After spending seven good days in Lahore I am convinced that cultural hub of the country is one of the most beautiful cities of Pakistan, chief minister Punjab despite having majority of flaws in his governance especially in health, education and law and order sectors has successfully maintained the beautification of the city. Unlike any other provincial Government, the Government of Punjab strictly follows no graffiti policy and this is the reason why Lahore’s walls are as clean as any civilized city of the world. Lahore’s roads despite not-so-broad have managed to accommodate smooth traffic flow with strict traffic laws, thanks to Chaudhries for setting up a bench mark in traffic management sector.

Compared to Karachi when we get out of Airport premises the huge bill board of Shahi Syed followed by Sunni Tehreek, Pirpagara and Sindhi nationalist leaders giving visitors a feel of terrorized city, Lahore’s way from Airport is covered with lush green and yellow mustard fields. What a beautiful sight it is. Although this is just one of the few good aspects of Lahore, majority of homes in Lahore have smaller walls which show people are not much concerned about the overall security situation. Not to forget that Karachites generally set up broken glass pieces or pointed iron needles on the walls to protect homes from thieves.

People of Lahore are fond of eating and so do Karachites but latter seems more concerned about eating good food rather than consuming everything for the sake of eating what I found in Lahoris.

I found Lahore too provincial; too many Punjabis however Karachi gives a feel of true cosmopolitan city. Its people speak in English, write in Urdu, think in Baluchi and dream in Sindhi.  Perhaps language is the reason why people in Lahore live with unity. Karachi’s complex demographics with no check and balance allows everyone to do whatever in the garb of “Karachi for everyone”.

People of Lahore love Mustafa Kamal but hate MQM although Karachi’s mainstream political party has managed to open offices in various cities of Punjab. Generally the educated and urban Punjabis keep soft corner for MQM but not majority.  They love MQM’s well versed work force, organization and management.

Lahoris would also show you sky scrappers and whatever shopping malls they have and ask whether such things exist in Karachi.

But the best thing I found about Lahoris is their civic sense, you won’t see them spitting Paan or Gutka on the roads or elsewhere.  Another interesting thing I observed is there is hardly any cab services running  in Lahore, earlier I thought that the fortunate city with the help of Chief Minister Punjab would be rich with Yellow cabs but to my surprise either they are parked at homes or repainted for private usage.

Chief Minister Punjab however is passionate to resolve the transportation issues for Lahories and initiating various CNG bus programs ignoring the fact that city bears at least three days off for CNG.

In short Karachi is a huge city trying to accommodate multiple cultures; it’s rich, fast, pulsating and dynamic. But the recent developments in Lahore including the new better and culturally rich food street near Badshahi mosque makes it a city to talk about.

This last and final part summarizes the conclusions and learnings that can be drawn from the report.

Primarily, the responsibility rests on the sheer failure of civil administration to control this matter in time, despite a multitude of alarming signals from all over the country. Having said that, a key player in the entire game was the Muslim League, which influenced and compromised the decision making process of civil government, to suit their own political agendas. Sounds familiar? It also jumped into bed with the Ahrar to piggy bag on a cause which if ignited was a cause close to the hearts of general Muslim population. Sounds familiar again? The fact that Chief Minister of Punjab gave in to the demands of Ahrar simply demonstrates his willingness to support the cause for political gains and his utter disrespect of human life and dignity.

One statement by Jutice Munir which is still so relevant states “And it is our deep conviction that if the Ahrar had been treated as a pure question of law and order, without any political considerations, one District Magistrate and one Superintendent of Police could have dealt with them…… But if democracy means the subordination of law and order to political ends—then Allah knoweth best and we end the report”.

However, in the report, a large bulk of responsibility is attributed to primarily Majlis-e-Ahrar and then all the religious parties which under the garb of a religious cause moved to gather political power. While they may aspire to enforce the Islamic theocratic principles in the country the sheer amount of disagreements and lack of understanding and alignment indicates that the objective is clearly political and not religious. The consistently threatening attitude towards human beings, government and anyone who was in disagreement with them reveals their inherent disrespect for the law and order and humanity. While some of us may argue that the religion stands above all but it seems from the replies and the ideology that the Ulama hold themselves above all, and not the religion.

Islam emphasizes the doctrine that life in this world is not the only life given to man but that eternal life begins after the present existence comes to an end, and that the status of a human being in the next world will depend upon his beliefs and actions in this world. While we are clear as Muslims that we should strive for a human conduct which ensures a better status in the next world but what we are not sure of is that whether the state has a responsibility to do that as well.

