Tag Archive | "army"

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

February 13th, …

Posted on 13 February 2012 by Tea Server

February 13th, 2012. Islamabad. For those of us still following the game of thrones taking place at the center, it appears that Prime Minister Gilani is running out of road. He’s taking a long walk off a short pier. Insert your own cliché here. The debate has overtaken the Prime Minister, the discussion is now focused on what Pakistan must do, post-Gilani. To write the letter or not? Will Senate elections go ahead or not? Will the PPP spin this ungraceful end to a five year term as a victory, will Gilani go back to Multan a living shaheed? Pity the constituency whose only claim to a fruitful five year term is a representative with a knack for getting stabbed in the stomach and making it look like he meant to fall on his sword. Gilani will end up being a sacrifice for an utterly worthless cause – twenty-eight million US dollars that will never be returned to the people of Pakistan. Ever.

The statute of limitations on the Swiss cases are rumored to be anywhere between April and August 2012. The time for reopening old cases is diminishing fast. Yet we insist that the court charade of the last few months was necessary – it’s not about the money, it’s about setting an institutional precedent.

It has been nearly two decades since our President and his late wife stole a mind-bubbling sum of money and squirreled it away into Swiss banks, mansions in Surrey, bank accounts in Dubai and trendy flats in London. Reading the famous 1998 New York Times article reinforces the idea that when politicians from very poor countries amass vast amounts of wealth, they are not likely to let go of it that easily. So forget fantasies of liquidating the Bhutto assets and paying off Pakistan’s international loans. The Pakistani Supreme Court can humiliate the Prime Minister, but it can’t overturn decades of sophisticated white collar crime, much of which takes place outside its judicial territory.

And surely impotence of this intensity is severely humiliating for Chief Justice Chaudhry himself. Having become the defacto arbitrator of every aggrieved party in Pakistan, he suddenly finds himself without any implementation power whatsoever. He is the supreme commander of a court system that is rotten at the foundation, fighting the country’s largest and most public corruption scandal while his own lower court clerks accept petty bribes to tie up litigation for years. His own middle-class biases against the landed elite of the PPP notwithstanding, Chaudhary now faces the task of living up to the dubious honor of being the sole institution in this country deemed impartial and uncorrupt. Which means that if he isn’t seen going after egregious acts of corruption, he will be immediately deemed implicit.

In the face of such impotence, charging and convicting a seated Prime Minister of contempt is a sufficiently bold task to secure Chaudhary’s tripod of potency: judicial independence, of having real power (as opposed to simply striking down the NRO and not being able to do a damn thing to implement it for a full two years), and of being a guardian of the people. Gilani’s removal, whenever it happens, will be sufficiently large to distract from the fact that the PM never stole the twenty-eight million. He never decided to write the letter, or not to write it, for that matter – any more than he decided to become Prime Minister. It will serve to silence those who suggest that post-reinstatement, the CJ has been “bought out” by the PPP, to outcry those who notice that investigations into sugar cartels, NILC, Hajj, Abbotabad,  and Karachi came to naught. It is eye candy for the myopic, a desperate sideshow to distract from a flaming circus of budget malfunctions, energy scams and policy fubars.

But lets not beat ourselves up too much. John Burns pointed out in 1998 that multilateral organizations such as the World Bank regularly support teetering Third World economies “bled dry” by corruption in exchange for weak promises of institutional reform. The last five years have been immensely lucrative for friends of the regime, for those individuals and institutions capable of buying out or bullying Mr. Hundered Percent. At last count, this included everyone from ARY Gold to the Pakistan Army, from AKD to NLC to the men who bring you fantastically overpriced imported cars at huge markups. Zardari did not invent corruption, but he’s a fine example (an institutional precedent, as it were) of just how successful some men and women become in countries with broken democratic systems. Where the Army can quietly wring the neck of anyone attempting to infringe on its economic and political territory. Where an entire Parliament – incumbent, opposition and all – routes all decision-making through the Supreme Court. Where a judge is deeply contemptuous of men who take advantage of their office for personal aggrandizement – and then goes and does exactly the same.

Syndicated from: Erum Haider

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Accused brigadier’s father urges govt to release him

Posted on 13 February 2012 by Tea Server

KARACHI: The father of an army brigadier against whom the army initiated court martial proceedings has requested the government to hold an inquiry into his son’s arrest and direct the concerned authorities to release him. Brig Ali Khan and four other officers were detained in May, 2011 for suspected links to Hizbut Tahrir. Brig Khan [...]

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Are Liberals to blame for Pakistan’s Extremism?

Posted on 11 February 2012 by Tea Server

Kashif. N. Chaudary

Imran Khan is Pakistan’s sports superstar. His philanthropy is also admirable. This, however, does not mean I should not exercise my right to criticize Khan’s politics. Sadly,Imran Khan’s followers do not take criticism all that well. Anyone who calls him Taliban Khan is quickly ascribed a set of views and labeled a “pseudo-liberal” and “fascist”.

In a recent interview, Imran Khan said he believed in engaging the far right and justified being represented at rallies of extremist groups by stating that his was a political party that believed in engaging marginalized groups. Will Imran Khan also engage the ostracized Ahmadi Muslims, Hindus and Christians of Pakistan? Or is his engagement limited to those that preach and execute their killings?

Imran Khan has been represented at rallies organized by banned terrorist outfits such as the Jamaat-ud Dawa and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi. His vice president has spoken at pro-Mumtaz Qadri rallies and has been in attendance at anti-Ahmadi rallies organized by the extremist Aalmi Majlis Tahaffuz Khatm-e-Nubuwwat. Khan believes this approach of friendship with the radical right will help bring them to the center. It will soften them and with time, allow them to shun their extremist ideology.

If Imran Khan genuinely believes in coherence, he should employ the same approach of engagement with the far left to make them more centrist, right? Surprisingly, he ridicules them openly, calling them “the scum of Pakistan.” He does not stop at that. He also blames all the extremism in Pakistan on the liberals living within. For example, in a recent interview, he said:

“These liberals. I don’t know these liberals, because these liberals back bombing of villages. They back drone attacks. I mean, I don’t call them liberals. I call them fascists. In my book these people are fascists…Because of them we have extremism in this country these liberals, so called liberals, applauded the incineration, where they bombed this mosque when there were children and women in it, students in it. And these liberals were in the forefront. I don’t call them liberals. I agree. I really think these are the scum of this country.”

Let me remind Imran Khan that liberals were not in the forefront at Lal Masjid. It was the Army. Also, drones do not take off from atop liberals’ houses; they take off from army bases. But I understand it is much easier to criticize vulnerable unarmed liberals than take on the Military-Mullah nexus.

I am flabbergasted. I am also confused. Does Imran Khan and his die-hard fans really understand the words he uses? A fascist is a person who is dictatorial and suppresses criticism and opposition through use of force. Scum refers to a low life, worthless or evil person.

I am yet to meet a “so-called liberal” who bombs mosques and attacks shrines. I am yet to see a “so-called liberal” who kills fellow Pakistanis citing differences of faith. I have never come across a “so-called liberal” who persecutes Pakistan’s very own minorities and razes their places of worship. I am yet to come across a “so-called liberal” who delivers sermons of hate against Shia and Ahmadi Muslims, inciting their killings.

Let me remind Imran Khan that it is the religious fanatics he engages that are the real fascists and the real scum of Pakistan. It is they that are responsible for all the extremism in the country.  Lest he has forgotten, it is they that bomb mosques and shrines. It is they that murder fellow Pakistanis they despise, namely the Ahmadi and Shia Muslims, and non-Muslim Pakistanis. It is they that have made life in Pakistan a living hell for everyone, especially its minorities. It is they that spread hate and incite violence against any and all voices of reason and moderation. Many have had to flee after being threatened by these bigots.

Now, why the far left liberals should be considered scum and unworthy of engagement while those who openly carry out and endorse acts of terror be considered worthy of engagement is beyond me!  Why must only the far right be brought to the center and the far left subjected to ridicule and left isolated? Why must one end of our political divide be
befriended and the other rejected? Above all, why must the heavy burden of sins of one be taken off its shoulder and placed on the shoulders of the other?

Is this justice? Is this Insaaf?

Imran Khan’s justice appears to favor the rightist and the strong. Unless he garners courage to blame extremism on those that actually perpetrate it and relieve the “so-called liberals” of unbefitting slander, his party will increasingly be seen as TPI (Tehreek-e-Pseudo Insaaf) and not PTI.

God Save Pakistan!

Syndicated from: Pak Tea House

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Life Of Muhammad sallallahu alaihi wasallam

Posted on 10 February 2012 by Tea Server



Appearance

Muhammad (pbuh) was of a height a little above the average. He was of sturdy build with long muscular limbs and tapering fingers. The hair of his head was long and thick with some waves in them. His forehead was large and prominent, his eyelashes were long and thick, his nose was sloping, his mouth was somewhat large and his teeth were well set. His cheeks were spare and he had a pleasant smile. His eyes were large and black with a touch of brown. His beard was thick and at the time of his death, he had seventeen gray hairs in it. He had a thin line of fine hair over his neck and chest. He was fair of complexion and altogether was so handsome that Abu Bakr composed this couplet on him:

“as there is no darkness in the moonlit night so is Mustafa, the well-wisher, bright.”

