian targets inside Afghanistan, according to American intelligence officials. The Haqqanis have also hit American ones, a possible signal from the Pakistanis to the Americans that it is in their interest, too, to embrace a deal.
General Petraeus told Congress last week that Haqqani fighters were responsible for recent major attacks in Kabul and the Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, adding that he had informed General Kayani.
Some officials in the Obama administration have not ruled out incorporating the Haqqani network in an Afghan settlement, though they stress that President Obama’s policy calls for Al Qaeda to be separated from the network. American officials are skeptical that that can be accomplished.
Richard C. Holbrooke, the Obama administration’s special envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan, said on a visit to Islamabad last weekend that it was “hard to imagine” the Haqqani network in an Afghan arrangement, but added, “Who knows?”
At a briefing this week at the headquarters of Pakistan’s premier spy agency, Inter-Services Intelligence, Pakistani analysts laid out a view of the war that dovetailed neatly with the doubts expressed by Mr. Karzai. They depicted a stark picture of an American military campaign in Afghanistan “that will not succeed.”
They said the Taliban were gaining strength. Despite the impending arrival of new American troops, they concluded the “security situation would become more dangerous,” resulting in an erosion of the American will to fight.
“That is the reason why Karzai is trying to negotiate now,” a senior analyst said.
General Pasha, the head of the intelligence agency, dashed to Kabul on the eve of Mr. Karzai’s visit to Washington in May, an American official said. Neither Mr. Karzai nor the Pakistanis mentioned to the Americans about incorporating the Haqqanis in a postwar Afghanistan, the official said.
Pakistan has already won what it sees as an important concession in Kabul, the resignations this month of the intelligence chief, Amrullah Saleh, and the interior minister, Hanif Atmar. The two officials, favored by Washington, were viewed by Pakistan as major obstacles to its vision of hard-core Taliban fighters’ being part of an Afghanistan settlement, though the circumstances of their resignations did not suggest any connection to Pakistan.
Coupled with their strategic interests, the Pakistanis say they have chosen this juncture to open talks with Mr. Karzai because, even before the controversy over General McChrystal, they sensed uncertainty — “a lack of fire in the belly,” said one Pakistani — within the Obama administration over the Afghan fight.
“The American timetable for getting out makes it easier for Pakistan to play a more visible role,” said Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas, the spokesman for the Pakistani Army. He was referring to the July 2011 date set by Mr. Obama for the start of the withdrawal of some American combat troops.
The offer by Pakistan to make the Haqqanis part of the solution in Afghanistan has now been adopted as basic Pakistani policy, said Rifaat Hussain, a professor of international relations at Islamabad University, and a confidant of top military generals.
“The establishment thinks that without getting Haqqani on board, efforts to stabilize the situation in Afghanistan will be doomed,” Mr. Hussain said. “Haqqani has a large fighting force, and by co-opting him into a power-sharing arrangement a lot of bloodshed can be avoided.”
The recent trips by General Kayani and General Pasha to Kabul were an “effort to make this happen,” he said.
Afghan officials said General Kayani had offered to broker a deal with the Afghan Taliban leader, Mullah Muhammad Omar, and had sent envoys to Kabul from another insurgent leader and longtime Pakistani ally, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, with the offer of a 15-point peace plan in March.
As for the Haqqanis, whose fighters stretch across eastern Afghanistan all the way to Kabul, they are prepared to break with Al Qaeda, Pakistani intelligence and military officials said.
The Taliban, including the Haqqani group, are ready to “do a deal” over Al Qaeda, a senior Pakistani official close to the Pakistani Army said. The Haqqanis could tell Al Qaeda to move elsewhere because it had been given nine years of protection since 9/11, the official said.
But this official acknowledged that the Haqqanis and Al Qaeda were too “thick” with each other for a separation to happen. They had provided each other with fighters, money and other resources over a long period of time, he said.
Also, there appeared to be no idea where the Qaeda forces would go, and no answer to whether the Haqqanis would hand over Osama bin Laden and his second in command, Ayman al-Zawahri, the official said.
The Haqqanis may be playing their own game with their hosts, the Pakistanis, Mr. Hussain said.
“Many believe that Haqqanis’ willingness to cut its links with Al Qaeda is a tactical move which is aimed at thwarting the impending military action by the Pakistani Army in North Waziristan,” he said.

GORDON DUFF: ISRAEL-SAUDI WAR PACT ON IRAN “HOGWASH”

Gordon Duff

The London Times reported today that Saudi Arabia has given permission for Israel to fly over their territory to attack unspecified “nuclear facilities” in Iran.  Mention of specific Saudi actions including deactivating their air defense systems to allow Israel use of their airspace was directly referenced by the Times in their story by Hugh Tomlinson.  However, not only is such a possibility not a possibility, the story itself is designed to destabilize world markets.
Iran is capable of closing the Straits of Hormuz and stopping all oil shipments from, not only the Persian Gulf states, including Kuwait and Iran but Saudi Arabia itself.  At the first sight of an Israeli plane, every tanker and oil facility in the Gulf would be destroyed and the Saudi capital in ruins from Iranian missiles.
The closing of the Straits alone would crash the world’s stock markets instantly throwing the world into an immediate depression.  Oil would go over $250 a barrel overnight and gas prices in the US would hit $10 per gallon.  This is not speculation.

IRANIAN SILKWORM MISSILE NEAR HORMUZ

Iran’s military capability has been focused entirely on closing the Straits and cutting off much of the world’s oil supply.  Thousands of Chinese Silkworm missiles are at the ready, set into the islands of the Straits seized by Iran years ago or hidden along the coastline or on mobile launchers.  In fact, the US Navy is would have to immediately withdraw from the region.
Every defense specialist in the world knows all of this.  The United Arab Emirates sits across the Straits from Iran and stares into this mass of missiles, torpedo boats and submarines.  They are funding a massive missile defense system and have even considered spending billions to construct a canal bypassing the narrow straits.  Iranian troops have been dug into islands adjacent to the Straits for decades.  When talking about the Straits of Hormuz, the term “tight as a tick” comes to mind.  “Duck in a barrel” is another analogy with us being the ducks.
The game isn’t to start a war, knowing full well that America would be required to defend Saudi Arabia though there are no agreements to defend Israel, especially if they are the aggressor.  With over $2 trillion dollars pumped from the US economy by Israeli-American companies like Goldman Sachs during the Bush sponsored “pump and dump,” the “banksters” weren’t satisfied.  They now want to pick America’s bones.
Any attack on Iran that involved Saudi Arabia in any way would bring an automatic response from Pakistan.  Without their military efforts, the US would be forced to withdraw from Afghanistan in weeks.  Even with their help, and increased force levels, America’s presence is unsustainable as the Karzai government has already collapsed.  Nobody is admitting it yet but Karzai and his US backers rule nothing and control nothing, even worse than when Bush left office.
The real players in the Middle East are Turkey, Iran and Pakistan.  Two of these nations are major US allies.  The population of the three nations exceeds that of the US and their combined armies number, with reserves at two million, over double that of the United States.  Were the three to join together, Afghanistan and Iraq would be forced, out of survival to join in, creating a contiguous state, a nuclear state, capable of taking Saudi Arabia in days and doing so without any US resistance.  After all, these are American allies and Saudi Arabia would be, technically, an aggressor nation.  Though mutual defense pacts do not include Iran, a history of resentment against Saudi-Israeli collusion and the current chill between Israel and Turkey would build this polyglot coalition state almost overnight.
In the long run, such a country would be the real strategic partner the US has always desired, with a single nuclear arsenal under Pakistani control and Iranian issues eliminated as they would be the junior power in a coalition with decades of ties to the US.  If any of this seems difficult to grasp, position papers outlining this exact situation have been around for years.
Given the chance, Israel would join this group of states.  Those familiar with private “back channel” diplomatic initiatives know that this has is considered.  Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan all maintain a covert level of cordial relations with Israel, relations poisoned by the Gaza crisis.
Israel’s aggressive stance toward apartheid expansionism, fueled by the hubris supplied by American hegemony in the region is only one of the considerations needed in evaluating the dynamic in the region.  The humiliation Turkey suffered, despite the fact Turkey’s powerful military has always worked closely with Israel, threatens to destabilize their civilian government and add to Islamic militancy there.
Iraq is going through a rough period after recent elections.  They are expect to ask the US to keep troops in place in significant numbers well past the agreed upon date of withdrawal.
Iran, a country whose civil government is extremely unpopular with its own people, maintains stability through police state tactics rivaling those of the Shah’s Savak and punishes its own population by maintaining status as a rogue state, a virtual pariah nation, as a way of clamping down on dissent.
Afghanistan is in total collapse.  Along with the Taliban, a number of additional divides with the nation have occurred and the new national army and police force are total failures.  An informal defacto government is now ruling increasing areas of the country and may be able to build stability if certified by the royal families.  President Karzai is trying to work closely with Pakistan, a major policy change for him, out of a combination of necessity and panic.  However, Karzai has burned too many bridges to be able to bring cordial relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan, nations with a history of rivalry and some acrimony.
Pakistan may be the key to the puzzle.  Pakistan’s unsteady democracy has been ineffective but current military leadership in Pakistan is highly competent, very pro-US and moderate.  The primary problems are Pakistan’s economy, nearing total collapse and the instability of terrorism that has pushed Pakistan to the edge.  Pakistan’s desire is to underwrite economic growth but has no oil resources for such as task.  Without the ability to overcome internal corruption and address the root causes of extremism in the tribal areas along the border with Afghanistan, Pakistan faces destabilization.  Membership in a coalition state would address some of these problems.  Occupation of Saudi Arabia under an “Islamic Protectorate” necessitated by Israeli incursions into Saudi airspace would solve all of Pakistan’s problems.
The media can be a powerful thing.  When a story, such as the one in the London Times, could jolt markets or push nations to irational acts, a poor understanding of regional conditions and history could have quite another effect, one entirely unexpected.

