| September 8, 2002 | Sunday | Jamadi-us-Saani29,1423 |
Come September: likely hypotheses!
Learning to rebuild the walls
Musharraf, Vajpayee and Bush at UN
A HYPOTHESIS is not a prophecy, it’s only a perception. Dictionarywise, it is a supposition; a proposition assumed for the sake of argument; a theory to be proved or disproved by reference to facts; a provisional explanation of everything.
AT some point in the foreseeable future, taking recent campus happenings into account, it would be a fairly reasonable proposition to try and determine what is the present image of Karachi University. Over the years has it gained in prestige or lost in the process?
One makes this suggestion even though Karachi University has only very recently been given the honour of being the best public-sector university in the country. The University Grants Commission has conferred the honour, in what is described as a “classification” conducted for the first time by the UGC.
This ranking comes on the basis of “availability of their resources, facilities, their research productivity and various systems of administration and management.” Good.
Having said this thought turns to this week’s shocking story which announced that the Karachi University’s Vice Chancellor, Dr Zafar Saeed Saify, had sent on forced retirement “a professor and a former chairman of the department of zoology. Reasons for this are stated to be “insubordination, misappropriation, indulging in political activities and violation of the University’s E & D regulations, and the Government Servants Conduct Rules 1966.”
On that very day, there appeared, enigmatically, in this newspaper, another story which said that a Karachi University teacher, Professor S. M. Saifullah, had been honoured by two major scientific bodies in the country, “in recognition of his outstanding work.” He was also given the best teacher certificate for the year 2001. The two institutions that honoured the professor were the Pakistan Academy of Sciences and the INFAQ Foundation.
It is after a fairly long time, it seems, that we have some good news coming out of Karachi university; which now has a vast, brown, campus which is not only protected and guarded by the rangers for the last decade plus, but it also has an appearance that is somewhat depressing to say the least. That is the image one has, and it is unlikely that it has changed for the better over the years.
There are always many reasons to be worried about the image and the reality vis-a-vis University of Karachi. Various reasons: quality of the teacher, the student, the administration, the shortage of resources, the apathy prevalent on the campus, and the decline in the quality of education, as a result of these and other factors. Discipline too, and there is much to be said on this factor too.
Karachi has enough reasons to be deeply troubled and unhappy about; in particular in the context of its educational institutions, there is almost no silver lining if one takes a realistic view. Now look at the latest news from Karachi University ... academic activities were suspended on the university campus on Thursday, due to a student-teacher unrest, caused by “the laidback attitude of the Vice Chancellor.” Put into perspective it is something that goes back to various recent administrative measures that have been taken by the vice chancellor, says a Dawn report. One reason that caused the teacher-student protest was “getting rough treatment at the hands of the Campus Security Force and law-enforcing agencies deployed on the campus.” There are other causes too. Rough treatment?
Frankly speaking, the details about the suspension of teaching activity on the Campus are so depressing, and the more one contemplates the deeper the worry, the frustration. While one prays that the issues that are agitating the minds of the students and teachers are resolved, and amicably, at this point in time, there are stories circulating in the pipeline that are not indicative of good times ahead. One hears that the Varsity administration is planning to take action against more senior teachers, for instance. Now what is one to assume about senior teachers on the campus. Are they not good enough? Are they dishonest, or lacking in ethics of sorts? Work ethics?
Look at the issue of the image of Karachi University from the point of view of the parents of thousands of boys and girls who go to the campus daily. Take parents of girl students in particular. What kind of a campus do these girl students go to? asks one citizen in dismay.
As one writes on this theme, thought goes out to the thousands of Karachi University graduates and postgraduates who have settled abroad ... or the much larger number that resides in Pakistan. There is not the slightest doubt that they are pained by such incidents, stories and developments. I have heard some former students recall fondly the quiet academic times on the campus in the sixties and the seventies, and lament the symbolism in the fact that the same campus is now protected by the rangers. But then, at the same time, let us bear in mind that even for chicken tikkas in some local restaurants, there is armed private security that is provided. We live in strange times, and it is all not 9/11 related, please!
But let us return to the Campus theme. Why is the University administration unable to sort out the problem in a manner that would do lasting good to the academic atmosphere, and set trends that would initiate traditions that would do us all proud.
Why does one have to hear stories which detail of how “Karachi University teachers feud leads to closure of computer lab.”!! Why do senior teachers have to be sent on forced retirement? What has been going on all these years? How deep is the rot?
