The Breeze Amid Political Heat


*Originally published in The News.

Since the past one month, the political temperature has been rising by the day. Attacks against the government have grown only to culminate as an intentioned final blow in the form of marches to the capital to unseat the PML-N government.

Imran Khan’s PTI and Tahir-ul-Qadri’s PAT are driving their respective marches and inquilabs.

Any political crisis is inevitably a breeding ground for opportunism, point-scoring, mud-slinging, propaganda, vendettas and agendas. The case hasn’t been dissimilar in Pakistan where the two-seater Chaudhrys of Gujrat, and the lone-parliamentarian Sheikh Rasheed have been hanging on inquilabi coattails.

However, amid the political chaos and uncertainty has been a positive development.

From JI, PPP, JUI-F, ANP to MQM, there has been a perceptible manifestation of political maturity. Having placed their own political agendas, differences and issues on the second rung of priority, they have come together in their advocacy for political dialogue; advice of negotiation, concession, flexibility and reconciliation to the government; and in the process, palpably demonstrated the spirit of democracy.

Publicly speaking on the dangers posed to Pakistan, its nascent democracy and hopes for a democratic future by current developments and the government’s response to them, many notable members and leaders of these parties such as Khurshid Shah, Raza Rabbani, Aitzaz Ahsan, Qamar-uz-Zaman Kaira, Mehmood Achakzai, Hasil Bizenjo, Zahid Khan and Afrasiab Khattak have emerged.

With separate visits made by these parties to the ruling government’s leaders and members, imparting advice and help to them in dealing with the marchers; this political engagement has been a welcome occurrence.

The government’s decision to allow passage to both marches was a prudent abandonment of the jitters and edginess it had been demonstrating by the placement of containers, barriers and other measures that were characteristic of its tendency to overreact and create crises; and making monsters of minions.

In Hamid Mir’s recent show of Capital Talk, Federal Minister Saad Rafique revealed that the government’s decision to allow passage to Tahir-ul-Qadri for his march was reached in consultation with the PPP.

It seems that the parties have learned from their mistakes and the lessons of the past which dictate that political infighting, politicking and the politics of destabilization only benefit and strengthen the forces against democracy at not just their cost but of the country too. 

It is also quite remarkable how JI has emerged as the voice of sanity and sense in the prevailing political chaos; a credit that clearly goes to Siraj-ul-Haq for practising his political leadership responsibly, thereby bringing the party to the forefront of the battle against potential destabilization in Pakistan.

Adjunct scholar at the Middle East Institute in America, Arif Rafiq agrees by saying:

 “Siraj-ul-Haq has been playing a solid role despite being in a tricky situation [coalition partner in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa]. They have a long way to go on the rights of women and minorities. But change on that front isn’t impossible.”

Political unity and maturity augurs well for Pakistan.

In the current crisis, it has attempted to function as a conduit between an obstinate opposition party and a sluggish government. Provided success at the end in the form of a deal out of this political pandemonium, this is sure to set a solid precedent as solution to future political tangles. Previously, it was witnessed in the signing of the historic 18th Amendment under the PPP government which effectively defanged the president by removal of the infamous 58(2)b that long stifled Pakistan’s democratic sprouts in the 90s; and enhanced political autonomy – all of which was a stride in Pakistan’s transition to a proper parliamentary republic.

Similar was the case during Tahir-ul-Qadri’s ‘inquilab 2013’ in Islamabad, which was deflated by the PPP government’s shrewd and sensible handling in cooperation with fellow political actors.

The late Eqbal Ahmad wrote in one of his articles that military intervention in politics only ends when ‘the legitimacy of the civilian system of power is established over a period of time.’  However, he went onto reason the unending military intervention and interference in Pakistani politics as, ‘We have been lacking both the political framework and leaders capable of investing the civilian system of government with authority, and taming the warrior class.’

