There’s nothing new about the fact that the response of authorities in Pakistan to emergency situations is habitually delayed . We let the water rise way above our heads before even trying to do something about it. In simple words, every problem is ignored until it becomes chaotic and we have a crisis at hand.
So there is nothing surprising about the fact that the plea of the people of Hunza went unheard for months. On January 4 , an artificial lake emerged as a result of a massive landslide, blocking the Hunza River. The landslide killed 20, and left about 25,000 people stranded. According to a report :
Some local experts are of the opinion that early use of powerful water pumps to ejaculate the water at the blockade site and subsequent start of work to make spill way across the debris could have saved Gojal from turning into a water bomb. As the situation deteriorates, the people are left in psychological trauma as they see their houses, properties, crops and plants getting submerged. Desperately they wonder why the authorities declared the disaster a minor issue in the first place. After outburst of the lake, will the people of Gojal survive along with remnants of their properties or would it be a desperate battle for survival?
The report aptly summarises the Hunza crisis and the authorities’ indifference that has resulted in creating mayhem. The government response is now that of sympathy. But is sympathy enough after months of indifference and exposure to psychological and financial trauma?
For over five months, the people of Hunza have waited for the authorities to respond to the deteriorating situation, to save their property and to rehabilitate them, but to no avail. Now, over 40,000 people are at risk of being displaced as a result of the flood. Adding insult to injury, the Hunza IDPs will now join ranks with the millions of internally displaced people who have had to leave their homes due to militancy in the past year. The striking figures presented in this report suggest that in 2009 over three million Pakistanis were displaced as a result of the ongoing offensive in the country’s tribal belt; the most in the world and three times more than the Democratic Republic of Congo, which falls in second place.
Despite these shocking, painful, and distressing revelations, the authorities remain apathetic to displacement crises. Instead energies and attention have been focused on political games and power tussles. The voice of a common man is too often snubbed or only heard when the damage is irreversible. On Saturday, hundreds of people in Hunza held a 20-hour long protest against the government’s apathy toward the situation. Most of them chanted anti-government slogans after being disappointed by Prime Minister Gilani’s failure to announce relief for the affected people.
The Hunza disaster is yet another failure of the civilian, popularly elected government. Once again, the army and international relief organisations have been requested to step in. This tendency to pass the buck makes one wonder whether there is any sense of crisis management in the country, or if the government even feels remotely responsible or is aware of its role in such a situation.
If we look at the history of crisis management before this, whether the crisis was caused by war or natural disaster, the government’s role lacks transparency. The Hunza crisis is a ticking time bomb both in terms of the unpredictable flood and the bottled up anger of the people. If the government does not take this opportunity to address the pending issues of crisis management now, it is only a matter of time that we witness yet another exodus.
Showing posts with label Dawn Articles. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dawn Articles. Show all posts
Goodbye International Cricket in Pakistan
As I broke the story of the attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore, I also mourned the imminent death of international cricket in Pakistan. This deadly attack simply means no international team will be willing to come and play any sport in Pakistan. What is most embarrassing is the fact that the attack was targeted at a team that was trying to help Pakistani cricket and cricket-crazed fans by agreeing to tour in a time of dire crises.
Kumar Sangakkara, Ajhanta Mendis, Thilan Samaraweera and Tharanga Paranavithana are injured and although their lives are out of danger, it was most unfortunate that these most sporting of cricketers had to face this. Only last week, during the Karachi Test, former England fast bowler Dominic Cork and Sri Lankan coach Trevor Bayliss spoke about the fool-proof security arrangements in Pakistan and pleaded international sides to come and play cricket here. What must they be thinking and doing now? Eating their words, and packing their bags to board the next flight home, I suppose.
The least the Pakistan Cricket Board and the Pakistan government can do now is issue a national, government-level apology to the Sri Lankan team and the people of Sri Lanka for this unfortunate incident – a bit more than the PCB chief saying ‘we’re assessing the situation.’
Pakistani fans can pretty much say goodbye to international cricket after this attack and dare I say, even prepare for a total boycott of all sports events in the country for the next few months.
Kumar Sangakkara, Ajhanta Mendis, Thilan Samaraweera and Tharanga Paranavithana are injured and although their lives are out of danger, it was most unfortunate that these most sporting of cricketers had to face this. Only last week, during the Karachi Test, former England fast bowler Dominic Cork and Sri Lankan coach Trevor Bayliss spoke about the fool-proof security arrangements in Pakistan and pleaded international sides to come and play cricket here. What must they be thinking and doing now? Eating their words, and packing their bags to board the next flight home, I suppose.
