Pages
- Home
- FrontPage
- FB
- Delusions
- Save Pakistan
- نظریہ پاکستان
- Electoral Reforms
- ووٹ کی شرعی حیثیت
- Kashmir
- Importance of Pakistan
- Love Pakistan
- Ideology of Pakistan نظریہ پاکستان
- Our Dilemma & Options
- Pak-Pedia
- One God
- Why Religion?
- Why Islam?
- Peace Forum
- Anti Islam FAQs
- Democracy, Shari'a & Khlafah
- Free eBooks
- Faith Forum
- خلافت
- Corruption
- Role of Ulema in Quran
- Reconstruction of Religious Thought
- Tolerance
- Altaf Qamar
- صرف مسلمان Muslim Only
- Free Books
- Islam & Pakistan
- Special Picks
- سلام انڈکس
Featured Post
FrontPage صفحہ اول
Salaam Pakistan is one of projects of "SalaamOne Network" , to provide information and intellectual resource with a view to...
Pakistan; A Secular or Islamic Democratic Republic سیکولر یا اسلامی پاکستان
کیا مولانا فضل ا لرحمان یہود و نصاریٰ کا ایجنٹ ہے ؟ Molana Fazal-ur-Rahman covertly seeks American support
Video on imran Khan -wikileaks >>>
Constitutional Islam In Pakistan .. need of dialogue
THE basic criticism of the Pakistani Taliban militants is that the 1973 Constitution, with its laws and courts, is not an Islamic constitutional system. The response by the non-militant Islamist elite (ie JUI-S, Jamaat-i-Islami etc.), is a denial of this critique.
They point out that the Constitution and the legal system is Islamic because of the categorical commitment in Article 227 that all existing, and future, laws must be in conformity with the injunctions of Islam, that there is a functioning Council of Islamic Ideology (CCI), a Federal Shariat Court, a Shariat Appellate Bench of the Supreme Court and the enactment and implementation of numerous ordinary civil and criminal Islamic laws.
But what the Taliban and non-militant Islamist elite have in common is the concept of a theocratic constitutional structure. This would have a religiously dominated political, bureaucratic, military and judicial elite. Their interpretation of Islam would be the predominant source of law, superior to all constitutional provisions, and Shariat courts would have pre-eminence over all other courts.
The difference between the Taliban and non-militant Islamist elite is one of strategy. The non-militant Islamist elite believe and hope that such a constitutional structure is possible through incremental Islamisation using constitutional and legal means, combined with political mobilisation and pressure. Such a strategy, predominantly through peaceful means, of the non-militant Islamist elite, is based on the acceptance of their political weakness of not being capable of unilaterally imposing such a theocratic structure.
For the Taliban militants, such incremental Islamisation does not work and is a ‘constitutional trap’ set by the liberal ruling elite; they believe that only a militant strategy can create a theocratic state because it would require the removal of the present structure with its ruling political, military and judicial elite.
Is the Taliban theory of a ‘constitutional trap’ correct? Ran Hirscl, in his book Constitutional Theocracy, tends to agree with this theory by stating that “The ‘constitutional’ in a constitutional theocracy … brings theocratic governance under check, and assigns to constitutional law and courts the task of a bulwark against the threat of radical religion”.
Islamist parties have had some success in Islamising criminal laws, some critical successes in socio-economic legislation like striking down land reform laws but they failed to capture political and state power through Zia and his remnants. Nevertheless, in accordance with Hirscl’s thesis, the Constitution and courts have generally controlled the threat posed by a theocratic structure because of the following reasons.
First, Article 227 (all laws must be Islamic) does not apply to constitutional provisions, so it cannot even be examined as to whether any other provision of the Constitution can be labelled un-Islamic or not. In short, all constitutional provisions (including those relating to fundamental rights, judicial independence and democracy) are equally superior and Article 227 has neither pre-eminence nor predominance.
Second, any decision of the Shariat Court can be challenged before the Shariat Appellate Bench of the Supreme Court, which is composed of a minority of two ulema judges and a majority of three ‘non-ulema’ Muslim Supreme Court judges.
Third, the CII is a toothless body, whose appointments are controlled by the government. Fourth, the Islamised qualifications criteria for the political elites, enacted in Article 62 of the Constitution, are too vague for strict enforcement.
But the Ran Hirscl thesis has its problem: why can’t the Pakistani constitutionalist experiment, as enacted in the form of the 1973 Constitution, be seen as a genuine dialogue of trying to negotiate between constitutionalism and religion and why can’t such a dialogue be seen as a genuine reflection of the people of Pakistan, whose identities are multiple, contradictory and confused, and who are on a religious and constitutional journey, with no destination in sight nor any end pre-determined?
