Why I Voted PML-N and the Expectations Now

*Originally posted on Express Tribune Blog, posting the whole version here.

_______________

So the people of Pakistan have finally spoken!

And their votes have surged the PML-N to power once again.

PML-N’s supporters and voters are immeasurably elated, they may not have been as expressive in declarations of their support but they certainly have been expressive and assertive of their support through the ballot box.

I voted for PML-N because I felt it satisfactorily addressed the list of pressing matters that I personally prioritize for Pakistan:

1. The acute civil-military imbalance that characterizes Pakistan’s power disequilibrium is an issue that I view to be not only pressing but whose offshoots are several other troubles in the country. It demands a rectification, and the PML-N has shown the clearest stance in this regard: upholding the rule of civilians; respect for the mandate of elected-representatives; autonomy from the military establishment, its ventures, adventures, forays into the political and policy-making arena. Picking and sticking to such a stance, in my opinion, is the first right step in the direction of its redressing.

2. Their economic and infrastructural focus has always been palpable, and their track record is a testament to that.

From the M2, setting up of NADRA, dams and power plants, PML-N has delivered in the past in the little time they were given in contrast to their mandate of a total of 10 years in separate stints at the federal government. The Metro Bus system has also been a noteworthy project that can not be denied as not having benefited countless people, regardless of other criticism.

3. It has proven its seriousness towards education. Apart from establishing the outstanding Danish Schools, the Punjab Government’s effective implementation of education reforms all over Punjab, although criminally underreported in Pakistan, yielded remarkable results. 

4.  A specific characteristic that struck me about the party, had been its sense of political maturity and responsibility.  I believe the PML-N displayed judiciousness by allowing the last government to complete its term and not bestowing a crown of political martyrdom and victim hood on its head.

If the PML-N’s role is seen in this regard and context, then it also gets the credit for contributing to the milestone of the first term completion of a democratically-elected government in Pakistan and thus, facilitating the transfer of power from one democratically-elected government to another which these elections were.

In its continuous display of political sagacity, the PML-N also brought together all opposition parties against the “circus” that Tahir-ul-Qadri put up in Islamabad; a reiteration of the party’s pledge to stand by democratic principles.

PML-N’s leaders also did not reciprocate the mudslinging and potshot-taking initiated by Imran Khan.

5. It is a party that has acknowledged its mistakes regarding Balochistan in the past and is making efforts to rectify those; it has reached out to Baloch leaders and called upon them to contest in the elections.

Back in September 2012, the PML-N announced its backing to the six-point proposals of Akhtar Mengal in removing the deprivation of the people of Balochistan.

6. One can gauge the interest and dedication of the party for cultural revival by the initiation of projects for the restoration of famous cultural and historical sites and places in Punjab, particularly in Lahore, that many citizens are well-aware of. The beautification of the provincial capital and the opening of the New Lahore Food Street only add more weight to this measure.

7. From Sartaj Aziz, Ishaq Dar, Khawaja Asif to Ahsan Iqbal, PML-N hosts a competent and capable team of veterans that will certainly assist in the implementation of its vision.

8. Lastly, the PML-N is an alternative for me to PPP and PTI, parties that I do not support for a number of reasons.

I was and am conscious and critical of PML-N’s flaws and wrongs, and know that the party I chose for these elections may not be the best. I also know that the aforementioned points I have penned as my reasons to support it may even be or are found in other party’s stances, manifestos and works but the collective existence of all of these in a single party, constituted a reason enough for me to cast my vote for them.

Now that they have been elected as the government, PML-N will understandably under the pressure of its mandate to fulfill its duties and expectations of the nation. It is required that they actualize the roadmap they presented in their manifesto: from economic revival and growth, curbing of terrorism and maintenance of law and order in the country especially in areas where the government’s writ has been blown into smithereens and that are routinely aflame; dealing with the energy crisis; reintegration of FATA into the political and national mainstream; the country-wide implementation of their education reforms of Punjab to promises such as the depoliticizing of sports boards.

PML-N can also rid the influence of the undemocratic forces in Pakistan by assertive democratization of the country which can largely be established through good governance.

Keeping aside the emergence of rigging allegations and controversies surrounding the elections for a moment, there is little doubt that these elections have been a historic one for Pakistan. Being the first transfer of power from one civilian democratically-elected government to another with the highest voter turnout to date; they have been more a victory for democracy than any party in the country.

The single sentiment that has simultaneously surged with the results of the elections has been of hopefulness.

Even if the PML-N was not the pick of a segments of some people, these elections and this government are hoped to be the opening of a new chapter in Pakistan’s tumultuous journey that sees the beginning of every Pakistani basically wants: a better, prosperous and progressive Pakistan.

~ Hafsa Khawaja

Elections in an Uneducated Pakistan?

*First posted on Seedhi Baat.

Voter illiteracy is often considered to be the bane of democracy in a developing country. The perception isn’t any different for Pakistan.

A recent article in International Business Times titled ‘Pakistan’s High Illiteracy Rate Threatens its Fragile Democracy’  said:

‘According to Unesco, only about 56 percent of Pakistani adults are literate — in contrast, South Asian neighbors India and Sri Lanka boast literacy rates of 74 percent and 97 percent, respectively.

Literacy rates in Pakistan are even lower for the rural poor and for women. Unesco estimates that some 70 percent of Pakistan’s rural population is illiterate, with even higher rates for women.

While the illiterate cannot be barred from voting, Saadat Ali Khan, a research associate at the Sustainable Development Policy Institute, warned in Pakistan’s Express Tribune newspaper that illiteracy plays into the hands of corrupt politicians who try to win votes on the basis of religious, tribal or ethnic affiliations, rather than on their contributions to the nation.

Indeed, in Pakistan’s rural hinterlands, voters (most of whom are illiterate) often vote for candidates who have paid them off with money or food or promised favors.

“Illiteracy undermines the very foundations of … democracy,” warned Unesco in its report on Pakistan.

“Illiterate citizens inevitably lack in awareness and reasoning skills. How can we expect a voter to make an informed decision when he/she is unable to even read a newspaper? Illiterate voters are easily misled.”

Pakistan, if it holds any faint hopes of solidifying its fragile democracy, will also have to overcome deep-seated cultural values in order to educate all of its people.’

As illustrated by the article, illiterate voters are largely perceived to make unsound judgments at polling stations, casting votes on the basis of biraderi, sects, caste, religion, ethnicity, owing to their state of being unlettered. While it is true that many do vote on these lines, it is important to understand the differentiation between illiterate and uneducated voters, that is frequently muddled up as one.

A voter may be illiterate but not necessarily uneducated.

The literacy of a voter relates to his ability to write and read, the latter relates to his level of information and degree of being informed as a voter.

Education and illiteracy are indeed crucial issues that require the imposition of emergency by the state. Indeed literacy, and that which goes beyond reading and writing, coupled with voter education would work as catalysts for the proper functioning of democracy and the betterment of Pakistan.

But currently, the level of awareness of the common man in Pakistan is also evolving.

