Mir Babbar Ali Anees remembered

THE main event last week was the seminar organised by the Marsia Foundation of Pakistan in connection with the 200th birth anniversary of Mir Babbar Ali Anees. Held in Alhamra Hall III on The Mall, it was presided over by the former caretaker prime minister of the country, Malik Meraj Khalid.

Acknowledging Mir Anees as one of the all-time greats of Urdu, speakers on the occasion regretted that no worthwhile research had been conducted on the marsia after the one done by Maulana Shibli Nomani in his Moazana-i-Anees-o-Dabeer. They, therefore, had a special word of praise for the Canada-based scholar, Dr Taqi Abidi, for his book, Tajzia Yadgar-i-Marsia, which was launched on the occasion. That book, they felt, was the first serious research on marsia after Shibli’s work.

Maulana Shibli had ranked the marsia as the topmost genre of Urdu poetry as there was nothing like it in any other literature in the world. (Elegy is not quite the same thing). A marsia has to be written in the context of the tragedy of Karbala according to a set scheme with all the twists, turns and digressions clearly marked and predictable. Yet a good marsia is also expected to offer something new and different. This makes it a formidable challenge for a poet to write a marsia which is solemn in context, strong in sentiment and fresh in approach. As Syed Wahidul Hasan Hashmi, an authority on marsia writing, once said that a marsia of any merit should have the wantonness of a ghazal, the expanse of masnavi and the majesty of qasida. Unless a poet wields authority on all genres of Urdu poetry, he cannot produce a good marsia as it has a wide canvas and is something unique.

In his speech that afternoon, Intizar Hussain said that the marsia of Anees had the elements of both drama and epic but it was not the diction alone that distinguished him from his contemporary poets. It was his deep understanding of human sentiments and his profound insight into the complex nature of peoples’ impulses and reflexes. Moreover, his poetry was different from Firdausi and Homer as they dealt only with male characters in their epics. On the other hand, Anees dealt with both male and female characters and masterfully presented the sentiments and feelings of mothers, sisters and daughters during, and after, the tragic happenings at Karbala.

Dr Salim Akhtar, who also spoke on the occasion, suggested that a Mir Anees award should be instituted as an incentive to writers and literary critics. This was later endorsed by Malik Meraj Khalid who added that if the government could not institute the award some literary organization should do so.

Dr Agha Sohail had also to speak at the seminar but could not attend in person; he sent his observations in writing which pertained to the proper reading of a marsia before the public.

Dr Taqi Abidi, who is a pathologist and has been practising in Canada for many years, also spoke at the seminar and explained the theme of his book. He said that Anees happens to be one of the four great poets of Urdu, the other three being Mir Taqi Meer, Ghalib and Iqbal. He regretted that not much had been written about him although he had produced 82,000 verses of marsia. He said he was compiling two more books on marsia in six volumes. That would be a stupendous work of dedication. This announcement, I feel, should put the locally based research scholars to shame.

THE local setup of the Pakistan Academy of Letters arranged a function in its office to pay tribute to the memory of Dr Annemarie Schimmel. It was presided over by Prof Gilani Kamran. Speaking on the occasion, Ikram Chughtai recounted her deep regard for Rumi and Iqbal and her prime work related to them.

He said she was also a poet and had written a travelogue about Pakistan. Recalling her association with Dr Schimmel at Harvard where she was her student, Dr Arifa Syed said that because of her simple ways and deep interest in spiritual matters, she used to call her ‘murshid Schimmel’. Her wish, she added, was that she be buried in the Matli graveyard in Sindh.

In his presidential remarks, Prof Gilani Kamran said that where others are appreciative of Pakistan we unfortunately tend to find faults in it. He said Pakistan was considered a new ideal at the time of its creation and everyone took interest in it. He said that the interest Dr Schimmel evinced in Islam was because it presents an entirely different point of view before the world.

POET, writer, educationist, dramatist, columnist, and former diplomat, Ataul Haq Qasmi has turned sixty. To celebrate the occasion, his three sons jointly arranged a dinner in the Lahore Gymkhana. As stated in the invitation letter, all those about whom they had heard their father talk with affection were being invited. They did turn up. But one person conspicuous by his absence was Amjad Islam Amjad. Wasn’t he once regarded Ata’s twin.

LAST month while writing about the sitting of the literary organization, Adab Serai, I had said that I saw all the familiar old faces there except those of Afzal Baqi and two others. Unfortunately it is now confirmed that I will never see that face again; the news of the poet’s death came during the monthly sitting of Adab Serai last Monday. The programme, therefore, came to an abrupt end.

SULTANA Munawwar, the poetess who presents her verses with a lilting tarranum, is in mourning these days. Her elder brother has been murdered in Jhang and, as usual, the killers are being shielded by the influential. The poor girl is in agony; she does not know whom to approach to have the offenders apprehended. — ASHFAQUE NAQVI

Powellism defined

MANY Pakistanis would have thought that the US secretary of state, Colin Powell, was a moderate man. Many of us thought that it were hawks like Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his triumvirate of Reaganites, Defence Policy Board chief Richard Perle, Assistant Defence Secretary Doughlas Feith and Deputy Defence Secretary Paul Wolfowitz who were calling the shots.

