Democrats, beware! - Article By Nadeem Paracha

In the following article, Nadeem Paracha offers a critical analysis of certain (pro-establishment, pro-Taliban and anti-democracy)elements in Pakistani media (e.g. Dr Shahid Masood, Shaheen Sehbai, Geo TV, and The News) who are dismantling the institution of democracy in Pakistan on various pretexts such as the anti-NRO and anti-politicians campaign.

The criticism against the PPP and PML (N) has very little to do with any constructive assessment, as such. On the contrary, quite like in the 1990s, some high profile newspaper reporters (and now also TV anchors) have yet again suddenly managed to get hold of ‘vital facts and figures on corruption,’ that have otherwise eluded even the most astute investigative reporters. Exactly where these facts and figures suddenly appear from, I’ll leave that to your own discretion. But the truth is these ‘reports’ read and sound more like anti-democracy indoctrination speeches than a crusading case of journalism, really. Have some columnists and TV personalities gotten down to once again preparing the ground for democracy’s disgrace? The alarming phenomenon is, that this time around these ‘forces’ (with their own tainted pasts) can now be seen on popular TV channels as well; meaning that this time the mantra against the ‘corrupt’ abomination called democracy is set to influence a much larger number of people.

Democrats, beware!
Ever since Field Martial Ayub Khan toppled a blundering conglomerate of civil servants and politicians in a military coup in 1958, as a culture, Pakistan was moulded into a desperate group of people to whom democracy was akin to corruption and chaos.

But compared to the 1950s, corruption scaled unprecedented heights during the Ayub dictatorship, and it was this corruption that generated a fresh interest in democracy among a new generation of politicians and youth in the 1960s.

Between 1967 and 1970, a movement led by progressive students and fiery politicians opened a new window of opportunity for democracy.

However, with the tragic dismemberment of the country in 1971 that saw East Pakistan become Bangladesh, this gave various politico-religious parties and conservative ‘pro-establishment’ politicians and intellectuals the fodder they needed to at once term the 1971 debacle as a demonic consequence of democracy.

In the 1970s this meant two things: first, that in spite of the exploitative ways the establishment had treated its Eastern wing, Bengalis were termed as ‘traitors.’ Secondly, some rightwing journalists and parties like the Jamaat-i-Islami started to claim that it was Bhutto who was responsible for the East Pakistan debacle.

Though a much loved leader, as Prime Minister, Bhutto awkwardly bounced between populist democracy and autocracy, in a way preparing his own downfall at the hands of forces that had been rejected by the electorate in the 1970 elections

Some suggest that Bhutto’s erratic behaviour in this context was mostly due to a concerted smear campaign against his personality (by the ‘rightwing press’) and against democracy itself that was said to be ‘undermining Islam’s place in Pakistan.’

Not surprisingly, during the 1977 elections, the anti-Bhutto coalition, the Pakistan National Alliance’s slogan became, ‘Nizam-i-Mustafa’ (a system based on Shariah).

Though Bhutto blundered by doctoring an election he could have won on his own, this gave his opponents the chance to pounce upon him like never before. But some opposition leaders panicked when Bhutto rallies once again started attracting large numbers of people.

A number of respected historians have claimed that the Alliance’s leadership then ‘requested’ the military (under General Ziaul Haq), to intervene, and which it gladly did.

Thus, in the next eleven years, state-owned media, politico-religious parties, anti-Bhutto politicians and educationists were used by the Zia dictatorship to engrave in the people’s minds the supposed incompatibility between Pakistan and democracy.

In the chaotic midst of rampant corruption, ethnic and sectarian violence, and the imposition of brutal laws (in the name of Islam) by the dictatorship, it continued to accuse democracy as a system that produced ‘monsters’ like Bhutto and divorced Islam from the political and social fabric of Pakistan.

The anti-democracy mantra and mindset cultivated during the dictatorship was now so well entrenched that even the revival of democracy after Zia’s death in 1988 failed to exorcise it.

Despite Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif’s own obvious shortcomings, it would not be far-fetched to suggest that at every turn during the 1990s, those associated with various intelligence agencies and politico-religious parties used a large section of the popular press to continue portraying democracy and democrats as abominations ‘planted by anti-Pakistan forces’ to ‘compromise Pakistan’s strategic victory in Afghanistan,’ and ‘work against Pakistan’s Islamic credentials’.

Another thing that was clearly exaggerated was the way democracy bred corruption because during the 1990s politicians weren’t any more or less corrupt than what they had been — along with a number of military men, bankers and businessmen — during the Zia dictatorship.

Today, some two years after the dramatic revival of democracy after the PPP, PML(N) and the lawyers’ movement successfully dislodged the Musharraf dictatorship, we are once again hearing the same mantra of ‘corruption’ and ‘incompetence’ coming from sections of the popular press and the private electronic media.

The criticism against the PPP and PML (N) has very little to do with any constructive assessment, as such. On the contrary, quite like in the 1990s, some high profile newspaper reporters (and now also TV anchors) have yet again suddenly managed to get hold of ‘vital facts and figures on corruption,’ that have otherwise eluded even the most astute investigative reporters. Exactly where these facts and figures suddenly appear from, I’ll leave that to your own discretion. But the truth is these ‘reports’ read and sound more like anti-democracy indoctrination speeches than a crusading case of journalism, really.

Have some columnists and TV personalities gotten down to once again preparing the ground for democracy’s disgrace?

The alarming phenomenon is, that this time around these ‘forces’ (with their own tainted pasts) can now be seen on popular TV channels as well; meaning that this time the mantra against the ‘corrupt’ abomination called democracy is set to influence a much larger number of people.

No wonder then, according to a recent British Council survey, a very small percentage of young Pakistanis have any faith in democracy; but up to 60 per cent of these young men and women trust the Army and, more alarmingly, up to 50 per cent exhibit faith in the madressahs — the very institutions that have been behind some of the messiest political, economic and cultural blunders that have continued to haunt Pakistan till this day. Source
Read more...

Paranoia, perversion, and hypocrisy of Pakistan's middle class

Nauseous mumblings
Nadeem F. Paracha

Sunday, 22 Nov, 2009

RECENTLY I was fortunate enough to be a part of an excellent ten-minute news video prepared by the New York Times’ reporter, Adam Ellick. Tastefully called ‘Tuning out the Taliban,’ the video has created the right buzz amongst young middle-class Pakistanis.

Adam treats his report as a way to understand why many educated, westernised and modern Pakistani pop/rock stars and their fans are all gung-ho about anti-Americanism in their songs and beliefs but at the same time keeping quiet about matters such as religious extremism, terrorism and the Taliban.

The funny thing is, this is happening even when there are disturbingly tangible and physical examples of the ubiquitous carnage and mayhem being caused by so-called jihadis; whereas conspiratorial notions such as the ever-present explanation of a ‘foreign hand’ — mainly the idea of an unholy alliance of America, India and Israel out to destroy Pakistan and Islam — remains to be a largely unsubstantiated and somewhat air-headed perception.

According to my own experience as a journalist covering the Pakistan music scene in the 1990s, it is never a good idea to encourage pop musicians to start making political statements. As an idea it can be exciting and relevant, but since much of the modern pop music scene in Pakistan originates from middle-class settings, one can thus expect nothing more than self-righteous droning and quasi-reactionary drawing-room demagoguery usually found in the urban bourgeoisie and petty-bourgeois sections of society.

Surveys and studies of these two classes in Pakistan show them to be two of the most conservative, with a history of economically and politically backing assorted military dictators (especially Ziaul Haq and Pervez Musharraf). Of course, there have been clear exceptions in this context, but it is also true that over the years the overall conservatism of these classes has seen certain sections from within become both supporters and financiers of the more extreme strains of Islamic thought.

There have been recorded cases against many petty-bourgeois shop-owners and traders of financing jihadi organisations; whereas many sections among the more ‘modern’ bourgeois class have largely exhibited their own version of extreme beliefs by passionately patronising (as supporters and clients), a number of Islamic televangelists and drawing-room preachers whose number has grown two-fold from 1990 onwards.

Consequently, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of young men and women from the middle-class now preferring to adorn beards and hijabs, and taking religious rituals a lot more seriously (compared to the situation till the late 1970s). But this class still constitutes a large number of westernised youth as well.

However, compared to their more socially conservative class contemporaries — who have been seen to follow right-wing groups from the Jamat-i-Islami, to defunct Sipah-i-Sehaba to Sunni Threek and the Tableeghi Jamaat and individuals such as Dr Israr Ahmed, Farhat Hashmi and Zakir Naik — the more ‘modern’ lot in this respect have not exactly fallen to the left as a reaction (like they did between the 1950s and the early 1970s). Instead, in spite of whole-heartedly embracing the economic, aesthetic and cultural fruits of secularism, they have retained their classes’ inherent political conservatism.

Adam Ellick’s interviews with former rock star and animated TV personality, Ali Azmat, and bubblegum-rock poster boy, Ali Noor, are the cases in point. Both hail from modern, middle-class settings and represent the more westernised sections of Pakistani bourgeoisie. In spite of mimicking the aesthetic, cultural and linguistic strains of western pop culture, both refused to see any contradiction whatsoever in conveniently attacking ‘western imperialism’ as the reason behind the terror attacks in Pakistan.

