Fighting terrorism: more DHAs, more metros

A nation at war? This is the biggest fiction of all. You wouldn’t guess this from Islamabad’s development priorities or the flyover craze in Lahore. Or from the billboards and ads glorifying the great amenities provided by that marvel of military planning, the Defence Housing Authority.

Yet when national complacency is punctured by another terrorist outrage – such as the latest in Charsadda – the flood of crocodile tears sweeps everything before it. Let me quickly add that those hit by the tragedy, the grieving souls, their tears are all too real. But the sorrow and the solemnities pouring forth from the apparatus of government are now part of a standard and tested routine. And when the moment passes, as all moments even the most tragic must eventually pass, it is back to business as usual and the return of complacency once more…until the next terrorist attack when the usual stock of clichés is offloaded again.

Army, Frontier Corps, intelligence agencies, and the rest of the security structure are all in this fight. But they are fighting a lonely fight. They are in it, up to their necks, taking the hits and the casualties. There is no village graveyard in the Chakwal district, as in adjoining districts from where come so many of the army’s soldiers, without its share of the martyred in this war. But the nation seems strangely uninvolved.

Away from the killing fields, away from the frontlines, does this really seem to be a nation at war? You won’t get this feeling from the bustle of big-city shopping malls, the obsession with turning Lahore and Islamabad into pale replicas of Dubai, or from the army’s single-minded preoccupation with real estate, something not mitigated even by this war, the longest and cruellest in our tumultuous history.

Do nations at war cultivate such priorities? Is this how they spend scarce resources? Leningrad under siege in the Second World War, London during the Blitz, were they into expensive projects meant to pander to the sensibilities of political bosses? Were their armies engaged in developing housing colonies?

Shouldn’t our limited resources go first and foremost, leaving everything else to one side, into police reform, judicial improvement and health and education reform? If this war against terrorism and the curse of religious extremism – misguided ‘jihad’ in the name of Islam – has to be won and Pakistan cleansed once and for all of the ‘jihadi’ nonsense made part of our national thinking as a result of our Afghan involvement, then it is not just the army and allied agencies but the nation as a whole which has to be put on a war footing.

War on terrorism means not only military operations but making Pakistan a more disciplined and better-run country. It means bringing order into our cities, better traffic management, better public transport, more buses on city roads and less of a fixation with such white elephants as the schemes so beloved of the Punjab chief minister.

War on terrorism means more aggressive state intervention in the realm of education: discouraging private schools and colleges and more spending on public education; having one system of education in the country including something we should be ashamed of, O and A levels which India got rid of as far back as 1964; bringing Islamic madressahs into the sphere of government education which is easier said than done because this requires the allocation of substantial resources which our governments, with their skewed priorities, are presently not programmed to deliver.

War on terrorism means more and better government-run hospitals. It means, if at all we have anything to do with Islam, free medical care – free dialysis, free kidney transplants, free cancer care. It means learning from godless Cuba because that’s where they have implemented this system. And Cuba does not have more money than us. They’ve run the gauntlet of the American economic embargo ever since the first days of their revolution. American cars from the 1950s still run on Havana’s roads because they don’t import cars, reserving scarce resources for health, education, social welfare and the armed forces.

The Americans tried every trick in the book. But they couldn’t push Cuba around because it is a proud country and a defiant one…thanks to the revolution. Such a cleansing, such an ordeal through fire, we needed. But we chose different paths and elected to suck up to the western world…even as we went hoarse shouting about the glories of Islam.

We did sentry duty for other countries. We swallowed their prescriptions and fought their wars, convinced of course that those were our wars. Our elite classes got rich. Our generals didn’t do badly for themselves. Many military fortunes are tied to Pakistan’s adventurism in Afghanistan…bareback generals becoming tycoons and fat-cats, even as they delivered sermons on Islam to the nation.

This was always an unequal society. But over the years we have made it more unequal and are pursuing economic policies which are further accentuating this divide. There is a practical angle to this. To fight holy terrorism, to eradicate the menace of religious extremism, and to convert the majority of Pakistanis to this cause, Pakistan has to be made a more just and equitable society. The ordinary Pakistani must feel that there is something in this fight for him.

This doesn’t mean a Bolshevik revolution because that’s never going to happen here. But it means less tax breaks for the rich and more money for public welfare.

Forget about everything else. Policemen don’t have proper toilets in thanas. They work 20 hour days. You can see them standing on roads asking for lifts when they are going home. We give them these conditions and then we expect them to have the sense of duty, and dignity, of the London or the Paris cop. What have we done to improve police services ever since we declared war on terrorism? Is there any improvement in the criminal justice system? Is there a quicker disposal of cases? Has justice become more affordable?

We know what the Ishaq Dars will say: create wealth first and then worry about distribution. We have been hearing this argument since Pakistan’s birth. It hasn’t worked in practice, more wealth here amounting to more wealth for the rich.

Why is Afghanistan unable to stand up to the Taliban even though the Taliban are no longer the monolith they once were? Because American money hasn’t created a better country or a better administration, or a more effective army…it has fuelled corruption and created a class of super-rich Afghans who are now finding they are no match for the ragtag Taliban.

Pakistan’s problem is not just the TTP. More than that, it is the spread of a certain brand of religiosity: the proliferation of groups, the spread of madressahs where closed minds and a fanatical world-view constitute the currency of education. This other Pakistan is the natural breeding ground of religious bigotry and fanaticism. The answer to this lies not in Shahbaz Sharif’s metros or the army’s DHAs but in education and social justice.

The Taliban hold out the prospect of salvation in the next world. To defeat them the state of Pakistan must be able to deliver justice, emancipation and salvation in this world.
By Ayaz Amir

Email: bhagwal63@gmail.com

- See more at: http://www.thenews.com.pk/print/92859-Fighting-terrorism-more-DHAs-more-metros#sthash.RHznwpaE.dpuf
http://www.thenews.com.pk/print/92859-Fighting-terrorism-more-DHAs-more-metros

Has anything changed under the PML-N?

کیا نون لیگ کے چکاچوند منصوبے ترقی کی علامت ہیں؟

To answer the question posed in the headline, yes, there are changes, both good and bad, but mostly bad. With so much borrowing from national and international resources and a great deal of material and political interest in shiny projects with great visibility, like the metro bus, no one is spared the visuals. Undoubtedly, people will use public transport — it is convenient and cheap. Having an urban public transport system, however, is not the issue under question — we needed it, and will have to expand and build more rapidly than ever before. The issue is regarding which mode of transportation is sustainable, when work on it should be initiated and where.

