Balochistan Nicca Jan&Feb 2010 Final

8/8/2019 Balochistan Nicca Jan&Feb 2010 Final

1/34

Monthly BalochistanNicca


Turbat

EditorJam Saka

Deputy EditorHabithan Umer 0322-2232603

Assistant Editor

Shugrullah Yousaf Sangat Rafiq

DesignerFurqan Ahmed

Reports Noor shah Noor Kamalan Dashti

Irshad Akhtar Hafeez Baloch

AdvertisementsMajid Samad03225235336

Circulation Manager

Khalid Pervez

Vol: 7 No: 7Jan&Feb 2010

Address

(14-16) Main Road TurbatTurbat Ph no: 0852-413068

Fax No: 0852-413986Quetta office:

Asaap publications SaryabRoad Quetta

Ph no: 081-2470131Fax No: 081-2470130

Email:[email protected]@hotmail.com

Price Rs: 15

Printed at:Asif Printing press

Address: Saryab road Quetta

1 Jan&Feb 2010
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/34


ContentsEditorial

CIA drone headquarter attackedOpinions :

Behind the burqa banSikander Amani

The world is not ending any time soonDr Syed Mansoor Hussain

Agents of changeShahzad Chaudhry

Conspiracy theories and theoristsIshtiaq Ahmed

Democracy in 2010Hebithan Umer

Enter the new age of slaveryDr Khalil Ahmad

Era of de-globalization and protectionismMohammad Jamil

Haiti: EarthquakeFareed Khan

A turning pointAsma Jahangir

The Punjabi and Pakhtun IDPs of ParachinarFarhat Taj

Origins of languageCharles Ferndale

2 Jan&Feb 2010


3/34


EDITORIAL:

CIA drone headquarter attacked

A suicide bomber hit the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) ForwardOperating Base Chapman in Khost, Afghanistan, killing seven CIA officers andinjuring another six. The question that arises is: what is the CIA doing inAfghanistan, especially this close to the Pakistan-Afghanistan border region?The CIA is known to use a combination of high-tech satellite technology andhuman intelligence gathering for carrying out drone strikes and covertoperations in Afghanistan, and quite possibly, Pakistan from this base.

The Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) has claimed responsibility for this

attack, probably in retaliation for the drone attacks by the US. The TTPmanaged to infiltrate the base with the bomber disguised as an Afghan armysoldier. The suicide bomber was given access into the base after the guardsmistook him to be an informer for the CIA. The base is a centre for recruitingand training informants for the CIA. Information is the name of the game anddrone strikes are heavily reliant on accurate information. Drones are moreeffective when compared with the methods used by the Pakistan Army heavy

bombardment, using ground troops, heavy artillery, helicopters and jets making military operations not only expensive but also causing civiliancasualties and displacement of the people residing in the zone of operations.Reports coming out of FATA suggest that the locals are being held hostage byforeign and domestic Taliban fighters and that they may just prefer droneattacks because they are precision guided and far more accurate, hence causingless collateral damage.

The Pakistani government and the Pakistan Army keep stating that theuse of drones is counterproductive. Publicly the government and military protestthe use of drones vigorously, calling it an infringement of the sovereignty of Pakistan but fail to go any further to stop drones from entering Pakistansairspace. The CIA, as the attack on its base shows, is playing a central role in

the war against terror and helping Pakistan along the way by eliminating theleadership of the Taliban. The US Army and the CIA, in particular inAfghanistan, should adopt better security measures in the light of this attack andthose being carried out by the Tehreek-e-Taliban in Pakistan against thecountrys security apparatus. *

3 Jan&Feb 2010


4/34


5/34


or worse, frame it in over-simplisticHuntingtonian terms of Islam vs. theWest. No doubt the extreme right inFrance or in Europe is happy to present itin such terms as well.

A ban on full veils would, no

doubt, be deeply unsettling, on severalgrounds. First of all, as stated, only aninfinitesimal minority of women in France(and a tiny minority of Muslim women)wears a full body veil. The claim that thefundamental values of the French identityare jeopardised by the practice thus soundsrather hollow: is French identity sovulnerable that a mere 1,900 people couldthreaten it by their mere attire? In whichcase, not only would the burqa ban not

solve the issue, but it would in effect act asa cover-up, a pretext, to avoid a deeper reflection on a changing national identity.Also, one can only regard such a tailor-made law with extreme diffidence: a law

based on a single-group issue runs a highrisk of being discriminatory, just as itdistorts the spirit of lawmaking, whichshould be general in scope and universal in

principle. The content of the law would bediscriminatory, and its form, a debasement

of lawmaking itself. Not to add that itcomes in a context of frantic legislating bythe Sarkozy administration, which hascome under severe criticism (andconsiderable mockery) for its spastic yetinefficient proclivity to adopt laws about

basically anything under the sun.Most importantly, of course, is the

contradiction between the proposed banand individual freedom: if a state takesindividual rights seriously, as France

claims to do, then it is extremely problematic to ban a particular outfit,however disturbing one might find it. Astate flirts dangerously withauthoritarianism once it starts dictatinghow women should be dressed. One might

add that it is perhaps high time lawmakersof all countries, Muslim countries andFrance alike, stop obsessing aboutwomens clothing and womens bodies.Amazing as it may appear to some, womenare free and rational too.

It is noteworthy in this regard thatmost law professors and legal specialistsauditioned by the parliamentarycommission concurred that it would bevery tricky, under French law, to find asuitable legal foundation for the ban, inlight of the constitutional protections of individual liberty. Little solace, alas, inthis: as soon as they were made aware of the problem, the members of the augustcommission openly discussed the

possibilities of circumventing this mosttroublesome obstacle of individual rights.A most surreal debate ensued (in which,sadly, dissident voices were painfullyrare): instead of reflecting on the reasonswhy the legislator had adopted such strongguarantees for individual rights in the first

place (hmm, might it have been to preventthis type of senseless legislation?), it allcentred on the best legal strategy to thwartthese very guarantees.

The irony is compounded by theclaim, made by the commission, that themoral grounding of the proposed ban iswomens freedom; in the minds of themembers, wearing a burqa mustnecessarily have been imposed by

brothers, husbands, fathers. Although thefull body veil certainly is no greathallmark of womens liberation, banning itin the name of freedom is an oxymoron at

best, a scandal at worst. Then again,

France is Rousseaus country, whofamously stated that the citizen may beforced to be free. A ban on the burqawould be a grotesque pastiche of the greatRousseaus polity.

5 Jan&Feb 2010


6/34


To be fair, some of the opponentsof the law make it equally thorny to feelcomfortable siding with them. It is nosmall irony to see some of the mostreactionary, anti-liberal and anti-feministforces in French society suddenly spring

up in defence of womens individualrights. The contradiction in their discoursereeks of political opportunism andnauseating hypocrisy: human rights are aWestern concept, not adapted to Islam,they claim, yet all of a sudden they aretheir staunchest defenders. Their instrumentalisation of human rights is aslittle palatable as the patronising tone of the authorities. An imam in the north of Paris, Hassen Chalghoumi, known for his

good relationship with other religiouscommunities in France, notably the Jewishcommunity, received death threats in hismosque a week ago after he came outagainst the naqab and in favour of the ban.Some 80-odd fundamentalists showed upin his mosque during the Friday prayer,took over the microphone, insulted theJewish community and the Frenchrepublic, then directly threatened the imamafter having accused him of apostasy.

Difficult indeed to feel any affinity withsuch fascist thugs.

It is also worth noting that many of the critics of the proposed ban take awrong aim when they attack France for itsilliberalism since France never claimedto be liberal. Indeed, contrary to the oft-repeated and deliberately simplistic viewof the West as a unitary, monolithicentity, there are some essential distinctions

between the political cultures and

underlying philosophies of its variousnation-states. As legislating citizen andmember of the public sphere, theindividual reaches true freedom. Thisdoes not mean that individual rights arenot important, simply that they are not the

fundamental element of citizenship: political rights are considered far morecrucial than civil liberties. This partlyexplains why a burqa ban does not raisethe same outcry about trespassingindividual rights in France as it would, say,

in the UK or in the US: a veiled woman isunderstood to detract from the publicsphere, to willingly refuse to engage withit; in other words, she is understood as a

person whose existence is limited to the private sphere, who lives solely as a private person. And this is the part whichis considered at odds with the Frenchidentity: not the dress in itself, but theunderlying desire to exist exclusively inthe private realm (which is also why the

burqa ban differs fundamentally from the ban of headgear in schools, to which thefull-body veil ban is often compared),whereas the French republic is based onthe premise that it is only as a publiccitizen that you acquire genuine liberty.And indeed, there is little doubt that thefull body veil is an obstacle to authentic

public community, insofar as it is preciselydesigned as a separation, as a refusal of communication.