Azmat is seen in a T-Shirt and shorts, with an expensive Apple laptop by his side, sitting in a room decorated like an arty version of an American college dude’s bachelor pad, and the following is what he had to say: ‘It (suicide bombing) is the agenda of neocons to de-Islamise Pakistan…’

In his astute and recently acquired wisdom (mainly inspired by Azmat’s newfound guru, celebrated conspiracy theorist Zaid Hamid), the Taliban are not behind the bombings of girls’ schools, but ‘foreign forces (CIA, RAW and Mossad),’ are to be blamed! Where else but in Pakistan can one find a hip rock star with a lucrative history of being proudly sponsored by various western multinationals, also become a shameless apologist of men who in the name of faith not only blow themselves up in public, but are also known to have used three-to-six-year-old children for the same deed.

Then, in the same documentary, we see yet another scion of the increasingly warped Pakistani bourgeoisie, Ali Noor, the long-haired, guitar-slinging lead vocalist of Noorie. Amidst terrifying and tragic footage of blown up cars, shops and body limbs, he announces that ‘the Taliban only constitute a tiny problem.’ While spouting this profound insight, Noor gestures the ‘tiny’ part of his grand statement with his hand and you wonder, shouldn’t that gesture be explaining the size of his brain? Is this symptomatic of mere delusion, or of some unprecedented form of collective psychosis? Source
Read more...

Consequences of Zia’s misrule and Talibanization

Wasted youth: Reflections on the British Council report

By Nadeem F. Paracha
Saturday, 21 Nov, 2009

Released today (Saturday 21 November), the Pakistan British Council’s hefty report titled, Pakistan: The Next Generation, encapsulates the economics, demographics and, more importantly, the opinions of the youth of Pakistan.

The report suggests that Pakistan is in a distinct situation where it can explore what is called the ‘demographic dividend.’
This means that the country is going through a period in which there is a positive ratio of productive youth — or currently there are more industrious youth than dependants.

According to the report the window of opportunity in this respect opened in 1990, but unfortunately the country has done nothing to exploit this opportunity.

Being perhaps the first truly representative survey and report of its kind in the country, it divulges that merely 15 per cent of the Pakistani youth believe that the country is headed in the right direction.

Accurately capturing the identity dilemma the youth of Pakistan has been going through, especially after the tragic 9/11 episode and its fallout in Pakistan, the report sees the country’s youth to be passionately inclined towards nationalism but having very little trust in national or local government, the police and even courts, in spite of the reinstatement of the celebrated senior judiciary that was dismissed by the Musharraf dictatorship in November 2007.

About three-quarters of the Pakistani youth define themselves as being Muslims first and then Pakistani. Fourteen per cent see themselves as Pakistani citizens first.

The democratic dividend window that opened in 1990, according to the British Council report, is set to close sometime in 2045. This means those at the helm of economic and governmental affairs now have 35 years or so to stem the waste and start devising policies in which the country can harvest the political, social and above all, economic benefits that come associated with this opportunity. The report predicts that the positive consequences of wisely exploiting this opportunity may give Pakistan an economic growth increase by a fifth by 2030.

Also in the report are the variety of opinions held by the Pakistani youth on matters of hope, fear, religion, education and international politics.
Not surprisingly, a healthy 92 per cent of the youth believe in the importance of education. However, even though the current bout of democracy in the country is hardly two years old, there are already growing signs of disillusionment with democracy within the youth. According to the report, only a third of those surveyed believed that democracy is the best system for the country.

This is an alarming finding, especially with the number of disastrous military regimes that the country has suffered and the proliferation of alternative faith-based systems being flaunted by conventional religious parties and the largely mythic-political ones propagated by clandestine extremist groups.

Thus, more alarming becomes the report’s finding in which it sees about 60 per cent of the country’s youth having faith in the military and around 50 per cent having similar trust in religious seminaries (madrassahs), which, in the last many years have come under scrutiny from the government and the state for both propagating and initiating extreme strains of Islam.

The bi-polar make-up of the Pakistani youth is further highlighted when the report suggests that the young generation by and large is civic minded. This generation insists that the primary purpose of education is to produce good and productive citizens.

When questioned about the reasons behind the recent spat of terrorist and other violence in the country, the respondents point the finger at ‘injustice’ (30 per cent); and ‘economics conditions’ (28 per cent).

Again, not surprisingly, a large number of young men and women also blamed the international community of ‘interfering in the affairs of the country,’ and for ‘demonising Pakistan.’

The truth is, if a majority of a country’s youth have more faith in institutions that have been largely responsible for the political, social and economic disasters that the country has faced for many years (the military and the madrassahs), it will be very hard for the international community not to exhibit any alarm or concern, especially if the same country also has a nuclear arsenal.

But the British Council report is not all that concerned by this dilemma. Instead in its concluding remarks, it is actually hopeful and advises the state and the government to tap into the nationalism and civic mindedness of the youth because we still have about 35 years to convert the economic, cultural and political potential of our youth into something that can rise above cynicism and a forlorn attitude, and play a more positive, productive and inspired role.
Around 2,500 young men and women (writers, journalists, students, NGO workers) were involved in the writing and preparation of this report that can go a long way in triggering some constructive debate and, as British Council’s Fasi Zaka hopes, ‘renew an interest in a much neglected subject.’ Source
Read more...

From Zion Hamid to Wali Azmat to Insaaf-e-Khan: The Pakistani extras of conspiracy theory

Extra! Extra!
By Nadeem F. Paracha

19 November 2009

Islamabad, November 18: Famous anti-India TV personality, Zion Hamid, was caught yesterday watching Shakuntali, a popular Indian TV soap opera. The discovery was made by one of his fans who Hamid thought was his milkman.

When Hamid opened his door, the fan heard and saw the TV in the background where episode No. 5, 904 of Shakuntali was running. Talking to this reporter, the fan said that he first thought it was a conspiracy, but after noticing the genuine red cap of Hamid, he was astonished.

Shaken, the fan, 23-year-old Abdul Karim, said: ‘I couldn’t believe it! What would Muhammad Bin Qasim think when he gets to hear about this?’

When told by this reporter that Qasim died hundreds of years ago, the fan accused him and his newspaper for working for Blackwater.

‘What you think you fool Mossad, CIA, Raw agent Qasim alive in our minds, hearts and lungs so oh you shut up!’ he added.

Talking to the media after the episode, Hamid accepted that he sometimes watches Indian soaps and that even though he is of the opinion that Hindus are paleed (dirty), there is no harm in watching them on TV because they can’t touch you and can’t cast their shadow over you.

He added that he also watches Indian soaps to decode the hidden plots of the Hindus to destroy Pakistan and Islam.

‘It was by decoding the dialogue of one such Indian TV soap that I was able to discover that the Mumbai attacks were actually planned and executed by Raw and Mossad,’ he explained.

He also said that he predicted the 9/11 attacks as a Zionist conspiracy back in 1996 by watching Dil Walay Dullaniya Lay Jain Gey on his VCD player over and over again.

‘It’s all there,’ he claimed. ‘And the songs aren’t all that bad either.’

Hamid was surrounded by a vocal group of fans at the press conference.

One Barkat Ali told the reporters: ‘What this happening? Attacking great man Zion, oh so brilliant genius zindabad, zindabad you kafir Western conspiracy US agent traitors fool, fool, fool!’

Another, Sharmeen Khan, a 25-year-old university student added: ‘What this nonsense of democracy because it only Hindu, American, Zionist, Papua New Guinnean plot to destroy beloved Pakistian zindabad, zindabad, zindabad!’

Kamran Ghani, a seven-month-old toddler also addressed the press conference. He said, ‘Goo goo gagagaga goo goo … burp!’

The fans then lifted Hamid on their shoulders and carried him to a nearby McDonald’s outlet where they all chanted slogans like ‘Amreeka ki ghulami namazoor’ over a couple of Big Macs, large Cokes and a romantic song sung by Wali Azmat called, ‘I hate Jews Yea, Yea, Yea,’ a song from Azmat’s forthcoming album, ‘Zionists ate my Homework.’

The album is dedicated to all the Taliban who died in American drone attacks. When asked why didn’t he also dedicate the album to all those who’ve died from Taliban’s suicide attacks, Azmat said, that there were no suicide bomb attacks in Pakistan and that all those people we see slaughtered and dismembered on our TV screens actually died from dengue fever. When asked how he can prove this, he said that one should watch the third season of Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

‘It’s all there,’ he claimed. ‘And the chicks aren’t all that bad either.’

Meanwhile in Lahore, Tehrik-e-Imran chief, Insaaf-e-Khan lauded Zion Hamid’s efforts for decoding vital truths about Hindu conspiracies from Indian soap operas.