For countries at the lower stage of economic development and productivity, like Pakistan, the model based on ‘import everything’ — when you are unable to pay for these imports considering the small export base — is not the right one. Except for the steel and gravel, nothing is ‘made in Pakistan’. The more intriguing part of the scheme is the ‘taxi-based’ payment to the Turkish company, meaning the government would pay for every seat, whether it is occupied or vacant, and would further subsidise the cost to make it attractive for commuters.

My point is, we are still far from reaching that stage and with a government at the helm that has a long history of surrendering to organised business interests, symbolised by the tax amnesty scheme, low tax rates, the widening gap between revenues and spending and giving more subsidies in the name of ‘the poor’, schemes like the Metro bus make little sense.
[Pakistan’s trade deficit amounts to $11.92 billion]

Isn’t it a joke that the country continues to beg from foreign countries, while those sections of society that are affluent, make big money and pay little or no taxes. Instead of netting tax cheats, the government makes laws to legalise their black monies. This has been done several times without there being any visible effect on broadening the tax base. This is a failed strategy of weak leaders, a visionless government and ineffective state institutions.

Another favourite project of the Sharif dynasty is distributing free laptops to students doing well in some examinations to “promote technology”. Is that the route advanced or developing countries have taken to develop information technology? Actually, in some schools in Punjab, I was amazed to see rows of computers in the labs. There is a lot of hardware on display without there being the software or skills to use them. The objective in every major development strategy of the Sharifs seems to be to create some political mileage, show ‘results’ and make people believe that the Sharif dynasty can do better than the Bhutto dynasty. The hired guns in the media and political mouthpieces with lots of connections and power to make illegal money, endlessly defend the dynasties, and when in the presence of chief oligarchs, indulge in flattery. Their mantra seems to be that ‘all is well and you are doing great work for the country’. This is an old song the professional flatterers have always sung.

You cannot escape all the loud announcements, with there being millions of rupees worth of advertisements in newspapers of mega projects that talk about ‘corridors’ and power plants. My humble submission is, how many of these mega projects have been initiated through our own national resources; are they clean, sustainable and economical; can they make Pakistan competitive? The answers to these questions will not paint a pretty picture.

The world is moving fast towards green technologies. That is where the future of mankind and the planet lies, while our ruling dynasties continue to look for softer, faster, expensive and unsustainable options. Mark my words — this government will leave the country in higher national debt than any other government in our history. This is because it neither has the credibility nor the competence to harness national resources.

Our failed model of populist politics offers no solution for complex national problems. The rulers lack the courage and wisdom to address foundational issues like education, health, governance, justice, energy and population growth.

By Rasul Bakhsh Rais: http://tribune.com.pk/story/1026365/has-anything-changed-under-the-pml-n/

کیا نون لیگ کے چکاچوند منصوبے ترقی کی علامت ہیں؟

یقینا ، بہت سی تبدیلیاں آئی ہیں۔ ان میں اچھی بھی ہیں اور بری بھی،لیکن کہنا پڑے گا کہ بری زیادہ ہیں۔ حکمران ملکی اور غیر ملکی اداروں سے بھاری قرضہ جات لیتے اور صحت ِعامہ اور تعلیمی منصوبوں کی بجائے چکاچوند منصوبے ،جیسا کہ میٹرو، بناتے ہوئے اپنے سیاسی وسائل کو تقویت دینے کی فکر میں ہیں۔ چونکہ یہ منصوبے واضح طور پر دکھائی دیتے ہیں اور عوام کو تاثر ملتا ہے کہ ملک میں بہت کام ہورہا ہے، لہٰذا ایسے منصوبے انتخابی کامیابی کا باعث بنتے ہیں۔ یہ بیانیہ آگے بڑھانا بھی آسان ہوتا ہے کہ عوام کو سفری سہولیات چاہییں۔ اس میں دو آراء نہیں ہوسکتیں کہ شہری علاقوں میں عوام کو سستی سفری سہولت درکار ہوتی ہے اور بڑھتی ہوئی آبادی کے تناسب اس میں اضافہ بھی ہونا چاہیے ،لیکن سوال یہ پیدا ہوتا ہے کہ ہمارے جیسے ملک میں کس قسم کی سفری سہولیات کی ضرورت ہے۔ یہ سوال بھی اپنی جگہ پر موجود کہ کیا اتنے مہنگے منصوبے بنا نا اور میٹرو اور اورنج ٹرین اور اس طرح کے دیگر منصوبوں کو سبسڈی دے کر مستقبل بنیادوں پر چلانا اور ان کے معیار کو برقرار رکھنا ممکن ہے یا نہیں؟

دنیا کے دیگر ممالک کا جائزہ ظاہر کرتا ہے کہ پاکستان جیسے کم درجے کی ترقی اور پیدا واری صلاحیت رکھنے والے ممالک ، جن کی برآمدات کم اور درآمدی بل زیادہ ہو، آپ اتنے مہنگے منصوبے بنانے کے متحمل نہیں ہوسکتے۔ خاص طور پر اُس صورت میں تو ہرگز نہیں جب آپ بھاری غیر ملکی قرضوں تلے پہلے ہی دبے ہوئے ہوں۔ ان مہنگے سفری منصوبوں میں استعمال ہونے والے سٹیل اور پتھر کے علاوہ کچھ بھی ملکی سطح پر تیار نہیںہوتا ۔ اس منصوبے میں ترک کمپنی کے ساتھ''ٹیکسی کرائے‘‘ کی طرز پر رقم کی ادائیگی کی شرط ہے ۔ اس کا مطلب ہے کہ حکومت کو اس کی ہر نشست کا کرایہ ادا کرنا پڑے گا چاہے اس پر کوئی مسافر سفر کرے یا نہ کرے۔ اس کا مطلب ہے کہ اس کا بوجھ پر ٹیکس دہندگان پر پڑے گا یا کرائے میں اضافے کی صورت میں دیگر مسافروں پر۔ 

