Unlike India, Pakistan was not really conceived as a democratic state. With the exception of Mohammed Ali Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan, no one in the Muslim League was really a democrat at heart. On top of all this, religious identity was the basic justification for forcing the partition. These were not good signs for a brand new 'Democratic State'. Unfortunately, Jinnah did not survive long enough to help establish the institutions of democracy. It was left to the first Prime Minister of Pakistan, Liaquat Ali Khan, to carry the load virtually single handedly. On October 16, 1951, Liaquat Ali Khan was assassinated at a public meeting. The fate of Pakistan's democracy was sealed that day. Nawabzada Liaquat Ali Khan was succeeded by Khawaja Nizimuddin, a Bengali, who had no local support in West Pakistan. All this while General Mohammed Ayub Khan was waiting in the wings. He took over the country in a military coup on October 27, 1958. Rest is history!

Democracies take time to develop. Even the United States of America took decades to develop as a stable functioning democracy. Even today, the 'Presidential Candidates' talk of an 'Imperfect Union'. That means, work in progress. Pakistan was very unfortunate, it never got the time or the leadership to develop as a 'Nation State'. What you have today is the legacy of Field Marshal Ayub Khan, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq and General Pervez Musharraf.

Teacher beaten to death by protestors in Malappuram
Malappuram (PTI): A primary school teacher died on Saturday after being beaten up allegedly by a group of protestors from the pro-IUML Youth League who were taking part in an agitation demanding withdrawal of a controversial seventh standard social science textbook.

James Augustin, Head Master of MLP School at Valillappuzha near Kondotty town, succumbed to injuries after he was attacked by the marchers near a school at Kizhissery where he gone to attend a meeting.

The protestors also disrupted the meeting which was convened to share the academic experiences of teachers in the nearby schools, police said.

Augustin was first taken to a private hospital and then to the Medical College Hospital in Kozhikode. He died before reaching the medical college hospital, the sources said.

The youth and student outfits of the Congress-led UDF have been on warpath for the last three weeks demanding that the LDF government withdraw the textbook which, they alleged, contained portions meant to propagate atheism.

The government had recently modified the disputed segment in the textbook based on the recommendation of an expert committee. The UDF had, however, refused to call of the protest, demanding that the book be withdrawn.

The pro-UDF outfits had taken out marches in different parts of the state and disrupted such meetings convened by teachers. End

10 Youth League activists held
July 21 2008, Express News Service, www.newindpress.com

KOZHIKODE: Police have taken into custody ten Muslim Youth League activists from Malappuram in connection with the death of James Augustine, the school headmaster who died after being allegedly attacked by the protesters during the cluster meeting of teachers at Kizhisseri on Saturday.

A special team led by Malappuram DySP K K Ibrahim and Kondotty CI A P Chandran have been formed to investigate the case. Senior police officers including the Inspector General (Thrissur Range) P Vijayanand visited the Kondotty police station on Sunday.

Police said that they have identified some party workers who are suspected to have involvement in the incident. There has been some unconfirmed reports that James’ death was not due to heart failure. Internal organs will be sent for forensic examination and the actual cause of death could be ascertained only after getting the report.

The body was buried at the St.Thomas Church at Thottumukkam in the evening after post-mortem examination at the Kozhikode Medical College. Hundreds of people attended the burial. Some minor incidents of violence occurred in the morning in front of the mortuary where the body was kept.

DCC president K C Abu and Youth Congress leader Ramesh Nambiyath was blocked by a mob when they arrived to pay respect to the teacher. They were later escorted by the police to safer place. Education Minister M A Baby and Industry Minister Elamaram Kareem visited the Medical College Hospital.

Baby said the attack on the teacher was part of a larger conspiracy. UDF leaders T Siddique and K C Abu blamed the CPM for trying to draw political mileage from a tragedy. Meanwhile, the hartal called by the LDF in Malappuram and Kozhikode districts was peaceful, barring minor skirmishes. Protest: Many organisations have come up against the killing of James Augustine, the headmaster of Valilappuzha AMLP School in Malappuram district, on Saturday. CPIML state secretary P J James in a statement issued in Kochi on Sunday asked the state government to control the ‘communal forces’ which killed a teacher in Malappuram. The Kerala Gazetted Officers’ Sangh State Committee in a statement issued in Kochi urged the protesting organisations to stop the violent strike.

The KGO Sangh will stage a dharna in front of state secretariat on August 22.The All-Kerala Private College Teachers’ Association will take part in the strike called by various teachers’ organisations on Monday, said district secretary D Salim Kumar.

MGU exams postponed

All the examinations of Mahatma Gandhi University scheduled to be held on Monday have been postponed. The revised dates will be announced later.

In parts 1 and 2 of this present series, I presented the primary source record of the events leading up to the unfortunate impasse between the newly formed Pakistan government and the Afghanistan-backed Frontier Congress led by the Khan brothers. This third piece will determine whether or not there was an alternative left to the dismissal of the ministry as was widely expected and which was to be carried out by Lord Mountbatten with the prior approval of the Congress Party in Delhi before August 15, 1947. This piece will also determine how and why it came to be that the Pakistan government had to take this step?

Before the referendum actually took place, Dr. Khan Sahib had famously said that he would resign from his post if Pakistan got 30% of the electorate. As shown by the last piece, Pakistan ended up polling more than 50% of the total electorate showing that the Pushtuns were overwhelmingly in favor of Pakistan. It was in the aftermath of the resounding defeat for the Congress that Dr. Khan Sahib declared that he didn't have to resign because he commanded a legislative majority (a situation analogous in many ways to General Musharraf's notorious re-election to the office of the president in 2007 by a legislature that was no longer representative).