His gait was firm and he walked so fast that others found it difficult to keep pace with him. His face was genial but at times, when he was deep in thought, there there were long periods of silence, yet he always kept himself busy with something. He did not speak unnecessarily and what he said was always to the point and without any padding. At times he would make his meaning clear by slowly repeating what he had said. His laugh was mostly a smile. He kept his feelings under firm control – when annoyed, he would turn aside or keep silent, when pleased he would lower his eyes (Shamail Tirmizi).

Dress

His dress generally consisted of a shirt, tamad (trousers), a sheet thrown round the sholders and a turban. On rare occasions, he would put on costly robes presented to him by foreign emissaries in the later part of his life (Ahmed, Musnad, Hafiz Bin Qaiyyam).

His blanket had several patches (Tirmizi). He had very few spare clothes, but he kept them spotlessy clean (Bukhari). He wanted others also to put on simple but clean clothes. Once he saw a person putting on dirty clothes and remarked,

“Why can’t this man wash them.” (Abu Dawud, Chapter “Dress”).

On another occasion he enquired of a person in dirty clothes whether he had any income. Upon getting a reply in the affirmative, he observed,
“When Allah has blessed you with His bounty, your appearence should reflect it.” (Abu Dawud)

He used to observe:
“Cleanliness is piety”.


Mode of living

His house was but a hut with walls of unbaked clay and a thatched roof of palm leaves covered by camel skin. He had separate apartments for his wives, a small room for each made of similar materials. His own apartment contained a rope cot, a pillow stuffed with palm leaves , the skin of some animal spread on the floor and a water bag of leather and some weapons. These were all his earthly belongings, besides a camel, a horse, and an ass and some land which he had aquired in the later part of his life (Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud). Once a few of his disciples, noticing the imprint of his mattress on his body, wished to give him a softer bed but he politely declined the offer saying,
“What have I to do with worldly things. My connection with the world is like that of a traveler resting for a while underneath the shade of a tree and then moving on.”
Amr Ibn Al-Harith, a brother in law of the prophet (pbuh), says that when the prophet died, he did not leave a cent, a slave man or woman, or any property except his white mule, his weapons and a piece of land which he had dedicated for the good of the community (Bukhari, Sahih Bukhari).

He advised the people to live simple lives and himself practised great austerities. Even when he had become the virtual king of arabia, he lived an austere life bordering on privation. His wife Aiysha (ra) says that there was hardly a day in his life when he had two square meals (Muslim, Sahih Muslim, Vol.2, pg 198). When he died there was nothing in his house except a few seeds of barley left from a mound of the grain obtained from a Jew by pawning his armour (Bukhari, Sahih Bukhari, Chapter “Aljihad”).

He had declared unlawful for himself and his family anything given by the people by way of zakat or sadaqa (types of charity). He was so particular about this that he would not appoint any member of his family as a zakat collector (Sahah-Kitab Sadqat).

His manners and disposition

“By the grace of Allah, you are gentle towards the people; if you had been stern and ill-tempered, they would have dispersed from round about you” (translation of Qur’an 3:159)

About himself the prophet (pbuh) said

“Allah has sent me as an apostle so that I may demonstrate perfection of character, refinement of manners and loftiness of deportment.” (Malik, Mawatta; Ahmed, Musnad; Mishkat)
By nature he was gentle and kind hearted, always inclined to be gracious and to overlook the faults of others. Politeness and courtesy, compassion and tenderness, simplicity and humility, sympathy and sincerity were some of the keynotes of his character. In the cause of right and justice he could be resolute and severe but more often than not, his severity was tempered with generosity. He had charming manners which won him the affection of his followers and secured their devotion. Though virtual king of Arabia and an apostle of Allah, he never assumed an air of superiority. Not that he had to conceal any such vein by practice and artifice: with fear of Allah, sincere humility was ingrained in his heart. He used to say,
“I am a Prophet of Allah but I do not know what will be my end.” (Bukhari, Sahih Bukhari, Chapter “Al-Janaiz”)

In one of his sermons calculated to instill the fear of Allah and the day of reckoning in the hearts of men, he said,

“O people of Quraish be prepared for the hereafter, I cannot save you from the punishment of Allah; O Bani Abd Manaf, I cannot save you from Allah; O Abbas, son of Abdul Mutalib, I cannot protect you either; O Fatima, daughter of Muhammad, even you I cannot save.” (Sahahin)

He used to pray,
“O Allah! I am but a man. If I hurt any one in any manner, then forgive me and do not punish me.” (Ahmed, Musnad, Vol. 6 pg. 103)

He always received people with courtesy and showed respect to older people and stated:

“To honor an old man is to show respect to Allah.”

He would not deny courtesy even to wicked persons. It is stated that a person came to his house and asked permission for admission. The prophet (pbuh) remarked that he was not a good person but might be admitted. When he came in and while he remained in the house, he was shown full courtesy. When he left Aiysha (ra) said,
“You did not think well of this man, but you treated him so well.”

The prophet (pbuh) replied,

“He is a bad person in the sight of Allah who does not behave courteously and people shun his company bacause of his bad manners.” (Bukhari, Sahih Bukhari)
He was always the first to greet another and would not withdraw his hand from a handshake till the other man withdrew his. If one wanted to say something in his ears, he would not turn away till one had finished (Abu Dawud, Tirmizi). He did not like people to get up for him and used to say,

“Let him who likes people to stand up in his honour, he should seek a place in hell.” (Abu Dawud, Kitabul Adab, Muhammadi Press, Delhi).

He would himself, however, stand up when any dignitary came to him. He had stood up to receive the wet nurse who had reared him in infancy and had spread his own sheet for her. His foster brother was given similar treatment. He avoided sitting at a prominent place in a gathering, so much so that people coming in had difficulty in spotting him and had to ask which was the Prophet (pbuh). 

Quite frequently uncouth bedouins accosted him in their own gruff and impolite manner but he never took offence. (Abu Dawud Kitabul Atama).

He used to visit the poorest of ailing persons and exhorted all muslims to do likewise (Bukhari, Sahih Bukhari, Chapter “Attendance on ailing persons”). He would sit with the humblest of persons saying that righteousness alone was the criterion of one’s superiority over another. He invariably invited people be they slaves, servants or the poorest believers, to partake with him of his scanty meals (Tirmizi, Sunan Tirmizi).

Whenever he visited a person he would first greet him and then take his permission to enter the house. He advised the people to follow this etiquette and not to get annoyed if anyone declined to give permission, for it was quite likely the person concerned was busy otherwise and did not mean any disrespect (Ibid).

There was no type of household work too low or too undignified for him. Aiysha (ra) has stated,

“He always joined in household work and would at times mend his clothes, repair his shoes and sweep the floor. He would milk, tether, and feed his animals and do the household shopping.” (Qazi Iyaz: Shifa; Bukhari, Sahih Bukhari, Chapter: Kitabul Adab)

He would not hesitate to do the menial work of others, particularly of orphans and widows (Nasi, Darmi). Once when there was no male member in the house of the companion Kabab Bin Arat who had gone to the battlefield, he used to go to his house daily and milk his cattle for the inhabitants (Ibn Saad Vol. 6, p 213).

Children

He was especially fond of children and used to get into the spirit of childish games in their company. He would have fun with the children who had come back from Abyssinia and tried to speak in Abyssinian with them. It was his practice to give lifts on his camel to children when he returned from journeys (Bukhari, Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 2 pg.886). He would pick up children in his arms, play with them, and kiss them. A companion, recalling his childhood, said,

“In my childhood I used to fell dates by throwing stones at palm trees. Somebody took me to the Prophet (pbuh) who advised me to pick up the dates lying on the ground but not to fell them with stones. He then patted me and blessed me.” (Abu Dawud)

Daily routine

On the authority of Ali, Tirmizi has recorded that the Prophet (pbuh) had carefully apportioned his time according to the demands on him for
offering worship to Allah
public affairs, and
personal matters.

After the early morning prayers he would remain sitting in the mosque reciting praises of Allah till the sun rose and more people collected. He would then preach to them. After the sermons were over, he would talk genially with the people, enquire about their welfare and even exchange jokes with them. Taxes and revenues were also disrtibuted at this time (Muslim, Sahih Muslim Tirmizi, Sunan Tirmizi). He would then offer chaste prayers and go home and get busy with household work (Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmizi). He would again return to the mosque for the mid-day and afternoon prayers, listen to the problems of the people and give solace and guidance to them. After the afternoon prayers, he would visit each of his wives and, after the evening prayers, his wives would collect at one place and he would have his dinner (Muslim, Sahih Muslim). After the night prayers, he would recite some suras of the Quran and before going to bed would pray:
“O Allah, I die and live with thy name on my lips.”

On getting up he would say,

“All praise to Allah Who has given me life after death and towards Whom is the return.”