Pakistan’s Watergate?: Supreme Court Gives Verdict on Parliamentarians with Fake Degree

Famous Chicago mobster Al Capone was nabbed not for his greatest sins but for tax evasion. U.S. President Richard Nixon was eventually removed from office because a minor political burglary at a Democratic Party office at the Watergate building led to a national conversation that unearthed far more disturbing trends in Nixon’s attitude towards governance, and his own respect for the law.
The issue of ‘fake degrees’ may be on its way to become Pakistan’s equivalent of a similar tendency: an offense than many Pakistanis would consider relatively “small” in light of larger abuses of the law that they see everyday, is being used by society - and now by the Supreme Court - as a means to expose and punish a deep-rooted tendency amongst those who seek and claim power to lie to and cheat those who they are meant to serve.
If it is indeed so - and one hopes it is - then that is a good thing. We at ATP have been clear and consistent in our stand on abuse of education - whether it is via plagiarism, via abuse of rules, or via fake degrees. There are those who argue that these are minor offenses in comparison to many others. They may be so. But they are also symptomatic of a larger rot - lying, and lying unashamedly, often to the very people one is supposed to serve. If this is a way that some examples can be set and that a larger message can be sent that such lying will not be tolerated, then we say it is a good thing. In its decision today, the Supreme Court of Pakistan and Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry seems to think the same.

As a public issue this issue has the virtue of being something that most people can instinctively understand and relate to. If I had to study and work for my degree, why should some slick politician not have to? It also has the virtue of being a matter of principle rather than of politics. Politicians in all parties seem to be lying about their education. Hence, accusations of political scapegoating are less likely to stick.
One hopes, of course, that the larger message about lying is one that is also being conveyed and received here. Indeed, as the Chief Justice was particularly incensed - as he should have been - because the politician in question was  making “a false statement on oath and by using bogus, fake and forged documents polluting the piety of [the parliament].” The Chief Justice called this a “callous contempt for the basic norms of honesty, integrity and even for his own oath.”
For all these reasons, the decision from the Supreme Court is worth noting, and maybe even celebrating. This news report from Dawn details why:

The Supreme Court ordered the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) on Thursday to initiate action against legislators accused of having used fake degrees to contest the election. Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry issued the order after writing a detailed judgment to justify rejection of an appeal of Rizwan Gill, PML-N’s former member of the Punjab Assembly from PP-34 (Sargodha VII), for possessing fake bachelor’s degree.
The commission is required to depute an officer to supervise the entire exercise, while sessions judges who will conduct these trials will conclude the probe in three months in consonance with the spirit of elections laws. The ECP has taken the position that it cannot act against lawmakers unless the Senate chairman or speakers of the National Assembly or provincial assemblies send references against them. It has pointed out that under an amendment to Article 62 of the Constitution, a person cannot be disqualified for being corrupt unless a court declares him to be so.
“No criminal could ever be heard, in any civilised society, to avoid punishment on the ground that some others, similarly placed had, on some earlier occasions escaped punishment,” the verdict said. “Likewise, no individual, except the ones constitutionally and legally authorised for the purpose, could be allowed in a civilised society to declare which law of the land was good and which one was bad and then feel authorised to defeat the same through unlawful and even criminal acts,” the judgment said, adding that such attempts, if not nipped in the bud, could lead a society to the dark depths of destruction.
The judgment said: “Every law of the land, so long as it exists on the statute books, has to be respected and must be followed. The same should also serve as an answer to some reservations expressed about disqualification of a person from becoming a member of a legislative institution if he did not practice the obligatory duties. “Suffice it, however, to add that identifying persons who could or could not become members of legislative institutions was a policy matter, but so long as such-like disqualifications were not omitted from the Constitution or the law, the courts were bound to honour and enforce the same and not so doing could amount to a grave dereliction of duty.”
In his verdict, the chief justice also mentioned what he called a revealing incident when Rizwan Gill, who had secured 72 per cent marks in a subject called IPS, was asked to define what it stood for. A long silence was the answer offered by Mr Gill who himself had come to the podium to address the court. On court’s insistence and after a deep thought, his reply was “Health and Physical Education”. The detailed marks certificate produced on record by Mr Gill himself mentioned the IPS as “Islamic Studies/Ethics and Pakistan Studies”.
“This answer of the appellant, said it all,” the verdict said. The judgment said: “The parliament of any country is one of its noblest, honourable and important institutions making not only policies and laws for the nation, but in fact shaping and carving its very destiny. “And here is a man who being constitutionally and legally debarred from being its member, managed to sneak into it by making a false statement on oath and by using bogus, fake and forged documents polluting the piety of this pious body. His said conduct demonstrates not only his callous contempt for the basic norms of honesty, integrity and even for his own oath but also undermines the sanctity, the dignity and the majesty of the said august house. Shouldn’t it then be incumbent upon the ECP in discharge of its constitutional obligations to guard against corrupt practices, to launch prosecution of persons who stood accused of the commission of the same. The punishment and consequent disqualification of such-like persons would not be an act undermining the dignity and the majesty of the houses of legislature, but an act in aid of enhancing the same.”