No wonder such a contradictory, confused nation does not vote into power either the Islamist or liberal parties with their definitive ideologies. This is because the real religious divide in Pakistan is not between the Islamist and liberals but between the conservatives and non-conservatives. The former are not Islamist but they do see a limited role of religion in state power as in criminal, cultural and personal matters, eg PML. The non-conservatives, meanwhile, are not secular liberals but those who see only a formal role of religion in state power, eg PPP.
Therefore, regardless of the desires of the Islamist and liberals for an outright victory of religion over constitutionalism or constitutionalism over religion, it appears that such a constitutional dialogue, or constitutional stalemate, is bound to continue.
Constitutional Islam
by Faisal Siddiqi, dawn.com
The writer is a lawyer.
The Rich Corrupt, Ignorant Religious Elite Thriving in Pakistan
آج جو طبقہ‘ جو کلاس‘ اس ملک میں سب سے زیادہ طاقت ور ہے‘ وہ مذہبی کلاس ہے۔ یہ سن کر ابتدا میں آپ کو حیرت ہو گی لیکن غور کرنے سے معلوم ہو گا کہ یہ آج کی بہت بڑی حقیقت ہے۔ اس طبقے میں وہ تمام افراد شامل ہیں جو مذہب کو ذریعہ روزگار بنائے ہوئے ہیں یا مذہب کو سیاست میں اوپر چڑھنے کے لیے سیڑھی کے طور پر استعمال کر رہے ہیں۔ دوسرے لفظوں میں یہ کہنا چاہیے کہ مذہب کے ذریعے اقتدار پر قبضہ کرنا چاہتے ہیں۔ یہ کلاس کسی ایک نہیں‘ کئی فرقوں پر مشتمل ہے۔ یہ الگ بات کہ کچھ مذہب کو استعمال کرتے ہوئے سیاست اور اقتدار میں آگے نکل گئے ہیں اور کچھ ابھی آگے بڑھنے کی جدوجہد کر رہے ہیں۔
آپ اور پاکستان : http://pakistan-posts.blogspot.com/2013/11/pakistan-basic-issues-need-immediate.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sufism and Peace
What kind of democracy?
AFTER years of living dangerously we seem to be finally losing control of ourselves and risking a veritable failure. The causes are both external and internal but the remedy has to be internal.
Given the resourcefulness of our people and multiple underlying strengths this is achievable; only if we try to understand and resolve the complexity of our challenges.
Most importantly we need to understand our system we call democracy. A democratic society organises itself in a way that it is anchored in a strong rule of law and provides to its citizens a level playing field and equal opportunity, promises a measure of economic and social justice, and tries to protect the weak and the vulnerable, and minorities — religious, sectarian, ethnic and regional. And its social structure, power balances, quality of leadership, people’s habits of mind and political culture are adapted to serve these ends.
Democracy’s core idea is power — where it should reside and how it should be used and to what purpose. A democratic system believes power resides in those who delegate it to their representatives as a trust so that it can be exercised to look after them and respond to their aspirations for justice, human security and quality of life, individual and collective. Democracy thus is focused on people, their well-being, happiness and self-fulfilment. It is all about substance. And it takes time to be a fully functional and mature democracy.
If society is not organised along these lines you can have as good an appearance as possible and as many elections as you want but it will not be a democracy and may never become so. It will remain something else, an imposter perhaps, in which case political power will keep empowering the dominant social groups who have a vested interest in a deformed political process that allows them to sideline the people and take turns in ruling the country for their personal, class and institutional interests.
They monopolise the state resources which are denied to the people.
Sadly, this has been the story of Pakistan. Democracy or army rule, power has been taken away from the people but not transferred back to them. The system is built to recycle power back into the hands of the already empowered alternating between civilians and the army, and within the civilians, from one set of politicians to another.
Yes we have something now that looks like democracy but in fact does not work like it. This mirage of democracy sabotages our understanding causing a confused debate, as some would say democracy in Pakistan has failed while others applaud free media, emerging civil society and flashes of judicial activism as signs that democracy is alive and well.
Both are wrong as are those arguing that it is the governance that has failed not democracy, not realising that in a modern democracy governance must reflect, to varying degrees, democratic values and principles.
What has failed in Pakistan is essentially a system whose form and rhetoric is democratic but whose substance is reactionary.
It needs to be changed. Media and civil society can help but they are merely facilitators or stimuli, not drivers of change. That can only come from political action. The good news is we have great strengths that could enable us to succeed; but the bad news is we also have great weaknesses that are increasing and causing us to fail, like the unresolved issues of identity, religion, security and widening fault lines, not to mention the existential threats we have come to face since 9/11. Pakistan is literally under siege, at its own hands and at the hands of others.