میرا موقف یہ ہے کہ ابھی ہم اس قابل نہیں ہوئے کہ یہ حکومت، جو کاروباری طبقے کی ناراضی سے ڈر کر اُس کے سامنے ہتھیار ڈالتے ہوئے ٹیکس میں چھوٹ دینے کی طویل تاریخ رکھتی ہے ، غریب مسافروں کو سہولت دینے کے لیے مزید سبسڈی دے۔ پہلے ہی ٹیکس کی کم شرح کی وجہ سے محصولات اوراخراجات میں فرق بڑھتا جارہا ہے۔ کیا یہ مذاق نہیں کہ یہ ملک غیر ملکی ذرائع سے رقم مانگ کرگزارہ کرتا ہے جبکہ اس کے معاشرے کے بہت سے دھڑے بے حد دولت مندہیں لیکن وہ ان سے ٹیکس وصول نہیں کرپاتا۔ٹیکس چوروں کو پکڑنے کی بجائے حکومت طاقتور حلقوں کے کالے دھن کو سفید بنانے کا موقع دینے کے لیے قوانین بنارہی ہے۔ اس نے پہلے بھی بارہار ٹیکس ایمنسٹی کی سکیمیں متعارف کرائی ہیں لیکن ان سے ٹیکس کے دائرے میں کبھی اضافہ دکھائی نہیں دیا۔ دراصل یہ کمزور حکمرانوں کی ناکام حکمت عملی ہوتی ہے جب وہ طاقتور حلقوں کو خوش کرتے ہوئے امید رکھتے ہیں کہ وہ کبھی رضا کارانہ طور پر ریاست کی طرف اپنے فرائض ادا کرنے کے لیے تیار ہوجائیں گے۔اگر انسان واقعی اتنے ''مہذب ‘‘ ہوں پھر ریاست قائم کرنے اور قوانین اور سکیورٹی ادارے بنانے کی ضرورت باقی نہ رہے۔ 

نواز شریف حکومت کا ایک اور پسندیدہ منصوبہ امتحانات میں اچھی کارکردگی دکھانے والے طلبہ کو مفت لیپ ٹاپ دینے کی سکیم تھی۔ ہمیں بتایا کہ اس کا مقصد ''جدید ٹیکنالوجی کا فروغ‘‘ ہے۔ کیا دنیا کے کسی اور ملک نے بھی ٹیکنالوجی کو ترقی دینے کے لیے ایسا قدم اٹھایا ؟ میں نے پنجاب کے سکولوں میں کیے گئے دوروں کے دوران بہت سے سکولوں میں قطار درقطار ، بے شمار کمپیوٹر دیکھے ہیں لیکن طلبہ نہ اُن کی مہارت رکھتے ہیں اور نہ ہی اُنہیں جدید علوم سے آگاہی ہے۔ کیا ہم یہ سمجھتے ہیں کہ میز پر کمپیوٹر کی موجودگی ''صارف‘‘ کو جدید علوم، جیسا کہ ریاضی، فزکس، کیمیا، انگریزی وغیرہ کا عالم بنا دیتی ہے؟ہمارے ملک کا اصل مسئلہ اشیا کی فراہمی نہیں ، فکری آبیاری ہے۔ دنیا کی بہت سی اقوام ہم سے بھی کم وسائل رکھتے ہوئے ترقی کے زینے پر چڑھنے میں کامیاب ہوگئی ہیں، لیکن ہم نے انگریزی محاورے کے مطابق گھوڑے کے آگے تانگہ باندھ رکھا ہے۔دراصل موجودہ حکمرانوں کی ہر سکیم کا مقصد سیاسی فائدہ حاصل کرنا ہے۔ ایک لڑکے کو جدید علوم حاصل کرنے اور اپنے ذہن کو جلا بخشنے میں وقت لگے گا لیکن اُس کے ہاتھ میں لیپ ٹاپ فوراً تھمادیا جاتا ہے۔ جب ایسی سکیمیں انتخابی نتائج میں ڈھلتی ہیں تو لوگ یہ سمجھتے ہیں کہ نواز شریف حکومت بھٹو خاندان سے سیاسی مقبولیت میں کہیں بڑھ کر ہے ۔ کہاجاتا ہے کہ عوام نے ووٹ کی طاقت سے ناقص کاکردگی دکھانے والی حکومت کو گھر کی راہ دکھا دی۔ اس کے علاوہ میڈیا میں موجود حکومت کے جوشیلے ترجمان موروثی سیاست کی حمایت میں مختلف تاویلیں پیش کرتے نہیں تھکتے۔ خوشامدی ٹولوں کے سہانے گیت ہی ان حکمرانوں کی کارکردگی کا بہترین اظہار ہیں۔ 

اس میں کوئی شک نہیں کہ اخبارات اور ٹی وی پر لاکھوں روپوں کے پرکشش اشتہارات کا فائدہ تو ہوتا ہے۔ تاہم دیکھنے کی بات یہ ہے کہ ان تشہیر کردہ منصوبوں میں سے کتنے شفاف طریقے سے مکمل ہوکر عوام کو فائدہ پہنچا رہے ہیں یا پہنچائیں گے؟ فی الحال ایسا کچھ دکھائی نہیں دیتا۔ جس دوران دنیا گرین ٹیکنالوجی کے نئے افق تلاش کررہی ہے تاکہ اس سیارے اور اس میں رہنے والوں کے لیے ماحول کو صاف ستھرا رکھا جاسکے، ہمارے موروثی سیاست دان اپنے وقتی فائدے لیے ریاست کے وسائل اجاڑ رہے ہیں۔ ہماری ہر حکومت آنے والی حکومت کے لیے ملک کو مزید مقروض چھوڑ کرجاتی ہے لیکن یہ موجودہ حکومت سابق تمام ریکارڈ توڑنے پر تلی ہوئی ہے۔ اس وقت مقبولیت حاصل کرنے کے لیے بنائے جانے والے منصوبے ہمارے سب سے بڑے مسائل ہیں۔ ہمارے حکمران تعلیم ، صحت، انصاف، توانائی اور بڑھتی ہوئی آبادی کو روکنے کے لیے کوئی منصوبہ نہیں رکھتے کیونکہ ان میں مطلوبہ 'کشش‘ کی کمی ہے۔ افسوس، کتابیں چاندی کی نہیں ، چمک سے محروم صفحات کی بنتی ہیں۔ 

Source:: http://dunya.com.pk/index.php/author/rasool-baksh/2016-01-13/13996/60194994#tab

Related:

Genesis of Terror & Road to Peace

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~

Humanity, Religion, Culture, Science, Peace

 A Project of 
Peace Forum Network
Peace Forum Network Mags
Books, Articles, Blogs, Magazines,  Videos, Social Media
Overall 2 Million visits/hits

Follow @Peace_Forum

The collapse of state institutions

Historically the state institutions and bureaucrats were always completely under the control of the ruler.  They were neither professionals nor well trained; therefore, the working of the institutions were not efficient. All efforts were devoted to please the King instead of finding solutions to problems of the common people.

In this way, China, however, differed from other countries as here bureaucrats were selected for high government offices and a competitive system was introduced to recruit talented youth who would sit examinations and only after passing these would they be appointed as high officials or absorbed into the aristocracy and thereby assume the privileged status.

