| 07 February 2004 | Saturday | 15 Zilhaj 1424 |
Honouring Baudelaire
Euphoria over EU expansion giving way to uneasiness
Another 'Malka' gone
The decapitation of Britain's widely respected public broadcaster last week sealed Tony Blair's second victory in two days. The first was the parliamentary vote on university top-up fees, which had prompted a backbench rebellion in the Labour Party. Given the party's huge majority in the House of Commons, a defeat on what is a crucial plank in the government's agenda would have been catastrophic, although it probably wouldn't have led to the prime minister's resignation.
But Blair had declared that any insinuation of his culpability in the report of the Hutton inquiry into the death last year of government scientist David Kelly would leave him with little choice but to vacate No.10 Downing Street.
Gordon Brown's heart must have missed a few beats at the thought of filling the prospective vacancy. Blair's remarkable statement was, however, calculated to intimidate rather than titillate. It was directed mainly at Lord Hutton - and perhaps also at the parliamentary Labour Party. It failed to quell the backbench revolt, but apparently helped - along with last-minute sweeteners - to persuade a sufficient number of MPs to change their minds about voting against the government. The university fees bill was passed by a humiliatingly small margin.
The effect that Blair's confession of vulnerability may have had on Hutton is open to conjecture. But in view of his lordship's background as an Ulster Protestant who has faithfully served the establishment for decades, it is fairly safe to assume that Hutton would have been mortified at the idea of provoking a crisis of government.
It is equally possible, of course, that he had no intention of criticizing the government anyhow. Perhaps Blair just wanted, as Shakespeare's Macbeth put it, to "make assurance double sure". Either way, the resulting report is a thorough whitewash that, barring a fairly mild swipe at the defence ministry, exonerates the government completely while being unreasonably harsh on the BBC.
The broadcaster has consequently been stricken with self-doubt. The chairman of its board of governors, Gavyn Davies, was the first to go, followed a day later by director-general Greg Dyke. The latter was forced out by the board, which lost little time in complying with Blair's demand for an abject apology. Following his resignation, Dyke has offered scathing criticism of the Hutton report, questioning not only its fairness but also his lordship's legal interpretations.
Next to go was Andrew Gilligan, the journalist at the centre of the allegations against the BBC. Gilligan, to recap briefly, had secretly met Kelly, who was employed by the ministry of defence and had been associated with Iraqi weapons inspections.
The scientist told the journalist that the government's dossier on Saddam Hussein's lethal armoury could not stand up to scrutiny: the intelligence used in it had been exaggerated to strengthen the case for invading Iraq.
Gilligan used his scoop, without identifying Kelly, in an early morning broadcast. It was notable for its allegation that the claim that Iraq could deploy its chemical and biological weapons within 45 minutes was a deliberate falsehood, and the insinuation that the dossier's language had been "sexed up" at the insistence of Blair's press secretary, Alistair Campbell.
These are the points that Hutton has latched on to, implying that Gilligan himself was guilty of sexing up the information he received from Kelly. The award-winning journalist - who, incidentally, was hired by the BBC to spice up its Today show - has admitted going overboard on a point or two, but insists that the overall tenor of his report was reasonably accurate.
The report hadn't been seen by his superiors before its initial broadcast, prompting Hutton to declare that the BBC's editorial procedures require an overhaul.
The BBC's errors were relatively minor. Gilligan certainly deserved a reprimand if he was trying to present his suspicions as facts - notwithstanding the fact that the 45-minute claim was indeed tendentious, like most of the other "information" in the dossier. Even Hutton acknowledges that words and phrases in the dossier were altered under pressure from No.10, in some cases significantly changing the sense of the allegations by dropping crucial qualifications. But he sees nothing wrong with this. Nor does he have much of a problem with the devious manner in which the government conspired to reveal Kelly's identity to the press, without informing the scientist in advance.
Rattled by the inquisition he had received at the hands of a parliamentary inquiry, during which he was less forthcoming than he might have been, Kelly - by all accounts a prim and proper gentleman who cherished his privacy - was evidently further shaken by his employer's betrayal and distraught at the prospect of losing his job, whereas earlier he had been in line for a knighthood. He decided, it seems, to end his own life.