While there may be a range of factors which have and are contributing to this change, the most notable has been the media.

Certainly illiterate voters are unable to benefit from the print media but presently Pakistan hosts a robust, vibrant, free and independent media in a booming industry. Especially electronic media. It has grown into a force to be reckoned with for both the state, the government and those aspiring to participate in them. Standing at the forefront of presenting expositions and hypocrisy on part of those that seek to rule and govern the nation, the electronic media exercises a mighty influence over the formation of people’s opinions, perceptions, choices, biases and ideas by continuing to impart such information and knowledge.

Pakistan is also home to a nation increasingly owning and using mobile phones and televisions. The increasing usage, availing, penetration and accessibility of technological products and electronic items has connected people to the flow of information transmitted through them.

In a developing country like ours, which is struggling to wriggle out of a siege of deep-rooted structural and cultural detriments, votes are not simply determined by a marriage between free will and choice of an individual. On practical grounds, votes are subject to a range of elements: feudalism, entrenched party loyalties, patriarchy, ignorance, threat of violence and more.

It is believed that illiterate voters are more susceptible to exploitation by the aforementioned factors, but here is where the crux of the argument lies, illiterate but educated voters can avoid exploitation and unsound judgments.

The IBTimes article mentions the instances of illiterate people voting on the promises or provision of food and money, but this hardly results from illiteracy than it does from poverty.

It is unwise to assume illiterate voters wholly lack reasoning sense, they may not be able to read and write, but a degree of generosity must be awarded to the illiterate people in accepting that they do posses basic sense of both reasoning and constructing a direction for their voting. Their can’t be and there isn’t a monopoly of common or basic sense and logic that is independent of formal education.

Being the most affected portion of the class hierarchy, the poor and illiterate have the strongest and greatest desire for shelter, clothes, bread and butter, a square meal and a better future for their children: a prosperous Pakistan.

If they are forced to turn to faulty political choices, it must be reiterated, that it has often more to do with poverty than illiteracy.

Alongside this, it should be acknowledged that there is no such guarantee that formally educated or literate people make the best of political choices through voting. Around the world, many literate and illiterate people alike have often voted in the worst of rulers and governments, and even supported them.

It is only through constant and continued democratic procedural cycles of elections that the political choices of people in Pakistan can be matured through experience and information which act as instruments of education for voters.

At the end, it must be realized that the average Pakistani today, regardless of his literacy and illiteracy, is palpably a more educated voter than he or she was years ago. They are more empowered by the vast free, fluid flow of information which exemplifies the age of today. And as illiterate people become educated and more informed voters, things in Pakistan sure are changing and heading in the right direction.

~ Hafsa Khawaja

Death of a Nation

*First posted on Pak Tea House.

Holding in the midst of political, social and economic storms, the Pakistan of today is a an unfortunate illustration of a national bedlam.

Unsurprisingly, death and destruction have now eased into the form of humdrum routinely occurrences for the people. Predictably throwing a cloak of desensitization over them; giving rise to apathy.

A rather common trend that has been nurtured in this environment is the juxtaposition of tragedies for comparisons to exhibit selectivity of people’s reactions and responses.

And it is to question this apathy that many have begun to question concern for and media coverage of a particular unpleasant incident; why one tragedy merits greater outrage or media attention than another. It is rather frequent to see comments on the social media touching upon drone attacks or killings in Karachi to ask why these do not yield as much public concern as other doleful incidents being usually currently shed light on, such as the shooting of Malala Yousafzai or the murder of Shahzeb Khan.

Stalin is to have allegedly said:

‘The death of one man is a tragedy; the death of millions is a statistic.’

Nothing better displays the human propensity of desensitization. The human mind perceives a single death or loss with genuine compassion and sympathy but when it comes to a loss of more lives, it simply can not grasp it with the same rush of emotions. The grip of those emotions loosens with the loss being bigger.

Keith Payne, a social psychologist, notes in an article of his ‘Why is the death of one million a statistic; Why we feel the least when we are needed the most.’ :  

‘Joseph Stalin is reputed to have said that the death of one person is a tragedy; the death of one million is a statistic. And Mother Teresa once said, “If I look at the mass I will never act.” When Stalin and Mother Teresa agree on a point, I sit up and pay attention. It turns out that the human tendency to turn away from mass suffering is well documented. Deborah Small and Paul Slovic have termed this phenomenon the collapse of compassion. It’s not simply that as the number of victims goes up, people’s sympathy levels off. No, when the numbers go up, the amount of sympathy people feel goes perversely down.’

This is not to justify the expansion of apathy in Pakistan, but to merely accentuate the human tendency for it that has ballooned in the country into an even worse phenomenon, of selective apathy and empathy.

An evident outcome of the aforementioned commentary – of pitting one mishap and its casualties against another – has been the polarization which has thrust people into dissimilar angles of this discourse.

One may also ascribe this approach to the Pakistani proclivity for knitting and credulity to believe conspiracy theories; or looking for ulterior motive angles to certain events springing from the importance being attached to them.

There are those who point out how many are unmoved by tragedies which involve perpetrators that claim to be Muslims and will only raise voice when America or some Western state is at this end, and there are those who believe that a certain segment of the Pakistani society is only disturbed when religious minorities or supposedly ’liberal’ causes lie in the very plinth and base of those tragedies.

However, both agree that condemnation and outrage in Pakistan rests on whatever perpetuates one’s narrative or beliefs.

Therefore, there is no uniformity, but selectivity in outrage.

But most importantly, the reason is simple: challenging people’s indifference and nonchalance.

Ironically, this course often tumbles into the same cast that it seeks to break.

As in many instances of comparing two tragic incidents, these attempts to rouse attention or sympathy towards an ignored happening seem to degenerates into diminishing the value of and disregard for the lives lost in the first one, because the entire concept of comparing and contrasting deaths reeks of obscenity.

There is a great deal of truth in the issue of Pakistanis conveniently cherry picking certain appalling occurrences for grieving and clamoring, whilst amplifying the blithe thoughtlessness for other terrible incidents.

But in reaching a point where we feel pitching tragedies against one another to raise and elicit equal compassion and commiseration for both and by doing so, we have let our collective morality and humanity slip between the cracks and diminish to specks.

Because surely when deaths are made to compete to be mourned, fouled and disregarded heartlessly to be given ascendancy over another, exploited to strengthen personal political arguments, ignored due to indifference and the solemnity they command consigned to oblivion, it signals nothing, but the death of a nation itself.

~ Hafsa Khawaja

Pakistan Hit by Fever of Turkey’s Popular Cultural Export

*Originally published in Turkey Tribune.

It is 9pm in Pakistan. An estimated thousands sit intently to watch what will unfold in a mansion scenically facing a shore of the Bosphorus, and in lives of the people who dwell in it. A handsome, philandering blonde, his sturdy uncle’s young gorgeous wife, her conniving mother and the mansion’s elegant governess. Characters that have eased into a part of their own lives.

These Pakistanis sit in anticipation of what will unfold in the Ziyagil Mansion. And so was the routine for them since months, until ‘Ishq-e-Mamnuu’ ended last December.