In a democratic system, the whole situation changes because this system ended the monopoly of aristocracy who were replaced by those who had merit and intelligence. It affected the working of the administration because the officials were now loyal to the state and not the rulers. During the colonial rule in India, the British Government introduced the competitive examination system for civil servants in the subcontintent who were responsible for administering government affairs throughout the British rule.

These bureaucrats reputed as honest and incorruptible maintained the control of the Raj and worked efficiently. As a result, these colonial institutions sustained the authority of the British over India.

In countries where the democratic system is stable and strong, state institutions are independent to govern the country. Generally in elections, people elect their leaders not only based on merit but also on propaganda and popularity. In the presence of mediocre leadership, the state institutions continue to run the affairs of the country uninterrupted.

Mediocrity can only be adjusted if the state institutions are strong and efficient.

In case of Pakistan, we inherited colonial state institutions in which the office holders are selected on the basis of their high merit and intelligence.

However, gradually our ruling classes distorted the working of these institutions, when competitive examinations and their high standard was deteriorated through lateral entry of individuals appointed from outside on the basis of sycophancy, nepotism and favouritism which polluted the working of these institutions.

At present, Pakistan is facing crisis after crisis as neither the state institutions are competent to check the deterioration and decay, nor the society and the mediocre, elected leadership has any vision or foresight to understand the complex problems of the country. Moreover, state institutions are serving the interest of the ruling classes instead of the people. They collaborate with dictators and corrupt political leadership, rendering damage to their own integrity and causing unrest and distress among the people; and when they fail to respond to the challenges of the time, the future of the country appears hopeless. Democracy could be useful only when politicians and the state institutions follow the policy of merit. 

By Mubarak Ali [Extract from http://epaper.dawn.com/DetailImage.php?StoryImage=20_12_2015_424_003 ]

Related:

Genesis of Terror & Road to Peace

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~

Humanity, Religion, Culture, Science, Peace

 A Project of 
Peace Forum Network
Peace Forum Network Mags
Books, Articles, Blogs, Magazines,  Videos, Social Media
Overall 2 Million visits/hits

Follow @Peace_Forum

Radicalisation of Youth and Terrorism

Nelson’s paper had originally appeared in 2009. It was one of the first academic attempts to suggest that the universal narrative and understanding of the rise of religious extremism in Muslim countries as being something entirely linked to the fall-out of madressah education, poverty and illiteracy, was just one aspect triggering the radicalisation of large sections of Muslim societies, especially in developing countries.

Nelson warned that this was a somewhat myopic mode of understanding the thorny phenomenon of religious extremism in these countries, because his research (of various private and public-sector universities of Pakistan and Bangladesh), had produced certain findings, signifying that those trying to comprehend the issue of religious extremism might be being a tad too simplistic in their approach.

Though agreeing that many madressahs in Pakistan and Bangladesh (ever since the 1980s) have played a role in molding militant mindsets, Nelson’s research concluded that the understanding needed to be stretched beyond the confines of madressahs.

Today, as Pakistan stands reeling from the shock of watching perfectly ‘normal’ and educated middle-class students and professionals being arrested for their alleged involvement in a number of gruesome acts of terror (in the name of faith), Nelson, in his 2009 paper, was advising experts to turn their attention towards this segment of society.

Then, the mushrooming of private universities undermined the importance public-sector universities had once enjoyed. The private universities kept conventional student outfits out. But, as Nelson observes, the administrations of most of these universities did not discourage the entry of religious groups who were (till the 1990s) completely absent from public-sector campuses.

The new groups were largely evangelical in nature. When in 2008, I was conducting research (for a paper on the historical evolution of student politics in Pakistan), I heard various lecturers and administrators of private universities in Karachi and Lahore suggest that the evangelical groups were apolitical and good for the ‘spiritual nourishment’ of the students.

It cannot be out-rightly proposed that the presence on campuses of such evangelical groups is the main reason behind the conservative nature of the two post-90s’ generations of Pakistani college and university students.

But when this presence is coupled with the proliferation of the myopic ideological narrative developed by the state (from the late 1970s onwards), along with the constant attacks ideas such as democracy face in the populist media, it becomes easier to figure out just why the last two generations of college and university students in Pakistan have been so conservative.

The blurring of the line that separates evangelical groups from the more clandestine and violent ones. Nelson’s concern was that universities in this region just might end up becoming recruiting grounds for those bent on committing and facilitating violence in the name of faith. He observed that they might be looking for young men and women who were a far cry from the archetypal madressah students.

Nelson concluded that the rise of extremism (in South Asia) should now be understood as something that has gone ‘beyond the madressah’. He insisted that the conventional idea which stated that acts of religious terror are only extensions of economic deprivation, should now take second place. The focus should be on the more problematic phenomenon of well-to-do, urban middle-classes being radicalised by environments constructed by the administrations of universities who are (willingly or otherwise) unable to comprehend that the evangelical groups just might be generating more notorious byproducts.

Ironically, these environments were proudly created (by facilitating evangelical groups) as a way to keep away the violence of conventional student politics. But as we have now seen, this environment has uncannily begun to produce violence of a completely different, and even more worrisome, nature.

It is blurring the line between demonstrations of piety and sheer terror by men and women who are supposed to be seen as sophisticated models of intellectual enlightenment, ideological refinement and professional success.
By Nadeem F Paracha [ Extracts from http://www.dawn.com/news/1228719 ]

Related:

Genesis of Terror & Road to Peace

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~

Humanity, Religion, Culture, Science, Peace

 A Project of 
Peace Forum Network
Peace Forum Network Mags
Books, Articles, Blogs, Magazines,  Videos, Social Media
Overall 2 Million visits/hits

Follow @Peace_Forum

Shia-Sunni Divide: A Possible Solution [Urdu with English Translation]

شیعہ سنی اختلاف کاامکانی حل

بقائمی ہوش وحواس یہ دعویٰ نہیں کیا جا سکتا کہ میرے پاس ایک ایسے مسئلے کاکوئی حل موجود ہے جسے صدیوں سے مسلمانوں کی اجتماعی بصیرت حل کر نے سے قاصر رہی۔تاہم اپنے تئیں اسے سمجھنے کی ایک کوشش ضرور کی جا سکتی ہے۔