As for claims about "impropriety" of "referendum", Dr. Khan Sahib himself agreed that the referendum was as proper or improper as the election that had gotten Dr. Khan sahib into power and this was promptly reported to the Viceroy by Rob Lockhart, Congress' governor of choice (Congress had campaigned for the removal of Sir Olaf Caroe and appointment of Rob Lockhart in his place). Lockhart went on to advise Dr. Khan Sahib that the right and proper thing to do was to resign immediately. The governor also expressed concern that the continuation of a ministry so utterly hostile to the new state would be untenable and that the Viceroy should consider dismissing the NWFP government under section 93 which would be the best course available. Jinnah was repulsed by the idea of dismissing the legislative assembly whole-scale and he and Liaqat Ali Khan suggested instead that if given a chance Muslim League could form a coalition government with non-Muslim representatives which would give the Muslim League legislative majority and thereby bypass the section 93 dismissal. Since there was no constitutional requirement for an assembly session before the budget session in 1948, the Muslim League would have ample opportunity to re-align politically and gain a legislative majority. Rob Lockhart was of the view that if a change was to be made in fitness of things, it had to be made quickly because he recalled the Dr. Khan Sahib had warned of a mass movement which he "would try and keep non-violent"(Minutes of the Viceroy's twenty third Miscellaneous Meeting Mountbatten Papers- also found in "Transfer of Power Papers, No 278, Volume XII, 405-409" and "Jinnah Papers Volume IV Appendix IV.1").

Here it is pertinent to quote Kanji Dwarkadas, a staunch Indian nationalist in his own right, who writing D G Pole on 26th July, 1947 said: "… an American journalist, a very reasonable and sound man, who has returned to Delhi from the Frontier has told me that …the Frontier referendum was run on fair lines and not as Dr. Khan Sahib and Abdul Ghaffar Khan have explained it. He found Dr. Khan Sahib to be muddled headed and both Khan brothers are now rather sore with the Congress for having let them down. The Muslim Leaguers don't want Afghanistan to interfere." (US National Archives 845.00/8-747, also quoted as appendix to Jinnah Papers Volume IV Annex IV.1).

On August 1st, 1947, Mountbatten and Rob Lockhart had a meeting with the newly appointed Pakistani cabinet minus Jinnah. These included Liaqat Ali Khan, Ghazanfar Ali Khan, Jogindranath Mandal, Ch. Mohammad Ali, Abdul Rab Nishtar and Osman Ali in which Mountbatten stated that the only course of action left was to ask Dr. Khan Sahib and his ministry to resign, failing which he would dismiss the NWFP ministry and invite the leader of the opposition to form a new ministry. The second option was to use section 93 and bring NWFP under federal rule on or before 14th of August, 1947. ("No. 301 Transfer of Power Papers, Volume XII, Pages 441-445" also quoted as "Jinnah Papers Volume IV Appendix IV.3") Having made this solemn pledge, Mountbatten went back on his word and refused to dismiss the NWFP ministry as he ought to have done and which was part of his responsibility.

If there was any doubt about what Dr. Khan Sahib was up to, it must have been cleared up by his indiscriminate issuing of arms licenses to his party men- as many as 6000. Bacha Khan's son Khan Abdul Ghani Khan (later awarded Sitara-e-Imtiaz by Zia government for poetry) was busy arming Pushtuns to the teeth. Almost a month before partition, Rob Lockhart had warned of unscrupulous activity by the Khan Sahib government in this regard. "There is no doubt that most improper things have been happening. Certain people have been issuing instructions for licenses to be issued on a party basis. Even Dr. Khan Sahib himself is said to be guilty on these scores. A prime offender in arms trade is Abdul Ghani, the son of Abdul Ghaffar Khan. I have given orders that if proof can be produced he is to be proceeded against… there are reports that the Nawab of Tank, MLA, Muslim League is guilty of similar practices. If he too could be proceeded against, it would be good". (Rob Lockhart to Mountbatten, 6 July, 1947, IOR, L/P&J/S/224 from India Office- also quoted as Annex II to Jinnah Papers Volume III Appendix IV.28) Ghani Khan was the leader of "Zalmai Pakhtoon" an organization that was involved in systematic violence against Muslim League and which was planning on creating wide-spread disturbances in the event of the dismissal of Khan Ministry.

The police intelligence report of 5th August, 1947 reads as under : "MILITANT CONGRESS PREPARATIONS AGAINST THE MUSLIM LEAGUE: It is rumored in some circles that Congress and Red Shirt supporters might start civil disobedience after the 15th of August if the Congress Ministry is made to vacate the office. It is reported that the Faqir of Ipi will declare Jehad against the British and the Hindus after the Id and that the Zalmai Pakhtoon Party would fight the Muslim League for the attainment of Pathanistan. Two Muslim League supporters of Prang were shot dead by certain Red Shirts on 20 July." (No. 220, National Documentation center, Islamabad, 1996, 263-264 "The Referendum in NWFP")

Faqir of Ipi was a firm ally of Bacha Khan and his party. On 8th July, 1947, Shah Pasand Khan had informed Jinnah that he had heard that "Abdul Ghani son of Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan , the Frontier Gandhi, who came to see Faqir of Ipi in connection with the resolution passed by the Congress in support of Pathanistan. Government authorities supported this move" (Jinnah Papers, Volume III, No. 68). The main crux of the Faqir's propaganda was that Muslim League was a bastion of British imperialism and Qadiyanism. It is ironic that those who claimed to be secular and liberal were now supporting Faqir of Ipi's "Jehad" against the British, Hindus and the Muslim League. Faqir of Ipi's role in the closing days of the Raj deserves an article by itself and would help understand the current state of Islamic insurgency in the tribal areas.

