| September 3, 2003 | Wednesday | Rajab 5, 1424 |
To send a letter to the Editor
Click here
Civility: opium of the unelected
Imposing ban on entertainment
Kalabagh Dam project
General’s uniform
How workable are UN resolutions?
Beautification of Murree
Presidential system
Osama
Women’s rights
Tipu’s sword
ALTHOUGH the article captioned “Some forgotten facts” by Mr Shahid Amin has stirred a measure of controversy, the argument as to who deserved what credit for the realization of the dream of Pakistan constitutes a positive testimony to shared national allegiance and dedication.
Having been associated with ambassador (retired) Shahid Amin for many decades, it is clear to me that no reflection on any group or people was intended by him. In my time, from the moment a young Pakistan diplomat entered
the diplomatic service, his entire focus was on Pakistan and nothing narrower. This broad, national focus was carried over into the post-retirement period.
Into the establishment of the state of Pakistan has gone the blood, the sweat, the tears and the toil, in varying forms, of all the Muslim people of undivided India, including obviously the people of areas constituting the state of Pakistan.
The Muslims of Punjab and Bengal, two of the most resourceful provinces of undivided India, readily agreed to have their provinces divided for the sake of making Pakistan a reality, in spite of the very distinct and developed ethnic identities of the people of the two provinces.
The price paid for Punjab’s enthusiastic support of the Pakistan movement was the tragedy of the diaspora involving a toll of several hundred thousand killed and the expulsion of many millions, victims of unprecedented atrocities. The carnage launched in Punjab by anti-Pakistan forces was both a retribution for Punjab’s role in the Pakistan movement and a last-ditch stand to drown the new state in blood and chaos.
Having been the first to have their assembly adopt a formal motion supporting the demand for Pakistan, the people of Sindh welcomed with open arms hundreds of thousands of refugees, in spite of Sindh then being the smallest province of British India. The province offered its entire facilities for hosting the federal government when there was no other suitable capital in sight and accepted on a permanent basis the social and economic costs of the resettlement of a large number of refugees. This was also done in East Pakistan and Punjab and to a lesser extent in the NWFP and Balochistan.
The Pukhtoons, for their part, rose up in good time to overcome the hold of the Khudai Khidmatgars and to defeat the intrigues of anti-Pakistan elements designed to keep the NWFP out of the state of Pakistan.
As for the Muslims of the minority provinces, they played the role of a catalyst in promoting the Pakistan demand, although there was no question of their areas being included in the proposed state of Pakistan or of more than a small fraction of their number being able to migrate to Pakistan. The bitter hostility of the majority community which the championship of the Pakistan movement on the part of the Muslims of the minority provinces evoked was there for all to see.
For the cause of an independent state in Muslim majority areas, the Muslims of the minority provinces mortgaged their entire future in the Indian Union in all fields, equality and dignity, security and economy, education and culture. They paid the price in pogroms and genocidal massacres, before and after partition. The perception of Indian Muslims as being responsible for India’s division and as being fifth columns for Pakistan became ingrained in the psyche of the majority community.
Some time back, Jagjit Singh, the Director of Delhi’s Institute of Defence Analyses, had referred to “unprecedented policy choices being open to India as a result of Pakistan’s failure to resolve its ethno-sectarian contradictions”. While rightly debating honest differences of opinion, it may be advisable for us in the light specially of the Indian approach to keep any perceived contradiction within acceptable limits.
MAHDI MASUD
Karachi
THE National Assembly session would begin with an uproar on Monday (Aug 25), said a news report in Dawn. Questions of honour and chivalry were likely to fray tempers, it added. The reason given (rather pragmatically) for the expected uproarious session was an altercation that had taken place between the minister of state for parliamentary affairs and a PPP woman member when the august assembly last met.