Maududi’s role against Jinnah’s Pakistan

Let me start by saying – as a disclaimer- that opposing Jinnah, the Muslim League or Pakistan is not an unpardonable crime. Support for Pakistan’s creation is not sine qua non for its citizenship. However an exception must be made in the case of Jamaat-e-Islami given its latter day claims about being the guardians of Pakistan’s ideology. Maulana Maududi claimed and his “Jamaat-e-Islami” still claims to be the guardian of Pakistan’s ideological frontiers as it were. They have been at the forefront of religious bigotry against all minority groups of Pakistan. They abuse those who stand for a peaceful settlement of Kashmir dispute and they hurl abuses at groups like Agha Khanis and Ahmadis- the two of the most actively pro-Pakistan groups during partition- and accuse them of being the enemies of Pakistan.
What a turn around. Maududi was the most vociferous opponent of Mr. Jinnah and the Pakistan Movement. I reproduce here some of his referenced works here from his “Muslims and the Present Political Turmoil” (Vol.III) First Edition published from Delhi. Jamaat-e-Islami claims that the whole Two Nation Theory project was derived from Maududi’s writings which is completely untrue. Maududi described the idea of Muslim Nationalism as unlikely as a ”chaste prostitute”. Here he wrote:
” Who are the Muslims you are claiming to be a separate nation? Here, the crowd called Muslims is full of all sorts of rabble. There are as many types of characters in this as in any (other) heathen people”. (Vol. III, P.166)
“If you survey this so-called Muslim society, you will come across multifarious types of Muslims, of countless categories. This is a zoo with a collection of crows, kites, vultures, partridges and thousands of other types of birds. Every one of them is a ’sparrow’. (Ibid. P.31)
One of Jamaat-e-Islami’s latter day claims has been that Mr. Jinnah wanted an Islamic state. Ironically this is what Jamaat-e-Islami’s philosopher in chief Maulana Maududi was writing back then:
“Pity! From League’s Quaid-e-Azam down to the lower cadres, there is not a single person who has an Islamic outlook and thinking and whose perspective on matters is Islamic“. (Ibid. P.37)
“To pronounce these people fit for leading Muslims for the simple reason that they are experts of Western type politics and masters of Western organizational arts, and are deeply in love with their people, is a manifestation of an unislamic viewpoint and reflects ignorance of Islam”. (Ibid. P.70)
“Even with a microscopic study of their practical life, and their thinking, ideology, political behaviour and style of leadership, one can find not a trace of Islamic character.”
Jamaat-e-Islami now claims claims that the Muslim League won the elections because it promised Pakistan as an Islamic state. Here is what Maulana Maududi said then:
“In no Muslim League resolution, or in a speech by a responsible leader of the League it has it been made clear that their final goal is of establishing an Islamic system of government. Those who believe that by freeing Muslim majority areas rule of Hindu majority, an Islamic government will be established here in a democratic set up, are wrong. In fact what will be achieved will be a heretical government by Muslims, indeed worse than that.” (Ibid. P.130-32)
One of the main arguments in favor of separate federations in India put up by Muslim League was that parliamentary democracy would not work in United India given the permanent minority that Muslims were with their own majority zones. Thus Pakistan – as a separate federation- had to be a democratic state. Jinnah’s vision, as Gandhi concluded after his abortive meetings with Jinnah in 1944, was of a perfect democracy in Pakistan. This vision was rejected by Maulana Maududi and his party. The fact that Jinnah used electoral methods and strengths of numbers for his politics also upset Maulana Maududi quite a bit. He wrote:
“For these reasons, the great numbers (of Muslims) that we find. (listed) in the census records has become worthless for purposes of Islam. Anything done on the strength of these numbers will result in acute frustration.” (Ibid. P.56)
Had these great numbers supported Maududi he would have gladly accepted their strength. In 1947, he moved to Pakistan and brought here with him his cancerous Jamaat-e-Islami too. He remained however a committed opponent of the Pakistani national causes including the Kashmir struggle calling it unIslamic. Today the Jamaat-e-Islami castigates anyone and everyone who wants a peaceful settlement in Kashmir. I suppose Maududi could not call the Kashmir struggle a Jihad because then Ahmadis were involved in fighting there under their Al-Furqan brigade.
A few years later Maududi in cahoots with the old anti-Muslim League and anti-Pakistan group Majlis-e-Ahrar started the anti-Ahmaddiya movement in Pakistan with the main objective of getting Zafrulla dismissed from his post as the foreign minister. This is the same Zafrulla who was the author of the Lahore Resolution and had been appointed by the Quaid to plead Pakistan’s case before the boundary commission and the United Nations. The movement led to a death sentence being handed down to Maulana Maududi which was not carried out.
At the Munir Report hearings the Jamaat e Islami described Jinnah’s vision of the state as expressed on 11 August 1947 as kufr and evil. Today Jamaat e Islami claims that 11th August speech was actually according to Islamic Law. Ofcourse they would never agree to its implementation in letter and spirit but perhaps we could consider this an improvement. Some Jamaat-e-Islami wallahs point to Maududi’s half hearted support to Fatima Jinnah’s bid for presidency as proof of his patriotism and love for democracy. The truth is that Jamaat-e-Islami had nothing against dictatorship and indeed military coup seems to be Jamaat’s preferred method of change of government. What alienated Maududi from Ayub was the latter’s insistence on taking lead in Islam-related matters from Allama Parwez and the modernist Harvard scholar Fazlurrahman instead of him.
The Jamaat-e-Islami expected to sweep into power in 1970 through elections (wait isn’t this a contradiction?). Maududi’s son even visited Ahmaddiya headquarters and told them to vote for Jamaat-e-Islami for “safe passage out of Pakistan”. However the election results didn’t quite turn out the way Maududi wanted it to. So he went about it another way forming Al Badr a militant organization which is distinguished in its role in East Pakistan. Those who accuse Bhutto of being power hungry by collaborating with army should also consider the fact that had Bhutto not played footsie with the dictator, it would have been an abject surrender of both East and West Pakistan, in the East to India and in the West to Maududi.
Given this history and Jamaat-e-Islami’s role in aid of General Zia, all their claims of democracy seem hollow. Had it not been for Aitzaz Ahsan’s sagacious leadership, they would have hijacked the Lawyers’ Movement. We must be on the look out for any meetings between Jamaat-e-Islami’s current chief and the Pakistan Army and the patriots of Pakistan must remember that Jamaat-e-Islami will always persecute those who actually stand for Pakistan. A few years ago they even started a campaign to have Aga Khanis declared Non-muslims. Ofcourse the fact that Aga Khan was the first president of the Muslim League and Jinnah himself was an Agha Khani by birth is too inconvenient for them.
It is therefore in this context that the slander, abuse and lies posted by a third rate newspaper “Daily Ummat” against PakTeaHouse and myself must be read. It is because we speak up for Pakistan, it is because we expose the Fitna-e-Maududiat, it is because we speak for Jinnah’s Pakistan and because we speak for the minorities of Pakistan and because we feel Pakistan deserves a shot. The Fitna-e-Maududiat will never attack those who abuse Pakistan day in day out because that group doesn’t challenge their lies or their claim to speak for Pakistan. We do.

Ideology and Jihad : What do they mean for Pakistan?