If just the ruling elite had failed and Pakistan only faced external dangers, its problems would not be so daunting. Thanks to the abysmal failure of the elite, people also have become part of the problem. Unfortunately, such is the power of their despair that anything other than the current system has come to have a fatal attraction. People are caught between the devil and the deep blue sea. On one hand are demagogues exploiting a great religion, who in a political vacuum are the only mediators available to the people. And on the other is the intelligentsia, much of it confused and conflicted, part fed by xenophobia and negativity, and part by twin illusions, that with a free media and the army in the barracks democracy has arrived and will solve all our problems.
So we have two overlapping slogans — one so-called Islamic and ultra nationalistic, and the other, supposedly secular/liberal, ‘give democracy a chance’. To say ‘let democracy however imperfect continue’ is naïve. If democracy in Pakistan was just imperfect there would be hope. It is deformed. And they require dismantling and rebuilding. Can it be done? Yes but not the way we are going about it. We do not realise that the system has weakened our strengths and exaggerated our weaknesses.
And we stand at the crossroads. At issue is not just democracy’s future but our own.
The system has failed and its repetition will not salvage us. Democracy that we want to persist with is not the democracy that can save us. We must not confuse democracy as practised by us and democracy as the concept. The first is failing us and the second can save us. ‘Democracy is dead; long live democracy’.
By Touqir Hussain ;The writer, a former ambassador, teaches at Georgetown and Johns Hopkins University.http://www.dawn.com/2011/10/16/what-kind-of-democracy.html
READ>>>> Present political arrangements is trash left by military dictatorship. Elections-2008 were aimed to continue with the puppet rule under US patronage. How elections held with 35 million fake voters [45% of registered voters] can result in democratic government? So what we see now is jus an illusion of democracy... some reforms are suggested... read >>>http://t.co/nWDNNWN
Shia- Sunni A fearful asymmetry
For various reasons, writing on Pakistan’s internal sectarian conflict is an incredibly sticky proposition. Hence Sectarian War: Pakistan’s Sunni-Shia Violence and Its Links to the Middle East by senior journalist Khaled Ahmed, is a welcome attempt to analyse the causes behind the sectarian strife that has plagued this country.
Referring to the national press, the author observes that “most crucial details relating to sectarianism are either glossed over or are simply not available to a sector that is in the habit of denying sectarianism by ignoring it”.
While perhaps some in the media and among the intelligentsia may choose to ignore or water down incidents of sectarianism so as not to inflame communal passions, it can be argued that unless there is an honest debate about the factors fuelling sectarian hatred, it will be impossible to find a solution and rebuild the edifice of tolerance that has been decimated by
the sectarian warriors aided, in no small measure, by their sympathisers within the Pakistani establishment.
As Ahmed vividly argues, the growth of sectarianism in Pakistan has been a parallel development to the rise of extremism and intolerance in society. Starting in earnest from the decade of the 1980s, sectarian differences between the Shia and Sunni communities in this country have gone from exchanges of polemical tracts between clerics to the mowing down of worshippers in mosques, Imambargahs and shrines, as well as terrorist strikes targeting religious processions and gatherings.
However, it is not as if both communities are at each others’ throats. Rather, extremists belonging to Deobandi/Salafi sectarian outfits, assisted by the ‘external’ jihadi groups as well as transnational terror concerns such as Al Qaeda, have seemingly set their sights on Shias in general. It is, as Khaled Ahmed puts it, a “fearful asymmetry”. He says that “The Shia are killed more often and in larger numbers. The Sunnis don’t get killed in large numbers because the Shia terrorists select the
extremists and then target-kill them”.
In the chapter titled “Soldiers of Sectarianism”, the author presents pen sketches of some of the major actors that have been involved in playing out the gory drama of sectarian terrorism in this country, such as Azam Tariq, the assassinated Sipah-i-Sahaba chief, Riaz Basra, the dreaded mastermind behind the Lashkar-i-Jhangvi, as well as Masood Azhar of Jaish-i-Mohammad, labelled “the bridegroom of Jihad”. As the writer illustrates, far from being pious defenders of revered religious figures, many of the sectarian outfits’ foot-soldiers are actually criminals who have hijacked religion.
The major regions of Pakistan affected by protracted sectarian conflict have also been profiled, such as Jhang, Gilgit-Baltistan, Parachinar, Quetta as well as Karachi. The history behind sectarian differences has been detailed in the chapter titled “The Shia-Sunni Schism” while the chapter “Shias in the Middle East” helps explain and links the sectarian situation beyond Pakistan’s borders. It touches upon Iran’s transformation into an Islamic Republic following 1979 revolution and the impact this has had on Iran’s Gulf Arab neighbours, as their own Shia populations have been emboldened. Until very recently, the Arab Shia remained a neglected sector where scholarly research was concerned.
