PERISCOPE ON PAKISTAN
Sliding into medievalism

Evidence that Musharraf’s Paki-stan is swiftly sliding into the Dark Ages, his penchant to emulate Turkey’s enlightened Kemal Ataturk notwithstanding, is everywhere be it in the political stables that he had promised to clean out, the military and even the illustrious game of cricket. Tribalism and religious fundamentalism touch every aspect of life in a nation-state that appears to have no moorings.

Deploring that "the State (of Pakistan) has been getting more and more medievalised", Khaled Ahmad, in an article in DAILY TIMES, stresses: "Over time, most Pakistanis think as if they were living in Baghdad of the Middle Ages when the mullas where beating up on the rationalists. Today, the process of medievalisation continues…

"We go by the rule of thumb: just clamp down on something or the other and the masses will think the State is vigilant and has the bull by the horns. That is how Islamisation has been done in Pakistan by rulers who wanted the crises played down or wanted their rule validated. As a result, the State has been getting more and more medievalised.

"The NWFP government had sent the following demands to the federal government that it should release all mujahideen who had been caught fighting against the USA; that it should abolish bank interest, do away with taxation on personally owned houses, cars and weapons. It also asked the Central government to take action against a group of people trying, apparently, to spread a new religion in Punjab. It also demanded that Friday be declared the national weekly holiday and that more royalties be paid to the province from the power projects located there."

DAILY TIMES adds: "Within the MMA, Qazi Sahib (Jammat Islami chief Qazi Husain Ahmad) increasingly occupies the status of primus inter pares. Because of its electoral strength in NWFP and Balochistan, it is the Jamiat Ulema Islam (JUI) of Maulana Fazlur Rahman that should be calling the shots at national level; instead, it is Mr Ahmad who declares in Peshawar that he would not allow the celebration of Basant next year.

"From Imran Khan to Dr Mubashir Hasan, the nationalist, liberal and leftist protests launched in the coming days will not move the masses nor enhance the image of their leaders, but will feed into the charisma of Mr Ahmad. He has a statesman-like approach to national politics, staying out of the sectarian fray unlike the JUI, and attempting dialogues as far in the West as the USA and as near to home as Iran, while the other religious parties find themselves hamstrung’ in communicating across the national frontier. On the other hand, Qazi Sahib’s policy of recommending war to decide the Kashmir dispute, registers very effectively with the indoctrinated rightwing majority in Pakistan.

"If allowed to rule, will he (the Qazi) be able to run Pakistan? That is moot because that brings us into the domain of a totally different discourse: the ability of a shariah-based State to run itself and at the same time negotiate peaceful coexistence with the rest of the world. Will Pakistan under him opt for extreme isolation to keep the ‘revolution’ alive?

"Qazi Husain Ahmad as the ruler of Pakistan will have to negotiate a very complex deal among the various stakeholders in Pakistan. His easiest task would be to reach a strategic understanding with the post-’pragmatism’ Islamist army on the basis of a continued conflict with India and defiance of the USA. More difficult would be negotiating with religious parties with a maximalist agenda of Islamic reform that he may consider too dangerous to implement’ straightaway, with the Taliban experiment at the back of his mind. The deal with the secular-liberal-leftist lobbies would, in fact, be roughly disposed of even though they would have played a major role in his anti- West campaign because of their loathing of the USA. They will have to change their spurious coloration and fall in line or simply leave the country."

Commenting on Jammat Islami chief Qazi Husain Ahmad’s pronouncement that his party would not allow the holding of Basant (next year) in Pakistan, Khaled Ahmad, in an article in FRIDAY TIMES observes: "Mr Ahmad’s threat, is well calculated. By next year, most of the crises faced by Pakistan on the foreign policy front would have come to a head. The biggest- factor going in his favour is — the historical ‘transnational’ feeling of the Pakistani Muslims."

Terming as "gross injustice" assertion of Nawab Akbar Bugti that Bugti tribes were doing (blowing up Sui gas pipeline in Balochistan and Punjab) what the people of Kashmir were doing, Dr Ijaz Ahsan in an article in NATION observes: "In the same country two types of laws

are inexplicable, unjustifiable and bizarre. The military government shouts from the house tops that it enforces law and order better than the civilians. If the present government, an amalgam of military and civilian components, cannot do this, they should abdicate in favour of someone

who can."

"There are two Issues here: the dispensation of Sui gas royalties, and warlordism. As far as the first is concerned, we are assured by a government spokesman that the locals are being given royalty at the agreed rate of 12.5per cent. The reason for blowing up the pipelines appears to be that the period of the agreement has expired, there is to be a new agreement, and the Balochs are exerting pressure to get an agreement more to their liking. Be that as it may, a new agreement should be negotiated between the parties, so that things proceed smoothly.

"The sardari system must be abolished. All sorts of criminals including car snatchers are protected by the tribal warlords? How long will the hardworking and law-abiding citizens of the ‘settled-areas’ in Sindh, and Punjab be hostage to the tribal areas with its sardari system."

According to "DIN" Pakistan’s famous cricketer with flowing beard, Saeed Anwar had convinced other great cricketers Wasim Akram, Waqar Yunus, Inzimamul Haq, Shoaib Akhtar and Imran Nazeer to grow flowing beards and do "tabligh" (preaching) of Islam. The great cricketers had agreed, to make themselves pious. Before this, Inzimamul Haq, Salim Malik and Mushtaq Ahmad, had done some "chilla" (self infliction of pain) together with Saeed Anwar.