What began as a venture by a new channel last year eventually evolved into a nation-wide mania of ‘Ishq-e-Mamnuu’ (Urdu for ‘Aşk-ı Memnu‘).

The first of its kind in the country, the UAE-based channel Urdu1 became available in Pakistan in June 2012 by broadcasting two foreign TV dramas dubbed immaculately in Urdu, one Spanish and the other Turkish.The latter’s fresh storyline, cast and their convincing performances set in the ambience of Turkish culture and the picturesque locales of Istanbul, within a matter of months ensconced itself in a large Pakistani urban audience. 

A diverse audience composed by people belonging to both sexes of all ages, occupations, backgrounds, stripes and walks of life. And Toygar Işiklı’s masterly music production only augmented its appeal for them.

During its run on TV, it was not an uncommon sight to see many Pakistanis jestingly meeting each other in the Turkish style of greeting with a peck on each cheek, the two genders swooning over Kıvanç Tatlıtuğ, Beren Saat and Hazal Kaya and women raving about Firdevs Yöreoglu’s and her daughters’ fashion. Hearing ‘Aşk-ı Memnu’s theme music as ringtones and heated discussions on the drama, with the obligatory dental clicking for poor Adnan Ziyagil, in various cafes, lounges, restaurants was an even more ordinary scene.

It was, literally, the talk of the town.

Considering Pakistan’s long-standing cultural, historical, bilateral and exceptional brotherly relations with Turkey, Pakistani interest in the Turkish state and nation is rather natural. Turkey frequently occupies a place in Pakistan’s political discourse; as an ideal political model. Recently, amid the fluttering of Pakistani and Turkish flags all over Lahore and much fanfare and excitement, the provincial government of Punjab inaugrated Pakistan’s first Metro Bus service in the city modeled on the Turkish system of this public transportation. It was also attended by the deputy prime minister of Turkey.

Add to this, the creation of frenzy owed to ‘Aşk-ı Memnu‘ . The massive following of the drama furthered the fascination with Turkey, its people, language and culture. Inevitably causing a shift in people’s travel preferences, wanderlust towards it and a surge in plans for Turkish vacations. It would come as no surprise, if soon Turkish tourism is compelled to welcome eager and swelling Pakistani throngs.

Televised the entire week, ‘Ishq-e-Mamnuu’ propelled the remarkable skyrocketed ratings for the channel, blurring behind well-established rival entertainment channels. This disconcertedness forced them to jointly file a petition in court against the Urdu1. While equally upset were and still are the numerous local producers and veteran drama actors and actresses, openly clamoring for protectionism for the entertainment and drama industry in Pakistan, with direct reference to ‘Ishq-e-Mamnuu’ whose sensational rise has posed a threat to them and their own soaps and TV shows.

In contrast to this, one notable veteran Adnan Siddiqui, who also played a role alongside Angelina Jolie in the film ‘A Mighty Heart’ , had a different approach and reaction.  Succinctly writing a note on ’Ishq-e-Mamnuu’ which acknowledged it’s attributes, he called on the Pakistani entertainment industry to accept it (the Turkish soap) as ’a production which is a learning mechanism to provide our industry with better quality for work’ and to learn from its causes of swift success to espouse professionalism and up their standards in conformity with international ones.

Presenting and dealing with subjects ranging from alcohol consumption, adultery to abortion under its themes of glamour, deception and betrayal, it came as surprise that it stirred no significant controversy involving conservative groups in Pakistan.

The slashing of steamier scenes in ‘Aşk-ı Memnu’ under the scanner and sword of censorship paved the way for its social and cultural acceptance but generally, the soap fuelled attraction and greater want for Turkish TV dramas in Pakistan.

The sudden popularity of actors Kıvanç Tatlıtuğ and Beren Saat in Pakistan along with the striking success of ‘Ishq-e-Mamnuu’ has led to many other entertainment channels following the trend set by Urdu1: with “Asi”, that started during ’Ishq-e-Mamnuu’ to have recently ended and replaced by “Menekşe ile Halil” by one channel, and “Gümüş” now being televised as “Noor” by a separate one.

Urdu1 has also replaced ‘Aşk-ı Memnu’ with the dubbed version of “Fatmagülün suçu ne?” which it proudly calls on its official Facebook page ‘A perfect successor to Ishq-e-Mamnu!’  due to its successful maintenance of the highest ratings amongst other dramas during prime time that the former achieved. It has become apparent that ‘Aşk-ı Memnu’ might just have been to Pakistan what “Gümüş” was to the Arab world: a flare that ignited a boom in dubbed Turkish dramas.

With Adnan, Bihter, Behlul household names in Pakistan, several other Turkish soaps being shown and the final episode of ‘Aşk-ı Memnu’ having surpassed local blockbusters by garnering record-breaking ratings; Turkey’s current greatest cultural export, which has and continues to captivate millions around the world, should add another country to its map. For Pakistan has been swept, taken and transfixed by the thrilling storm of Turkish dramas!

~ Hafsa Khawaja

Political Expediency & Abetting Extremism in Pakistan

*First published on Borderline Green.

__________

With the arrival of 2013 and fast-approaching elections scheduled for the year, the political environment in Pakistan is heating up. Recently, the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) which is in government presently, announced an alliance with the Sunni Ittehad Council.

In view of the political season, this would be seen as a conventional electoral alliance, except that it isn’t.

In early January 2011, Governor Punjab Salmaan Taseer, who belonged to Pakistan People’s Party himself, was gunned down in broad daylight by his guard Malik Mumtaz Qadri due to his vehement opposition to the country’s controversial Blasphemy Laws. An incident which intensely polarized the Pakistani society, leaving its fault lines exposed; with the people divided over antipathy to the killing and shockingly, raising justifications for it on religious grounds.

A product of this polarization, the Sunni Ittehad Council, amongst the other hordes, thronged to the court where Qadri was later presented to hail, cheer and garland him. Later, they held rallies in his support.

Despite being small, like all religious parties in Pakistan, the Sunni Ittehad Council has great street power stemming from the country being deeply religious (over 95% in Pakistan are Muslims) and have considerable organizational capacity and ability. Although, for reasons otherwise, this power of the religious parties does not translate into a significant percentage of votes at elections.

In 2001, the Sunni Ittehad Council(SIC) launched a *’Difa-e-Pakistan’ (Defense of Pakistan) campaign that was aimed at creating public awareness against NATO attacks on Pakistan’s border military posts in Mohmand Agency. Also involving participation in a ‘Condemn America Day’.

Despite this, it was revealed after SIC’s support for Qadri that the U.S government had given aid to them in 2009 to plan and organize nationwide rallies, demonstrations and protests against militants, suicide-bombings and terrorist attacks.

A report on the matter says:

‘A US diplomat said that the embassy had given money to the group to organise the rallies, but that it had since changed direction and leadership. He said it was a one-off grant, and wouldn’t be repeated.