Do we really need someone else to defend our faith and beliefs? Do we really need a protector in shape of these self proclaimed Ulama or religious leaders? And protection against what? I know I hold a responsibility to God and I would like to be left alone for its accountability.

My fear is that we haven’t learned anything from what has transpired in the past and knowingly we will continue to repeat the same mistakes and follies. Ulama have the biggest responsibility to bring about harmony in a society and they nowadays are the harbingers of hate and disgust. Speeches against Ahmadis still continue, persecution of non-Muslims still goes on, some brave voices are silenced through aggression, politics and extremism play a hand and glove role, civil administration is completely politicized. Imagine the conundrum the government now faces when a banned organization holds a Difa-e-Pakistan conference in Lahore or a hard hitting sectarian hate speech is delivered in Karachi. Should the government carry out the job it is supposed to execute as per constitution or should it protect its own politically aligned strategic interest groups? 60 years onwards we can expect to see the same behavior all over again…BUT we need to change and we need to evolve…!

Quoting the report once again:

“Pakistan is being taken by the common man, though it is not, as an Islamic State. This belief has been encouraged by the ceaseless clamor for Islam and Islamic State that is being heard from all quarters since the establishment of Pakistan.

And as long as we rely on the hammer when a file is needed and press Islam into service to solve situations it was never intended to solve, frustration and disappointment must dog our steps.

The sublime faith called Islam will live even if our leaders are not there to enforce it. It lives in the individual, in his soul and outlook, in all his relations with God and men, from the cradle to the grave, and our politicians should understand that if Divine commands cannot make or keep a man a Musalman, their statutes will not.”

This 3 part series recounts religion based disorder that unfolded in Punjab, particularly Lahore, between 1950-53 resulting in several hundred deaths, violent street agitation and imposition of first martial law in our history. It also covers the religious, political and administrative deficiencies in the system which led to general deterioration of law and order, and ultimately the fall of both central and provincial governments.

The first part is factual, second is ideological and last is analytical. The source of this series is the “REPORT of THE COURT OF INQUIRY constituted under PUNJAB ACT II OF 1954 to enquire into the Punjab disturbances of 1953” also known as Justice Munir report.

In the beginning of March 1953, widespread disturbances broke out in the Punjab and these took so alarming a turn and assumed such a menacing form that in several places the military had to be called in, and Pakistan’s first Martial Law had to be proclaimed, which remained in force till the middle of May 1953.

The disturbances were the direct result of the rejection by Khwaja Nazim-ud-Din, the then Prime Minister of Pakistan, of an ultimatum by a deputation of the ulama constituted by the All-Pakistan Muslim Parties Convention. The ultimatum was to the effect that if within a month the Ahmadis were not declared a non-Muslim minority and Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan, the Foreign Minister who is an Ahmadi and other Ahmadis occupying key posts in the State, are not removed from their offices, the Ulama would resort to direct action (rast iqdam).

It all started with an organization called Majlis-i-Ahrar which was part and parcel of Congress in Pre-partition days and was vehemently against formation of Pakistan. It conferred the titles like Palidistan / Khakistan to Pakistan and Kafir-e Azam to Quaid-e-Azam. The establishment of Pakistan came as a great disappointment to the Ahrar because all power passed to the Congress or the Muslim League, and no scope for activity was left for the Ahrar in India or in Pakistan. The new Muslim State came to them as a shock, disillusioned them of their ideology and finished them as a political party. Have being sidelined and seeing the level of mistrust against them in the new state, in middle of 1948, they announced their decision to cease functioning as a political party and to continue their future activity as a religious or tableeghi group. Soon to gather traction and attention, Ahmadis started featuring in their conferences and demand was raised to declare Ahmadis as non-Muslims, remove Chaudhri Zafrullah (who was nominated as Foreign Minister by Quaid-e-Azam) and all other Ahmadis from Public office.

At a time when Pakistan was struggling for resources on day to day basis and faced a multitude of challenges, the Ahrar made Ahmadis their sole focus of speeches invoking feelings of hatred and disgust amongst public against the minority. The first incident occurred when a certain major Mahmud was lynched by participants of a conference on Khatm-e-Nabuwat. No one claimed responsibility and no one was arrested. The adviser for the law made the following despicable comment “They have made the Ahmadis the target of their attack in order to gain a hearing from the public. They are trying to exploit the religious feelings of an average Musalman against the Ahmadis ; but I do not think it would be advisable to take any action against the Ahrar for the present as the Muslims are very touchy on the point of Ahmadism and to prosecute the Ahrar for their vituperations against the Ahmadis, would, give them an air of martyrdom in the eyes of public which they do not deserve. I would not, therefore, advise any action against the Ahrar leaders for the present”.