He used to brush his teeth five times a day, before each of the daily prayers. After midnight, he used to get up for the tahajjud prayers which he never missed even once in his life (Bukhari, Sahih Bukhari). He was not fastidious about his bed: sometimes he slept on his cot, sometimes on a skin or ordinary matress, and sometimes on the ground (Zarqani).
On friday he used to give sermons after the weekly “Jumma” prayers. He was not annoyed if anyone interrupted him during the sermons for anything. It is stated that once, while he was delivering his sermon, a bedouin approached him and said, “O messenger of Allah, I am a traveler and am ignorant of my religion.” The prophet (pbuh) got down from the pulpit, explained the salient features of Islam to him and then resumed the sermon (Tirmizi, Sunan Tirmizi).

On another occasion his grandson Husain, still a child, came tumbling to him while he was delivering a sermon. He descended and took him in his lap and then continued the sermon (Ibid).

Trust in Allah (swt)

Muhammad (pbuh) preached to the people to trust in Allah (swt). His whole life was a sublime example of the precept. In the loneliness of Makkah, in the midst of persecution and danger, in adversity and tribulations, and in the thick of enemies in the battles of Uhud and Hunain, complete faith and trust in Allah (swt) appears as the dominant feature in his life. However great the danger that confronted him, he never lost hope and never allowed himself to be unduly agitated. Abu Talib knew the feelings of the Quraish when the Prophet (pbuh) started his mission. He also knew the lengths to which the Quraish could go, and requested the Prophet (pbuh) to abandon his mission, but the latter calmly replied,

“Dear uncle, do not go by my loneliness. Truth will not go unsupported for long. The whole of Arabia and beyond will one day espouse its cause.” (Ibn Hisham, Sirat-ur-Rasul.)

When the attitude of the Quraish became more threatening, Abu Talib again begged his nephew to renounce his mission but the Prophet’s (pbuh) reply was:
“O my uncle, if they placed the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left, to force me to renounce my work, verily I would not desist thereform until Allah made manifest His cause, or I perished in the attempt.” (Ibid)
To another well-wisher, he said,
“Allah will not leave me forelorn.”

A dejected and oppressed disciple was comforted with the words:
“By Allah, the day is near when this faith will reach its pinnacle and none will have to fear anyone except Allah.” (Bukhari, Sahih Bukhari)
It was the same trust in Allah (swt) which emboldened the prophet (pbuh) to say his prayers openly in the haram in the teeth of opposition. The Quraish were once collected there and were conspiring to put an end to his life when he next entered the haram. His young daughter Fatima, who happened to overhear their talk rushed weeping to her father and told him of the designs of the Quraish. He consoled her, did his ablutions and went to the Kaaba to say prayers. There was only consternation among the Quraish when they saw him (Ahmed, Musnad, Vol. 1, pg. 368).
Then leaving his house for Madinah he asked Ali (ra) to sleep on his bed and told him,

“Do not worry, no one will be able to do you any harm” (Tabari, Ibn Hisham)
Even though the enemies had surrounded the house, he left the house reciting the Quranic verse:
“We have set a barricade before them and a barricade behind them and (thus) have covered them so that they see not” (translation of Qur’an 36:9)
Abu Bakr was frightened when pursuers came close to the cavern in which he and Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) were hiding during their flight, but the Prophet (pbuh) heartened him,
“Grieve not. Allah is with us.”

A guard was kept at the Prophet’s house in Madinah because of the danger that surrounded him but he had it withdrawn when the Quranic verse was revealed:
“Allah will protect you from the people” (translation of Qur’an 5:67).

A man was caught waiting in ambush to assault the Prophet (pbuh) but he was directed to be released with the words,
“Even if this man wanted to kill me, he could not.” (Ahmed, Musnad, Vol.3 pg. 471)

A Jewess from Khaibar had put poison in the Prophet’s (pbuh) food. He spat it out after taking a morsel but a disciple who had his fill died the next day. The Jewess was brought before the prophet (pbuh) who questioned her:

“Why did you do this?” “To kill you,” was her defiant reply. She was told, “Allah would not have allowed you to do it.” (Muslim, Sahih Muslim.)

In the battle of Uhud when the rear guard action of the Makkan army had disorganized the Muslim army and had turned the tables, the Prophet (pbuh) stood as firm as a rock even though he had suffered personal injuries. When Abu Sufiyan taunted the Muslims and shouted “Victory to hubal!” (hubal was one of their idols), the Prophet (pbuh) asked Umar (ra) to shout back, “Allah is our protector and friend. 

You have no protector and friend. Allah is Great, Magnificent.” (Ibn Hisham, Sirat-Ur-Rasul).
Again in the battle of Hunain, when the unexpected assault of the army had swept the Muslim force off its feet and a defeat seemed imminent, the Prophet (pbuh) did not yield ground. With trust in Allah (swt) he showed such courage that the Muslim army rallied behind him to win a signal victory.

Justice

The Prophet (pbuh) asked people to be just and kind. As the supreme judge and arbiter, as the leader of men, as generalissimo of a rising power, as a reformer and apostle, he had always to deal with men and their affairs. He had often to deal with mutually inimical and warring tribes when showing justice to one carried the danger of antagonizing the other, and yet he never deviated from the path of justice. In administering justice, he made no distinction between believers and nonbelievers, friends and foes, high and low. From numerous instances reported in the traditions, a few are given below.

Sakhar, a chief of a tribe, had helped Muhammad (pbuh) greatly in the seige of Taif, for which he was naturally obliged to him. Soon after, two charges were brought against Sakhar: one by Mughira of illegal confinement of his (Mughira’s) aunt and the other by Banu Salim of forcible occupation of his spring by Sakhar. In both cases, he decided against Sakhar and made him undo the wrong. (Abu Dawud, Sunan Dawud, pg.80)
Abdullah Bin Sahal, a companion, was deputed to collect rent from Jews of Khaibar. His cousin Mahisa accompanied him but, on reaching Khaibar, they had separated. Abdullah was waylaid and done to death. Mahisa reported this tragedy to the Prophet (pbuh) but as there were no eye-witnesses to identify the guilty, he did not say anything to the Jews and paid the blood-money out of the state revenues (Bukhari, Sahih Bukhari Nasai).
A woman of the Makhzoom family with good connections was found guilty of theft. For the prestige of the Quraish, some prominent people including Asama Bin Zaid interceded to save her from punishment. The Prophet (pbuh) refused to condone the crime and expressed displeasure saying,

“Many a community ruined itself in the past as they only punished the poor and ignored the offences of the exalted. By Allah, if Muhammad’s (My) daughter Fatima would have committed theft, her hand would have been severed.” (Bukhari, Sahh Bukhari, Chapter “Alhadood”)
The Jews, in spite of their hostility to the Prophet (pbuh), were so impressed by his impartiallity and sense of justice that they used to bring their cases to him, and he decided them according to Jewish law. (Abu Dawud, Sunan Dawud)
Once, while he was distributing the spoils of war, people flocked around him and one man almost fell upon him. He pushed the men with a stick causing a slight abrasion. He was so sorry about this that he told the man that he could have his revenge, but the man said, “O messenger of Allah, I forgive you.” (Abu Dawud, Kitablu Diyat).
In his fatal illness, the Prophet (pbuh) proclaimed in a concourse assembled at his house that if he owed anything to anyone the person concerned could claim it; if he had ever hurt anyone’s person, honor or property, he could have his price while he was yet in this world. A hush fell on the crowd. One man came forward to claim a few dirhams which were paid at once. (Ibn Hisham, Sirat-ur-Rasul)
Equality

Muhammad (pbuh) asked people to shun notions of racial, family or any other form of superiority based on mundane things and said that righteousness alone was the criterion of one’s superiority over another. It has already been shown how he mixed with everyone on equal terms, how he ate with slaves, servants and the poorest on the same sheet (a practice that is still followed in Arabia), how he refused all privileges and worked like any ordinary laborer. Two instances may, however, be quoted here:
Once the Prophet (pbuh) visited Saad Bin Abadah. While returning Saad sent his son Quais with him. The Prophet (pbuh) asked Quais to mount his camel with him. Quais hesitated out of respect but the Prophet (pbuh) insisted: “Either mount the camel or go back.” Quais decided to go back. (Abu Dawud, Kitabul Adab)
On another occasion he was traveling on his camel over hilly terrain with a disciple, Uqba Bin Aamir. After going some distance, he asked Uqba to ride the camel, but Uqba thought this would be showing disrespect to the Prophet (pbuh). But the Prophet (pbuh) insisted and he had to comply. The Prophet (pbuh) himself walked on foot as he did not want to put too much load on the animal. (Nasai pg. 803)
The prisioners of war of Badr included Abbas, the uncle of the Prophet (pbuh). Some people were prepared to forgo their shares and remit the Prophet’s (pbuh) ransom but he declined saying that he could make no distinctions. (Bukhari, Sahih Bukhari, Chapter “Ransoms”)
During a halt on a journey, the companions apportioned work among themselves for preparing food. The Prophet (pbuh) took upon himself the task of collecting firewood. His companions pleaded that they would do it and that he need not take the trouble, but he replied,

“It is true, but I do not like to attribute any distinction to myself. Allah does not like the man who considers himself superior to his companions.” (Zarqani, Vol 4 pg. 306)
Kindness to animals

The Prophet (pbuh) not only preached to the people to show kindness to each other but also to all living souls. He forbade the practice of cutting tails and manes of horses, of branding animals at any soft spot, and of keeping horses saddled unnecessarily (Muslim, Sahih Muslim). If he saw any animal over-loaded or ill-fed he would pull up the owner and say,
“Fear Allah in your treatment of animals.” (Abu Dawud, Kitab Jihad).