The Ittehad council was formed in 2009 to counter extremism. It groups politicians and clerics from Pakistan’s traditionalist Barelvi Muslim movement, often referred to as theological moderates in the Pakistani context.

Taseer’s assassin, Mumtaz Qadri, is a Barelvi. He claimed he acted to defend the honour of Prophet Mohammed.

At its rallies, the group (Sunni Ittehad Council) maintains its criticism of the Taliban even as it supports Qadri — a seemingly contradictory stance that suggests its leaders may be more interested in harnessing the political support and street power of Barelvis than in genuinely countering militancy.’

For many, this indicated that Sunni Ittehad Council’s ardent antagonism towards militancy was somewhat, a dollar-fueled programme or play that they merely executed and orchestrated.

In response to the revelation, the head of the council Sahibzada Fazal Karim said:

“This propaganda is being unleashed against us because we are strongly opposed to Western democracy and American policies in the region and in the world.. we are against extremism, but we support Qadri because he did a right thing,”

The Sunni Ittehad Council also strongly denounced any move to grant India the status of Most Favored Nation by Pakistan as means of liberalizing trade between the countries which it is firmly against.

Scholars and clerics from the SIC were part of the Islamic clerics in Pakistan which publicly denounced and even issued a fatwa against the Taliban’s attempt to kill Malala Yousafzai. Many people and skeptics see these occasional stances of theirs as a smokescreen to appear religiously moderate and politically progressive.

What makes this alliance stand out is the popular perception, at home and especially abroad, of the Pakistan People’s Party as a liberal or a relatively liberal party in Pakistan: one that has suffered the losses of many of its members and leaders to the rage of extremism, including its chairperson and the Muslim world‘s first female prime minister, the iconic Benazir Bhutto, due to its liberal and staunchly anti-extremist stances. But the  PPP has continually belied this image with its decisions and reactions to events in this tenure, that astoundingly go uncritically unquestioned by Pakistan’s otherwise vocal intellectuals.

It is not just the PPP which has formed such an alliance, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz or PML-N is also widely known to be on cordial terms with and to have reached a political consensus over seat adjustments for the upcoming general elections with the Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan. The SSP, which resurged by changing its name to ‘Ahle Sunnat Wal Jamaat’ in order to display organizational differentiation – from the SSP which was banned under Musharraf’s rule - is an extremist and terrorist organization.  Ineffectively banned by the state, it is primarily concerned with thwarting Shia influence in Pakistan. It is the ideological father of the terrorist militant organization, Lashkar-e-Jhangivi which has been responsible for the slaughter of countless Shias in Pakistan.

These are not isolated events of the electoral season.The formation of these reprehensible alliances by two of Pakistan’s largest and most prominent political parties which have enjoyed stints in power are but a microcosm of politics in this South Asian country:

Playing to the gallery of the religious right, exploiting religion, allying with extremist factions for political gain which inevitably leads to appeasing and patronizing them thus, augmenting their growth and emboldening them.

These instances of indulgence in political expediency, which reign supreme, have been a potent factor in abetting extremism in Pakistan.

As Pakistan finds itself at a crucial juncture, it is a demand of time that all segments of the state unite to devote themselves, with absolute sincerity, to the battle against extremism and terrorism that has already spilled the blood of over 40,000 innocent Pakistanis and cast the state as a virtual international outcast.

It is mutually exclusive for a party or government which blatantly collaborates and partners with organizations, that are established on the idea of hate and radicalism and promote bigotry, to ever fully commit itself to the war against terrorism and extremism in Pakistan. And that is the last that the country needs today.

_____________________________________________________________

*Not to be confused with ’Difa-e-Pakistan Council’ (Council for the Defense of Pakistan) which is an umbrella coalition of more than 40 Pakistani quasi-political religious parties that advocates closing NATO supply routes to Afghanistan and rejects the Pakistani government decision to grant India most-favored nation status.

~ Hafsa Khawaja

Pakistan’s Political Messiah Fixation

*Originally published in Pakistan Today.

A chapter of a survey released in July 2012 by PEW, spanning six predominantly Muslim countries – Pakistan, Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt and Tunisia – shows that majorities in four of the six states believe that democracy, rather than a strong leader, can best solve their country’s problems.

The country with the most prominent opinion contrary to those of other countries is Pakistan, where preference of a leader over a democratic government is mirrored in the percentages: 61 percent of Pakistanis say their country should rely on a strong leader, while just 31 percent say democracy can better solve national problems.

The expression of favorability towards an individual over a system, be it judicial or governmental, isn’t a new phenomena but a political and cultural approach that has been ingrained in Pakistan.

The plausible notion of a strong leader being the pivot of progress has been made to inflate in importance through over-emphasis in the country, to a magnitude that all remaining requisites for the state’s prosperity are blurred into insignificance by it. That is, potential leaders or figures are deemed the panacea; virtually messiahs.

Although the roots of this precedence remain somewhat obscure, it can be assumed that they lie in the grounds of political culture and history.

A quick glimpse through Pakistan’s tumultuous history would reveal a dearth of stability and continuation of a democratic system, which all the more provides validation to the idea that Pakistan is a developing democracy, not yet a complete democracy.

In February this year, a survey conducted by the Oxford Research International says Libyans would favor a ‘strong leader’ over a democratic government. Commenting on which Oxford University’s Dr Christoph Sahm said the survey suggested Libyans lacked the knowledge of how democracy works.

This applies to Pakistan as well.

This inadequacy of acquaintance with the system of democracy is one of the reasons for the ‘Messiah Mania’ in Pakistan: lack of understanding of how democracy works and interest in it leads to supposing one man can cure the country’s ills all by his existence at the helm.

A developing democracy, as we are, Pakistanis are also terribly disenchanted with the order of democracy itself after what they have seen in this greatly disappointing democratically-elected government’s tenure.

 Sifting through the historical pages of Pakistan’s formation, most Pakistanis evince towards Jinnah single-handedly creating Pakistan in support of this preference (of choosing an individual or leader over a system), forgetting the lapses of decades that have occurred since 1947 and the vortex of change that there has been on the geographical, political, social, regional and national landscapes, which cancel much, if not the entire, basis of comparisons and references of Jinnah.

Pakistan’s political culture has also bred this disposition: with parties centered on dynasties, their histories and scions, politics and governance in Pakistan have been made a play of personalities beyond what they should probably be.

But with the rise of Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), it has been proven that the fashioning of this leaning is not exclusive to dynastic and ‘family’ parties such as Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) and Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N).

The Kaptaan’s larger than life persona, charisma of the cricketing days and illustrious background in a sport that is similar to religion in Pakistan’s – along with philanthropy, his shrewd stance that subliminally echoes this mentality (a single honest man can channel change even through a team of ideological turncoats, opportunists and remnants of previous regimes) – has alone bolstered and intensified the idea of a messiah.

A dictatorial history may also explain why nations like Pakistan and Libya would choose a ‘strong leader’ over a democratic government.

A past that has been a witness to and victim of four separate authoritarian military men wheels around the concept of a single omnipotent figure. This has devised the perception of ‘one-man-government’ in peoples’ mind who believe a lone man can cause massive shifts in the country’s fortunes, systems and situations depending on his nature an d intentions (good or bad).