Returning to the issue at hand, given this situation the dismissal of Khan Ministry was logical and the proper thing to do. Dr. Khan sahib should have resigned as he had himself claimed he would be. And after he refused to, it should have been Mountbatten who should have dismissed the ministry as he had been advised and as he had himself agreed to do so. He ultimately went back on his word and the governor of NWFP was left with no option but to dismiss the Dr. Khan sahib ministry under the Government of India Act 1935 after the creation of Pakistan.

Addendum to Part 3: I was frankly baffled by Shehryar Ali's emotional outburst in his form of his article. When stripped of his irrelevant references to Howard Zinn and Edward Said (neither of whom had anything to say about the referendum), Mr. Ali's article was a mere regurgitation of the Pushtun Nationalist dogma and the muddled thinking that it produces. The point about the electorate not being based on adult franchise is also ironic because the same electorate elected Dr. Khan Sahib and the Congress in the first place. Furthermore Dr. Khan Sahib had famously boasted that if 30 percent of the electorate voted for Pakistan, he would quit. It turned out that more than 50% voted for Pakistan and Dr. Khan Sahib went back on his word.

For all his distortions, Sheheryar Ali has got one thing right: History is not a farce. So why does he insist on making it so? In this he is a true follower of Wali Khan who said "facts are sacred" but never quite got the meaning of that apt phrase.

NEXT: Faqir of Ipi's uprising and the frontier Congress

"History is the memory of states," wrote Henry Kissinger in his first book, A World Restored, in which he proceeded to tell the history of nineteenth-century Europe from the viewpoint of the leaders of Austria and England, ignoring the millions who suffered from those statesmen's policies. From his standpoint, the "peace" that Europe had before the French Revolution was "restored" by the diplomacy of a few national leaders. But for factory workers in England, farmers in France, colored people in Asia and Africa, women and children everywhere except in the upper classes, it was a world of conquest, violence, hunger, exploitation-a world not restored but disintegrated.
My viewpoint, in telling the history of the United States, is different: that we must not accept the memory of states as our own. Nations are not communities and never have been, The history of any country, presented as the history of a family, conceals fierce conflicts of interest (sometimes exploding, most often repressed) between conquerors and conquered, masters and slaves, capitalists and workers, dominators and dominated in race and sex. And in such a world of conflict, a world of victims and executioners, it is the job of thinking people, as Albert Camus suggested, not to be on the side of the executioners"

Howard Zinn

This is my favorite passage from one of my favorite books, "A Peoples History of United States". Pakhtoon territory has been a victim of this "statist" history which has served to further the imperialist goals in this region. First British Empire used it to divide Pakhtoons, and later, American Imperialism adopted the same policy.

Under the British, a vast scholarship appeared on Pakhtoons which to this day is serving its purpose. All such scholarship must be re-examined under light of Edward Said's "Orientalism".

What happened in Pakhtoonkhawa is not the memory of State, its lament of a people, those who  are the  direct victims  o f two imperialist powers, and whose case, history, sociology, anthropology all acted in the same as Edward Said says, in aid of the White Man.

History is Not a farce

A fellow writers at the Pak Tea House has started this beautifully crafted series of articles on Pakhtoonkhawa, this latest article on the referendum. It demands a response. The article presents a partial, unilateral  view. Over time, in the mainstream discourse, the official position of the democratic representatives of the area has been largely ignored and colonial version of history along with Muslem league's view point have been projected.

I would indicate here the position of Khudai Khidmatgars , the precursors of NAP and ANP to balance the issue -

Why Referendum??he historian must ask a simple question: why referendum was called by the colonial masters in NWFP, when an elected assembly was in place. NWFP, was a province of India, it had an elected assembly. Its counterparts like Bengal and Punjab were divided, their geography was changed but referendum was not called. Though the situation demanded it, whether Bengalis or Punjabis wanted to be partitioned or join any state as whole. But NWFP was asked to go to polls. Why? because NWFP had progressive assembly, and there was a need to subvert the public opinion. Muslim League and their British masters wanted a democratic cover for their action.

Khan Abdul Wali Khan writes in "Facts are Facts"

" Khudai Khidmatgars' first objection was that since the Congress and the Muslim league had both agreed on Partition, and since they considered themselves bound by the congress decisions (Bacha Khan himself used to represent Khudai Khidmatgars in the Congress working Committee), and since the congress had accepted that NWFP had to be part of Pakistan, then why hold a referendum? The exercise would only exacerbate the existing communal and political tension and political tension and create an atmosphere of confrontation.

The  Muslim League and the British had their own purpose behind the design. Muslim league was keen to convey the impression that Pakistan was formed its demand and its demand alone; and that the Khudai Khidmatgars had opposed Pakistan which was why a referendum had become necessary. There was another purpose in singling out NWFP for a different treatment from other provinces. In the rest of India, only the assembly members of the Muslim majority provinces were asked to give their vote. Bengal and Punjab assemblies voted for the partition and thus the provinces were divided. Sindh assembly was asked to vote for Pakistan. Why not then NWFP assembly also? The reason was obvious. Here the Khudai Khidmatgars were in Majority in the assembly. If they opted for Pakistan the decision would have been that of the Khudai Khidmatgars. The Muslim League was not prepared to concede that credit. Nor were the British."hy the progressive forces boycotted the dubious referendum. As Wali Khan has mentioned, BachaKhan considered himself bound by the Congress decision. There was no need of a referendum. The elected assembly was being subverted to give Muslim League political advantage in future government in Pakhtoonkhawa. The only meaningful  purpose of this referendum would have been if it would have included the option of "Pakhtoonistan". When the elected representatives of a state were demanding it , such an option should have been considered. A referendum is only meaningful if it gives a genuine choice to the electorate. But when its clear that its purpose is to bypass the public opinion, it becomes a futile exercise . Which it became. It was boycotted by the elected representatives of the state.
Khan Abdul Wali Khan further writes:

Why Boycott:

" For their part the Khudai Khidmatgars decided that if the British were insistent on holding the plebiscite despite the general acceptance that NWFP would go to Pakistan, then following the same principle of self-determination the province should also have the freedom to a third option, of an in dependent Pukhtoonistan. Mountbatten, however, refused to include this alternative. The Khudai Khidmatgars then decided that since between the available two options the decision had already been taken and the referendum was there fore pointless they would boycott it"have already mentioned that any referendum is only meaningful if it gives a meaningful valid choice to the electorate. Here we are seeing that the demand of the most popular political party who had won an election and was in government in the state was ignored. It was solely being conducted to give the Muslim League a political credibility in NWFP. It was boycotted by a major political force. It was any thing but fair. It was to use the standard British term a "White Wash".

The Referendem : Fair or Farce

A farce and a shameful farce , this referendum was. And the key reasons were:

A: It was not based on adult franchise, Voting was restricted
B. Not all Pakhtoons were allowed to participate in the referendum that would seal not only their fate but that of their brothers in Afghanistan
C. The tribal Pakhtoons were not allowed to vote. In the population of 3.5 Million only 0.6 Million were allowed to vote
D. 6 Tribal agencies were barred from it
E. The States of Sawat, Dir,Amb, and Chitral were also not allowed to participate

Any referendum that disenfranchises such a large number of population can never be called a legitimate exercise of "self determination". It has no political, legal and moral authority whatsoever.

Progressive Position on Referendum:ali Khan writes:

" Anyway, the government of India started preparing for referendum. Olaf Carore was replaced by Sir Robb Lokhart as the NWFP governor and the vote was held under his supervision. Although the Khudai Khidmatgarshad announced boycott of the exercise and its result had been a foregone conclusion,yet the Muslim Leaguers made extraordinary efforts. They brought their leaders from all corners of the country including students from the Aligarh University, who all fanned out in the province to incite hatred against the Pukhtoons.

For all that, on the polling day they resorted to such rigging that it is hard to find a parallel. Ballot boxes were freely stuffed and even the votes of Khudai Khidmatgar leaders were cast. Let me cite two instances, one told to me by Sikandar Mirza himself who was former deputy commissioner in Hazara. Touring the polling booths he reached the one at the gullies. The staff proudly told him: "This is mountainous area. We have just 200 voters on the list here. But, Sir, we have already polled 210."espite a virtually unopposed Referendum , and monumental effort by the Moslem League what was the result?

The Results:
Number of votes 5,72,799
Polled votes (51%) 2,92,118
For Pakistan (51.5%) 2,89,244
For India 2,874

51.5% of the allowed Voters , Voted for Pakistan.Is this the result of a referendum that sealed the fate of Millions of Pakhtoons? With the disenfranchisment, it can't even be called a majority vote.

My honorable and learned friend, Ysser Hamdani, has written that the referendum was free and fair unlike those conducted by the Military dictatorships in Pakistan. Alas, it was the same story.

Wu referendem tha ya jin tha shaher mein hoo ka alam tha----emocracy is about "equal opportunities". Here the elected representatives were suppressed, and an escape route of "referendums" was taken. Why?

Again lets ask those who were debarred , whose parliament was subverted:

Wali Khan writes:

" In the ends, thus, one keeps coming back to the same conclusion that the British were keen on putting an Islamic halter round the socialist order in the north and were not prepared to permit any hurdle,Khudai Khidmatgars' or whatever, in their way. In fact they were convinced that unless they removed all the nationalist and anti imperialist forces from their path would not be able to consummate their design."

This all was to block progressive forces in the area, to make NWFP a"Petri dish"for imperialist agenda to block Socialism. The Saur Revolution was snuffed out using NWFP, the Islamists madness was spread, the Frankenstein that  is now playing havoc from New York, from Islamabad to Bara.

All this was result of this "Referendum".

"Lamhon ne Khata ki , sadiyon ne saza payi"

History is Not a Farce------

(Continuation from "The beginning of the New Great Game")

June 3rd Plan - agreed upon by Congress and Muslim League- envisaged a referendum in the NWFP to determine which constituent assembly the province will join.  Prior to this, Jawaharlal Nehru and the Congress had waged a successful campaign against Sir Olaf Caroe, the governor of NWFP, removed because he was deemed by Nehru and Dr. Khan Sahib to be partial towards the Muslim League. Perceptive historians on both sides of the border have since concluded otherwise.  In any event Sir Olaf was replaced by Rob Lockhart.   It was under the new governor, who enjoyed the confidence of the Congress Party and its ministry in the Frontier that the referendum was to be held.

