Burying the past

HISTORY is full of heroes. They come in all shapes and sizes and colours. How one admired people like Robin Hood, Joan of Arc and Salahuddin Ayubi. Sometimes other names pop up in people’s minds when they are fantasising, like the German flying ace Manfred von Richthofen in the First World War, the Rajput warrior Prithviraj in the wars of the Indian princes; and Horatius in the Lays of Ancient Rome.

And now, closer to home, the Baloch have added the name of Nawab Akbar Bugti to their list of heroes — a violent man whose death endorsed the saying that those who live by the sword die by the sword.

Bugti didn’t strafe enemy soldiers from a Tiger Moth, or wield a wicked sword while on horseback, or hold the narrow bridge against a much larger and better equipped fighting force. But he became a legend in his lifetime and a martyr after his death.

Though the dust has now started to settle on the blighted landscape of Balochistan, amid government promises to turn the province into a model of development and progress, there’s hardly a person in this country that hasn’t formed an opinion on what happened during the fierce battle near the mountain hideout that killed the tribal leader and more than 50 tribesmen and soldiers.

It’s a subject that has nicked the collective national nerve and has sent shock waves throughout the country. Many writers, especially those that belong to the upper class and enjoy the eunuchoid cosiness of a leather armchair, regarded the Oxford- educated septuagenarian as the last of the rebel Mohicans — a leader who, though full of bluff and bluster, was essentially an affable person who enjoyed a droll story and occasionally delighted in focusing his attention on some poor unfortunate wretch and making him the target of his rebukes.

Others regarded him as a patriot and a true nationalist, as head of a tribal campaign to win political autonomy and a greater share of revenue from Balochistan’s gas reserves, and who at various points in his life butted heads with just about all major leaders in Pakistan, and managed to get away with it.

He was no Che Guevara or Charu Majumdar, or even Emiliano Zapata, whose causes were vastly different from those of the Baloch sardars whose politics are reactionary and totally out of tune with developments in the Third World. But there is something essentially romantic about the picture of a rebel hiding out in the mountains defying capture.

As often happens when a prominent person dies in this country, eulogies pop up like sprinklers on a lawn. And one learns that in spite of what the bard once wrote about the evil that men do living after them, in Pakistan the good is apparently not always interred in their bones.

After reading some of the tributes that have been paid, one gets the impression that the late Bugti chief was a jolly old soul who though he broke bread with his bearded warriors when hiding out in the mountains, was equally at home in the drawing room admiring a Matisse or a Dufy.

However, not everybody sees the late tribal chief in quite the same way, and believes there is also a flipside to the coin that in the heat of the moment writers cheerfully ignore — life in the tribal gulag — where some chieftains employ the full despotic apparatus — private army, prisoners, executions, centralised administration and absolute and capricious power. What is truly astonishing is that in the 21st century with human rights activists clamouring for justice, a tribe can turn into an icon a man who boasted that he killed his first victim when he was 12.

While one admires the late leader’s audacity and boldness, one cannot ignore the fact that on his instructions tribesmen had been carrying out a regular campaign of destruction. Every time the warriors blew up a gas pipeline, some family in Mayo Gardens or Gulberg II in Lahore discovered halfway through the day that they weren’t able to cook their food or warm the hearth. No matter what one’s political views or beliefs might be, one just doesn’t go around blowing up national assets. This doesn’t necessarily mean that the central government is right. It suggests that there are other avenues of communication that were not properly explored.

Bugti’s supporters will continue to see him as the rebel who single-handedly defied the might of an oppressive power and who was martyred in the process. However, in spite of government assurances that the leader’s body will be exhumed and a DNA test carried out, it is the manner in which he was killed and the mystery shrouding his death that has greatly irked the tribesmen. The incident is calculated to worsen the security situation in Balochistan and exacerbate the feeling of marginalisation amongst the Baloch.

Nawab Bugti’s recent standoff with the Musharraf government was not the highpoint of his own political career but it may well be the lowest point of President Musharraf’s rule. However, more than the implications on immediate politics — which will become clearer and more pronounced over the next few weeks — nobody can deny the fact that this has been a great tragedy.

If the government is at all serious about tackling the grievances of the Baloch people, they should try to bury the past and turn over a new leaf. They should start an immediate dialogue with the sardars and representatives of a cross section of the population. The grievances of the Baloch are many and varied, ranging from massive unemployment and gross underdevelopment to not receiving an adequate share of the revenues generated by the gas that’s pumped out of their territory.