Ultimately, it might not be a clash of civilisations as much as a clash of interpretations. While the French

parliamentary mission is animated by theidea that women who wear the full bodyveil must be dominated, oppressed andhelpless, it seems that many women inFrance who wear it do it out of a free,uncoerced choice often against the wishof their family and environment. So muchso that they also defeat another

misconception, that of traditionalists:women in France who wear the burqa havedone so out of an individual, oftenrebellious motivation and based, in anyevent, on a very Western, individualistconcept of the self. In these ambiguous

6 Jan&Feb 2010


7/34


times, and in this muddled polemic, whatis required above all is a fresh look, newconcepts, and an innovative perspective,on both the meaning of the polity, as onwomen. *

The worldis not

endingany time

soon

Dr Syed Mansoor Hussain

According to the MayanCalendar, the world ends in the year 2012 CE. This has spawned manyend of the world scenarios and

most recently a rather graphic moviethat depicts one way the worldmight end and soon. The movie isaptly called 2012. Of course theworld will end sometime and mostlikely in a few billion years.However, there are enough

conniptions that alter the world as weknow it every so often.

There have been many changesduring my own lifetime that would suggestthat much of the world I knew even 40years ago has changed or if one wishes to

be dire, has ended forever. However,Pakistan still exists and goes on in spite of the predictions to the contrary by theresident prophets of doom and gloom thatinfest our media, particularly certain TVchannels these days.

Frankly I stopped watchingtelevision when the load shedding hit us afew years ago. Even though my televisionworked due to UPS devices attached to it,the cable company I subscribe to would

shut down transmission when they lostelectricity supply. So, I no longer watchtelevision or the channels that most oftenhighlight the horsemen of theapocalypse. Especially the one horsemanthat made his reputation by discussingeschatology, though I must admit thatsince then I have trouble figuring outwhether his area of expertise iseschatology or scatology.

Recently, Pakistani politics has

been thrown into turmoil after the mosthonourable Supreme Court invalidated the

NRO. The ire of all of the horsemen of theapocalypse is now aimed at President Asif Ali Zardari. The way it looks, thesehorsemen expect that President Zardarimust do either of two things: commit

7 Jan&Feb 2010


8/34


seppuku or else just ride off into thesunset. Of course they prefer the firstoption since they are mortally afraid thathe might just make another comeback.As far as I am concerned, I am quitesatisfied with the state of politics in

Pakistan. The problem with mostPakistanis, especially what passes for theintelligentsia in this country, is that theyhave not really seen politics as it happens.I was in the US during the Watergatehearings when Senator Baker asked thefamous question, What did the presidentknow and when did he know it? President

Nixon subsequently resigned and nothingreally changed.

Yes, I was there when under

President Ford, the US embassy in Saigonwas evacuated and people hung on tohelicopters while that was being done. Iwas there when President Carter sent in thetroops to rescue the hostages held in theUS embassy in Tehran and the missionfailed and the US Secretary of Stateresigned. And yes, I watched the Iran-Contra hearings and subsequently sawsenior US officials being indicted for whatthey did. And what about the cake sent by

President Reagan to the Iranians?The Clinton years were of course aneducation in politics. The White Water Scandal, the suicide of Vince Foster, theend of the healthcare initiative headed bythe First Lady were all very instructive.The ultimate was of course theimpeachment hearings against PresidentClinton about the Monica Lewinskyscandal, the entirely prurient Starr Report

being the hallmark of that episode. And yet

President Clinton survived and finished histerm with his popularity very much intact.In spite of his personal failings, Clintonwas in modern times one of the better

presidents the US has had. And he wasfollowed by a president who was a person

of great moral probity and yet gave the USand the rest of the world much sorrow. Thequestion of course is whether it is worsefor a president to have an affair with aWhite House intern or to attack Iraqwithout good reason?

Now to President Obama. The manis so clean that it is worrisome. Evidentlythe only weakness this man has is that heoccasionally smokes cigarettes. Yet hisopponents are all over the place. Theyclaim that he is not an American citizensince he was not born in the US, or elsethat he is a Muslim by birth and thereforelies about being a Christian. The lessvirulent opponents insist that he is really asocialist. Of course his opponents cannot

blame him for being an African-American,which of course is the problem most of them have with him anyway.

The point I want to make is simplythat I do not believe that Pakistani

politicians are any different from politicians anywhere else. However, for the first time in the history of Pakistan itseems that different branches of thegovernment, including the executive, thelegislature, the judiciary and the army are

acting as they should. Until these four pillars of the state find the right balance,things will seem a trifle unsettling to thosePakistanis who are used to being governed

by autocrats and army generals.Democracy is a messy business.

To repeat an oft-repeated clich, the besttreatment for a bad democracy is moredemocracy and not less. And free and fair elections at the right time are the onlyeffective form of accountability that

politicians understand and accept withoutquestion. As far as good governance isconcerned, that is not an inherent but alearned ability.

And yes, neither Pakistan nor theworld is ending anytime soon. President

8 Jan&Feb 2010


9/34


Zardari is not going to suddenly disappear either, all the huffing and puffing by hisopponents notwithstanding. *

Agents of change

Shahzad Chaudhry

There is something phenomenalhappening in Pakistani society. There areundercurrents and overtones that point to areformation in process. Beyond earlysigns, and with effects taking shape, therecent verdict of the Supreme Court in the

NRO case, and even more importantly the political and civil elites reactionto it, manifests that somethingmore profound in terms of areflection of the popular sentimentis underway.The political elite has the usualmantra of apparent reconciliationto another challenging judgment;

below the surface though they areseething remember the NawazSharif-Sajjad Ali Shah standoff?Also, they are understandablydefiant, particularly the party in

power. It is political power, political credibility and prestige allat stake. One cannot miss thelatent ferocity that has just about begun tofind expression; outbursts as extreme asrecalling dead leaders, talk of dead bodies,

ethnic leanings and kinship all resort tothe primordial fear of survival against whatseems politically insurmountable andhaemorrhagic in the long run.

The judgment itself is mostgeneric, striking down the NROexpectantly, and recalling the subsequence

of the effect on all related constitutional provisions, including the most sensitiveArticle 62(f), and elements of Article 63.

9 Jan&Feb 2010


10/34


Implicit in the judgment is the reinstitutionof all legal positions ante October 5, 2007.It so happens that the over 8,000

beneficiaries of the NRO, including Mr.Asif Ali Zardari, are required afresh toclear their cases in relevant courts of law.

This is what is apparent. What remainshidden though is not a concerted attempt atzeroing in on the president as it has beenmade out to be but a lot more fundamental

what addresses societal concerns of theserious malady that afflicts the nation andthe state.

The superior judiciary has chosento give voice to a growing undercurrentamong the masses of the profligate andexploitative trends of the elite; this country

has been used by the elite to fill their coffers with ill-gotten wealth and stolenearnings. The masses and their countryhave been reduced to poverty while theelite have grown richer. The ruling elite

borrows money in the name of the masses but end up misappropriating it to their own benefit. The masses get thrown the crumbsand scavenge for a living. The superior

judiciary could not align itself with theelite any longer and had to reflect on what

the masses felt right, particularly after the popular surge that cushioned the lawyersstruggle to restore the chief justice and hisdismissed colleagues. The Supreme Courtin its judgment on the NRO has beenconstitutionally correct and morally right

they have also made a popular decision.They cannot be faulted for being on theside of right. The elite reaction, howsoever expected, is misplaced and defiant andhence morally wrong.

There have emerged four different barometers exhibiting the massesresponse and reaction to how the state andsociety are being governed. It has beenusual till date, and a popular refuge at that,of the inefficient political governments to

fall back on popular support in theelectoral process and how their electionsunderwrite their populist credibility. Thedays of such carte blanche may well beover; a smoke wall cannot be built in thename of electoral justification around

intrinsic failures of capability, intellectualcapacity, performance, uninhibitedcorruption and widespread greed and graft.There are expectations and the need todeliver; of doing at least the morally rightthing, especially when the leaders havefailed the masses over the last 62 years andhave exploited their patronage only toenhance their own stock.

