AS if to remind us the state of Pakistani society on Pakistan Day 2006, there appeared a truly symbolic photo with the heading “Road Murder Protest” in Dawn. It was reflective of the ever ready bitter mood of the people on the streets of Karachi. The caption read “Police baton charge protestors after a truck ran over a pedestrian on Mauripur Road on Wednesday”.

It reminded me of two incidents. The first was the Bushra Zaidi’s accident that took place near Sir Syed Girls College in Nazimabad. In May 1986, Bushra Zaidi died in an accident in which a public bus was involved and that vehicle was set on fire. This Bushra Zaidi case had an impact on society in more ways than one. It showed, for instance that the people of this city were unwilling to accept loss of life caused by rash and negligent driving. That society was willing to stand up for students causes. And people could be angry instantly. There is more that can be read into that solitary incident, but suffice it to say that street protest took violent form. Was that anger over the death of innocent college girl also indicative of the public opinion against the authorities of the day? Those were the days of President General Ziaul Haq, let me add.

Now let me refer to the second incident that I want to underline. The kind that takes place daily and still remains unreported. But it generates anger and frustration, nevertheless, as if a silent rage is sustained. A six-year-old girl Shumaila was hit by a two-wheeler when she was on her way for tuition with her seven-year-old brother Yasir when a speeding motorcyclist hit her. The locality, Akhtar Colony’s Sector-B, suddenly saw a crowd assembly, as the girl was thrown on the ground in pain and injuries. The motorcyclist was slapped and roughed up. It was the anger of a neighbourhood. A mohalla had responded.

Shumaila was lucky that she survived, but sustained some minor fractures, and suffered pain. She missed school. Her brother was unhurt. But that girl was traumatized, and perhaps walking on the road will haunt her for long. In any case, walking on roads is hazardous and risky in this city, as we have observed in the past as well.

Karachi’s public, which gathers instantly when an accident takes place, now acts as a judge it seems. They take the law into their own hands. I am trying to think where else does the public become so angry. Why is it that a road accident, involving a vehicle brings out the latent repressed feelings of anger, even hatred? And the public assumes (right or wrong) that the driver of the vehicle is guilty. In fact one Karachiite believes that somehow the people perceive that the bigger vehicle (in case two vehicles are involved) is the one that is guilty, and is the cause of the mishap and the loss of life. What does this public opinion say?

In Mauripur, a nine-year-old boy Noor Mohammad was crushed to death on March 14 when he was crossing the road. A speeding lorry knocked him down and he died on the spot. I find this kind of news very disturbing. What happens to the family? How do they reconcile with this kind of a tragedy? They don’t, I fear. And the other members of the family live in a strange fear for the rest of their lives. A fear of the roads!

And when Noor Mohammad died the area people gathered, blocked the road to protest, the area police negotiated with the enraged protestors, after which they dispersed. But as one sensitive citizen says, “They have dispersed to reassemble when the next accident takes place.”

Then we saw another instance of road rage, as it is called at times, when an angry mob set fire to a bus after it ran over a traffic policeman on Sharea Faisal last week. A head constable of traffic police Syed Sajjad Ali was knocked down by a coach when he signalled it to stop at Awami Markaz traffic signal. Defying the traffic lights, the driver crushed a policeman with his driving skills and tried to speed away. But see what the public did. Some motorcyclists chased the bus and set it on fire.

There was a time when such stories were unusual and seldom reported. Now along with the usual crime stories, there are these reaction stories, which do suggest that the social scientists ought to give this trend a serious thought. Where does this take Karachi, if the common man takes to violence to express himself? Are they protesting only about what went wrong on the road? Or are they carrying within that anger other frustrations? For example, if they are disgusted at the way they are treated by the levels of authority when they go for public dealing in government departments, do they take it out on the public transport? Or if they are fed up with the way in which the political scenario is unfolding do they express it by setting ablaze a lorry or a car. It would be very pertinent to ask local psychologists to look into this context.