شیعہ سنی اختلاف کی نوعیت وہ نہیںہے جو دیو بندی بریلوی یا حنفی شافعی اختلاف کی ہے۔ مسلمانوں کے عصری مسائل کی تفہیم میں ، اس بات کا ادراک پہلی بات ہے۔مسلمانوں کے مابین اختلافات کے دو اسباب رہے ہیں۔ ایک سبب سیاسی ہے اور دوسرا کلامی و فقہی۔ سیاسی اختلاف نے ابتدائی عہد میں تین گروہوں کو جنم دیا۔ اہل سنت والجماعت جو سواد اعظم ہے۔ پھر شیعان علی اور خوارج۔ خوارج اس وقت میرا موضوع نہیں۔ شیعان علی نے جس بات پر سواد اعظم سے اختلاف کیا، وہ نیابتِ رسول کا مسئلہ ہے۔ ان کے خیال میںیہ حق سیدنا علیؓ اور ان کی اولاد کے لیے خاص ہے کہ وہ رسالت مآبﷺ کے بعد امت کی دینی و سیاسی قیادت کریں۔

امت نے بحیثیت مجموعی اس مقدمے کو قبول نہیں کیا۔اہلِ تشیع کی تعبیر کے مطابق ایک گروہ نے منصب ِ سیادت پر قبضہ کر لیا اور امت نے اس معاملے میں اس کا ساتھ دیا۔ سانحہ کربلا اس اختلاف کا نقطہ ء عروج ہے۔ اس معرکے میںحکومت ایک طرف تھی اور خاندان اہل بیت، چند جاںنثاروں کے ساتھ دوسری طرف۔ اس طرح یہ تقسیم آخری درجے میں مشہود ہو گئی۔ یوں یہ مقدمہ اہل بیت اور امت مسلمہ کے مابین ہے۔ اہل تشیع اسی کے قائل ہیں۔ یہ سیاسی اختلاف تھا، جس کے لیے پھر مذہبی دلائل جمع کیے گئے اور آج یہ سیاسی مسئلہ ایک مذہبی قضیے میں بدل چکا۔ اس سے امت میںفرقہ واریت کی بنیاد مستحکم ہوئی۔ اس طرح یہ کہا جا سکتا ہے کہ آج مسلمانوں میں دو فرقے ہیں، اہل سنت والجماعت اور اہل تشیع۔بعض لوگوں کے نزدیک اس عہد میںخوارج کا بھی ظہورِ نو ہوا ہے جس سے دونوں گروہ اظہارِ برأت کر رہے ہیں۔

اختلاف کا دوسرا دائرہ کلامی و فقہی ہے۔ اس اختلاف کے باعث اہلِ سنت میںایک طرف اشاعرہ اور ماتریدی کی تقسیم ہوئی جو کلامی تھی اور دوسری طرف فقہی اعتبار سے بالعموم چار مذاہب پر اتفاق رہا، اگرچہ ان کے علاوہ بھی فقہا موجود رہے اور ان کے پیروکار بھی۔ اس کے علاوہ ایک طبقہ 'اہلِ حدیث ‘بھی ہے جو کسی ایک امام کی تقلید کو جائز نہیں سمجھتا۔ یہ اختلاف اصلاً علمی ہے اور استنباط کے باب میں ہے جو فطری ہے۔ قرآن مجید اور سنت پیغمبر کو سب بنیاد مانتے ہیں، تاہم ان کی تفہیم اور ان سے استنباطِ احکام میں اختلاف کرتے ہیں۔

قرآن و حدیث کی تفہیم کے باب میں لوگوں نے اختلاف کیا اور یوں کئی فقہی مسالک وجود میں آئے۔ اس اختلاف کا فائدہ ہوا اور مسلم سماج فکری ارتقا کے مراحل سے گزرا۔ اس سے امت کی سیاسی وحدت کو کوئی نقصان نہیں پہنچا۔ اس کی وجہ یہ ہے کہ امت کو ابتداًایک سیاسی تصور کے طور پربھی قبول کیا گیا تھا۔ وحدت امت کو نقصان سیاسی اختلاف سے ہوا، علمی و فقہی اختلاف سے نہیں۔

اہل تشیع کے ہاں بھی دو گروہ وجود میں آئے۔ ایک اثنا عشری اور دوسرا اسماعیلی۔ ان میں امام جعفر صادقؒ کے بعد امامت کے تسلسل میں اختلاف ہوا۔ اثنا عشری جو سواد اعظم ہے، وہ امام موسیٰ کاظمؒ کو امام جعفر صادقؒ کا جانشین مانتے ہیں۔ جبکہ اسماعیلی امام اسماعیل ابن جعفرؒ کو۔ پھر اسماعیلیوں میں بھی دو گروہ ہیں۔ اسماعیلی غیر سیاسی ہیں۔ اثنائے عشری شیعوں کا معاملہ خمینی صاحب کے بعد یہ نہیں رہا۔ تاہم ان کے عقائد کے مطابق آخری امام، امام مہدی غَیبتِ کبریٰ کے دور میں ہیں اور قیامت کے قرب میں ان کا ظہور ہو گا۔ زمین پر ان کا اقتدار قائم ہو گا اور وہ اسے عدل سے بھر دیں گے۔ اہل سنت و الجماعت بھی کچھ فرق کے ساتھ امام مہدی کے ظہور کو مانتے ہیں۔ 

شیعہ سنی اختلاف کا یہ پس منظر ذہن میں رہے تو میرے نزدیک دور حاضر میں تطبیق کے امکانات تلاش کیے جا سکتے ہیں۔ سنی شیعہ اختلاف اصلاً تاریخ کے باب میں ہے۔ اس عہد میں خود اہل تشیع کے نزدیک کوئی امام معصوم موجود نہیں، کیونکہ وہ غَیبت میں ہیں۔ اب نظام زندگی کو غیر معصومین ہی نے چلانا ہے۔ اہل سنت کا نقطہ نظر بھی یہی ہے کہ خلیفہ کوئی الٰہی منصب نہیں ہے۔ جسے جمہور کا اعتماد حاصل ہو، وہ اس منصب پر فائز ہو سکتا ہے۔ مستقبل کے حوالے سے بھی دونوںکا نقطہ نظر ایک ہے۔دور حاضر میں کسی گروہ کے پاس ایسی شخصیت یا ادارہ موجود نہیں جو الٰہی (Divine) ہو۔ یوں وہ مل کر ایک نظم اجتماعی تشکیل دے سکتے ہیں۔ اس کے لیے چند نکات پر اتفاق ممکن ہے۔

1۔ موجودہ مسلم قومی ریاستوں کو خود مختار وجود کے طور پر تسلیم کر لیا جائے اور ایک دوسرے کے امور میں عدم مداخلت کا اصول اپنایا جائے۔

2۔ جمہوری ریاست کے اصول کو قبول کرتے ہوئے، جہاں جس کی اکثریت ہے، اس کے حق اقتدار کو تسلیم کر لیا جائے۔

3۔ مسلمان ریاستوں کو جدید قومی ریاست کے اصول پر منظم کیا جائے جن میں جمہوریت اور آئین پسندی (Constitutionalism) 

