| 27 April 2005 | Wednesday | 17 Rabi-ul-Awwal 1426 |
In search of roots
Lebanese thoughtful after Syrians’ departure
ISLAMABAD: President Pervez Musharraf’s second trip to India after the ill-fated July 2001 Agra Summit appeared to leave no room for a dull moment. With cricket, diplomacy and politics all taking centre-stage, it was a mega media event.
TANDO Thoro in Sindh in the 1800s was a sandy desolate patch of land under the burning sun. Now it is green all around, the weather is agreeably cool and the town is flourishing.
RIYAQ, (Lebanon ): Crouching over a small stone pedestal amid a grove of pines, Maj Hadi Husseini on Monday quietly marked the imminent end of Syria’s nearly three-decade military presence in Lebanon. He carefully put the finishing touches on a monument he designed, simple and solemn, to memorialize the thousands of Syrian soldiers who have died in his country over the years.
Although no major breakthrough on Kashmir was achieved during the Musharraf-Manmohan talks, the terms of engagement on this complex issue were somewhat established. It created a better understanding between the top leadership of the two countries and helped to build up trust.
During his less than 48 hours stay in New Delhi, President Musharraf met Dr Manmohan Singh on six different occasions which included their 75-minute one-to-one interaction. Both agreed that, given the complexities involved in the Kashmir issue, there was no substitute for top political-level engagement, away from media glare.
There was recognition on both sides that Kashmir issue could not be resolved overnight and both the leaders advocated a step-by-step approach towards a final settlement acceptable to India, Pakistan and the Kashmiris. President Musharraf made it clear that converting the LoC into a permanent border was out of question and the Indian prime minister made it equally clear that there would be no redrawing of boundaries. Both sang the “soft border” tune that would eventually make the LoC irrelevant.
The joint statement issued at the end of the visit on April 18 did reflect significant forward movement in confidence-building with more Kashmir-related CBMs that could eventually pave way for addressing the political aspects of the issue.
The two-page statement was reportedly negotiated between the two foreign secretaries till midnight on April 17. Phrasing of paragraph eight, that pertained to terrorism, remained a bone of contention during these negotiations. The statement, already prepared through back channels, was shared with the foreign office folks on April 16 with Foreign Minister Khurshid Kasuri perhaps being the only exception. While it was seen by the Indian camp as “very good”, it evoked some reservations from the Pakistani side that saw little relief in it for the Kashmiris from the human rights standpoint.
Another view was that there was less focus on the core issue of Kashmir and more on trade and economics links.
Mr Kasuri was conspicuous by his absence at the announcement of the joint statement at Hyderabad House. A day earlier he had declared that the statement would reflect progress on all bilateral issue, including Jammu and Kashmir. It was learnt later that he had left for the United States the night before on a private visit. It was merely said he had “some prior family commitments” there and that he had already informed the president about it.
It is reported that minutes before the statement was read out by the Indian prime minister, Information Minister Sheikh Rashid and foreign office spokesman Jalil Abbas Jilani dubbed the “most popular persona non grata”, had gone and sat with the Indian delegation in a show of solidarity. The gesture was not reciprocated by the Indian side despite emphatic calls from the media persons present on the occasion. The otherwise glib-tongued Sheikh Rashid was visibly embarrassed and smiled sheepishly when Pakistani journalists jocularly accused him of floor-crossing.
Reportedly, the three Pakistani spokesmen visiting Delhi as part of the official delegation did not hold a single briefing for the 40-plus Pakistani media team specially flown to India for the event. The foreign office spokesman, the DG ISPR, and the information minister were probably enjoying cricket while the Indian propaganda machine industriously turned its wheels. Ironically, it was Indian TV channels that fed the Pakistani media with news and cues.
According to Pakistani journalists, when they approached foreign secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan and complained that they were not given any briefing on the talks unlike the Indian media that was formally briefed by their foreign secretary earlier in the day, he was said to have commented: “India is a sovereign country and their foreign secretary is free to brief them.”
“I will not say anything on the substance of the statement, we are still working on it,” he tersely told the journalists who sought Pakistan’s point of view. So it seems that the Pakistani camp let the Indian media define the context of the visit and, as always, the Indian side opted for the preemptive strike while our folks remained on the defensive. One explanation given for the Pakistani camp remaining so tight-lipped was that it was only too conscious of the Agra debacle and did not want to risk a repeat.