In the next few years Ahrar ramped up their rhetoric, delivered hate speeches and circulated booklets/pamphlets across the country. They calculated that if they could arouse public feeling and the masses against the Ahmadis, nobody would dare oppose them and that the more the opposition to this activity of theirs, the more popular they would become. They issued fatwas against Ahmadis, declared them Kafirs, called them traitors to Pakistan, called them Indian spies, while repeating their original 3 demands. Calls to Muslims such as “not only be nimazies but also Ghazies had no other meaning but to say that Ahmadis should be put to sword.”

The civil government machinery did keep an eye on this development over the years and several references and letters were written to Chief Secretary and Chief Minister by the Central Intelligence department, department of Law and the Police. One of the reports by DIG CID reported “I will be failing in my duty if I do not point out to Government that the atmosphere aroused by Ahrar leaders is pregnant with dangerous possibilities and may lead to individual cases of violence against Ahmadis”. Several similar toned letters and notes can be found in records which were sent to higher authorities in government through formal and official channels. But to no avail…

The maximum that was done was a series of warnings issued to Ahrar leaders both in letter and in person. While the Ahrar leaders agreed to adhere to warnings in principle but in practice they completely ignored the warnings and continued with their agenda. Later on, they openly defied warnings and instructions by Police and justified their actions by blaming the government for its inaction.

More murders of Ahmadis followed across Punjab during 1950-51 and Ahmadi mosques were burnt. In some cases, even a few non-Ahmadis were killed as some people misled the mobs to settle their own personal grievances.

On the political front, Ahrar aligned itself with the Muslim League as a tit-for-tat arrangement. Ahrar brought the goodwill of the general Muslim public who always takes pleasure in satire against the cult of new prophet hood in Islam while Muslim League brought support of a popular ruling organization.

In 1952, after careful consideration, Government decided that in the general interest of the public peace and tranquility, neither the Ahrar nor the Ahmadis should be permitted to hold public meetings under any name or garb. In a clever move, the Ahrar shifted the venue of the meetings from public places to mosques which were under the control of Imams etc. The Imams were subsequently instructed by government not to become a party to violation but it didn’t work. On several occasions, public meetings were held in a Sargodha and Gujranwala mosques in violation of section 144 of criminal law with the usual ranting. Some of the people responsible were also prosecuted in court and sentenced to imprisonment but most of the senior leaders were released on bail.

Soon the Ahrar began to confound the issue by making it a grievance that for purely religious activities inside the mosques the worshippers were being arrested and prosecuted and that the Government was thus encroaching on people’s religious beliefs and observances. This is illustrative of the propaganda that began to be carried on against the Government.

The warnings continued, the hate speeches continued, violation of law continued, propaganda against government continued, CID kept informing government of the imminent dangers but the inaction also continued all the while.

Having created a lot of noise and gathered attention of the Muslims, it was at this stage that the Ahrar enlisted the support of the ulama relating to other religious parties by calling a convention of all Muslim parties at Lahore on 13th July 1952 and giving out that the doctrine of khatam-i-nubuwwat had become a general issue for all creeds and sects of Muslims. Invitation was sent to 14 religious parties including Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Islam, Jama’at-i-Islami. During the days the convention was held, section 144 was in place in Lahore but still it was decided not to interfere with the proceedings. Also at this Convention the three demands, namely, that the Ahmadis be declared to be a minority, that Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan be removed from the office of Foreign Minister and that the Ahmadis be removed from key posts in the State, were adopted and a Council of Action (Majlis-i-Amal) was formed of the following to decide upon the future plan of action.

Qurban Ali Khan, Inspector-General of Police, noted “That Ahrar are assisted by someone is accepted in all quarters. The Ahrar by themselves are not strong enough to have raised this demand but someone from amongst them or those who are behind them are clever enough to have foreseen that none of the so-called religious jama’ats would be foolish enough to lag behind on an issue over which every Musalman has the strongest feeling against the Ahmadis. That every single Muslim will rise on this issue cannot be denied.”