From the Dawn
Ideology and jihad have always remained a part of Pakistan’s political discourse but without an agreement on what the two concepts mean. They have meant different things to different people at different times.
Pakistan’s current crisis, too, can be traced in large measure to a dogmatic view that the ideology of Pakistan is Islamic and jihadist in the sense of fighting for faith, and is enjoined on all Muslims. Both show up together in Mr Majid Nizami’s recent plea to the Taliban to wage jihad in Kashmir and not in their own country. The Taliban are unlikely to pay heed but the point to consider is that if Mr Nizami as chairman of Pakistan’s Nazaria (ideology) Foundation has the right to coax the Taliban to fight the Indian forces in Kashmir, by the same token, he cannot deny the same right to Sufi Mohammad, ideologue of the rule of Sharia, to fight the Pakistan Army in Swat.
The first and undisputed principle of jihad by war, however, is that it can be authorised only by an imam which in today’s parlance would mean a legitimate and just government. Armed jihad is permitted, or ordained, only to repel an aggressor or to dislodge an intolerably oppressive or bigoted ruler. It is considered that the superior form of jihad is to purge oneself of evil, preach peacefully and invest in worthy causes.
In present-day circumstances jihad has come to be associated with suicide bombings rather than noble exertions. In the presence of organised armed forces jihad for the civilian population lies in improving their character and capabilities, spreading the Quranic message and helping the victims of oppression. The ideology of Pakistan, call it Islamic or give it any other label, can be gleaned only from the struggle waged over a century for the safety and rights of the Muslims in a country of continental proportions in which they constituted no more than one-fifth of the population, their loyalty to the imperial rulers was suspect and they were economically backward and averse to modern education. Here may be briefly recounted some of the landmarks along the way.
— In the last quarter of the 19th century Sir Syed Khan counselled the Muslims to dissociate themselves from the Indian National Congress and urged the British to recognise them as a separate nation. In the same period Jamaluddin Afghani envisioned the north-western part of India merging with the neighbouring Central Asian countries to form a large Muslim state.
— Allama Iqbal, seven years after his celebrated 1930 Allahabad address, wrote to Jinnah: ‘Why should not the Muslims of northwest India and Bengal be considered as nations entitled to self-determination just as other nations in India are?’ This, he thought, ‘would be the best course to adopt in the interests of both Muslim majority and minority provinces’. In yet another letter to Jinnah he hinted at a bold social and economic programme based on the law of Islam but what the law was to be and how it was to be implemented he did not explain and Jinnah ignored it.
— In 1933 Chaudhry Rehmat Ali put across his chimerical scheme for the establishment of no less than eight Muslim states and their consolidation after total exchange of populations into the Pakistan Commonwealth of Nations which in turn was to be integrated with the Muslim belt all the way from Central Asia to the Bosphorus.
— In 1940 came the Muslim League’s Lahore Resolution with all its ambiguities and contradictions asserting in substance that the geographically contiguous areas in which the Muslims were in a majority (as in the northwest and east) ‘should be grouped to constitute independent states in which the constituent units shall be autonomous and sovereign’.
— Notwithstanding this resolution, in 1946 the Muslim League agreed to the Cabinet Mission Plan which proposed to put Muslims in two autonomous regions within the Indian federation (the plan did not materialise).
— A month before leaving Delhi for a sovereign Pakistan, Jinnah disdainfully dismissed a suggestion that Pakistan would be a theocracy. Then came his historic statement in the constituent assembly of the new state in which the liberals, modernists and secularists still revel. He mentioned no ideology. Instead, he set out his ideal of a democratic nation in which ‘faith’ would be personal to each individual.

One is at liberty to pluck any ideology out of this odyssey. Mr Nizami’s foundation finds the roots of Islamic ideology in Allama Iqbal’s presidential address at Muslim League’s session at Allahabad in 1930. Sir Zafrulla Khan (who presided over the League’s session the following year) was a member of the Muslim delegation to the Round Table Conference held in London soon after the session. So were Iqbal and Jinnah.It would be of interest to see what Zafrulla had to say in an article he wrote for Pakistan Times on Feb 13, 1982, to clarify a controversy raised by Wali Khan about the contents of a constitutional plan that Zafrulla had submitted to Lord Linlithgow with the knowledge of Jinnah only days before the Lahore Resolution: ‘It is stated that the Quaid-i-Azam was instrumental in procuring the election of Allama Sir Mohammad Iqbal as the president of the Muslim League at the Allahabad Session in 1930 as the Quaid was anxious that Allama Iqbal should have an opportunity to express his views on the creation of a Muslim state before the Round Table Conference was held in 1931. May I point out that Allama Sir Mohammad Iqbal was himself a member of the second and third Round Table Conference in 1931 and 1932 and said not a single word on the subject of a Muslim state whatsoever, one way or other. Moreover, the Quaid-i-Azam himself was a delegate to the first and second Round Table Conferences in 1930 and 1931 and he did not make the slightest reference, direct or indirect, to the setting up of a Muslim state.’
The central point of Zafrullah’s unusually long essay was that Pakistan was created by the efforts of a single individual — Jinnah. If Pakistan had an ideology it could not be but what he had said on the eve of independence. All of us, nevertheless, remain entitled to our own view of ideology and jihad. But the fate of the country now hangs in balance between the Taliban and Pakistani soldiers as it did in 1971 between the Mukti Bahini and the Pakistan Army. One can only hope that the result this time round is different.

Textbooks – Source confusion and extremism

An outdated Pakistani textbook

Pakistan’s poor education system and its bias curriculum that often incites intolerance and violence has increasingly become a matter of international concern. The government-mandated curriculum is a major concern for Western observers who say it encourages intolerance, anti democracy, anti freedom, anti minorities and anti peace and a narrow worldview.
“Pakistan’s poor public education system and lack of access to quality education, which in turn limits economic opportunity, makes young Pakistanis targets for extremist groups helps stoke militancy, while the religious schools often cited as a cause of extremism appear not to be a major risk factor”, says a report by a Washington think tank. The U.S. report, released by the Brookings Institution, examined a raft of studies to assess links between militancy and education, a priority area for the Obama administration as it boosts development aid to Islamabad. The researchers said low enrollment rates were a risk factor for violence and demand for education inside Pakistan far exceeded the government’s ability to provide it. In addition, Pakistan’s public school system was highly corrupt with positions handed out for political favors and teachers paid whether they turned up for class or not. “The way the education system is set up is contributing to support militancy,” said Rebecca Winthrop, with the Center for Universal Education at Brookings.
The curriculum and teaching methods in public schools helped create intolerant views and also did little to prepare students for the labor market, frustrating youngsters and increasing the pool of militant recruits, the report said. Winthrop and fellow conflict specialist Corinne Graff said the religious schools, or madrasas, that were frequently cited by the West as causing Islamist militancy, were not as numerous as suspected. Far less than 10 percent of the full-time, school-going population went to them. “Madrasas account for a tiny fraction of student enrollment and they can hardly be cast as the main obstacle to high quality education and stability,” they wrote. “The almost exclusive focus on madrasas as a security challenge — which is especially prevalent in the West — needs to be corrected,” the researchers added. The Brookings researchers cited problems with the curriculum in many schools, with historical facts altered and hatred toward archrival India and Hindus prominent in texts. The curriculum and textbooks include hate material and “encourage prejudice, bigotry and discrimination” toward women, religious minorities, and other nations, especially U.S and India. Pakistani textbooks are silent over a plethora of important social issues and evils. The books do not speak of local domestic issues i.e honor killing, blasphemy laws, hudood laws, rijam (stoning to death for committing adultery), child labor, etc. Thus, the students remain unaware of a number of local and provincial issues. The books of social studies provide no education but indoctrination. Historical facts are distorted. The students have been kept completely ignorant of the facts due to which democracy could never flourish in Pakistan and they are not told about the follies committed by the military dictators. Human rights, women rights and minorities rights are absent from the books, minorities’ sacrifices for Pakistan have been totally ignored. Minorities are described as if they are some “inferior entities” who have been given some rights by the “generous” Pakistanis. Minorities are not described as equal citizens of Pakistan. They are discussed as “second class” citizens who have been given certain favors by the Muslims.The textbooks are full of hatred against the Hindus, India and English. Hindus have been portrayed as the worst people on earth. The Hindus and the Muslims had lived together for centuries. There are several true stories about love and amity between the Hindus and the Muslims. Such stories should be included in the syllabi. If the hate element against India was not reduced, peace and trade between the two countries would merely remain a dream. The Hindus are repeatedly described as extremists and they have always been an enemy of Islam and their set up is based on injustice and cruelty, Islam gives a message of peace and and brother hood and there is no such concept in Hinduism. The Hindus have been presented as “myopic” and “arrogant”" and the bigoted clergy is accused of instigating the Christian rulers to declare crusade against the Muslims” the Roman Pope announced the crusade the Christians, particularly the clergy is told to have “malice” in their heart against the Muslims, who had given the latter every right and freedom. In Pakistan and Muslim countries chapter, an attempt has been made to give the students an impression that Muslim countries are the “friends” and the non Muslim countries “enemies” by averring: “when a Muslim visits another Muslim country, he does not find himself in an alien’s country.”
Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy, wrote in Foreign Affairs: “Pakistani schools–and not just madrassas–are churning out fiery zealots, fueled with a passion for jihad and martyrdom.” CFR Senior Fellow Daniel Markey also notes the concern over textbooks. “Rather than actually serving to moderate public views, the education system is exacerbating the problem of extremism,” The textbooks are based on the past history and do not ask the students to look on present and into the future. Many renowned scholars like K. K Aziz, Dr Pervaiz Hood Bhoy, Rubina Sehgol, Dr. A.H Nayyer, Dr Ayesha Jalal, Zafarullah Khan, Ahmad Salim and many others have pinpointed factual mistakes and confusing ideas in the text books. The policy makers who claim to make Pakistan a moderate, liberal democrat state must check and revisit this Confusing educational jungle and remove all factual mistakes, hate speeches and confusing ideas. There is a consensus among the democrats and concerned citizens that what is being taught in our educational institutes is not very supportive of democratic thinking and if we continued with that the destination of democratic Pakistan would always remain a distant dream.
It’s really a good news that the Obama administration has promised to put more money into improving education in Pakistan and has made it a focus of the $1.5 billion in non-military aid allocated annually by Congress for Pakistan over the next five years. “Undoubtedly, a high-quality education system prepares its students to participate in and contribute to economic growth, which leads toward security and stability,” said Rajiv Shah, who heads the U.S. Agency for International Development. USAID’s total education budget in Pakistan for fiscal year 2010 is $335 million – with $265 million for basic education and the remainder for higher education. Since 2002, USAID has invested $682 million for education projects in Pakistan. One way in which the money is being used is to offer stipends to families as a temporary measure to offset the cost of education for the poor. Now it’s state’s  duty to make Pakistani educational system liberal and modern.