Talking to a group of rabid rightwing columnists at his residence, the great Khan said that Pakistan was in great danger from all kinds of plots being hatched by its enemies, especially Asif Zardari Bhutto Zardari Bhutto, Bilawal Zardari Bhutto Zardari, and the ghost of late Benazir Bhutto.

‘This government is sucking the blood of poor Pakistanis,’ he told the rabid rightwing communists all of whom then started to sing the national anthem in unison.

‘This government has sold Pakistan’s strategic and political interests to America!’ Khan added, to which the rabid rightwing columnists started burning George Washington and Abraham Lincoln’s effigies.

Praising the columnists’ bravery, Khan promised them to meet again after he returned from New York where he will undergo a cheekbone operation.

The columnists informed him that they too will be in New York for sightseeing, except for one, who got up and started burning Henry Truman’s effigy. He was the one who failed to secure an American visa.

Khan termed this to be racial discrimination and a CIA conspiracy.

Later in the day, the issue was discussed on a famous TV talk show on a local news channel.

Participating in the show were the incensed columnist, a rabid rightwing reporter, a PPP Minster, and a woman in a burqa.

‘This is an outrage!’ said the reporter. ‘Blackwater is behind this,’ he announced.

When asked how he knew, he picked up a Class One children’s nursery rhymes book and claimed: ‘It’s all here. And the rhymes aren’t all that bad either.’

The PPP Minister, Rehman Malika Zardari Bhutto Zardari, promised that his government will look into the issue, to which the reporter landed a swift punch on Malika’s face.

When Malika’s bodyguards tried to stop the reporter, the talk show’s host accused the government of curbing the freedom of the press.

‘This is an outrage!’ he said. ‘I implore the Army to intervene, overthrow this incompetent government and impose martial law!’

Mr. Malika apologised and started to land punches on his own face saying that the government too believed in the freedom of the press.

This made the reporter very happy who asked Malika to raid book stores and confiscate all secular literature because solutions to Pakistan’s problems lie in jihadi literature.

‘It’s all there!’ he claimed. ‘And the topics aren’t all that bad either.’

Turning to the woman in a burqa, the show’s host asked if she agreed.

‘The real problem lies in women wearing jeans,’ she said.

The host asked her to elaborate, to which she said: ‘The real problem is in women wearing jeans.’

‘Yes, but can you please elaborate?’ asked the host.

‘The real problem lies in women wearing jeans!’ she said again.

‘Please elaborate,’ the host insisted.

‘But that’s all I was asked to say,’ she said.

‘By whom?’ inquired the host.

‘By you!’ she said.

‘This is an outrage!’ said Mr. Malika, and in response, the host punched him and proceeded to burn an American flag. He burned half of it and announced that the other half will be burnt later because he had to catch a flight.

‘To where?’ asked Mr. Malika.

‘California,’ said the host. ‘I have to attend my son’s graduation ceremony.’

Nadeem F. Paracha is a cultural critic and senior columnist for Dawn Newspaper and Dawn.com.
http://blog.dawn.com/2009/11/19/extra-extra/
Read more...

International tolerance day

Posted by: Jarri Mirza
Guest blog: Humza Ikram

Today world is celebrating International tolerance day but sadly Pakistani society is getting more and more intolerant. Our right wing media is spreading a lot of hatred in our society and the beauty of our pluralistic society is now sadly a memory of the past. One of my young cousins ,who is an avid Zaid Hamid viewer, has sent me a picture of a map showing India to be a part of Pakistan. He urged me to make it my face book display picture. The following is a post by Nadeem Paracha highlighting the importance of tolerance in social life. Also, checkout the following video and see how Zaid Hamid is spreading hatred towards Hindus. I'm wondering how insecure Hindu community living in Sindh might feel in their own country.


Blow Daddy

By Nadeem Paracha

Daddy?
Yes, son.
Are we going to have a war with India?
Perhaps.
Oh, goody. We will thrash them, right? Like we did in 1857!
It wasn't in 1857, son.
Oh, okay. But whom did we thrash in 1857?
The British, son …
And the Hindus too, right?
Well …
Did Quied-e-Azam fight in that war along
with Muhammad bin Qasim and Imran Khan?
No, son. The Quied and Imran were born much later and Muhammad bin Qasim died many years before.
Then who ruled Pakistan in those days?
There was no Pakistan in those days, son.
But there was always a Pakistan! It has been there for 5000 years!
Whom have you been talking to, son?
No one. I've just been watching TV.
It figures.
Daddy, why are all these people against us Arabs?
Arabs? But we aren't Arabs, son.
Of course we are because our ancestors were Arabs!
No, son. Our ancestors were sub-continental.
Sub-what?
Never mind.You seem to like wars, son.
Yes. I like to watch them on TV.
But real wars are fought outside the TV, son.
Really? How is that possible? What sort of a war is that?
Never mind.
Daddy you look worried.
Of course, I am, you little warmongering punk!
Daddy. Why are you scolding me?
Because TV is talking rot and so are you!
Daddy, are you turning into a Hindu?
No!
Daddy, have you become a kafir?
Keep quiet! No more TV for you! Go watch a movie on the DVD player, or listen to a CD.
Can't do that.
But we have so many DVDs and CDs, son.
Not any more.
What do you mean?
I burned them all.
What?!
I burned them all.
I heard that! But why?
They spread obscenity.
Oh, God. Son, go do your homework. What happened to that science project you were working on?
It's almost complete.
Good boy. What are you making?
A bomb.
What?!
A bomb.
I heard that! But why?
Because I am a true Muslim mujahid who hates America.
But only last week you wanted to go to Disney Land.
That's different.
How come?
Mickey Mouse is a Muslim.
No he isn't.
Is so. He converted when he heard the azaan on the moon.
On the moon?
Yes. Because the Earth is flat and …
What??
The Earth is …
I heard that!
Daddy, do you want to see my science project, or not?
Gosh, that bomb? But your science teacher will fail you.
No she wont.
Really …?
Yes. I plan to blow her up as well.
God, what is wrong with you? Go call your mother!
She can't come.
Why not?
I've locked her in the kitchen.
But what for?
A woman's place is in the kitchen. I will not let her out until she starts wearing a hijab!
But she's your mother!
No. She's a woman!
So?
So she should be hidden.
Hidden from whom?
You, me, the whole world and Tony.
Tony?
Yes, Tony.
But Tony's a cat.
Yes. But he's a male cat.
Son, have you gone mad?
No. By the way, I've made sure Kitto starts wearing a hijab as well.
Kitto?
Yes, Kittto.
But Kitto's also a cat!
Yes. But a female cat.
But she'll suffocate.
Oh, she's already dead.
What?
She's already dead.
I heard that! But how?
I buried her alive.
You what??
Yes. To avenge Tony's honor. But now I will behead Tony.
But why?
To save mom's honor!
Oh, God!
Don't say that. Always say Allah Hafiz instead of Khuda Hafiz.
What's the difference?
Daddy, do you want to be beheaded too?
No!
Do you want to be stoned to death?
No!
Do you want to be flogged?
No!
Do you want to get your arms chopped off?
No!
Then stop asking stupid questions. By the way, I won't call you daddy anymore.
What will you call me then?
Whatever is Arabic for daddy.
I don't know any Arabic, son.
That's because you are a kafir.
Who the heck are you to tell me who I am, you little fascist twit!
What's a fascist?
An irrational, violent, self-righteous mad man!
WAAAAAAA!!
Why are you crying?
You scolded me.
Okay, I'm sorry. You have to be tolerant and rational, son. Now be a good boy and go read a book instead of watching TV.
I have no books.
Of course, you do. I bought you so many books.
I burned them all.
What?!
I burned them all.
I heard that! But why?!
They were all in English.
So?
Christians speak English.
But we are speaking English as well, aren't we?
WAAAAAAAAAAAA …!!
What now?
Zionists made me forget Arabic!
But you never knew any Arabic, son.
WAAAA … yes I did until you and mommy gave me polio drops … WAAAA …
Okay, tell me, can you do me a favor?
Sure, dad. (*sniff*).
Can you blow up something for me?
Oh, goody! Of course, dad. What should I blow? A CD shop, a hotel, a school …?
No, no, something a lot more sinister.
Mom?
No, no …
What then?
The TV set!
What?!
Blow the TV Set.
I heard that! But why?
Just do it!
I see. Dad?
Yes.
You're so unconstitutional.

...

source

Read more...

Pakistan politics and media: The abuse of Islam for political gains?

Smokers’ Corner: Speaking fire
Nadeem F. PARACHA
Sunday, 15 Nov, 2009

A blogger makes a valid point in a recent blog on dawn.com. He suggests that the reason why recent election rallies in Gilgit-Baltistan are so diagonally different from those held in the rest of Pakistan is perhaps due to the lack of militant madressahs and the concept of political Islam in that area.

He is also right to note that the language and the overall content of the recent rallies by almost all the leading political parties there are squarely concentrated on various economic and development issues; whereas political rallies held by the same parties elsewhere in Pakistan are usually studded with impassioned sloganeering and jingoistic takes on Islam, India, Jews and America. The general aura of these rallies also smacks of a xenophobic and chauvinistic exhibition of ‘patriotism.’