The least the Pakistan Cricket Board and the Pakistan government can do now is issue a national, government-level apology to the Sri Lankan team and the people of Sri Lanka for this unfortunate incident – a bit more than the PCB chief saying ‘we’re assessing the situation.’
Pakistani fans can pretty much say goodbye to international cricket after this attack and dare I say, even prepare for a total boycott of all sports events in the country for the next few months.
A small victory
At least three major Taliban groups emerged. The first was the group headed by Mullah Omar who had led the government the Taliban had formed in Kabul in the mid-1990s. It is widely believed that this group was led by leaders of the ‘Quetta shura’ whose main goal is said to be to bring Afghanistan under the control of the Taliban. That could happen only if the Americans were made to leave Afghanistan. The bulk of support for this group came from the many local commanders involved in various insurgencies in Afghanistan.
The second group was led initially by Jalaluddin Haqqani and is now under the control of his son Sirajuddin. The older Haqqani had been helped by the Americans, the Saudis and the Pakistanis to fight the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Having achieved that objective they were unable to work together to govern the liberated country, paving the way for the Taliban regime.
When the Americans moved into Afghanistan in late 2001 and pushed the Taliban out of Kabul, the Haqqani group shifted to Pakistan’s North Waziristan. It has remained there, supporting the insurgents in the areas adjoining their sanctuary in Pakistan. Since the senior Haqqani had served in Mullah Omar’s government his Taliban movement retained some contacts with the Quetta shura. But the linkages are believed not to be strong.
The third group had little to do with the insurgency in Afghanistan but wanted to bring about change in Pakistan. It was formed out of several small tribal groups and was given the name of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). Initially led by Baitullah Mehsud who was killed last year in a drone attack, the TTP quickly expanded its reach.
Last summer its affiliate in Swat took over the district and advanced into Buner. They were only a short distance away from Islamabad. It was then that the army moved to reclaim the areas, carrying out a successful operation. It followed it up with an equally successful operation in South Waziristan. Recently, newspapers carried the story that Hakimullah Mehsud, Baitullah’s successor, had died of injuries sustained in a drone attack sometime earlier.
While Pakistan drew a sharp distinction between these three groups, the Americans were of the view that all of them had to be treated the same way. They were pleased with Pakistan’s move against the TTP in Swat, Buner and South Waziristan but were unhappy that Islamabad was not anxious to go into North Waziristan against the Haqqani group or to hit the Quetta shura.
Neither of the two groups had launched attacks against Pakistan while the TTP was involved in many terrorist activities that had killed hundreds of people in various parts of Pakistan. Also, Islamabad, worried about the political vacuum that might occur once the Americans and Nato forces began the promised withdrawal from Afghanistan. It wanted a situation where it could depend on these two groups of Taliban to help establish a regime in Kabul that would be friendlier towards it than the one headed by President Hamid Karzai. What motivated the Afghan president to dispense with his enduring antipathy towards the Taliban movement to hold out an olive branch to some of them in London?
In fact, Karzai and his associates went to London to get the support of the countries assembled there to help him win over those in the Taliban movement who were its foot soldiers for economic reasons and not out of ideological compulsions. His finance minister asked for assistance amounting to $1.2bn, with $200m dispersed immediately so that employment opportunities could be created for these people. The regime held out the assurance that this money would not be used to bribe the Taliban but for promoting development. This, in fact, is a recognition by Karzai that an important reason for his mounting troubles was of the poor governance of Pakhtun areas, most of which border Pakistan. The president was also thinking of the time when the Americans would not be present in large numbers to prop up his administration. The time had come for him to bring under his tent those Pakhtuns who were prepared to work with him.
While the outcome of the London conference vindicates Pakistan’s long-held position, it also points to the importance of focusing on economic development as a way of countering insurgency. It is important for Pakistan to launch a massive programme for the development initially of Malakand division and South Waziristan — two areas where the army has scored impressive successes — in order to ensure that the people there remain loyal to the Pakistani state.
A well-articulated programme of economic development will have the support of the West and should not impose a heavy financial burden on Islamabad. This is a good time to start work on it.