One hopes that some way will also be found of getting rid of the thought and plan to convert the Shaikh Zayed Islamic Research Centre into a marriage hall. For that one hall could lead the way to much more commercialism on the campus, and which would be deplorable, to say the least.
What happens in the traumatic month of September, 2002, must remain veiled in the mist of time. For a sample, however, what can be foretold definitely and without any contradiction is that the 6th of the fateful month would see the 37th anniversary of our own first ‘total’ war with India; the 11th, the 54th anniversary of the Quaid’s death and the fall of Hyderabad, Deccan, pre-partition India’s largest Muslim state, together with the first anniversary of the first-ever aerial invasion of the American mainland. The single event that shook the world.
In any military planning, considerable space and thought are given to the so-called ‘enemy or adverse hypotheses’. These, in simple language, happen to be assumptions and perceptions, logically argued about the likely counter-moves of the enemy against ‘own’ planned tactics and strategy. It is not just an academic exercise, but an integral part of a war plan deliberated at the highest staff level.
Success in war would depend largely on the ability of the staff planners to foresee and hypothesize about the enemy moves and counter-moves to offset such material superiority as our eastern neighbour enjoys over us. For as long as India remains in a state of conflict, actual or perceived (specially the ominously impending one since the beginning of the year), Pakistan’s one major task would remain: how well to hypothesize about India’s likely moves to contain and beat them off.
Whether September would see a sudden war-like major flare-up along the LoC and the international borders should best be wished away. Hypothetically, however, the likelihood of an odd accident, or something as little as a stray match setting the whole barn ablaze cannot be ruled out.
India’s Deputy Prime Minister Lal Krishan Advani would not hesitate to declare, in a press statement from London, that ‘India is at war with Pakistan’. Even if essentially rhetorical, its hypothetical challenge stands out, nevertheless. Defence Minister George Fernandes makes no bones about the existing massive troop deployment going well beyond October. There is more of hard talk than an empty verbiage in the threat of Fernandes.
“India threatens to take further steps”, loudly proclaims a front-page headline. The text contains a warning by Foreign Minister Yashwant Sinha of ‘further steps, short of going to war to get Islamabad to act ...’ and stop cross-border terrorism once and for all.
“The classical theory is that war is the last resort of diplomacy. Sinha goes on to theorize. In fact, it is just the reverse. For effective diplomacy should rule out war altogether even as a weapon of the last resort.
As recently as the fourth week of August, India mounted a land-air effort along and may beyond the LoC. The director-general of the ISPR, Maj-Gen Qureshi, called it a highly escalatory act.
It was the first time ever since Kargil (May-August 1999) that India had pressed the IAF into service. A matching Pakistan riposte would have led to a virtual cliffhanger. India had ‘dozens’ of its military personnel killed and wounded in the armed encounter. Yet another one or two such aggressive aberrations may well get the two sides trapped in a so-called limited conflict with an unlimited potential to escalate.
On Sept 11 (or thereabouts) President Musharraf and Prime Minister Vajpayee are expected to be in New York, maybe in the same hotel, for the UN General Assembly session. This coincides with the first anniversary of the 9.11.2001 Armaggedon vapourizing the stately twin towers symbolizing America’s economic predominance worldwide. The prospect of the two leaders going beyond a formal exchange of greetings and a lukewarm handshake remain bleak. However, this is not to rule out chances of a miracle, happening beyond the scope of an adverse hypothesis. Even against one’s better judgment, one could at least hope for the best.
On the global scale, the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld lethal tirade is out to go for a ‘regime change’ in Baghdad. They remain callously unmindful of the horrendous loss of lives and property that the innocent Iraqi civilians must suffer.
That America can repeat as choreographed and widely, even universally-supported military campaign as operation Desert Storm (1990-91) I am tempted to rule out firmly. The UN stays out of it; and the European Union (less UK), Japan and the rest of the world together stand on the wrong side of America.
Nevertheless, there is little hope or prospect of America being wiser before the event and make a re-appraisal of its gung- ho tactics. Concerted naval/air bombings of Baghdad would appear to be very much on the cards. Having gone so far on the road to war, it would not be easy for America to retrace its steps and let Saddam get away with a moral victory. It must force a showdown if only to save its face.
Back home, the election campaign train would hopefully roll on towards its final station - October 10. However, the journey may not be as smooth one as one might wish.
The adverse hypothesis, in this case, may be traced back to two principal roadblocks. First, the emerging problems along our western border and the likely escalation on our eastern border and the LoC. US General Tommy Frank’s hypothesis regarding a possible extension of his coalition forces’ operation beyond Afghanistan, even if impromptu, could not have been just impulsive. He said: “The relationship that we have with surrounding states around Afghanistan will permit us overtime to do the work that all of us recognize needs to be done .....”