Till about the late 1960s, political rallies, rather their content, were largely different in Pakistan. The people’s economic wellbeing and the country’s economic progress used to be the focus of the speakers at these rallies. However, things in this respect began to change with the consolidation of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (as an opposition leader) in 1967.

Already a gifted orator, Bhutto took his cue from the celebrated speakers of the 1960s’ leftist student leaders who in their passionate outbursts addressed economic issues using rhetorical Marxist lingo and revolutionary bravado.

In his speeches at the time, Bhutto too addressed economic issues faced by the people, but he began to use more and more revolutionary symbolism and lingo trying to work the crowds into a captivated frenzy, just like Mao Tse Tung was doing during the Chinese Cultural Revolution. Aggressive vocal posturing became a hallmark of the Bhutto rallies, but this aggression got its first physical manifestation when during the 1970 election campaign, hoards of Jamat-i-Islami (JI) and its student wing, the Islami Jamiat Taleba (IJT) activists, started to attack Bhutto rallies.

In his book, Pakistan People’s Party: Rise to Power, Phillip E. Jones states that PPP rallies became a target of the JI and IJT activists who, incensed by Bhutto’s leftist rhetoric, labelled him as ‘anti-Islam’ and a ‘kafir.’ Till then political rallies were usually attacked and dispersed by government-hired hooligans and the police, so this was perhaps the first time one political party was attacking another party’s rally.

Jones further writes that to counter these attacks by the JI and IJT, the PPP formed the ‘People’s Guards.’ These were groups of tough young men picked from various leftist student organisations, especially the National Students’ Federation (NSF) that was supporting Bhutto. A number of clashes took place between the ‘People’s Guards’ and the JI activists during the 1970 election campaign.

The tone of Bhutto’s speeches became a lot more aggressive after he came to power in 1972 — especially from 1974 onwards, when smitten by the sudden turn that the ideology of Pakistan took after the East Pakistan debacle, both Bhutto and his political-religious opponents began using ‘Islam’ a lot more frequently. It was the Bhutto government which presided over the change of direction Pakistan’s history and school books took after the 1971 civil war in the former East Pakistan. It was also Bhutto who had Ahmadis declared as non-Muslim.

Suddenly, Islam took centre-stage like never before, even to the extent that these books were infused with half-baked truths and historical distortions, mainly so that the ‘two nation theory’ that helped originate the concept of a separate Muslim country in the subcontinent could be defended, especially after the theory had actually collapsed with the creation of Bangladesh (on the basis of ethnicity) in 1971. As Bhutto’s opponents raised the bar of fiery Islamic rhetoric, by the 1977 election campaign, Bhutto too was heard using Islamic symbolism and promises more than revolutionary socialist idioms. General Ziaul Haq who arrived as a military dictator in 1977, soon turned political speechmaking into a calculated expression in which, for the first time, a modern-day political leader was heard using Quranic terms, verses and sometimes whole hadiths. Days of speeches addressing economic and development issues in secular terms became history.

As radical/militant Islam took root in Pakistani society during the Afghan civil war in the 1980s; pro-Zia politicians and religious parties began doing the same. By the 1990s speeches heard at PML-N and JI rallies were usually studded with heavy Islamic symbolism and terms. The trend has continued, so much so, that today, even the more secular parties such as the PPP, ANP and the MQM can’t escape from using Islamic symbolism in their speeches to constantly reinforce their spiritual credentials.

What’s more, the trend has now infested the electronic media as well, where supposedly ‘objective’ newscasters and talk show hosts punctuate their speech and tirades with Islamic terms like Allah, Sharia, Shaheed, etc., as if trying to give their obvious vocal diabolism a righteous sheen. What is being sacrificed is cohesive speech based on facts and a practical vision of the future, a dialogue that is actually a rational discourse on politics, economics and terrorism, instead of an ‘I am holier than you’ clash of bloated egos. Source
Read more...

Amirul Momineen Mian Nawaz Sharif, a model 'moderate Muslm' of today's Pakistan

Smokers’ Corner: The peril of being moderate

By Nadeem F. Paracha
Sunday, 01 Nov, 2009 (Dawn)

Some five years ago when rising cases of religious extremism and suicide bombings started to spell a serious problem for the state and society, the easiest position taken by those condemning such barbarism was to point to the need to promote ‘moderate Islam.’

It seemed the logical thing to do in a country that took its religion very seriously; but exactly how has the promoting of ‘moderate Islam’ by the state and the electronic media in the last few years helped contain the nuisance of faith-driven terrorism? It hasn’t.

This is because we forgot that ‘moderate Islam’ comes attached with a pragmatism that, during a crisis of religious identity, can be as harmful as the uncouth babbling of an extremist or the sheepish convolutions of his ever-willing apologists.

The biggest problem thus with so-called ‘moderate Muslims’ is that they fail to hold any solid convictions, and would largely remain quiet, even in the face of their more extremist counterparts’ irrational take on faith, and their reliance on coercion and violence. Why on earth did it take the moderate majority of Pakistan so long to realise that the Taliban always had the potential to unleash a blood-splattered havoc?

If being ‘moderate’ in matters of faith really means banking more on one’s commonsense and the faculties of logic, then exactly what logic determined the moderates’ silence in the midst of widespread bloodshed and the loud spiels unloaded by so many crackpots who are still in search of ‘hidden hands’ when the enemy breathes and breeds right underneath their Pinocchio noses? In the kind of unprecedented turmoil we are in today, the whole idea about the silent moderate majority needs to be confronted and shaken out of its comfort zones of navel-gazing.

I say this because the so-called moderate Muslims are now perhaps the only ones who could allow themselves the advantage of being persuaded by a rational debate against extremism; because no amount of reason, commonsense and appeal to humanity can ever dent the stone-cold wickedness of the blood-thirsty extremists, or the shameful epileptic populist rhetoric of their apologists who appear in front of us in the guise of ‘journalists,’ ‘experts’ ‘leaders’ and whatnot.

They also include some conventional political-religious parties. They have done all they could to keep upsetting the government’s and the army’s attempts to build a wider consensus for the state’s war against terrorism. We would actually be doing democracy a great service by taking away from these drawing room and TV-friendly fitnas the privilege of spouting nonsense and naked hatred in the name of freedom of speech.

One should not even bother trying to have a rational debate with the many apologists of the barbarians who are found across TV screens and in internet forums; as far as commonsense, intellectual decency and even the Quranic concept of aqal are concerned, they’re a spent force, gasping loudly like a fish out of water.

But what about the so-called moderates? As more and more Pakistanis are finally coming around to nodding in approval beyond the matters of sect, political party and ethnicity to continue consolidating an all-round consensus against religious extremism, many ‘moderate Muslims’ can still be caught navel-gazing.

Politically speaking, the attitude of the PML(N) and its leader, Mian Nawaz Sharif, in this context is a vivid example. The party can be described as what political scientists call a ‘Muslim Democracy’ party, or a centre-right political entity which, like the European Christian Democrats, are moderate, faith-based parties minus any theocratic or fundamentalist pretensions, and which have a healthy relationship with modern democratic notions and a liking for market economics.

So, never mind the many delusions Mian Saheb held in the past, wanting to be crowned as the Amirul Momineen, today he is a ‘moderate Muslim.’ But in spite of making all the right noises about democracy, constitutionalism and a free judiciary, the man has only rarely been heard castigating extremism. This is ironic from a man whose party’s bastion of support is Punjab, a province that has recently experienced some of the most harrowing acts of terrorism perpetrated by the Taliban, and yet, Mian Sahib remains mum about them.

What is he waiting for? Is he still expecting some large sections of his mostly petty-bourgeois constituency in Punjab to hold sympathy for extremists? Does he still believe that if he openly talks against the Taliban, he will lose his votes? It is true that in the past religious extremists of all shades did find sympathy with certain sections of Punjab’s petty-bourgeoisie, but one doubts such is the case anymore.

Read more...

Pakistani media's somersaults on air - By Nadeem Paracha

Somersaults on air

Posted by Nadeem F. Paracha (Dawn Blog)

Talking to DawnNews, veteran journalist Agha Murtaza Poya called America, India, and Israel an ‘axis of evil out to destroy Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan.’

There is absolutely nothing new or original about Poya’s grand ‘geopolitical’ assessment, but when such unsubstantiated claptrap comes from a respected journalist, what common sense or responsibility can one expect from the hoards of TV anchors and print journalists whose figurative 15 minutes of fame have already overstayed their cacophonic welcome.

It is a ‘fame’ gathered from cheap fist-clenching demonstrations of populist nonsense and so-called political discourses that are thoroughly anti-intellectual in nature and akin to deal more in sardonic barbs and thrilling sound bytes for an audience that seems not to have the patience, or for that matter, the capability to enjoy a more rational discourse.

TV screens and the pages of some newspapers are choked with hosts, journalists, and ‘experts’ dishing out the most worn out clichés that can be wonderful fodder for fast food spy fiction, consequently announcing the demise of any semblance left in this society to actually understand international and local politics as a dynamic science instead of reading it as a rapid-fire script of a racy James Bond film.

