With the first ever democratically elected Parliament nearly passing the baton to another parliament via general elections in the midst of our reach, we may just be witnessing history.  History is in the making because over the 66-year roller coaster ride, Pakistan has never observed such a transition.  Numerous military interventions, lack of assertive civilian leadership along with the involvement of non-state and foreign actors has made Pakistan suffer deeply.

While our democratic institutions have taken a beating, our weak and feeble state has given room for militants and terrorists to not only take root but also exploit our country’s weaknesses.  Such exploitation has allowed for terrorists groups such as the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ) to invoke and spread terror while creating a safe haven for sectarian activities to take place.  These heinous acts have seen the eradication and isolation of minority groups including Christians, Hindus, Shiites and Ahmaddi’s.

The nurturing of militancy and terrorism in Pakistan has been a shortsighted, well thought out plan courtesy of the Pakistan military.  The military establishments’ obsession with religion and terrorism has been an open secret within Pakistan and abroad.  Such an involvement was seen with their ‘strategic depth’ policy in Afghanistan during the 1980s and due to the military’s fixation with India and Kashmir, the rise of the mujahedeen in the 1990s.

The common denominator in sectarian and religious militancy and terrorism in Pakistan is religion, or rather Islam.  Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto fired the first bullet back in 1974 with the acceptance of the Second Amendment to the constitution.

Such soiling of the constitution back in 1974 was only the beginning.  More amendments and clauses were brought into law while Zia had a whale of a time further sullying the constitution of Pakistan.  The most harrowing laws Zia put in place were; The Offence of Zina (Enforcement Of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, Pakistan Penal Code Ordinance, XLIV of 1980, the Anti-lslamic Activities of Quadiani Group, Lahori Group and Ahmadis (Prohibition and Punishment) Ordinance, XX of 1984 and Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, III of 1986.  These laws planted the seeds for violent extremism, militancy and terrorism across Pakistan, soon enough spreading its tentacles into our neighboring countries and across the globe.

The promulgation of such laws has inadvertently allowed citizens to take the role of the state into their own hands.  Alleged blasphemers are killed without due process, Ahmaddi’s are isolated to a point where they are unable to profess or state their faith while Shiites are targeted and killed mainly because of their surname.  It is with this perpetual fear of death and isolation with which millions of Pakistani’s have lost their lives, lived their lives, or like the Hazara community, have escaped from this life.

The utilization of religion in our political discourse has been present since Pakistan’s independence in 1947.  It is unfortunate where 66 years down the road, our politicians have not understood the toxic environment such a discourse creates.  Many people have lost their lives or have lived in complete isolation and fear due to the lethal mixture of the state and mosque, but yet our political leaders are keen to invoke religion primarily to shore up electoral ballots.  Ironically,  religious parties such as the Jamaat and its various factions have been contesting elections since 1947, but have yet to create even the slightest of dent in the national political arena in terms of forming their own majority  government.

Every day we hear statements made by politicians in various surroundings.  The PTI (running their first major political campaign) chief, Imran Khan, has deduced that his electoral campaign will be restricted to Punjab by making a piñata out of his arch-nemesis, PML-N leader Nawaz Sharif.  Ironically the two parties have a similar vote bank (+/- the youth vote).  Both are center-right leaning, have a knack for invoking religious ideology and sentiment with a pro-business approach towards guiding Pakistan out of the deep trench we find ourselves in.

It is an open secret that the PML-N leader enjoys cuddling up to the Saudi royals.  During his stint as prime minister, Sharif allowed the Arab royals to promote Wahhabism across Pakistan, fund madrassah’s alongside providing safe havens for mujahedeen’s in the southern part of Punjab.  It thus comes as no surprise that Sharif chose Saudi Arabia as his new home when being expelled from Pakistan in 1999.

But that was 1999.  Today, Nawaz Sharif has shown that he is a hardened and seasoned politician than he was when ousted.  Religious rhetoric is not as prevalent in his current electoral campaign.  Sharif is now focusing on a progressive Pakistan, emphasizing economic growth and infrastructure development.  It is with this hope that the Karachi Stock Exchanged recently crossed the 19,000 mark in anticipation of a PML-N government. 

Being a novice at Pakistani politics, Imran Khan has resorted to fanning public sentiment.  Khan has been labeled as ‘Taliban Khan’ by his foes due to his alleged soft and naïve approach towards tackling terrorism and militancy.  But giving credit where it is due, Khan has been vocal in condemning sectarian and terrorist activities.  Understanding that a majority of Pakistani’s do not view the United States as an ally, Khan has consistently lambasted the US for their foreign policy and persistence use of Predator drones in the west side of Pakistan.  The problem however lies in Khan’s determination to invoke religious sentiment and ideology in his campaign narrative.  He frequently uses divine verses in speeches highlighting his Muslim background, is known to stop speaking during his rallies to publicly pray on stage and refuses to answer whether he will rescind the lethal blasphemy law or other Islamic related provisions in the constitution.

In the latest video posted to his Facebook page, Khan states that he is a Muslim who is an ardent follower of the Sunnah. Further in the short clip, Khan explicitly articulates that he will not purge the constitution of the Islamic clauses initiated by Bhutto in 1974 or those by Zia in the 1980s and unequivocally argues that Ahmaddi’s are non-Muslims.  Khan’s vision for the country is to make Pakistan an Islamic welfare state  and as one op-ed recently stated “Khan [wants] to make Pakistan a state like Khilafat-e-Rashda.”