Although Gen Franks wouldn’t name Pakistan (or any of the other neighbouring Central Asian states), our foreign office was the first to react. A foreign office spokesman said Islamabad was not in favour of a ‘large-scale’ presence of foreign troops. The expression ‘large scale’ used for the presence of foreign forces is noteworthy. There would be little objection (or option) to their stay, as such, within permissible and mutually agreed limits. Hardly a promising prospect.
Regarding the law and order situation, there is a presidential hypothesis and another of a field commander. Speaking at 25th Export Trophy Award function, President Musharraf said the law and order situation in the country could not be improved ‘overnight’. A ‘long-term’ strategy, however, had been put in place to overcome the situation.
Maj-Gen Salahuddin, commander of the Pakistan Rangers, said he had credible information that angered militants might launch attacks in Karachi on Sept 11. Yet another adverse hypothesis. A safe exit strategy out of the historically crucial month is yet to be devised.
The writer in a retired brigadier.
BARELY a fortnight ago as I roamed about the cobbled streets of Florence in Italy, true Tuscany country, vineyards included, gasping at the effort undertaken to preserve the past, for the entire city seems like one huge museum, it made me remember my Lahore, probably one of the oldest cities in the world. It is today an utter mess ... and yet there is just so much to it, the people, the places, the things, the faces ... for that is what memories are made of ... that elusive mental concept that keeps one living here.
As I roamed about in the central square ... the piazza de Doumo ... I met an old English gentleman, rather Victorian in appearance, whose attire seemed more like out of a fading photograph of the subcontinent of a big game hunter. My present day journalistic colleagues in London would call him a “geezer out of tune and time.” He had a huge leather-bound book in hand and was giving Florence the ‘once over’.
We managed to get talking and what surprised me about the gent was that he knew Lahore very well. He even knew the names of the 13 gates. He shook his head in disbelief at my description of the present-day Lahore. “You will one day regret it,” he said, and recommended that I go to Treveso, near Venice, to see how they have managed to rebuild their old walled city, gates and drawbridges included. It is a piece of art, he said. I took his advice and set off on a three-hour train journey to Treveso, and it was well worth it.
As a young school-going lad I had often heard my father lamenting the fact that we were not looking after the Ravi and the Walled City. He was then Editor of that old and famous Lahore daily, The Civil & Military Gazette and he wanted, with assistance from friends like Khwaja Zaheeruddin, the architect, to preserve Lahore as “the world largest living museum”. The idea then was to make the Ravi the centre of the city by building two huge embankments on both sides lined with beautiful trees and parks, and to decrease the bursting population of the walled city, place strict restrictions on building and demolition, and to preserve each and every house as it then stood. There was a plan to such effect lying in the LIT, or the Lahore Improvement Trust. But then Lahore was hijacked by the “claim racketeers” or the 47ers as my father used to disdainfully call them. “I suppose one day they will turn Model Town into a commercial proposition,” he used to joke. Today that is a tragic reality. Even an “enlightened” friend has built an office bang in the middle of the quiet G Block, much to the residents’ dismay. That is why visiting Treveso was so important. One had to see what they had done, and to try to attempt to make the proverbial flea move an inch in the conscience of the rulers of Lahore, whoever they may be, for these days one just does not know.
In Treveso they have rebuilt the entire walls of the old city that tried, in vain, to defend itself against an expanding Venetian maritime power. They knocked the walls down to deprive them of the ability to defend. This is what the British did to old Lahore after defeating the Sikhs. In Treveso the old walls have been rebuilt. It is, in every aspect, like the original wall, and the gateways are like the original. The moat outside has been dug again, though it remains dry. The streets are cobbled and there are restrictions on house occupation.
It is a marvel of intent and a place of immense peace and beauty. After all, Italy houses approximately 80 per cent of the ancient monuments of Western civilization, and its people are the closest you will find to the Pakistani psyche ... terribly creative, with an immense sense of history, not to speak of other traits. In Treveso lies the answer to many of the problems that face our own Walled city. There is need, urgently to declare all of the Walled City a “protected city”.