Democratic continuity is the root of this much-needed establishment of legitimacy of the civilian system of power, a cause for which some of the prominent political parties have now been seen to be standing up for amid current political problems through active engagement with the government; PTI and PAT.

Therefore, if it flourishes, this political solidarity, maturity and sagacity can strengthen, empower and invest the civilian system of government with the power, will and dynamism it sorely lacks to face challenges and set Pakistan on the road to prosperity.

Political unity, maturity and sagacity are undoubtedly essential complements to Pakistan’s democratic evolution.

And one hopes they prevail at the end of the current political turmoil; and democracy triumphs.

~ Hafsa Khawaja

Advertisements

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.

ppp-sunni

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.

PML ASWJ articleIt 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.

pakelections

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

PTI: Nickel and Dime No More


The week of all hyped political shows-of-power finally came to an electrifying end with Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s massive Jalsa in the heart of Punjab on Sunday.

Led by the heads of PML-N and PTI respectively, the rally and Jalsa contained mediocre speeches and may seem to be just pre-2013 election jockeying but their implications yield greater implications and establish substantial modifications in Pakistan‘s national, political and social landscape, especially the latter’s.

(Regardless of the drastically differing views and opinions the nation holds when it comes to Khan Sb)

With estimations of the number of those who attended varying from 150,000 to 500,00, PTI’s Jalsa was undeniably a befitting announcement of its entrance into mainstream politics and to put it aptly, the birth of Imran Khan, the politician.

Imran Khan’s Jalsa succeeded in mobilizing the middle class, upper middle class and the youth to come out of their comfort zones, drawing rooms and into the field, with sheer zeal and discipline, to take part in the political process of the country; something which is imperative for the democratic structuring of Pakistan thus, for the development and advance of the democratic environment too.

Nadeem F. Paracha writes in his article:

‘Becoming a political participant through the democratic process edges out the fanciful Utopianism that usually overtakes and muddles the thinking of those who want to remain outside this process in the name of revolution or whatever. The result of such a disposition is mere frustration and eventual isolation from ground realities turning the person into a mindless, babbling conspiracy theorist or a blob of reactionary emotions.’

One may attribute the pleasantly surprising turnout of these people to their complete and utter disillusionment and disenchantment with the two main tried-and-tested parties, PML-N and PPP against whom they view Imran Khan and his party, as the only alternative to rule and take Pakistan forward.

While overuse of the word ‘Inquilab’ (revolution) and ‘Tabdeeli’ (change) does not actualize them, a spark has already been lit by the populist event which evoked a fresh sense among all, those who attended it and those who watched through the media, of being active participants in the next elections and using their votes as the channel for a change.

The day right after the Jalsa, groups thronged to the Office of Election Commission in Lahore and around Pakistan, to register themselves and their families to verify themselves, many of whom have never voted or deemed voting to be an act of significance, as voters or to get registered as ones.

Outside the Lahore Office of ECP, the diverse range of parked vehicles, each associated with a different class, attested to the scope of influence emanating from the event.

This particular surge in the rush of voter-registration is also the result of statements from political parties (which comes after their practice of dismissing PTI as an important or worthy party to be even discussed by stating its followers are all ensconced in their air-conditioned rooms in front of their laptops or computers; ’Facebook warriors/supporters’) questioning PTI’s ability to translate the number of supporters at their Jalsa into votes in the next elections. To prove wrong their delectable skepticism of the capacity of PTI Supporters to vote for their party, the supporters of other parties who were a part of this rush and the PTI supporters abandoned their apathy in pursuit of making their voice and choice count through their votes in the forthcoming elections.

The ECP Officials in Punjab had also been increasingly disobliging after the Jalsa, which might be ascribed to the instructions given under intense insecurity by the Provincial Government.

A revival of this activity is a betoken of the restored faith in people related to the system of democracy and their vigor to strengthen it; a manifestation of the hope the event has permeated people with.