This crucial reawakening of sortswithin the electorate, the masses, was in

turn triggered by two specific events.General Musharrafs shenanigans post-March 9, 2007, woke them to therealisation that personal agendas rather than national concern seemed moreobvious; hence the resultant unease. Thelawyers movement suitably nourishedthrough civil societys activism set forth acourse that ultimately not only resulted inMusharrafs ouster but also culminated inrestoring the superior judiciary. The

second event of course was the definingevent of March 16, 2009, when thelawyers and civil societys long march

juxtaposed with Nawaz Sharifs politicalintervention, howsoever opportunist, inresuscitating the extinct judiciary. Peoples

power in Pakistan delivered a monumentalcorrection in line with what was popularly

perceived to be right.Of the four different barometers,

the media takes the honor of being that

crucial driver, fomenter and mentor of public opinion. Its wide access and specialfocus on developing informed opinionamongst the general masses has taken

politics (read public service) away fromthe secure precincts of the political elite

10 Jan&Feb 2010


11/34


and handed it over to the man on the street.Peoples expectations and datum of

performance is thus well established.Failure to deliver along those lines

becomes the bane of any politicalleadership today. The NRO and its

aftermath are likely to be followed by theshameful exposure of those who defaultedon huge loans, which were in the first

place acquired under elite patronage, bythe elite, and for their equally shameful

personal ends. The media will continue to play a central role in voicing and reflectingthe concern of the man on the street onsuch extrapolation gained under state

patronage, while the government will haveto appease public anger and help in

recovering the loot. This is where the roleof that second evolving pillar of thecommon mans resurgent awareness of hisrights as a citizen, the judiciary, comesinto play.

To the puritan the judiciary mustrestrict itself to adjudicating on the issue

before it, and then only to the extent thatthe law and its jurisdiction permit. All veryright, but then who shall protect the rightsof the citizen, any citizen, when the state

seems luxuriantly oblivious to theconcerns of the common man? Loot and

plunder under any denomination,democratic or military, must be brought to

justice and made to answer. Public moneyis the publics, not of a group of peoplewho may even be elected. Plunder cannot

be permitted in the name of the people or in the name of providing them governance.The judiciary, and the superior judiciary atthat, must don the mantle of protecting the

public interest. The decision in the NROcase was in the public interest and henceentirely justified.

Creating bogeys of Zardari-specificadjudication or myths of another military

preeminence because the politicians may

be seen to be in poorer light, are just that bogeys and myths. The political elitedoes not wish to notice the larger questionof reflection of public interest, rather morph the issue into an Us vs. Themzero-sum equation. Even the PML-Ns

stance is reflective of a queasy effort tozero in on an individual, President Zardari,rather than let the much more fundamentalissue be seen in the light of the challengethat the NRO decision portrays in askingquestions of the political elite in the publicinterest. If anything, it is now an issue of the Public vs. the Elite. This may just bethe beginning of a cycle of such questionsthat the masses wish to ask of their rulers.The last two barometers reside within the

public itself. Civil society, or the moreenlightened of the common people, has todate stood and endeavoured for flagshipcauses, such as democracy, reinstitution of the judiciary, as indeed womenempowerment all elite issues.

They have been found woefullyquiet on what touches the life of a commonman rule of law, governance issues,security and safety of life and property,against corruption or exploitation, and

provision of basic necessities.Unfortunately, as evinced by the responseto the NRO decision, some veritablenames of civil society have gone on thewrong side of prime public interest.

There is a need for correction in perception of the noted few in civil societyaligning themselves more withfundamental public interest issues, or theymay find themselves overwhelmed by themomentum and weight of the other three:

the media, judiciary and the peoplethemselves. There is a perceptible changein how the people now react to their leadership; there is a need to galvanize

public opinion through suitableenunciation of their known interests by

11 Jan&Feb 2010


12/34


civil society leadership. We may thenforce a change in our politics that is

paramount for the long-term health of boththe state and society. If we the people canget our act together, we have for the firsttime in our history the support of two

crucial organs the media and the

judiciary to make known to our political leaders how we wish to begoverned. In its absence, there is onlyunmitigated disaster. *

Conspiracy theories andtheorists

Ishtiaq Ahmed

These are very troubled times.Such times are a bonanza for conspiracytheorists because they know how best tosimplify extremely complex situationswhile simultaneously grossly exaggeratingthe evil ingenuity of the plotters, and thuscreate thorough confusion. If suchconfusion can generate panic, then theconspiracy theorist has earned his livingthrough real hard work. The art then is totop it off with an ending that results in the

defeat of the evildoers. Such stuff is the bread and butter of writers of mysterystories and thrillers. Their works help shedeveryday boredom, even if only for themoment.

Conspiracy theories and their authors become a cause for concern whenthey begin to hallucinate and can no longer distinguish between their own flights of imagination and the world around them. If such delirious moments only carry them

into a world of make-believe, then theharm is limited. However, when theyhijack a whole nation or community intoanother world, then they ought to be heldaccountable. When such characters appear in popular talk shows or, much worse,

begin exploiting TV channels to present programmes full of war games and prophecies against a demonized group of plotters threatening the existence of anation nay, a universal community suchas that of the Muslims then I believesuch persons should be held accountablefor taking people on a ride with their yarns.

By now the readers must haveguessed that I have no other person in

mind other than Mr Zaid Hamid. Initially Iwas reluctant to comment on the farce he

pedals in his talks and his TV programmes.The reason is that one can end up givingmore importance to individuals than isdue. On the other hand, the danger is thatthe angst and fears that run deep inPakistani society will push our societyeven deeper into a pathological state of mind or national outlook.

The daily bomb blasts by remote

control or by suicide bombers, thegalloping rate of unemployment and

politicians who specialize in making amockery of democracy and responsiblegovernments have taken a huge toll on thespirits of the Pakistani people. Last year

12 Jan&Feb 2010


13/34


when I visited Lahore I took a long walk beginning from Anarkali up to Lohari Gateand then eastwards till I came to MochiGate. Then I walked down to Gawalmandi,from there I went down Nisbet Road till Icame to Lakshmi Chowk. I can tell you

that for the first time in my life I felt thatLahore was in mourning. People could nottake any longer all the betrayal of hopesfor a Pakistan without want and hunger.Mr Zaid Hamids grand conspiracy has ahappy ending, however. The Muslimworld and the Islamic Ummah in generaland Pakistan in particular are the victimsof a Zionist-Brahminical-CIA-Mossad-RAW-MI5-MI6, and all the rest, plot,according to this celebrated defence and

security analyst. Our only true friend isChina. The latter of course is still weddedto Marxism-Leninism and thus to atheism,

but that does not matter. Just as there aregood and bad Taliban, there can be goodand bad atheists. Is that not logical? Onceupon a time, I remember, the Chinese withtheir special eye shape and highcheekbones, we were told, were the peoplethat Islam would fight, also accordingly tosome prophecies. That was of course when

Pakistan and China had not becomefriends, whose friendship was later described as higher than the Himalayas.So, there is a season for prophecies some come in while others go out.Mr Zaid Hamid tells us not to worry.Pakistan is a nuclear power and the defeatof Hind (India) has been prophesied 1,400years ago. It will not only be the end of India but Israel and the US and all other evil powers, including Russia. Pakistan

and China and some true Muslims willtriumph in the final father of all battles the mother of all battles is dead since along time, I believe. Hopefully then wewill convert all the Chinese, otherwisewhat is the point?

What will happen to all the nuclear weapons that the enemies of Islam

possess? Their total is in the thousands!Well, they will become un-useable or explode in their own countries so theIslamic forces will not be responsible for

the genocide of billions of members of thehuman race. In any case, such details,which disturb the elegance of a simple butsensational conspiracy theory, have to beignored. The green flag will fly atop theDelhi Fort as it should have had we notcreated Pakistan and denied ourselves thatopportunity 63 years earlier.

Is there any chance that such prophecy may not hold or rather that nosuch prophecy has existed in the past and it

has been manufactured by Mr Zaid Hamidto support his grand theory, which hasalready declared a Muslim victory? I think such questions should suffice to explain tointerested readers to distinguish betweenconspiracies and conspiracy theories.Attributing so much power to the Zionistsor Mossad also makes no sense. The wayMossad has messed up its crime in Dubaiwhen a hit squad was sent to assassinate aHamas leader only shows that such an

agency cannot sometimes manage evensimple operations. RAW is even less likelyto pull off an attack on Pakistan withimpunity. Recently the Taliban killed anumber of CIA operatives in Afghanistan.If Mossad-Raw-CIA were to join ranks,would they perform better or is it likelythat in the absence of a common chain of command they can mess up things evenmore? I do not know. But I do know thatneither Mr Zaid Hamid nor his theory

allow for an error, and in any casewhatever initial advantage these evilagencies and powers may have, our victoryis a foregone conclusion. That is exactly aconspiracy theory.