In all this chaos, some of the local Muslim Leaguers started presiding over the Ahrar conferences, particularly in smaller towns. This was declared breach of discipline by the provincial Muslim League office and, as a policy; members were prohibited to preside over non-Muslim League meetings. Paying no head to the warning, resolutions were passed by local offices demonstrating support for the Ahrar cause.

Between the Lahore convention in July 1952 and February 1953, Punjab was marked with several incidents of lawlessness. From street protests to lathi charge, from police opening fire to police officers getting killed, from social boycott of Ahmadis to burning of commercial shops, it was chaos all around.

The Prime Minister Nazim-ud-din finally rejected the demands of Ahrar and leaders of Ahrar were arrested on 27^th February 1952. The agitation then took on a completely different course. Mobs all over Punjab, particularly Lahore & Gujranwala, defied the law, attacked police cordons injuring and even killing policemen. As the situation went out of control and Army was called in, Martial law was declared and curfew was imposed on March 5th.

Daultana, the Chief Minister of Punjab and head of Punjab Muslim League issued a statement on March 6^th giving assurance that the demands will be raised to the Centre and also demanded immediate forced resignation of Chaudhri Zafrullah. This statement was later on withdrawn by Daultana on March 10^th based on the argument that it was an appeal to citizens of Lahore to maintain law and order and since that hasn’t happened and martial law had to be declared to bring order to the province the statement is withdrawn. This demonstrates the complicity of the Muslim league leaders with the Ulama to suit their political agendas.

Post these events a commission was formed to make an inquiry. The commission conducted interviews with a large number of people i.e. from civil administration to law enforcement agencies, from Chief Minister to Prime minister, from Ulama to Masjid Imams etc. It also conducted a highly academic research into almost every important branch of human knowledge—religion, philosophy, science, ethics, attributes of God, reason and revelation, origin and destination of man, aim and object of life, functions of the State and the church, sovereignty, democracy and theocracy, in short, all subjects highly relevant to the functioning of a state.

However, the most fascinating part of the report is the ideological dichotomy which stubbornly exists in the minds of Ulama as well as ordinary citizens. The horror of it all is NOT that a handful of Ulama preached a certain ideology and were able to impose it on general population BUT that the majority of people in the citizenry and in complete control of government allowed them to.

(To be continued)…

Analytical Report The young members of Pakistan Peoples Party are not happy with their party leadership in Gilgit – Baltistan. Two senior members, Manzoor Bagoro and Babu Astori, have openly led protests against the Chief Minister, who is also the party’s president in GB. The dissatisfied group, with the help of some nationalists, like Kashif [...]

Pakistan needs rule of law and de-politicisation of police. Those engaging criminal offences like hate speech, threats and incitement to violence, and vigilante violence must be charged, tried, prosecuted, and punished. We will not allow people in public office or public positions, like political parties and traders’ unions to go around supporting hate-campaigns and violence. Please sign this petition demanding an end to violence against religious communities in Pakistan

—————-
STOP VIOLENCE AND THREATS OF VIOLENCE AGAINST PAKISTAN’S RELIGIOUS COMMUNITIES

The President of Pakistan, Mr. Asif Ali Zardari
Prime Minister of Pakistan, Mr. Yusuf Raza Gilani
Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Ch. Nisar Ali Khan
Chief Minister of Punjab Mr. Shahbaz Sharif, PML-N
President Markazi Anjuman-i-Tajran Malik Shahid Ghafoor Paracha

We urge you to intervene and stop the killing of Pakistan’s religious communities, including Sunni (Barelvi), Shia (including Hazara) and Ahmedi communities that are facing a virtual genocide simply for following their religious beliefs and practices.

You are no doubt familiar with Quaid-e-Azam, Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s speech to the Constituent Assembly on Aug 11, 1947, in which he said: “You are free; you are free to go to your temples. You are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion, caste or creed –that has nothing to do with the business of the State.”

The recent attacks on the 12 Rabiul Awal processions in various cities around Pakistan (including Gujranwala, Mansehra, Gojar Khan, Mirpur, Khairpur and Karachi) are evidence of the menace of bigotry and intolerance. The government must act with all of its might to put a stop to this. It needs to be done NOW.

The evil lurks in the belly of the so-called Diffa-e-Pakistan Council, a coalition comprising several ‘religious parties’ including some banned organsiations whose views dont resonate with the majority but are able to use their armed status and street power to attack others with impunity. The activities of this coalition need to be curtailed before it becomes the Destroy Pakistan Council.