"This is medievalisation to duck charges of sleeping around with prostitutes during the World Cup in South Africa. The latest news is that the register containing the record of how many girls went to our cricketers’ rooms has mysteriously been deprived of the relevant pages. But if our boys have escaped unhurt and will now reap the sacred benefit of flowing beards, the nation has not forgotten that a judicial inquiry was held into their alleged business of losing matches after receiving payments from the bookies. If the news is true, our cricket eleven will add to the medievalisation of the country. ADNI Bureau

Pentagon’s baised portrayal of India

By K. S. Bajpai

The Pentagon, the nerve centre of US strategic policy, selectively leaked a 176-page classified document, Indo-US Military Relationship: Expectatiors and Perceptions, early this year. It was a clever leak. The purpose was not to create a sensation. The Pentagon, mother of all psywar operations, wanted the story to percolate down, slowly, to circumvent the most likely possibility of a public uproar in India.

The story, therefore, got not more than a day’s mention in the Indian newspapers. Besides, with few stories scattered among magazines and a dotcom running a series based on the document, the implications of what the Americans wanted from India left no trace on the Indian psyche.

Prepared for Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, the document is a fairly exhaustive analysis of the India-US military relationship, a key factor in the bilateral engagement of the two most prominent democracies in the world. Before I take up the issues discussed in the document, it is important to understand that the American establishment takes such studies very seriously, unlike in India where they are forgotten rather hastily. For instance, the Kargil Review Committee Report and the Group of Minister Recommendations have already been shelved.

One clear sign of the American establishment taking the Pentagon study seriously is the way in which top US leaders make it a point to drop in or come up with those ‘endearing’ gestures that make headlines in the Indian newspapers at least. The latest instance was Mr. Rumsfeld dropping into see Deputy Prime Minister L. K. Advani in his hotel room. The news item, obviously inspired by the Pentagon, took pains to explain that the Defence Secretary’s gesture was an extraordinary one given his preoccupation with matters other than India.

The US Defence Secretary is not given to such gestures on a normal course of a day. He is following the doctrine enunciated in the Pentagon document. According to it, the Indians are obsessed with "protocol, with symbolic gestures. For the Indians, the act is much more important than the substance, the theory is more important than execution; and the tactic is more important than strategy". So now you know why the American leadership is suddenly making appropriate noises, gestures, handshakes, bear hugs, all the works. They believe we can be taken in by gestures.

The only reason I am stretching this protocol business as detailed in the Pentagon document relates to the other two significant pointers that form part of the overall strategy on dealing with India being worked out at the heart of the American establishment. The document makes several significant assessments in fact, but for the purposes of current analysis, I am picking only two. For reasons that would become obvious shortly.

The first is the China factor. The drumbeats have already begun. If you happen to scan the opinion pages of newspapers, well known analysts have already begun their oft-repeated warnings about the Red Dragon. Indian Defence Minister George Fernandes, portrayed forever as a China-hater, had a fruitful visit to Beijing. Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee is scheduled to reach the Chinese capital soon.

Though there is no perceptible warmth in the relationship, both countries are willing to walk towards a common ground of understanding in the present and the future without the baggage of the past. This willingness itself is a positive step towards resolving four decades of bitterness. Such a scenario seriously upsets the geopolitical world visualised by Washington in the next two decades. For, China is the only country with the potential of becoming a stumbling block in the way of the American juggernaut.

So the American plan is to sustain the China bogey especially in Asia where at least two countries, India and Japan, share a history of bitterness with it. It is, therefore, not surprising that in India there has been a sustained campaign against China, both subtle and overt.

The campaign has been so well doctored that it is difficult to know the puppeteers who pull the strings of public opinion. Broadly speaking, there have been two kinds of campaigns- one which extols the superiority of the Chinese military power, and another which finds nothing but virtue in Chinese economic progress. Both campaigns are aimed at creating fear and awe, a sense of insecurity that is then fanned by stories of increasing Chinese collaboration with Pakistan. I won’t be surprised if the Pentagon runs both campaigns. Notice the occasional references made by the American establishment to India being an emerging superpower- it keeps us happy even while making the Chinese wary. The seeds of suspicion have long been planted in the minds of the people of the two nations that have the potential of rivalling America in every sphere of life.

I am not disputing Chinese ambitions, both in terms of military and economic development. We can’t stop them from becoming a superpower. Nor should we succumb to needless suspicions and fears. We have a place under the sun, and we should look at issues that matter to us from our point of view.

The Americans have their own agenda and views. We too should have an agenda. Yes, it is true we had a bitter past with the dragon. But does that mean we should continue to follow a path of confrontation with Beijing? Does that help us in any way? It doesn’t. China is a neighbouring country and it is time we formulate a strategy that works to our benefit rather than some talking head in Washington. Reading the Pentagon document is therefore, important. We will then know what the Americans are planning in the next few years.

The US strategy becomes clear once we look at the second pointer: The Pentagon document complains that the Indian establishment, both civilian and military, are suspicious of US intentions and are not willing to think strategically. The document goes to considerable length to explain the timidity of the Indian establishment. The aim is to belittle the intellectual and moral courage of the Indian leadership that refuses to kowtow to the diktats of Washington like the General-next-door. We are suspicious of American intentions, and there are quite strong reasons. I can vouch for the Indian military leadership: It is quite clear about what it wants from the US or any other country interested in a fruitful engagement.

The Pentagon document dubs our defence personnel as being "easily slighted or insulted". This is an insinuation. The Indian military leadership is certainly one of the best in the world for the simple reason that it has been engaged in military confrontations for more than half a century. We do believe in a regimented protocol but so does the American military, perhaps not as regimented as the one handed down to us by the British.

What actually irks the Americans is the Indian military leaders’ refusal to jump whenever Washington fires a blank in the air. The Americans have always found it difficult to persuade the Indian military leadership to follow their line and hence the disparaging remarks. Once we accept their plans for opening military bases in India and running their aircraft from our airbases, I am sure the next Pentagon document would find the Indians quite strategically savvy. INAV