13 Jan&Feb 2010


14/34


Another thing to keep in mind isthe following: conspiracies by their verynature are secretive and oftentimes catchtheir targets off-guard. Et tu, Brut?(Even you, Brutus?), exclaimed JuliusCaesar, as his best friend joined other

plotters and stabbed him to death. Of course his (Julius Caesars) wife,Calpurnia, had been seeing such anightmare many times, Shakespeareinformed his readers. So, maybe one cansee visions about such happenings. In anycase, conspiracy theories that have alreadyexposed the culprits and punished themand defeated them are just flights of theimagination, or, could be deep dives into a

bottomless void inside the belly of the

earth. *

Democracyin 2010

Hebithan Umer

The political outlook at the beginning of the year does not appear to bereassuring for democracy in Pakistan. ThePakistan Peoples Party (PPP)-led federalgovernment, including the presidency, findthemselves in a siege environment with

pressures coming from the superior judiciary, the military and the politicalopposition, especially the Pakistan MuslimLeague-Nawaz (PML-N). One cannot go

to the extent of suggesting that there is acarefully planned conspiracy to pull downthe government. However, the politicalfallout of the developments in 2009 hasraised doubts if the post-election 2008system can stay intact for another year.

The political future of PresidentAsif Ali Zardari is not the only thing in

jeopardy. There are more serious issuesinvolved here. Given the fact that Pakistanfaces a grave terrorist threat and itseconomy is heavily dependent on externalsupport, increased political wrangling anda now-or-never struggle between thegovernment and opposition can collapsethe whole edifice of civilian politicalorder. All political players will lose in the

incident of the unravelling of the state andsocietal order.

The pressures on the current political arrangements are coming fromfour major sources, in addition to thethreats of religious extremism andterrorism. These sources are the military,the judiciary, the opposition politicalforces and ineptitude of the government.

14 Jan&Feb 2010


15/34


Traditionally, the military andits allied intelligence agencies havehad a profound impact on politics andthese continue to be important playerseven today. However, as the militaryhas adopted a low profile and a subtle

approach to power management, thesuperior judiciary has stretched thedomain of judicial activism to build

pressure on the civilian political elite,especially those in power. What hasincreased political bickering is theeffort by different political parties toget political mileage against the PPPout of the Supreme Court rulings.

The confrontation between the PPPand the PML-N is going to intensify in

early 2010 with a focus on the politicalfuture of President Asif Ali Zardari. Thestatements by Nawaz Sharif and Asif AliZardari on December 31, 2009 clearly

show that the battle lines are being sharplydrawn. Nawaz Sharif targeted Zardariwhen he asked the beneficiaries of the

NRO to resign and face the courts andargued that the money deposited in Swiss

banks was the property of the people of Pakistan and that it must be brought

back to national exchequer. This

statement means that Nawaz Sharif hasadopted the perspective of the hard-lineelements in the party that have long arguedfor taking on the PPP in unambiguousterms.

Zardaris address on December 27carried a clear message that he will fight

back against his adversaries. OnDecember 31, he was more categoricalin responding to PML-Ns growinghostility towards him. He said that he

possessed some political weaponswhich he would use when he feltnecessary. He did not explain the

nature of his political weapons.

It is noteworthy that parliament doesnot figure in different scenarios thatthe opposition is constructing for Zardaris exit. No opposition leader talks of impeachment of Zardari on the

basis the corruption charges becausethe opposition knows thatunsubstantiated charges do not provide

a credible basis for impeachment. Further,

they do not have enough votes in the twohouses of parliament to adopt this method.

The focus of the PML-N is on thedevelopments outside parliament. Three

possible scenarios can be constructed.First, the Supreme Court strikes down the

15 Jan&Feb 2010


16/34


presidential immunity from criminal trialand then Zardari is put on trial andconvicted. The most dubious assumption isthat the Supreme Court will strike down aclearly written article of the constitutionand disregard the internationally

established political norm of certainimmunities to the head of state.

The second scenario hopes that themilitary top brass will apply enough

pressure from the sidelines for Zardarisresignation and, thus, clear the politicaldeck for the opposition. This scenario is

based on the assumption that the militarytop brass will facilitate the oppositionagenda.

Third scenario perceives the PML-

N spearheading a nationwide agitationagainst the backdrop of the alienated

judiciary and the military. This agitationwill paralyse the government, forcing it toaccept the demand for the removal of the

president. The dubious assumption in thisscenario is that the PML-N can launch anationwide agitation at a time when itsmain support is concentrated in Punjab andits political standing is weak in other

provinces. Perhaps some religious parties

may be willing to help the PML-N butthese political parties, too, have major standing in Punjab.

The PPP is not expected to give awalkover to the PML-N, especially when ithas strong presence in Sindh and Punjaband has a reasonable presence in the

NWFP and Balochistan. There are strongdoubts that the Muttahida QaumiMovement (MQM), the Awami NationalParty (ANP) and the Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-

Islam-Fazlur Rehman (JUI-F) will joinhands with the PML-N to oust Zardari.Another set of assumptions relate

to the continuation of the PPP governmentminus Zardari. The underlying idea is thatYousaf Raza Gilani will play Farooq

Leghari and join hands with theopposition and the military establishmentto knock out Zardari.

The available evidence suggeststhat the minus-one formula is not going towork. The PPP is not expected to stay in

office if Zardari is ousted. It will not be aneasy job to create an alternate politicalcoalition at the federal level around thePML-N.

If the military and the Inter-Services Intelligence/Military Intelligence(ISI/MI) help to contrive a coalition for thePML-N, how long the PML-N ledgovernment will play subservient to theseking-makers? Will it be in a position tochange Pakistans counter-terrorism policy

and pull out of all security and financialarrangements with the United States tosatisfy its rightist and Islamist support

base? If it does not do that, how far its policy will be different from the currentPPP government?

The revised version of theBangladesh model whereby the PPP andthe PML-N are excluded and a governmentof technocrats, established with the

blessings of the military and the judiciary,

is going to run into political andconstitutional obstacles. Any deviationfrom the constitution and establisheddemocratic norms, including the electionof February 2008, will unravel the politicalinstitutions and processes. This willcompromise Pakistans effort to cope withreligious zealots and other extremists whoare challenging the domain of the state. Asthe political forces get bogged down inunnecessary power struggle, these anti-

state forces will have greater freedom of action, thereby causing the fragmentationof the state system.

The major political parties shouldshow restraint in pursuing their partisanagendas. The PML-N and the PPP should

16 Jan&Feb 2010


17/34


work out a working relationship within theexisting political arrangements. Anyattempt to turn them upside down by anymeans and for any reason will be self-destructive for the civilian political forces.It may be easy to dislodge the present

arrangements, but no credible politicalalternative is going to be available quickly.

The PPP should go ahead with theconsensus constitutional amendments atthe earliest. President Zardari needs to step

back from active role in policy making andmanagement and the federal governmentshould devote more attention to improvinggovernance. However, both thegovernment and the opposition will haveto review their present postures

simultaneously, otherwise democracy canrun aground in 2010. *

Enter the new age of slaveryDr Khalil Ahmad

It is the failure to learn this thatexplains the emergence, persistence andspread of world terrorism nearlyunprecedented in the history of violentmovements. Presently, al Qaeda, theTaliban and the likes of them are itsmanifestations. Certain characteristicssingle out this terrorism as the most

atrocious human activity on our earth.This terrorism has a clearly statedand demonstrated political agenda thattranscends frontiers and peoples. Not onlydoes it envisage a theocratic worldgovernment, it is hell-bent upon making ithappen at any cost. It is using all violentmethods, those already in use andthose never dreamt of, to achieve itsgoal.

This terrorism is not confined

to a specific geographical area. Itsmembers, activists, partners,supporters and sympathisers arescattered all over the inhabited earth.In the past, they were usuallyconcentrated in this or that specific

location. This time they exist almosteverywhere.

This terrorism enjoys wider backing of supporters and sympathisers allover the world not only in the Muslim

population but also among those whofavour targeting the centres of economicand technological powers they hate.