The Romance of Gauhar Jaan

By Vikram Sampath In December of 1911, at the famous Delhi Durbar, Emperor George V was crowned the paramount power of British India in the presence of Indian princes and aristocrats. While the announcement by the emperor that the capital of his Indian territories would be shifted to Delhi from Calcutta might have cast a pall of gloom in “the second city of the empire”, the durbar itself brought unprecedented glory to one Calcuttan—the legendary Hindustani vocalist Miss Gauhar Jaan. Pop sensation: (clockwise from top) Gauhar Jaan in a recording studio; a nautch performance under way in the early 1900s; a Singer record of Gauhar Jaan’s; a portrait of young Gauhar; and a 1905 drawing of her on a matchbox that was made in Austria. At that glittering ceremony, in the presence of the emperor and his queen and all of India’s royalty, Gauhar Jaan, along with her contemporary Janki Bai, were bestowed the rare privilege of presenting a song specially composed for the occasion Yeh jalsa taajposhi ka mubarak ho mubarak ho! They were escorted to the emperor after the concert and he praised them profusely for their talent and presented them with a hundred guineas as a token of his appreciation. Such was the fame of the first Indian and woman to record on the gramophone, Gauhar Jaan. Born Eileen Angelina Yeoward in Azamgarh, in what was then the United Provinces, in 1873, Gauhar was a woman of exceptional beauty, talent and grace. She seemed to symbolize the secular ethos that Indian classical music is known for—her grandmother was Hindu, grandfather British and father Armenian Christian. Gauhar embraced Islam and remained a devout Muslim all her life, though most of her compositions are replete with Krishna bhakti. The marriage of her parents ended in a bitter divorce when she was barely six years old. Angelina and her mother Victoria then moved to Benaras, where they converted to Islam and took on the names of Gauhar Jaan and Badi Malka Jaan, respectively. In the culturally vibrant atmosphere of Benaras, Gauhar’s innate talents in music, dance and poetry blossomed. Fortunes turned for the mother and daughter as they moved to Calcutta and established themselves in the court of Nawab Wajid Ali Shah. They were counted as among the most famous baijis of Calcutta. No wonder then that in 1902, Frederick William Gaisberg, the Gramophone Company’s first India agent, chose Gauhar as the first Indian artiste whom he wanted to record. When recording technology came to India in the early decades of the 20th century, it was the women who accepted this very novel and unfamiliar medium and adapted to it. Disregarding several superstitions (recording on evil English instruments would displease the gods and make one lose one’s voice) that were floated by men, they went ahead and recorded. This not only helped democratize music and bring it out of the confines of the kothas (brothels) and courts, but also liberated these performing women from the clutches of their exploitative patrons. To Gauhar goes the credit of devising a unique template of presenting something as expansive as Hindustani music in just 3 minutes, which was all that a single disc could record at the time. The end of a recording was usually marked by the high-pitched and sometimes flirtatious announcement “My name is Gauhar Jaan!”. This was of course a technical necessity because record masters were sent to Hanover in Germany for pressing, and these announcements helped the technician identify the singer. In her illustrious career, Gauhar recorded close to 600 records in over 10 languages. Her repertoire was vast and ranged from the weighty khayal and dhrupad to the supposedly lighter forms of thumri, dadra, kajri, hori, chaiti and bhajan. But what set Gauhar apart as a star of her times was her feisty nature and flamboyant lifestyle. She became notoriously famous for throwing a lavish party that cost Rs20,000 when her cat produced a litter of kittens. She was among the few people in Calcutta who flouted government regulations and went around in a four-horse-driven buggy, for which she even paid a fine of Rs1,000 a day to the viceroy. Despite all the fame and adulation, Gauhar pined for true love all her life. After several unsuccessful and short-lived romantic escapades, including one with the famous Gujarati theatre actor Amrit Keshav Nayak in Bombay, Gauhar chose the most unlikely of suitors—her secretary Abbas, who was much younger than her. Sadly their courtship ended in a bitter legal tangle after she realized that Abbas was embezzling her money. She won the case but lost all her money in the process of funding her high-profile lawyers and was reduced to a state of near beggary. That was when she was invited to Mysore by the Maharaja Nalvadi Krishnaraja Wodeyar as a state guest and court musician. But by then Gauhar had lost the will to fight and in 1930 breathed her last in Mysore, lonely and forlorn, with none by her bedside. In her lifetime, Gauhar attained a celebrity status that few women of her era could even dream of. For someone whose photograph appeared on picture postcards and matchboxes during her time, sadly today Gauhar is almost forgotten and largely unacknowledged even by the world of Hindustani music. This is what made researching her life for her biography an immensely challenging, yet enjoyable task. In a culture where the art is always perceived to be bigger than the artiste, and where documenting their personal lives is seldom considered important, it was quite an exercise to exhume this marvellous artiste from her grave and place her in a historical perspective, bringing her memory and contributions to Hindustani music in the public discourse. The CD that comes along with the book of her digitized and mastered soundtracks from original 78 rpms, seeks to immortalize Gauhar Jaan for readers and lovers of Hindustani music. As an Urdu poet had once said: Hum to markar bhi kitabon mein rahenge zinda Gham unhi ka hai jo mar jaayen to guzar jaate hain (Even in death I will remain immortal in the books that are written about me, Pity those who don’t just die, but ‘pass away’ into oblivion). Vikram Sampath is the author of ‘My Name is Gauhar Jaan!’ The Life and Times of a Musician. Write to lounge@livemint.com Source: The Live Mint, New Delhi URL: http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamIslamicCulture_1.aspx?ArticleID=2722

