Adil Najam
This photograph of lawyer leader Aitzaz Ahsan on top of an ambulance putting his hand together and begging for peace and a stop to the needless violence by some who are ’supposedly’ his supporters, speaks volumes. It speaks volumes about Aitizaz Ahsan; volumes about the culture of anger and violence that has gripped Pakistan, and volumes about the the state of Pakistan politics. A sense of anger and angst continues to define Pakistan.
Read also, Aitizaz Ahsan’s letter to his fellow lawyers, back in December.
Whether the violence is the result of nefarious ‘agency’ designs to discredit the lawyers movement or the disgruntlement of frustrations within the movement, it does not bode well for the country and for democracy in the country. It may serve the short-term interests of some, but it cannot be in the long-term interests of Pakistan.
The pictures (above) of mayhem and violence on the streets of Pakistan are are equally articulate about the state of affairs in Pakistan.
@Ibrahim
assuming ur allegations r 100% true, does that mean everything he says is wrong?
i liked certain things he says, and i wud continue to quote him even though i dont feel convinced with most of his other points. same goes for everyone
You said:
It may serve the short-term interests of some, but it cannot be in the long-term interests of Pakistan.
I disagree, violence can’t be in anyone’s interest in both short and long term. A destabilized Pakistan makes everyone a loser.
In any society there re those who thrive on violence. Whose power increases when there is violence and who benefit from violence. Marial Laws, for example, always thrive on violence because it gives them legitimacy and their propagandists can start saying that they can only stop the violence. But the fact is that they cannot. Here is the history and the evidence.
- Pakistan was less violence before Ayub Khan and more violent by the time he left. (He gave us the conditions that led to the dismemberment of the country by alientaing the Bengalis so much that violence started.
- Pakistan remained violent but became even more violent in the Zia ul Haq time. (He gave us Klashnikov Culture and his own twisted interpretation of violent Islam by encouraging people to become violent in the name of religion).
- This violence continued again after him, but in the Musharraf years Pakistan become even more violent than before. (He gave us the culture of suicide bombings of organized massacres of political foes and of blowing innocents away).
In any society the violence mongers will find political allies who will do the dirty work of killing for them.
The difference between societies who come out of violence and those who remain there is that some societies celebrate the voices of peace and justice and others don’t. Pakistan remains violent not just because we let the forces of violence (the Military, the Jamaat and later the MQM) rule us by fear, but also because we do not respect people like Aitizaz Ahsan who do call out for peace.
Pakistan will change when we start respecting those who call for peace rather than fearing those who call for violence.
Pleaseread the related column from following path
http://www.kashifhafeez.com/mazameen_large.php?pat h=2008-04-11&img=kh_articles/large/2008-04-11.gif
Shafqst Mahmood’s analysis is brilliant and rt on mark. We must nor let this derail democracy which I’d what Gen Mush and ISI and their political gondas really want.
This op-ed in The News is an interesting read.
http://thenews.jang.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=106 145
“Conspiracies against democracy?”
Friday, April 11, 2008
Shafqat Mahmood
If the assaults on Arbab Ghulam Rahim and Dr Sher Afgan were condemnable because they militated against one’s inherent sense of decency, the violence and killings in Karachi have added a sinister dimension to the situation. These were not incidental happenings. Groups of armed men deliberately targeted buildings housing law chambers and offices of bar associations. Cars were also burnt in different parts of the city to create fear and a sense of insecurity. It was an organised attempt to intimidate in which human life was not considered of any consequence.
The timing of the Karachi killings has given a new colour to earlier happenings concerning Arbab Rahim and Sher Afgan. While sad and inexcusable, they had at first appeared spontaneous. Now many questions are being raised. Why did Arbab Rahim insist on visiting the Sindh Assembly after he had been treated shabbily a day earlier? Was it done to provoke an incident in the full glare of the media? He could have easily sat out for a week and taken oath after things had settled down. But, no, it seems he wanted an unpleasant incident and walked deliberately into it.
What followed later also seemed like a well-orchestrated plan. The MQM immediately boycotted the Sindh Assembly session and Q League leaders descended on Karachi. Press conferences followed with rapidity from all and sundry with the purpose to make the PPP government look bad. But this was not enough for those who were plotting against the revival of democracy. The lawyer’s movement for the restoration of the judiciary also had to be made to look wicked and evil. And it was here that the Sher Afgan incident became handy.