Howard Donovan, the Counselor for US Embassy in Delhi, in his periodic report of 26th June, 1948 addressed to US Secretary of State George Marshall, points out that "observers in New Delhi believe that the Muslim League will win the forthcoming referendum and that it is a foregone conclusion that the NWFP will join Pakistan.  This is unpalatable to Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan and his recent talks with Jinnah and Gandhi in Delhi were an effort to forestall... Gandhi has supported Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan... Nehru, Patel, and other Congress members of the Government are understood to be opposed to the idea of Pathanistan.  It is of course ridiculous for the Congress to oppose independence of Travancore and at the same time espouse the cause of independence for the North West Frontier Province... Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan's action will further complicate the situation in the North West Frontier Province and it will in all probability lead to further strife and bloodshed"

On 27th June, 1947,  Ghaffar Khan announced that "we have decided to establish Pathanistan which will be an independent state of all Pathans".  He also announced that the British were planning on making NWFP the base of operations against Russia and that the "arrival of Gen Montogomery and his meetings with Mr. M A Jinnah are significant".  Taking a leaf out of Jinnah's own political vocabulary, he told the Pathans  "Let us all organize ourselves and work under the discipline".  He also announced the boycott of the upcoming referendum.   The editorial of the decidedly Indian nationalist newspaper "Statesman" for 28th June, 1947 stated that this amounted to an admission that the Frontier Congressmen who had been claiming that they had killed the Pakistan idea in the elections were now "afraid to meet its ghost".  It went on to say "Nor can it be regarded simply as a provincial affair; it carries grave all India implications.  It is the first breach in the Mountbatten plan... To that plan the Congress was pledged by Pandit Nehru and AICC.  Frontier Gandhi's boycott then suggests one of the two unpleasant things;  either the Congress High Command during the recent New Delhi confabulations possessed insufficient authority to get its decision accepted by its Pathan followers or else it abstained from exercising that authority to the extent which its June 3rd commitments morally required.  Perhaps, however, Mahatma Gandhi operating to some extent independently has been a complicating factor. This seems a reasonable deduction from recent comings and goings in the capital... his advocacy of Pathanistan with its Balkanizing implications has involved him in some logical difficulty because of his simultaneous strong denunciation of independence for the state of Travoncore.   Of the possible consequences of boycotting the referendum, Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan and his colleagues cannot be unaware.   Under June 3 plan it was to be the lynchpin of all future constitutional change in the province. Refusal to participate thus looks like an attempt to disintegrate the procedure before it has begun... That the difficult process of the referendum should be followed not long after by general election might cause grave disorder even chaos. Yet if the votes recorded next month result in the province joining Pakistan - as now seems inevitable- it is not easy to see how a ministry which has always opposed and derided Pakistan should remain in office."

On 2nd July, 1947, Pakistan Times carried a story by API with Peshawar Dateline of 30th June which said that "The idea of an independent Afghan state between Punjab and Afghanistan is supported by the Kabul newspaper,  Islah, the semi-official organ of the Afghan Government which says there is no reason why these Afghans should be forced to live under the domination of Indians of Pakistan or Hindustan as slaves."

Henry Grady of the US Embassy in Delhi in his report of 1st July to the Secretary of State  wrote: "Jinnah's charge in June 28 statement that Frontier Congress' resolution demanding free Pathan state is ‘direct breach' of Congress acceptance [of] His Majesty's Government's June 3rd Plan seems fully justified.  Frontier Congress Resolution favored establishment of a ‘Free Pathan State of all Pakhtoons; constitution based on Islamic conceptions of democracy; and refusal by all Pathans to submit to any non Pakhtoon authority'.  Jinnah pointed out Gandhi speaking at AICC meeting urged acceptance June 3rd Plan which provided for referendum to decide whether Frontier should join Hindustan or Pakistan;  Frontier Congress was bound to honor agreement.  Gandhi, however, has encouraged Khan Brothers ‘to sabotage' plan and sudden volte-face is ‘pure political chicanery', Jinnah said only constitution which Pakistan CA could frame would provide for ‘autonomous unit' but Khan brothers have made false charge that Pakistan CA would ‘disregard fundamental principles of Shariat and Quranic laws'... Gandhi's decision to effect boycott of NWFP referendum appears to be deliberate effort to embarrass League... While the Afghan Government must realize it is not in a position to control the tribes, it might be tempted to annex the tribal territories and NWFP... Therefore while League will obviously win referendum current Congress campaign, based on wholly on party considerations with no regard for international angle, could produce conditions in NWFP more precarious than at present."  Prophetic words for what we have been witnessing till today.

On 3rd July, in a meeting chaired by Prime Minister Atlee himself, the India and Burma committee met to discuss inter alia the situation in NWFP.  Here the League's position as expressed to Mountbatten that the League was not ready to give any assurances regarding the continuation of treaty obligations of the British Raj was cited as irresponsible and it must be pointed out to the League that this would weaken its case on the NWFP considerably.  On 4th of July, the Indian Cabinet met with Nehru, Patel, Rajagopalachari and Liaquat Ali Khan amongst others where the Government of India refuted Afghan Government's claims on NWFP declaring that it had no locus standi.  Thus both Muslim League and Congress high command were on the face of it aligned with each other on this fundamental question.   In private the Frontier Congressmen were already conceding that a fair referendum would yield a favorable result for Pakistan.  Yet their insistence on boycott of the referendum continued for public consumption.  Rob Lockhart wrote to Mountbatten on 3rd July, 1947 saying "Although the Ministers admitted that there was no question of the North West Frontier Province wishing to join the Hindustan constituent assembly and appeared to agree that there was no way of putting any other alternative before the people except Pakistan or Hindustan without changing the plan of 3rd June, 1947, they would not agree to modify their statement."

Defending the indefensible, Nehru wrote, in a telegram addressed to one M K Vellodi on 4th July, " no breach of pledge involved in abstention from referendum by Frontier Congress" but admitting that "quite clear that there is no demand for separate sovereign state as everyone realizes Frontier province too small and weak for such existence".  Apparently Nehru sahib was not reading the resolutions tabled by the Khan brothers and their followers.

As had been predicted from every corner, the referendum, to decide between Pakistan CA and Hindustan CA, held under an impartial governor who enjoyed the confidence of the Congress, with a Congress government in the province, still resulted in a landslide victory for the Muslim League on the Pakistan question.  Even though, the Congress had itself expected this outcome, its Frontier leaders denounced it as being rigged, though without any real basis. The referendum was held to be largely fair by independent observers and reaffirmed what had been expected by all quarters - quite unlike the referenda that have followed in Pakistan under our military. 