This terrorism believes, bothideologically and strategically, that the end justifies the means. It has repudiated allvalues humans have come to hold as most

precious: love for each other, regard for human life, freedom of conscience,freedom of professing and practicing

17 Jan&Feb 2010


18/34


religion, the right to pursue happiness,tolerance all sacrificed at the altar of itswar.

This terrorism has unleashed a war that knows no rules. How impressive of usthat if war could not be ruled out

completely, at least we made somehumane rules to be followed by warring

parties, such as not targeting civilians. Butthis terrorism kills everyone, includingchildren and women. It even uses them asits blasting instruments.

Last but not the least, this terrorismis a friend of none and an enemy of all. Inthe past, such movements tried to winsupporters. It has no such concern of earning friends; maybe because it has its

supporters already on its side or it believesit is the only right path. Its theocraticagenda is narrow but it has no organisedclerical authority to bring uniformity todifferences tearing at its own ranks. That iswhy frequent internal fighting is common.It may indeed be destined, due todifferences of opinion or practice, to comedown hard on its own supporters andsympathisers in its puritanical countdown.This is its internal dialectic.

This makes this terrorism callouslyideological, mercilessly inhuman anddangerously destructive. And all that in thename of faith! It poses a unique threat tohuman civilisation. It threatens to enslavefree humanity once again. Forget the ageof physical slavery, or economicenslavement by ruling cliques. With thisterrorism raging from Pakistan andAfghanistan to Iraq, Somalia and Yemen,enters the spectre of a new age of

theocratic slavery. A new slavery of thehuman conscience is on the top of thisterrorisms agenda.

It was money that freed men from physical slavery by enabling them to meettheir needs independently of their masters,

but it was the physical person whommoney freed; his mind and soul werealready free. This terrorism attempts toenslave ones mind and soul. It is intentupon seizing political power, which

controls the freeing power of money alsoand thus invests immense power in thehands of political masters to enslave

bodies as well as minds and souls.Those who back this terrorism

think it will enslave only others by forcingthem to embrace its truth, but they aremistaken. By its very nature, this terrorismis nihilist, directed towards excludingeveryone and everything different from it.Thus it is destined to annihilate its ownself in the end. This terrorism, like a black hole, will gulp down everything intonothingness. It is already killing anddestroying indiscriminately.

18 Jan&Feb 2010


19/34


The apologists of this terrorism blame the US and NATO presence inAfghanistan as the cause of its destructiveaggression. In Pakistan, this terrorismtargets anyone and anything ever said tohave any relation with the US or NATO.

Also, it is this terrorism that wreakedhavoc on 9/11. The US did not beget it.Finally, is it US presence in Somalia andYemen that justifies this terrorisms

playing havoc there?

We must face what this terrorismreally means if we are to do justice to itand to ourselves also. Only then willhumanity be able to fight the new slaveryof mind and soul for which this terrorismis prepared to bomb the whole world to

ashes! *

Era of de-

globalization andprotectionism

Mohammad Jamil

In 1989, Francis Fukuyamadeclared in his controversial treatise TheEnd of History that capitalism and liberaldemocracy had won, communism hadlost, and there would be no moreideological conflict in the world. Buthe ignored the ongoing war betweenthe exploiters and the exploited.Secondly, his myopic vision could notvisualise the rise of China as asuperpower, whose leadership cameout with the new concept of marketeconomy controlled and monitored bythe communist party.

Finally, capitalism with itsinherent contradictions like businesscycles, boom, gloom and doom, led torecession, which inherently gives rise

to crises, turmoil and wars. The two worldwars in the 20th century were imperialistwars. In the recent financial meltdown and

19 Jan&Feb 2010


20/34


ensuing recession, the bailout packages of trillions of dollars bythe US, Britain, Japan and other industrial countries could not makemuch difference in stemming theslowdown.

Last year, when the dollar was losing its value, the globaleconomy found itself in dire straits,with serious ramifications for theworld. President Barack Obamaannounced a $ 700 billion packageso that credit could flow again to

prop the economy. The European CentralBank pumped $ 70 billion into the inter-

bank money market. Japan and Australiaalso pumped billions of dollars into their

banking system. Then, with the decliningvalue of the US dollar, global currenciesturned volatile, as more and more globalinvestors and investment advisors werethinking of investment in the most solidinvestment asset: gold.

James Grant, a global financialexpert, reposed his faith in gold in place of the US dollar. In an article in The WallStreet Journal at the height of the crisis,Grant pointed out: Return to the gold

standard is the best possible solution. Inthese times of financial troubles, investorsaround the world are losing faith in thedollar and the problem lies with itsmanagement. The prescription offered bycentral bankers and politicians to cure thedisease has been more of what made the

patient sick in the first place morecredit and more leverage; this time notfrom the private sector but from the publicsector. One would agree with him, as for

years due to availability of easy credit andlow interest rates, consumers shoppedmore. The credit card system, auto-financing and housing loans createdenormous demand in the market, resultingin sky-rocketing prices. Today, the US

faces complex challenges like a huge fiscaldeficit due to its misadventures, flawed

policies and enormous current accountdeficit, which is 6.4 percent of GDP. The

deficit, now a recurring feature, washeavily financed by foreign central banksthat bought dollars and invested in USTreasury Securities with a view to keepingthe value of the dollar stable and toincrease their exports.

This in effect was a subsidy, because the dollar had been revalued dueto this increase in its demand, makingimported goods cheaper for Americans.But American households have been

spending more than they earned; hencetechnically speaking, many of them do nothave any net worth. And this is due toglobalisation, easy credit and trash

produced by corporations impacting thedeveloped as well as developingeconomies. David Korten in his book,When Corporations Rule the Earth,describes multinational corporations asinstruments of a market tyranny thatextends its reach across the planets living

space, destroying livelihoods, displacing people, rendering democratic institutionsimpotent and feeding on life in aninsatiable quest for money. The factremains that MNCs originating from theUS, Japan and the West, with surplus

20 Jan&Feb 2010


21/34


capital, have been able to expand themarket for capital, whereas labour-surpluscountries cannot expand the market for labour.

Though there is no indication of aGreat Depression-like situation at present,

it appears that this is the end of theglobalisation era and one will witnessmore protectionist policies fromgovernments throughout the world.Proponents of globalisation have beendescribing it as a process that cementseconomic, cultural and political bonds

between peoples of different countriesaround the world. And that large-scaleflow of commodities, capital, technologyand labour has precipitated the process

leading to an integrated world market, andwhat they call a global village. But theresult was contrary to the much-toutedmerits of globalisation, as it resulted in thecreation of global monopolies and cartelsthrough the mergers of MNCs that wereotherwise likely to compete with eachother. Globalisation, once the popular

paradigm of development for Europeanand developing countries, for quite sometime has become unpopular even in

western countries, and during the lastdecade wherever the IMF, World Bank and World Trade Organisation (WTO)held meetings, activists, mainly fromEurope, chased them and protested againsttheir policies.

In fact, the Europeans have alsosuffered from the undesirable effects of globalisation, effects that transcendnational frontiers, relegating the nation-state to a secondary position. When MNCs

dismantled factories in European countriesto shift them to emerging economies anddeveloping countries to benefit from cheaplabour, and also save on transportationcosts, the Europeans suffered in the formof unemployment. Secondly, most

developing countries owe large sums to theIMF and the World Bank, and they needloans to pay back loan instalments andinterest. These countries are pressured into

privatisation of public sector enterprises atthrowaway prices, and government

departments responsible for the socialsector are also privatised.

The state thus abdicates itsresponsibilities in the spheres of education,health and utilities; the reason being thatthe IMF advises the governments of debt-ridden countries to balance their budgets

by reducing current expenditure. But in the presence of an alarming rate of unemployment, it is undesirable to resortto retrenchment of the government

employees. The axe, therefore, falls ondevelopment or social sector programmes.The liberalization of imports exposes local

producers to subsidized foreigncompetition, but, on the other hand, thegovernments of developing countries arenot allowed to grant subsidies to domestic

producers by the IMF and WTO. Thatsaid, the superstructure of the marketeconomy is crumbling, and the world willhave to find a new paradigm, a new

currency, or invoke the gold standard.James Grant, a global financial expert,reposed his faith in gold in place of the USdollar. In an article in The Wall StreetJournal at the height of the crisis, Grant

pointed out: Return to the gold standard isthe best possible solution. In these times of financial troubles, investors around theworld are losing faith in the dollar and the

problem lies with its management. The prescription offered by central bankers and

politicians to cure the disease has beenmore of what made the patient sick in thefirst place more credit and moreleverage; this time not from the privatesector but from the public sector. Onewould agree with him, as for years due to

21 Jan&Feb 2010


22/34


23/34


forced out of the country. Since then Haitihas been on a roller coaster with thingsgetting progressively worse. Today,

besides being one of the poorest nationsaround, it is also a country that has been

particularly ravaged in recent years by

hurricanes, floods and now this massiveearthquake.