For a man who states he does not represent the status-quo and is looking to create a nationalistic movement, Khan needs to understand that continuing to drive the wedge between the minorities of Pakistan and the majority based on religion will only hasten the speed with which our society is disintegrating.  There is a difference between being right and self-righteous, and as a potential national leader, he needs to represent the unity and the people of Pakistan.

The fanning of religious sentiment has grown into the Frankenstein monster Benazir Bhutto warned us of decades ago.  Now that Pakistan and the world have felt the pain and sorrow stemming from religious terrorism, it is time our politicians took the onus on their own shoulders and refrain from exploiting religion in the political arena for the sake of parliamentary seats.  Human lives and a life of peace and dignity is far more valuable than any seat parliament may provide.

Rumors are adrift of what all is happening.  MQM creates chaos in Karachi by targeting their kill; Baluchistan is the battleground for foreign agents and players hence the unrest; Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ) does not approve of Shi’ism and therefore has Shi’as murdered at will.  While all these games are simultaneously being played, the PPP sits idly on the sidelines, issuing press release after press release, shrugging their shoulders claiming in private that the Pakistan Military controls foreign and national security policy, thus their hands are tied.

The PPP constantly reaffirms that they are committed in fighting the ‘menace of terrorism’ and their ‘resolve’ will not wane despite the thousands of lives lost across the country. But is this really enough?  Where are the Parliamentarians? Where are the standing committee meetings? Where is the legislation to control violence that has buried thousands six feet under the ground?

The most the government could muster for the recent murders of the Hazara community in Quetta was a “condemnation.”  Issuing press release No. 119 and No. 120 denouncing the blast and “direct[ing] the concerned authorities to provide best medical facilities to the injured of the blast”.  The releases like the other hundreds issued before 119 and 120 are nothing short of a façade.  What does it mean to ‘provide the best medical facility’? Where is the “resolve of [this] government to fight and eliminate the menace of terrorism”?  Does credibility mean nothing to the PPP-led government?  How many more bomb blasts and target killings, murders caught on CCTV cameras and missing persons petitions will it take for the government to uphold their oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan”?

Over the course of this government’s tenure, the action undertaken by those in power has done little to curb terrorism and violence. Rather than taking the onus and looking for long lasting initiatives that will reduce such heinous crimes, the federal and provincial governments have at best taken only stopgap measures. Such actions have morphed Pakistan into a real-time fort.  Government buildings are wrapped around in razor-sharp barbed wires with security checkpoints at every nook and corner.  All army installations and entrances to cantonments across the country have vehicles screened and trunks inspected.  Sniffing dogs are dragged around cars at hotels and restaurants making it feel as if one is entering a top-security prison.  But the citizen of Pakistan is still living in fear.

The problem of sectarian and ethnic violence and terrorism will not be brought to an end unless Parliamentarians and the Federal Government alter the prevalent narrative.  Those with empathy towards the violence we experience will always carry out protests.  The Hazara community refused to bury their loved ones and sat in the cold to register their anger while the civil society and human rights activists try and shed light on the plight of millions across the country.  Unless our public servants and officials grab the bull by the horn, we will continuously be holding our heads in shame behind the coffins of those who lost their lives due to our cowardice.

Some politicians took a stand and publicly denounced the activities of Lashkar-e-Jhangvi.  While this baby step is still a step, the mountain we have to climb needs far more tenacity and strength.  We cannot bow down to the very ideology that is slowly but surely eradicating Pakistan from within.  Elected officials having the legitimacy of the electorate can no longer issue a mere press release while refusing to undertake any serious action to exterminate this hateful ideology.   It is time they use the microphone and loudspeaker as a tool to denounce the violence rather than ink and paper.

Religion cannot be used as a tool of violence.  Has the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan in the 1980s and the Mujahedeen activities in Kashmir of the 1990s not taught us anything?  Due to our Establishment so fondly using religion in pursuing their own agenda, Pakistan has now become synonymous with terrorism.  Across the globe our moral standing has greatly diminished while we also find ourselves completely fractured from within.  The Establishment must be curtailed and this too can only be done by the Parliament.

History has taught us that the ballot is stronger than the bullet.  While the ballot is still a raw force in Pakistani politics, its credibility can only be strengthened by the acts passed by those voted to the legislature.  The responsibility of freeing Pakistan from this warped and bigoted interpretation of Islam rests on the shoulders of those in power.  The narrative needs to change.

During his near-decade of power, Pervez Musharraf introduced many different pieces of legislation.  The public at large admonished some laws, while few regulations were applauded.  However, one ordinance in particular, Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA), signed in to law by 2002 is (should be) praised by all.  The said ordinance not only capsized Musharraf’s regime, but has also brought a vibrant and dynamic media sector to Pakistan. The beauty of an independent media, free from the ownership of the state, provides room for an accountability mechanism in a democratic setup.  Unfortunately the power players in Pakistan have not been able to understand and utilize this powerful domain.

Today, the power of social media has brought an end to decade old dictatorships, initiated revolutions and has been instrumental in mobilizing people to band together for a common cause.  Due to the enactment of PEMRA, there has been a tsunami of news channels and talk shows on Pakistani airwaves.  With the media’s influence spreading across a wide spectrum of society, it comes as a surprise that the Pakistani government and opposition parties have not understood the true essence and effectiveness of the media.

The idea behind penning this article stemmed from the circus and fiasco surrounding President Zardari and his ‘heart-ailment’.  These discrepancies are highlighted in two separate press releases issued by the Government.  PR. No. 34 December 6th 2011 states “President Zardari Tuesday evening left for Dubai to visit his children and also to undergo some medical tests.”  “According to the President’s personal physician Col. Salman the proposed medical test are of routine nature”.  Then, the very next day, PR No. 39 December 7th, 2011 articulates, “The President went to Dubai following symptoms related to his pre-existing heart condition.  After the initial medical tests in Dubai, Doctors found him to be in stable condition. The President went to Dubai at the insistence of his children.”