Thanks to globalisation, what happens in the Middle East very much affects the situation on the Pakistani street. For instance, when Saudi tanks rolled into Bahrain earlier this year to help the island nation’s monarchy crush pro-democracy protests spearheaded by the country’s Shia majority, there were several Shia-led demonstrations in Pakistan expressing sympathy with the Bahraini protesters. On the other hand sectarian and Jihadi outfits in Karachi organised a “Difa-i-Haramain” march ostensibly in defence of the holy places, that is, Makkah and Madina, though it was clearly a rally in favour of the Saudi and Bahraini monarchies.
The author links the rise of sectarianism in Pakistan to Islamisation of the Arab world after the failure of secular Arab nationalism, though he traces the seeds of sectarianism much further back in history. For example the anti-Shia fatwas issued by a number of prominent Deobandi seminaries in Pakistan apostatising the community in 1986 drew their inspiration from the Fatawa-i-Alamgiri, compiled during the reign of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb.
The book also confirms a suspicion held by many observers: that local sectarian death squads and jihadi outfits have a healthy working relationship with transnational groups, such as Al Qaeda. Ahmed states that “state-backed jihadis… were devoted to jihad but did Shia killings on the side”. One example of this nexus is the fact that Kashmir-centric jihadi outfit, Jamat-ud-Dawa\Lashkar-i-Taiba, organised a funeral prayer for the notorious anti-Shia Al Qaeda militant, Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, in 2006 (as it did for Osama bin Laden this year). It was Zarqawi who had declared that the rafida [Shias] were a greater threat than the Americans.
Sectarian War is in fact so full of information (with extensive footnotes that offer great sources for further reading) that it is not possible to truly summarise the numerous issues it touches upon in this review. The narrative is gripping and bold.
However, there are points which are repetitive while the one major disappointment about the book is that it could have done with better fact-checking.
There is little argument with the writer’s narrative; it is some of the details that have not been cross-checked. For example he states that “[Shias’] Zakat is called Khums.” This is not correct, for in Shia Ithna Ashari jurisprudence Zakat and Khums are
two distinct religious taxes. Also, assassinated Pakistani Shia leader, Allama Arif Hussain Al Hussaini, is erroneously referred to as Ariful Hussaini throughout the book.
Book reviewed by Qasim A. Moini. The reviewer is a Dawn staffer
Sectarian War: Pakistan’s Sunni-Shia Violence and Its Links to the Middle East
(RELIGION), By Khaled Ahmed, Oxford University Press, Karachi, ISBN 978-0-19-547956-0 ,369pp http://www.dawn.com/2011/09/25/non-fiction-a-fearful-asymmetry.html
Fixing up Pakistan is not nuclear science
“Fixing Pakistan is not nuclear science. It requires will and the ability.” I have been repeating this phrase ever since I started seeing Pakistan’s issues up-close from the grassroots level. The solutions are already worked out by the best of Pakistani brains and the best of foreign experts. They have been debated over and over again. However, unfortunately, they simply have not been implemented, since those in the driving government seats have different agendas.
In a country, which has natural resources boasting copper, iron ore, gold, rock salt, minerals, natural gas, water, agriculture, industries, human demographic dividend, and tourist attractions second to none, is it difficult to turn that country’s GDP around? It cannot possibly be nuclear science? It surely has to be common sense.
There have been several great austerity plans written in this country and then shelved. Great 2030 vision documents written. Great Planning Commission Annual plans written. Many donor reports written. Had any of them been taken seriously, the GDP would have been pushed up. Surely, many more jobs would have been created. What a lot of intellectual resource has gone into suggesting how to fix Pakistan’s economy and we are sitting close to a failed state! With the best of Pakistani brains, who are capable of running their corporations profitably, themselves making money through kosher means, do you honestly think that we need to be at growth less than half of the rest of Asia, and inflation more than double the rest of Asia? Is the energy crisis so dismal that there can be no solution to it? I doubt very much. Taking care of the thieves, who have pocketed the commissions that have led Pakistan into such crises, is not difficult. It simply requires the rule of law.
Forty-eight percent of Pakistanis are food deprived, despite Pakistan being an agricultural country. Do we not have the best of farmers, the best of techniques well researched, the rivers and the water conservation strategies? And yet every Pakistani is indebted to the world and is hungrier today. The ruling elite is stealing ruthlessly from every State institution and turning it financially bankrupt. Do we not know how to plug the leakages in State-owned enterprises? Does it not take one solid managerial team of professionals, who can turn the corporations from bankruptcy to success? Are we so poor in human resources that we don’t have such people? I don’t think so. Such people exist and they must be reading this article, as we speak. They just need to volunteer their expertise for the sake of the nation and be part of their own party, their own fix it team. Every Pakistani has to give to an ailing economy what they do best. Every possible corruption discovered in these corporations or in the canal water thefts has to be prosecuted. It simply requires the rule of law.