After the death of Czech politician Vaclav Havel and North Korea’s Kim Jong-il, Joshua A Trucker, professor of politics at New York University, pertinently writes in his article on Al-Jazeera English ‘How much do individuals really matter in politics?’

“The most pressing question for policymakers now is how likely it is that the course of Czech or North Korean politics will be altered by the death of Havel or Kim. Many important differences exist between the two, not the least of which is that Havel has been out of political power for years now, while Kim (we assume) has been running the country.

However, perhaps the most important difference is the fact that the Czech Republic is an institutionalized democracy while North Korea may be the world’s last totalitarian dictatorship. Therefore, one viable hypothesis would seem to be that there should be less disruption to the Czech Republic’s political trajectory (or any established democracy) due to the death of an important political figure than in a case like North Korea, where power is so centrally wrapped up around one person.”

Professor Trucker’s analysis is the principal point in this matter: power patterns contrast between a totalitarian and democratic governments and countries. Absolute control and authority is always vested in one figure in an autocracy but an individual is weighed by and down by the system in democracy (especially in a parliamentary democracy) with no space for any such ‘messiah’.

Another pressing question arises of this messiah culture that stresses a tremendous amount of reliance on a single figure: what will become of the country with the demise of the leader? Will the system, institutions and nation tumble into chaos? Who will take his place? After all, even messiahs are mortals.

Pakistan will have to take political leaders as they are: humans with flaws, who will have to make compromises, reconciliations and unfavorable decisions in the face of political gridlocks. A politician may possess a fine character and even a vision, but to expect him to actualize it for the country’s good all in his own entirety, unaided of followers, party members, a framework for implementation and a civilized system of governance is outright ludicrous. Which is why critical thought must be lent to all these factors and to make a cult of leadership is wholly nugatory.

Sculpting messianic idols out of political leaders, criticizing whom is to blaspheme and who are unknown to mistakes and over and above any system or principles – and the search for saviors needs to end for Pakistan, for it is an endless and futile one. To pull Pakistan from the precipice it currently staggers at will take more than a leader or a savior, and the population’s sensibilities being held hostage by this mindset that seeks a messiah will certainly not help.

~ Hafsa Khawaja

Dissection of a Trivial Argument: Ramadan or Ramzan?

*First published on the Express Tribune Blog.

Since the last few years, the arrival of the holy month brings with itself the ignition of a debate on social media in Pakistan; at the center of which is the usage of words for the month: the Urdu word Ramzan and Arabic word Ramadan.

Some tweets explain better:

“Beena Sarwar @beenasarwar:

You can call the holy month what you want. I’ll use Ramzan, rather than the corporatised, commercialised, Arabised, westernised Ramadan.

Fazeelat Aslam @FazleetAslam

If you’re Pakistani say Ramzan. If you enjoy continuing Zia’s mission and being a lemming, please say Ramadan. #lemmings

AM‏ @delhisultan

@AneelaBabar Today we say use Ramzan, not Ramadan. Tomorrow it will be something else. Where will these social dictates take us? @bdutt “

Those on left side of this schism opine that usage of Arabic instead of Urdu words are a constituent of Arabic cultural imperialism and religious rigidity in Pakistan; commenting sarcastically how the country’s name itself should be changed to Al-Bakistan (The Arabic language doesn’t contain ‘P’ in it.)

While those on the right argue for using Arabic words to keep to ‘proper’ religious linguistics or holding onto Pakistan’s Islamic heritage; often ‘correcting’ other’s greeting of Ramzan to Ramdan.

An article in Guardian titled ‘In Pakistan, saying Goodbye can be a religious statement’ on a similar Khuda-Hafiz/Allah-Hafiz issue, says:

‘Until about 10 years ago “Khuda hafiz”, which means “God protect you”, was the phrase commonly used to say goodbye. But, in the past decade, “Khuda hafiz” began to be overtaken by a new term “Allah hafiz.

While languages change and evolve with time, and Pakistan certainly has bigger problems such as corruption and militancy, the alteration has unsettled liberals in Pakistan, who say it reflects a wider change in the country’s cultural landscape.

The promotion of “Allah hafiz” first began in the 1980s under the rule of General Zia-ul-Haq when Pakistan was involved in the US- Saudi-backed jihad against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.’

The belief that this ‘religious linguistic propriety’, which included the introduction of ‘Allah Hafiz’ and ‘Ramadan’ in Pakistan’s lingual fashion, began with Zia’s campaign of cultural Islamisation does hold truth. It has inevitably led to these (words, phrases) to be seen symbolic of the infamous General’s Islamification drive or ‘Saudization‘ of Pakistan; which is the cause of many liberals and progressive-minded people objecting to their use today.

Although it is a question of precedence of subjects that needs to be reconsidered by them because Zia’s ideological influence is at its most dangerous when it exists from our madrassas, mindsets to our constitution, not in mere words or phrases.

Despite that, it is important to realize that with the flight of decades; these words became incorporated into the nation’s lingo and style of speaking in a manner that they are now viewed and used as ordinary as any other ones (for most); regardless or unknown of and removed from their background of Islamisation/Arabisation of the linguistic culture. This is particularly true for the young generation of today; that was either born in the 80s or grew up in an age where they were unable to notice the process of lingual transformation that was being attempted through a state-fuelled campaign.

It is questionable whether the application of a few phrases or words cause or be a testament to some ‘rampant Arabisation’ of  Pakistan presently and to assume that all who like using the Arabic word for Ramzan are proponents of degradation of Pakistan’s own, distinct culture, lingual establishment and imposition of an Arab one, is preposterous.

Many use either of the words out of pure personal preference or habit. To be fair, Urdu as a language faces more threat of perishing at the hands of the colonial era inculcated sense of inferiority amongst us which has manifested itself in the ’Angraizi complex’, or the paramount significance that this society grants the English language over Urdu.

On the other hand, to believe that the occasional usage of Arabic words lends one more religiosity or ‘Muslim-ness’ is equally absurd. Those possessing this outlook need to review it, too, because respect for religion rests not in a handful of words but in actions, behaviours and attitudes.

Does addressing Allah as God make one a lesser Muslim?

Intentions behind uttering something and its essence is what matters most; words and expressions may differ.

The aforementioned points, thus, should validate how trifling the apprehensions and perceptions and their basis are for both of the groups. To be so vehemently opposed to the usage of either ‘Ramazan’ or ‘Ramadan’ by any, on the account of the stated views or any other reasons, is irrational and in contrast with good sense.

Let everyone have the freedom and choice to pick their own unit of language up, without forcing or prodding others to conform to each other’s self-defined mediums of ‘appropriate’ expressions.

The people of Pakistan need to stop making a mountain out of this molehill and quit attaching such alarmingly grand nature to it; of cultural foist and religious inaccuracy.

While Pakistan gets mired in troubles of far great and disturbing kind, debate over ’Ramazan’ or ‘Ramadan’, only gives prominence to the penchant amongst this nation with its preoccupation with the trivial.