A companion came to him with the young ones of a bird in his sheet and said that the mother bird had hovered over them all along. He was directed to replace her offspring in the same bush (Mishkat, Abu Dawud)
During a journey, somebody picked up some birds eggs. The bird’s painful note and fluttering attracted the attention of the Prophet (pbuh), who asked the man to replace the eggs (Bukhari, Sahih Bukhari).
As his army marched towards Makkah to conquer it, they passed a female dog with puppies. The Prophet (pbuh) not only gave orders that they should not be disturbed, but posted a man to see that this was done.
He stated,

“Verily, there is heavenly reward for every act of kindness done to a living animal.”

Love for the poor

The Prophet (pbuh) enjoined upon Muslims to treat the poor kindly and to help them with alms, zakat, and in other ways. He said:
“He is not a perfect muslim who eats his fill and lets his neighbor go hungry.”
He asked,
“Do you love your Creator? Then love your fellow beings first.”

Monopoly is unlawful in Islam and he preached that
“It is diffucult for a man laden with riches to climb the steep path that leads to bliss.”

He did not prohibit or discourage the aquisition of wealth but insisted that it be lawfully aquired by honest means and that a portion of it would go to the poor. He advised his followers
“To give the laborer his wages before his perspiration dried up.”

He did not encourage beggary either and stated that
“Allah is gracious to him who earns his living by his own labor, and that if a man begs to increase his property, Allah will diminish it and whoever has food for the day, it is prohibited for him to beg.”

To his wife he said,
“O Aysha, love the poor and let them come to you and Allah will draw you near to Himself.” (Bukhari, Sahih Bukhari)

One or two instances of the Prophet’s (pbuh) concern for the poor may be given here. A Madinan, Ibad Bin Sharjil, was once starving. He entered an orchard and picked some fruit. The owner of the orchard gave him a sound beating and stripped off his clothes. The poor man appealed to the Prophet (pbuh) who remonstrated the owner thus:

“This man was ignorant, you should have dispelled his ignorance; he was hungry, you should have fed him.”

His clothes were restored to the Madinan and, in addition, some grain was given to him (Abu Dawud, Kitabul Jihad).

A debtor, Jabir Bin Abdullah, was being harassed by his creditor as he could not clear his debt owing to the failure of his date crop. The Prophet (pbuh) went with Jabir to the house of the creditor and pleaded with him to give Jabir some more time but the creditor was not prepared to oblige. 

The Prophet (pbuh) then went to the oasis and having seen for himself that the crop was really poor, he again approached the creditor with no better result. He then rested for some time and approached the creditor for a third time but the latter was adamant. The Prophet (pbuh) went again to the orchard and asked Jabir to pluck the dates. As Allah would have it, the collection not only sufficed to clear the dues but left something to spare (Bukhari, Sahih Bukhari).

His love for the poor was so deep that he used to pray:

“O Allah, keep me poor in my life and at my death and raise me at resurrection among those who are poor.” (Nasai, Chapter: Pardon)

The following is an excerpt from the book entitled “The Message of Mohammad”, by Athar Husain. Among other things, it talks about some of the personal characteristics of the prophet Mohammed (Peace Be Upon Him), the final messenger of Allah (God). It has been edited slightly in order to reduce it’s length. Care has been taken not to change the content inshallah.

*****

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Citizen Journalism Grows in Pakistan

Posted on 09 February 2012 by Tea Server

By Sonya Rehman

With internet usage on the rise, Pakistanis are turning to the blogosphere and citizen journalism to share their opinions. Hosh Media epitomizes the growing popularity of locally-based, online portals for citizen journalism in Pakistan.

According to the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA), the number of broadband internet subscribers rose from 26,611 in 2005 to 1,656,800 in September 2011; an increase of 1.5 million subscribers. It is also estimated that as of 2011, Pakistan’s population stands at approximately 187 million; of this, the internet penetration is estimated at over 20 million.

Given the proliferation of internet usage in Pakistan, local citizen journalism portals have also seen a rise in popularity. SeenReport, Gawaahi, Maati TV, and other blogs and websites initiated by local media outlets and independent journalists/bloggers have given Pakistanis with access to the internet the chance to have their voices heard.

Hosh Media, though, has a specific focus as a citizen journalism portal. ‘Hosh’ is an Urdu word that loosely translated means ‘to awaken,’ and that is precisely what it hopes to do. By connecting the blogosphere and traditional reporting in Pakistan, founder and Pakistani journalist, Sahar Habib Ghazi, wanted to create a fresh way to engage the public while infusing news with youthful perspectives and voices.

Ghazi credits her time at Stanford University in California as a John S. Knight Journalism Fellow in 2010 for inspiring her to launch this citizen journalism initiative for Pakistanis.

“I came to Stanford with a proposal that aimed at countering the breaking news oriented tilt of our TV newsrooms,” Ghazi explained. “But the fellowship program exposed me to many exciting narratives on the digital and social media front. Within a few months, I was hooked. I decided I needed to bridge the divide between my people – journalists – and online communities – bloggers, activists and tweeters – in Pakistan. Stanford proved to be the perfect incubator for turning that concept into Hosh.”

While at Stanford, Ghazi met Syed Ali Abbas Zaidi and Shahid Saeed via blogging and tweeting. These two young Pakistanis proved to be vital to Hosh Media’s founding in May 2011, as well as its subsequent development.

Primarily known for his social activism in Pakistan, Zaidi is the portal’s Community Lead, while Saeed, a blogger, helped Ghazi establish the portal’s basic set-up. Saeed now works as an Archivist for Hosh along with Technical Lead Haleema Mehmood, Marketing Lead Farhan Kamal, and Operations Lead Nadia Zaffar.  All 5 employees comprise of the initiative’s core team of young Pakistanis.

“Our contributors – bloggers, students and activists – can now log onto hoshmedia.org and send in their videos, images and thoughts. Our team packages these crowd-sourced contributions into news stories for mainstream networks in Pakistan,” Ghazi stated in a Knight Fellowship talk.

Sahar Habib Ghazi during her Knight Fellowship talk

The role of citizen journalism in Pakistan today is “essential,” according to Ghazi. “The more voices straight from the ground,” she said, “the more representative and democratic our media will be.”

Hosh Media recently added six online journalism tutorials to its website which are short, interesting, well-packaged videos featuring veteran Pakistani journalist Abbas Nasir highlighting important subjects within journalism such as, “Covering Survivors of Abuse,” “Quoting Anonymous Sources,” and “News vs. Opinion,” among other topics. These tutorials serve as a reservoir of information and articulate instruction for budding citizen journalists and bloggers.

“Our larger goal is to make media in Pakistan more representative of the majority of Pakistan – the youth,” said Ghazi. “Two in three Pakistanis have yet to celebrate their thirtieth birthday; we are overwhelmingly a young country, and we believe these young voices need to be on the mainstream media.”

Hosh Media’s content is quickly gaining attention after its first digital article, “The Youth Speaks” was published on the website of the well-known Pakistani daily newspaper DAWN. The piece focused on youth reaction to the death of Osama bin Laden with crowd-sourced videos and text, according to Ghazi.

In response to that criticism citizen journalism lacks of objectivity, Ghazi argues that broadcast journalism in Pakistan can be biased too. “Our goal at Hosh is to take not one citizen report, but many crowd-sourced reports, curate and edit them into an objective, balanced news piece,” Ghazi said. “Take our story ‘The Youth Speaks,’ for example. It starts with a video featuring three individuals saying they don’t believe Osama bin Laden was in Pakistan, followed by another video featuring three individuals critiquing the army and the government’s role in the bin Laden affair. Balance is essential, and that is the value our editorial team adds to our crowd-sourced citizen reports.”

 AudienceScapes

Syndicated from: Sonya Rehman’s Archive

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Rs 8,500 bn corruption mars Gilani tenure: Transparency –>Ansar Abbasi, The News

Posted on 06 February 2012 by Tea Server

Transparency International Pakistan says Gilani tenure has given a loss of Rs 8,500 billions in corruption so far. Still nincompoos and corrupts in government expect people to pay taxes like “responsible” citizens. Yes, people like us who pay taxes despite corruption are responsible and they are responsible for beeing ignorant.

People should go for a collective boycott of taxes and take back the country from these evil ruling elite.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Rs 8,500 bn corruption mars Gilani tenure: Transparency

Source : http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=12258&Cat=13

by Ansar Abbasi

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has lost an unbelievably high amount, more than Rs8,500 billion (Rs8.5 trillion or US$94 billion), in corruption, tax evasion and bad governance during the last four years of Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani’s tenure, Transparency International Pakistan (TIP) claims.

The TIP advisor, Adil Gillani, told The News that the real impact of corruption in the country’s economy is far more than what is generally estimated or what is formally uncovered. He believes that Pakistan does not need even a single penny from the outside world if it effectively checks the menace of corruption and ensures good governance.

It is generally believed that the four years of the present regime under Gilani had been the worst in terms of corruption and bad governance in the country’s history. Past records of corruption were broken and Pakistan started rising in the ranks of the most corrupt nations of the world.