Judicial reform in Swat
In the launch of the drive to reform Swat’s legal system, it is apparent that the state is aware of the sort of steps needed to alter some of the realities that had formerly led the people of the area to extend support to the Taliban before disowning them. For nearly four decades, the area’s judicial system had been notoriously slow-moving and corrupt, leading to the erosion of the residents’ faith in the state. Little wonder then that the Taliban’s promise of a ‘quick, Sharia-based’ justice system resonated with Swat’s people. To the consternation of many, it became clear after the ‘peace deal’ brokered between the government and the militants by the Tehrik-i-Nifaz-i-Shariat Mohammadi that the Taliban’s version of the Sharia consisted of beheadings, floggings, the repression of women and other gross violations of fundamental human and constitutional rights. It appears that Swat’s rejection of the Taliban has finally been seen as an opportunity by the state to win over the population by installing a judicial system that will hopefully be quick, inexpensive and unbiased.
Judicial officials have launched a drive to speed up and reform the area’s legal system. Sixteen new judges have been hired and new courts have been created with the laudable aim of processing new criminal cases within four months and civil ones in six. The backlog of cases has reportedly been reduced from 18,000 to 2,300. The significance of this reduction ought not be underestimated given that each resolved case means a large number of people with newfound confidence in the state and government, which is crucial to the project of preventing the Taliban or other anarchist elements from regaining influence in the area. Legal and judicial systems in other parts of the country must make similar efforts. According to a statistical report released recently by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, 1.52 million cases were pending in the superior and lower courts at the end of 2009. Each of these represents a miscarriage of justice, since justice delayed is justice denied. The project to build Pakistanis’ faith in the state and government must include an overhaul of the judicial process.
Judicial officials have launched a drive to speed up and reform the area’s legal system. Sixteen new judges have been hired and new courts have been created with the laudable aim of processing new criminal cases within four months and civil ones in six. The backlog of cases has reportedly been reduced from 18,000 to 2,300. The significance of this reduction ought not be underestimated given that each resolved case means a large number of people with newfound confidence in the state and government, which is crucial to the project of preventing the Taliban or other anarchist elements from regaining influence in the area. Legal and judicial systems in other parts of the country must make similar efforts. According to a statistical report released recently by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, 1.52 million cases were pending in the superior and lower courts at the end of 2009. Each of these represents a miscarriage of justice, since justice delayed is justice denied. The project to build Pakistanis’ faith in the state and government must include an overhaul of the judicial process.
Encouraging signs
Are consumers no longer suffering power cuts as claimed by a Pepco official? No. But the severe crisis in April has eased, partly because of the measures announced at the energy conference held in Islamabad last month and partly because of more tolerable weather in some parts of the country and more water becoming available for hydel power generation.
It is relatively clear that a large portion of the blame for the acute crisis last month can be laid at the door of the circular debt issue. During peak summer there is certainly an issue of power generation capacity, but that was not the case last month. Unfortunately, dealing with the problem of circular debt appears to have been put off, perhaps with an eye towards containing the fiscal deficit for the financial year ending in June. The government has been kept on a tight leash by the IMF, and adding to borrowings can compound the crisis. The problem for consumers, though, is that delaying the resolution of the circular debt issue may aggravate the situation in the months ahead, leading to a double whammy of sorts as the gap between supply and demand will keep growing in the summer months.
Nevertheless, it is encouraging that at long last the national and provincial leadership appears to have awakened to the need to deal with the power crisis. A second energy conference has been convened by the prime minister and once again all the provincial chief ministers have been invited. The measures taken at the last round of meetings have somewhat eased the consumers’ torment in many places. Yes, there have been problems, as evidenced by the flouting in Karachi of the ban on supplying CNG to motor vehicles one day a week. Punjab is feeling aggrieved that the other provinces have not acted with as much alacrity to implement the energy-saving measures. However, it is encouraging that there appears to be at least some commitment by all sides to continue with a national response to the energy crisis as opposed to Islamabad issuing orders that the provinces ignore.
It is relatively clear that a large portion of the blame for the acute crisis last month can be laid at the door of the circular debt issue. During peak summer there is certainly an issue of power generation capacity, but that was not the case last month. Unfortunately, dealing with the problem of circular debt appears to have been put off, perhaps with an eye towards containing the fiscal deficit for the financial year ending in June. The government has been kept on a tight leash by the IMF, and adding to borrowings can compound the crisis. The problem for consumers, though, is that delaying the resolution of the circular debt issue may aggravate the situation in the months ahead, leading to a double whammy of sorts as the gap between supply and demand will keep growing in the summer months.