It is time somebody in Islamabad took the initiative and tried to redress the grievances of the Baloch in a meaningful way. There are already signs that the grip of the sardars on their tribesmen is not as strong as it used to be and that tribal culture is undergoing a change.

Perhaps the time has come for the prime minister to convert his four-nation whistle-stop tours to four-city whistle-stop tours to the trouble spots of Balochistan. Quetta and Zhob might not be as exciting as Oslo and Beirut, but then Oslo and Beirut do not threaten to destroy the federation of Pakistan. It’s a question of getting one’s priorities right.
 ‘official line’.

 -Anwer Mooraj
 

Jinnah — the legend
Mumtaz Hamid Rao

With a truthful pledge for a glittering and vibrant vistas to accomplish all the cherished goals—set by the marvelous legend of the 20th century epoch, a fabulous nation, the people of Pakistan observe with enormous reverence on September-11, the 58th death anniversary of an illustrious and spirited soul, Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, who smashed all manacles of a longed rule by aliens—by changing the Atlas of the world to get indexed a sovereign homeland for the Muslims of South Asia—to live-on with dignity and honour till time without end.

As adapted, manifold assemblage and ceremonies are to take place around the globe, wherever Pakistanis dwell with an imposing event at the Mazar [Mausoleum] of the great Quaid in Karachi atop to mark the day with veneration.

The day is observed every year with the objective to spotlight singular aspects of the life and achievements of the Quaid-i-Azam with a zest to promote the real essence of the Pakistan Movement. Yet, in view of the peculiar situation, being faced by the Ummah [Muslim World]—of which Pakistan is a herald, the commemoration of the day has assumed special significance.

The observance of the Quaid’s anniversary coincides with that of Nine/Eleven episode, which by all perceptions diverted the course of history especially for the Muslims — the worldover, they are facing a lot of perils even to the magnitude of to their very survival at the hands of the power-drunken West.

Secondly, we have Muslim League in power, a party on the platform of which the Muslims of subcontinent gathered and achieved their goal of an independent Pakistan under the powerful leadership of Quaid-i-Azam. The nation, therefore, has special expectations from the PML [Q] and this day is, thus, an occasion to recollect as to what was the pragmatic vision of the Quaid about Pakistan.

Have we made any endeavour to realize that? It is an established fact that the death of the founder—this day in the second year of our independence—left a hefty vacuum that could not be filled despite passage of 56 long years. During the early and complex months of Pakistan’s emergence, the Quaid undertook a countrywide tour aimed at building confidence and raising spirit of the people. In his speech in Lahore he urged people to “Save the honour of Pakistan and Islam. Do your duty and have faith in Pakistan. It has come to stay”.

Unfortunately, we lost faith in ourselves and lost one wing of the country. Pakistan’s honor is also at stake because of the bigoted approach of some elements who are trying to sow seeds of hatred and chaos in the lovely homeland—Pakistan.

Again, the Quaid emphasized the need to root out the evil of nepotism and jobbery but today—paradoxically—merit is a disqualifier, a handicap and certainly not an asset with any interpretation. Pakistan came into being on the basis of ‘our own distinctive culture and civilization, language and literature, art and architecture, sense of values and proportion, legal laws and moral codes….’ but all this is threatened because of the foreign cultural onslaught and our inability to counter it effectively.

There is, therefore, need to strengthen our identity—and for this rationale special responsibilities devolve on the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, Education and Religious Affairs to take strenuous steps—to make every citizen a proud Pakistani.

We ought to search our souls to analyze if at all we have done our duty in line with aspires of the great leader, who is much adored even beyond oceanic.

Everyone knows that the splendid gift, the Quaid gave us on August-14 in 1947—is as greatest and precious—as was the vision of the legend. Hence the day is idolized every year by bowing before Allah Almighty, the Most Gracious and the Most Merciful, Who blessed the Muslims of South Asia with a unique souvenir—filled with fragrance bouquet to breath in environs of freedom, absolutely free from any coercion or ascendancy of a Martian character.

While paying rich tributes to the marvelous cerebral of the previous century, the great leader of the Muslims, Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah who got translated a dream into a reality within a short span of a few years every son and daughter of the soil, irrespective of ones’ faith, age, gender, caste, colour, creed or credo—is ought to vow in a crystal clear style that each one of them shall do his/her level best to shield like a hard-rock, the sovereignty, integrity and affluence of the dazzling realm of Pakistan by offering any sacrifice, whatever its scale and size may be.