A resident of Hazara Colony, near Kalapul, Rahim Bakhsh says that it is common in his locality to have children being knocked down by erring drivers of two-wheelers. There have been a couple of deaths of children caused by water tankers. But what he agrees is that at times the drivers are truly innocent, and the mistake was committed by the person who either lost his life or limb. He wasn’t careful while crossing the road, or was jay walking. But evidently, the society is at this stage driven by enigmatic considerations.

In New Karachi, some days ago “enraged people” set a passenger bus on fire after it hit a couple on a two-wheeler. Luckily the couple survived. And in that same Nagan Chowrangi spot, a bus was set on fire by people protesting “against the death of two siblings killed in police firing.”

I have heard drivers expressing their fear that were they to be involved in a traffic accident they would be lynched, or at least roughed up before the police would arrive. This mirrors a certain imbalance in this society, born of a depleting faith in justice, and a dwindling trust all round. It is, perhaps, more complex than that we comprehend.

WASHINGTON: Republicans, beset by an array of political troubles, are cranking up the attacks on Democrats and trying to change the subject from President George W. Bush ahead of November’s congressional elections.

With Bush slumping in the polls and Republicans on the defensive over the Iraq war and a series of ethics scandals, the party wants to shift the spotlight away from the White House by convincing voters that Democratic rule would be a dangerous choice.

Republicans hope the strategy will limit the national momentum that Democrats might ride into November and fire up the party’s conservative base supporters to ensure they turn up at the polls.

“What the Democrats are trying to do is make this a referendum about Bush,” said Republican pollster David Winston. “What we are saying is, ‘Look, this is about a choice.’ The strategy is to go out and define what this choice is going to be about and that’s what you are beginning to see.”

Vice President Dick Cheney fired the latest salvos against Democrats on Friday, saying their “sorry record” on security issues proved they were not capable of leading the war on terrorism.

“Some Democrats in Congress have decided that the president is the enemy,” Cheney said at a fund-raiser in Orlando, Florida, referring to objections raised against Bush’s domestic surveillance programme.

Republican Party chief Ken Mehlman has led attacks on Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold’s push for a censure resolution against Bush and Democratic calls for a phased withdrawal of US troops from Iraq.

“The Democrats’ plan for 2006? Take the House and Senate and impeach the president,” Mehlman said in a fund-raising e-mail sent to Republicans on Thursday. “With our nation at war, is this the kind of Congress you want?”

Republicans say the strategy is designed to get them off the defensive about their recent political problems, including scandals involving high-profile party leaders and uproars over a now-dead Arab port deal and a secret eavesdropping programme.

Those difficulties have eaten away at public support for Bush and the Republican-led Congress in recent polls. But Republicans also believe Democrats, who have yet to develop a unified approach on Iraq or a uniform domestic agenda for the fall, remain vulnerable.

“When you have a climate like we currently have the last thing Republicans want is a nationalized election,” said Republican consultant Whit Ayres. “But there is no assurance that even voters who are upset with Republicans will necessarily choose a worse alternative in Democrats.”

All 435 House seats and 33 of the 100 Senate seats will be on the ballot in November, when Democrats must gain six Senate seats and 15 House seats to regain control of each chamber.

Bush’s slump in the polls has included a drop in Republican support but raising alarms about the prospects of a Democratic takeover can help bring the disenchanted back to the fold, strategists said.

A series of votes planned in Congress over the next few months on hot-button social issues like abortion, gay marriage and flag burning also should solidify the party base, analysts said.

“Midterm elections are all about rallying the base,” said Steven Schier, a political analyst at Carleton College in Minnesota. “If you can bring up censure and impeachment, maybe you can get back the 10 or 15 per cent of Republicans who have peeled off in the recent polls.”

Given the political climate, putting Democrats on the defensive could be the best hope for Republicans, he said.

“Anytime you are on offensive, it is always better. It means you are driving the discussion and debate,” Winston said.—Reuters