True believers of all faiths shallinvoke the Supreme Deity and look for adivine justification for what has happened.The less religiously inclined will talk of grinding poverty worsened by corruptionand cycles of violence that created acountry without the rule of law and, assuch, without building codes, or infrastructure that could withstand some of

the horrors of this earthquake.Personally, I think that if we wish to takethe divine plan idea one step further, then

perhaps the poverty, corruption, lack of governance, dictatorships, repeatedmilitary coups, foreign interventions andthe repeated natural calamities must also

be included in the divine plan. So I hope Iwill be forgiven if I stick with humanfrailty and random natural calamity as thecause of the disaster unfolding before us in

Haiti.Many of us in Pakistan remember

the earthquake that devastated parts of thenorthern areas. There is much in commonin what happened then to what ishappening in Haiti right now. Buildingsthat were built poorly collapsed and thatincluded almost all government buildings;the rudimentary infrastructure vanishedand access to the victims was hard, as was

bringing in heavy equipment required for

search and rescue operations. But theaftermath of that earthquake in Pakistanwas a great example of how the countrycame together and how foreign aid came inand helped out. Even though thereconstruction efforts are no longer being

talked about, it does seem that things arenot that bad today and perhaps buildingsand roads were rebuilt to be able towithstand future earthquakes better.Once the immediacy of widespread humantragedy is behind us, international help

will allow rebuilding of the infrastructureand other vital services, but ultimately itwill be the people of Haiti who willdetermine whether this is a chance torebuild not just the brick and mortar butalso the very basis of what their country isand could be.

Pakistan was fortunate that in itsmajor earthquake, the area involved wasonly a small part of the country but inHaiti the entire capital has literally been

devastated. It seems almost heartless to sayso, but I will repeat the rather overusedclich, that in every major crisis there isalso great opportunity.

Perhaps the wealthy countries of the world led by the US, which has spentuntold billions of dollars in wars on Iraqand Afghanistan, can put together acredible effort to rebuild this country, notthrough dole and intermittent aid butthrough a sustained and mutually

respectful partnership with the people of Haiti.

I realise that it is probably a pipedream, but I would like to believe thata country like Haiti can indeed be helpedto recover and rebuild and, as aconsequence, become a self-sustainingmember of the world community rather than just another country labelled as oneof the poorest. Let that, then, become thenew Obama Doctrine. The US is not only

a destroyer but also a builder. And it willhelp rebuild Haiti not for strategic but for humanitarian reasons.

For us in Pakistan, the disaster inHaiti is also a lesson. When the statewithers away and anarchy sets in, random

23 Jan&Feb 2010


24/34


natural disasters are transformed fromlimited calamities into widespreadtragedies that can unravel the entirenational fabric.

Finally, as human beings we mustaccept the simple reality: we are all in thistogether. *

A turning point

Asma Jahangir

The recent carnage in Mumbai isterrifying. Indians are entitled to be angry,

hurt and disgusted. The government of India has alleged that initial evidenceindicates that some of the terrorists camefrom a neighbouring country. Eventhough the prime minister of India has sofar not accused the government of Pakistanof being directly involved in the attacks, itis apparent who the neighbour is. ThePakistani foreign minister and othershave so far reacted responsibly. To hiscredit, he admonished journalists who

tried to downplay the tragedy or whoshirked away any need for alarm.Yet the media on both sides is

full of jingoistic messages. SomeIndians want revenge and even went sofar as to urge their government to bombPakistan. A few voices in India havecautioned against a call for revenge andhave suggested looking deeper into thefailure of the security system in Indiaitself. They are pushing for effectivediplomacy to be deployed so thatPakistans rulers are encouraged to takeaction against those who are using their country as a launching pad for terroristactivities.

Those in India who want reprisalsagainst Pakistan are falling into the very

trap that the terrorists and their allies haveset for them. It is no secret that both the

terrorists and their patrons within sectionsof the Pakistani intelligence communitywant a disengagement of the militaryagainst the Taliban and Al Qaeda in north-western Pakistan. But, despite all effortsmade through peace deals with themilitants, Pakistans security forces haveneither been able to convince them to de-

escalate violence, nor have they been ableto persuade the current Americanadministration to loosen the grip on thewar on terror. As such, they are caught in a

war they are most reluctant to fight.Therefore the Pakistani military isunderstandably desperate to end theconflict in FATA and Swat.

It also suits the militants to distractthe military on all sides, so that they have afree hand to consolidate their power base

24 Jan&Feb 2010


25/34


within Pakistan. Therefore the Indiansmust take note that the risk of a better organised force of militants will not onlyendanger the people of Pakistan but mayalso create havoc in India in time to come.

Some of the reaction in Pakistan is

mind-boggling. Several militantorganisations have issued publicstatements rejecting all claims thatPakistans territory was in any way used to

prepare the Mumbai attacks. Some, likethe Tehreek-e Taliban Pakistan, haveclaimed that the terror attacks in Mumbaiwere part of a conspiracy to defamePakistan and the Mujahideen. The TTPhas warned India against attackingPakistan and assured Pakistanis that in

such an eventuality the Mujahideen wouldfight shoulder to shoulder with the armedforces and the people of Pakistan.Through this statement, they want toappear as having arrogated to themselvesthe authority to respond on behalf of Pakistan and to appear as the saviours of its people. Ironically the TTP is fightingPakistans military in the tribal areas and isaccused of having killed hundreds of Pakistanis in the most inhumane manner.

Senior security officials are widelyquoted in the press as warning that the next24 to 48 hours are crucial. One of them isquoted to have suggested that if Indiaescalates tensions, then the war on terror will no longer be their priority and as suchPakistani troops will have to be movedfrom the eastern to the western border of Pakistan. Naturally, while that may be thecase, it would also be the responsibility of the security forces to keep equal pressure

on all borders, so that civilians are protected.The statement, however, shrugs

away any responsibility for protecting people from the militant groups operatingin the north of the country. This belies all

claims by the present and previousgovernments that military actions againstthe militants were being carried out purelyin the interests of Pakistan and to protectits citizens, rather than at the behest of theUnited States. It is deeply worrying to

imagine that those who are supposed to protect civilians from the violence of themilitants seem reluctant to do so.

Are they not convinced or aware of the urgency? Or are they simply notconcerned? Do they have a game planunknown to the people of Pakistan andtheir political representatives?

A spokesperson of the PMLNlambasted the government for bowing toIndia by agreeing to send the director-

general of the ISI or his representative toIndia. In the past, the PMLN has itself

been severely critical of the role of the ISIand supported calls for reforms within it.Regrettably, at this critical moment, theopposition is dangerously exploiting thesituation.

In contrast to the PMLN statement, LK Advani, the hawkish leader of theopposition in India, has for now assured all

support to the Indian prime minister.Perhaps we need to learn a few lessons of how the opposition can also beconstructive in times of nationalemergency. After all it is not the military

but the representatives of the people whoare entitled to take policy decisions. Itmust be the politicians rather than theintelligence agencies of both countries thatmake policies regarding foreign affairs.Surely the head of the ISI or its

representatives do not carry a stature beyond that of those representing the people of Pakistan. The PMLN will makea grave mistake by arrogating a grandstatus to the ISI, as this will undermine the

powers of any civilian government. After

25 Jan&Feb 2010


26/34


all, joint dialogues, investigations andactions that resolve tensions should beencouraged rather than be taken as anaffront to national dignity.

Most sections of society withinPakistan seem to be in a state of denial

regarding the allegations made by theIndian authorities. They are not willing toaccept even a remote possibility of anyconnection between Pakistan and theterrorist attacks that took place in Mumbailast week. At the same time, any attack within Pakistan is treated differently. Alarge number of people have openly

blamed militant groups operating withinPakistan and rogue elements within our intelligence agencies for acts of violence

carried out in Pakistan. Yet, we are notwilling to grant the same significance toany claims made by neighbours against thevery same elements that admittedly areunder insufficient control.

