We brought our camels to New York: DATELINE WASHINGTON

ONCE in New York, I made a small group of friends who also had come from violent cultures. They were from everywhere: Bulgaria, Chechnya, Russia, Uzbekistan, Sri Lanka, West Africa and even Timbuktu. And yes, one of them was the so-called Blueman of Timbuktu.

We were bound together by our flight from fear. All of us had escaped political, religious or cultural repression to live in a more tolerant society, yet we could not escape our past. We never tired of telling each other how great “home” was. We lied to each other about our past, forgetting that we cling to the past just as tightly as the past holds us in its grip. It shows on our faces, in our habits, in the way we speak, dress up, eat or walk.

But such considerations never slowed our tall tales. If you believe us, we all came from well-to-do, if not rich, families. We all had left behind “palatial homes” — as a West Indian friend used to say — in the rich neighbourhoods of homelands scattered across the globe.

In our new world, our past could be gliding about in limousines and chauffeur-driven cars, sojourning at salons and spas, and eating at five-star hotels and restaurants. Once I almost got lynched when I told a group of people from my own city that the particularly rich part of the city they said they came from did not have more than 500 houses — yet I already had met several hundred people in America who claimed to have a house there. But such is the life of an immigrant.

Most people in our group spoke English even before they came to America. They were educated and either had — or could get — white-collar jobs back home. Here, they were working at 7-Elevens, McDonald’s or corner liquor stores. Even these odd jobs brought in more money than the so-called white-collar jobs back “home,” but they hurt our egos. And this forced them to make up stories about their “glorious” past.

They spent the entire week dishing out hamburgers, hawking newspapers or arranging bottles in the coolers and during the weekend they got together — often at the residence of a Pakistani because he was the only one in our circle who had a three-bedroom house in Queens — to dream our dreams and tell our past as we wished it had been.

The most innocent in the group was the Blueman of Timbuktu. He never claimed a huge house or big cars back home. Instead, he spoke fondly of his father’s camel herds that made him a very rich man in his community.

Like most of us, the Blueman also wanted to return home one day. He was waiting to save enough money to buy 500 camels, not one less. Don’t ask me why 500 because he never explained.

And once there, he wanted to build a big house and live there with his harem. Yes, harem. That’s why he wanted 20 rooms in his house — 10 for his harem and 10 for the rest of the family. He had not yet figured out how many wives and concubines he wanted except that he wanted plenty. Every time he spoke of his harem, I would say I wanted to be a thief in his harem.

“Why a thief?” he would ask.

“Haven’t you read the old harem stories? These kings and nobles had so many wives and concubines that each had to wait for at least a year to be graced with the royal favour. So it was the thieves who kept these women happy,” I would joke.

“I would let my dogs loose on you. I would kill you if you polluted my harem,” he would say, with a grin on his face.

“But thieves played a key role in keeping the harem healthy. There was no other outlet for these women to take out their frustration,” I would joke.

This always made him furious.

“This is blasphemy. Royal women do no such things. They are not two-dollar prostitutes of New York,” he fumed. “OK, OK. They had no natural desires,” I would say.

This always made him so angry that he walked out muttering, “You people have no regard for the nobility.”

Of course we didn’t. Although we lived in a borough named after a British queen, there was nothing regal in our lives. Fortunately for us, New York did not have much respect for the royalty either. If there ever was a city which was invented for the workers, it’s New York. Everybody is a king here, even the homeless.

When he was in good mood, Blueman would agree.

“Have you noticed? The beggars here are so different,” he would say. “They do not plead. They demand alms. Back home, the beggars are polite and humble. Not in New York.”

The New York City is like an onion. People live in layers. It is possible to live in your own rut without even being exposed to other layers of society. Those on the top are so rich and mighty that they look celestial, creatures from another planet whom you never see except on the TV screen or in newspapers. But on the bottom, the daily wage-earners share space with a diaspora of interesting people. There were homeless and jobless among them. There were part-time workers, the beggars, the prostitutes and the alcoholics.

Those of us who worked at liquor stores had a very jaundiced view of New York. From where we were, everything looked grim and pale. For the liquor clerks, New York was equally divided between alcoholics and prostitutes, sprinkled with beggars who stood outside and collected change until they had enough to buy a bottle of 100-proof alcohol. Then they disappeared until the next evening.