No disrespect to official spokespersons or Ministers but the number of diverse press releases emanating from the Presidency puts them at par with Mansoor Ijaz.  Why not tame the flames that were fanned by Twitter and The Cable and issue a coherent statement.  Was it a routine medical check-up or was he suffering chest-pains prior to departure? Did the President go to Dubai to visit his children or did his children send him to Dubai?

These disjointed statements gave fuel to the very conspiracy theorists most progressive and conservative commentators admonish.  Talk shows were set ablaze with the trivial pursuit of the President, while foreign newspapers were inking stories of a silent-coup taking place in Pakistan.  Was it really necessary for the country to become the laughing stock of the global arena because of a communication fiasco?

The incompetence exhibited by the ruling elite has allowed conspiracy theorists to run amuck in the media space.  In the aftermath of the OBL Operation on May 2nd, the PM Secretariat, Presidency and ISPR remained silent on the issue for the first few days.  While the globe had their eyes fixated on Pakistan, there was no coherent message put forward.  A haphazardly press release was put forward by MoFA (Ministry of Foreign Affairs) while the Prime Minister and the President refused to come in front of the camera.  Similarly, ISPR did not issue a press release until the 5th of May.  This did not resonate well with the people of Pakistan and allowed the global media to take charge of the media debate surrounding bin Laden and his adopted residency.

The lack of knowledge in communicating has also hindered public support for the Gilani Administration when they have passed historical and critical legislation.  The 18th Amendment was a landmark introduction to the Constitution.  The government was unable to put forward a strategic communications plan and therefore forfeited an opportunity to highlight their good governance. Other significant laws have also passed which included protection and empowerment of women rights, NFC Awards and Aghaz-e-Haqooq-e-Balochistan amongst others.  These pieces of legislation have died a silent death.

When there is a disregard of the public domain; it gives rise to conspiracy theories, unanswered question and forces the subject of the crises to go on the defense.  President Zardari may have genuinely suffered a minor heart attack, but today the news stories disprove that theory, because his spokespersons allowed themselves to be caught like a deer in headlights.

By remaining silent, the Government allows the conversation to be controlled and dictated to them rather than being lead by them.  It is extremely important for the government and military to analytically view the media space and gauge their strengths and weaknesses. The ruling elite must learn how to utilize the media space.

Traditional and social media provide a comprehensive insight into the temperature of the political climate of the country.  These outlets should not only be used to measure their own effectiveness in terms of governance and policy formation but also as a tool for strengthening democracy.  It is time that the Government and Military become more transparent of their respective roles by communicating before it becomes a crisis.  It would not only enhance their own credibility, but also showcase their achievements and enforce the public to be involved with their government.

Agha Haider Raza is a freelance journalist and can be reached via his Twitter handle @ahraza_

2011 has been a rather tumultuous year for Pakistan. There have been too many incidents to highlight and ponder over.  With the assassination of Salmaan Taseer in January to the deaths of Pakistani soldiers in November, the land of the pure has taken a lot of bruising. Despite suffering at the hands of homegrown and natural disasters, Pakistan continues to point fingers at the United States and other foreign intelligence agencies.  Now don’t get me wrong, the US has done its fair share to ruffle things up in the region, but I have to ask– how long can the country blame foreign powers for our own misery? Pakistan has failed to create a cohesive narrative at a time when it is most necessary.

 Leadership can be defined as “the process of influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task.” Perhaps 2012 will be the year that this common task is redefined by the elected members of parliament and becomes Pakistan’s mainstream narrative.  One can only hope that this common task will be free of an Indian centric military, strategic depth Afghanistan and usage of militancy for short-term gains.  While concentrating on economics, religious tolerance and curtailing the out-stretched limbs of the Military Establishment. It is hard to imagine how the country can afford to go another year without undertaking these tasks.

Whilst terrorism and floods have battered Pakistan’s economy for the past few years, many of our economic woes are homegrown.  This stems from a weak and feeble foundation upon which the country’s economics are built upon. Agricultural reforms, trade development and most importantly tax generation are key aspects in strengthening Pakistan’s economics.

If privatization in Pakistan is carried out with transparency and through the proper channels, it seems difficult to comprehend why the Supreme Court would intervene.  If the power sector were to be given its due payments by the government, we can diminish the circular debt.  If the media were to act as an accountability mechanism, the government will not be able to make sweeping statements.  Article 25A (18th Amendment) of the constitution stipulates “the State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of five to sixteen years.”  Empty rhetoric will not suffice anymore. Solutions to our economic problems come from Parliament and the Government.  The United States does not hold the keys to our economic engine.

It is also time that the citizens and the government of Pakistan become publically tolerant of other religions and sects.  The PPP government continues to forfeit the opportunity to clamp down on religious intolerance. Conducting politics by living in fear will only lead Pakistan into further isolation, as we will witness a greater loss of life through sectarian violence and terrorism.  While the PPP manifesto of 2008 “commits itself to religious tolerance”, the party leadership cannot merely condone acts of religious violence that have taken the lives of thousands in the past few years.