Altercation? What does that mean? Perhaps an act of quarrelling or arguing noisily. Uproar is a synonym then. Some more synonyms would be bickering, showdown and brawl. Would ‘grapple’ fit into it? Why not? But the word wouldn’t apply with its complete nuances and etymological implications unless one had seen members of the assembly made sure that it did by grabbing one another by the scruff of their necks. To further consolidate the case for the word, they could employ lethal jabs and deadly punches, apart from hurling invectives unheard of in civil societies, at each other. Perhaps one is terribly mistaken. Didn’t these things happen in the past? Even if they did, it must have been a long time since one last saw members of the National Assembly grappling with their opponents.
It is heartening to note that our elected leaders, with whom the duty of resolving their issues has been entrusted, do not make any bones about voicing their opinion and making their presence felt. They have always done us proud. Not many people cotton on to the fact that unless they create a hullabaloo, legislations are hard to introduce and laws are difficult to enforce. Civility is the opium of the unelected. Culture must be legislated by those who have the powers to do so. It is they who mould the shape of our very society and show us the right path to tread on. They are a responsible lot who would never let us down, for we have chosen them. Those who whisper or murmur are never able to put their message across.
It is a sign of congenital weakness. That is something that everyone has to bear in mind. This is precisely why when it rained like cats and dogs in Badin submerging the city, thin voices of protest drowned out in the ruckus and fracas of the assembly. This is precisely why when Tasman Spirit cleaved in two, causing potential ecological hazard, feeble chants for launching a lighterage operation lost in thumping of desks in the assembly. This is precisely why when an engaged couple was abducted in Karachi and the girl was raped by the abductors, groans and moans of pity couldn’t turn into remonstrance that would have provided solace to the unfortunate affianced couple.
It’s time we discerned that we are a nation whose voice is as feeble as a sheep’s bleat, surrounded by howling wolves. Long live the uproariousness of our assemblies.
PEERZADA SALMAN
Karachi
VULGARITY is not the only reason for imposing ban on entertaining Indian channels (Sana Rehman, Aug 14), anti- Pakistan propaganda is the actual cause behind the decision.
For many years both Pakistan and Indian state-owned channels have been in practice of fabricating things and divulging only one-sided picture of the events. For this reason not only Pakistan but also India have been imposing ban on the respective channels for the viewers.
In today’s media-oriented societies it is not wise to ban the transmission of a channel as truth can’t be kept hidden from public. For instance, the government should have a strong media to raise voice against the propaganda and reply to the anti-state actors on a factual basis.
Not getting involved in the question of who is right and who is not, I will suggest the government lift the ban on these channels because one way or the other people have access to them by means of recorded cassettes, Cds, etc.
Still, if the government is not in favour of this, it should ban the porn sites on the Internet, western movie channels and magazines like Time and Newsweek which are involved in letting out poison against Islam, as well as against Pakistan.
SABEEN JAMIL
Karachi
BRAVO, Gen Pervez Musharraf, for your decision to go ahead with the Kalabagh Dam. You are also late by almost four years. Gen Zia had also failed to appreciate the utility of this national project in the early years of his reign and later was too engrossed in perpetuating himself in power. Whatever be the dynamics of your decision, you deserve to be congratulated.
The project has suffered enormous delay due to a handful of selfish and incompetent politicians who cannot see beyond their parochial horizons but claim to be leaders of national stature. With the ANP leading the bandwagon, it carries a few politicians from all the provinces who believe that the project will benefit Punjab alone, not appreciating that 20 per cent of the benefits will go to the Frontier, while the major gainer will be Sindh. Their political philosophy is spreading hatred which can catch roots quickly. The ANP is afraid of the D.I. Khan area becoming richer, causing the province’s base to shift to D.I. Khan, where the ANP has no support.
The Kalabagh Dam project is a victim of wrong perceptions about the royalty system in Pakistan. It is generally believed in the NWFP that the federal government is duty-bound to pay royalty in lieu of power generated on the NWFP soil and that large sums are due on gas and petroleum exploration in Balochistan to the Bugtis. This misconception has to change.