Some of the liquor-store owners and workers were Muslims. They had to overcome an agonizing moral dilemma before they worked in a liquor store. Islam forbids alcohol. For a Muslim, all income associated with alcohol is haram, impious, filthy. But life is filthier if you live in New York and you are unemployed.

Water scarcity a big problem: DATELINE SUKKUR

BEING the third largest city of the Sindh province, Sukkur has been badly neglected in the matter of civic amenities, as well as in the development of its trade and industry. Although, unfortunately, its size was cut some years back when the new district of Ghotki was created, its problems remain enormous, as well as unattended.

A great tragedy is that potable water is not available in any of the city’s 22 union councils. Recently the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) — officially assigned the task of analysing the Indus water — discovered the truth that its water from Gudu to the Sindh delta of Thatta is unfit for human use, as well as for agriculture. The EPA director at Sukkur, Wiqar Hussain Phulpoto, says an EPA team has got the water at various points tested but found it unusable. Shortly an EPA gathering will be held at Khairpur to find out a solution to the problem.

The people of Sukkur, at the Indus river embankment, have to suffer greatly from the pollution created by industrial waste carried into the river, though there is already a law which bars industries from throwing their waste fluid into the river until it is treated scientifically. What is regrettable is that despite the existence of EPA laws not a single environmental tribunal has started its work, with the result that pollution has grown manifold in the urban areas here.

Poor sanitation poses great health hazards to the poor inhabitants of the city. According to reports, many people in the last few months were afflicted with hepatitis B and C.

Sewers along Military Road and in New Goth areas have been dug out at half a dozen places after remaining choked for a long time. But the diggers have not been able to detect the points where faults have developed, and, hence, the problem lingers on.

Similarly, the condition of roads is poor. Lately the district government has taken up a number of city roads for renovation and reconstruction. It is hoped the authorities would ensure the quality of work to make the roads long-lasting and trouble-free. It may be pointed out that the small bridge on Shikarpur Road near Lal Mashaikh needs to be widened, with the expansion of the road there, to facilitate the flow of traffic to Subzimandi.

A word of caution here. It is painful to see the sheer lack of coordination among the various departments that have undertaken development work recently. For example, even the newly-built roads and streets are being dug out for laying utility lines. This is waste of public money, and the situation must be rectified.

TUSSLE: The tussle between the newly-inducted provincial ministers and the district Nazims of Sukkur, Jacobabad, Khairpur, Nawabshah, Larkana and Badin has entered into a crucial phase in which four of the Nazims: Nafisa Shah of Khairpur, Khurshid Junejo of Larkana, Shabbir Ali Bijarani of Jacobabad and Syed Nasir Hussain Shah of Sukkur: are holding closed-door meetings with the NRB officials.

A district Nazim told this correspondent that NRB chief Gen Tanveer Hussain Naqvi was given a complete picture about the doings, rather the wrongdoings, of three ministers during the past one month. According to him, Gen Naqvi was told that the ministers’ confrontationist policy was hurting the grassroots democracy. After all, “we are here to protect the system, and so our aims and objects and those of the government are one and the same, and any harm to the system would damage both of us,” Gen Naqvi was told. According to the Nazim, the NRB chief showed positive concern about the matter.

The Local Government Order 2001 has clearly spelt out the functions and duties of district Nazims and their district governments and, therefore, any interference by provincial ministers in their working is bound to cause irreparable damage to the system.

Sukkur district Nazim Syed Nasir Hussain Shah maintains that their main reason for avoiding talks with the governor before talking to the NRB chairman was because the governor did not take any action on their complaints which were sent to him in writing by Khairpur district Nazim Nafisa Shah. He says the present ugly campaign seems to be aimed at creating a distance between them and the regime.

Whatever might be the outcome of their efforts at Islamabad, the position here is that the government affairs in these districts have almost come to a standstill. With the election staring in the face, this would hurt the government most, the Nazims maintain.

The attack on Iraq: MEDIA REVIEW

IT IS indeed quite disconcerting to see the way most major American newspapers, and most of the mainstream British ones — except of course the Guardian saying nothing about America’s hare-brained scheme to attack Iraq. For a change, Britain showed some reluctance, at least initially, in going ahead with what many perceive to be George Bush (the father’s) unfinished agenda but eventually (and true to the video of George Michael’s Shoot the Dog), London eventually caved in.