Pakistan’s civilian-military imbalance is no secret.  The military junta is very powerful and has stretched its tentacles into the social- economic sector. The armed forces of Pakistan should not be basking in the commerce of banking, insurance, housing, cement production, sugar mills, power and gas, processing of cow-dung and production of cereals amongst others.  It thus comes as no surprise that the military would want to take the largest slice of the pie when it comes to determining Pakistan’s budget.  The military needs to open the Army Welfare Trust and Fauji Foundation to the private sector and return to the barracks.  Having a military powerful enough to undermine civilian governance undercuts the very core of a democratic system.  Furthermore, it is time to realize that military power alone cannot carry Pakistan into the 21st century.  Rather, economics, will determine the stature of Pakistan in the global arena.  Placing soldiers on our eastern borders will not spur GDP growth or facilitate Pakistan in achieving its macro-economic objectives.  The flip side of amassing a nuclear arsenal is the deterrent aspect.  A developed nuclear armory should trigger a restructuring of Pakistan’s Armed forces.  This would allow the national budget to spread the nations wealth in order to fund social programs and target economic goals.

Blaming the United States for our economic problems, terrorist activities and domestic policies is easy, but futile.  I would rather see Pakistan challenge the US, India and Israel economically than have the Military Establishment conducting proxy wars to undermine other nations. The current leadership needs to realize that their worries about garnering supporters will be over as long as people see their needs being addressed.

While the title of this post is called New Year, New Tasks, in reality it should be called New Year, Same Ole Tasks since the tasks I’ve defined here should not be completely unfamiliar.  These are issues that have plagued the country one time or another since its inception.  However one needs to ask, how many more years will go by with Pakistan wobbling its way along an undefined path?  Our current economic standing and domestic insecurity shows that Pakistan has nearly hit rock bottom.

Over the decades many analysts, journalists and politicians have come to assume that true power in Pakistan rests with the Military and/or the United States.  The social movement, which saw the restoration of the Chief Justice in Pakistan, changed this dynamic.  True political power is in the hands of the people.  The military was not able to undertake the operation in Swat without public approval.  A powerful president who wore the uniform could not conduct politics, as he desired.  And the PPP government has had to rescind many decisions, which have not sat well with the people of Pakistan.  The civilian leadership needs to provide a common task narrative, supported by the citizens of Pakistan to carry the country forward.  By doing so, the government would be able to harness a dangerous and lethal religious uprising, stabilize poor economic indicators and attempt to reign in the military.

Journalists across Pakistan have continuously stressed the importance
of protecting the freedom of speech as way of ensuring the media’s
role as one of the country’s most crucial accountability mechanisms.
However as of late the media seems to have overstepped the very
function they speak so highly of.

Creating a national narrative is part of politics.  Senator Obama
touted in his 2004 keynote speech for then-Democratic Presidential
nominee John Kerry, ‘there is not a blue America or a red America,
there is the United States of America’.  Upon his election in 2008,
President Obama has carried forward this narrative of a bipartisan
America that works towards the uplift of the American people.  Point
being – a politician set the narrative forward and enacted upon his
election by the ballot.

Unfortunately in Pakistan, the elected officials have not framed the
national narrative, typically expected of leaders in a democratic
system of governance.  This has created a vacuum, which various
institutions have hijacked to their own advantage.  The MMM (Military,
Media and Mullahs) have set forward a national narrative which
directly and indirectly weakens the civilian government. Fortunately
for the MMM, the judiciary acts as a mechanism to apply the obtrusive
narrative set in motion by the MMM.  One of the core issues with the
MMM is their self-belief in being righteous.  While I am focusing
particularly on the media for this piece, I plan to follow up with
articles on how the Military and Maulvi have further controlled our
national discourse.

Our media gained a very valuable card under General Musharraf.  They
were allotted independent airtime and were made independent from the
state, its institutions and various agencies across the country.
However, the media has not carried out their duties with the respect
and dignity their profession requires.  The role of the media requires
them to keep a check on a civilian government (GoP), making sure they
conduct their business per the Articles and Clauses laid out in the
constitution of Pakistan.  The media however, is not entitled to
dictate the narrative of the country.  They do not have the electoral
mandate by the people of Pakistan to increase their standard of living
nor provide security to the citizens.

News anchors and journalists have discredited facts while highlighting
opinions.  Basic principles of journalism require the media to check
the reality of statements made by politicians and hold them answerable
and responsible for their actions.  Nightly talk shows have become a
forum for political jargon and predictions, which more often than not,
end up in personal attacks on various politicos.

Furthermore, many journalists have a holier than thou attitude where
they refuse to be questioned for their writings and have complete
disregard for defamation laws (albeit weak in Pakistan).  No evidence
is provided for sweeping statements while specific buzzwords are used
in articles to create impressionable meanings for readers.  I am not
saying one should muzzle the media, but rather the media needs to
‘practice what they preach’, accountability and transparency within
their own profession.

In the aftermath of the OBL operation, all eyes turned to Pakistan.
How could OBL be in Abbottabad? Was the military incompetent or
compliant? While the Presidency remained indoors penning an Op-Ed for
the Washington Post, Rawalpindi put together a press release for
Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir to read out in front of the cameras.
GoP lost the narrative.

A man, who accused Mr. Taseer of blasphemy, murdered the Punjab
Governor in broad daylight.  While the murder itself is questionable,
the underlying factor that it was carried out over religious
differences was a narrative the GoP should have grabbed by the horns
and tackled.  Rather – as is done in most political crises – the GoP
remained quiet and eventually the media focused its attention on other
issues.  The cancerous ideology causing the murder was swept under the
rug.  GoP lost the narrative.