Accusations are conveniently floated about ‘corruption’ and ‘foreign hands,’ and not even once have they been proven as something more concrete than drawing room gossip or obsessive finger-wagging.

Thankfully, those sickened by such baloney have gotten down to systematically dismantling the many myths and conspiracy dribble that are smugly rolled out as ‘facts.’

Take the books written on the subject of Islamists and terrorism in the region by well known author Ahmed Rashid. In Decent into Chao (2008), Rashid uses reliable sources to turn the already known narrative of Pakistan being its own worst enemy into an elaborate and convincing intellectual and journalistic exercise.

But myth-busters – including Rashid, Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy, Dr. Mubarak Ali and others – may seem ‘too dry’ in their style compared to the many compelling babblers, journalists, and columnists who have turned spouting populist twaddle and worn-out conspiracies into an industry. Now, however, the myth-breaking brigade have found their own shock troopers.

This is a vital development in which sanity in this respect seems to be evolving a muscular side to challenge the sheer brawn of gaseous drawing room jocks such as Zaid Hamid, Aamir Liaquat, Mubashhir Luqman, Shahid Masood, Ansar Abbasi, et al.

Urdu columnist and TV host Hassan Nisar and investigative journalist Aamir Mir have been the frontline shock troopers. They have continued to dent the jocks’ numerous theories not only with arguments rooted in facts, but also with a punch.

In his book, Talibanisation of Pakistan, Mir, like Rashid, uses the most convincing investigative tools, smartly gathering on-ground facts from various competing intelligence agencies in Pakistan to lay out a harrowing narrative that puts Pakistan’s many schizophrenic intelligence agencies smack-dab in the middle of all that has gone so terribly wrong with Pakistan in matters of extremism and terrorism.

Mir’s book is a warning, but without the holier-than-thou approach that many of his detractors usually take.

The more we remain in denial about our own agencies’ historical dabbling in civilian political matters, and the many deadly games that these agencies played moulding armies of fanatical and violent Frankenstein Monsters, the deeper we shall tumble into the bottomless pit we have managed to dig for ourselves.

Interestingly, every time certain awkward truths about our own political and societal failures start to become a hot topic among the amoral chattering classes, there are always those who suddenly up the ante of their respective TV shows and their newspaper ‘scoops’ and columns, diverting the attention of the people either back to the wrecking and scheming ways of ‘foreign hands,’ or, of course, the Kerry-Lugar Bill and the NRO.

I’ve been associated with both investigative and desk journalism for more than 15 years now, and I know how vulnerable to exploitation journalists can get; quite like the politicians we so self-righteously bash. And even though I have very little experience with electronic journalism, one can quite easily point out the cynicism that cuts across it.

In 2007, the army (for the TV news channels) became the villain and the lawyers our saviours; terrorists were dealt with velvet gloves, even glorified as men who were creatures of circumstance instead of the cold-blooded murderers that they really are.
The same year, when late Benazir Bhutto met with Pervez Musharraf, she was mocked and put down as a ‘puppet of America.’ Soon after her tragic death, she suddenly became a heroine, and whole documentaries were dedicated to her.

In 2008, the army was still the villain and democrats became supermen. Terrorists were still seen to be fighting a noble war against America, and those who were blowing themselves up in mosques and schools were ‘Indian agents.’

In 2009, after the government and the army finally took decisive action against the terrorists, the army returned to the TV screens as heroes. Terrorists, meanwhile, became an elusive cross between barbarians and men funded by foreign powers. Last year’s supermen, the elected democrats, on the other hand, become ‘corrupt,’ ‘incompetent,’ and a laughing stock.

Suddenly, for TV news channels in Pakistan, it seems democracy isn’t all that cool anymore. They’re back indulging in Pakistani journalism’s all-time favourite pastime: looking for those ‘dark clouds’ of army intervention to ‘control corrupt politicians.’ They just never tire of this hollow, reactive exercise. It’s been going on ever since 1958.

The electronic media claims these somersaults are undertaken in the fine name of ‘democracy,’ and ‘freedom of speech.’ But the truth is, much of our electronic media is simply driven by what is better described as a mobocracy! Even a casual glance at any ‘talk show’ should suffice as proof.

Nadeem F. Paracha is a cultural critic and senior columnist for Dawn Newspaper and Dawn.com.

http://blog.dawn.com/2009/10/29/somersaults-on-air/

Read more...

A perspective on anti-Americanism found in Pakistan today

Smokers’ Corner: Bogey nation

Nadeem F. Paracha
Sunday, 25 Oct, 2009 (Dawn Blog)

Anti-Americanism today is an obligatory part of populist rhetoric.— Photo from File

Recently the monthly Herald published the results of an elaborate survey that it undertook to determine the extent of anti-Americanism in Pakistan. The findings suggest nothing that we do not already know. The percentages in this case hold only an academic interest.

Though anti-Americanism during the Cold War (1949-89) was mostly the ideological vocation of pro-Soviet leftists, today (some twenty years after the collapse of the Soviet Union), one can safely suggest that America is experiencing its most detested hour. It hasn’t been hated across the board so much and so instantly as it is today, thanks mainly to the many arrogant misdeeds of the Bush administration and its utter deficiency in the art and skill of empathetic and prudent diplomacy.

However, the anti-Americanism virus — at least in most Muslim countries — today is such that the critique that comes with it is largely rhetorical, and, at times, rather obsessive-compulsive. The recent ‘debate’ that took place in Pakistan’s electronic media on the Kerry-Lugar Bill is a vivid example of this trend, in which, it was quite clear that certain politicians, TV talk show hosts and their audiences among the country’s ever growing chattering classes, who were quick to attack the Bill, hadn’t even read the document! Their single cue in this respect was the Pakistan Army’s concerns about certain conditions mentioned in the aid bill, and off they went on a rampage.

More interesting however will be to trace the history and evolution of anti-Americanism in Pakistan. According to a research paper written by Dr Talukder Muniruzaman in 1971 on the politics of young Pakistanis, a majority of Pakistanis viewed America positively and admiringly in the 1950s. The paper also suggests that right up till Pakistan’s 1965 war with India, most Pakistanis saw America as a friend, especially in the context of the Soviet Union’s close ties with India.

According to a lengthy paper (published by Chicago University in 1983) on the ideological orientation of Pakistan’s university students (by Kiren Aziz and Peter McDonough), anti-Americanism among most Pakistanis remained somewhat low even during the celebrated movement (in 1967-68) against the Ayub Khan dictatorship; in spite of the fact that the movement was largely led by leftist students and politicians.

The paper further suggests that anti-Americanism in the 1970s that was ripe among many Arab countries due to the United States’ single-minded support for Israel, started to finally make its way into Pakistani society during the Z. A. Bhutto regime (1972-77); especially when Bhutto started to expand his ‘Islamic Socialism’ doctrine at the international level by striking firm relations with various radical Muslim states and Arab countries. The build-up to this was the otherwise sympathetic Richard Nixon administration’s failure to militarily help its Asian ally during the 1971 war with India.

In spite of this, America remained Pakistan’s leading aid donor. According to Lubna Rafique’s 1994 paper, ‘Benazir & British Press,’ it was only in the last year of Z. A. Bhutto’s regime (1977), that he started to allude to moving out of the ‘American camp,’ calling the US a ‘white elephant.’ He also went on to accuse the Jimmy Carter administration of financing right-wing parties’ agitation against him in 1977.

Throughout the Ziaul Haq dictatorship in the 1980s, anti-Americanism remained a much polarised affair in Pakistan. Most political-religious parties and their supporters, and the industrial class that supported Zia, were either openly pro-America or ambiguous on the subject. This was due to the fact that Zia was an Islamist military dictator who was backed by the Ronald Regan administration with military hardware and dollars during the West’s war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and against ‘communism in the region’. On the other hand, anti-Americanism became rampant among those opposing Zia.

Though by the late 1980s the intensity of anti-Americanism had grown (compared to the preceding decades), it never became violent. In fact, some would suggest that in the 1990s as America largely divorced itself from the region after the end of the Afghan civil war, anti-Americanism actually receded, and Pakistanis got busy tackling the bitter pitfalls of the war in the shape of bloody ethnic and sectarian strife.

Anti-Americanism returned to the fore like never before after the tragic 9/11 episode in 2001. According to veteran defence analyst, Hassan Askari, this strain of anti-Americanism is an emotional response of most Pakistanis to the confusion that set in after 9/11. In other words, this version of anti-Americanism has very little to do with a more academic or concrete understanding of both international and home-grown terrorism. The post-9/11 confusion and emotionalism in Pakistan is given vent and an ‘intellectual tilt’ by Islamist apologists of all shapes and sizes pointing fingers at ‘outside forces’ for the blood that is being shed by home-grown fanatics, is only too visible.

Whereas there was a prominent streak of individualism and romantic rebellion associated with the anti-Americanism of Pakistani leftists during the Cold War, nothing of the sort can be said about the widespread anti-Americanism found in Pakistan today. The present-day phenomenon has become an obligatory part of populist rhetoric in which American involvement is blamed for everything — from terrorist attacks, to the energy crises, to perhaps even the break of dengue fever.