The plan to attack seems to be very much on, with at least one website reporting that American army engineers have already begun building air strips in northern Iraq, to be used by American and Turkish troops. While the issue has been in the print and electronic media in both America and Britain, its coverage seems to centre more on its technical aspects with not many journalists or commentators raising the moral issues involved in attacking a sovereign nation. Once the New York Times leaked the details of the attack — and at least one website had already carried details of it prior to the leak to the Times — all the coverage hovered around on what sort of attack needed to be carried out for a swift victory, with no one bothering to even question the basic premise of such outlandish action. In any case, the much misled and misinformed American reading public has already been prepared for this kind of vigilante-ism by the events following September which seems to allow Washington, and some other nations, to justify just about anything as terrorism-related.

This is not to say that Saddam Hussein is an angel but surely he is not the only dictator that the world has, or his the only nation with a nuclear or chemical or biological weapons capability. Initially, the attack was linked to the condition of weapons inspectors with Baghdad’s opponents saying that the attack would go ahead if the inspectors were not given permission to enter the country. Tony Blair later chimed in saying that there would be no attack without proof of Iraq’s complicity in still pursuing to build a nuclear, chemical and biological arsenal. However, a few days later this changed with a senior American diplomat saying that this was never the case and that even if Baghdad were to allow the weapons inspectors that would not save it from a possible attack.

Clearly, the American media tends to be rather selective and does not want to look at this whole issue of attacking another country in the larger perspective. The reason for saying this — and it relates very much to the issue of weapons inspectors — has to do with a story that the New York Times carried on its front page on January 7, 1999, with the heading: “US Spied on Iraq Under UN Cover, Officials Now Say.” It said quite unambiguously: “United States officials said today that American spies had worked undercover on teams of United Nations arms inspectors ferreting out secret Iraqi weapons programmes... By being part of the team, the Americans gained a firsthand knowledge of the investigation and a protected presence inside Baghdad.” The next day, in a follow-up story, the Times reported: “Reports that the United States used the United Nations weapons inspectors in Iraq as cover for spying on Saddam Hussein are dimming any chances that the inspection system will survive.”

For all his indiscretions, Saddam Hussein can hardly be blamed for not allowing UN inspectors, especially if the best-known newspaper of his biggest and self-proclaimed opponent reports (quoting American officials) that the teams had spies. For a journalist to miss out this important fact and context when reporting on the current stand-off is at best a sign of slackness and carelessness and at worst proof of a straying conscience.

Here’s Normal Solomon who in his piece War and Forgetfulness - A bloody media game (available on the website of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting at www.fair.org) wrote: “Instead of presenting a complete relevant summary of past events, mainstream US journalists and politicians are glad to focus on tactical pros and cons of various aggressive military scenarios. While a few pundits raise cautious warning flags, even the most absurd Swiss-cheese rationales for violently forcing a ‘regime change’ in Baghdad routinely pass without challenge.

“In late July, a Wall Street Journal essay by a pair of ex-Justice Department attorneys claimed that the US would be ‘fully within its rights’ to attack Iraq and overthrow the regime — based on ‘the customary international law doctrine of anticipatory self-defence.’ Of course, if we’re now supposed to claim that ‘anticipatory self-defence’ is a valid reason for starting a war, then the same excuse could be used by the Iraqi government to justify an attack on the United States... As a matter of routine, US journalists are too discreet to bring up unpleasant pieces of history that don’t fit in with the slanted jigsaw picture of American virtue. With many foreign-policy issues, major news outlets demonstrate a remarkable ability to downplay or totally jettison facts that Washington policy-makers don’t want to talk about. — OMAR R. QURAISHI

(email: omarq@cyber.net.pk)

Do you fancy a nazm or a nasm?

DESPITE complaints by every publisher of an Urdu literary magazine about the financial problems faced by them, new magazines continue to come out. I have just received a copy of a quarterly from Rawalpindi, Aafaq, which happens to be its second issue. It has some top writers on its 270 pages. But what struck me immediately was the article by the short story writer, Nilofer Iqbal, who has gone out of her way in praise of Ahmad Faraz. At places she almost appears to be hugging him. I can only say that the effort is unbecoming. I do not know how the editor accepted it for publication.