There has been no check on corruption as the anti-corruption institutions like the National Accountability Bureau and Federal Investigation Agency instead of checking corruption have been siding with the corrupt.

These institutions have been helping the corrupt to get off the hook by distorting and mutilating the evidence in favour of the influential accused.
Adil Gillani, the TIP representative, who too has been haunted by the government during these years for producing corruption reports, explained that the TIP pointed out corruption of Rs390 billion in 2008, Rs450 billion in 2009, Rs825 billion in 2010 and Rs1,100 billion in 2011 under the present regime. The total of these identified cases of corruption is Rs2,765 billion.
In addition to this, he explained the following:

The minister of finance of the present regime himself confirmed corruption in FBR of over Rs500 billon per year, which makes the total Rs2,000 billion; Auditor General of Pakistan pointed out Rs315 billion corruption in 2010; Public Accounts Committee recovered Rs115 billion in 30 months till 2011; circular debt is Rs190 million; KESC was given Rs55 billion illegal benefits per annum since 2008; state-owned enterprises like PSO, PIA, Pakistan Steel, Railways, SSGC, SNGC are eating away Rs150-300 billion per annum; tax to GDP ratio in 2008 was 11%, which in 2011 has reduced to 9.1% instead of being increased.

Gillani explained that Pakistan’s Gross Domestic Product is worth US$175 billion and in the light of this the drop of 1.9% in the tax GDP means annual loss of US$ 3.3 billion. This confirms that FBR is losing Rs300 million per annum, which is annual additional loss since 2008 and stands at Rs1,200 billon in four years
The TIP adviser added that India’s tax-GDP ratio is 18%, and at that rate, Pakistan’s tax evasion/corruption in FBR is 9% of $175 billion, which is US$15.5 billion per year, i.e. Rs1,400 billion per year.

It is worth mentioning here that it is not only the Transparency International but there have been different international bodies including the World Bank and world capitals, which have been showing their concern over rising trend of corruption in Pakistan under the Gilani’s regime. It was mounting corruption and extremely bad governance, which even dithered the outside world to offer cash to Pakistan during 2010 and 2011 floods, which devastated different parts of Pakistan and affected millions of people.
At home the corruption became a fashion in such a shameless manner that even the cabinet ministers started openly pointing fingers at each other and even at the highest levels including the prime minister. Some even approached the Supreme Court but despite all this, corruption remained the hallmark of the present regime, which instead of curbing it started defending it in the name of democracy.

Syndicated from: United4justice’s Weblog

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Strong Defense Means Ultimate Survival

Posted on 03 February 2012 by Tea Server

PROFESSOR ALI SUKHANVER What is more important; food or security; health or defence; prosperity or safety; certainly a difficult question to be answered. Today one finds a hurricane of allegations, accusations ultimately forming the shape of suggestions that Pakistan needs not spend a huge amount on its army and the relevant security set-up. Various so-called [...]

Related posts:

  1. China-A Threat to Indian Hegemonic Designs
  2. Indo-Pak Military Expenditures and Global Trends
  3. Dangerous Quest for Arms in South Asia
  4. China becomes world’s second military spender
  5. Celebrating Defense Day with the same fervor



Syndicated from: GeoTauAisay Pakistan

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

India, Pakistan and Democracy

Posted on 01 February 2012 by Tea Server

Raza Habib Raja
Professor Philip Oldenburg is a professor of political science in Columbia University and author of the book titled India, Pakistan, and democracy: solving the puzzle of divergent paths. As an academic, Subcontinent has been his prime area of political research. A few months ago, he was invited to Cornell University where I was privileged to hear his views on a very interesting topic which was why India and Pakistan despite being apparently similar in history and culture have taken divergent paths as far as democracy and role of military are concerned.

First of all Professor Philip made an interesting statement that India’s successful evolution as a democracy is not a “normal” phenomenon but rather an exception whereas Pakistan has evolved the way most of the third world countries with similar characteristics are likely to evolve. Now this contradicts with most of the stuff I hear about the reasons as to why India and Pakistan have taken different trajectories. I have mostly heard that democracy has not evolved simply for the sole reason because military has not allowed it to evolve. Explanation for the difference in India and Pakistan has always been pinned down to only deep conspiracies of the “deep state” against political class.
Now this analysis at least partially disagrees with the overwhelmingly prevalent and rather simplistic explanation according to which democracy does not function solely because Pakistan’s army has always been conspiring against it whereas in India the armed forces have decided to respect the political template of the government.

According to Professor Philip, a country with low literacy rate, weak industrial base and with a colonial legacy is often expected to take the similar trajectory as of Pakistan. He then cited many examples of the countries where military coups have taken place and the institution enjoys great power and privileges.
However, he made an interesting remark that Pakistan in many ways had performed worse and while many other countries (like Bangladesh and Turkey) are gradually shaping towards the ascendency of political class and strengthening of democracy, in Pakistan the political developments are pointing towards the other direction.

So what makes Pakistan a similar and yet in the longer run a “different” case as far as the role of military is concerned? Why the neighbouring India is an exception and why could not Pakistan follow the same trajectory despite the fact that it was carved out of the same British Empire?
Well the reasons are complicated and cannot be solely just attributed to the conspiracies of the military. Besides trying to understand as to why military intervenes, it should be worthwhile to also dwell as to how it is actually able to intervene. In Pakistan’s case the reasons are rooted in:
1) its general cultural and political traits such as low literacy, rural dominance and lack of developed stabilizing as well as independent institutions like Judiciary,
2) the history of Pakistan movement and its early years after coming into being
3) chaos when civilians are in power and their inability to take a decisive action when opportunity presented
4) Urban middleclass impatience and excessive emphasis on “order” which has provided armed interventions a semblance of support
5) Manipulations by the army and the intelligence apparatus

Firstly, one has to understand that military in weak third world country is often the only well-disciplined, centralized and sophisticated institution. It has sophisticated instruments of violence and has a top down chain of command which is seldom if ever broken. Particularly in countries where democratic institution are either nascent or democracy after its introduction leads to chaos, military due to its ability to bring “stability” and restore order often intervenes. Third world has thus witnessed a number of coups and Pakistan by no stretch of imagination is an exception. However, military interventions by no stretch of imagination are good developments, though in the context of tremulous political cultures, understandable .

Military once it intervenes to overthrow the political government becomes a political stakeholder and from that point onwards, takes steps particularly in the constitutional and legal realm, which solidify its acquired political status, powers and privileges. Of course the military is not accountable to the electorate and therefore in the longer run is quite insulated from the normal pressures which a political government has to go through. Military rule seriously undermines the democratic evolution and does not allow the political culture to deepen. It depoliticizes the populace and also creates a state which is not responsive to its people.

In Pakistan unfortunately the genesis of the military rule is actually in the way the Pakistan movement shaped up and the complex interplay of the dynamics of the movement with cultural and political characteristics of the region which eventually became Pakistan.

Compared to Indian freedom movement, Pakistan’s independence movement became a mass movement at a very late stage. Whereas Congress’s birth was in 1885 and it became a mass movement particularly due Gandhi’s efforts by 1920s, Muslim League even in early 1940s had not been successful to garner the same kind of mass support. Ironically the areas where it was actually popular were areas which subsequently became part of India.

It was only in the second half of the decade of 1940s that the Muslim League started to make real appeal to the people of the areas which subsequently became Pakistan.

Muslim League did not attain the political maturity the way Congress did which had gone through several generations of leaders and the political culture was institutionalized in the party as well as the movement headed by it.

This is an important distinction which shaped the respective roles of the military in both the countries. In India the political class was dominant from the beginning and moreover the public perception of the army was not of a saviour as the Indian army had served loyally under the British empire . The entrenched political culture ensured that Indian political landscape made a smooth transition from a movement into a functioning democracy from the word go. Moreover, Nehru remained at the political helm in the initial years providing the much needed political stability under democratic umbrella. Military was never in a position to stage a coup both because the chaos-which often precedes the military coup and at least is the justification the first time- was never there and secondly the army did have an “image” issue due to its close association with the colonial rule. Nehru’s revered and towering status also prevented the development of any militaristic bonapartism.

Pakistan on the other hand was founded in an area where had already been militarized as most of the recruitment was taking place from so called “Martial Races” of Punjab and what is now Khyber Pukhtunkhawa. Moreover the state apparatus was stronger in Punjab and local politicians had to rely a lot on the civil bureaucracy in order to get things “done”. The reliance of political class on the state apparatus in areas falling under West Pakistan was much greater than in areas which later became India.

So when Pakistan came into being, the local politicians, particularly in the rural areas, had already become too entrenched in the practice of looking towards state apparatus to gain privileges and powers rather than rather than through political mechanism consisting of parties, manifestoes and ideology. In rural Punjab, this practice with varying degrees continues to this date.

When Pakistan came into being the Muslim League despite having gained support in the last two years was still not a deeply rooted political party in the area which was West Pakistan. The main leaders of the League actually belonged to the areas which were in India and when they came to Pakistan, they were without the same kind of support. The nationalist movement actually brought leaders in West Pakistan whose roots had been left behind. In addition, Jinnah through charismatic did not live long and during his one year at the helm also did not do much in line with democratic norms. His one year rule was as a Governor General and was highly personalized.