Many of those involved in the DPC are also active in the hate-campaign against the Ahmadiyya community. Most recently, hate-mongers have proposed the demolition of the Jamaat Ahmadiyya’s Aiwan e Tawheed building in Satellite Town Rawalpindi. We express our disappointment at the participation of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leaders in an anti-Ahmedi rally of Jan 29, 2012, attended by Member of Punjab Assembly Zia ullah Shah and traders union leader Sharjeel Mir (nominee for a PML-N ticket). It is also shocking that a leader of the traders community at this occasion made a threatening speech against the Ahmedi community.

We strongly condemn these threats of violence, and urge the establishment of a code of ethics, across the board that prohibits any political party supporting those who victimize others.

The Government, both at the Federal and Provincial levels, must take immediate action against violence, threats and intimidation, including those in the name of religion.

A witness protection plan must be instituted and the police empowered, enabled and de-politicised to act against those who violate basic human rights in Pakistan.

The full force of the law must be employed to ensure that no one attacks or threatens members of any community simply for following their religious beliefs and practices.

—————-

Sincerely,

[Your name]

The United States (US) Committee on Foreign Affairs is set to convene a congressional hearing on Wednesday (February 8), for an exclusive discussion on Balochistan.

The extraordinary event has generated great interest among followers of Pakistan-US relations, as the allies’ mutual relationship seems to be deteriorating. The powerful House of Representatives committee oversees America’s foreign assistance programs and experts believe it can recommend halting US assistance to Pakistan over human rights violation in Balochistan.

Calls for ‘independence’
While Islamabad has strictly treated Balochistan as an internal matter, the debate on such a divisive topic by the powerful committee has highlighted the level of American interest in Balochistan and its support, if any, for the nationalist movement. On its part, Pakistan has kept Washington at arm’s length on the Balochistan issue, by refusing to grant it permission to open a consulate in Quetta.

A Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, who recently co-authored an article with Congressman Louie Gohmert expressing support for an independent Balochistan, will chair the hearing.

“Perhaps we should even consider support for a Balochistan carved out of Pakistan to diminish radical power there (in Pakistan),” Rohrabacher wrote in his piece.

According to Asia-Pacific Reporting Blog, “it is expected that the hearing will tackle issues related to whether or not the US Congress should tie human rights issues in Balochistan to Pakistani aid.”

Witness box
Another area of interest is of the controversial witnesses who will testify before the committee. The three-member panel comprises of defence analyst Ralph Peters, Georgetown assistant professor, C. Christine Fair and Ali Dayan Hasan, Pakistan Director of the Human Rights Watch.

Ironically, the panel on Balochistan does not include a Baloch representative, an issue which has disappointed the Baloch diaspora in the United States, who fear the misinterpretation of their stance by people they view as unfamiliar with the Baloch conflict.

One of the witnesses, Ralph Peters, attracted scathing criticism by right-wing Pakistani strategists in June 2006, when his article Blood Borders was published in the Armed Forces Journal with a map of Free Balochistan. Peters, 59, a former US army officer, is expected to support in his testimony the idea of an independent Balochistan comprising of the Balochistan provinces in Pakistan and Iran and parts of Afghanistan.

On the other hand, Dr Christine Fair is known as a passionate supporter of Pakistan with an anti-India stance. The Pakistani media quoted Dr Fair in March 2009, for allegedly linking India with the Baloch insurgency. She was reportedly questioned the role of the Indian consulates in Afghanistan and Iran.

“Having visited the Indian mission in Zahedan,” she told a roundtable organized by the Foreign Affairs magazine, “I can assure you they (Indians) are not issuing visas as their main activity.” Later on, however, she told Outlook, an Indian news magazine, in an interview that the Pakistanis had blown her comments out of proportion.

On Twitter, a week ahead of the hearing, Dr Fair called Ralph Peters, the fellow witness, a “nut” and asked “WHAT does he know?” On Saturday, she also irked the Balochs by questioning their majority status in Balochistan while in another Tweet she warned the separatists not to “expect me to support an independent Balochistan”.

Public debate
Dr. Akbar S. Ahmed, Pakistan’s former high commissioner to the United Kingdom, told Dawn.com that the congressional hearing was a “significant step” in highlighting Balochistan’s problems. “The information provided in the event,” he said, “will not only be used by members of the US Congress but will also be picked up by the world media.”