The HEC was (according to the GoP) to be dissolved under the 18th
Amendment.  A public battle ensued between the media and the GoP.
Without explaining legitimate reasons, the GoP was merely using a
machete where they needed a scalpel to dissolve various ministries.
Social media played an active role in highlighting the achievements of
the HEC.  The GoP would not supply the public with reasons for its
decision to dissolve the Commission.  Lower ranking officials
published Op-Eds, while Twitter personalities faithfully defended the
government with their own reasons, not the GoP’s narrative.
Eventually, the plan to dissolve the HEC was shelved, because the PPP
was wooing the PML-Q for Federal support.  Yes, I know there is no
connection between the political courtship and HEC, but the commission
survived.

The Zardari/Gilani administration has unfortunately not been able to
tackle the new media in Pakistan.  While the President refuses to stay
on message, the Prime Minister has too much message.  And dare I say –
the timing is often off for whatever message comes out of Islamabad.
Tackling extremism, economic and foreign policy and outline of a plan
for domestic uplift all requires a narrative.  I don’t need to hear a
vision (2020 load-shedding will end!).  I need a roadmap that will be
carried out, benchmarks to be graded, and long-term goals to be
achieved.

While the three M’s have formed and pushed forward Pakistan’s
narrative, none of them have been given this responsibility by the
people of Pakistan.  That job is granted solely to the members of
Parliament.  Unfortunately our current leaders have refused to provide
a national narrative to unite a fractured country towards a stronger
and safer future.  Having said that, they need to realize they have
the authority to put forward our agenda.  The media space needs to be
utilized by the government of Pakistan to change the current national
discourse.  President Zardari and Prime Minister Gilani need to step
up to the plate and carry out the functions and duties of their
respective offices they selflessly signed up for.  Our discourse needs
to be changed; our future needs to be altered.

It’s not every day that you are woken up by the statement “oi jaago, Bin Laden ko khatam kur diya hai” (wake up, Bin Laden has been finished).

As soon as I heard the rumor, I did exactly what millions of others around the world must have done, and swiftly turned on the television. Indeed, blaring upfront was the breaking news that the world’s most wanted terrorist had been shot dead.  Tickers were already running below the screen on all news channels, as they anticipated President Obama’s remarks that would turn the rumor into reality. The President of the United States soon came on the air and with a straight face announced the death of Osama Bin Laden in Abbottabad.  All eyes now turned to Pakistan.

In order to understand the audacity of Osama Bin Laden hiding in Abbottabad, eager news junkies waited for a statement from the Government of Pakistan.  After all, it had been hours since the Operation to eliminate Bin Laden had been carried out on Pakistani soil. President Obama had already made his statement acknowledging the role of Pakistan’s intelligentsia at 8.35AM PST.  “It [is] important to note that our counterterrorism cooperation with Pakistan helped lead us to bin Laden and the compound where he was hiding”.  With pride, I awaited the response from a government I am rarely proud of.  Pakistan had suffered tremendous losses over the past decade because of 19 hijackers on 9/11 and an uncomfortable policy in Afghanistan known as ‘strategic depth’ carried out by the ISI.  But here was our shining moment.  To silence those who consistently called on Pakistan to “do more”.

As the day progressed, the conventional and social media exploded.  Fox News had their stories while MSNBC captured live images of Americans celebrating in the streets in the wee hours of the night.  With little information in regards to the Operation, information released from various media outlets started portraying their own stories.  Questions arose about the extravagant compound Bin Laden was residing in with such close proximity to the PMA, while many inquired about the sincerity of the Pakistan Military.  Sohaib Athar who happened to be tweeting about a low-flying helicopter announced that he heard a loud explosion during the night, became an instant celebrity.  CNN published the news about his tweets and instantly @ReallyVirtual found himself as the most sought out tweeter.  The poor man was bombarded for media interviews from around the world.  I guess that explains how he was able to garner over 90,000 followers (and counting) within a matter of hours.

While the world dissected and deciphered any news story about Osama Bin Laden, the Pakistan Government chose to remain silent.  Soon the Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a rather awkward but amusing statement.  “This operation was conducted by the US forces in accordance with declared US policy that Osama bin Laden will be eliminated in a direct action by the US forces, wherever found in the world”.  The press release was truly mesmerizing.  It implied that the United States unilaterally undertook the Operation to root out Bin Laden – in stark contrast to what President Obama had announced earlier.  I tried to find President Zardari’s schedule, to see if there was any slot for a public announcement.  Luckily, via http://www.president.gov.pk I was able to understand Zardari’s absence from a public announcement in regards to Bin Laden’s capture only a 100 kilometers from the Presidency.  Asif Zardari was accepting credentials from newly inducted Ambassadors at Diplomatic Enclave along with presiding over the Oath-taking ceremony for 18 new Ministers (which in itself is shrouded in mystery).

While the international media openly criticized the Government of Pakistan (GoP) and the Pakistan Military for allowing Bin Laden to reside so closely to Islamabad and the PMA, our civilian leader chose to remain away from the mic and camera.  Assuming that the GoP may have let the Military handle such a worldwide story due to the sensitivity of the issue, I scanned the ISPR (Pakistan Military Press Dept.) but found nothing.  Here we were, at the core of the biggest news story of the century and beyond the 243 words of the press released issued by MoFA, nothing.

The entire day has passed by and world leaders have spoken on the death of Osama Bin Laden. Yet, our Government and Military have remained silent.  With hundreds of unanswered questions, the GoP and the Military have lost the opportunity to tackle the bull by the horns. when it missed an occasion to discuss the Operation in the morning.  Rather than acknowledging the role of Pakistan and her military, the Foreign Office snubbed the United States by hinting they operated unilaterally.  I find it rather hard to believe that US Helicopters were in Pakistani Airspace, conducted a 40 minute “solo” mission, and escaped with the body of Osama Bin Laden –without the knowledge of the GoP or Pakistan Military.