In the political arena, PTI’s Jalsa which surpassed PML-N’s two-days-earlier held rally in attendance of genuine supporters, luster and in magnitude of all that mattered- sent jolts of shock to them by conducting an entirely triumphant event at what is, the core of their power.

The Jalsa clearly denoted, increased and accentuated the cracks of division in PML-N’s urban vote bank in Punjab; evincing a snap or a fracture in their prepotency and dominance with its origins in Lahore, auguring well for both PTI and PPP.

Although, PTI’s stupendous Jalsa should push all parties in Government or in Pakistan to a rouse from complacency

PML-N’s apprehensions connected with the rise of PTI are well-grounded if the reported registration of 3 crore new voters, of the chunk of which comprise much youth – generally, which is a quarter of the population amongst which Imran Khan has an immeasurable clout, is taken into consideration.

While it is certainly debatable whether PTI can sweep the next elections or even bag enough seats to form the provincial government in Punjab in 2013, as seen in retrospect; late Benazir Bhutto’s Jalsa in Lahore in 1986 was the biggest in the city’s history yet the 1988 Elections resulted in PML-N being the recipient of a notable slice of the seats in Punjab, and the country after PPP, (They were supported by the Establishment as part of the IJI  to counter PPP, which also makes that comparable to the state of affairs currently involving PTI and PML-N).

Not to mention, PTI’s vote bank centers around urban areas and has not, yet, reached rural areas (where around 60% to 70% of Pakistanis live) where support for PML-N is concentrated. PTI will have to toil to break through the entrenched voter loyalties and political demographics of Punjab and Pakistan.

Nonetheless, PTI has now self-validated and elevated its position to of a party, that can not be deemed nickel and dime or bundled into oblivion, and in all that followed on at the Jalsa, the victor was no party but the cultivation of the democracy and the democratic culture in Pakistan.

~ Hafsa Khawaja

Rest In Peace, Pakistan’s Iron Lady.


On 23rd October 2011, Nusrat Bhutto departed from the world.

Although she was mainly known as the wife of popularly-elected Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, who was dubiously hanged by the Military Regime in 1979, and as the leader of his Pakistan Peoples’ Party after his execution; there was much more to this figure than this aspect.

Stanley Wolpert writes in ‘Zulfi Bhutto of Pakistan’:

‘Nusrat Isphani was one of Karachi’s most beautiful debutantes. Her Kurdish-Iranian parents had migrated to Bombay, where she was born on 23 March 1929. Her father had founded Bombay’s Isphani Soap Factory, which soon exported large quantities of soap to Iraq that he later changed its name to Baghdad Soap Factory.’

‘Nusrat joined the Pakistan Women’s National Guard, was good at martial drill, and soon learned to drive trucks and ambulances. A tall, slender, dark beauty, she was soon promoted to captain, with silver pips on her shoulders.’

With her efforts even praised by Begum Ra’ana Liaquat Ali Khan, she is widely acknowledged for her exemplary role as part of the Women’s National Guard at the time of the Refugee Crisis.

It was at Bhutto’s sister’s wedding, where they were first introduced to each other and just after a few meetings, he proposed to her. Even persuading her to elope with him when parents on both sides objected to the match, but after her refusal to undertake such an initiative, much drama ensued leading to Zulfi and his Nusratam (My Nusrat, as he used to call her) becoming man and wife within a week.

As the First Lady of Pakistan, Nusrat Bhutto was unparalleled. A paragon of style, class, refinement and sophistication along with being a fashion icon of that time, she dressed with flair and carried herself with natural poise as she stood side by side and hobnobbed with Heads of States and their wives.

At this position, she splendidly represented and promoted Pakistan at international forums. As the head of the Red Crescent Society, she worked tirelessly for the poor, women and children of Pakistan.

In 1975, she led the Pakistani Delegation to the United Nation’s International Women’s Summit and was also elected the Vice President of the Conference.