 (NEXT: The Aftermath: Dismissal of the Khan Ministry)

Building new bases

The Islamist terror network has quietly spread to States where its presence was least expected.
K. ANANTHAN
Misleading calm

T.S. Subramanian
in Chennai

WHAT next? This question seems to haunt many of the 83 Al Umma cadre who were released from the Central Prison in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, after the judgment came in the Coimbatore serial bomb blasts case. Although Special Court Judge K. Uthirapathy sentenced the 83 to varying terms of imprisonment, they were set free because their period of detention during trial had equalled the term of imprisonment they were sentenced to undergo.

Tamil Nadu Police officials say that the Al Umma men want “to settle down, start a new life and not to have any confrontation” and genuine organisations such as the Released Prisoners’ Welfare Board are trying to rehabilitate them. However, the activities of a new organisation called the Charitable Trust for Minorities (CTM) has come under surveillance. The CTM has been collecting funds to rehabilitate the 83 Al Umma men and to help the families of other cadre who are still in prison. Police sources allege that the CTM is receiving funds from Saudi Arabia, from where a number of Muslim extremist organisations in India, including the Muslim Defence Force operating in Tamil Nadu, are being financed.

The police have also put another organisation, “Manitha Neethi Pasarai” (Organisation for Human Justice), under the scanner. Mohammed Ali Jinnah is its State president. Together with two other organisations, the National Development Front of Kerala (NDF) and the Karnataka Forum for Dignity (KFD), it has formed a charitable trust to finance their activities. “They are trying to be aggressive. They held a conference in Bangalore a year ago. Manitha Neethi Pasarai is active, trying to organise demonstrations for reservation for Muslims and on other issues. It is under a close watch,” said a police officer.

An organisation called the South India Council, set up ostensibly to do “dawa” work (propagation of Islam) in the southern States, collapsed. In its place sprouted the Popular Front of India, an umbrella organisation of Manitha Neethi Pasarai, the KFD and the NDF. “The chairmen of these organisations are former SIMI [Students’ Islamic Movement of India] zonal presidents and their members are ex-ansars [full-time members],” the police officer said.

Top police officers concede that “although everything is calm on the surface in Tamil Nadu, there are deep undercurrents of Muslim extremism”. Former zonal (Tamil Nadu) presidents of SIMI have started a number of front organisations. They could not continue in SIMI because they had crossed the upper age limit of 30 years for membership. “All these organisations are alive in one form or the other. Nobody really went away [from SIMI]. These organisations’ objective is to establish Islamic rule in India,” a police officer said.

For instance, M. Ghulam Ahmed, former zonal [Tamil Nadu] SIMI president, founded the Manitha Neethi Pasarai. When he was expelled recently from the Manitha Neethi Pasarai, he went on to establish another organisation, the Darul Islam Foundation Trust. M.S. Jawahirullah, who is now a top leader of the Tamil Nadu Muslim Munnetra Kazhagam, was a State SIMI president. Another Tamil Nadu SIMI president, S.M. Baucker, is now the general secretary of the Tamil Nadu Thouheed Jamat. Ibn Saudh, who was the first president, in 1982, of the Tamil Nadu unit of the Jamaati-Islam-Hind, the parent organisation of SIMI, is now the president of the All-India Milli Council. Mohammed Ansari, who was a SIMI ikwan (supporter), is now Al Umma general secretary.

He was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment in the Coimbatore blasts case. Ansari’s brother-in-law, Shahjehan, who is an ex-ansar of SIMI, is one of the top leaders of Al Umma. Tajudeen, Al Umma treasurer, was also a SIMI ansar.

SLEEPER CELLS
A police officer declined to rule out the possibility of the existence in Tamil Nadu of sleeper cells of organisations such as the Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Jaish-e-Mohammad, the Jammu and Kashmir National Liberation Front and the Harkat-ul-Jihad. He said: “The people in these sleeper cells come [to Tamil Nadu] as students, patients in need of treatment, cultural performers and as visitors. They continue to stay here. These sleeper cells can be activated any time. These organisations have deeply infiltrated Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. Tamil Nadu is heading towards that.”

SIMI came in for adverse notice first in Tamil Nadu in 1999 when it published a propaganda organ called “Seithi Madal” (News Letter), which often carried articles describing terrorist activities in Kashmir as “another Kosovo liberation movement” or “Chechnya movement”. What made the police sit up was the publication of a map of India without Jammu and Kashmir and an article titled “The Return of the Ghaznavi Calendar” in the Seithi Madal. Since the publication “contained seditious and incriminating material, which will also create communal disharmony”, the police registered a case and arrested those who ran the “Seithi Madal”.

After SIMI was banned in 2001, the police arrested 21 SIMI members in Tamil Nadu. Four of the 120 “ansars” who attended a secret meeting at Athanwale in Gujarat a few months after the ban were from Tamil Nadu. They were arrested when they returned to the State. On January 26, 2006, when SIMI members met in Kerala, Syed Azeem of Pallapatti in Karur district, Tamil Nadu, who attended the meeting, was arrested. He is on bail.

Former SIMI members are now busy organising libraries and charitable trusts or doing “dawa” work. An organisation called “Baithul Marg” (a trust) was formed recently in Madurai. It runs a library. “Members of this trust are former SIMI members,” a police source said. A publishing firm called “Thinnai Thozhargal Pathippagam” (Bench friends’ Publishing Company) has published several books in Tamil.