A discredited retired Pakistanigeneral took on an aggressive tone on

public television against any claims made by the Indians of the involvement of militants operating within Pakistan.Without waiting for any evidence, he

emphatically concluded that the attacks inMumbai were solely carried out byindigenous Indian militants. No doubt, anattack of this nature cannot be carried outwithout local complicity, but to rule outany link to any of the militant groupsoperating within Pakistan is unrealistic.

The general explained thatmilitancy was rife in India because of anenvironment of suffocation. The samegentleman has on several occasions in the

past pleaded for sympathy andunderstanding for the growth of militantsin Pakistan on the justification that the rootcauses of all this was poverty and neglect.In his view, Indian militancy stems fromsuffocation, while the Pakistani one is a

result of being victims of economicdeprivation.

A balanced and transparentapproach is urgently needed. It is clear thatIndia too needs to look into theeffectiveness of its own security forces.

However, that does not absolve thegovernment of Pakistan from ensuring thatits territory is not used as a breedingground for militants, where they can plan,train and carry out terrorist activities. It isin no ones interest to let a handful of organised militants keep the entire regionhostage and polarise its populations.

The recent Mumbai terror attacksshould be the turning point. Governmentsof the region are challenged to support an

open and transparent investigation in order to identify and prosecute the masterminds

behind such carnage. They must have themoral courage to face the truth and havethe determination to inform the publicaccordingly. The current and persistentstate of insecurity should be a wake-up callfor the region. Governments shouldreinforce their commitment to dismantleall forms of international terrorismgrowing within the region.

India and Pakistan have bothexperienced terrorism. It is not new tothem. Yet, the implications of recentinternational terrorism are far morecomplex and damaging to any society. The

jihadi groups that are suspected of havingcarried out the Mumbai attacks are a wellorganised and networked with a strategythat is mercilessly used to extend their

political agenda in the name of religion. Itwas apparent that they saw an opportunity

to attack now, when the world wasinvolved in a financial crisis and theUnited States distracted because of a

political transition period.The carnage in Mumbai has several

advantages for them: they received

26 Jan&Feb 2010


27/34


international attention, they were able todemoralise those who challenge them, theysucceeded in creating a wedge between theimproving relationship of India andPakistan, they brought themselves into a

better bargaining position before the

Obama administration takes over andcreated a precarious situation for thefragile civilian government of Pakistan. *

The Punjabi and Pakhtun IDPsof Parachinar

Farhat Taj

Someone recently informed me thatthere are Punjabi IDPs from Parachinar who live in deplorable conditions inAttock, Hasan Abdal and Rawalpindi. Ihad the opportunity to talk to some of these Punjabis who had settled inParachinar during the pre-partition Britishera. Since then their futuregenerations lived and prospered inParachinar in peaceful coexistencewith the majority Shia Pakhtun andminority Sunni Pakhtun tribes. Theynever felt the need to go back totheir native areas in Punjab. Like thePakhtuns of Parachinar, they alsospeak Pashto in a Kurmawal accent.They informed me that even if therehad been tribal tensions or conflicts

in Parachinar in the past, they werenever threatened by any of theinvolved parties. This peace,

protection and respect accorded tothe tiny Punjabi minority a total

All this changed in November 2007when rival Shia and Sunni sectarian gangs,with links to Punjab-based sectarianorganisations and arguably financed andindoctrinated by eternal Arab and Persianrivals, unleashed a reign of terror on theSunnis of Parachinar. The Sunnis,

regardless of ethnic discrimination and

27 Jan&Feb 2010


28/34


gender, suffered death and destruction.Many were killed and their houses andother properties were burnt to the ground.The Punjabi IDPs informed me that theycould only save their lives when they ranaway and took refuge in compounds

belonging to the Kurram Militia. Our houses and shops were burnt to asheswhen we were hiding with them, said oneof the Punjabi IDPs. Like the SunniPakhtun tribes of Parachinar, the Punjabishad no option but to become IDPs as theywent to different parts of Punjab. Wewere prosperous people; we had homes,shops and other businesses. We have losteverything and live almost like beggars,said one Punjabi IDP who now lives in

Attock. They say they have received nohelp at all from the government.

The Punjabi IDPs have anadditional problem: no state authority isready to own up to them. One manexplained: They keep saying we are nottheir [state authoritys] responsibility.When we go to the government of NWFP,they tell us to go to the government of Punjab, which in turn says that we are nottheir responsibility. Similarly, the FATA

secretariat has also shown us the door. We just do not know who is the state authorityrendered to register us as IDPs and providesome help.

28 Jan&Feb 2010


29/34


There has always been a nativeSunni Pakhtun minority in Parachinar of about 6,000 people. They belong to Zazi,Ghilji, Parachamkani, Ali Sherzai, Mengal,Muqbal and Utayzai tribes. The biggesttribe in Parachinar is Shia Toori where the

Shia section of the Bangash tribe alsolives. For centuries both Shia and Sunnitribes lived in harmony under the tribalcode of Pakhtunwali. Most disputes were

peacefully resolved through the jirgasystem. Armed clashes, if any, were tribalrather than sectarian over resources likeland and water. The states inability or unwillingness to crush the Punjab-basedsectarian gangs, especially Sipah-e-Sahaba(Sunni) and Sipah-e-Mohammed (Shia)

bolstered them to engage in bloody clashesfor control over the Shia-dominatedParachinar. In April 2007 there was a clashin Parachinar among people linked withexternal sectarian organisations resultingin a soured relationship between the Shiaand Sunni Pakhtuns in the town. In

November 2007 there was another clash inwhich many of the Sunni tribesmen,women and children were killed, their houses and businesses burnt and a number

of them were made to flee Parachinar.They now live as IDPs in many parts of the NWFP in miserable conditions.

The Sunni IDPs informed me thatmany of them have not even beenregistered as IDPs in over two years.Those who have been registered have

29 Jan&Feb 2010


30/34


received meagre help in the form of cooking oil, wheat, sugar and blankets, andthat too only a couple of times.

The IDPs expressed concern over last weeks news in an Urdu daily that theFATA secretariat has stopped all kinds of

aid to the Parachinar IDPs. According tothe IDPs, the only people approachingthem with some promise of help werelinked with jihadi groups. The IDPmothers that I am in contact with areterrified that the jihadis will take their children for suicide missions. Many of theIDP children have never been able to re-enter schools since they left Parachinar andhave ended up in child labour. Parents areespecially worried about teenage boys who

they fear might end up committing crimesdue to poverty and lack of any educationalfacilities.

Both the Pakhtun and Punjabi IDPshave requested the government to either offer them material help in their strugglefor survival or restore the writ of thegovernment in Parachinar so that they cango back. In the latter case they have alsorequested for some help from thegovernment, as they have to restart their

lives from scratch. Both complain thatstate authorities in the FATA secretariat,the government of NWFP, and thegovernment of Punjab treat them witharrogance and contempt. The PakhtunIDPs expressed their disappointment in the

parliamentarians, especially the gentlemenfrom Kurram agency, namely Sajid Tori,Munir Orakzai and Rashid Ahmed Khan.Whereas these parliamentarians enjoyluxurious lives, go on visits abroad and

educate their children in good schools,they never visit the IDPs to see how theystruggle to survive or consider their children worthy of education, claim theIDPs.

Both Punjabi and Pakhtun IDPswere of the view that the media and thegovernment of Pakistan offered sympathy,attention and help to the victims of bombexplosions in Karachi and Lahore and allthey requested was the same meting out of

treatment from both the media and thegovernment. They constantly kept asking,Are we not Pakistani?

It is lamentable and even strangethat the state has not been able to establishits writ in a small city like Parachinar inover two years. Why do we have a strongarmy that has not been able to killsectarian terrorists massacring Sunnis,Shias, Pakhtuns and Punjabis in theKurram agency?

According to many people of FATA, the state has deliberately createdthis chaos in their area to hide the jihadisfrom the Arab world, Central Asia, Europeand North America and, of course, fromPakistan and Afghanistan in pursuit of strategic depth in Afghanistan. The morethe chaos in FATA and the rest of Pakhtunkhwa, the easier to deceive theworld and hide these Islamists who love tokill in this world for a place in paradise in

the hereafter. The more the people of FATA suffer, the more the chaos beinggenerated. Thus the people of FATA Pakhtun, Punjabi, Shia, Sunni, Sikh, Hinduand Christian must suffer for anindefinite period until strategic depth isattained in Afghanistan.