Ridiculous, really. (Source: Dawn Blog)

.....

The futility of hating

Tuesday, October 27, 2009 Mosharraf Zaidi We know that Pakistanis are not alone in the world, when it comes to being more than a little miffed about how their country is treated by the United States. The hullabaloo over why there is so much anti-Americanism in Pakistan, however, is a bit mystifying. The implicit insistence that high levels of anti-Americanism in Pakistan are unacceptable seems to reek of hubris. US officials, both bureaucrats (like Ambassador Ann Paterson) and politicians (like Congressman Howard Berman) have grown increasingly testy in recent weeks, trying to perfume the world-famous love letter of the American people to Pakistan (formerly known as the Kerry Lugar Bill). If the incredulity of Americans trying to convince Pakistanis that their country is Uncle Sam's little love-muffin seems a little ridiculous, it's because it is. Only committed Orientalists would insist that a country of nearly 180 million be starry-eyed about America's thus-far unproven, newfound wisdom about Pakistani democracy. Proconsul Dick Holbrook should get over it. And so should Howie Berman. Pakistanis aren't the only ones that don't trust the US government. Nevertheless, Pakistan would be best served by some introspection on the whole anti-American routine. The sad truth is that "Go America Go" and anti-American narrative in Pakistan is a microcosm of the quality and texture of public discourse in Pakistan--irrational, without evidence, and oftentimes, downright malicious and ill-intentioned. It seems Pakistani mistrust of the United States is rooted in the US drone strikes to take out Al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders hiding out in Pakistani territory. That is understandable, given the high number of innocent Pakistanis killed by these strikes, and the brazen absence of any contrition or remorse on the part of the US government. but anti-Americanism has always existed among some segments in Pakistan, but it has never been quite so universal, or quite so pronounced, as it has been in the last two months. No doubt, Pakistanis should be proud to be proud, and should reserve the right to like or dislike countries on the basis of how they perceive those countries treat Pakistan. However Pakistanis should also be smart while they're being proud. If anti-American rhetoric is masking other more important and more urgent problems--dare we say, Pakistani problems--then the rhetoric is poisonous and need to be shunned. Anti-Americanism in Pakistan has two dimensions, in particular, that make it a rather poisonous instrument in the public discourse. The first is that anti-Americanism is itself marked by incompetence, and in turn masks Pakistani incompetence. The second is that anti-Americanism easily displaces responsibility for Pakistani problems, from Pakistan's leaders, to the abstraction of the American beast. In short, the second dimension is about accountability, and how anti-Americanism prevents such accountability. Two of the most recent big-ticket stories in the country amply demonstrate the competence problem in Pakistan's anti-American odyssey. The Blackwater controversy and the Kerry Lugar Bill both demonstrated the failure of Pakistani public discourse to produce viable and defensible positions, and thereby losing the opportunity to engage audiences in the United States that might actually be amenable to Pakistanis' concerns, and who might have actually enabled a true dialogue between Pakistanis and Americans at large. In the case of the Blackwater controversy, the national public discourse was aimed at a demonisation of the United States, rather than a serious examination of what was actually taking place in terms of the presence of private US security contractors in Pakistan. The controversy failed to ever truly define, what, if any, laws were broken, or, indeed, what moral or ethical problem the presence of private security contractors presented for Pakistan. Is there a fair public policy debate to be had in Pakistan, on the legitimacy and legality of private security contractors from another country working in Pakistan? Most definitely. But the manner in which the issue has been discussed thus far has done two things. First, it has turned off and alienated rational Pakistanis who seek evidence before unleashing nationalist tirades against another country. Second, it has largely de-legitimised the entire subject matter altogether--once a topic is coloured with an irrational taint, it is difficult to have a substantive discussion about it, even if the data and evidence to conduct the discussion is in place. With this being the ambient quality of Pakistani national discourse, it should not surprise anyone that Pakistanis collectively adopt anti-Americanism as an instrument of debate. Engaging in a serious and substantive debate about the role of non-state actors in Pakistan would require a basic level of effort invested in understanding the dimensions of government and the extent to which the state is receding. Blaming Americans for wanting to turn Islamabad into Baghdad, on the other hand, is both a sexier hook for dining room conversation, and perhaps more importantly, an easy way out for those responsible for running the country. Which brings us to the second dimension of anti-Americanism: the impunity that it enables Pakistani leaders to operate with. Having Uncle Sam to beat with a baseball bat every time Pakistani leaders need a scapegoat, is ultra-convenient. Even this government, which is otherwise so deeply immersed in building all kinds of bridges with the US, keeps Finance Minister Shaukat Tarin close at hand to deliver verbal smack-downs about the price Pakistan is paying in the war on terror, and its urgent and immediate need for a US federal bailout. The entire range of political parties, including the military, have banked on anti-Americanism, not because of hatred for America, but because any deconstruction of Pakistan's problems would illustrate how deeply culpable Pakistan's leaders--political and military--have been, and how completely disconnected from most of Pakistan's domestic problems America truly is. Pakistan's fiscal crunch is a function of spending too much money on the wrong things (war and debt-servicing), and not extracting enough money from the right people (feudal land owners, and desi rogue speculators of the Karachi Stock Exchange). Pakistan's mosque and madrasa problem is a function of leaving the job of faith leadership to the most underprivileged, and sending all the nice-smelling lucky kids to Wisconsin, Waterloo, Worcester and Wollongong. Pakistan's education problem is a function of the use of teachers' jobs as political spoils. Pakistan's healthcare problem is a function of not treating doctors with the respect and dignity they deserve, and treating patients like cattle. Pakistan's most serious problems are not the products of America's desire to devour Pakistani sovereignty. They are a product of Pakistani sovereignty not knowing what to do with itself, and how and why. Hating on America won't solve that problem. The writer advises governments, donors and NGOs on public policy. He can be reached through his website www.mosharrafzaidi.com (The News)

Read more...

The Hypcratic Republic of Pakistan: A Profile

Country profile: Pakistan

Posted by Nadeem F. Paracha in Dawn Blogs

History

The state of Pakistan occupies an area which was home to some of the earliest Neanderthal settlements, some of whose decedents can still be found hiding in caves in the mountains of North Pakistan. The only difference is, in the Stone Ages, these Neanderthals were armed with clubs and stones, and today they are armed with guns and bombs. Remarkably though, they remain as furry as they were millions of years ago.

The modern state of Pakistan was born out of the partition of the Indian sub-continent in 1947 and has faced many regional confrontations, usually brought on by its continuing habit of poking its nose where it doesn’t belong.

Created to meet the demands of Indian Muslims who wanted to have their own boxing ring, Pakistan was originally in two parts: Part 1 was called Maula Jat and Part 2 was called Jat in Dhaka. The east wing - present-day the Flooded Republic of Bangladesh - is on the Bay of Bengal bordering the Bollywood Republic of India and the Miserable Republic of Burma. The west wing - present-day the Not-Quite-Arab Republic of Pakistan - stretches from the Arabian Sea to the Himalayas and - according to famous patriots and military geniuses like Munawar Hussain and Zaid Hamid – the country actually stretches all the way to New Delhi, Kabul, Tashkent and maybe even Beijing (the last needs to be conquered because Chinese eat frogs and frogs are makru, even if some people say that they taste just like chicken).

The break-up of the two wings came in 1971 when the mainly Bengali-speaking and fish-eating east wing seceded with help from the Elders of Zion.

The disputed northern territory of Kashmir has been the flashpoint for two of the three utterly useless India-Pakistan wars - those of 1948 and 1965. There was a further brief but bitter armed conflict after Islamic militants (ironically led by an enlightened-moderated army man, General P. Mush Bonaparte) infiltrated Indian-administered Kashmir in 1999. After the operation ended in a fiasco, he blamed it on the not-very-enlightened-moderated former prime minister, Mian Naraaz Sharif.

Civilian politics in Pakistan in the last few decades has been tarnished by corruption, inefficiency, confrontations, and bad breath between various institutions and/or whatever institutions that are left in the country. Actually, the word political institution is an oxymoron when discussed in the context of Pakistani politics and state.

Alternating periods of civilian and military rule have not helped to establish stability. In fact, instability is the only stable tradition in Pakistan; a tradition that is being passionately upheld by a series of TV talk shows because political stability would mean lack of viewership and advertising revenues for the channels and a drastic drop in popcorn sales that could turn people into boring book readers which is so passé.

Pakistan came under military rule once again in October 1999 after the ousting of a civilian government that had lost a great deal of public support because the public lost its appetite for rich Mughal dishes such as nihari, paye, and biryani which Prime Minister Naraaz Sharif was a great fan of.

He has since become a vegetarian and is usually taunted as becoming a sissy by Brig. (rtd.) Cookie Monster Billa, the architect of the Afghan Jihad and – according to trendy patriot Madam Maria B - the 1857 Indian Mutiny in which the madam also took part as a gallant needle-worker. Her gallantry was praised by the famous poet Mubashir Lucman on the recommendation of Adolf Hitler. Madam Maria B. still has her famous 1857 needles with which she now pokes voodoo dolls of her competitors in Pakistan’s cut-throat fashion world.