Nevertheless, it is encouraging that at long last the national and provincial leadership appears to have awakened to the need to deal with the power crisis. A second energy conference has been convened by the prime minister and once again all the provincial chief ministers have been invited. The measures taken at the last round of meetings have somewhat eased the consumers’ torment in many places. Yes, there have been problems, as evidenced by the flouting in Karachi of the ban on supplying CNG to motor vehicles one day a week. Punjab is feeling aggrieved that the other provinces have not acted with as much alacrity to implement the energy-saving measures. However, it is encouraging that there appears to be at least some commitment by all sides to continue with a national response to the energy crisis as opposed to Islamabad issuing orders that the provinces ignore.
US Pressure
In the immediate aftermath of Faisal Shahzad’s arrest in the US, the Obama administration acted to reassure Pakistan that the event was not automatically going to strain ties between the two countries. However, there appears to have been some change in the tone and tenor of comments by American officials over the past couple of days.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has warned that there will be “severe consequences” for Pakistan if a successful terrorist attack in the US is traced to this country. Meanwhile, unnamed officials have voiced fresh concerns about militancy in Pakistan to The New York Times and The Washington Post. What are we to make of this? First of all, Ms Clinton’s comments are unfortunate and will rekindle suspicions here that America is no real friend of Pakistan. The Shahzad case is cause for serious concern and the possible nexus between American citizenship holders and Pakistan-based militants needs to be investigated thoroughly. But why is America’s top diplomat venturing into hypotheticals and suggesting an intention to visit harm on Pakistan as some sort of possible retribution? It is odd, to say the least. Perhaps Ms Clinton was speaking more to the domestic American audience, some members of which have been critical of the Obama administration’s being ‘soft’ on Pakistan. But her words were heard in Pakistan too and they would not have gone down well.
Curiously, in more or less the same time frame, Gen Petraeus, the head of the US military in this region, spoke to the Council of Foreign Relations after returning from a trip to Pakistan and struck a far more conciliatory tone. When asked if the timing of the Shahzad plot would adversely impact military-to-military cooperation between the US and Pakistan, Gen Petraeus replied: “The attempted New York attack in Times Square, if anything, may strengthen the relationship. In fact, the Pakistani intelligence services, or its police, quite quickly carried out some operations related to this.” So is this a case of the good-cop, bad-cop routine once again being rolled out to get Pakistan to ‘do more’ in the fight against militancy?
If so, it is a bad idea. The Pakistani state is unlikely to respond to threats or inducements on this count. Assistance in relation to the Shahzad case is, both sides appear to agree, being extended by Pakistan. There appears to be some friction, but disagreements are very likely in the course of such investigations. Everything is not a conspiracy; the American side, after all, almost let Shahzad fly out of America. However, the Times Square plot must not be used as a stick to beat Pakistan with. It is the common enemy — the militants — that need to be fought.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has warned that there will be “severe consequences” for Pakistan if a successful terrorist attack in the US is traced to this country. Meanwhile, unnamed officials have voiced fresh concerns about militancy in Pakistan to The New York Times and The Washington Post. What are we to make of this? First of all, Ms Clinton’s comments are unfortunate and will rekindle suspicions here that America is no real friend of Pakistan. The Shahzad case is cause for serious concern and the possible nexus between American citizenship holders and Pakistan-based militants needs to be investigated thoroughly. But why is America’s top diplomat venturing into hypotheticals and suggesting an intention to visit harm on Pakistan as some sort of possible retribution? It is odd, to say the least. Perhaps Ms Clinton was speaking more to the domestic American audience, some members of which have been critical of the Obama administration’s being ‘soft’ on Pakistan. But her words were heard in Pakistan too and they would not have gone down well.
Curiously, in more or less the same time frame, Gen Petraeus, the head of the US military in this region, spoke to the Council of Foreign Relations after returning from a trip to Pakistan and struck a far more conciliatory tone. When asked if the timing of the Shahzad plot would adversely impact military-to-military cooperation between the US and Pakistan, Gen Petraeus replied: “The attempted New York attack in Times Square, if anything, may strengthen the relationship. In fact, the Pakistani intelligence services, or its police, quite quickly carried out some operations related to this.” So is this a case of the good-cop, bad-cop routine once again being rolled out to get Pakistan to ‘do more’ in the fight against militancy?
If so, it is a bad idea. The Pakistani state is unlikely to respond to threats or inducements on this count. Assistance in relation to the Shahzad case is, both sides appear to agree, being extended by Pakistan. There appears to be some friction, but disagreements are very likely in the course of such investigations. Everything is not a conspiracy; the American side, after all, almost let Shahzad fly out of America. However, the Times Square plot must not be used as a stick to beat Pakistan with. It is the common enemy — the militants — that need to be fought.