With the great Quaid—atop, the people of Pakistan pay homage to all the faithful, who embraced martyrdom at the hands of fanatics and belligerents during the process of migration to Pakistan. While rejoicing the fruits of liberty, as a pragmatic view, we have not yet been able to clutch the lofty level of unity, faith and disciple—a magnificent icon of trust which was zestfully beamed to us by the Father of the Nation—in the pre-dawn hours, almost six decades ago.

Paradoxically we are still engaged in superfluous scuffles, pre-dominantly marked of egocentricity and narcissism. Not only in a way we lack a political acumen, our institutions are also confronting an impediment in their swift augmentation. Obviously due to political volatility, as by and large each one, irrespective of its egalitarian stature aspires to reach the corridors of power—even, to some extent by placing the national interests at stake.

Needless to elucidate, every realistic and patriotic soul is fully awake with angst of the posture, of the democratic Government versus the Opposition and vice versa. It is an apposite time to evaluate the candid raison d’être which shaped a podium of our freedom from the British Empire.

Its all the more necessary due to the antagonistic mindset of our neighbour—India, which is though airing the messages of love and peace nowadays has in fact not acknowledged the very creation of a remarkable country—Pakistan by heart. It is apparent from the veracity that on the one hand, New Delhi portrays its’ delight for love through the exchange of delegations, yet at the same time eschews with one ploy or the other—the lucid approach of amity and harmony via the process of summit-level dialogue to solve all the issues with Kashmir dispute—as the foremost, as it has been and shall continue to stay so as—the root cause of irritants in ties between the two nukeneighbours.

With such a pugnacious and truculent attitude, India has by now fought three wars with Pakistan, which eventually proved nothing except a worldwide loathing for New Delhi warlords. By all parameters of realism India’s hostilities towards Pakistan persist un-abated.

The only way-out to thwart every wicked eye thus rests with full unity alone more explicitly in the ranks of our politicians, who are well-acquainted with the events cataloged in to folio of the history of South Asia. They are ought to reflect the aspirations of their electorates in place of their own peculiar outlook, based on odd aspirations and wishes. We zealously hope that the nation shall not be disillusioned by its elected representatives in any way, who have all intellects—backed by potentials in sketching a distinction between a friend and foe.

And would opt for a concord—at this point in time—instead of depicting idols of skirmishes in any cute and crafty style. Everyone knows that we have to go only for the superb and splendid ideology of Pakistan comewhatmay, as this is the only spring and helix of inspiration and strength for all who deem precious pretty Pakistan as a sparkling abode.

At the same time, we have to keep in mind the plight of our brethren in India held-Kashmir, who are heroically engaged in an unprecedented resist to make the invaders of a part of the Himalayan State—the Indians—quit their sacred soil, at-once. The gallant Kashmiris are in fact adding a new charismatic chapter in their history of struggle to seek their bona fide right of self-determination, as has—time and again—been envisaged in the UN resolutions on Kashmir as well as in the charter of the world body.

The hideous and gruesome state of bloodbath, unleashed by the armed Indian intruders is, eventually ought to reach an eternal end. The supreme sacrifices, being made by Kashmiris shall in no way go in vain as the sunrise—with a point of their freedom from the Indian yoke is about to appear.

Email: post@mumtazrao.net

Quaid — a lofty minaret
Imtiaz Rafi Butt

Jinnah was the most remarkable of all the great statesmen that I have known. It put him on a level with Bismarck.—Aga Khan


Today is the 58"’ death anniversary of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad All Jinnah, the man who altered the course of history, modified the map of the world and gave us a nation-state known as Pakistan. For a decade he pondered over the Hindu-Muslim question and reached at the conclusion that the two communities were poles apart and would never mix. In 1940, he declared that Muslims were a separate nation and they must have their separate territory and homeland. Seven years of unremitting effort and messianic zeal led to the creation of Pakistan on 14 August 1947.

58 years have passed but Pakistan has not found that peace and harmony, political and economic stability, rule of law, social justice, democratic culture and freedom from exploitation which the Quaid had envisioned. The cardinal factor responsible for such a state of affairs was frequent military intervention and lack of sustained civilian rule. The country suffered. Every successive military ruler asserted that he was compelled to assume responsibility because corruption, mismanagement and palace intrigues of the civilian government had brought the country to the edge of precipice. When General Pervez Musharraf took over as Chief Executive in 1999, he announced a seven-point agenda which included retrieving money from plunderers, breaking the powerful hold of the feudal barons and ensuring justice and fair play for the common man. He promised to set things right and put the country on the road to genuine democracy. While he has managed to keep PML (Q) and MQM intact and has promised to build dams and control insurgency, he has failed, despite the passage of seven years, to implement the more crucial items on his agenda. Soon after assuming power, President Musharraf found cause to observe: “The nation would not have come to such a pass had the rulers not strayed from the path prescribed by the Quaid.” His observation was, indeed, correct. All our subsequent ills, in fact, stemmed from our flagrant disregard for the advice and counsel of the Father of the Nation.