For starters, there is an immediate need to rebuild the entire Old City wall on the Western side, from Bhati to Taxali gate. There is no reason there should be any problem with that. The moat from the days of Akbar the Great is there, the land is there though slightly encroached, the need is there to protect the residents of old Lahore. It will be a beautiful sight to say the least, and it will be a modest beginning. The walls all around the city can be rebuilt, for the space and need very much exist. Within the old city the population will have to adhere to strict living conditions, not six to a room. Some form of civil living conditions will have to be imposed. This will improve the quality of life of the residents. All this sounds ambitious, dreamlike ... but then what harm is there in dreaming something good for our city. To begin with, the use of the rickshaws within the Walled City must be banned, for the noise level there the old city is the highest in Lahore, almost 45 per cent above the human tolerance level.
It goes without saying that comparing Venice or Treveso or Florence to Lahore a rather unfair. They have the resources, we do not. We have an uncontrollable population, which they do not have. But then they have the tourists instead and on them the Italian economy manages very well. Then they have the education and sensitivity, which we apparently lack. Even a handful of concerned citizens can change the situation of the “wretched of the earth”. It does not take a Fanon to bring home the truth. We can do it within our resources ... that is if we want to. My view is that we can, and we must. — Majid Sheikh
WHEN Narasimha Rao was India’s prime minister, he came to attend the UN General Assembly session and as usual had a meeting scheduled with the then US president, Bill Clinton. But so did some dozen or more heads of government and state. So, before Mr Rao was ushered in to meet Mr Clinton after waiting in line for some time, he quipped:”Its humiliating that we have to stand in line, like in a court of an emperor waiting to hear our name being called to see the king.”
Well, things have not changed much since then.
When Gen Pervez Musharraf comes to attend the UN General Assembly session on Sept 11, Kashmir and fight against terrorism will be the front and the centre of his agenda. And Indian Prime Minister A. B. Vajpayee will come with a similar agenda. Both leaders will not talk to each other about it, instead they will complain to US President George Bush about what the other is not doing and what is expected of the Americans.?
Although both leaders have separate times to meet Mr Bush but their agendas would be pretty much the same. Gen. Musharraf is likely to tell Mr Bush that he has stopped all cross-border terrorism in the Indian-occupied Kashmir, and Mr Vajpayee will complain that it’s not true and more US pressure is needed on Pakistan on this count.
Whether Gen Musharraf likes it or not, US concerns about democracy and elections would be underscored by the US president and officials.
No matter how “tight” the general is with the US, concerns about democracy are tied to the US aid package.
No one was tighter with the US in the 1980s than former dictator Ziaul Haq, who was recipient of the biggest American largesse, as he and the ISI organized the Mujahideen to fight the Soviet invaders in Afghanistan. Yet when the push came to shove, even the slayer of the “evil empire” president Ronald Reagan had difficulty in getting his aid package through to Pakistan in 1984 due to the US laws which prohibited continued aid to a dictatorship, particularly the one which was suspected of being capable of producing nuclear weapons. Hence Mr Reagan was forced to ask his Republican colleagues on Capitol Hill to bail him out and thus the infamous Pressler Amendment was enacted.
The Pressler law basically allowed the US president to authorize aid certifying that Pakistan did not posses the capability of producing nuclear weapons, thereby allowing aid to continue unabated. Yet dictator Zia was forced to allow elections in 1985 wherein a democratic government of sorts, headed by Mohammed Khan Junejo, was ushered in to allow US aid to continue beyond that time.
But all that changed under Mr Bush’s father, the senior Mr Bush, who in September of 1990, following dismissal of prime minister Benazir Bhutto by president Ishaq Khan, refused certification, and all US aid, including the delivery of F-16s, was stopped. The aid never did resume, really, but under Benazir Bhutto when the Brownback amendment was enacted to help president Clinton resume some aid and to refund to Pakistan the F-16s money in the form of a barter agreement, i.e soybean oil for F-16s. Gen. Musharraf’s former ambassador to the US, Maleeha Lodhi, would be able to enlighten him on the process since she was deeply involved in it.
Last year against the advice of his aides Gen Musharraf revisited the F-16 issue, hoping that as he has now become America’s foremost ally in the war against terrorism, they will heed his call to give Pakistan the fighter jets. He was immediately rebuffed by Washington, with his friend Secretary Colin Powell saying on television that there is no question of supplying Pakistan with the planes. That fact alone should have opened Gen Musharraf’s eyes: US will not go along with every one of his demands no matter how “tight” he is with them.