The Hutton report says the inquiry found no cause to doubt that Kelly committed suicide.
Hutton's verdict is just what the government wanted to hear. Perhaps it would be cynical to claim the same with reference to Kelly's fate, but other governments involved in the aggression against Iraq have also reacted ruthlessly towards the insiders who have questioned their case for the war. And Kelly wasn't by any means a typical whistleblower. His conscience must have been profoundly weighed down for him to seek to unburden himself surreptitiously.
Which takes us to the bridge that Blair has yet to cross. The inquiry was essentially a diversion. Whether or not the prime minister was instrumental in the conspiracy against Kelly, he was unquestionably at the heart of the conspiracy to invade Iraq without good cause. The Hutton report can therefore only be a pyrrhic victory. The war is not going to go away in a hurry. The false pretences under which it was waged continue to haunt Blair.
In recent weeks, significant sections of the US hierarchy - including Colin Powell, who lectured and bullied the Security Council exactly a year ago, and Condoleezza Rice - have confessed that the intelligence on which they based their case for ridding Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) was, at best, deeply flawed. That hardly counts as a revelation. Much more pertinent is the extent to which decision-makers knew before sanctioning a massive misadventure that their casus belli rested on falsehoods. And if they were dealing in lies without being aware of it, are they really fit to wield so much power?
Large numbers of analysts in the US and British intelligence communities were profoundly concerned about the dubious allegations and outright untruths their governments were peddling. They were either intimidated into silence or their submissions were ignored.
It has now emerged that the US officials - and almost certainly their British counterparts - have known since last May that no WMD would be found. Which means the Blair government launched its vendetta against Kelly, Gilligan and the BBC after it became clear that Saddam had no stockpiles of chemical or biological, let alone nuclear, weapons.
George W. Bush has announced that he wants to "know the facts" about Iraq's WMD, and has ordered an independent inquiry. His probity is most commendable. It would have served more of a purpose, though, had it manifested itself before he committed himself to an illegal war.
Blair has reluctantly followed suit, although the inquiry he announced on Tuesday is limited to the intelligence on which political decisions were based - the decisions themselves are beyond its jurisdiction. Which means that any criticism will be directed at MI6 rather than Whitehall or No.10. Australia's John Howard has been under pressure to sanction a similar charade.
Even if they escape punishment in the short term at the hands of their respective electorates, history will judge harshly all the governments that colluded in the assault on Iraq. And it will be particularly scathing towards Blair should he succeed in permanently damaging the BBC.
In the wake of the Hutton report, an opinion poll asked respondents which of the two they trusted more to tell the truth: the government or the BBC. Only 10 per cent cited the government. At least three times as many plumped for the Beeb.
There is a credibility deficit on both sides, and it's worth noting that the BBC isn't now nor ever has been anything other than a fairly conservative organization. It isn't dedicated to the overthrow of the established order.
Campbell sought to depict it as endemically anti-war, but that charge does not stand up to scrutiny. At the same time, the BBC's independence from the government has increased over the decades, and it usually does try to be impartial. It will resist being reduced to an official mouthpiece.
Senior staffers throughout the organization have expressed their displeasure over Hutton as well as the knee-jerk obsequiousness of the BBC's board of governors. They are disinclined to accept subjugation. And perhaps they also know what Blair may not have yet realized: that in his eagerness to please George Dubya, he has bitten off more than he can chew.
e-mail: mahirali2@netscape.net
Honouring Baudelaire
Siddiqa Begum, chief editor of the oldest surviving literary monthly of the country, the Adab-i-Latif, has devoted the entire issue for January to only one literary figure - the greatest French poet of the 19th century, Charles Baudelaire (1821-67).
It is a comprehensive magazine with a detailed assessment of his life and work plus his selected poetry translated into Urdu. She has, however, made sure not to include some of the poems which would not go well with the self-imposed censors of literary work in our country.