Foreign agencies
According to top police officers, several foreign agencies based in Saudi Arabia are trying to infiltrate South India. They have funded not only individuals but extremist organisations in Tamil Nadu. For instance, Imam Ali, the prime accused in the case relating to the bomb explosion at the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) building in Chennai in August 1993 in which 11 persons were killed, was trained by the Hizbul Mujahideen. His training in Bangladesh was funded by agencies in Saudi Arabia. Abu Siddiqui of Nagore, Tamil Nadu, who was responsible for parcel bomb explosions at Nagore and is an accused in the case of the bomb blast at the Hindu Munnani office at Chintadripet, Chennai, was in touch with Saudi-based fundamentalist organisations. The police have not been able to arrest Abu Siddiqui yet. Thoufeek Chotu of Adirampattinam, near Thanjavur, accused in the bomb blast at Ghatkopar in Mumbai, is now on bail. He has launched an organisation called “Iraivan Oruvan” (There is only one God).

In November 2002, a special team of the Chennai City Police smashed a “budding” terrorist organisation called the Muslim Defence Force (MDF), which had planned to explode bombs in Tamil Nadu on December 6, the anniversary of Babri Masjid demolition. The MDF was originally founded in Saudi Arabia and had connections with the Lashkar-e-Taiba . Its 21 members, including important leaders such as Thoufeek and Zackria, were arrested. The MDF was founded in Tamil Nadu under guidance from Abu Hamsa of Hyderabad, who was a key accused in the Sai Baba temple blast case in Hyderabad. After the blast, Abu Hamsa fled to Saudi Arabia. Hamid Bakri, who married Imam Ali’s sister, was one of those who founded the MDF. He reportedly has links with Islamic fundamentalist agencies in Saudi Arabia.

Madrasas and Arabic colleges in Tamil Nadu have been infiltrated by Muslim fundamentalists from other States and countries, police sources say. These institutions are located at Vellore, Umarabad Kayalpattinam, Melapayalam and Kadayanallur. “Most of the teachers and students in these colleges are from Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Gujarat and also Nepal. The principal of one of the Arabic colleges is a Nepali Muslim,” said the police sources.

A London-based organisation called Hizb-ut-Tahiri, which has been banned in 50 countries, has fathered a movement called the Khilafat Movement in Tamil Nadu.

A top police officer was, however, confident that “the situation is under control”. He said, “We are keeping a tight watch on fundamentalist elements. Everything is under surveillance.”

‘Transit point’
By R. Krishnakumar
in Thiruvananthapuram

FOR the first few days during his fortnight-long interrogation in Thiruvananthapuram in April 2005, Maldivian national Ibrahim Asif behaved like a true professional. He spoke good English and seemed to know his way around the city, like many of his countrymen who take the hour-long flight from Male to Kerala every day and get ‘visa on arrival’. Since the mid-1990s the State had become a tourist destination and, more importantly, a health care centre for people of the small island nation.

Initially at least, Kerala officials said, Asif Ibrahim seemed well trained in the art of fudging answers and bewildering interrogators with religious rhetoric. “It was not Allah’s way to indulge in violence,” he would say at the end of every question. But from the sixth day onwards the truth began to come out “in reluctant bits”.

Ibrahim Asif had heard that explosives were easy to obtain in Kerala, where their use in granite quarries and for other industrial purposes was widespread. He had indeed been trying to procure ammunition and arms and was a member of a Maldivian Islamist group that had the support of similar organisations in Pakistan. The explosives were meant to blow up a mosque run by the Maldivian government, he told his interrogators, and the weapons were to try and “kill the Maldivian President”.

He kept in touch with members of his group, not by sending e-mail messages but by “saving them as drafts in his e-mail account” and letting his handlers open his account using a common password. He had been in contact with “friends” in Kerala and wanted to start a “brotherhood” of like-minded people in the State. The plan failed because he was intercepted by security agencies, he told his interrogators.

In September 2007, the Maldives witnessed its first ever terrorist bomb blast, in Male, and investigations showed that the man who triggered the explosive device had been in Thiruvananthapuram (from Colombo) barely six months after Asif’s arrest. He had the support of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) operatives in India on his way to Pakistan.

In October 2006, soon after an Al-Badr operative, Mohammed Fahd, a Pakistani national, was arrested in Mysore on charges of planning an attack on the Vidhan Soudha in Bangalore and the Central Institute of Indian Languages in Mysore, police teams were in Kozhikode, recovering documents of his stay there a few months earlier and of his alleged connections with jehadi groups operating in Jammu and Kashmir. Fahd, the police learnt, was the son of a local resident, Abdulla Koya, who migrated to Pakistan in the early 1970s and settled in Karachi.

Before the bomb blasts in Mumbai, on a local train at Mulund, on March 13, 2003, intelligence officials had indicated that key operatives of the LeT, including its southern commander Muhammed Faisal Khan alias Abu Sultan, had visited Kerala on a fund-raising mission to support the Mumbai operation. Abu Sultan, who was killed in a police encounter after the blasts, came with a close associate of C.A.M. Basheer. The latter is a former president of SIMI who is a native of Kerala and a key terrorist operative who is now listed as absconding.

Records recovered during a police raid on SIMI’s offices in Kozhikode and elsewhere in northern Kerala in October 2001 indicated a huge inflow of funds from West Asia through hawala channels, often ranging “up to one lakh Saudi riyals a week”. The police also found propaganda material printed by a Kashmiri militant outfit, Tehreek-e-Hurriyat-e-Kashmir.

Basheer is a key suspect in a case filed in Ahmedabad in 1992 by the Central Bureau of Investigation under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act (TADA) and in another, relating to the March 2003 Mumbai blasts. He has been described as a “key fund raiser” and “recruiter” for several Islamist groups in the country and has allegedly trained several operatives from Kerala and other places in subversive activities.