By choosing to remain quiet, the GoP and the Pakistan Military have allowed the conspiracy theorists (found in abundance) and international media to construe their own stories and draw their own conclusions.  I cannot fathom the fact that on such a monumental news story, the GoP and the Military would revert to silence. However, this morning President Zardari deemed it necessary to publish an Opinion piece in the Washington Post.  Yet again, President Zardari assumed it was a better approach in reaching out to the American public rather than quashing the fears and queries of Pakistani’s.  Sending out bland statements (by PM Gilani and MoFA) should have been done once the President or Prime Minister addressed the citizens of Pakistan and the world.  It has been more than 24 hours since Bin Laden was shot dead and we are still awaiting a public statement by the President, Prime Minister, Defence Minister or Senior Military Officials.

In a globalized day and age, where social media has brought down dictatorships and reinforced democratic ideals, the sheer recklessness of those in power is mind-boggling.  The tranquility of the Government has only garnered more suspiciousness and resentment towards a fledgling and weak leadership.  At a time when the whole world is eyeing Pakistan for a statement on the death of its most notorious terrorist, it is shocking that Zardari or Prime Minister Gilani would remain silent.  With plenty of damage done to Pakistan’s reputation over the course of 24 hours, I sure hope Firdous Awan has her talking points ready for a media and country that still needs answers to many questions.

When Salmaan Taseer was assassinated eight weeks ago, I quoted Max Weber in my article: “If the power of violence shifts from the state to the people, we also see a shift from a state to anarchy”.  Weber’s paradigm of anarchy is becoming more evident in Pakistan as time progresses.  The brutal murder of Shahbaz Bhatti in Islamabad has solidified the notion that the PPP led government is ignoring extremism.  This perturbed ideology is challenging the writ of the State and if not handled with the delicacy and precision required, we will surely dissolve into a state of oblivion.

During the past year, President Zardari has sent over 70 press releases to the Associated Press of Pakistan (APP – GoP’s official wire agency) “condemning” deaths, murder and terrorist actions.  Yet Mr. Zardari seems ignorant of the very extremists who killed Benazir Bhutto, assassinated Salmaan Taseer, murdered Shahbaz Bhatti and thousands of civilians.  Zardari changed his children’s surname so they would carry the name of their maternal grandfather and even went to the extent of renaming his own hometown of Nawabshah to Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto district.  Why invoke Benazir Bhutto if the extremists who murdered her are still wreaking havoc in Pakistan?

I am not undermining the sacrifice Ms. Bhutto gave this country.  But what use is it to Pakistan if Mr. Zardari refuses to acknowledge the very threat of violence that has forced him to name cities after his slain wife?  Where is the speech of a President uniting a fractured country? Where is the public condemnation of murder? Sitting within the Presidency’s bubble and sending 250 words to the APP will surely not break the shackles dragging us towards anarchy.

Having recently travelled through southern Punjab, it was highly disturbing to see the number of madrassahs being constructed.  These institutions are being set-up every 20 kilometers along Multan Road through Sadiqabad.  The graduating batch is more fodder for the “extremist Frankenstein monster” Benazir Bhutto spoke of two decades ago.

It is arguably difficult to tame the monster.  However, a thoughtful analysis of threats and opportunities is required in order to break free from extremism.  The Islam being preached at such institutions needs to be modified and reexamined.  This concept of invoking fear into the hearts of “infidels” and “blasphemers” through violence is not an Islam that was practiced by Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) nor advocated by his followers.

Islam can survive without violence, as it has for 1400 years.  It is truly mesmerizing where a religion that was not spread by the sword is now synonymous with suicide bomb and cold-blooded murder.

Those who are inspired by carnage and terrorism through religion need to be shown that Islam at the core does not follow such principles nor evokes such behavior.  Education is one method of response, but that is a long-term goal.  Pakistan requires a proactive responsibility from the government, opposition parties and civil society in order to marginalize the thought-process of extremist elements threatening our social fabric.

The government needs to take a lead role in countering religious violence.  First and foremost the writ of the state is being challenged as civilians are utilizing the power of violence.  Despite all odds, Mumtaz Qadri (a self-proclaimed assassin) needs to be dealt with according to the law.  If religious parties, the government and political parties constantly rally for Raymond Davis to be dealt in accordance to the laws in Pakistan, I don’t see why we should be discriminating.  Providing military training for mujahid’s in covert operations needs to cease.  Investments for NGOs providing roti, kapra aur makaan (food, clothing and shelter) should be increased exponentially, while the public-private sector partnership needs to assist the government in dealing with the monster of terrorism.  The Zia-ul-Haq era of textbooks containing religious violence should to be revoked.

Islamic History is absent from books utilized in schools across the country.  From the very basic public schools in rural Pakistan to elite institutions like Aitchison College, 1200 years of Islam is absent.  Islamiyat is taught from the birth of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) to the death of Imam Hussain (AS).  Pakistan Studies picks up from the reign of the Mughal Emperor Babar to the inception of Pakistan in 1947.  The Umayyads, Abbasids, Ottoman Empire, Safavid dynasty are crucial to Muslim history but is overlooked.  These dynasties brought about a social cultural change through religion and would be an important aspect to countering religious violence in Pakistan.

There are some who may argue that if the government is absent, the people of Pakistan need to voice their opinions.  While this may be true, I still feel that an elected, representative democratic government is required to take the lead on such a sensitive issue.  Harping on the Shaheeds of a party will not rid us of the Frankenstein monster that has taken the life of thousands across Pakistan.  Pakistan’s very identity and survival is at stake.  Actions truly speak louder than empty rhetoric.