Moreover, through this column Iwould also like to challenge theinternational scholars of the Pakhtuntribal culture who circulate around the

pedantic notion that whatever happenedin Kurram agency is tribalism rather thansectarianism, i.e. the Pakhtun tribal cultureis the root cause of the massacre of theShias and Sunnis in the area rather than theextreme versions of Sunni and Shia Islam,

30 Jan&Feb 2010


31/34


financed by the Arabs and Iranians,executed through the Punjab-basedsectarian gangs and imposed on thehelpless people of Kurram agency. Ichallenge them to elaborate how their scholarly opinion explains the tragedy of

the Punjabis in Parachinar! The Punjabisdid not belong to any of the local tribes.They did not take sides with any of the

tribes. They themselves admit they never felt threatened during the tribal clashes inthe past but in November 2007 they weretargeted just because they are Sunnis. Theysay they suffered because of sectarianismrather than tribalism; tribalism, they say,

has always protected them. *

Origins of languageCharles Ferndale

I shall begin my discussion of theorigins of language with a statement that Ishall treat as an axiom of the life sciences.All functionally important characteristics

possessed by any living creature are possessed because they conferred upon theancestors of that creature the ability to

propagate their genes successfully. And so,like all such characteristics, language wasselected by the advantages it gave thosewho possessed it in their struggle to

propagate their genes in the highlycompetitive struggles of life.

The origins of human language will perhaps remain for ever obscure. Bycontrast the origin of individual languageshas been the subject of very precise studyover the past two centuries.There are about 5000 languages spoken inthe world today (a third of them in Africa),

but scholars group them together intorelatively few families - probably less thantwenty. Languages are linked to each other

by shared words or sounds or grammaticalconstructions. The theory is that themembers of each linguistic group have

descended from one language, a commonancestor. In many cases that originallanguage is judged by the experts to have

been spoken in surprisingly recent times -as little as a few thousand years ago.If the ability to communicate was selected

because of the survival value it conferredupon its possessors, then a number of questions naturally arise: (i) whatadvantages did the ability to speak confer upon our ancestors, such that their genesout-proliferated those of members of our species who could not speak? (ii) Do anyof our relatives in the animal world havethe ability to speak? (iii) Can creaturescommunicate without language, and, if so,what additional features does linguisticcommunication confer on those who cando it? (iv) Can we imagine a persuasiveevolutionary past that could explain thehuge gulf between the abilities of humansto communicate, relative to the abilities of our closest rivals? (v) Exactly what werethe selective pressures that came to bear onour ancestors and resulted in the evolutionof skills so advanced that they would

31 Jan&Feb 2010


32/34


(apparently) not be fully needed until atleast one hundred thousand years after theyevolved? What we call civilisationcomprises no more than eight percent of our life on earth, and advancedtechnological civilisation no more than

0.0005 percent of our life on earth, so whydid a species that lived by gathering fruitsand plants, and by using sticks and stonesfor weapons, need the (entirely unused,indeed unknown) ability to do all thosethings upon which our 21st century,technologically-driven, lives depend? Wehave not changed a lot over the lasthundred thousand years, but the world inwhich we live has been changeddramatically by us. So, why did humans

evolve the skills necessary to create aworld so unhealthy to live in? Why didthey evolve the ability to destroy life onearth? Most technological skills arelanguage dependent. Or, put differently,why have we not evolved the skills tocheck ourselves from destroying the onlyworld we have? I shall make no attempt toanswer here these consequences of our mastery of language. But you should beaware of them (an interesting approach to

answers to these questions can be found in:Jared Diamond: The Rise and Fall of theThird Chimpanzee and Collapse; and inRonald Wright: A Short History of Progress).

It should come as no surprise thatall the answers to these questions are still

being hotly debated. Can animals other than us communicate? It depends uponwhat you mean by communicate, but, to

be brief: yes, a lot of other animals, by

many criteria, can communicate; some caneven speak. What advantages does theability to communicate confer on animals?Many: all of which depend upon thecommunicating animals being members of a community. Communication is restricted

to social animals and is clearly an integral part of the advantages conferred bycooperation. When did the ability tocommunicate arise among our ancestors?Millions of years ago. When did hominids(man-like animals) first acquire the ability

to speak? The answer is still debated andawaits the discovery of more bone fossilsand other advances in our understanding of how speech sounds can be made.

Nevertheless, from the study of fossils, itseems clear that Homo sapiens had the

physiological means to speak at least twohundred thousand years ago. Neanderthalswere probably as intelligent as us, andwere certainly able to communicate, butmay not have had the physiological throat

structures necessary for speech (which isone explanation advanced for the

probability that we wiped them out). Whendid we first evolve the ability tocommunicate by means of speech? It may

be impossible to answer this question because speech in those early times left notraces, but art is a form of symbolismintended to be meaningful and the earliestundisputed evidence of art (75,000 yearsago) comes from the Blombos caves at the

most southern sea-shore of South Africa.After that there are debatable dates of caverock carving in Australia about 50,000years old. And, finally, the earliest cave

paintings so far found in Europe (atChauvet, in France) are just under 33,000years old. So Homo sapiens have beencommunicating with symbols for at least75,000 years.

Thus it appears that we canapproach questions about the origins of

language through many different fields of study. But we can also do so by studyingwhat we might be called the logic of meaning. To do this is to analyse thenecessary and sufficient conditions for successful communication among people

32 Jan&Feb 2010


33/34


to occur and to see how these conditionsmight give rise to the conventional uses of ordinary language.

I shall now construct an earlyhuman, pre-linguistic, context for communication, so we may discover what

conditions must logically be met if effective communication is to occur. Itmight interest the reader that theseconditions would apply to any attempt wemight make to communicate with aliensfrom other parts of the universe, and that itwas his failure to meet these conditionsthat made me think the great astronomer Carl Sagans attempts at communicatingwith aliens were bound to fail.

Imagine a world long before people

began to live in settled communities, say30,000 years ago. And imagine we areliving in that world and are running alongan unfrequented path through the wilds.We come suddenly upon a stretch of quicksand, well concealed by tussock grass, into which we are only saved fromfalling by good fortune. Now try toimagine what we would have to do to warnanyone else who came that way about thequicksand. In other words we want anyone

following in our footsteps to conclude:someone is trying to tell me to beware of quicksand. For communication to occur, itwould not be enough for the stranger todiscover by some means (that may or maynot have involved our intervention) thatthere was a dangerous patch of quicksandin the way of the path. That might happenif we place a cunningly concealed trip-rock on the path so that when the stranger tripped, his hands and face landed at the

edge of the quicksand, but the rest of his body remained safely away from it. Hemight discover the quicksand, but fail toconclude that he had been intentionallywarned about it by someone before him;

that we had intentionally tripped him inorder to tell him something.

Communication would not haveoccurred unless, at the very least, heconcluded that a communicative intentionwas involved. So communicative

intentions logically predatecommunication, and probably predatethem historically. Of course if the only

people who might ever come that wayshared a language, such as a junglehighway code, then all we should need todo was to put up a sign Beware of Quicksand! But such a language has togrow out of something? Language usecomes after the communications I amdescribing, which logically predate it.

What are the logically necessaryconditions out of which any language usesmust grow? They must grow out of communally shared knowledge andassumptions. First, I must attract thestrangers attention; I must do that in away that causes him to believe thatsomeone is trying to tell him something;then he must ask himself what I mightmean him to conclude; then he must have areasonable chance at arriving (guessing) at

the right conclusion. Three of these four conditions necessary for successfulcommunication require shared knowledgeand presuppositions.The most widespread group of languagestoday is the Indo-European, spoken by half the world's population. This entire group,ranging from Hindi and Persian to

Norwegian and English, is believed todescend from the language of a tribe of nomads roaming the plains of eastern

Europe and western Asia (in modern termscentering on the Ukraine) as recently asabout 3000 BC.

From about 2000 BC peoplespeaking Indo-European languages beginto spread through Europe, eventually

33 Jan&Feb 2010


34/34


reaching the Atlantic coast and thenorthern shores of the Mediterranean.They also penetrate far into Asia -occupying the Iranian plateau and much of India.

Once such a successful form of

communication has taken place the beginnings of conventional language are inexistence. Because, once the stranger shares his experience with the village towhich he was traveling, it would bereasonable for the people there, whenconfronted by the need to communicate thesame message in future, to use the samemeans. By accepting communally whatmeans will be used to convey meanings,symbols with conventional meanings come

into existence. What to use to say whatyou want to say becomes commonknowledge. This is the essence of ordinarylanguages, of which highway codes areexamples. From this analysis a very widerange of consequences flow.

Documents

Balochistan Nicca Jan&Feb 2010 Final