~ Hafsa Khawaja

Pakistan’s ‘Supreme’ Quagmire

*Published on Borderline Green.

After spending 4 years, 2 months and 26 days in office as Pakistan’s 24^th Prime Minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani was removed from power on 19th June 2012 by an order of the Supreme Court that proved to be crescendo in the on-going stand-off between the government and judiciary.

The background to the case lay in the overturning of the controversial National Reconciliation Ordinance in 2009 by the Supreme Court. The Musharraf-issued NRO  basically provided a cover of insulation from being tried and convicted for  politicians and bureaucrats by offering them amnesty in all cases of any crime or corruption that they were involved in or may have committed.

Its dissolution meant that all the cases of the NRO Beneficiaries were now revived; on top of which was President Zardari who faced the Swiss Cases worth $60 milliom. In relation to this, the Supreme Court directed the Prime Minister to write a letter to the Swiss Authorities to commence with the proceedings associated with their reopening; which the PM refused citing the presidential immunity Zardari enjoyed from prosecution. Gilani’s defiance of the order was construed as contempt of court and his disqualification was the result.

The discourse that took Pakistan after the verdict of Gilani’s disqualification and subsequent dismissal, centered not on disagreement about whether cases of corruption against Zardari should be reinstated but on the judiciary’s conduct; which appears to be increasingly engaging in judicial activism, inevitably encroaching upon the parliamentary and political space.

The binaries created by this discourse, on one hand lead to those who support the judiciary’s decisions and those who disapprove of the direction they feel the judiciary has chosen.

Pakistan’s history of chaos and disorder consigned the establishment of accountability to the bin; giving rise to a culture where exploitation, abuse of authority, lawlessness, chaos and a states within the state have thrived.

The country’s two principal organizations: the National Accountability Bureau and the Federal Investigative Agency with the respective aims of ‘the responsibility of elimination of corruption through a holistic approach of awareness, prevention and enforcement’and ‘to serve and assist the nation to get justice through an effective law enforcement’ have been pervaded by a systematic politicization; disabling their organizational and regulative capacity and impeding a proper pursuit of accomplishing the basis of their formation by proffering a virtual immunity and amnesty to those in positions of power from being made answerable and treated accordingly.

In these circumstances, the susceptibility of a certain void of regulatory apparatus for ensuring the accountability of those in government or in power is natural and visible.

After the success of the momentous Movement for the Restoration of the Judiciary, the judiciary emerged to fill this void; an institution with the capability and focus to bring all within the loop (or noose) of justice.

And as news of scandals, scams and stories of personal aggrandizement of this PPP Government and its members kept stacking upon each other; public frustration and desperation waxed.

What followed is a thumping public thirst for accountability, which some see to be slaked by the judiciary’s recent course of actively taking on the government head on and thus, has invited a swarm of petitions to be filed at the Supreme Court that target what is perceived as governmental maladministration and misrule. 

This is where the strand of contention ascends into sight: is the judiciary the right institution for making the government answerable?

Tausif Kamal, an Attorney at Law in Houston pens in his article in Daily Times:

‘The basic function of our SC is to hear, adjudicate and interpret the law on actual cases or disputes between two adversaries that comes before it on appeal. Such appellate jurisdiction and application of law is the court’s primary duty. Its original jurisdiction should be rare and limited to hearing cases between two provinces, or where one province and/or the federal government is a party.’

It is clear, that the primary function of the judiciary isn’t holding the government responsible or keeping the ‘state’s excesses’ in check. The term ‘excesses of the state’ being broad enough to vary and differ between people. Is it one that is defined by the dictates of the law, the popularity and moral standing of the government with the people? And who defines it? How and when is it subject to the suo moto? About which, to quote Tausif Kamal again :

‘Article 184 (3), which incredibly bestows on the apex court almost limitless and unbridled powers of original jurisdiction. Enabling it to adjudicate on its own whim and fancy any matter under the sun in the name of ‘public importance’ or ‘fundamental rights’, it gives rise to the overuse of suo motu.’

To many, Gilani’s removal has been a ‘judicial coup’ with the judiciary greatly overstepping its domain. After all, the three main means of dismissing an individual from the Prime Minister’s secretariat are laid through the Parliament, Election Commission and the people itself which can be availed by the motions of a vote of no-confidence, disqualification and voting in the next elections, respectively.

The debate that the ‘historic’ decision of the Supreme Court has stirred has also provided fodder for debate that revolves around the lengths that the Supreme Court can stride about to oversee the government’s dealings and matters, the suo moto as an instrument for witting or unwitting immersion in judicial activism of sorts (Despite international praise for Pakistan’s higher judiciary, international calls have also been made to form a distinct, fair criteria that guides the use of suo moto) and in current instances of the government’s refusal to obey the judicial orders (regardless of the reasons); the extent that the Lords of the Supreme Court can go to rein in its deviance from compliance and the removal of an elected Prime Minister as a  of the Supreme Court.

Dr. Mohamed Taqi writes:

‘The post-March 2009 judiciary arrived at the helm with a sense of entitlement and populist vigour, which it felt it had earned for inspiring and leading its own restoration movement. Frequent references, in several recent verdicts, by several judges to the Supreme Court of Pakistan to being “the people’s court” rather than a constitutional court indicated that the justices were operating under the influence of what they perceived was popular support received during the restoration movement. The restored judiciary had come to the bench after contracting the messiah complex! The misplaced assumption of being the new saviors has put the judiciary in a unique situation where it has on occasion been at odds with both the civilians and the military and appears to be acting not just as a proxy, at least in its own mind, but a power player.’

By proclaiming itself to be the ‘people’s court’, it is reckoned that it intends to be a representative of the public sentiment rather than, or more than, an exponent and upholder of the law and legal system because to be both is mutually exclusive.

To become the ’true representatives’ of the people is the sole prerogative of the Parliament and the penchant for making assertions of being the ‘real representatives’ of the people by state pillars such as the media and judiciary contravenes to their distinguishable reasons of existence.

Their separate roles, institutional duties and professional ethics command that they remain detached from such populism and matters invalidating their ambition to advocate the people’s will and view. The judiciary and Supreme Court in particular are required to be objective and egalitarian.

The judiciary and dispensation of justice is not governed by vox populi but by the laws and constitution.

By assuming or borrowing the charge of another instituition or organ Pakistan will only be mired into a din of further confusion and conflict in which any possibility of accountability and transparency will be the only casualties; and polarise the state organs that need to be brought together in agreement at present, more than ever, for a stable, democratically-viable Pakistan.

As Babar Sattar says in his must-read article ‘Legal Eye: On Picking Sides’ on this very issue:

‘We need an independent judiciary, a functional parliament, a performing executive, a strong army, an uncensored media and a vibrant civil society. None of this is expendable if Pakistan is to thrive.’

Any espousal of the functions of another institution, for whatever lofty reason and possible short-term relief, hamstring that institution to evolve, shed its failings and ability to develop to overcome its defunctness and shortcomings.