According to journalists, the president’s marathon session with the APHC leadership was not without terse exchanges between him and hardliner Geelani, who opposed the general’s show of flexibility on the Kashmir issue, saying it would only weaken Pakistan’s position. His disenchantment with the additional Kashmir-specific CBMs was all too evident when he unloaded himself before the Pakistani media on his way out of Pakistan House after the talks. His concern was that all these moves would strengthen the hands of Mufti Sayed, chief minister of the occupied Kashmir. The president was unable to bring together the divided APHC as differences in approach between the two factions were too sharp even if their ultimate goal remained the same.
President Musharraf was given a 30-minute PowerPoint presentation on a giant display screen by his Indian counterpart A.P.J Abdul Kalam on the latter’s pet model of a rural development programme that he had also shared with Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz when the two leaders met last November. President Musharraf, in turn, was believed to have educated his host about the poverty alleviation initiatives and empowerment of local government back home.
Reportedly, the Indian president also gave a lesson in history to the general on topics as wide-ranging as 18th-century India to the industrial revolution in Europe. His point was that India and Pakistan must not miss out on the new industrial revolution. “Place all the CBMs in a goodwill basket and see the chickens hatch,” President Kalam was quoted as having said to his Pakistani counterpart in the context of ongoing Indo-Pakistan peace process.
A day after the crucial talks and cricket match, leading English-language Indian dailies’ banner headlines screamed: ‘Ghost of Agra buried in Delhi’, ‘Man of the match: Musharraf’, ‘Forward march in April’, ‘Series lost, ties won’, ‘Win win for both sides off the field’ and ‘Sunday win for both’.
President Musharraf declared at the end of his visit that he was satisfied and extremely happy with it as it had been positive beyond his expectations. Not surprising given that he was leaving India with the pleasant discovery of being two years younger than he believed, courtesy the birth certificate presented to him by the Indian prime minister, who also gifted the general a painting of the latter’s ancestral house in Delhi, Neharwali Haveli.
This is part of the history that we are in the process of forgetting. Some of it was brought to light at the launch of the book ‘A Georgian Saga: From the Caucasus to the Indus’ last week.
Muzaffar Ali Shah in a brief speech said there was a surge among people all over the world to discover their roots.
The book reveals how two orphans, Mirza Khusro Beg and Fareedun, came from central Asia to this region. The former, adopted by the then ruler of Sindh, Mir Karam Ali Shah, and the latter who later became his son-in-law, were brought under odd circumstances from Gorgia to Sindh through Iran.
Author Meherafroze in her brief remarks said she had a deep-rooted desire to find her roots since her younger days, and it was re- kindled when she happened to find some relevant material during her sojourn in Toronto, Canada. Browsing in a library there, she found material on the Caucasus relating to Sindh and decided to delve into Mirza Kalich Beg’s valuable collection of books and family records.
The rise of Khusro and Fareedun to the pinnacle of power had not made them proud and arrogant, Javed Jabbar pointed out at the book launch. Instead the family set a tradition of learning and writing. Mr Jabbar had two suggestions to offer on the occasion: the founding of a Pakistan-Georgia friendship association and a car rally from Karachi to the Caucasus to bring the places closer. It was anybody’s guess whether he was serious in his remarks, just as when he described the writer as a ‘schoolgirl historian’.
Actually geography and history are among subjects that appear to have been banished from the school curriculum. What is written in the name of history and is being taught to the children is akin to fiction, compiled to satiate our appetite for self- acclamation, making heroes and creating villains. History has been tailored to meet our ideological needs. This has blurred our vision of the past, confused our understanding of the present and misguided us in our journey to the future.
At the conference, scholars outlined many aspects of the subcontinent’s past and recalled the contribution of academics and archaeologists who had unearthed civilizations and cultures buried in the past — like the ancient material recovered in Quetta (serena) and the archeological discovery of Mehrgarh (Balochistan).
How writers enriched history with their contribution to literature, poetry and culture is seen in the researches of the German scholar Dr Annemarie Schimmel who wrote more than 100 papers on the religion, mysticism and poetry of Sindh and added immensely to Sindhology studies.
Creative writing including travelogues, diaries, biographies, fiction and even poetry have been major sources of historical material. Many books and papers may be quoted in this regard.
One may recall in this context the letters Mirza Ghalib wrote just before and during the uprising in 1857 and his eyewitness account of the ravaging of Delhi at the hands of the English soldiers.
One should remember that the writing of history is not the sole concern of historians but all those who are witness to the making of history and are also part of it. Writers have a special part to play. The history conference may have helped to focus attention on this.
After he left the presidential ‘gaddi’, senior poet Manzar Ayyubi presided over the sitting. Qamar Warsi and Majid Khalil, the naat-poets, were there. It was the night of Eid Miladun Nabi so their naats were received with devotion and reverence.