Common Pakistanis are being kidnapped by gangs, who are patronised by government ministers, but the ruling elite have private militia that protects them. Do we not know where the ministers keep the kidnapped? Do we not know where the political party torture cells are located, which kuccha areas the tribal warlords take the kidnapped victims to? Of course, the intelligence does and so do most citizens, thanks to a vibrant media. It is just a matter of putting such people behind bars. I say you put one minister, one political party representative behind bars for such a crime and that will take care of all the others. It simply requires the rule of law.
Ethnic, sectarian and religious minorities are getting slaughtered by banned terrorist organisations with linkages to Al-Qaeda, but the ruling elite are protecting these organisations. We know where these banned organisation chiefs live. But we choose to live with them. In the process, we have almost reduced Pakistan to a banana republic where the jungle law prevails. With the result that investment freezes and flees. Brain drain doubles up. Is the ‘fix it’ not simple. Prosecution of the criminals. It simply requires the rule of law.
Seven million children are not in schools. However, those in schools are in danger because their buildings are dilapidated, and most of them between the ages of 6 to 16 cannot read and write since the teachers are mostly absent. Yet, the ruling elite are siphoning off the development funds allocated to building schools. A careful execution of the “fix education” reports already written by the experts and debated at length on every possible intellectual forum will fix it. A firm hand is required to punish those siphoning off education funds and not teaching. It simply requires the rule of law.
Millions have been displaced by earthquakes, glacier meltdown and floods, but the ruling elite are merry-making with the international donations they receive. An execution of the earthquake plans from 2005, an execution of the global impact change studies reports, an execution of the flood reports, a fixing of the irrigation and drainage system, and a close execution of the bund manuals. The list is long and known to every environmental expert. A penalty should be awarded to all those criminals, who have made millions of Pakistanis suffer damages due to their corruption in the irrigation systems. It simply requires the rule of law.
Half of the labour force is protesting on the streets for minimum wage, but the ruling elite are busy shelling them and implicating these innocent protestors in cases of terrorism, they are asking for their rights - an enforcement of labour laws, of regularisation laws, and a water-tight merit policy to put competence back into government. It simply requires the rule of law.
Our soldiers and civilians are being needlessly killed by drone attacks and Taliban militant bombs alike, but we are still trying to figure out whether both breach our sovereignty or not. Negotiation and firm hand is the order of the day. It simply requires the rule of law.
Is our first priority not simply the implementation of existing rules of business and the execution of the rule of law? It is truly not nuclear science.
By Marvi Memon, is a former Member of the National Assembly of Pakistan.
http://nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Opinions/Columns/03-Oct-2011/Its-not-nuclear-science
Multimedia e-Books-Free
Here is some thing different, some thing new, e-books integrated with multimedia. find books of your interest.. FREE: Click Here "Multimedia e-Books" & More . . http://wp.me/PCgrB-MM
Fixing Pakistan is no rocket science- Views of Intellectuals, Politicians
“Secular Pakistan as Jinnah wanted,” says one Dawn reader. “Complete implementation of Islam; enough of man-made laws,” suggests another as an answer to the many problems Pakistan faces today.
India and Pakistan have no option whatsoever but to cooperate with each other for the betterment of their people. The trust deficit is only between the ruling elites and is maintained to protect vested interest, here and there. There is no such deficit between the people of the two countries.
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s planned visit to Pakistan is very welcome. In the foreign ministers’ talks last month the best thing they could have achieved but failed was a relaxation in the visa regime. Liberalise the movement of people to reduce the much doubted trust deficit. Two more openings along the Line of Control agreed in the meetings should be appreciated.
If Pakistan could control terrorism then there should have been no terrorism here. Pakistan is a victim of terrorism itself; it cannot be its initiator. Indian leaders should understand this.
I am optimistic that both the countries will eventually cooperate with each other and they will have to come out of the ‘suspicion mode’. For thousands of years India had been a victim of hoards from the north-west; that spectre is again on the horizon, and India seems to be realising this.
Syed Musahid Hussain
Our Founding Fathers were self-made, honest, educated, middle class leaders who created this country through a relentless constitutional struggle, whose essence was the rule of law, rather than the rule of men. They left behind no hidden foreign bank accounts, no progeny to claim a ‘born to rule’ dynastic privilege, and, against all odds, they negotiated deftly and with dignity to protect and promote the interests of their Muslim constituents.