Beyond Madrasas: assessing the Links Between Education and Militancy in Pakistan

Report by Rebecca Winthrop and Corinne Graf

Report published by the Brookings Institute:
Overview:
Increasing educational attainment is likely to reduce conflict risk, especially in countries like Pakistan that have very low levels of primary and secondary school enrollment. Education quality, relevance and content also have a role to play in mitigating violence. Education reform must therefore be a higher priority for all stakeholders interested in a more peaceful and stable Pakistan. Debate within the country about education reform should not be left only to education policymakers and experts, but ought to figure front and center in national dialogues about how to foster security. The price of ignoring Pakistan’s education challenges is simply too great in a country where half the population is under the age of 17.
There has been much debate concerning the roots of militancy in Pakistan, and multiple factors clearly come into play. One risk factor that has attracted much attention both inside Pakistan and abroad is the dismal state of the national education sector. Despite recent progress, current school attainment and literacy levels remain strikingly low, as does education spending. The Pakistani education sector, like much of the country’s public infrastructure, has been in decline over recent decades. The question of how limited access to quality education may contribute to militancy in Pakistan is more salient now than ever, given the rising national and international security implications of continued violence.
The second half of 2009 witnessed not only the Pakistani government stepping up action against insurgents but also the release of a new Pakistan National Education Policy that aspires to far-reaching and important reforms, including a commitment to increase investment in education—from 2 to 7 percent of gross domestic product. Hundreds of millions of dollars in international education aid have been newly pledged by donor countries. This renewed emphasis on education represents a substantial opportunity to seek to improve security in Pakistan and potentially also globally over the medium to long term. Policymakers both inside and outside Pakistan should give careful consideration to whether and how education investments can promote peace and stability, taking into account what we now know about the state of the education sector and the roots of militancy.
This report takes a fresh look at the connection between schools, including but not limited to Pakistan’s religious seminaries, known as “madrasas,” and the rising militancy across the country. Poor school performance across Pakistan would seem an obvious area of inquiry as a risk factor for conflict. Yet to date, the focus has been almost exclusively on madrasas and their role in the mounting violence. Outside Pakistan, relatively little attention has been given to whether and how the education sector as a whole may be fueling violence, over and above the role of the minority of militant madrasas.
PDF of full report

Aqsa Pervez : Who will speak for the Daughter of Pakistan?

Aqsa Pervez

The report by Natasha Fatah of the CBC is an eye opener for Canadians, Pakistanis and for everyone in general. It highlights the deleterous effects of excessive poliitcal correctness to the point where few, if any, are questioning the role of religious extremism that caused a father and brother to kill Aqsa Pervaiz, a 16- year Pakistani- Canadian girl, who did not toe the line of the increasingly Wahabi-dominated mosque establishment.

MINORITY REPORT : Who will speak for Aqsa Parvez? http://www.cbc.ca/news/viewpoint/vp_fatah/20071214. html
Sixteen-year-old Aqsa Parvez did not want to wear the hijab. The Middle Eastern head covering has become the most significant icon for Islam in the West, which is unfortunate, since 90 per cent of Muslim women in this country don’t wear one. By extension, they get dismissed as not being authentic Muslims.
The CBC’s own Little Mosque on the Prairie plays into this stereotype by showing every prominent Muslim woman in a hijab. This superficial measurement of Muslim-ness has become so prevalent that a small but increasing number of families are pushing it on their daughters.
Aqsa, a Pakistani-Canadian, was just one of the victims of this growing obsession.
Now that Aqsa is dead, who will speak for her? Who will speak for the countless Muslim girls who lead double lives and who suffer in silence in their homes? Who will make sure they aren’t abused or killed?
Who chooses?
Most Islamist men and women say that a woman chooses to wear the hijab. But, all too often, that choice is taken away from young Muslim girls. They are being told by their parents and their imams that if they don’t wear the hijab, they are no longer Muslim. This occurs even though the Koran, Islam’s holy book, does not say that a woman has to cover her hair.
Take a walk in downtown Toronto, Montreal, Windsor or other cities with large Muslim populations. You will see little girls, as young as four, five and six, wearing hijabs on their way to school. Did these little girls really make a choice to wear the hijab? Did they make a declaration to their parents that they want to be religiously pious and sexually modest? Common sense indicates that these children did not choose for themselves.
The innuendo
Meanwhile, the mullahs and Islamists are busy dismissing the idea that Aqsa’s alleged murder had anything to do with religion. They are circulating rumours on-line that she had a black boyfriend, that she was sexually promiscuous, that she was a drug pusher. These are cited as reasons why her family was strict with her. Why are they so afraid of acknowledging that obsession with a religious ritual may have been a factor? It is because they fear their own culpability in this horrible tragedy. Before their congregations, these religious leaders tell men to control their daughters, wives and sisters. They have brought into Canadian homes the radical Islamist notion that a man’s honour is encompassed in the sexual and physical body of the women in his family, that’s why they must be covered up and kept inside.
Muslim fundamentalists have made a woman’s body the fighting ground for their religious wars, and it is unfortunately women who pay with their lives for the sake of their men’s honour.
A wall of silence
Women’s advocacy groups have played mute on the issue. When Canadian feminists are asked for their reaction to Aqsa’s murder, they decline to respond and instead suggest that it would more appropriate to turn to Muslim women’s groups for reaction.
Advocates are willing to speak up for all other women in Canada, from women who need cancer treatment because of radioisotope shortages to the dozens of prostitutes murdered in British Columbia, but they will not speak for Aqsa.
Even social pundits and critics are making excuses. They say that this isn’t something unique to the Muslim community. They bring up examples of honour killings in Christian, Sikh and Hindu families. Just because there are religious fanatics in every group doesn’t take away the need to investigate what is happening to young Muslim women. So far, the only ones who have spoken honestly are the young girls that attend Applewood Heights Secondary School in Mississauga.
The friends and classmates of Aqsa, who aren’t concerned with political correctness, have said without hesitation that Aqsa was abused and threatened at home because of the religious fanaticism of her family. They have said she was killed because she wanted to be herself. The rest of Canadian society could take a hint from these girls. We hesitate to condemn this behaviour because we don’t want to be seen as racist. Are we going to allow cultural relativism to be the scapegoat for abuse and murder in this country?
This is not the time for discussions about cultural nuances and lowered expectations for ethnic and religious minority groups. This is the time to speak up, and say enough is enough to the religious fanatics in Canada.
If a vacuum of silence is left by the moderate people in Canada, who are the overwhelmingly majority, then that vacuum will be filled by the religious extremists on one side, who will make excuses for these actions; and by intolerant racists on the other, who will say religious minorities are poisoning this country.
Canadians, Muslim and non-Muslim, must say that while this country’s greatest pride is its diversity, multiculturalism and acceptance, there are certain beliefs and laws that are inherently Canadian and that must be respected.
We have to say loudly that a woman is free to cover her body as she chooses. She is free to wear her hair how she likes. That at least in this country, she is free, no matter how you interpret your religion.

What’s on Pakistan TV talk shows? Extremists.