Democracy, representative government and fundamental rights were principles particularly dear to the Quaid-e-Azam. Difference of opinion, he believed, was the cornerstone of democracy. The Quaid worked as a democrat and never hesitated to afford fully the democratic right to his own opposition. He fought and won his first battle of democracy in 1918 when he demonstrated his courage and resentment against the British Governor of Bombay, Lord Wellington, when a meeting was called to bid him farewell. The Quaid and his supporters opposed the move to give Wellington an honourable send-off because the Governor had earlier called into question the sincerity of the Home Rule leaders, of which the Quaid was one, in the war effort. The Quaid reached the Town Hall on the morning of I I December to occupy the front seats. The Police Commissioner ordered his men to clear the hall and the Quaid was among those who were assaulted. The Quaid led the crowd to Apollo Street to address the people the significance of the occasion. He roared: “Gentlemen, you are citizens of Bombay. You have today scored a great victory for democracy. Your triumph has made it clear that even the combined forces of bureaucracy and authority could not overcome you. December I I is red-letter day in the history of Bombay. Gentlemen, go and rejoice over the day that has secured us the triumph of democracy.” After this momentous occasion, the Quaid’s admirers contributed thirty thousand rupees to build a memorial hall in his honour, which is still called the Peoples Jinnah Hall. Its opening ceremony was performed by Mrs Sarojini Naidu. The Quaid-i-Azam was then in Europe and in a telegram to him Mrs Naidu described him as a prophet honoured in his own country and in his own time.

Democracy, it must be reiterated, was always high on the Quaid’s agenda. To him it was the lifeblood and the sheet anchor of Pakistan. During the stewardry of the Quaid-i-Azam, the All India Muslim League too gave an excellent account of itself as a staunch democratic organisation. The periodic muzzling of democracy thereafter did not allow the tender sapling to take root. It is hoped that the elections scheduled for 2007 will be free, fair and transparent, provide a level playing to all the contestants and usher in the kind of democracy that the Quaid had in mind. If President Pervez Musharraf succeeds in accomplishing his vital task, he will not only win the gratitude of the nation but also go down in history as one of the great benefactors of Pakistan. The sooner Pakistan realigns itself with the democratic world, the better it would be. The Quaid was a man of phenomenal integrity. Even his enemies could not fault him on this account. Dr Ambedkar, by no means a friendly critic, writes: “It is doubtful if there is a politician in India to whom the adjective incorruptible can be more fittingly applied. No one can buy him for it must be said to his credit that he has never been a soldier of fortune.” It is not a paradox that a man of such great integrity should be the architect of such a corrupt country.

We cannot be grateful enough to the Quaid for the many ordeals he went through for our sake. Had he been a man of weak fibre and succumbed to the multi-pronged pressure of the British and the Hindus, the star of the Muslims would have sunk into a dark abyss never to rise again. Had he not been gifted with exceptional foresight, we would today have been squirming helplessly under the jackboot of Hindu fanaticism. “One thinks of the Poles,” says Nirad Chaudhri, a Bengali Hindu, “as an unhappy people whom history has treated and is treating very shabbily. But I do not consider that even their fate has been as tragic as that of the Muslims of India, not only in their present State, but even from the time the British ousted them from political power.” And here is a more recent assessment by Ms Fouzia Shahnaz: “The Muslims of India are very vulnerable in a country which describes itself as world’s largest secular democracy. The condition of 150 million Muslims in India is that of ‘Shudras’. Muslims are either to be killed or expelled from India. ‘Purify Bharat Mata from Muslim entity’ is the slogan. VHP’s general secretary, Pardan Tugadia, has gone to the extent in suggesting New Delhi that ‘if the government wants tranquillity in India, there is no way out but having slaughtered millions of Muslims in one go.”’

The creation of Pakistan is a lasting tribute to the Quaid’s vision. He brought us out of the wilderness, battled against formidable odds, gave us a homeland, served us till the very end of his earthly days and hoped that we would fashion a modern democratic State.

The writer is Chairman, Jinnah-Rafi Foundation.