“The shocking stories of torture and murder in Balochistan will become part of the public debate. It is in the interest of Pakistan to quickly and effectively resolve the situation in Balochistan bringing back the Baluch with honor, respect and dignity,” said Dr Ahmed, who is currently the Ibn Khaldun Chair of Islamic Studies at the American University in Washington DC.

Dr Ahmed, who served in 1980s as the Commissioner of three districts in Balochistan, says the hearing can potentially create a great deal of negative publicity for Pakistan.

Close watchers
In the United States, the conflict in Balochistan has been gaining remarkable attention of late. While some officials from the government and non-governmental organizations have only expressed concern over the situation, other individuals, including former army soldiers, State department officials and members of the US Congress, have now begun to publicly assert support for an independent Balochistan.

For instance, on January 15, Victoria Nuland, the State Department spokeswoman, expressed America’s “deep concern” over the ongoing violence in Balochistan, especially targeted killings, disappearances and human rights violations.

“This (Balochistan) is a complex issue. We strongly believe that the best way forward is for all the parties to resolve their differences through peaceful dialogue,” she said.

Last year on November 16, the State Department deputy spokesman, Mark Toner, had also observed during a press briefing, “You know, more broadly, we do have concerns about the situation in Balochistan. We’ve addressed those concerns with the government of Pakistan.”

Nationalist view
Baloch nationalists are cautiously monitoring Wednesday’s hearing.

“To be honest, we are not very optimistic about this meeting,” Sardar Akhtar Mengal, a former chief minister of Balochistan, told Dawn.com, “but both support and attention from the US are significant because the presence of the US cannot be overlooked in South East Asia. It is essential that the US gives attention to Balochistan, as the aid that is given to Pakistan in the name of war against terror is being spent to commit atrocities in Balochistan.”

A political expert in Washington DC, who requested anonymity, said during the election year, the Republicans are likely to bring up the Balochistan issue to castigate Democratic President Barrack Obama for deliberately keeping quiet against Pakistan, an ally in the war on terror, for allegedly misusing American assistance to fight the secular Balochs instead of quashing the Taliban.

After the killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, many American policymakers have become disillusioned with Pakistan and now some of them propose an independent Balochistan to fight religious extremism. Last month, Louie Gohmert, another Republican Congressman from Texas, suggested that the US should, “talk about creating a Balochistan in the southern part of Pakistan…they love us. They’ll stop the IEDs (improvised explosive devices) and all the weaponry coming into Afghanistan, and we got a shot to win over there.”

Sardar Mengal, who leads the largest Balochistan National Party (BNP), says the hearing does not mean that the Washington is going to support the Baloch cause in the future.

“What the US can do for us is to care for the Baloch as human beings. Since Washington is apparently a committed supporter of human rights, it is obligatory that the US should stop the genocide of the Baloch nation by the authorities as it has done in other parts of the world, supporting their right of self-determination.”

M. Chris Mason, a Senior Fellow at the Center for Advanced Defense Studies, who recently retired from the US Foreign Service, has emerged as another ardent proponent of free Balochistan in the United States.

In an article, Mason, who lecturers at the prestigious National Defense University, argued an independent Balochistan would solve many of the [Af-Pak] region’s most intractable problems overnight and would create “a territorial buffer between rogue states Iran and Pakistan.”

“The answer to the current Pakistani train-wreck is… recognizing Balochistan’s legitimate claim to independence… to help the Baluchis go the way of the Bangladeshis in achieving their dream of freedom from tyranny, corruption and murder at the hands of the diseased state,” he wrote.

Routine matter
Hassan Abbas, a scholar based in Washington DC who until recently was Quaid-i-Azam Chair Professor at Columbia University in New York, seriously doubts if the US will officially support Baloch nationalists at this time as this will complicate US-Pakistan relations.

“I think the hearing is a routine matter as all security related issues in Pakistan are being analyzed in the policy world with keen interest as well as concern. The hearing will discuss human rights issue as well as politics,” says Abbas, who is also a Senior Advisor at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government, “but the hearing itself will not create any serious diplomatic row. The US Congress must listen and understand that there is a variety of perspectives on the subject.”

Dr Ahmed, meanwhile, attributes the deepening crisis in Balochistan to Islamabad’s failure to understand that time is running out for it.

“The leaders of Pakistan are so focused on the power struggles in Islamabad that they seem to have little will or imagination to deal with the urgent issues that concern the country’s largest province of Balochistan.”

How will Islamabad respond to the hearing?