Paths of terrorism lead but to Pakistan
The adoption of terrorism tactics can no longer be merely attributed to ignorance, poverty, deprivation or hardship.
Many of our neo-terrorists are schooled and brainwashed beings, with a grudge, or several grudges, imbued with bravado, intent on disrupting what is left of civilised life, with nary a care as to how many complete strangers they either blow to smithereens or maim, or how much they destroy.
Pakistan of course has its daily dose of terrorism, in one form or another. Schools are blown up with regularity in the newly-named K-P province, bodies of men executed by the local Taliban are found, men have their hands chopped off, women are ‘dishonoured’ and our main cities are under siege, bunkered and concreted, awaiting the suicide bomber from up north or from down south in Punjab where they are said to be heavily congregated (for one, Ajmal Kasab).
Unless one of those strange and much despised creatures known as VIPs or often VVIPs are targeted, suicide and other bombings no longer earn headlines in the media. They are now taken as a matter of course.
But apart from terrorism connections within Pakistan, we have those outside Pakistan, the paths of which lead straight into our heartland. The latest New York Times Square failed car bomber is but one of a string of notable Pakistanis who have garnered academic degrees and are not materially down and out in any way. What is it about Pakistan that it manages to produce so many young men who are violence prone, caring neither for their own or other people’s lives? We seriously need to ask ourselves this question.
It was asked and partially answered in the Wall Street Journal of May 3 by Sadanand Dhume under the heading ‘Why Pakistan Produces Jihadists’. He firstly asks: “Why do Pakistan and the Pakistani diaspora churn out such a high proportion of the world’s terrorists?” He cites Mir Aimal Kasi, the CIA shooter, Ramzi Yousef, the 1993 World Trade Centre bomber, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed of 9/11 fame, Omar Saeed Sheikh, the Daniel Pearl kidnapper, and three of the four July 2005 London train bombers as being ‘made in Pakistan’.
He goes on to list a few “whose passage to jihadism passes through” Pakistan — Osama bin Laden himself, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Mohamed Atta, Richard Reid and his shoe, and John Walker Lindh of the so-called American Taliban. These are not lists to be proud of. Something is radically wrong and heaven alone knows how long it will take to even start to put it right. With the governments and leadership we have suffered and still suffer it is not likely that in the foreseeable future our production line will decrease, let alone cease.
Dhume puts much of it down to the distant past, to the formation of the country when he claims it “was touched by the messianic zeal of pan-Islamism”, with men such as Muhammad Asad (an early ambassador to the UN), Said Ramadan who collaborated with Abul Ala Maududi and with the 1949 establishment by Pakistan of the world’s first transnational Islamic organisation, the World Muslim Congress.
All this possibly may have set the trend — with massive help from Liaquat Ali Khan’s 1949 Objectives Resolution — but it was not until Ziaul Haq, army general and devout worshipper at the altar of his own dangerous brand of Islam, that bigotry and the inevitable violence that must accompany it truly set in. Even the mighty army was tainted, to a certain extent brainwashed by the joys of jihad.
The seal on the full conversion of the Pakistani mind towards militancy was stamped by the support given by Zia to the Mujahideen in Afghanistan and then by the adoption of the Taliban by Benazir Bhutto’s second government.
No one, not even the most nationalistic Pakistani, can deny that the country is used as a training ground for terrorists or jihadists or whatever.
It is open knowledge that both the ignorant poor and deprived and the university-educated youth, and even adult men, can come to Pakistan and learn how to make bombs to blow up themselves, if they so wish, and as many others that they can either take with them or leave dead and maimed while they flee.
Can some bright psychologist work out why Faisal Shahzad, a college graduate, son of a Pakistani air force officer, married with two children, was prompted to do what he did on May Day?
Friend I.A. Rehman has written an excellent column, finely tuned and finely balanced, published in this newspaper on May 6 on the subject of anarchy in Pakistan. It sets out many of the acts of government in recent days which come under the heading of anarchy. It should be widely disseminated so that people realise just what their lives are all about under this present dispensation which is at as much a loss with itself as it is with the governance of this unruly country. It is a sad commentary on the seemingly deliberate acts of commission and omission which so relentlessly beset us.
Strangely, the sole anarchic activity he has missed out on is the terrorism and jihad factor. Perhaps he, like so many, is hardened to the fact that it exists, that it has become a way of life and that it seemingly cannot be dealt with by the civilian government we have lurking on the ground, or will not be dealt with, for reasons we can but guess at, by the army that is the de facto ruler of this country for which the world at large has no love lost.