In the initials years army was needed again and again both at the external front (Kashmir front) as well as the internal front (riots of 1953) to restore order. During these times while army’s role strengthened, the political landscape was fraught with chaos and repeated change of governments. The political class in the absence of a stabilizing political leader (Liaquat Ali Khan was shot dead in1951) and a political infrastructure underpinned by proper political culture, could not gain strength.

While government heads kept on changing, the Chief of Army Staff continued to gain power and moreover whereas in India the Chief of Army staff position witnessed at least five different individuals, Pakistan persisted with Ayub Khan. Repeated changes of governments and chaotic situation provided the impetus for the military intervention and when finally military intervened; there was actually a sigh of relief.

The military intervention of 1958 is extremely important as it initiated several things. First, military’s image among the urban middle class (at that time small in number but powerful due to its monopoly over education, and white collared job market) as a saviour was created. From that point onwards, the middleclass, particularly the urban middleclass has seen army in that light particularly when during short stings of democracy the situation gets chaotic. It actually expects army to intervene. Secondly, army’s self-image also enhanced to include itself as the ultimate custodian of the political stability as well. Third, it gave the loudest signal that army was a definite stakeholder and in fact more powerful than all others. So from that point onwards, political class had to factor in army more than any other stakeholder for its own survival.

Although Ayub was personally perhaps a secular but increasingly the army was tutored in Islam in order to provide it with an ideological fabric to bolster its combative zeal. Increasingly the army also started to see itself as the ultimate custodian of the ideological frontier also. It was in fact during the Ayub tenure that army also started to make overtures to the religious outfits for both external and a domestic objectives, a trend which over time has only increased .

The ascendency of army given the unique circumstances of Independence, earlier turmoil, the “expectations” of the urban middleclass, and the work done during Ayub era to solidify its status as political power, was difficult to check but nevertheless there were several opportunities which could have been availed.

Given army’s “respect” as a saviour, the best time to curtail army’s role as a political force is at the time when it has been dishonoured or humiliated. However, for that the political class besides removing the head of the armed forces also needs to exercise maturity in its own conduct. This is essential in order to dispel army’s potential role as the “saviour” of the last resort, a role which is largely perceived by the urban middleclass.

Unfortunately Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto due to his personal conduct and “I am above the law “ attitude squandered the chance. Bhutto ruled in a capricious manner, and used security forces to terrorize his rivals. Moreover, he alienated the urban middleclass too much due to his personal conduct and dictatorial traits. He rigged the elections and once again it was urban middleclass which was in complete resentment as ZAB had taken several steps to displease them and supplanted those with his style of rule. The “movement” against the election rigging was primarily an urban bourgeoisie movement and during those times there was a resurgence of army’s image also. The leaders of the movement were in fact giving overtures to the armed forces to intervene and “rescue” Pakistan. Army, at that time while apparently supporting Bhutto, was at the same time also in contact with the opposition and was cleverly plotting a coup. When army finally intervened on that fateful night, it was not only in accordance with its own institutional interests but also the interests of the urban middleclass.

This point is essential here because the urban middleclass actually has historically provided the armed interventions a semblance of popular support. Although urban middleclass is not monolithic and it would incorrect to assume that it can actually think like a unified orgasm but by and large this class is anti-democratic and apolitical in its orientation. This class is upwardly mobile, prefers stability over chaos and has been successfully tutored in a nationalist brand of civic nationalism. In Pakistan’s case the brand of civic nationalism has Islam as an important ingredient coupled with inherent negation towards plurality. Civic nationalism here tries to promote a strong centre and homogeneity or oneness. This brand of civic nationalism is strongest in the urban middle class as it is cultivated chiefly through education and then further reinforced by mass media. Further on this brand of nationalism also places strong emphasis on Pakistan’s place in the Islamic world and also in the global context.

Army, particularly the officer cadre is chiefly drawn from the middleclass and its ideological thrust is quite identical to that of the urban middleclass. So besides the deep suspicion about “corrupt” politicians and “chaotic” democracy, another major reason that urban middleclass likes army is its own ideological thrust resonates closely with that of army. Consequently despite major blunders army’s respect remains high. Even when it has suffered a blow it has buoyed again.

In some ways, it is the expectations of the urban middleclass and the pedestal on which it by and large holds the army that the latter finds additional incentives to keep a “check” on politicians.

And then there is the case of almost complete ownership of foreign policy by the army which was taken over during Zia’s time. Of course Zia was the head of the government also but the espionage activities of the army and ISI during the Afghan war made it the most important stakeholder. Once Benazir came into power she quickly had to resign to the fact that foreign policy was not an area where a civilian government could have much leeway.

Over the years, even under the façade of civilian governments, army has been running the show. Foreign policy particularly its terms of engagement with “foes” like India and “friends” like USA has become the sole domain of the army. It is from here that army draws its most strength and even its reason for existence and it won’t allow any sort of “interference” from the civilian government.

Over the years, army has ensured that Pakistan double deals with the United States, constantly adopts a hostile posture towards India and pursues the policy of strategic depth in Afghanistan. For these objectives, military and its intelligence apparatus has constantly courted militant organizations which at times have gone out of control like a Frankenstein monster only to at times turn against itself.

It is here that military simply does not listen to the concerns of the civilian governments and in fact won’t hesitate to pressurize it through back door means and even mount a coup. In 1999, it deeply embarrassed Nawaz Sharif government by initiating Kargil war while he was trying to make peace initiatives towards India. And it is agitated against Zardari led government for being too cosy with Washington (though these charges are hardly credible).

Unfortunately USA has also more or less accepted the dominance of military and has adopted the tactic of directly dealing with the military at times bypassing the civilian governments. And of course all the military dictatorships have been supported by the US which found it easier and convenient to deal with them and were ready to ignore “trivialities” like democracy.
In fact Hussain Haqqani’s masterpiece ( one of the most extraordinary books I have ever read) also makes the same point that USA in its desire of convenience found it easier to deal with military.

Turning a blind eye policy adopted by the USA has eventually resulted in military being the party they have to negotiate with even when it is not cooperating and indulging in double games. Civilian governments virtually are irrelevant.

It is hold over foreign policy and terms of engagement with critical countries like India, United States and Afghanistan which military guards even more than its finances. The entire intelligence apparatus is dedicated towards this end and if a civilian government tries to assert its authority in this domain, it pays the price.

Can we break this hold? Yes, it can be broken but for that politicians too have to show maturity and respect rule of law. They also need to show unity instead of cheap opportunism when the opportunity to weaken military presents itself. My mind immediately goes back to what happened when Osama Bin Laden was killed. Instead of having a united front, Mr. Zardari was keen on creating a rift between army and Nawaz Sharif for short sighted political gains. That opportunity was lost. And subsequently Mr. Sharif actually went to Supreme Court in Memo scandal despite the fact that the military establishment was targeting him also and if democracy were to be derailed, he too will be a loser. However, in Mr. Nawaz sharif’s head nothing mattered more than Zardari’s scalp.

We cannot wrestle away the power unless we show unity and an unshakable belief in democracy. However that belief in democracy is also underpinned by the way major political actors govern when in power and also engage with each other. Urban middleclass does not love army just for the sake of loving it. It likes army (rightly or wrongly is a separate issue) because it restores order and since it is politically insulated therefore gives an impression of merit. Army needs chaos as a reason to intervene. It needs political governments to fail to ensure its hegemony. It wants political class to be riddled with internal rifts.

What the political parties (the two main parties) can do is to at least ensure that they govern properly and ensure rule of law. They need to be united on the fact that they would not conspire against each other and will not try to seek army’s help for derailing the other.

Remember that it is no longer feasible for the army to directly rule the country and therefore the chances of an old fashioned coup are very rare. The chances of a complete roll back of the system are slim and therefore the political parties can take decisive steps provided they are united and get their act together.

Syndicated from: Pak Tea House

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

GailForce: Department of Defense Budget Cuts- Hold On It’s Coming!

Posted on 01 February 2012 by Tea Server

2,500 years ago the warrior philosopher Sun Zsu said:

“The art of war is of vital importance to the State. It is a matter of life and death,
a road to safety or to ruin. Therefore, it is a subject that must be thoroughly
studied.”

I start out with a quote from the old guy because the Defense Department folks are tasked with the difficult problem of designing a military that protects against 21st Century threats in an era of fiscal hardship. The challenges they face are not just financial but also in identifying what are the threats? Some are fairly obvious like North Korea and Iran and its “possible” nuclear weapon development program. I put possible in parenthesis because there are “declared” nuclear powers and those nations we suspect may have or are in the process of trying to develop nuclear weapons.

There are many other potential problems. Just because Bin Laden is gone does not mean terrorism will go away. Terrorism was a problem before Al Qaeda and it will remain one after that group is wiped out. The issue will always be which terrorists groups only have the capability of “trash talk” and which groups or lone individuals are real threats. Cyber also presents an ongoing threat which so far has not resulted in a Cyber Pearl Harbor because of the hard work of countless people working to counter the situation but much still remains to be done.