All land in Pakistan is national land. No royalty is due to any province or individual on power generation or exploration for oil, gas or any other mineral anywhere in Pakistan. Distribution of water from the national rivers and release of funds for development are federal government privileges. There is enough water and resources available to cater for our requirements. It is all one country and one nation. Provincial boundaries are only administrative barriers. We all are one and together. There is no difference between one city and another.
HADI IQBAL HUSSAIN
Lahore
MUCH as I have defended the incumbent president in wearing the general’s uniform on suitable occasions to keep the wily politicians in check, I was unpleasantly amused to see the photograph of the president receiving a shawl (presumably from the valley of Kashmir), wearing his military uniform, in your issue of Aug 13.
He was my junior by several years in the September war of 1965, so I feel no hesitation in telling him that a civilian sherwani would have appeared more graceful for the occasion shown in the photograph. His guests were all civilians and he was not facing members of parliament, rather politicians and intellectuals from India.
I distinctly remember my Indian friends in Switzerland in 1962 wishing that they should have had a uniformed general as their prime minister instead of the very brilliant Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. This was after the defeat of India in the north-eastern border between China and India.
Those were different times, the military uniform is not liked by the democracies of the world any longer, and President Gen Pervez Musharraf should avoid the elements of showbiz from affecting the gracefulness of solemn occasions.
WG-CDR (R) AHMAD ZAFAR FAROOQI
Karachi
WHAT we are noticing, specially after the Kargil fiasco, is a renewed infatuation of the regime for the UN’s Kashmir proposals. From head of the state to cabinet members, statements are being issued that the conflict should be resolved in line with the UN resolutions.
The rhetoric of some political parties say the world body’s proposals offer the people of Kashmir a choice between Pakistan and India.
On the Indian side of the Valley, the APHC boycotts election again and again, saying it is no substitute for a plebiscite, promised by the UN half a century ago.
The interim constitution of Azad Jammu and Kashmir wants the conflict resolution in accordance with the freely-expressed will of the people through a UN-sponsored plebiscite.
Even India sometimes manoeuvres resolutions in its favour by demanding withdrawal of Pakistan forces, “organized and unorganized, fighting or participating in hostilities” on the basis of the UN resolution of Aug 13, 1948.
The resolution asks Pakistan to withdraw its “troops”, “nationals”, and “tribesmen”, who have entered the state for the purpose of fighting — as their presence “in the territory of the state of Jammu and Kashmir constitutes a material change in the situation.
“Pending a final solution, the territory evacuated by the Pakistan troops will be administrated by the local authorities under the surveillance of the UNCIP (United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan).”
The same resolution favours the presence of the Indian army on the pretext of law and order situation. It says: “The Indian government will maintain those forces of the army which in agreement with the UNCIP are considered necessary to assist local authorities in the observance of law and order.”
India always takes advantage of this resolution whenever there are talks to resolve the Kashmir imbroglio. It seeks the withdrawal of Pakistan troops from Azad Kashmir first. Perhaps last peace talks broke on this intransigence of India.
That was why Pakistan had abandoned these resolutions at Shimla and Agra. At Shimla prime minister Z. A. Bhutto agreed to resolve the issue bilaterally. While at Agra President Musharraf persuaded Prime Minister Vajpayee to recognize the Kashmir region as a whole as a “core issue” but in vain.
There is no denying the fact that a plebiscite is the only way to resolve the dispute as mentioned in the several resolutions of the world body. The UN in 1950 had agreed to appoint Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz as the Plebiscite Administrator who even had to work with the Indian government to “conduct a free and impartial plebiscite”.
A resolution adopted by the UN Commission for India and Pakistan on Jan 5, 1949, clearly says: “A plebiscite will be held when it shall be found by the commission that arrangements for it have been completed.” These arrangements include “an agreed programme of progressive demilitarization.