The settlement to this ‘supreme’ quagmire of Pakistan, rests in the exclusive practice of the segregate authority that the state organs are vested with, while strictly dwelling within the confines of their legal, constitutional turfs.

Upon ending, a reported remark by the American Chief Justice Roberts as the US Supreme Court upheld Obama’s Healthcare Law, would sum up the case in Pakistan well:

“It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.”

~ Hafsa Khawaja

Internet Censorship: Why The Lifted Twitter Ban is Serious Matter

Exactly two years since the date on which a ban on Facebook was enforced in Pakistan, Twitter was blocked by Pakistan Telecommunication Authority on orders of the I.T Ministry today.

The ban has just been lifted on orders of the PM.

The given ground for it was the ’promotion and encouragement to participate in blasphemous contests’ through Twitter.

The first point of argument that arises upon hearing this, is: if such contests are being held by some, how will Pakistan’s suspension of Twitter stop it? How does barring people from any site, accomplish anything, leave alone the discontinuation of the alleged ‘offensive’ content?

It is patent that this is at a complete discord with rationale, thus rendering the whole act futile while assigning the element of sheer foolishness to it.

Second, what kind of ‘blasphemous contests’ were being publicised on Twitter, that those who are logged onto in 24/7 are not aware of, but only PTA was?

And that too, on a site like Twitter where any such controversial or globally or locally ‘trending’ topics immediately come into the cognizance and under the discussions of the millions of users?

In view of these, the reason given by PTA was seen more of a pretext rather than a valid explanation for their action.

Although the ban has been removed now, the situations surrounding the internet and its usage in Pakistan command that its core be taken seriously: internet censorship.

Since the advent of social networking sites, many in Pakistan have found a medium where the relatively great freedom of speech and expression available in the country, could be utilized to have their voice heard.

But the fact that the government and its organizations are vested with the authority to define a broad term like ‘objectionable’, misuse it to cease access to the internet under its cloak, is, to say the least, disconcerting.

Relevantly, taking into account that religion is the most dangerously sensitive pulse of the nation (and the most handiest of cudgels in Pakistani politics) and from 200 million only around 10% to 15% of Pakistanis are on the internet (while the rest are not conscious of what is really present or happening on it), using the guise of religion ( ‘blasphemous, objectionable content’) is the most ‘lucratively’ easy strategy for the puissant to advance their aims.

Especially in a country where there has been a tremendous transformation of the internet as a vent for public outrage, anger and criticism of the legislative, judicial and executive organs of the state, and as a forum for unprecendented critical scrutiny of the Military Establishment and the ISI.

Not to mention, how the internet has revolutionised the transmission of information, knowledge of global political, social or cultural happenings – at a phenomenal rate.

The abovementioned factor, is what usually troubles those ruling a state.

Generally speaking, the reach to all information of the populace is not in their (rulers, the potent) favor for it often ‘endangers’ the status quo or the position maintained by them.

And this leads to decisions that are, to go by the rhetoric, taken to ‘safeguard the public’ (and posed as forms of social control, when they really are government-foisted constraints to preserve the profitable ‘political equilibrium’) as the state jumps to keep up this drumbeat by parading notions of threat of disturbance to the social order.

(In Pakistan, that can be seen by how the alarm on the society’s morality was raised with the abundance of porn sites given as an example to justify banning many and ‘filtering the internet’; a sweep which included many Baloch sites that documented the gruesome, organized massacres in Balochistan and unambiguously naming the uniformed perpetrators while containing the grave disenchantment of the Baloch with Pakistan)

In the case of today’s Twitter ban, which was implemented with such a dubious founding, it all makes the aforementioned concern feel all the more real and reasonable.

Considering the popularity and usage of sites like Twitter and Facebook span continents and billions of people, they are correctly resembled to bridges that link the world; transcending physical borders and geographical separations.

Their incredible reach has established them as a connection between populations all around the world to interact, engage in healthy discussions, clear common misconceptions, express their point of view on a range of  topics and even promote commercial, educational, political and social goals.

And at a time when Pakistan is practically a pariah state, heavily stereotyped and misunderstood and such is the power of the internet in this age, that it has been successfully used as a tool for revolutions; it can not afford  and must resist internet censorship in any form, which not only removes it from availing the benefits that the platform offers, deprive its citizens from their right to freedom of speech, expression and information but also virtually, further isolates Pakistan from the rest of the world.

~ Hafsa Khawaja

* Later published on Express Tribune.

Hauling Jinnah and His Life From Distortion: A Factual Rebuttal To PTI’s Story

NOTE: On account of all the presumptions and accusations being cast through comments which assume my leanings with a certain party, this is to clarify, that this post comes from someone purely non-partisan: neither a PPP, PML-N, JUI-F, MQM nor a PTI supporter. An independent observer of Pakistani politics.

_______________________

Lately, a message is being posted and circulated by supporters of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf, that attempts to strike some semblance between Imran Khan and M. A Jinnah.

While a strong liking may be taken to it by those politically aligned with PTI, but to those who are just reasonably au fait with history and Jinnah’s life, it is seen as an obnoxious distortion of and selective display of facts; which must be set straight.

In a sincere effort to put together a relatively, factually accurate rebuttal; this post relies heavily on excerpts from the magnum opus on Jinnah: Stanley Wolpert’s ‘Jinnah of Pakistan’.

And so it commences:

1. Contrary to what the altered versions of this viral post/status say, Jinnah never in his life, attended Cambridge University or any other university, leave alone having been enlisted in a ‘Hall of Fame’ of some educational institution in England. He only completed his legal education there. How someone could so callously come up with such a fallacy is beyond logic.

[1]

*Mamad was what Jinnah was lovingly called in his family.

[2]

Jinnah was later enrolled at Sindh Madressa-tul-Islam.

At a young age, his aunt Manabai took him with her to Bombay, (where uncertainty casts doubt on whether he attended Muslim Anjuman-I-Islam over there or Gokul Das Tej Primary School).  After which, he was brought back to his parents who registered him at the exclusive Karachi Christian Mission High on Lawrence Road.

[3]

In that period, the flourishing business of Jinnah Poonja (the Quaid’s father) had come to be associated with Douglas Graham and Company, whose General Manager Sir Freidrick Croft who ‘obviously liked Mamad and thinking highly of his potential to recommend the young man for an apprenticeship to his home office in London in 1892’.

[4]

After his travel to London, it was on April 25th 1893, that Jinnah ‘petitioned’ Lincoln’s Inn  and was granted permission to be excused the Latin portion of the Preliminary Examination, which he passed on May 25th .

Wolpert pertinently states:

‘Had he procrastinated he might not have been able to complete his legal apprenticeship, for the next year a number of prerequisites were added and the process of professional legal certification was substantially prolonged.’

While in England, Jinnah was influenced and fascinated by the fresh British liberalism and it was there, that he was presented with a glance in the fascinating world of politics. He often visited Hyde Park and the visitor’s gallery at Westminister’s House of Commons.