A section of the magazine is devoted to the extolling prose-poems. Some of such compositions have also been published for the readers to appreciate, that is, in case they are read at all. However, one of these cannot escape attention for its fascinating title, Bastard.

Alongside these so-called poems there is a full length article by some Muhammad Hameed Shahid who has coined a name for this ridiculous genre. Spelling it with noon, seen and meem, he makes it ‘nasm.’ The seen, evidently, has been brought in to denote nasr or prose. Now the author of this article, and the inventor of this word, takes it for granted that his invented word would be accepted by all and sundry and would henceforth be put in use in everyday writing. As such, he has assumed the role of a lexicographer and given a long list of derivatives from the word ‘nasm,’ like mansoom, nasmana, naasim, and so on. I really do not know why he has wasted so much effort.

The funniest thing in this magazine is an article condemning Anis Nagi for his opposition to the ghazal. The writer calls ghazal hamaray mo’ashray ki abroo or the centrepiece of our culture.

IN ITS programme highlighting the achievements of our forebears, the Pakistan Academy of Letters arranged talks in its local offices on Sir Syed Ahmad Khan. Presided over by the intellectual, Anwar Ali Bukhari, the main speakers on the occasion were Dr Muhammad Kamran of the Oriental College and Ziauddin Lahori who has written a lot on the pioneer of modern education for the Muslims of the sub-continent. It was heartening to note that a large number of people turned up to attend the function including such literary diehards as Dr Anis Nagi, Tahir Masud, Niaz Sufi, Karamat Bukhari and Shagufta Nazli.

Sir Syed lived at a time when the Mughal empire was on its last legs. Then followed the uprising of 1857 which was crushed by the British. As a consequence, they assumed full control of the country but started discriminating against the Muslims whom they blamed for all that happened in 1857. Even the jagirs of Muslim landlords were confiscated. Not only that: when the British invited applications for minor jobs under them they specifically mentioned that only Hindus need apply. On their part, the Muslims of the time nursed a special hatred for the British. Following their ways, however enlightened, was considered to be a sin. This included English education.

It is interesting to note that initially Sir Syed also held orthodox views. This is reflected in his book recalling the glories of the past. Some time around 1855 when Sir Syed reverently showed this book to the great poet, Mirza Ghalib, he advised him not to waste time in trying to resurrect what had outlived its usefulness.

It was only after the events of 1857 that Sir Syed became convinced that the only way the Muslims could pull themselves out of the mire was through education on western lines. Making a mark as a reformer, he wrote a commentary both on the Holy Quran and the Bible and proved that there was no difference between the teachings of two religions. He also wrote a small book, Asbab-i-Baghawat-i-Hind to bring out why the entire country had risen against the British. He made it clear that it were the British themselves who had created general disaffection against them in the minds of the Muslims. At the same time, he exhorted the Muslims not to keep basking in past glory but make an effort to live according to the times and work for a place of honour for themselves in the modern world. He pointed out that the Muslims had somehow developed a wrong concept of their religion. Islam, he said, should be understood according to the established laws of nature and it was wrong to compare the Holy Book with scientific laws.

While posted at Moradabad in 1859, Sir Syed took the first step forward in the field of education. He established a Persian madressah there. He was critical of the education system imposed by the British as it was confined to the teaching of vernaculars. He advised them to impart education through English as well.

Later, during his posting at Ghazipur, he established a madressah on self-help basis. He also established a scientific society there and got English books translated into Urdu. Later when he moved to Aligarh, he brought out a journal, the Aligarh Institute Gazette. After a visit to England where he studied the English education system, he started publishing his famous weekly, Tehzibul Akhlaq. It was in 1875 that he established the Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental College at Aligarh. He died in 1898 as an acknowledged Muslim reformer, educationist and writer.

It is unfortunate that some people have not fully appreciated all that Sir Syed did for the Muslims of his time. They even acuse him of being a lackey of the British as no one from the district where he was posted took part in the uprising of 1857. They forget that after the mutiny when he was offered a jagir out of the confiscated lands of the Muslims of Moradabad, he refused to accept it. All that he requested was his pension as he had decided to go to Egypt and spend his last days there. — Ashfaque Naqvi