Considered one of the first modernists, Baudelaire started writing when romanticism was at its height in France. However, his first collection of poems, Les Fluers due Mal (Flowers of Evil), was laced with macabre imagery. Considered unworthy of publication, he came under severe criticism because of it. In fact, a heavy fine was imposed on him.
However, his collection of prose poems, Spleen de Paris, is considered one of the best in literature. Called a modern Dante by the literary critic of his time, Edouard Thierry, he is accepted as equal to Goethe by no less a person than T. S. Eliot. Sartre merely calls him a rebellious person. His poems have been translated into English by American poet Edgar Allan Poe (1809-49) and were published in three volumes. Baudelaire had a close association with Victor Hugo (1802-85) and Balzac (1799-1850).
Like many literary people of the time, Baudelaire was also a controversial figure. He lived a carefree life and was constantly under debt. Refusing government service in France, he moved to the Latin Quarter and lived like a Bohemian. Being a great connoisseur of art as well, he moved to Belgium in 1864 to lecture on the subject. He was promised a hundred francs for each lecture but when he demanded payment for four lectures he was given only one hundred. The result was that he again got under debt. He returned to Paris in 1866.
In Urdu, Meeraji was the first to write about Baudelaire. His article appeared in Maulana Salahuddin Ahmad's prestigious literary journal, Adabi Dunya, in 1941. However, he was wrong in saying that the French poet had visited India.
He probably got the impression because Boudelaire has used the words huqqa, bazaar, and annanas in his poems. The fact, however, is that to keep him away from doubtful company, his friends sent him away to India in 1841 but, the person that he was, he fell for a woman at a port where they landed, and returned to France before ever reaching India.
Siddiqa Begum has got the material for her issue from a book of Boudelaire's Urdu translations published in Hyderabad (Deccan). She has sought permission from the translator, Mazhar Mehdi, who also happens to be a poet. He has two published collections.
* * * * *
I am indebted to the Ghalibologist, Dr Syed Moeenur Rahman, for favouring me with books published in India. He retired recently from the Government College, Lahore, (my alma mater) where he held that Sufi Tabassum Chair and was chairman of department of Urdu. He had a publishing establishment, Al-Waqar, even before retirement. It was managed by his dutiful son, Waqar. However, now having more time at his disposal, the venerable professor is devoting his attention to its working. And since he is well connected and known to the literati in India, he receives books published across the border. In these days of cross-border restrictions, such a book becomes a rare gift. As it is, I have yet to see a book of my translations of Mansha Yad's short stories which was published by the Oxford University Press in New Delhi.
The latest gift from Dr Moeen is a 350-page Zatal-nama, a collection of Mir Jafar Zatalli's prose and poetry. It has been compiled by Rasheed Hasan Khan and published by the Anjuman-i-Tarraqi-i-Urdu, New Delhi.
Although authentic dates of his birth and death are not available, it is believed that Jafar Zatalli lived from 1658 to 1713. That was the time when Urdu was in its adolescence in northern India. The main reason why Jafar Zatalli deserves special mention in the literary history of Urdu is because of his being the first to capture the social problems and difficulties of his era.
There is no doubt that his expression in this respect is crude and, at times, even vulgar, yet his observations are truthful. In his poetry, he gives a picture of all that goes on around him and speaks of the crumbling administrative machinery.
He is correct when he says that following the death of Emperor Aurangzeb there was no one capable enough of handling the affairs of state. He paints a graphic picture of the prevailing unemployment and poverty.
Credit must be given to him for naming those he considered responsible for the deteriorating situation and condemned them in his poetry. That speaks of his courage as in those days anyone could be put to the sword for being outspoken and blunt, a fate which ultimately befell him. Jafar Zatalli can, therefore, be considered as a poet of resistance and a sociologist of his time.
The research scholar has also negated the belief that Urdu poetry in northern India started when Wali Dakhani's divan came there and, hence, ghazal was the first genre which the poets adopted. Jafar Zatalli was a contemporary of Wali, no doubt, but his entire poetic output is in nazm. In fact, Wali's divan made its appearance in Delhi seven years after Jafar's death. Another thing worth noting in Jafar Zatalli's poetry is his vast vocabulary. He had innumerable words at his command, many of which are out of use today.