 Pakistan TV talk-show hosts like Zaid Hamid and Amir Liaquat Hussain peddle anti-American conspiracy theories and bash minorities.
By Issam Ahmed,
When Taliban militants stormed two minority-sect mosques in Lahore last month, Pakistani television crews swung into action, breaking police lines to document a dramatic siege that left 95 people dead. What they left out of the coverage highlights the Pakistani media’s increasingly belligerent bent.
Reporters refrained from honoring these victims, part of the frequently persecuted Ahmadi sect of Islam, with the title shaheed, or martyr, as they had done for thousands of others killed in militant violence in recent years. Nor did they refer to the places of worship as mosques. TV news programs downplayed the sectarian nature of the attack. Some instead accused India of trying to undermine Pakistan on the anniversary of successful nuclear tests, or America for fomenting instability to expand its presence in the country.
While Pakistani media are banned by law from recognizing Ahmadis as Muslims, their apparent lack of sympathy for the victims underscored the growing dominance of a worldview that’s rooted more in the country’s conservative religious seminaries than its Western-oriented universities. Nowhere is this more evident than in a bevy of news and talk shows that promote anti-Americanism, the idea of a transnational Islamic government, and minority bashing.
“These [programs] need to be looked at and reviewed. Instead of demonizing the Taliban, they glamorize them,” says Sherry Rehman, a lawmaker from the ruling Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) and former minister of information.
As in Pakistan, American media has its share of rabble-rousers, such as radio host Rush Limbaugh and the Fox News host Glenn Beck, whom the Anti-Defamation League has called America’s “fearmonger-in-chief.” But they don’t talk openly about links with religious militants.

Pakistan’s new firebrands raising eyebrows include televangelists such as Amir Liaquat Hussain, who hosts the popular “Alim Online” show on Geo Television, Pakistan’s largest private TV network; the fez-sporting ex-jihadi Zaid Hamid who famously coined the term “Hindu Zionist” to describe what he sees as the unholy alliance of Israel and India in their quest to undermine Pakistan; and Hamid Mir, host of “Capital Talk,” who counts among the country’s most respected journalists and who interviewed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on her last visit to Pakistan, and is currently in the midst of scandal regarding his alleged ties with the Taliban uncovered in a taped phone recording.

Dozens of private cable channels sprouted during the early 2000s under the rule of former President Gen. Pervez Musharraf, who liberalized the country’s strict media laws. The newly-empowered broadcast media has played a key role in shaping public opinion on matters ranging from the militancy to the long-standing power struggle between the executive and judiciary which eventually helped lead to General Musharraf’s ouster.
Today, every evening, millions of viewers tune-in to watch their preferred nightly hosts. According to industry insiders, Hamid Mir consistently rates No.1 as Pakistan’s most popular talk show host, with advertisers paying about $2,400 a minute for air-time during his slot – a princely sum in impoverished Pakistan.
But of the three new firebrands, Zaid Hamid, who counts rock star Ali Azmat and fashion designer Maria B among his fans, has perhaps the largest youth following, with some 58,000 fans on Facebook.
Mr. Hamid has advocated the Pakistani conquest of India as a solution to poor Indian-Pakistani relations. Other bold declarations include an insistence that, if left unmolested by foreign powers, Pakistan would place a man on the moon within five years. Late last year, he claimed on his show to have evidence that Israel was on the verge of bombing Pakistan – an event that never came to pass.
“One of the reasons why he is beloved is because he’s someone who helps absolve self-reflection. His insistence is that we were destined by greatness but we were robbed by America, by the Jews and the Hindus,” says popular radio-show host and columnist Fasi Zaka.
Hamid has also used controversial (and widely discredited) religious texts to bolster his claims of being the savior of Islam – citing one as saying that the revival of Islam will come from South Asia, and another which says the savior Islam will wear a red hat (much like the hat Hamid is famous for).

Audience appeal

Much of Hamid’s target demographic – young middle-class professionals – grew up after widespread Islamization measures imposed by military ruler Gen. Zia-ul-Haq during the 1980s. Policies include demonizing India and minorities and promoting Islamic government as the only solution to political problems, says Taimur Rahman, a political science lecturer at the Lahore University of Management Sciences. “It’s easy then to relate to what Zaid Hamid says because that’s what they’ve grown up with. It takes more reasoning to challenge that.”
Kamran Zia, a trader in the city of Karachi, says that for him, Zaid Hamid’s show is about “believing in yourself, your culture, your religion and your identity, and not assuming that because something is Western it’s automatically superior.”
Mr. Hamid’s show often references the accomplishments of the Muslim empires that ruled India for close to a thousand years before being supplanted by British rule.
Mr. Zia says when he returned to Pakistan from university in Britain in 2007, “there was a lot of despondency” because of political unrest and a failing economy. “He gave us back that self-belief. It’s good for us.”
Hashim Malik, an officer with Pakistan’s National Bank, adds: “We do have a glorious past and today people look back and only remember the negative things. I like Hamid’s shows because though I do believe in live-and-let-live, we still need to keep ourselves morally intact.”
Despite his substantial following, Hamid’s show was recently cancelled owing to a torrent of opposition of right-wing student groups who felt Hamid has strayed too far in his self-aggrandizement, while allegations resurfaced that Hamid had been a close follower of Yusuf Kazzab, a man who claimed to be Islam’s final Prophet in the late 1990s. He is also being investigated in a murder case, and at present Hamid’s appearances on television are sporadic.

Calls to violence

While Hamid generally reserves his venom for what he perceives as Pakistan’s external enemies, others, like televangelist Amir Liaquat Hussain openly call for violence against Pakistan’s minorities. In a show recorded in 2008, the Karachi based religious-scholar, who held the post of minister of state for religious affairs in the Musharraf regime, said it was incumbent on all true-believers to kill Ahmadis.
Within two days, a prominent Ahmadi doctor and an Ahmadi rice trader were shot dead in Sindh province.
Though Hussain’s membership in the secular MQM political party was terminated, no further action was taken against him or his channel, Geo, owned by Pakistan’s largest media group.
Pakistani media outlets generally refrain from engaging in criticism of each other. But some liberal papers did criticize veteran reporter Hamid Mir – who has interviewed Osama bin Laden three times – when an alleged tape recording linked him to the execution of a Taliban hostage in May.
“We all know that journalists have sometimes to ingratiate themselves with dubious people who can provide them information. But you may want to ask yourself, how much information is Mir’s ’source’ actually sharing and how much of the conversation is the ‘reporter’ informing his ’source,’ ” wrote a blogger on Café Pyala, an anonymous media watch blog that helped break the story.
In the tape, Mir brands Khalid Khawaja, a former intelligence agent being held by the Taliban at the time, a “CIA collaborator” as well as an Ahmadi sympathizer. He also advises the Taliban spokesman not to let Khawaja go but instead interrogate him further. Khawaja was executed days later.
Mir hotly denied the allegations and called the tape faked. “They took my voice, sampled it, and manufactured this conspiracy against me,” Mir told the UK’s Guardian newspaper. Khawaja’s son, meanwhile, announced he would take Mir to court.
After an initial storm of publicity, Mir has retained his show and to date no formal investigation has been launched.

Contrary voices silenced

In such an atmosphere, few hold out hope for positive change. There are no liberal personalities of comparable standing to counteract the right-wing voices, says Mr. Zaka, and the liberal press is largely restricted to English-language newspaper, channels, and blogs – all of which reach only highly-educated Pakistanis.
According to Abbas Nasir, editor of Dawn, Pakistan’s leading English daily, Urdu newspapers outsell their English counterparts in Pakistan by approximately a 10:1 ratio.
“The dangerous thing … is that the middle and upper class are [falling] hook, line, and sinker for these conspiracy theories. The fringe argument has become the mainstream,” says Mr Zaka.