جیسی اقدار کو بنیادی اہمیت حاصل ہو۔ نظری اعتبار سے پاکستان اس وقت بہترین ماڈل ہو سکتا ہے۔

4۔ مخلوط مسلم معاشروں میں علمی مباحث کو علمی دائرے تک محدود رکھا جائے۔ ہر گروہ کو یہ حق حاصل ہو کہ وہ مہذب اور آئینی طریقے سے، اپنے خیالات کی تشہیر کر سکے۔ اس اختلاف کی بنیاد پر کافر سازی کے عمل کی حوصلہ شکنی کی جائے۔

5۔ ریاست کو ایک سیکولر ادارہ تسلیم کیا جائے جس کا بنیادی مقصد فرد کی آزادی، فلاح و بہبود اور ارتقا کو یقینی بنانا ہو۔

یہ تمام تجاویز ان کے لیے قابل قبول نہیںہوںگی جو بادشاہت یا پاپائیت پر یقین رکھتے ہیں۔

 اس لیے ان پر عمل در آمد آسان نہیں تاہم مسلم دنیا کے اہل علم کو چاہیے کہ وہ اس باب میں رائے سازی کریں۔ میرا احساس ہے کہ سیاسی و اجتماعی امور میں مذہب کے کردار پر ضرورت سے زیادہ اصرار رہا تو فرقہ واریت مستحکم ہو گی۔گزشتہ بیس سال میں سعودی عرب، پاکستان، سوڈان، ایران اور افغانستان میں بالخصوص جو انتشار پیدا ہوا ، اس کا بڑاسبب یہی ہے۔ اس کے بر خلاف ملائشیا اور ترکی جیسی ریاستوں میںمذہب کے کردار کو اجتماعی مفاد سے ہم آہنگ بنایا گیا۔ اگر آج فرقہ وارانہ تشخص پر اصرار ختم ہو جائے تو میرا خیال ہے کہ سعودی عرب اور ایران کی کشمکش کو ایسے دائرے میںمقید کیا جا سکتا ہے جو خطے اور دوسرے ممالک کے لیے وبال نہ بنے۔

پاکستان میں 1973ء کے آئین نے ، کم از کم سیاسی سطح پر،بڑی حد تک شیعہ سنی مسئلہ حل کر دیا ہے۔یہاں جمہوری عمل کی برکت سے یہ ممکن ہوا کہ قومی سیاسی جماعتیں اس تقسیم سے ماورا ہو گئیں۔اس کی وجہ سے ہمارا انتخابی عمل فرقہ واریت سے آ لودہ نہیں ہوا۔اگر ریاست مذہبی سرگرمیوں کو قومی مفادات سے ہم آہنگ بنانے میں اپنا کردارا دا کرے اور بیرونی مداخلت کو روک سکے تو پاکستان کو فرقہ واریت کے مضر اثرات سے بچا یا جا سکتا ہے۔اس کے ساتھ قومی مفاد کے نام پرمذہبی انتہاپسندی کی ریاستی سر پرستی کو روکنا بھی لازم ہے۔جس حکمتِ عملی کے نتائج ہم نے تیس سال بھگتے،اب تو اس سے نجات حاصل کر لینی چاہیے۔

By Khursheed Nadeem

- See more at: http://dunya.com.pk/index.php/author/khursheed-nadeem/2016-01By

06/13911/42080726#tab2

English Translation by Google

Being fully conscious and in senses, I cannot claim to offer a solution to the centuries old dispute of  Shia-Sunni split which, the collective wisdom of Muslims could not solve in centuries. However an effort can be made to understand this problem.

The Shia- sunni differences are not like differences among Deobandi, Hanafi Shafi'i, the Sunni groups. This is the first step in understanding of contemporary issues, there are two reasons of Shia Sunni differences. One reason is political and the theological and jurisprudential. The second reason is Political differences gave rise to the initial period of three groups. 1) Ahl ul Sunnah WalJamat. is the Sunni majority 2)The Shias of Ali and 3) the Khawarij. Khwarif is not my subject this time. Shias, disagreed with the majority on the issue of appointment of successor to the Messenger. They favor that 'Ali and his descendants, are only entitled to lead the Muslims in political and religious matters as the spiritual and political inheritors of Prophet (pbuh)

The Muslims nation on the whole did not accept their point of view, according to the interpretation of Shiite hegemony position occupied by a group and in this case it was with people. 
The point of difference is the height of the tragedy of Karbala. It was a battle mynhkumt family household, the other side with a jannsarun. It has been witnessed in the last level distribution. The case is between the family and the Muslim Ummah. Shiites believe the same. It was a political dispute, for which he collected religious arguments and religious controversy today it has turned into a political issue. The Root of the nation mynfrqh been strengthened. Thus it can be said that the two sects, the Sunni and the wal tsya.baz nine people near the mynkuarj is the appearance of the two groups are disavowal.

The second circle is the theological and jurisprudential. The reasons for this difference by the Sunni Maturidi Ash'arīs and distribution, and the legal basis which was exchanged four religions generally been agreed, although there are also scholars and their followers too. Also a class 'scholars' who also understands the legitimate role of a priest. This difference is primarily in the field of knowledge and understanding which is natural. Based on the Quran and the Prophet Sunni admits, however, differ in their understanding and their laws are derived from.

Quran chapter in understanding the differences and the many theological schools came into existence. This had the benefit of the Muslim community through the stages of intellectual development. It was no damage to the nation's political unity. The reason for this is that the nation celebrates abtdaayk was accepted as a political concept. Unity of the nation's political differences, not the intellectual and theological differences.

Yes, two groups of Shias came into existence. Ashari and other Ismaili a time.The Imam was a difference in the sequence of the lead. Meanwhile, the majority is Ashari, the successor of Imam al-Kadhim to do. Ismail Ismail ibn Jafar al. The Ismailis are the two groups. The Ismailis are apolitical. Ashari Shia Khomeini middle of his case since he was not. However, according to their beliefs Imam, Imam Mahdi and the major occultation near Resurrection will be their appearance. They will be established on earth, and they will fill it with justice. Wal Sunni Muslims also believe in the appearance of the Mahdi. 

Shia-Sunni divide this background in mind, you come away with me, adjustment possibilities can be explored. The chapter is primarily on Sunni-Shiite conflict. No sight of the Shiite Imam in the present, because they are in backbiting. Do you have a question for longer system life. This is also the view that the Sunni caliph is no divine counterpart. To gain the confidence of the majority, they may be appointed. Both with regard to the future outlook presented in a hy.dur a person or entity not a party to the Divine (Divine) is.Together they can create a collective. It is possible to agree on a few points.