VAJPAYEE: As for Indian Prime Minister A. B. Vajpayee, he is likely to spend time in places and rooms and corridors, avoiding meeting Gen Musharraf. Their first encounter could be at the World Trade Center site where some 10 world leaders are likely to assemble to pay homage to the Sept 11 victims. The second encounter would be at the photo-op ceremony at the opening of the General Assembly session. The third time they could see each other at the secretary-general’s luncheon for the heads of state and government (Mr Vajpayee deliberately skipped last year luncheon just to avoid meeting Pakistan’s leader) and the fourth contact could be at the traditional reception hosted by the US president for the world leaders.
Although the world community would like nothing better than seeing the two leaders from South Asia meet and stand down from the eight-month-old stalemate, yet Mr Vajpayee who has been forced by the hardliners in his BJP government not to talk to Pakistan is not expected to heed any such advice. He is expected to tell the world that Kashmir is a bilateral issue and could not be resolved with any outside interference. He is expected to underscore that the cross-border infiltration by the Pakistan-supported militants has not stopped. He would instead ask the world to pressure Pakistan to stop all such activities so that the elections in the occupied Jammu and Kashmir could take place without hindrance.
Many experts here feel that New Delhi believes that by massing forces on Pakistan’s borders and prompting Islamabad to do the same could bleed Pakistan economically, thereby exacting a price. But such tactics work both ways, as we witnessed when the US and the world community ordered their citizens out of India fearing a nuclear confrontation in May of this year. The immediate economic impact was so severe on India that it had to back down from an imminent war posture.
Mr Vajpayee is likely to ask President Bush to further push Pakistan to completely clamp down on the cross border infiltration so that elections could be held in the occupied Kashmir. Mr Bush is likely to comply, like in the past. But such pressure is now a moot point, since Pakistan asserts it has complied.
Experts say: “India doesn’t realize that there is no alternative to talks with Pakistan and the Kashmiri leadership. The issue will not go away on its own.”
However, the Indian delegation, as expected, would mount a public relations campaign to convince the world community that Pakistan is the sponsor of terrorist and it must be stopped. But that line is not likely to sell much because Washington and indeed the world community recognizes Pakistan as the frontline state in the terror war.
Immediately following Sept 11 attacks and US President George Bush’s call “either you are with us or against us”, India jumped at the opportunity sensing that Pakistan would be ruled out of the game and designated a terrorist state, given the links between Pakistan’s Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI), the Taliban and the Al Qaeda. But the aboutface done by President Musharraf in the face of imminent US threat anointed Pakistan as the frontline state. India believed that once it became a US ally it could force a Kashmir settlement when Pakistan is declared a pariah nation. But that to New Delhi’s chagrin did not happen. “The wind was taken out of their sails” so to speak.
But New Delhi regrouped and decided to embark upon a new strategy. i.e. that any and every incident in India and in Kashmir since Sept 11 was to be placed at Pakistan’s doorstep. Surprisingly New Delhi’s plan worked as the US and the world community pressed Pakistan to stop cross-border infiltration which it says has now stopped. But India believes it’s still not enough.
Thus the stalemate could continue unabated as the American still don’t have a roadmap to resolve the crisis.
LOWERING TENSIONS: A Muslim American who prays five times a day and sports a long beard has become a top comedian in Chicago’s comedy nightclubs using self-deprecating humour to break tensions which exist between the mainstream Americana and the Muslim community since Sept 11.
Comedian Azhar M. Usman was focus of a feature in many Chicago papers and The New York Times.
Before he begins his routine on the nightclub stage, Usman walks to the bar, asks for a bottle of water and goes and performs ablution and then prays before coming to stage to make the people laugh.
“Everywhere I go these days, the FBI follows me,” begins Azhar M. Usman, a Muslim comedian. “I am not a member of Al Qaeda, nor am I a member of the Taliban — though I play one on TV.
“I am a Muslim, I am an American Muslim,” he continues.
“American and Muslim at the same time. He prays and eats hamburgers!”
The NYT said Mr Usman, 26, a lawyer by day, is one of a number of Muslim and Arab-American comics who have sprung up on the stand-up scene in recent months, capitalizing on the public’s increased awareness of their religion and culture since Sept 11 — and, perhaps, helping to ease tensions surrounding the nation’s newest persecuted minorities.
PIA: My last piece on the PIA was an effort to focus on basic shortcomings in its service orientation. I did not intend to implicate, nor was there any effort to undermine its general manager in New York, Mr Salahuddin. In his personal capacity he has been extremely helpful.
The responsibility for the lack of service to the customers is a collective responsibility at PIA and no one individual should could be singled out or blamed for the overall malaise which is afflicting the organization. In fact, Mr Salahuddin must be complimented for his efforts to set the record straight.