Many of our neo-terrorists are schooled and brainwashed beings, with a grudge, or several grudges, imbued with bravado, intent on disrupting what is left of civilised life, with nary a care as to how many complete strangers they either blow to smithereens or maim, or how much they destroy.
Pakistan of course has its daily dose of terrorism, in one form or another. Schools are blown up with regularity in the newly-named K-P province, bodies of men executed by the local Taliban are found, men have their hands chopped off, women are ‘dishonoured’ and our main cities are under siege, bunkered and concreted, awaiting the suicide bomber from up north or from down south in Punjab where they are said to be heavily congregated (for one, Ajmal Kasab).
Unless one of those strange and much despised creatures known as VIPs or often VVIPs are targeted, suicide and other bombings no longer earn headlines in the media. They are now taken as a matter of course.
But apart from terrorism connections within Pakistan, we have those outside Pakistan, the paths of which lead straight into our heartland. The latest New York Times Square failed car bomber is but one of a string of notable Pakistanis who have garnered academic degrees and are not materially down and out in any way. What is it about Pakistan that it manages to produce so many young men who are violence prone, caring neither for their own or other people’s lives? We seriously need to ask ourselves this question.
It was asked and partially answered in the Wall Street Journal of May 3 by Sadanand Dhume under the heading ‘Why Pakistan Produces Jihadists’. He firstly asks: “Why do Pakistan and the Pakistani diaspora churn out such a high proportion of the world’s terrorists?” He cites Mir Aimal Kasi, the CIA shooter, Ramzi Yousef, the 1993 World Trade Centre bomber, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed of 9/11 fame, Omar Saeed Sheikh, the Daniel Pearl kidnapper, and three of the four July 2005 London train bombers as being ‘made in Pakistan’.
He goes on to list a few “whose passage to jihadism passes through” Pakistan — Osama bin Laden himself, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Mohamed Atta, Richard Reid and his shoe, and John Walker Lindh of the so-called American Taliban. These are not lists to be proud of. Something is radically wrong and heaven alone knows how long it will take to even start to put it right. With the governments and leadership we have suffered and still suffer it is not likely that in the foreseeable future our production line will decrease, let alone cease.
Dhume puts much of it down to the distant past, to the formation of the country when he claims it “was touched by the messianic zeal of pan-Islamism”, with men such as Muhammad Asad (an early ambassador to the UN), Said Ramadan who collaborated with Abul Ala Maududi and with the 1949 establishment by Pakistan of the world’s first transnational Islamic organisation, the World Muslim Congress.
All this possibly may have set the trend — with massive help from Liaquat Ali Khan’s 1949 Objectives Resolution — but it was not until Ziaul Haq, army general and devout worshipper at the altar of his own dangerous brand of Islam, that bigotry and the inevitable violence that must accompany it truly set in. Even the mighty army was tainted, to a certain extent brainwashed by the joys of jihad.
The seal on the full conversion of the Pakistani mind towards militancy was stamped by the support given by Zia to the Mujahideen in Afghanistan and then by the adoption of the Taliban by Benazir Bhutto’s second government.
No one, not even the most nationalistic Pakistani, can deny that the country is used as a training ground for terrorists or jihadists or whatever.
It is open knowledge that both the ignorant poor and deprived and the university-educated youth, and even adult men, can come to Pakistan and learn how to make bombs to blow up themselves, if they so wish, and as many others that they can either take with them or leave dead and maimed while they flee.
Can some bright psychologist work out why Faisal Shahzad, a college graduate, son of a Pakistani air force officer, married with two children, was prompted to do what he did on May Day?
Friend I.A. Rehman has written an excellent column, finely tuned and finely balanced, published in this newspaper on May 6 on the subject of anarchy in Pakistan. It sets out many of the acts of government in recent days which come under the heading of anarchy. It should be widely disseminated so that people realise just what their lives are all about under this present dispensation which is at as much a loss with itself as it is with the governance of this unruly country. It is a sad commentary on the seemingly deliberate acts of commission and omission which so relentlessly beset us.
Strangely, the sole anarchic activity he has missed out on is the terrorism and jihad factor. Perhaps he, like so many, is hardened to the fact that it exists, that it has become a way of life and that it seemingly cannot be dealt with by the civilian government we have lurking on the ground, or will not be dealt with, for reasons we can but guess at, by the army that is the de facto ruler of this country for which the world at large has no love lost.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)