I initially wanted to name my book A Woman’s War, War On Any Given Day, because as I worked in military intelligence I knew if the intelligence community didn’t get it right war could erupt on any day. There are any numbers of potential flash points but it’s difficult to predict if, when and/or which ones will erupt. Speaking before a conference in San Diego last week, Marine Corps Lt. Gen George Flynn, Director, J-7, Joint Staff, speaking on potential threats said, “We guess wrong 100% of the time.” This is why I consider the concept of “reversibility”, one of the points mentioned in the Obama administrations new defense policy, probably the most important part of the strategy. Basically as I understand it if we have “guessed” wrong we can reverse our defense policy and strategies as needed.

George Little and Captain John Kirby. (Department of Defense)

This brings me to the main topic of today’s blog, the defense budget. Last week I participated in a Department of Defense Bloggers Roundtable With Dr. George Little, Pentagon Press Secretary, and Captain John Kirby, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Media Operations, on the subject: “Programmatic Preview of
the FY 2013 Defense Budget”.

Dr. Little opened the proceedings by stating the budget decisions “flowed from the strategic guidance that the department issued earlier this month…And that was the mechanism that secretary and other senior department officials insisted on, and that’s how we view these budget decisions…the Congress of the United States, through the Budget Control Act last summer, required that the department find nearly $500 billion in savings over the next 10 years. So we have undertaken a multi-month effort to define a strategy based way ahead for framing the budget decisions that we’re starting to see come out. We’ve kept in mind the men and women of the U.S. military. We want to make sure that we don’t break faith with them.”

Here is the guidance they were working on as presented in the January 2012 Department of Defense publication Defense Budget Priorities and Choices:

“I. Rebalance force structure and investments toward the Asia–‐Pacific and Middle East
regions while sustaining key alliances and partnerships in other regions
II. Plan and size forces to be able to defeat a major adversary in one theater while
denying aggression elsewhere or imposing unacceptable costs
III. Protect key investments in the technologically advanced capabilities most needed for
the future, including countering anti–‐access threats
IV. No longer size active forces to conduct large and protracted stability operations while retaining the expertise of a decade of war
V. To the extent possible, structure major adjustments in a way that best allows for
their reversal or for regeneration of capabilities in the future if circumstances
change “

Last Thursday, the day before the bloggers roundtable, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and Army General Martin E. Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff announced the major changes. Panetta said there was a need to make $487 billion in cuts over the next 10 years. The budget request for 2013 is $525 billion with an additional $88 million for overseas contingency operations. Last year’s budget request was $531 billion plus $115 billion for overseas contingency operations.
Some of the major changes are a reduction in the size of the Army from 570,000 in 2010 to 490,000 by 2017. The Marines will go from 202,000 in 2010 to 182,000 by 2017. The Air Force will loose some of its transport aircraft, while the Navy gets to keep all 11 of its aircraft carriers and all of its amphibious ships but will loose some of its older cruisers.

Captain Kirby provided some more information on what the proposed cuts mean to the Navy:

“…there are some platforms in the fleet that are going to be curtailed in the near term, in
terms of the buys. And some of them, the purchases are going to be pushed a little bit beyond the future years’ defense plan — in other words, beyond the next five years.
But I think it’s also important to remember that we’re still at the end of the FYDP going to have a fleet that is roughly the same size as it is as you and I speak today — over 280 ships — so certainly, still the biggest, most capable navy in the world. And … while we may not have the same number of decks in some categories of some classes of ships that we do right now, we’re very comfortable that the — that what we will have will be commensurate with our Fleet Marine Force requirements. I mean, as the Marine Corps gets smaller, to the tune of about 20,000 Marines, there’s — we want to — they want to get back to expeditionary amphibious warfare, as does the Navy. But as the Marine Corps
gets smaller, so, too, will, probably, get smaller the requirement for sealift for them and for support. So we understand there’s a risk there, but we’re very comfortable that we’re able to mitigate that risk.”

I asked was there any provision in the budget to finance Black Swan (unpredicted bad events) in the budget. Dr. Little responded:

“…that’s something that we grapple with all the time in the national security community. I would not be credible if I said to all of you today that we could perfectly crystal ball the future. That is simply impossible. That being said, we think we have an understanding of the near-term strategic horizon and where the threats are likely to come from. And we’re adapting to be able to meet those threats. Now we have factored in the possibility of surprise. As we’ve gone through this strategic review and the budget decisions, we’re preserving capabilities that enable agility — rapidly deployable forces, the most advanced technology to be able to account for and put capabilities against any challenges that come our way — any unanticipated challenges that come our way in the future. So I don’t know that we have a specific fund set up for that. That’s really something kind of that we believe we need to account for across the defense budget, because we know that we can’t always perfectly predict what’s going to occur. So your point is one that is well-taken, and I — and I appreciate it. And the bottom-line answer is: absolutely. We need to preserve the mix of skill sets and capabilities and of course people. People are the heart of our enterprise here. Without our people, the rest of it falls away. And we need to make sure that we’re ready for whatever comes down the pike.”

One of the bloggers brought up what he called the “monkey in the room”; the issue of health care for retirees and did the proposed health care (Tricare is the military health provider) cuts break faith with the retiree community. In the spirit of disclosure I have to remind the reader I am a military retiree. Here’s the response:

“Captain Kirby: these TRICARE fees, as you know, have not gone up since they’ve — since they were first implemented for our retirees. And the only retirees affected by this are those that are under 65. And therefore most — and most retirees under 65 are working and have other means of income and oftentimes have health care plans in conjunction with that civilian employment of theirs that can help offset their health care plans and needs. We understand that any change to compensation and health care fees is an emotional thing. And we understand that there’s — there is an impact. But we really believe that this was the right thing to do for — to help us get control of spiraling health care costs and to keep — to keep pace with the kind of — with the kind of commitments we — that we have to our people, our retirees, and realizing that they have other — these retirees under 65 have other options as well. Now, I say another thing that — you know, you talked about breaking faith. We would be breaking faith with our retirees and our active-duty if we didn’t make some of these difficult decisions because health care costs and the cost of personnel, which run roughly 60 (percent) to 70 percent of the department’s budget year to year, can very well eat you alive if you don’t try to take care of it. If we don’t try to do something to stem that, we’re going to — it would
force us to cut back on other things that are absolutely vital to the force, like training and readiness.”

I challenged the assumption that all military retirees under 65 were working and had other health care programs by telling Dr. Little and Captain Kirby I was under 65, self employed and had no other health insurance. I also told them I had undergone 3 surgeries since September. I suggested they do a survey with retirees before implementing any new health care policy. General Dempsey and Secretary of Defense Panetta say no new health care policy will affect those that are medically retired from the current conflicts. I believe if they go back on promises they’ve made to military retirees of my generation, they’re setting a precedent that might encourage future administrations to go back on promises to this current generation. Think I’ll end here. As always my views are my own.

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Husain Haqqani, former Pakistan envoy to US, allowed to travel abroad

Posted on 31 January 2012 by Tea Server

By Richard Leiby for The Washington Post

Husain Haqqani, Pakistan’s former ambassador to the United States, was permitted to travel abroad Monday by the nation’s Supreme Court after two months of fending off treason allegations over his purported involvement in a mysterious memo that sought Washington’s help to neuter Pakistan’s powerful military.

The court ruling indicated that authorities seem to have lost interest in continuing to probe Haqqani’s role in the scandal, known here as Memogate, which at one point threatened to bring down the civilian leadership of this coup-prone country.

Haqqani, a confidant of President Asif Ali Zardari, was forced to resign, recalled to Islamabad and ordered not to travel abroad after a Pakistani American tycoon, Mansoor Ijaz, alleged that the diplomat engineered an unsigned missive to the Pentagon hoping to block a coup in the turbulent days after the killing of Osama bin Laden.

Haqqani denied involvement and said Ijaz, a onetime acquaintance, cooked up the memo.

In an e-mail to Agence France-Presse, Haqqani said: “I am glad that the Supreme Court has restored my right to travel, which had been rescinded without any charges being filed against me.” He added that he planned to join his family in the United States.

Memogate prompted a showdown between the army and the civilian leadership, which technically oversees the military, and brought an already shaky government to the verge of collapse. The fissures between the two sides now seem to have been repaired, and the incessant political and media interest in the scandal has waned in recent days.

One reason seemed to be the dwindling credibility of Ijaz, who has yet to appear to testify about his role in the memo, saying he fears for his safety. The bulk of evidence has come from Ijaz, who released logs of what he says are BlackBerry message conversations between him and Haqqani.

Since his return to Islamabad, Haqqani has stayed within the walls of the official government residence, saying he feared for his life.

Earlier this month, U.S. Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) issued a statement condemning the “harassment” of Haqqani, a former journalist and Boston University professor. They called him a “principled advocate” for Pakistan.

Despite allowing the erstwhile diplomat to travel, the Supreme Court did not drop the matter entirely: It granted a two-month extension to the judicial commission that is probing Memogate. And Haqqani’s lawyer had to guarantee that the former envoy would appear before the court if called, on four days’ notice.

A separate parliamentary investigation is also underway.