“When the demilitarization preparatory to the plebiscite has been accomplished to the satisfaction of the UN representative, the Plebiscite Administrator (PA) should proceed forthwith to exercise the functions assigned to him under the terms of resolution of Jan 5, 1949”.
Resolution 126 (1957) calls for demilitarization of the region “as one of the steps towards a settlement.”
Now much water has flowed under the bridge. Since then we have witnessed the nuclearization of the South Asian theatre. Above all, to the satisfaction of India the Kashmir issue is out of the UN.
Why then our policymakers insist on resolving the Kashmir issue on the basis of these “unworkable” resolutions of the UN?
MANZOOR CHANDIO
Karachi
SOME ministerial meetings were held recently in Murree for the beautification of this ill-fated hill station. Leave aside beautification, immediate concrete steps are required to rid this hill resort of a most unhealthy environment.
The shopping streets of Murree are stinking, trash is accumulating on roadsides with unhealthy sanitary conditions and there is a complete blackout at night. Street electric poles are lying on the ground and those standing are without bulbs. There being no taxi-stands at Murree, the drivers park their vehicles at places of their choice, thus blocking the flow of traffic. The police seem to be on the side of defaulters.
Moreover, buses and trucks run unchecked with their loud, deafening horns leaving black smoke screen behind. Kuldana has become the most hazardous area of Murree because of motor workshops belonging to the Cantonment Board on one side of the road and motor spare-parts shops owned by the municipal committee on the other side.
The dual responsibility has made the area dirty and unhealthy, normally jammed with heavy traffic since the road leads to all public places of interest in and around Murree. Despite the fact that such conditions are in the knowledge of high officials, nothing has been done for the relief of the public.
One wonders who is manning the fort. If such conditions are left to persist, this health resort will become death resort and beautification will be of no consequence.
SHAHID JAN
Peshawar
THOSE who are currently making out a case for the presidential system citing its relatively better economic performance forget that we lost East Pakistan because of it.
The parliamentary system offers greater incentives to prominent families or politicians from different diverse provinces to support the federation as the prime minister is dependent on their support. It has held India together.
K. M. AHMAD
Montreal, Canada
OSAMA may be whatever he is being called but he did bring a sophisticated change in an old established American spoken culture which no Arab ruler was able to achieve. His name is being correctly pronounced by them.
Z. A. KAZMI
Karachi
WHILE I agree with Nazia Azfar’s lament on the plethora of problems faced by Pakistan citizens, I take strong exception to her statement that a discussion of gender rights is a “waste of time” (‘Woman’s status in Islam’, Aug 28).
Any discourse on gender rights in Pakistan suffers from a lack of public acceptance. This has led to an almost casual perpetuation of the most blatantly sexist beliefs, where society is unwilling to condemn gender-based injustice even in principle. For example, the most hardened feudal lord will adopt an apologist mask in public when asked about his treatment of serfs, but a typical patriarchal male — one who forces the women in his circle to child-bearing, cooking, cleaning and other subservient roles — will unabashedly quote the holy Quran in support of his beliefs.
It is this attitude that progressives in society must seek to reverse. Injustice must be recognized as such, even if its perpetrators cloak themselves in the garb of religion.
ZIA AHMED
Burlington, MA, USA
I DON’T see any rationale in M. Shafique Ahmed’s letter (Aug 23) suggesting that Tipu Sultan’s sword be acquired by Pakistan. That brave Indian warrior is held with great affection and admiration by the people of Mysore. Record has it that he was the first to use rockets in battles. He even helped financially to build a Hindu temple at Sri-Rangapatna.
It is most appropriate that the sword be displayed at the Tipu memorial located on the outskirts of Mysore.
VITTAL P. PYATI
Southfield Drivebeavercreek, OH,
USA
You can also send letters to the Editor
Just send your message to the following address:
Make sure you include your full name, postal address, e-mail address, and in the case of Pakistan your day-time telephone number.