Euphoria over EU expansion giving way to uneasiness
With only a hundred days to go before the European Union's much-feted May 1 expansion, euphoria over reunification of the once-divided continent is giving way to increased uneasiness over the functioning of a union of 25 very diverse nations.
Governments in the current 15 EU states make no bones of their financial concerns, with the richest six, including Germany, France and Britain, demanding that EU spending over the next few years be capped at a strict one per cent of GDP regardless of expansion.
Seeking to prevent the dilution of their ideals of European integration, Berlin and Paris are working closely to ensure that prospects of greater European cooperation in areas such as foreign policy and defence are not watered down by the ten "new" European states joining the club.
Much to the fury of Italy and Spain, leaders from France, Germany and Britain will be meeting in Berlin on Feb 18 to explore closer trilateral ties ahead of the May enlargement
Diplomats in Brussels, meanwhile, make clear that decision-making in a union of 25 states will become even more difficult and unwieldy. But western Europe's real fear has to do with immigration - and the much-feared mass arrival in "old" Europe of Roma gypsies and out-of-work Poles, Czechs and Slovaks.
Although the reality is expected to be much less dramatic - the European Commission foresees that only 250,000 eastern Europeans will seek jobs in the West - western European governments are pulling up the drawbridges to build a new Fortress Europe.
Never mind that most western European nations desperately need skilled and unskilled foreign workers to give their flagging economies a boost and make up for an aging work force.
And never mind that most EU governments promised their borders would remain open to newcomers when expansion negotiations were underway two years ago. All current EU countries - except Ireland - are opting for some form of restriction to keep out a feared flood of low-cost easterners.
Germany, Austria and Italy are applying the toughest and longest seven-year transition period for restricting the free movement of workers allowed under EU rules.
Others such as Belgium, Luxembourg and Finland have said they will curb immigration from the east for an initial period of two years, with an option to extend restrictions for another three if required.
Most worryingly, giving in to public fears, Sweden and Britain are reversing their earlier pledges to open their doors to all new Europeans as of May 1. British Prime Minister Tony Blair is believed to be considering tougher tests for housing and income benefits which will make life more difficult for those seeking jobs in Britain.
Most dramatically, Swedish Prime Minister Goran Persson has said he expects "enormous problems" unless Sweden protects itself from uncontrolled immigration from its new eastern European neighbours. Details of the planned curbs are currently under discussion.
EU officials acknowledge that rules negotiated and agreed by the ten newcomers allow old members of the bloc to restrict the entry of their new fellow EU citizens for a period between two and seven years after expansion.
But while the two-year transition period does not have to be justified, countries invoking the seven-year closed-door policy have to prove that they are experiencing serious disturbances on the labour market.
Brussels also argues that while governments can design their specific social security systems, they cannot discriminate between workers from old and new Europe.
The real problem, however, is that the tough new rules do not reflect reality. With jobs expected to flow into the east as investors step up their business stake in the region and the EU pumps in billions of euros in aid, many eastern Europeans are actually expected to stay home.
For instance, Spanish and Portuguese immigrants in France, Germany and elsewhere moved back to their countries of origin after their countries joined the union in the 1980s to take advantage of new employment opportunities opening up at home.
Significantly, however, although EU officials warn that the threat from the east is vastly exaggerated, no leading politician seems interested in making a public case for keeping Europe's gates open.
A passionate appeal for a more humane EU immigration policy made by United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan in Brussels last month hardly elicited any response from EU policy-makers.
With regional and European Parliament elections coming up this spring, EU politicians clearly appear to be opting for a tough vote-winning anti-immigrant line. And forgetting their vow to build no new walls in Europe.