It is difficult to say whether the good doctor deliberately walked into the lion’s den which for him, given the current state of tension, must be places where lawyers congregate. At the very least, he could not have expected a favourable response from the law community given his open support to the dictatorial actions of the-then Gen Musharraf. But let us say that it was not a conspiracy and he had genuine legal business and had to go to a law chamber. Yet, what happened later creates huge misgivings.
He was locked up inside for nearly five hours and, thanks to live coverage, the event was visible to everyone in the government. Yet no attempt was made by the police to rescue him. By all accounts, there were not more than two hundred people at the scene. Was it so difficult to disperse them and take Sher Afgan out? Anyone with even a little experience of law-enforcement will tell you that it could easily be done. Yet, Aitzaz Ahsan had to go there and try to use his moral authority to calm the situation.
Aitzaz only realised later that he had been put in an untenable situation. If the gathering was entirely of lawyers, he could have handled them, despite some black sheep, because they have immense respect for him. It is clear now that some other elements, possibly sent deliberately by interested parties, were determined to make an incident. Thus, a small situation in law-and-order terms became potentially big. Police was unwilling to use force, and without force, the agent provocateurs were not ready to leave. They did their business on live television. The lawyer’s movement was tarred with a black brush.
The Karachi situation is also being orchestrated essentially in the context of the judiciary’s restoration. The MQM and the PPP may have differences over issues of power sharing and distribution of ministries, but the real situation is different. The PPP is being told that if it goes ahead with the restoration of the judiciary, as demanded by its coalition partner, the PML-N, there is going to be serious trouble in Sindh. The MQM is the only party aligned to Musharraf that has muscle, and it is showing it. The message to the PPP is that it can have either a smooth time in Sindh or a coalition with PML-N. The issue hanging in balance is restoration of the judiciary, which Musharraf sees as his ultimate defeat.
There is little doubt that these conspiracies – and there is no other way to describe it – are coming from the Musharraf camp. Time is running out on him and he knows it. He is fighting a rearguard battle in which he is using his remaining allies in the political sphere to create a split between the PPP and PML-N, and thus scuttle the restoration of the judiciary. For this purpose, he is using the MQM to put pressure on the PPP. But the sad part is that some in the media have also become a party to this sinister game.
This is visible from the commentary that is coming out after the disgraceful incident with Dr Sher Afgan. Those who are inherently opposed to restoration of the judiciary and covertly and overtly support Mr Musharraf are using this as a stick to beat the lawyers’ movement and their leadership. The fact that the presidents of the Supreme Court, the Lahore High Court and the Lahore District Bar Association actually tried everything to save Dr Sher Afgan is given short shrift. The secondary agenda is to tarnish the PML-N, because it is also being dragged into this incident.
I have been saying repeatedly that we cannot move forward as long as Mr Musharraf holds the presidency. He will just not allow the political situation to settle down. Some people justify this by saying that a drowning man will do everything to save himself. While this may be true in a philosophical sense, in this case the future of the country is at stake. The nation is bigger than one individual or his continuance in a particular office. The problem is that this man or those whose future is directly or indirectly linked to him, are not willing to recognise it.
But the political forces should have no such illusion. They must realise that he will not in any circumstances allow them to take genuine control of power. He will continue to create roadblocks and hope that enough trouble is created so that he can create a justification for using 58 (2) (b) to sack all the assemblies. They should be ready for more troubles like the ones visited on Arbab Rahim and Sher Afgan. It is an orchestrated plan to scuttle democracy.
What this means is that the political forces need to cut the nonsense and focus their entire attention on Mr Musharraf. All this talk of him being a national asset amounts to digging one’s own grave. They should get ready to impeach him. There is no other way out. If they get distracted and allow dissentions to occur between them, they should prepare for a short and unhappy stint in power.
Well, it is catch-22 for ppl of Karachi. It is similar question when ppl in USA ask me when muslim world will be liberal and democratic. I think with time things will change.
What I do believe that change will come in our life time for better. Also Atlaf is growing old
Faraz. I agree to your recent comment. Then what do you think, how can an alternate sincere leadership be brought up?