Regrettably, their successors, both in khaki or in mufti, have generally governed Pakistan as an extension of the ‘Mughal mindset’, a sort of ‘political tribalism’ where personal, family, clan or partisan interests are paramount. Pakistan’s problems primarily emanate from its visionless, greedy, grabby and callous elite, which winks at corruption, prefers coercion to consensus, and is easily amenable to capitulation abroad.
Fixing Pakistan is no rocket science, provided people at the top are willing to develop values, vision and the will of the Founding Fathers. For starters, three areas will suffice: Education as the main priority with a school system that relies on vocational training helping to promote employment, counter extremism/terrorism and strengthen the Federation through a unified curriculum; respect for the rule of law and accountability of the big-wigs whether they are politicians, bureaucrats, business tycoons, media barons, generals or judges. Enforce Conflict of Interest laws ensuring politics and business are kept separate.
These steps will generate hope and faith in the future for our highly talented and hard-working people that they too can rise on merit, not just due to an accident of birth.
Asma Jahangir
Millions of Pakistanis and the international community are impatiently waiting for Pakistan to take a turn for the better, but a large section of Pakistani society is either oblivious of the perils faced by the country or infected with the disease of self-denial. Formal economy is shrinking while informal wealth is rapidly expanding. This too has made the State hostage to corrupt and criminal elements in society including those within the government.
Proliferation of arms, terrorism backed by an ideology mixed with religion, lack of basic infrastructure and a crisis of governance in all institutions of the State is leading the country to a cycle of violence and instability. This is staring us in the face, but those in any capacity of leadership are only concerned with their own survival and distasteful glorification rather than striving for collective recovery. To our misfortune, some commentators describe us as being big on ego but low on reliability, sharp in wiliness and dull on being constructive.
A large portion of the blame for deteriorating moral values and depleting economy can certainly be laid on our military rulers, but our civilian authorities too have shirked their responsibility. They not only lack skills and integrity but also have shown scant wisdom while in power. Witness the daily mini-clashes between the judiciary and the government; the brazen disappointment expressed by the “tasadum” group; the shouting matches between the politicians in full public view and the propagation of Taliban mentality even when hundreds of our own are being brutally murdered owing to the promotion of a vicious form of intolerance.
Worse still is the role of self-styled leaders of society who audaciously speak, act and intervene on behalf of a discredited establishment. The blame is, therefore, all round. To make matters worse we are constantly in search for personalities that we can adopt as the messiah rather than strengthen democratic institutions.
Governance in Pakistan is not easy. The unresolved issue of Kashmir and an open border with Afghanistan has made illegal trade and movement of militants effortless. Azad Kashmir remains under the heavy thumb of the establishment and Fata remains a haven for militants and smugglers, while the local population is denied all basic rights and protection from violent groups. Similarly, the dual system of policing in A and B areas of Balochistan has made civilian administration ineffective.
In 2009, fatalities had risen to 12,632 as against 907 in 2006. Policing is weak. There are several strands of law enforcement and coordination between them is virtually non-existent. There are no systematic databases for weapons, vehicles on the road, DNA matches, blood samples and crime patterns. According to a study on criminology, 74% of terrorist related cases ended in acquittal in the last 20 years. Poor prosecution, intimidation of witnesses, ineffective legislation and a lethargic judiciary adds to impunity.
The role of parliament has been disappointing and the judiciary is more of a chat rather than a system that delivers justice based on law and logic. The high courts are working on half strengths and fresh appointments are mostly appalling. Some would argue that a draw of lots amongst the lawyers for appointment of judges to the superior courts judiciary would at least ensure transparency and fairness. It may also add to the professional ability of courts.
At the moment we are only deteriorating, but every society has been through similar suffering until they have resolved to make a change for the better. Even for the worst malaise there are recipes for improvement but there is no medicine to cure lack of political will and dithering sincerity.
Pakistan needs to build some consensus on major issues. First, we must agree that our future lies in the promotion of a democratic transition, despite lack of exceptional leadership. To speed up the cycle of transition and to use the system of elections as a filter to discard dead wood that is recycled into politics and to give fresh blood an opportunity for genuine leadership to emerge; it may help to shorten the election period from five to four years. It would keep the opposition alive and the patience of the people will not be put to an extreme test. The quota seats for Fata, women and minorities must be rationalised so that those elected from general seats are not made hostage to reserved seats. Political parties should be financially supported through budget allocations in a transparent manner, based on electoral performances. They too must follow democratic principles within their party setups. A truly independent and autonomous Election Commission should be established that has the confidence of all political forces and the support of the administration.
