|
|
August 18, 2002
REVIEW: Rashdi remembers
JOURNALIST, diplomat, wildlife expert and politician, Pir Ali Muhammad Rashdi (1905-1987) played an important role in the affairs of Pakistan, particularly in his home province Sindh, for well over 50 years. He had a keen, almost uncanny, understanding of the ebb and flow of politics. In an environment in which politics were often reduced to behind-the-scenes manipulation and palace intrigues, he refused to be outwitted by his fellow politicians. What distinguished him from most of his contemporaries was his keen intellect, his gift for articulation and his grasp over the technique of being able to make his views and ideas understood both by the lay person and the sophisticated newspaper reader.
Roedad-i-Chaman (the odyssey of the garden) is a collection of Rashdi’s columns — 23 in all — which he wrote for the leading Urdu daily Jang between March and August 1982 summarizing his views on the circumstances which led to Pakistan’s political instability and lack of progress. In this sense the book should be regarded as the quintessence of his first-hand experience of the developments in Pakistan over a lifetime of being an insider in politics.
Rashdi has come to the conclusion that the bureaucracy as a class has been the key factor in what he calls the destruction of political and constitutional stability in Pakistan. It has obstructed the path of progress and ultimately succeeded in concentrating all power and authority in itself.
This is not very different from what many other social scientists and political analysts also believe to be the reasons for the derailment of Pakistan from the path of democracy.
In tracing the background of the Pakistan movement, Rashdi contends that Iqbal advocated partition as the way out of the perennial communal problem in the subcontinent. He had expressed this view in his address at the Allahabad session of the All India Muslim League as early as in 1930. But enough thought was not given to what would be the constituent units and the boundaries of the new state. Neither was the constitutional form for the proposed Muslim entity defined. It could have been anticipated, though it was not, that a division would inevitably involve a massive transfer of population from one part of the subcontinent to the other.
After Partition, India displayed unusual political sagacity and refused to be lured into the sphere of American influence. But Pakistan, because of its deep sense of insecurity, opted for an alliance with America.
The situation became more complicated for Pakistan when Quaid-i-Azam died within 13 months of the founding of the new state. India had the good fortune of benefiting from the political wisdom and leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru for as long as 18 years.
Once the Quaid was no more the nation lost its sense of direction and split into groups and factions, each endeavouring to tighten its hold over the levers of state power. Bureaucrats like Ghulam Mohammad, Chaudhry Mohammad Ali and Iskander Mirza came to the helm of affairs. The need to evolve a constitutional framework for the country was virtually lost sight of. For nine long years there was no constitution in Pakistan and the leadership of the nation was usurped by the faction representing powerful elements in bureaucracy. Elected representatives of the people did not get the chance to govern the country.
India and Israel which too had gained their independence about the same time as Pakistan did evolved a constitutional framework for themselves without losing much time and began to steer their national affairs with a sense of purpose and direction. The ideals which the Quaid and his close associates had enunciated as the guiding principles for governance of the independent state of Pakistan were abandoned. Political leaders were either sidelined or prevented from exercising their right to be in politics by draconian laws such as EBDO and PRODA masterminded by the bureaucrats. By one means or the other political leaders even of the stature of Khwaja Nazimuddin and Hussein Shaheed Suhrawardy were marginalized.
Dedicated leaders of the Muslim League from the Punjab such as Mian Iftikharuddin and Sardar Shaukat Hayat were kept out of the mainstream of politics. Disagreeing with the prevailing sentiment, Rashdi even believes that Ghaffar Khan despite his known allegiance to the nationalist Congress in the pre-Partition years, should have been given a position of responsibility in the new born state.
Rashdi repeatedly refers to the political contribution of Muhammad Ayub Khuhro to the effort to preserve the rights of Sindh and his long service to the Muslim League. However, he regrets that far from being rewarded, Khuhro was pursued and persecuted under PRODA. Rashdi believes that Khuhro had an uncommon genius for administration and he deserved better.
A great deal of information about the affairs of Sindh over the decades is to be gained from Rashdi’s columns devoted to the politics of the province. He pays glowing tributes to the services rendered by Sheikh Abdul Majeed Sindhi who moved the resolution in the Muslim League Conference in 1938 which two years later became the basis for the Lahore resolution. Yet, Sheikh Sahib was humiliated especially during Ayub Khan’s regime. His only “fault” was that he was resolute in his demand for a better deal for the common people.
Another Sindhi who played a pioneering role in organizing the Muslim League in Sindh was G.M. Syed. He was virtually treated like a pariah by those who came to wield authority in the country. Syed was persecuted and incarcerated for long years and deprived of his right to participate in politics. Likewise, in the eastern wing, leaders like Fazlul Haq were branded as traitors.
Rashdi holds the bureaucracy squarely responsible for the evils of corruption and nepotism. The mis-conceived policies of the top level of bureaucrats under every regime widened the class divide. The bureaucrats also plunged the nation into a cycle of dependence upon foreign aid and loans while depleting the national resources.
Rashdi has managed to expose the sinister role played by those in key positions in Pakistan at various levels from time to time. Thus the reader is made aware of their deeds and misdeeds. The writer does this competently, with his admirable command over the use of Urdu language combined with apt Persian verses. Rashdi’s Roedad-i-Chaman is not only enlightening but also a delight for the reader.
Roedad-i-Chaman
By Pir Ali Muhammad Rashdi
Sang-e-Meel Publications, 20 Shahrah-i-Pakistan, Lahore Tel: 042-7220100
Email: smp@sang-e-meel.com
ISBN 969-35-1325-8 200pp. Rs175
|
|
|