Filed under: Afghanistan, Democracy, Pakistan, Pakistan Army, Pakistanis, United States Tagged: Asif Ali Zardari, Husain Haqqani, Mansoor Ijaz, Memogate, Osama Bin Laden, Pakistan, PPP

Syndicated from: Pakistanis for Peace

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Challenge the Hegemony of the Pak-Army

Posted on 30 January 2012 by Tea Server

By Danish Khan:

In the apprentice of political economy, there are distinct theories to elucidate the lack of development in the developing countries. Some political economists point towards the colonial days to trace back the roots of the contemporary social and political institutions of the developing countries, while others rest blame on the geography of the developing world, and the variance to the doctrine of the free market capitalism as some of the possible sources of the nuance. The inclusion and the close examination of the social and political institutions of the developing countries are certainly worth discussing, while I cannot say same about the other posed explanations. One of the few possible explanations of the developing countries to being socially, politically and economically astern are their historical “extractive colonial institutions” which were established during the colonial times, and in most developing countries, they have stayed alive and functional in one way or other, even after the official withdrawal of the former colonial powers. Colossal wealth disparity, lack of modern infrastructure, and the diminutive industrialization are some of the cardinal features which have differentiated these countries from the developed part of the world. Certainly, I find legitimacy and rationale in this “institutional” framework explanation to understand the lack of development in most developing countries, and especially in Pakistan.  Comprehending the contemporary abject situation of Pakistan in the paradigm of the “Extractive Colonial Institutions” certainly helps us to understand this complex phenomenon of persistent under-development in Pakistan.

The abysmal socio-economic conditions in Pakistan are not a mere result of certain dissolute and adulterate politicians in power, although they are a part of the problem, but not a core problem. In Pakistan, the mainstream media and right-wing political parties tend to amalgamate all the problems in one basket, and then they dump that basket on the democratically elected government or generally on the politicians of the country. While during all this ambiguous and miserable socio-economic situation of the country, one institution of the country allays itself, and it is able to keep itself insulated from the brutal criticism of the mainstream media and the mainstream political parties. To not make it a riddle, I am talking about the Pakistani Army, if one institution that can help us in rationalizing the contemporary socio-politico and economic conditions of Pakistan; it would be none other than the Pak Army.

Although most liberals in Pakistan strongly condemn Martial Law, and any interference of military in the political affairs, but not many liberal commentators risk to go beyond this popular stance. By that I am referring to the fact that, military certainly makes things worse off by disrupting political process and violating the constitutional framework, but even during the epoch of the civil rule, when there is democratically elected government, military continues to play the integral role in formulating the socio-economic and foreign policy of the country. And this hegemonic power runs on the blood and sweat of the people of the Pakistan, figures vary around depending on the source, but most statisticians, politicians and economists would agree that around 75 percent of the national budget goes in to the tummies of the military of Pakistan. Furthermore, the huge sum of US dollars ends up in the hands of the army, and it makes the Pak Army one of the supreme and fortified post-colonial institutions of the country. The Army of Pakistan is not just an army anymore, it has become a one of the most powerful and hegemonic social, political and financial institution of the country. One might say, what’s wrong with that? Well, the constitution of the country, clearly defines concrete role of the army, and according to constitution, army is not supposed to be a real estate enterprise and those who have read Ayesha Siddiqa’s Military Inc., they do know what I am talking about. When military of a country turns in to Military Incorporated, then it should be imminent to the rational people from where the problems are originating. The narration of completely flawed and lethargic ideologies like, “Two Nation theory”, and “a persistent threat from our neighboring state India” have been the popular rhetoric of the military, and they have launched their political wing in the form of religious parties and ISI, and the right-wing religious forces second every single notion made by the Pak Army, and they spread and impose the word of the army on average citizen by amalgamating it with the religious sentiments of the people.

The assiduous people of Pakistan are sick and tired of their fathomless lives; it is quite pleasing and apposite that most folks in Pakistan are demanding a change. But unfortunately, the mainstream political parties, and the newly emerging political force like Tehreek-e-Insaaf are not challenging a status quo by questioning the social and political role of the military. On contrary, they are focusing on the peripheral issues, i.e. corruption, Zardari, etc. Thus, anybody who understands the socio-economic structure of the country finds it nothing but a mere rhetoric when Tehreek-e-Insaaf shouts out for a change and revolution. The change cannot be realized in Pakistan, unless the hegemony and absolute power of the military is not challenged. The dismal lives of the people of Pakistan cannot be altered, unless we transform and substitute the “extractive colonial institutions” with our own new institutions. The people of Pakistan cannot afford to write a hefty check to the military of the Pakistan to venture in to real estate, and other business ventures, i.e. cement industry, cereal industry, etc. It is the time that oppressed and downtrodden masses of the country challenge the extractive institutions which have been the dominant source of their distress and affliction. In our contemporary political situation of the country, it is only possible through a grass-root social and political movement of the tyrannized and exploited classes.

Danish Khan is a social and political activist, and a final year student at University of Utah, US, studying Economics and International Studies.

Syndicated from: Pak Tea House

Comments (0)

Tags: , , ,

Our Nation Our Leaders Our Country- Pakistan

Posted on 28 January 2012 by Tea Server

There is a saying, A Nation is awarded with those leaders which it deserve. A very clamorous truth that we all know but shun it. Today our incumbent leaders are perfectly epitomized as our nation. The nation which has transcended almost towards a stalemate due to its callous attitude towards their life. Our youth is the future of this country and it should be serious about the current nadir

Syndicated from: PAKISTAN DEFENCE BLOG

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Indian Army Forced to Eat Rotten Food in Camps

Posted on 26 January 2012 by Tea Server

New Delhi – Pointing out that the Army marches on its stomach, India’s Public Accounts Committee of Parliament has taken exception to its ration supply chain practices and cited several “glaring deficiencies and inadequacies.”
Observing that in certain cases dry rations were consumed by troops even 6-28 months after the expiry of their normal Estimated Storage Life (ESL), the PAC in its

Syndicated from: PAKISTAN DEFENCE BLOG

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

25 January, 2012 07:37

Posted on 25 January 2012 by Tea Server

Islamabad Tonight - 24th January 2012 Islamabad Tonight - 24th January 2012
Watch Now Islamabad tonight on aaj news - 24th january 2012
http://www.awaztoday.com/playshow/19434/Islamabad-Tonight-24th-January-2012.aspx
http://www.zemtv.com/2012/01/24/islamabad-tonight-on-aaj-news-24th-january-2012/
http://www.friendskorner.com/forum/f247/video-islamabad-tonight-nadeem-malik-24th-january-2011-a-261507/
http://www.pakistanherald.com/Program/Islamabad-Tonight-January-24-2012-Nadeem-Malik-9465

ISLAMABAD TONIGHT

WITH NADEEM MALIK

24-01-2012

TOPIC- BRANNIGANS OF PAKISTAN POLITICS

GUESTS- TARIQ AZEEM, PROFESSOR IBRAHIM KHAN, ABDUL QADIR BALOCH, JUSTICE TARIQ MAHMOOD, SHARJEEL MEMON

TARIQ AZEEM OF PML said that may be there is some story behind Mansoor Ajaz denial to come to Pakistan. He said that the problems of the people are not being solved and memo case has been postponed for another two weeks. He said that if we look at the related issues with memo it turns into a very important matter. He said that it seems like there is a story behind the curtain other wise army chief submitted his signed affidavit to memogate commission.

He said that Nawaz Sharif and Imran Khan are demanding early elections so there is a possibility of elections this year.

PROFESSOR IBRAHIM KHAN OF JI said that the memo is a reality because American officials have confirmed it. He said that the army is not giving any importance to memogate at the moment and witness of the case is not coming either. He said that 2nd of May incident; Mehran base attack and Salala check post attacks are more important than the memogate scandal. He said that army is a real plaintiff in memogate scandal but is not taking any interest in it.

He said that there is a possibility of elections in the country in October or November this year. He said that to set a care taker set up three months before the elections is now part of the constitution. He said that the President and Prime Minister are the leaders of their parties so care taker set up should replace them also. He said that it is a peculiar situation that SC and election commission having a conflict. He said that the media is a reflection of the society and will only show what is happening. He said that if army chief will raise the issue of memogate media definitely will talk about it.

ABDUL QADIR BALOCH OF PML-N said that the problem of PML-N was to form a commission on memogate and not to resolve it. He said that now it is up to memogate commission that how to resolve this problem.

JUSTICE (R) TARIQ MAHMOOD said that Haqqani will not provide any evidence against himself and Mansoor Ajaz has to come to Pakistan. He said that as long Mansoor Ajaz statement is not taken nothing will happen in the memogate issue.

SHARJEEL MEMON OF PPPP said that Mansoor Ajaz tried to astray Pakistani people and now every body should forget about it. He said that we should not pay any attention to memogate issue because of Mansoor Ajaz reputation of the past.

He said that Peoples Party will hold elections only after its constitutional limit is over. He said that Peoples Party will hold free and fair elections according to the constitution. He said that media should talk about the issues of the people instead of irrelevant things. He said that the memo was a balloon and it has been deflated.

Filed under: CURRENT AFFAIRS

Comments (0)

Register your blog:

Enter your blog address below to become a part of the TeaBreak network.

About TeaBreak:

TeaBreak.pk is a blog aggregator that syndicates pakistani blogs and categorizes them appropriately. Our mission is to give our readers a break from work and let them enjoy their blog time. And we are doing this by bringing all the popular blogs of Pakistan on one platform.