Foreign policy should be tailored around the need of the country, rather than be based on historical prejudices, grandeur and impractical ideas or emotions that are kept alive at a great cost to the nation. Public expenditure should be diverted towards social sectors rather than being spent on weapons of war. After the passage of the Eighteenth Amendment provinces should call for technical assistance to cope with the gigantic powers devolved to them. A clear policy should be devised to counter religious extremism and to gradually deweaponise the civil population.
Above all, the courts should function efficiently, independently and remain depoliticised. Reforming a society is not easy and it takes decades before any positive signs of stability can be detected, but there has to be a starting point. Ours is still awaited eagerly.
Ayaz Amir
Our problems are not unique. Our confusion is in a class of its own. Much as we like to think otherwise, Pakistan was not a manifestation of divine grace. That we are a fortress of Islam is, sadly, a fiction we have lived with for too long.
Although much of the Muslim clergy had opposed Pakistan they seized upon the idea of Muslim separateness to press for the creation of an Islamic republic. As for the secular elites, the more they failed in running the country the more they ran behind the banner of Islam. The mullahs were never an influential power in themselves. Their rise to number one national nuisance owes itself to secular failure. Pakistan’s English-speaking classes have failed it the most.
The one exception to the trend to use Islam for political purposes was Ayub. But he fathered his own folly in the shape of the 1965 war, the single most disruptive influence in our history. In many mysterious ways we have still not recovered from its effects. The India-centricism of our national security fallacies was fixed in stone by that ill-conceived venture.
A visionary leadership could have rescued us from our past. But we were unfortunate in that respect. Bhutto’s ‘democracy’ was almost an invitation to the reactionary backlash which came with the 1977 agitation and Zia’s martial law, the darkest chapter in Pakistan’s history. From the dragon’s teeth sowed then sprouted the monsters of religious extremism and violence which haunt Pakistan today.
We have signally failed in solving our own problems. But we remain obsessed with trying to wield influence in Afghanistan. Our posture towards India lacks clear thinking. We have spread our feet too far apart and, in many things, continue to live in a world of fantasy and make-believe.
Our major problems are self-created. If only we could live and behave like a normal country.
Khurshid Ahmad
There is a need to make the conduct of the leadership transparent. Time has come for the leaders of all fields to become role models by showing honesty, forbearance, steadfastness and sagacity. Pakistan should seek economic self-reliance instead for looking towards America and China. This will give it independence of thought and action, enabling it see what is right for it and what is not.
There is a need to remove the huge knowledge deficit. Nearly 59 per cent children leave school at the primary level and nobody is noticing it with seriousness. An educated human resource is much beneficial than swarms of uneducated, directionless youth.
Educated young people can work better for the welfare of the country and for their own good.
There should be dignity of work and an end to feudalism. Pakistan must develop a labour force of women, providing them with proper education and skill training. This can bring a big social change. The energy crisis should be tackled on a war footing so as to manage the crisis-ridden industry. The crisis has badly affected production and business, generating large scale unemployment.
There is a need to ensure the rule of law and provision to justice to all. Injustice, poverty and illiteracy are the root causes of terrorism, and the country can no longer afford to ignore them. The rights of the working class should be protected.
There was no need to devolve the subject of labour to the provinces under the 18th Amendment because this has eroded the element of oneness among the labour force. We can still take the country forward if we start sincerely working for the good. Otherwise we should remain prepared for Egypt and Tunis-like revolutions.
Aitzaz Ahsan
We must first understand what we cannot do quickly to uplift the country. We cannot suddenly improve power and food supplies, stabilise prices and provide housing, educational facilities or employment opportunities to the people.
Yes, we can salvage the people by abolishing the VIP culture, ensuring accountability and submission to it by everyone. This will greatly reduce the frustration, and resentment among the people who must feel that the ruling classes are subject to the same inconvenience and problems as they are. The reduced frustration will help the country tackle terrorism. There is no substitute to the use of fire power and intelligence to combat terrorism. But people and youth get inducted in the world of terror by seeing the elite’s ostentatious, loud and above accountability lifestyle. Upon seeing huge cavalcade of a minister they react, become willing recruits to the ranks of the extremists, and work to tear the system down.
The situation in Karachi is more complicated. If on the wave of one man’s hand violence can suddenly be stopped, it is not different to discern who is responsible for it.
We have to recognise and take advantage of the potential of our own region and negihbourhood. We cannot swap neighbours.
Why should we deprive our industry a market seven times the size of our own if it is offered by our neighbours? Why are we begging for market access for our products to Europe and the West when we have a huge South Asian market at our doorstep?
We should give up the hypocrisy of trading through third party conduits such as Dubai and go for direct cross border trade.
Peace itself has an enormous economic benefit, and is the greatest engine of growth. Prosperity comes as it did in Europe with trade, interdependence and mutual growth. This in turn introduced peace even amongst fratricidal neighbours who had fought horrible World Wars I and II.