In his inaugural speech Pakistan’s founder stated, “You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this State of Pakistan.  You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State”.  It is only fair we live up to his expectations; it’s the least we as a nation can do to the very man who gave us Pakistan.  If the government refuses to provide this safety net to those who practice other religions, we most definitely are sliding towards anarchy.

Our country is at a crossroad.  Pakistan has come to a point where thousands believe they are righteous and have divine authority to carry out God’s acts on this earth.  The repugnant response by the supporters of Salman Taseer’s alleged killer has truly been mesmerizing.  Qadri’s fan base has distorted Islam to such an extent that it has become laughable to comprehend how they perceive themselves to be protecting the sanctity of Islam.  Are they protecting the very Islam, which teaches that murder of one human is the equivalent of killing mankind? Are they protecting the very Islam, which allows for questions over ambiguity? Are they protecting the very Islam that believes in modernity and equality for all? The unfortunate reality today is the religious parties although do not have the political capital; they have influence over our society.  These parties need to be exposed to the Pakistani public through education and the media.  Their dangerous interpretation of Islam needs to be questioned and highlighted.  Many in our country have been manipulated through religion and this should not be tolerated anymore.  This twisted ideology has taken too many innocent lives in our country.  Surely this madness needs to come to an end?

Much has been discussed, gossiped and publicized on Governor Salmaan Taseer’s inhumane assassination a week ago.  Above the chorus about the Governors personality, character and political viewpoint, what I find completely baffling is the absence of condemning cold-blooded murder.  I am not talking about the monotonous paragraph that has appeared on behalf of our government officials denouncing the murder, “we condemn the killing…will investigate”.  What we need from our ‘democratically elected’ leaders is, showcase to Pakistani’s around the country the draconian way of life many of our ‘religious scholars’ have adopted.

I find it highly unfortunate that the President of Pakistan and co-chairman of the Pakistan Peoples Party, Asif Zardari, has not used stronger words to deplore the heinous act.  Furthermore, only two politicians, Imran Khan and Shujaat Hussain have linked Taseer’s murder to the growing extremism that many of the political establishment enjoys turning a blind eye towards.  Murder is not justified – under any circumstances.

Those who argue that Islam has no place for modernity are incorrect.  The Prophet (PBUH) was a 7^th century Arab who married an older businesswoman.  He broke with tradition.  The Prophet broke idols that were in the Kaa’ba.  He broke with tradition.  The Prophet stopped female infanticide during his time.  He broke with tradition.  Islam was introduced at a time of jahaliyat and it was Prophet Muhammad who brought about a social change, expanding the concept of modernity.  Why have we been estranged from the very foundation of Islam?

What is the purpose of believing in the Day of Judgment if we are judging people and deciding their fate in this world? Is it not blasphemous for Qadri to be carrying out God’s work? If Taseer was wrong in what he said or did, why was Qadri allowed to take away the Governor’s opportunity of repentance?  Is it not blasphemous of Qadri to kill a human being when (in Islam) only God is the decider of our destiny?

The clergy has always been a powerful institution throughout history.  One cannot deny the power and sway they maintain, but in a religion where we believe that God has the divine authority, I find it hard to believe how a moderate country like Pakistan has allowed the ‘right Ummah’ to become the ‘righteous Ummah’.

It also seems very hypocritical that we seem to merrily criticize any other religion on this earth.  We mock the Jews, pass judgment on the concept of the Holy Trinity and laugh at believers who worship their own deities.  And yet, when it comes to Islam, we don’t stand for any religious tolerance.  How does one expect others to respect our religion when we don’t return the favour?  What right do we have in condemning Aasia Bibi (who is a Christian) for blasphemy, when we are guilty of the same charge when it comes to her religion?  Have we forgotten what the white stripe represents on our national flag?

The rising bourgeoisie in Pakistan needs to be exposed to heinous crimes that are being committed at the beck and call of the religious right.  Such parties are entitled to voice their opinions and sentiment, but they are not allowed to instigate violence.  The religious party (JuI) has been active prior to partition (1947).  They have never been able to secure the Federal Government.  If Pakistan believed in the ideology the religious parties put forward, we would have been a very different country today.  It is in fact, the Pakistan Peoples Party, a grassroots, liberal, secular party that is not surprisingly, the largest political party as well.

The Establishment needs to wake up and smell the putrid air that has encompassed Pakistan.  Pakistan no longer believes in their concept of ‘strategic depth’, Pakistani’s don’t want any further deaths in Kashmir, Pakistani’s don’t want to fund madrassah’s that mass produce suicide bombers.  It is the very seed that was planted decades ago, which we reap today.  It is the very ideology that was preached during the 1980s, which convinced the alleged assassin Mumtaz Qadri to empty two magazines on Governor Taseer.

The blasphemy laws in Pakistan are no doubt a very sensitive issue.  But so was the Hudood Ordinance, which was rectified by Parliament.  Pakistan went through a very turbulent period under General Zia-ul-Haq.  Laws were incorporated that reeked of a very conservative and distorted form of Islam.  But as the Governor rightly said, these are ‘man-made laws, not God-made laws’.  They can and should be amended.  The Political Establishment needs to challenge and enlighten those parties, groups and individuals who believe in suicide bombings, murder and religious intolerance.

Governor Taseer was murdered for what he rightly believed in a law that is dangerous to a prosperous society.  This law has been interpreted to a point where a citizen believes it is lawful to murder another citizen.  The blasphemy laws have been interpreted in a manner, where a citizen believes he does not need to respect the law enforcement agencies, the judicial courts or the legislative authority of Parliament.  Max Weber famously articulated that a state solely possesses a monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force.  When the power of violence shifts from the state to the people, we also see a shift from a state to anarchy.