1. Existing Muslim autonomous existence as nation states accepted the principle of non-interference in each other's affairs should be adopted.

2. While accepting the principle of a democratic state, where the majority of which, it acknowledges the right to rule.

3. Muslim states should be organized on the principle of the modern nation-state democracy and constitutionalism (Constitutionalism) 

The fundamental values ​​are identical. Ideologically Pakistan is currently the best model.

4. Mixed Muslim societies academic debates be limited to the academic realm.Each group will have the right to a decent and legal way, can promote their views. On the basis of this pagan-making process should be discouraged.

5. A secular state institution to be recognized the independence of the individual whose main aim, to ensure that the welfare and development.

All these proposals are acceptable to them or papayyt nhynhungy believe the monarchy.

 It is not easy to implement the scholars of the Muslim world should follow in this opinion. I feel that the role of religion in political and social affairs, excessive insistence, then sectarianism stabilized gy.gzsth twenty years in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Sudan, Iran and Afghanistan, particularly those born anarchy, it is brasbb Is. Unlike the states like Malaysia and Turkey's role mynmzhb made compatible with the common interest. If I insist on sectarian identity, so I think that will end the conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran can be trapped in a circle of the region and other countries should not bear the burden.

The 1973 Constitution of Pakistan, at least at the political level, the problem here is largely Sunni blessing of the democratic process, it was possible that the national political parties because our distribution transcended gyyn.as I do not ludh hua.agr state electoral sectarianism religious activities of its role in coordinating national interests and to prevent outside interference of Pakistan, sectarianism often with harmful effects can be avoided or State patronage of national religion extremism strategy to stop the weaker results we have experienced for thirty years, so it should be saved.

By Khursheed Nadeem

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~

Humanity, Religion, Culture, Science, Peace

 A Project of 
Peace Forum Network
Peace Forum Network Mags
Books, Articles, Blogs, Magazines,  Videos, Social Media
Overall 2 Million visits/hits

Follow @Peace_Forum

From threatening Pakistan in 2011 to holding hands with Nawaz Sharif, Modi has come a long way

http://www.dawn.com/news/1228759/from-threatening-pakistan-in-2011-to-holding-hands-with-nawaz-sharif-modi-has-come-a-long-way

Madressah reforms

IN the National Action Plan (NAP), points 10 and 18 convey the state’s resolve to register and regulate madressahs and eradicate sectarian terrorism. Both actions fall primarily within the preview of the criminal justice system but we are still far from achieving these objectives. We need to undertake a forensic analysis of the madressah landscape in Pakistan before we can move forward.

The commonalities and differences bet­ween formal education and madressahs can be identified through a diagnostic approach whose terms of reference should include the following: what percentage of school dropouts is attracted by madressahs? Is there any established link of madressah curriculums with militancy and terrorism? Are madressahs really spreading sectarianism and extremism? Is integration of madressahs into the formal education system a viable option?

Would it be appropriate to reform madressahs in isolation or should such reforms be part of broader educational reforms? What are the hurdles in communication between government and madressahs? What is the actual number of madressahs and their students?

Where schools are absent, madressahs are an alternate educational facility. Our madressahs have multi-dimensional characteristics, including political, sectarian and foreign leanings. According to the report The Madressah Conundrum, there are approximately 35,000 seminaries in Pakistan. Organised under five boards of different ideologies, most of them are of Deobandi and Barelvi persuasion and, according to media reports, are imparting religious education to approximately 3.5 million students.

There has been a mushroom growth in the number of women’s madressahs, and the reasons for this should be explored. Although a clear breakdown of male and female madressahs is unavailable, it is estimated that girl students constitute 30pc of the total strength.

Foreign students in madressahs are not really an issue. Over the years, strict government regulations as well as the obsolete curriculums taught at madressahs, have led to a 74pc reduction in foreign students’ enrolment. In 2006, there were 10,117 foreign students from 45 countries enrolled in Pakistani madressahs; currently, the figure is down to 2,673 from 37 countries.

Religious leaders too have been the target of militancy.
A total of 182 suspect madressahs have been closed since NAP was announced. Of these, two were in Punjab, 167 in Sindh and 13 in KP. A research-based study can determine how many graduates of madressahs have been involved in militancy or criminal activities. Has anyone devised a programme to integrate madressahs into the formal education system? How about examining the ways in which the clergy can be used to counter extremism?

Section 21 of The Societies Registration Act, 1860, which was inserted in 2006, requires registration of madressahs within one year. Originally the act was meant to cover the registration of literary, scientific and charitable societies in colonial times. As per Section 21, madressahs must submit annual reports of their educational activities and audited accounts to the registrar’s office. Section 21(4) clearly states that such institutions shall neither teach militancy nor spread hatred.

Seminaries are generally regarded as traditional educational facilities not compatible with modern educational values. However, such perceptions need to be objectively evaluated. For their part, madressahs, which tend to believe that curriculum and management are their exclusive jurisdiction — in the process of which they neglect curriculum development and teacher training — must cooperate with the state and prove they are not in conflict with it.

Without a partnership between academic institutions, madressahs, the National Counter Terrorism Authority, investigation and intelligence agencies, it will be difficult to determine the exact linkages between madressahs and militancy.

Reforms cannot be effective until the reasons for mistrust between the clergy and state are understood. For the majority of the clergy, madressah reforms are an initiative driven by an external agenda with foreign funding.

After 9/11, and more recently following the announcement of NAP, madressah reforms once again are in the forefront. However, reforms without the clergy’s participation prove futile. Although registration is a legal requirement, madressahs do not want to surrender their autonomy. To equip the faculty with modern teaching skills, it is imperative to establish teacher training colleges for mohtamims at provincial levels. They should be trained in human rights, religious tolerance, interfaith harmony and computers.

One should not forget that madressahs too have been the target of militancy. Religious leaders like Maulana Hassan Jan and Maulana Sarfaraz Naeemi lost their lives at the hands of extremists against whose tactics they spoke out.

Madressahs should not be seen as an adversarial educational system but rather as an alternative. But it is the state’s responsibility to regulate them.
By MOHAMMAD ALI BABAKHEL
The writer is a police officer.
Source: http://www.dawn.com/news/1225968/madressah-reforms

Bad Governance & Democracy

Let me start with the famous remark made by Winston Churchill on democracy: “Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” It is quite common in Pakistan to see people complaining against democratic governments over every major or minor issue. There is widespread public disappointment with the performance of governments today, but this has always been the case whenever we have had elected governments. Let us acknowledge, with open minds, that dynastic leaders, parties, the electoral elite, political families and powerful political groups, in every region of Pakistan, have very few achievements and little success to show to the public. They are long and strong on rhetoric and very short and weak on performance.