“Pakistan’s establishment is quite sensitive about the Balochistan crisis and they will follow the hearings closely and sceptically,” says Hassan Abbas, whose book, Pakistan’s Drift into Extremism, was published in 2005.

According to Abbas, hawkish elements in Pakistani media are likely to create a lot of hue and cry over the hearing. Yet he cautions, “They will serve Pakistan better by focusing on projecting the concerns of the ordinary Baloch people, who are disenfranchised, distressed and increasingly getting disenchanted.”

Sardar Mengal of BNP, who was detained in Karachi for several months during the Pervez Musharraf regime, predicts there would be a definite reaction from the government.

“They can only display their superiority to the ones who are weaker, and in this case, the Baloch are the weaker ones,” he says and warns, “But if there is a reaction from Pakistan toward us, this time it will be once and for all. Either the Baloch will swim across or sink as a nation.” (Courtesy: Dawn, Pakistan)

 Monitoring Desk Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif has distributed portfolios of several ministries after being criticized by opposition for holding the portfolios and concentration of power. However, Shahbaz Sharif still holds the health ministry despite severe criticism over the deaths of dozens of patients in Lahore caused by taking spurious drugs provided free of cost [...]

Asim Iqbal Gilgit, February 1: Chief Minister Gilgit Baltistan Syed Mehdi Shah has ordered release of all NCP vehicles which had been confiscated during a special operation some months ago. Talking to media he said that NCP vehicles were only source of income of many families in the region and owing to confiscation they were [...]

GB Government is raising expectations, not resources! PT Report Gilgit, January 31: Formation of Diamer Division, comprising of District Astore and Diamer, was announced today by Chief Minister Syed Mehdi Shah. The administrative change leads to formation of a reduced Gilgit Division, comprising of District Gilgit, District Ghizar and District Hunza – Nagar. It is [...]

Monitoring Desk Islamabad, January 25: The Chief Minister Gilgit-Baltistan‚ Syed Mehdi Shah has said that a peace plan has been devised and started implementation on it for durable peace in the province. Talking to media-men in Islamabad on Wednesday he said that a committee headed by Chief Secretary would call on Ulema of different schools [...]

PT Report Islamabad, January 25: Chief Minister of Gilgit – Baltistan, Syed Mehdi Shah, called on the Iranian envoy here in the capital city. Matters related to investment opportunities in the region were discussed. According to the Embassy’s website, the Chief Minister of while welcoming the Ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and referring to [...]

Foremost among these is the raging controversy surrounding Salman Rushdie’s scheduled appearance at the Jaipur Literature Festival, a saga that neatly encapsulates both the virtues and vices of the Indian polity. The gathering has fast emerged as the largest and most prestigious literary event in Asia, and it is a fine example of the soft power strengths India brings to the competition with China for influence in the region. This year’s installment attracted some 250 writers from South Asia and beyond (including talk show maven Oprah Winfrey, new age guru Deepak Chopra and Joseph Lelyveld, whose book on Mahatma Gandhi was greeted with a blast of invective from the Indian political class last year) as well as 70,000 visitors. Yet the imbroglio over Rushdie, who was supposed to be the main attraction at this year’s festival, has tarnished India’s credentials as emerging Asia’s brightest exemplar of democratic freedoms.

Rushdie, who was born in Mumbai to a Muslim family of Kashmiri descent, is the author of the 1988 novel, The Satanic Verses, which inflamed Muslim sentiment throughout the world and lead Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Iran’s supreme leader, to issue a notorious fatwa against his life. Concerned about the potential for upheaval among its sizeable Muslim population, the Indian government quickly banned the book, part of its familiar but disgraceful ritual of proscribing books that touch on sensitive issues or arouse passions in certain quarters. Rushdie, who continues to live under the threat of death, has traveled to India without incident numerous times in the years since, including an unannounced 2007 visit to the Jaipur gathering that is credited with putting it on the world’s cultural map.

But his headline participation at this year’s event brought forth a torrent of umbrage and threats. Muslim clerics started things off, including those at Darul Uloom Deoband, an influential Islamic seminary in Uttar Predesh, India’s most populous state which will hold legislative elections next month that many believe are critical to the survival of the Congress Party-led national government in New Delhi. Another seminary issued a fatwa calling for protests against the visit and a number of Muslim groups warned of “unprecedented protests” and burned Rushdie’s effigy.