Since her marriage, not only was she the emotional and mental anchor for her ambitious husband in all his endeavors and decisions but soon became a political backbone for him when she assumed charge on his orders of PPP’s leadership (Coming to be the first female chairman of any party in Pakistan‘s history), when he was incarcerated after being deposed through a Coup.

During Zia’s authoritarian rule, she was kept under detentions, possibly in Class-C cells with no running water, bedding or air, hit with batons while attending a cricket match at Gaddafi Stadium in Lahore, when the crowd began to raise pro Bhutto slogans (It is said, that this clubbing was the origin of complete health deterioration that affected her later and the cause of Alzheimer)

Before Bhutto’s execution, both Nusrat and Benazir were whisked away suddenly, without previous notice, to his cell and were allowed only a half an hour with him instead of the full one hour entitled to the family on the prisoner’s ‘last day’. And that too, they could ‘meet’ only through the bars.

It was then that Bhutto gave permission to her to take the children and leave Pakistan if they wished to, but instead Nusrat Bhutto chose to take the dicatorship head-on.

Diagnosed of lung cancer during her battle against the cruelest of dictatorships, Zia ridiculously constituted a Federal Medical Board to decide whether her condition was serious enough to allow her to travel abroad for treatment which expectedly decreed that she was perfectly fine while recommending her tests that could have aggravated her malignancy. After much international lobbying, she was allowed to travel abroad.

With the founder killed, deserting members on the rise and the Zia regime leaving no stone unturned in trying to isolate PPP and throttle any legacy of Bhutto, she not only kept the party together but astutely organized it in the fight against the autocratic military regime but was one of the most prominent spearheads of the Movement To Restore Democracy, a movement for the revival of democracy and all the freedoms and rights it entails.

A lean woman who felt no hesitance in defying the dicatator and standing up to oppose his afflicted oppression on the nation , she was considered a threat by him and unsettling for the whole system he had organized to his advantage thus, arrested and placed under detentions numerous times as the MRD spread its activities throughout the country and gained support.

Throngs would come to hear her speeches or to her rallies.

Nusrat Bhutto endured a life, that is best-described as a struggle of suffering with a tragedy at each turn; From the Coup of 1977, Nusrat Bhutto’s life took a plunge into tumult and tragedy which continued till her demise. A plunge that took away her husband, both sons and a daughter from her. All murdered. Since the last few years, Begum Sahiba had even lost the ability to recognize her own two daughters, grandchildren or remember anything.

In all her 82 years, Begum Bhutto proved to be an epitome of strength, valor, resilience, elegance, resolution and extraordinary prowess; giving weight to her family’s tracing of their ancestry to the legendary Salahuddin Ayubi. She was and will remain a symbol of resistance and unflinching conviction against tyranny and suppression.  Something that even those with political dislike for PPP and the Bhuttos, would find hard to deny.

Her fortitude and story will inspire generations to come.

May she rest in what was never granted to her in this world; peace.

~ Hafsa Khawaja

Jamshed Dasti And The PM


My letter in the NewsPost on the appointment of Jamshed Dasti, whose graduation degree was proven fake, as the advisor to the Prime Minister:

Saturday, April 17, 2010:

This is with reference to your editorial “Dasti and the PM” (April 12). The PPP has once again decided to give party ticket to Jamshed Dasti to contest the by-election. He had resigned recently after his graduation degree was proved a fake. Rather than reprimanding him, the PPP has once again taken a step that will damage its image. On the other hand, another MNA who had to resign due to the same reason has been welcomed by Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer because he decided to join the PPP. What kind of message are they giving us? That fraudsters will be rewarded rather than punished? While the PPP has learned and admirable people like Raza Rabbani and Aitzaz Ahsan it is patronising dubious characters like Jamshed Dasti. The PPP should maintain some standard. Where are Sherry Rehman and Naheed Khan?

Hafsa Khawaja

Lahore