One more thing in our social and democratic context is very important, which is also true for other Muslim majority societies, i.e., the solid connection between misrule and rise of extremism, terrorism and militant ethno-nationalism. Misrule is perhaps a polite and benign expression for the massive plunder of Pakistan by the ruling elite, often elected on the strength of illegal monies and strong political networks they have created. Most of the ruling elite have little respect for the people of this land or any real interest in the development of this society. They are here for the easy money they can make and when the going gets a little tough, they escape to their safe havens abroad — and live in peace, prosperity and happiness.

The rise of radicalism in every Muslim society has been a real cause of the neglect of education, rule of law, good universal values and governance. Unlawful behaviour of the elite and the immunity they enjoy through their power and political clout, have in turn produced many forms of illegalities in society. The deterioration of values, decline of institutions and weakening of laws and their implementation have spread to every part of society. Political catchwords like ‘we have done nothing wrong’ and ‘no court has convicted us’ tell us more about the failure of the system of accountability than the innocence of all famous and infamous political players of the country. Their conduct in power has created a vacuum of ethical legitimacy that has been effectively exploited by radical ideology, which argues that the failure of the ruling elite is actually the ‘failure’ of Western democracy, and that elected public figures are nothing but ‘tools’ of Western powers.

Add to this pervasive social discourse and popular narratives at the lower levels of society is the problem posed by our young population that is without adequate, let alone good education, and has limited employment opportunities and avenues for personal progress. Indeed, these are all serious problems that may continue to pull Pakistan down. Ignoring these problems, which are often associated with democracy and ‘democrats’, is not an option anymore.

What is the alternative to bad democracy? Frankly speaking, none. After four military interventions and more than four democratic movements as well as the restoration of the Constitution, democracy has emerged as a ‘default position’ for Pakistan. Our institutional endowment for democracy is far stronger than any other Muslim state’s, and we have a long history of development of political and state institutions going back to colonial times.

We have the means to improve conditions under democratic rule, and we know how others have transformed bad democracies into good ones. Chief among them is public awareness, which is better than before. We have laws and institutions that need to be strengthened and should be made to work in the areas of accountability and rule of law. Pakistan’s future progress, order, stability and coherence depend on good democracy.

By Rasul Bakhsh Rais: The writer is a professor of political science at LUMS

http://tribune.com.pk/story/997619/living-in-a-bad-democracy/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fuss over good governance:

By Imtiaz Gul:

The Pakistani media has been awash with heated debates over the ‘unconstitutionality’ of the concerns on good governance that General Raheel Sharif conveyed during the November 10 Corps Commanders’ conference. Opposition members of parliament pounced upon the army chief’s advice in order to settle scores with the government. The discourse in the media clearly stemmed from the civilian government’s displeasure over the advice coming from a “constitutionally subordinate institution”.

But was this really something unusual given Pakistan for decades has been guided by the military establishment and an erratic, self-serving civilian ruling elite? Certainly not. So, why all the fuss? Let us first see how the UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific defines good governance. It describes it as “decision-making by which decisions are implemented (or not implemented)”. It also identifies eight major characteristics that constitute good governance: a system that is participatory, consensus-oriented, accountable, transparent, responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and inclusive, and follows the rule of law. It assures that corruption is minimised, the views of minorities are taken into account and that the voices of the most vulnerable in society are heard in decision-making. Can the federal and provincial governments claim they are following all or some of these ingredients of good governance? The answer is largely in the negative on many counts.

Despite Finance Minister Ishaq Dar’s rosy projections, Pakistan is ranked a lowly 138 out of 189 countries on the World Bank’s Doing Business 2016 ranking. Has the government elevated or jolted the confidence of multinationals already operating in a fragile situation? We understand that the FBR is acting like a ‘robber baron’ to extract funds for its IMF-dictated resource mobilisation campaign. In a high-handed, unbecoming manner, individuals and businesses are being asked to cough up funds to meet IMF demands. This state of affairs will certainly not encourage foreign investments, nor will other countries remove travel advisories for those of their citizens intending to visit Pakistan.

The recent Midterm Report Card for Members of National Assembly (MNA), launched by Alif Ailaan, states that only three out of a total of 272 elected MNAs managed an overall ‘A’ grade in the scorecard for progress in terms of school facilities, student retention, gender parity and the student-teacher ratio in public schools of their constituencies. So much for the democrats’ love and commitment to education! Has the Model Town case of 2014 or the Kasur child sexual abuse case been resolved to the satisfaction of the aggrieved? What steps have been taken so far to review and amend the dated Criminal Procedure Code or the 1861 Police Act — both being at the root of low conviction rates, heavy pendency and unreasonably protracted trials often to the disadvantage of the poor and the victims?

Has the Punjab government followed principles of transparency, fairness and the rule of law when approving funds for the Orange Line project or for the security of the Sharif family in Jati Umra? Removal of reluctant government officials and replacing them with yes men certainly doesn’t bespeak good governance. Hospitals, even in provincial and federal capitals, are extremely short on critical, life-saving vaccines and equipment, such as ventilators. Hospital administrations have to wait for months to get petty amounts approved, while pregnant women are forced to give birth on the stairs of hospitals. On the other hand, the bureaucracy and chief ministers hardly waste a minute in approving tens of millions for their own security, with some 2,751 police officials already in the service of the entire Sharif family. Is this good governance? Has the government transparently resolved fiascos such as the Quaid-e-Azam Solar Park and Nandipur project? Or do ‘democrats’ believe that the poor man’s vote makes them accountable for their deeds?

The list of such questions is endless and this obligates civilian rulers to handle the poor man’s trust, i.e., votes, with some sincerity. All stakeholders — politicians, bureaucracy, the military, media and the civil society — are supposed to raise concerns when there are administrative lapses and legal deviations, more so in a culture where abuse of power and deviation from the rule of law are norms. Votes from the public do not give our rulers the carte blanche for arbitrary and self-serving governance. Questions, like the ones raised by General Raheel, will continue to be asked as long as rulers continue to abhor the rule of law and transparency.

The writer heads the independent Centre for Research and Security Studies, Islamabad and is author of Pakistan: Pivot of Hizbut Tahrir’s Global Caliphate

http://tribune.com.pk/story/997587/fuss-over-good-governance/

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~

Humanity, Religion, Culture, Science, Peace

 A Project of 
Peace Forum Network
Books, Articles, Blogs, Magazines,  Videos, Social Media
Overall 2 Million visits/hits

http://JustOneGod.blogspot.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~