Mr Mush eventually relinquished his army post amidst tears in November 2007, but at parliamentary elections in February 2008, his supporters were defeated, also amidst tears.

The Pakistan Khapay Khapay Khapay Party (KKK) formed a coalition government led by Asif Zulfikar Ali Bhutto Zardari and an impeachment process was launched against Mush, who resigned (amidst more tears) in August 2008.

Pakistan’s place on the world stage shifted after the September 11, 2001, attacks in the US. It dropped its support for the Neanderthal regime in Afghanistan and was propelled into the front line in the fight against terrorism, becoming a key ally of the Elders of Zion and assorted secret Freemason societies.

However, Pakistani forces have struggled to maintain control over the restive Neanderthal regions along the Afghan border, where Neanderthal militants are firmly entrenched with sophisticated dish antennas hidden in their turbans and bombs strapped around their tummies which they claim is only a weight reducing exercise. But nobody (except maybe the brilliant Lord Imran Khan), believes them.

In the spring of 2009, the government attempted to reduce disaffection in the troubled north-western Swat district by agreeing to the imposition of the Whipping Women Law.

Far from improving security, this move allowed the Neanderthals to tighten their grip on the region, and the agreement broke down after only a few whips. Since then, the government has waged a rolling military campaign to flush the furry Neanderthals out of the tribal areas - an act that many sensitive Pakistanis such as Professional Hajji Aamir Qayamat and the notorious Male Nurse Shahid Masood have criticized.

Tensions with India over Kashmir have resurfaced regularly ever since the partition of the sub-continent, and the two nuclear-armed (but empty bellied) powers have on numerous occasions been on the brink of renewed conflict that promises to be as exciting as a close Twenty20 cricket match on a bouncy pitch. Or, at least, that’s what most Pakistani and Indians think. Idiots.

Asif Zulfikar Ali Bhutto Zardari won the presidential race of September 6, 2008, by a big majority. His election by Pakistan’s legislators came a few weeks after his predecessor General P. Mush Bonaparte resigned amidst tears under threat of impeachment that, however, has now turned into an imbananament!

At his swearing-in ceremony, Mr Zardari said he was accepting the post of president in the name of his assassinated wife, Benazir Bhutto, who was killed by a leading Neanderthal who himself was killed by an American drone attack. Many Pakistanis do not approve of American drone attacks, even if they usually manage to kill the scum of the earth. However, it is likely Pakistanis would have hailed the drone attacks had they come from the Saudis who are our brothers and we their camels.

Media

General P. Mush Bonaparte’s rule ushered in increased freedom for the print media and a liberalisation of broadcasting policies. Television is the dominant medium, and there are around 50,000 private channels all babbling about the same things.

More than 100 private FM radio stations have been licensed. Fake American accents and low IQ levels are firm prerequisites for success. These FM stations are not allowed to broadcast their own news programmes, and thank God for that!

Scores of unlicensed FM stations are said to operate in the tribal areas of North-West Frontier Province. They are usually operated by Neanderthal RJs, of which DJ Fazalullah In Da Caaaaave is the most popular.

The broadcasting regulator can order a halt to the carriage of foreign TV channels via cable. However, the spouting of utter nonsense and hate speeches on local channels is allowed. Keeps popcorn sales from falling.

Pakistan’s press is among the most outspoken in South Asia, although its influence is limited by a literacy level of around 50 per cent. Out of these, perhaps a mere 5 per cent actually make the effort to read a newspaper and those who do read newspapers they read dailies that spout utter nonsense and scribble hate speeches. Nadeem F. Paracha of the Daily Zion is one such iblees.

There are around 18 million internet users in Pakistan. A growing number of bloggers write about politics, and informative, engrossing and intelligent discussions take place on various internet sites. Here is one example:

Superbilla:
What you think you think you are you kafir anti-Islam Pakistan Afghanistan Israeli Hindu dog!

Pakpunk:
Oh, you shut up you deobandi terrorist what you think you are you and I am I am great Muslim and Pakistan jeeay jeeay yea!!

Munchkins:
Oh why you fight you both you fight you both we all Muslim ummah and Pakistani patriots so we should get together and gather and explode atom bum on India!!!!

Superbilla:
Oh you shut up you hypocrite you not real Pakistani but Ahmadi nonsense, oh you bastaaaaaaaa!!!

Munchkins:
Shut up your face you blasphemy man you destroy unity of Muslim ummah and reader of kafir NFP you too bastaaaaaaaa!!!!

Moderator:
Guys please refrain from using bad language. We are Pakistanis and Muslims and this is a respectable forum where tolerance is practiced.

Munchkins:
Oh why you say this to me to me what about superbilla and pakpunk I am tolerant best Muslim in whole wide world like Pakistan best country in whole wide world.

Moderator:
I said exhibit tolerance and respect, okay? That goes for all.

PartabIndia:
Thank you, sir, for the tolerant words. I am from India and …

Moderator:
Oh, you bastaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!

Read more...

In defence of Murree Brewery

Unhappy hours
Posted by Nadeem F. Paracha (Dawn Blogs)

I have been fortunate enough to travel across Europe and much of Asia in the last seven years. One learns so much by engaging with a variety of cultures, cuisines and people, but, at least with me, there always comes a time (as a visitor in a foreign country), when I start craving good old Pakistani/Indian food.

In 2005, while traveling across Holland, Germany and France, the pangs and cravings for desi food struck me in the middle of a busy shopping district in Paris. Luckily, almost at once I was able to spot a restaurant whose doorman was dressed in a traditional Pushtun dress. I don’t exactly remember the name of the place, but on inquiry, I was told it was owned by two middle-aged gentlemen - one an Indian (from Bangalore), and the other a Pakistani (from Lahore).

What’s more, the waiters too were a colorful sub-continental mix: Pakistanis, Indians and Bangladeshis. It was a fantastic environment, and I was able to speak Urdu/Hindi for the first time during my brief stay in a city where people even struggled with English. It was a joy looking at a menu that I could actually understand.

After ordering some biryani, nihari and a couple of rotis, I turned to the drinks section in the menu. I was delighted to note that the restaurant was also offering Indian beer, which I ordered right away

Lighting myself a cigarette, I waited in enthusiastic anticipation. It took just five minutes for the waiter to bring in the beer and lo and behold! I looked at the bottle and it was Murree Beer!

It was a pleasant little surreal moment discovering Pakistani beer in Paris. I at once called back the waiter and asked him what was the name of a Pakistani beer brand doing under ‘Indian Beers’ on the menu?

The middle-aged man was from Pakistan (Punjab), and he gave me a puzzled look: ‘Sorry, what did you say?’ he politely asked.

From Urdu, I switched to Punjabi: ‘Friend, this is a Pakistani beer brand …’

But before I could continue he interrupted: ‘Sir, goras (Caucasians) usually ask for Indian beer … you want an Indian brand?’

‘Absolutely not!’ I said. ‘I love Indian beer, but Murree has its moments too. Ask your bosses to put it under the heading of ‘Pakistani Beer,’ will you?’

Murree Beer is made by Murree Brewery Co., Pakistan’s oldest (and now only), tax-paying brewery. It was established in 1860 near the famous resort town of Murree in the Punjab province of what is now Pakistan. In the 1920s, the brewery was moved to Rawalpindi where it still stands. In the 1960s, Murree, which until then was famous for its beers, introduced Malt Whisky, and by the early 1970s, Murree was also producing vodka and gin.

Before prohibition on the public sale of alcohol was imposed in Pakistan in April 1977, various foreign whisky and beer brands were available in bars, liquor shops and clubs in the main urban areas of the country; but Murree remained to be the leading (and most affordable) brand.

In fact its popularity (especially among young urban middle-class Pakistanis) was such that it started to advertise its beer in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Hoardings and billboards carrying images of Murree Beer went up, mostly in Karachi, with the biggest being a neon sign put on top of a six-storied building in Karachi’s Lucky Star area in the shopping vicinity of Saddar. This sign was also stoned and damaged by a passing procession of the fundamentalist Jamat-i-Islami supporters during the 1970 election campaign.

In the 1970s, Murree was competing with various imported beer and whisky brands, but it continued to do well because it was mostly catering to a growing middle-class market to whom imported alcoholic brands were an expensive luxury. There were a few other local brands as well, but none of them survived the ban on alcohol that was, ironically, imposed by the secular government of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in April 1977.

Though voted into power through a free and fair general elections in 1970, by 1977 Bhutto was facing a full-fledged protest movement led by a coalition (PNA) of anti-PPP parties. The leading PNA parties were all conservative politico-religious groups - (i.e Jamat-i-Islami, Jamiat Ulema Islam and Jamiat Ulema Pakistan) - all of whom had taken to the streets after accusing the Bhutto regime of rigging the 1977 elections.