Afrin recited her verses and ghazals, which brimmed with her love for Karachi and Malir, where she was born and brought up.
Masroor Javed is a popular figure in the literary and journalistic circles of New York. He is also known as a capable manager who runs successful mushairas. Before reciting his couplets, Javed said he would love to invite as many poets as possible to his mushairas in New York. The announcement was received with cheers.
Rafiuddin Raz, Athar Shah Khan, Ms Nasim Nazish, Raashid Noor, Akhtar Saeedi, Iqbal Majeedi, Aqeel Abbas Jafry and Shahnaz Noor were among those who took part in the mushaira. Jazib Qureshi as the host recited one or two couplets, patronizingly.
“These red flowers are the symbol for blood,” said Husseini, who was 9 when Syrian troops rolled into Lebanon in 1976 at a time of a burgeoning civil war. Over the next 29 years, a period scheduled to end officially on Tuesday during a military ceremony at the army post here, at least 2,000 Syrians were killed in Lebanon. A roughhewn foundation stone will be set into Husseini’s shrine, medals exchanged and speeches given by the heads of the Syrian and Lebanese armies. Then the last 600 Syrian soldiers, from a force that once numbered 40,000, will board trucks, buses and rickety jeeps to sweep across the border roughly 10 miles away, ending an era in the Middle East. Husseini, a burly man from the seaside capital of Beirut, 30 miles west of this village in the Bekaa Valley, tenderly placed a sapling cedar tree at the centre of the monument and planted blue, gold and pale yellow flowers around its base. “These represent all of the others in Lebanon,” he said.
In the weeks since a Feb. 14 bombing killed former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, tens of thousands of Lebanese have participated in angry street demonstrations demanding an end to Syria’s domination of Lebanon’s political life. But as international pressure has mounted against Syria to quit Lebanon, particularly the intelligence services that many here hold responsible for Hariri’s death, some Lebanese have tempered their outrage with a sense of gratitude toward the foot soldiers who served here through the 15-year civil war and for as many years after.
No one is clamouring for the Syrians to stay, and many people watched impassively as convoys of Syrian military vehicles trundled along the valley’s narrow roads on Monday toward the shared mountain frontier. But neither was there jubilation, especially among the senior military officers and Lebanese civilians who worked with and lived among the Syrian troops here for decades. And some Lebanese expressed frustration over the intense international pressure directed against Syria to end its domineering presence in Lebanon. The final departure marks a retreat that was widely unexpected by Western diplomats and Lebanese officials in the days immediately following Hariri’s death. Syria’s military and intelligence services have almost entirely departed since then, and three of six Lebanese security chiefs have stepped aside, including Maj. Gen. Jamil Sayyed, the powerful head of Lebanon’s General Security department, who announced his resignation on Monday.
The Lebanese parliament, still dominated by pro-Syrian legislators, plans to pass a law this week to set general elections for the end of May. Leaders of Lebanon’s anti-Syrian opposition hope the voting changes the political balance of power here and ushers in a more independent government. In the short term, the withdrawal will mean tighter borders between Lebanon and Syria with the closing of a special access road long used by the military, Lebanese and Syrian dignitaries and well-connected smugglers to avoid the customs outpost. It will also mean import taxes on some goods moving between the two countries and a far larger responsibility for Lebanon’s military in controlling this broad valley where hashish and opium crops flourished before Syria’s arrival. Lebanese troops, transport trucks and armoured-personnel carriers massed at several key intersections around the Bekaa Valley on Monday, and filled posts recently vacated by Syrian soldiers.
But mutual defence pacts remain in place; the leaders of both countries see Israel as a common foe. Hezbollah, the armed Shia political movement that Syria has long used as a proxy army against Israel, has so far declined to give up its formidable arsenal despite international demands that it do so. In a sign of sympathy, Hezbollah party activists placed party banners and posters on top of a pedestal that until recently held a statue of the late Syrian president Hafez Assad at the entrance to the hillside town of Baalbek.
“This was a brother army, and no body ever complained about it,” Elias Farhat, the Lebanese army general who heads its media operation, said as he watched over the parade ground alive with high-stepping Syrian troops, military bands and ranks of Lebanese soldiers practicing for the farewell ceremony. “The complaints came over the politics. But our cooperation will continue to go on.” Farhat, 53, was a young lieutenant in 1976 when Lebanon’s Christian-led government sought Syrian help in corralling fighters from the Palestine Liberation Organization, who had attained military and political power in large parts of the country.–Dawn/LAT-WP News Service