Predictably enough, politicians soon took up the cudgels, many of them Congress Party leaders fearful of losing the allegiance of Uttar Pradesh’s large bloc of Muslim voters, who formed about a fifth of the state’s electorate. Ashok Gehlot, chief minister of Rajasthan, the northwestern state where the festival takes place, and a former general secretary of the All India Congress Committee, reportedly pressed the organizers to rescind their invitation to Rushdie and appeared indifferent to the threats being made against Rushdie’s safety. Chandrabhan Singh, head of the Congress Party’s Rajasthan unit, declared that “Rushdie has hurt the sentiments of many Indians. He must not be allowed to come to India.” Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi, the party’s national leader, maintained a studious silence, while one of Singh’s Cabinet members pronounced that Rushdie’s “presence is not desirable.”

In contrast to the poltroon instincts of the political class, India’s boisterous media leapt to Rushdie’s defense. The Times of India accused the Congress Party of playing identity politics and argued that “by catering to such intolerance, the Congress has further contributed to creating an increasingly illiberal atmosphere in the country.” The Hindu called the affair “a national shame” and charged that “India has again betrayed its heritage of providing sanctuary to persecuted individuals and ideas, not to speak of its Constitution.”

If the saga had ended at this point, it would have amounted to an embarassment to the country’s reputation. Instead it unexpectedly morphed into an outrage against free expression. On the eve of the festival’s opening, Rushdie suddenly withdrew when the Rajasthan police warned him of an assassination plot being hatched by a Mumbai underworld boss who has close ties to the Pakistani security establishment. Media outlets, however, soon reported that the death threat was concocted by authorities to scare him away. When Rushdie made plans to address the gathering via video link, Rajasthan officials attempted to throw up new impediments. In the end, the video conference was abruptly cancelled by the venue’s owner following police warnings about violent protests.

In solidarity with Rushdie, four Indian writers at the gathering staged an impromptu reading of passages from The Satanic Verses, a prohibited act that drew quick police notice. Advised by legal counsel that they had unwittingly opened themselves up to criminal charges, the writers hastily departed Jaipur and, in some cases, the country.

Unfortunately, the Rushdie affair stands out for its prominence but not its singularity. Currently, the Delhi High Court is considering a petition that seeks to hold Google and Facebook liable for not censoring content that might offend the sensibilities of Hindus, Muslims and Christians. The judge overseeing the matter ominously warned that if the companies could not police their own sites, “like China we may be forced to pass orders banning all such websites.” Prime Minister Singh’s government has lent its imprimatur to the petitioner’s cause.

Late last year, Kapil Sibal, a Harvard-educated lawyer who serves as Mr. Singh’s telecommunications minister, likewise threatened to censor social networking sites for objectionable content (here and here).  Similar to the rhetoric directed at Rushdie, he argued that “religious sentiments of many communities and of any reasonable person is [sic] being hurt because of content which is on the sites.” Last June’s death of M. F. Husain, the most acclaimed painter of modern India, also recalled how he had been hounded into self-exile by Hindu nationalist groups incensed at his nude depictions of Hindu deities. Prime Minister Singh called Husain’s passing in a London hospital “a national loss” but he did nothing to dampen the mob culture that caused Husain to spend the last years of his life outside of India.

Indeed, over the last two years, India’s illiberal tendencies have been in particular bloom:

• A fictionalized biography of Congress Party supreme Sonia Gandhi was banned;
• Government officials helped put the kibosh on plans to make a movie based on Indian Summer: The Secret History of the End of an Empire, a non-fiction book that sheds light on Jawaharlal Nehru’s furtive relationship with the wife of the British Raj’s last viceroy;
• An outcry organized by the family of Bal Thackeray, a Hindu nationalist politician, forced the University of Mumbai to drop Rohinton Mistry’s novel, Such a Long Journey, a finalist for the prestigious Man Booker Prize, from its English-language syllabus;
• And Arundhati Roy, a perennial bete noire to the political establishment and a Man Booker Prize-winner for her 1997 novel, The God of Small Things, was charged with sedition for her remarks on the Kashmir dispute.

All democracies are continuous works in progress. But this year’s Republic Day reveals just how far India still remains from the ideals of free expression.

Monitoring Desk Skardu, January 14: Chief Minister Gilgit-Baltistan Syed Mehdi Shah says the Government is working for strengthening of the democracy and supremacy of Parliament under the leadership of President Asif Ali Zardari. Addressing a function held at Radio Pakistan Skardu on Saturday‚ he said the Gilgit-Baltistan Government and people have full confidence on the [...]