PNA protests were mostly driven by right-wing students, small traders and shopkeepers, supported by industrialists many of whom had been bitten by the Bhutto regime’s ‘socialist’ policies between 1971 and 1974. The bourgeois and the petty-bourgeois youth who had overwhelmingly supported the PPP’s socialist promises in the late 1960s and early 1970s, had now turned rightwards, looking for ‘Islamic laws’ (Shariah), which the anti-Bhutto alliance promised to implement.

In the many anti-Bhutto rallies in Karachi and Lahore, protesters also attacked bars, nightclubs, wine shops and cinemas, denouncing them as symbols of the ‘unIslamic Bhutto regime.’

PNA leadership maintained that not only had the Bhutto regime’s socialism undermined Islamic culture and law, it had also failed to offer equality and relief to the poor. The PNA leaders insisted that only Shariah could guarantee justice and economic wellbeing to the poor – even though, ironically, the PNA alliance and movement was being financed by a number of anti-Bhutto industrialists and, as some political commentators claimed, by theJimmy Carter government in Washington with which Bhutto had had a falling out over Pakistan’s then nascent nuclear ambitions.

Fearing a toppling and, more so, a military coup by the Army, Bhutto decided to hold talks with PNA leaders and if need be, hold fresh elections. For this he also agreed to close down the nightclubs, bars and wine shops, outlaw gambling, and declare the Muslim holy day of Friday as a weekly holiday instead of Sunday.

But just as a compromise between Bhutto and PNA was in sight, Bhutto’s own hand-picked General, Muhamad Ziaul Haq, toppled the regime in a military coup and imposed Martial Law on 5th July, 1977.

An admirer of conservative Islamic scholar and Jamat-i-Islami chief, Maoulana Abul Ala Moududdi, Zia declared that it would be he who will give Pakistan a Nizam-e-Mustapha.

Zia used ‘Islamization’ as a political process. His puritanical and at the same time Machiavellian interpretation of Islam had contributed considerably to the rise of fundamentalism, obscurantism and retrogression.

Obviously, the ban on alcohol stayed put but Zia added severe punishments (for Muslims) on selling and consuming alcohol. The non-Muslim Pakistanis now required a license to buy alcohol, which nonetheless was allowed to be sold (only to non-Muslims) in ‘licensed wine shops’ mainly in Karachi, the interior of Sindh and Islamabad.

Apart from the fact that more than 90 per cent of the customers of these ‘legal wine shops’ were Muslims, the 1980s and 1990s also saw a dramatic rise in cases of heroin and tranquilizer addiction. What’s more, though quality Murree brands are available in these shops, their prices have risen, leaving many lower-middle and ‘underclass’ Pakistanis consuming inferior and dangerous ‘home made’ alcoholic beverages sold by shady bootlegging mafias operating in improvished areas of urban Pakistan.

Also, ever since the ban on alcohol, liquor smugglers and dealers have been turning a profit with contraband alcohol. Trucks bring vodka in from China across the mountains along the country’s northern border, while ships unload cargos of beer and Scotch whiskey from Europe on its southern coast.

Though the disruptive growth of heroin and bootlegging mafias has been a natural consequence of the long ban, the irony is, ever since the 1980s, the number of chronic alcoholics in Pakistan has almost quadrupled.

On the other hand, though there were no heroin addicts in Pakistan until the late 1970s (the first registered case was reported in 1979), by 1985 Pakistan had the second largest population of heroin addicts.

Also, today there are more alcoholics in Pakistan than ever before – an emergence that has triggered the opening of various privately run alcohol detox centers in the country’s main cities.



Murree Brewery is one of the biggest tax-paying companies in Pakistan. Ever since 1977, it has survived the various waves of imposed piety and convoluted expresssions of state-sanctioned ‘Islam’, which, on most occasions, has only managed to spell political, cultural and even spiritual disaster in Pakistan.

Most Pakistanis usually remain silent on the issue of the ban on alcohol and the mostly negative affects that this ban has had on a society in which the consumption of alcohol (among large sections across all classes in both urban and rural areas) remains to be a common occurrence and habit.

Of course, the conservative elements simply refuse to look for a more moderate solution, whereas others have suggested that the lifting of the ban will not only gradually rid the country of bootleggiong and heroin mafias, the rate of alcoholism and the deaths and disease caused by inferior quality liquor in the large shanty towns of the country will come down as well.

The truth is, if the risk of being lashed, getting arrested or harassed by the police didn’t stop so many Pakistanis from getting a drink during the oppressive Zia years, why would they stop now? There will always be a lot of Pakistanis who will continue to drink and this should be left as a matter between them and God. The state or any self-claimed imposer of ‘God’s writ on Earth’ should remain away from an issue that has only been complicated and disruptively manhandled in the name of both law and faith.

Nadeem F. Paracha is a cultural critic and senior columnist for Dawn Newspaper and Dawn.com.
Read more...

With thousands killed in jihadi and sectarian violence, Pakistanis still consider terrorism to be a secondary problem?

Leaving sanity

By Nadeem F. Paracha
Friday, 09 Oct, 2009 (Dawn)

With thousands that continue to die so harrowingly in bomb blasts and suicide attacks year after year, Pakistanis still consider terrorism to be a secondary problem? —AFP Photo

As the country’s electronic media and drawing-rooms buzz with the ins and outs of the Kerry-Lugar Bill, yet another suicide terrorist attack ripped through the already devastated and blood-soaked streets of Peshawar.

Some would say such attacks were imminent in the light of the Army’s affirmative action against barbarians called the Taliban, and especially after the leader of Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan’s leader, Baitullah Mehsud was killed in a drone attack last month, but there is no justification whatsoever for the knee-jerk manner the mainstream Pakistani media handles such a threat.

The question is, why in the face of such a threat and destruction do we casually steer away our intellectual and emotional energies towards abstract and rhetorical issues such as ‘sovereignty’ and ‘self-reliance,’ when we as a nation have exhibited such helplessness in addressing and arresting the more tangible threat and issue of mass terrorism?

Debates about lofty ideals and desires of national autonomy and ‘ghairat’ seem rather frivolous and hollow in a country imprisoned by its own delusional pretensions of being a ‘nuclear Islamic power;’ always trapped and forcibly obliged to flex its withering muscles against big bad superpowers, while behaving like utter cowards and false supermen when it comes to the question of terrorism.

Over and over again, many Pakistanis, their politicians, their glorified media personalities and holy men have tried to ignore the issue, treating it as a secondary phenomenon compared to the ‘more pressing issue’ of Asif Ali Zardari’s wealth, Altaf Hussain’s self-imposed exile and Meera’s domestic ordeal - as if trying their level best to obscure the issue of terrorism only because the bloodshed that takes place in the name of God might ridicule the already ridiculous notions of political Islam that the state of Pakistan has been flaunting for so many years now.

To defend all that started to socially and politically de-evolve in the spheres of religion, state and society during the Zia-ul-Haq dictatorship in the 1980s, a number of lunatics in the shape of discarded politicians, conspiracy theorists, TV anchors and maulvies can be heard loudly distracting the people’s attention from the threat that Pakistan faces from within. They either start blaming imagined intrigues plotted outside Pakistan or they shamelessly start defending murderers and barbarians as helpless and hapless consequences of poverty and injustice.

Can’t we already see that it is these lunatics that continue to be given vital space in the mainstream media to go on glorifying the ‘brave deeds’ of the barbarians, going as far as (rather audaciously) linking these deeds with us Pakistanis’ oh-so-noble cry for sovereignty?

With thousands that continue to die so harrowingly in bomb blasts and suicide attacks year after year, Pakistanis still consider terrorism to be a secondary problem?

Are we mad? That’s what it seems. The gruesome insanity of sectarian clashes and terrorism in the fine name of God across the last three decades is bound to have impacted our collective sense of sanity. By tomorrow each one of us who is not apparently a bearded maniac, will forget about this attack and tragedy as well, and move back to our fixation with imagined enemies and the political soap operas that we love to create about famous politicians.

Within a matter of days, we will jump from silently watching the devastation of the blast on the TV, to cursing Zionists, Hindus and the Americans, to cracking jokes about Meera and eventually nodding in thoughtless appreciation the hatred and the accepted forms of psychosis spouted and exhibited by harebrained showmen whom we call ‘scholars,’ ‘analysts’ and ‘preachers.’

We all know about the why’s and who’s of terrorism in Pakistan. And yet, those who were lucky to survive terrorist attacks, or those whose loved ones were maimed so mercilessly in these attacks, we will go on wagging our fingers telling them they died because we are not good Muslims, or they died because certain elusive enemies of Islam are out to destroy our country and religion.

Those willing to point out the real perpetrators will at once be denounced as being western puppets and agents of anti-Pakistan/Islam elements. It is as if the few who are ready to speak out the truth in this respect, loiter among a milieu of mass delusion and denial, and a society that has collapsed from being a neurotic mess to becoming an almost incurable bundle of noble-sounding psychosis. Couple this state of being with a collective love affair we have with nuclear devises, all I can say is God have mercy on us all. (Dawn Blog)

Read more...