Ava Gardner in Lahore for ‘Bhowani Junction’

This photo was taken on April 22, 1955 and it shows American actress Ava Gardner at Lahore Railway Station. She was in Lahore for the filming of Hollywood Movie ‘Bhowani Junction‘. When Ava came to Lahore, there was only one reasonable hotel in Lahore. It is still there - Falletis. The suite in which Ava stayed has been named after her - “The Ava Gardner suite”. In it’s lounge one could see a beautiful large size, black & white portrait of Ava Gardner smiling.


‘Bhowani Junction‘ is the name of a novel by John Masters which came out in 1952. In mid 50s Hollywood decided to make a movie out of it. The movie is set amidst the turbulence of the British withdrawal from India. It is notable for its portrayal of the Eurasian (Anglo-Indian) community, who were closely involved with the Indian railway system. The film was directed by George Cukor, and was shot on location in Lahore, Pakistan. It starred Ava Gardner as Victoria Jones, an Anglo-Indian nurse in the British Army, and Stewart Granger as Colonel Rodney Savage, a British army officer.
I found following review of movie plot at The Internet Movie Database

The town of Bhowani is a railroad junction and both the Congress Party and the Communist Party are doing all kinds of sabotage to help the British quickly get out of India. Of course each is doing it for their own reasons. In the movie, two people who may have given the outstanding performances of their careers are Ava Gardner and Bill Travers. Both play bi-racial people who don’t fit in either society. But they react differently. Gardner is going through a whole lot of angst, really seeing both the British and Indian point of view.
Bill Travers is the railroad station manager and his whole life is his job. He focuses narrowly on that and his tunnel vision leaves him oblivious to the momentous changes around him. Except for the fact that when the British leave he might lose that little piece of authority where he is, that which gives him stature in the Raj society.

Photo to the left is the book cover image of the novel ‘Bhowani Junction’.

In the movie, the issues are complex, but in the hands of a great director like George Cukor the characters and their struggles become real and even more important, the audience becomes interested. Stewart Granger who was the British Colonel in charge of the whole mess in Bhowani, said that Bhowani Junction was one of the few films he was really proud to be associated with. He has a struggle to, he really does see the Indians as human beings and not just “wogs.” He’s quite knowledgeable about their customs and at one point utilizes that knowledge to unjam that railroad terminal.

Here is the original Movie Trailor of Bhowani Junction showing several shots of Lahore Railway Station.

WPvideo 1.10

[ Download ]

Following two images are the movie posters of Bhowani Junction. In the first poster below one can see the wordings ‘Filmed in Pakistan’ right under the title in yellow which says Bhowani Junction.


We are especially proud to feature the photo to the left from Bhowani Junction filming days. It comes from the personal collection of Zohra Arshad Mahmood, who is seen standing in this photo. Photo credits go to her son and my friend Imran Mahmood, who generously agreed to share this photo with us.
Pakistan’s famous writer Mustansar Hussain Tarar’s has mentioned atleast at two places and dedicated a whole chapter in his book ‘raakh’ on the making of Bhowani Junction. While I cannot tell if all of account is real or fictional, there is certainly some degree of truth to it. Following is an excerpt from ‘raakh’ on Bhowani Junction.
The text is in Urdu but as I get time I’ll translate it for our English Readership.






Translation of Above Urdu Text:
This will be an ongoing project for a while but I will start today. Hopefully I can finish the translation task in next few days. Ok here it goes:
In the simplistic, contentful and slow paced Lahore city, a train suddenly comes to a full stop at Bhowani Junction
Lahoris in general and the crowd of Mansion in particular see their dreams arriving in this train which had just stopped at Bhowani Junction. These were the dreams which they had seen under the shadows of white snows of Kiliminjaro. In these dreams there was a soft and bare foot contessa. In this train, there was the heroine of Hemmingway’s novel ‘Fiesta’ who destroys herself after falling in love with a bull fighter. In the same train at Bhowani junction there were Scaramouche and Wild North.
Mushahid was walking back from school. He was on foot because he had so far misplaced 3 Raleigh bicycles and his father had told him that he will not be getting fourth bicycle until he can learn how to ride a bike himself.
He considered those people as the most qualified in the world who could ride a bicycle on two wheels, pedal it continuously, keep control on the handle, saved themselves from other bicycles and tongas on the road and still didn’t fell down themselves. He looks up to those guys with utter repsect. His maternal unlce Ali Ahmed had tried several times to take him to Minto Park and give lessons on Bicycle riding but he thought he will never be able to learn bicycle riding.
So what would he have done with the three bicycles that he had lost. The answer was simple. He had hired drivers for those three bicycles.
Every morning he would come down from his apartment after eating a layered paratha made from desi ghee by his elder sister and his driver number 1, Kamal would be waiting for him.
When school got off, his class fellow Naseem reached the cycle stand before him and with a dirty blue handker chief was seen cleaning the bicycle. Naseem was driver number 2. It was becuase of these driver’s negligence that bicycles kept getting stolen one after another.
Therefore Mushahid was coming back after getting 2 dozen hits of cane on his hand by Mast Aziz was the Headmaster of Muslim Model School. The young Mardan was also accompanying him. Aapa-ji (Mardan’s mother) always made sure that Mardan followed Mushahid everywhere. Aapa-ji was worried that because of living on 3rd floor Mardan doesn’t get to walk much and his legs may get crooked, therefore she always made Mardan go where ever Mushahid went as part of his leg exercise.
Therefore it was understandable that after getting caned 24 times, walking instead of bicycling and with Mardan enxt to him, Mushahid’s mood was not too good.
As Mushahid kept walking disheartedly, he saw a foreginer couple on a deserted footpath of the Mall, near Regal Bus Stop. He looked at them with just a cursory look but then his heart suddenly skipped a beat - It was like the jerk one gets when a fast moving train suddenly applies brakes. He knew the blue-eyed, tall lady with milky calves and he knew her from very close. After she passed by him, he still remained dazed. She looked exactly like her - but how was it possible?
As soon as he reached his apartment door, he gave his bag pack to Mardan and asked him to quickly climb the 52 stairs to his 3rd floor apartment. Mushahid himself walked briskly towards the Mansion ground where the usual crowd of friends was already gathered.
‘naaah’ Peter said after arcing his Gorkha hat even more.
‘No way’ said Harris with snapping fingers.
Kamal also reached the spot and after hearing whom Mushahid saw he also said ‘No way’.
Peter looked quite bored and said ‘naah naah - you’ve done it before after you told us Groucho Marx was walking down the Mall and we all had to run so far –but Mush if she is whom you tell u then by Christ I will climb to the top of dinga Singh building and sit on the golden top of it and you know how sharp that top is”
“I think it was her” said Mushaihd. He too was now doubtful because if Peter could swear to sit on golden pointed top of the building then he must be very sure.
“Hey Guys” Kamal said by pulling his loose knickers up on his hips by putting thumbs in the pockets. “Come on. Let us check it man”
The four of them made sure to put their autograph books in their pockets -just in case and walked towards the spot where according to Mush she was seen talking to a huge foreigner with her arms around him and smiling with her blue eyes.
It was getting dark on the mall and one had to see right and left before crossing the road. Of course she was not to be found at the spot.
“They were going towards the High Court” said Mush and the four of them started walking like innocent puppies, smelling and looking everything around them, inside the shops, in every side street. And then they all saw her and they all got the shock of their lives. She looked like her. In Imperial Shoe shop’s semi lit showroom she was sitting with her long legs rested one over other and mvoing them slighlty with a grace. She was looking at embroidered Chakwali shoes. All four of them walked with their backs bent as if a seeker goes infront of a giver and then they stood infront of her with their autograph books opened.
“Autographs please!”
At first she looked annoyed but when she saw four sily puppies infront of her she started smiling. She placed Mushahid’s autograph book on her thigh. Mushahid kept holding his autograph book as long as she was writing her name - Eva Gardner. It was her.