Mufti Munib-ur-Rehman
Our present ‘government of national reconciliation’ is just a power sharing arrangement among contradictory elements. There is no agenda for the survival, evolution, protection and security of the country.
One simple solution to all our problems is rule by honesty, trust, courage and social justice: resources should reach the common man; oppression, killing, plundering, violence, lawlessness and terrorism should be eliminated.
Joining the war against terrorism we have lost enough but are not aware of its outcome. The government has not told the people the truth. It needs to explain to the people that if this is not America’s war but our own, they (people) should be taken into confidence and told what Pakistan has achieved or lost by becoming part of this war.
The people are denied their basic needs. The power and gas crisis has upset every Pakistani. The rulers are not interested in resolving these issues. The nation needs a leadership of character that is bold, committed and determined to rekindle hope and restore confidence of the people. –Mufti Munib-ur-Rehman spoke to Habib Khan Ghori
Nadeem Farooq Paracha
Almost every political, social and economic crisis faced by Pakistan today stems from questions that should have been addressed 60 years ago: about the role of religion, ethnicity, military, democracy and civil society in the polity. These questions were brushed aside with a rather Utopian narrative that encouraged authoritarian intervention and bullying to impose a singular, centralised and impractical concept of nationhood and religion.
This concept only ended up alienating and insulting the rich religious, sectarian and ethnic diversity that Pakistan is made of, triggering all sorts of political fissures, ethnic upheavals and sectarian violence. The answer lay in the flowing of uninterrupted democracy and provincial autonomy – they still do. These should be the central planks of Pakistan’s future make-up.
The provinces should be allowed to bag democratic mandates to decide what sort of a role religion and ethnicity should play in their respective regions and what kind of economics they prefer. The central government and the military should only be there to facilitate this kind of democratic and progressive provincialism. Anything less is bound to continue bouncing us from one catastrophe to the other.
Shehzad Roy
The future of Pakistan is with its youth. We have to invest in the coming generations by educating them. The biggest problem of our system is rote learning, and its futility in practical life. It negates the very essence of education. Rather than making thinkers, it preaches to our children.
Education must be imparted in a language the child understands and is able to express himself in. We talk about reforming the education sector but we don’t have thought-provoking books in our own languages. Children and youth are in a majority in Pakistan. There are hopes, dreams, and a sense of pride associated with them. The public school system needs a drastic change in curriculum. Children need counseling, guidance, and eventually jobs, for which the school must prepare them.
Allama Abbas Kumail
The tragedy of Pakistan is that we lost the Quaid-i-Azam soon after independence. The rulers that followed, instead of building institutions, were interested in amassing wealth for themselves. They surrendered the sovereignty of Pakistan to super powers.
Today we are is in a fix of confusion on why the country was created and whether Pakistan is or should be a theocratic, orthodox Islamic state or a moderate progressive state. This confusion has given birth to sectarianism, ethnic tensions and extremism.
Individuals in the army grabbed power for their personal gratification; religious preachers also contributed a lot to this mess which started because of deviating from the path of the Quaid.
We can overcome our problems by reverting to the Quaid’s vision of Unity, Faith and Discipline, and by pursuing principles of love, brotherhood and equal opportunity for all; by upholding the principle of peaceful co-existence within the country and with our neighbours.
We have enormous wealth of resources, strategic and geo-political as well as human. But we lack a sincere leadership. We need to eliminate the cancer of sectarianism and ethnic rivalries or risk dismembering the country like in 1971. –Allama Kumaili spoke to Habib Khan Ghori
The Other side: Positive Role of Madaris
Lounge Revolutionaries: History of Pakistan Politics
-
Open letter to Sharif brothers: While Pakistan Army is busy fighting the terrorists, Shahbaz Sharif & Nawaz Sharif in Punj...
-
GOOD governance, human rights and individual freedoms, and rule of law are among the main features of democracy. A democratic state cannot c...
-
The world is in turmoil; mass killing, genocide, ethnic cleansing, occupation of Muslim lands for natural resources, oppression,...
-
The press and electronic media are frequently reminding us that the civil and military leaderships are on the ‘same page’ and there exists a...
-
Besieged Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has been assured by military that there will be no coup, but in return he must “share space with the ar...
-
There is an urgent need for an earnest dialogue between our political and military leaders. Notwithstanding who emerges as winner in the cu...
-
بے جا تکرار فوج کو ثالث ‘ ضامن یا سہولت کاربنایا جائے۔ فرق کیا ہے؟ فوج کی ذمہ داریاں کسی سے ڈھکی چھپی نہیں۔ بنیادی طور پر یہ ادارہ ملکی سلا...