Another 'Malka' gone
During the past two decades, Pakistan has lost Malika-i-Museeqi Roshan Ara Begum and Malika-i-Tarranum Noor Jahan. On Feb 4 died Malka Pukhraj, the queen of Pahari folk songs and perhaps Pakistan's senior-most female vocalist of repute. All of them have left an indelible mark on the annals of our rich melodic culture.
Born in 1912 in village Hameerpur Sidhar, nine miles from Jammu, in a family where music was given priority over other mundane pursuits, Malka Pukhraj began her singing career when she was only nine-year old at the court of the maharaja of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. She remained in the employment of Maharaja Hari Singh for about 10 years.
Malka Pukhraj had to leave the maharaja's court and Kashmir in 1928 to escape the wrath of the ruler, which was triggered by a cobweb of intrigues and conspiracies woven against her by jealous courtiers.
A rumour floated by her adversaries pointed to a conspiracy she allegedly had hatched with the support of Cyril Wakefield, the British resident in Srinagar (her first husband), against the maharaja. She left Kashmir and spent time in Delhi and Lahore, pursuing her musical career by regularly participating in programmes of All-India Radio.
It was the era of such stalwarts as K.K. Saigol, Begum Akhtar, Benaraswali Rasoolan Bai and Afzal Husain of Nagina, with whom she rubbed shoulders on many occasions. She lived for a few years in Bombay from where in the late 1940s she produced a number of successful films, including Kajal, Sabaq and Dak Bungalow. After partition, she returned to Lahore to live there until her death this week.
A lady with charming looks, Malka Pukhraj had a rich repertoire of thumris, dadras, ghazals and nazms, but her forte remained Dogri Pahari geets of different hues and shades, which originated from the hilly areas of northern India, especially Jammu.
In Lahore, she also produced the film Shammi for which composer Master Inayat Husain recorded a couple of songs in her voice. A disciple of Ustad Ali Bakhsh Khan of Kasur, father of Ustad Bare Ghulam Ali Khan, she also benefited from the wisdom of Ustad Akhter Husain Khan of the Patiala Gharana.
Among her popular numbers were Abhi to mein jawan hoon, Allah bailooa ho, Yeh baatain teri yeh fasanay terey, Lo phir Basant ayee and Taskeen ko hum na roain jo zauq-i-nazar milay. She adroitly employed her bass voice for the rendition of thumri-accented ghazals of classical and contemporary poets.
Malka Pukhraj belonged to an era, a trend and a milieu in which music flourished and its practitioners prospered. It was a time of nawabs and maharajas, whose munificence helped professional musicians to live respectable and creative lives.
She had collected a large number of Pahari folk songs from different mountainous regions and refined them with subtle variations in their melodic leitmotifs and sang them with the confidence of a seasoned vocalist. She also tailored her voice to suit all kinds of light musical genres, which she demonstrated through radio programmes and the 78-rpm gramophone discs cut in the decade of the 1940s.
Malka Pukhraj chose different modes to express her creative urges. One of these was to make embroidered portraits and scenes on cloth, which reflected her mature taste and competence in mixing different colours in a pleasing manner.
I met her only on a few occasions, once at the American Centre in Lahore, where she came in the late 1960s to inquire about western music which she desired to practice before visiting the United States. Later, I was a co-participant with her at a seminar sponsored by the Pakistan National Centre, Lahore, where she reminisced about the cultural vivacity of the senior denizens of Lahore.
I heard her speaking at a 'seminar' organized by the All-Pakistan Music Conference at Alhamra a few years ago, where, the intrepid artist that she was, she vigorously defended the traditional varieties of our music.
She made a passionate plea for steps to prevent our musical heritage from fading away into oblivion. Emphasizing the impact of good quality music, which makes an individual a cultured and tolerant member of society, she high-pitched the three basic ingredients of ghazal-singing - a tuneful voice, good composition and proper enunciation (and understanding) of the contents of the ghazals selected for vocalization.
Some of Malka's folk songs and ghazals became memorable milestones in the world of entertainment in her lifetime and far outlived their composers and producers. The haunting strains of her songs of the 1940s met with a tumultuous response from music buffs that helped to carry her name to every nook and corner of the subcontinent.