Maybe this is what President Zardari meant when he awkwardly stated, Mumtaz Qadri threatened democratic institutions.  The only logical explanation would be that if the blasphemy laws can be interpreted in a manner that threatens institutions, would it not be appropriate to repeal or amend such a law?

Salman Taseer will forever remain a hero of mine for the bravery he showed. But those who wish to change the blasphemy law need to adopt a different course of action.

“The Ornament of the World” is a wonderful book written some years ago by Maria Menocal, a professor at Yale University. The title of the book refers to 13^th century Cordoba – a city which in those dark ages had libraries with hundreds of thousands of books, more than in all of England, a city in which Muslim, Jew and Christian all lived in the greatest harmony. But as Professor Mendocal notes, even in those days of peace and brotherhood, defamation of the Prophet was regarded as being so completely and utterly unacceptable that death was the only punishment.

Many people who critique the blasphemy law do so on the basis that there is no punishment provided in the Quran for denigrating the Prophet. So what? There is no punishment provided in the Quran for many crimes. Surely, nobody can deny that a society has a right to determine the acts it wishes to punish. And as Ms. Menocal’s book shows, blasphemy is a crime to which Muslim societies have historically been – and self-evidently remain – uniquely sensitive.

The standard jurisprudential response to my assertion is that society indeed has a right to determine what actions are to be treated as criminal, but only within certain rights provided by the fundamental human rights guaranteed by the Constitution. I concede that point so let us then look at the next issue: is punishing blasphemy violative of fundamental human rights?

My answer is no. As much as I disagree with the blasphemy law, I do not think that criminalising the act of blasphemy is violative of any fundamental human rights guaranteed by the Constitution. All of those rights are subject to reasonable limitations. And in Pakistan – repeat, in this country – I do not think it is unreasonable for the law to provide that blasphemy shall be a criminal offence. Even in England, the last blasphemy prosecution took place not centuries ago, but in 1977.

Does that mean the blasphemy law cannot, or should not, be challenged or changed? Absolutely not. The blasphemy law, as it stands today, invites abuse and serves as a terrible instrument of oppression. But what it does mean is that the change must be brought about through political means, not legal. And politics, as we too often forget, is the art of the possible, not the art of the desirable.

There are three basic ways to attack the blasphemy law. The first is to argue that criminalising blasphemy is wrong per se. The second is to concede that blasphemy may be punishable but to argue that executing blasphemers is excessive. The third option is to argue that while it is permissible to punish blasphemy with the death sentence, it is not acceptable to kill or harass innocent people.

To begin with, let us recognise the simple fact that any direct attempt to decriminalise blasphemy in Pakistan is doomed. Given the intensity with which the average Pakistani believes in the necessity of punishing blasphemy, there is little point in challenging the law directly. In fact, direct attack makes the situation worse because it leads to an overwhelming negative reaction from the public which in turn makes it difficult even to tinker with the law.

What then can liberals do? The answer is to adopt the third option and attack the law indirectly. The benefit of this approach is that it frames the debate in a completely different manner. The average Pakistani certainly believes that blasphemers should hang but that same average Pakistani also believes that people are entitled to the due process of law. Similarly, the same average Pakistan will also concede that vigilante justice is not normally a good idea. If we do not reframe the debate around the need to protect innocents, we will be helpless when people like the odious Meher Bokhari prove their populist credentials by preening as defenders of our faith.

The liberal response to this approach would be to argue that it is unprincipled and craven. I disagree. It is more important to change people’s lives than to stick to some purist conception of an ideal society. Take, for example, the Women’s Protections Act which was opposed tooth and nail by the feminist lobby but which has successfully defanged the Hudood Ordinance of its worst excesses.

But doesn’t this concede too much room to the extremists: after all, do we really want to live in a country where any person can be declared a blasphemer and then killed?  Again, obviously not. I repeat: I do not want to live in a country where people can be executed for blasphemy.  But I only get to choose my opinions. I do not get to choose my own facts. And the fact is that the people of Pakistan really want to execute people who they think have committed blasphemy. I can either accept that fact or I can seek to change it. But to act as if that fact does not exist is not sensible.

People also need to understand that the moral outrage of an indignant few is not normally sufficient to bring about legislative change. Instead, laws are changed when the government has a good reason to do so. And in the case of Pakistan, the government has no rational incentive to amend the blasphemy laws. The minorities who tend to be the main victims of the blasphemy law are both politically and socially powerless. The liberals who are outraged by the blasphemy law are so few in number as to be politically irrelevant. And so far as the international community is concerned, Pakistan is that unique country which negotiates with a gun pointed at its own head. Give us money, we say, or else the mullahs will take over. But in order for that threat to be credible, the international community needs to be more scared of the possible alternatives than the kleptocrats currently in power. If the blasphemy law is repealed, it would show that we are a mature, intelligent and sophisticated nation. Unfortunately, that would also mitigate the impression that the loonies are about to take over.

How then should the liberal community position its challenge? The answer is that we must make the establishment realise that the mullahs playing on popular anger have a direct, election-free, bureaucrat-free hot-link to power. Because while the average politician couldn’t care less about fundamental rights, the average politician certainly cares about other people having power.  As such, the liberals need to focus on ensuring that those who give fatwas against others are immediately challenged and charged with incitement to murder.  That is the only area in which the interests of the liberals coincide with the interests of the establishment.

Patton once said that no person ever won a war by dying for his country; instead, he won it by making the other person die for his country. If we are truly outraged by the death of Salmaan Taseer, then we need to learn to fight. And wishful thinking never won a fight.

-AHR