[5]

Due to a rather dramatic turn of events (paronomasia intended: Jinnah had developed a passion for theatre in London, and had sent a letter to his father to allow him to participate in it – only to be reprimanded and summoned back) Jinnah had to return back to British India after applying for a ‘certificate’ from Lincolns’ Inn:

|2|. Nothing more could be more further from the truth than the view that Jinnah ’suffered severely at the start of his legal career’ .

Upon his return, the realization of his mother’s death and his father’s sinking business, which had been subject to the whims and vagaries of time, dawned upon him dealing him a dark stroke but eventually, Jinnah did climb up the ladder professionally and out of this sombre chasm.

[6]

 

      

|3|. The ‘Flower of Bombay‘ that blossomed in  Jinnah‘s heart had converted to Islam becoming Maryam from Ruttie, three days before their marriage on Friday April 19th, 1918. [7]

And although Ruttie and Jinnah’s story was a Shakespearan tragedy, and their marriage eventually withered but they did not divorce.

Penned in an article on her at Dawn:

‘Her health continued to deteriorate; from 1926 through 1928 she was restricted mostly to bed.

Accompanied by her mother, Ruttie went to England in 1928 and later to Paris where she was admitted at a clinic in Champs Elysee. She was in a semi-comatose condition there …

Mohammad Ali Jinnah went to Paris and stood by her side, even eating the same food she was given. Ruttie’s health improved and she moved to Bombay where it took a turn for the worse again.’

An outstanding video comprising painstakingly compiled quotes and excerpts, weaves a silent narration of this entire so beautiful, yet so heartbreaking tragic love story.

    

|4|. As Jinnah and his wife had never divorced, the idea perpetuated by PTI’s page that Dina Jinnah’s custody was awarded to her mother by a judge, is naturally overturned.

Little is known of how and where Dina stayed during the years of her parent’s separation and after her mother’s demise.

But Wolpert mentions her at the time of Jinnah being at the peak of his political engagements at the age of 55, which means that the year must either be 1931 or 1932:

[8]

Jinnah also maintained formal correspondence with Dina, even after her marriage to Neville Wadia that he was in opposition to.

A reported picture of Dina and Neville after their marriage.

He addressed her as ‘Mrs. Wadia’ throughout it.
        

|5|. To roughly cram Jinnah’s first few years in politics as a ‘failure’ is not only harsh, but a travesty.

There is nothing that suggests his political penury during the years of 1900s, when he stepped into the domain.

And there is much that can be used in rebuttal of this, but for the sake of brevity, the following excerpts should suffice.

At the beginning of his political career, Jinnah simply remained a keen observer of  and judiciously analyzed the course of events in British India while closely following figures like Dadabhai Naoroji and Sir Pheroze Shah Mehta – on whom he was not unable to leave a favorable impression.

[ 9]

Jinnah had joined the Congress in 1906, and later the Muslim League in 1913.

The belief and notion of a single Indian nation regardless of religion, which recurred in Mehta and Naoroji’s speeches, reverberated strongly in Jinnah’s stance and thoughts; eventually earning him the respected title of ’Ambassador for Hindu-Muslim Unity’ in 1916, after his role in the formation of the historic Lucknow Pact – a common ground for cooperation between the Muslim League and Congress for accomplishing gains in the bid for self-government for British India. (Jinnah presided over the joint party session in Lucknow).

How all that comes down to evolving into failure, is rather a very difficult conundrum.

[10]

|7|. Exactly to which era of pre-partition history that was intended to indicated towards through the point ‘Won only 1 seat after a decade of struggle’, is unclear but in retrospect the year of Jinnah’s ‘solemn’ involvement and foray into politics, which is largely-accepted to be 1906, should be considered.

After being bestowed with honorary titles such as the ‘Ambassador for Hindu-Muslim Unity’for the result of the culmination of his and others efforts to ensure union between the two parties, four years after 1906, in 1910, he was elected to the Imperial Legislative Council. (Bear in mind, Jinnah was only a member of the Congress at that point in time, neither a party leader nor part of the Muslim League.)

[11]

|8|. The adoption of the ‘Lahore Resolution’, was indeed a most momentous day in subcontinental, and Muslim League history, and in Jinnah’s political life. But how exactly can it be assessed that it was definitely what ’won people’s hearts and minds’ is quite complex and cumbersome to gauge.

So for the purpose of lucidity, it must be assumed that this phrase was meant to imply the complete guarantee and consummate ‘arrival on the political scene’ and success of Muslim League and its future proposals: Pakistan.

Even this is not in perfect accordance with reality, as after his return from London and the fragmentation of the All India Muslim League, Jinnah had diverted all his focus and energies to the strengthening and revamping of the party through critical and massive reorganizing – something which took a toll on his health too.

(‘Towards Lahore’ is an immensely informative chapter centering around this very ’restructuring’ of the AIML in the 1930s)

[12]

The watershed moment at Minto Park on 23rd March 1940, was only a result and culmination of the success of this pivotal political and social rearrangement of AIML.

|9|.There wasn’t really a plethora of or ‘weighty’ parties in Pre-Partition India, if there were any, there were only the Indian Congress and  All India Muslim League. Both, which at the end, owing to a twist in situations, stood completely different – on divided soil.

Bottomline is, nugatory and politically pointless parallels need to be stopped being drawn between the politicians of today and the leaders of yesterday.

Emotionalism, exagerration, lack of realism dipped in populism are what deplorably compose ’appeal’ in Pakistan. But still, at the end of the day, 200 million people do not want to know how similar a party leader is with the founder of the country but what a party has to offer them; socially, politically and economically.

Most importantly, please study history before indulging in an utterly distasteful presentation of ‘facts’. And do leave Jinnah out of it, his ideology and vision for Pakistan has been distorted enough to reach the brink that this state is on – kindly spare his life now.

To quote Stanley Wolpert again:

“Few individuals significantly alter the course of history. Fewer still modify the map of the world. Hardly anyone can be credited with creating a nation-state. Mohammad Ali Jinnah did all three.”

He was not infallible but there was only one Jinnah in Bombay, in sartorial incomparability, peerless finesse and debonair, political brilliance and realism and only one Jinnah of Pakistan. Let us not make him and his life a casualty in and party to political tactics.

~ Hafsa Khawaja

_______________________________________

References:

[1] Chapter I: Karachi, Page 5.

[2] Chapter I: Karachi, Page 5, 6 and 7.

[3] Chapter I: Karachi, Page 7.

[4] Chapter I: Karachi, Page 9 and 11.

[5] Chapter I: Karachi, Page 15.

[6] Chapter II: Bombay, Page 16 and 17.

[7] Chapter IV: Lucknow to Bombay, Page 53.

[8] Chapter X: London, Page 130.

[9] Chapter II: Bombay, Page 20.

[10] Chapter II: Bombay, Page 27.

[11] Chapter III: Calcutta, Page 32.

[12] Chapter XI: Towards Lahore, Page 155.

* Most pictures courtesy Doc Kazi on Flickr.

* Any factual correction or edit needed in the post, would be highly appreciated if pointed out. Thank you.