The Pentagon, more precisely a coterie of diehard neoconservatives with extremely close ties to Israel’s Likud party, was effectively running America’s foreign policy leaving out the likes of Mr Powell in the cold. But anyone who thought that would have to think over their assessment of the man, Mr Powell seems to have been won over by the hawks or perhaps deep down he was always one of them, just unwilling to come out in public. Whatever the case my be, he has now come out as America’s chief spokesman on the war against Iraq.

His address to the security council was followed by a, perhaps inadvertent, admission that the long-term goal of the war against Iraq would be to radically re-order the geo-politics of one of the most crucial regions of the world, the Middle East, in such a manner that there would be no recurring threat to America’s (or Israel’s?) dominance in the area. In fact, this is precisely what the likes of Messers Perle, Feith and Wolfowitz have wanted all along: a Middle East reshaped in such a way with pliant pro-US regimes that there would be any opposition to America’s policies. Such a plan was drawn up as the USSR disintegrated, and its formulators had one premise in mind: to prevent any other superpower or regional power from replacing the Soviets.

However, part of the reason that he enjoys such a positive public image — and that could be said for the defence secretary too, at least with American viewers — is that he isn’t asked the right questions.

For example, during his speech to the UN Security Council he cited Iraq’s violations of UN resolutions to justify the US launching a full-scale war. However, one should ask him that American allies like Israel, Turkey and Morocco violate Security Council resolutions all the time. Shouldn’t other nations then, especially in the case of Israel, claim the right and moral high ground to launch a full-scale war so that the enforcement of these resolutions is ensured?

Mr Powell said in his speech that the Iraqi regime was dangerous and a “grave threat” to the other countries of the Middle East. If that were the case, as in if the other countries of the Middle East felt gravely threatened, then how come they aren’t at all that gung-ho about attacking Iraq? As for Iraq being an aggressor nation (notwithstanding the fact that Saddam Hussein is a despot and that no one is trying to defend his record) it hasn’t attacked any country in 12 years whilst America has bombed the life out of at least one country in the post two years alone. Mr Powell also said that Saddam “gassed his own people”, which he did, and used chemical weapons against Iran, but how come no mention is made of the assistance the Iraqi regime got in terms of intelligence and material help from the Americans during the Iran-Iraq war?

Mr Powell then went on to say that the Security Council risked placing “itself in danger of irrelevance” if it failed to endorse a US-led war on Iraq. Well, isn’t the Security Council, then, already quite irrelevant because it has time and again failed to respond when many of its resolutions have been flouted by errant nations? Also, isn’t such a statement a frank admission that America think that the UN is relevant only when it is willing to endorse what Washington wants?

And let’s not forget that: (1) In 1986, while as a senior aide to then Defence Secretary Caspar Weinberger, Colin Powell supervised the transfer of 4,508 missiles to the CIA, and then sought to hide the transaction from the US Congress and the American public. He did this because almost half of those missiles had become part of the Iran-Contra scandal’s arms-for-hostages deal. (2) As Ronald Reagan’s national security adviser, he worked with the contra guerrillas who were killing civilians in Nicaragua. (3) In December 1989, as head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he was a key player behind the invasion of Panama.

It should also be mentioned here that during the Gulf War when asked about the Iraqi death toll, he said that such numbers didn’t interest him.—OMAR R. QURAISHI

(Email: omarq@cyber.net.pk)

‘Another injustice with Sindh’

IBRAT writes that the Sindh government has agreed to allot land to the displaced people of Tarbela Dam. The department of land utilization, Board of Revenue, has told Wapda in a letter that the Sindh government is prepared to allot 7,000 acres of land to the displaced people.

The daily says that it does not have any objection to land allotment to the displaced people of the dam because any citizen displaced by a government scheme must be compensated. However, giving away to them land in Sindh cannot be supported. Why doesn’t the Sindh government allot land to the displaced people of the Chotiyari Dam, which lies in its own territory?

Ibrat argues that the decision should be withdrawn as it is bound to intensify inter-provincial tension and increase the sense of alienation existing in Sindh. Instead, a comprehensive plan should be prepared to rehabilitate the displaced people of the Chotiyari Dam.

Commenting on remarks made by Sindh minister Manzoor Panhwar to Jacobabad journalists, Kawish deplores that he has supported Karo-kari killings and the jirga system. The daily says that no civilized society can allow the killing of womenfolk on the pretext of honour. Similarly, the demand to provide a legal cover to the jirga system is an attempt to push the wheels of history backward. Ironically, the paper says, the demand and the endorsement of Karo-kari killings has come from none other than a parliamentarian, who is supposed to uphold the rule of law. Settlement of the Mahar-Jatoi dispute through a tribal jirga does not mean that the social and legal structure has recognized the system’s utility. Kawish calls on the courts of law to take notice of Mr Panhwar’s remarks and remove the misunderstanding created among the people.

Tameer-i-Sindh refers to the Sindh Assembly’s demand that the federation should withdraw the rangers from the province as the force has failed to help maintain law and order and proved to be a burden on Sindh. Despite providing 67 per cent of revenue to the centre, Sindh receives a meagre share from it and has to survive on overdraft. Therefore, there is urgent need to divert the amount being spent on the rangers, Frontier Constabulary and other federal forces to developmental and public welfare-oriented programmes, the paper says.

Sach says that police reforms have failed to improve the efficiency of the force and make it people-friendly. As a result, Sindh continues to be a “police state.” A report from Thatta suggests that the police are also being misused by some elected representatives. A permanent solution to the situation must be sought to provide relief to innocent people falling prey to the lawlessness of the police.