According to the police, he hails from Aluva near Kochi. After his studies at the U.C. College there and at the Aeronautical Engineering College at Chalakkudy near by, he initially worked at a flying institute in Bangalore and then at the Mumbai international airport. In 1991, the police said, he suddenly came into prominence as a key organiser of the all-India SIMI conference held in Mumbai that year.

Basheer disappeared from India soon after the 1993 Mumbai blasts and security agencies believe he is in Saudi Arabia heading the Muslim Development Force (MDF), an organisation he floated in close association with the LeT. It is said to have its tentacles in many parts of India. Kerala itself has been relatively free of terrorist incidents of the kind witnessed in the northern States, except for a few minor bomb blasts – one at a bus station in Kozhikode and another on a boat in Beypore – and the periodic seizure of explosives from different parts of the State.

But it is increasingly being described as “India’s new terror hub”, a “sanctuary”, a “place of refuge” and a “quiet transit point” for terrorists. The reasons for this may be found in the operations of some virulently fundamentalist organisations in the State.

In the early 1990s, no sooner had the government imposed a ban on the Islamik Sevak Sangh (ISS, a sort of copycat version of the RSS, which too was banned in the aftermath of the Babri Masjid demolition), than its chairman Abdul Nasir Maudany disbanded it. He then transformed his profile into that of a leader of a new, more moderate political party, the People’s Democratic Party (PDP).

As Maudany dabbled in Kerala’s coalition politics, his PDP seemed to drift from its fundamentalist moorings because of political expediency. Subsequently, the party’s core Islamist cadre, among them several SIMI activists, regrouped under the banner of the National Development Front (NDF), which is today Kerala’s most high-profile militant Islamist organisation. It claims to be a socio-cultural organisation of the minorities.

Similarly, according to State police officials, most of the core operatives of the proscribed SIMI have floated a dozen new organisations within Kerala or become their members. Among the organisations are the NDF and the PDP and a series of fringe groups with names such as Muslim Youth Cultural Forum, Sahridaya Vedi, Karuna Foundation, Samskara Vedi, Solidarity Students Movement, and Movement for Protection of Islamic Symbols and Monuments.

In June last year, the State government filed an affidavit before the Justice B.N. Chaturvedi Tribunal considering the extension of the ban on SIMI (extended regularly every two years since 2001), in which it stated categorically that in addition to 12 organisations that former SIMI members were part of, they were also operating under the cover of a number of rural development and research centres, religious study centres and counselling and guidance centres.

It also stated that they continued to receive copious funds from West Asia and had strengthened their links with the LeT and other fundamentalist organisations in Kuwait and Pakistan. The government also named the key personnel engineering the regrouping of the SIMI cadre. Importantly, the affidavit said, SIMI had been organising regular indoctrination drives, particularly targeting young Muslims in the State, mostly college students.

The significance of these events is not in the changing profile of these organisations but in the persistent and widespread indoctrination of Muslim youth under an umbrella of virulent Islamist ideology that drew its strength, initially, from the lingering socio-economic problems in Kerala society, the post-1990 aggressiveness of Hindutva forces and later on from the anti-imperialistic, anti-globalisation sentiments that gained prominence in Left Front-ruled Kerala ever since the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Many such problems and concerns, though common to all communities in the State, were being increasingly sought to be projected as instances of discrimination against one community alone, with the clear objective of propagating a divisive fundamentalist agenda and setting the stage for the growth of radical Islamism.

Muslims form a significant proportion of the population in Kerala and the community has, from the time of Independence, tried to give expression to its need for recognition and development through its own political and social organisations. The Muslim League, importantly, used this as an opportunity to gain a prominent place in the State’s coalition politics, which satisfied a major psychological need of the community in the years after Independence.

But over the decades, the Muslim League, like many such political organisations that came in its wake, became the cause for much disenchantment because of its failure to find solutions to the community’s socio-economic backwardness. Though remittances from expatriates in West Asia provided temporary economic relief, in a way it only helped deepen the divisions within Kerala society. The Muslim political, social and religious leadership, which had traditionally been in the hands of a small group of rich trading and landholding familes, also increasingly began to face challenges from a lot of ordinary Muslims who had come up in the social hierarchy following the Gulf boom, gaining education and a better quality of life and exposure to religious and social trends in various West Asian nations.

It was into this confusing milieu that the new factor of pan-Islamic radicalism was being imposed. A senior Home Department official told Frontline: “It is from within the new generation of comparatively prosperous, educated young Muslims that the fundamentalist forces are finding new recruits. The real terrorist activity in Kerala is in the bombing of the minds of our young people.”

Taking root
By Suhrid Sankar Chattopadhyay
in Kolkata

THE violent agitation in Kolkata on November 21 by a section of Urdu-speaking Muslims, which required the deployment of the Army, serves as a reminder of how deeply Islamist militancy has infiltrated West Bengal, Kolkata in particular.

The protesters came together under the banner of the All India Minority Forum (AIMF), but the police suspect that Islamist militant groups such as the Harkat-ul-Jehadi-al-Islami Bangladesh (HuJIB) and some militant outfits from Uttar Pradesh with links to the banned SIMI played a crucial role in inciting the mobs. State Home Secretary Prasad Ranjan Roy, however, denied receiving any report on SIMI’s involvement.

“Staging demonstrations is not a new phenomenon in Kolkata, but the way it turned violent suddenly and inexplicably was ample evidence that a peaceful demonstration was not on the agenda of those behind the agitation. It was a clear effort to precipitate a law and order situation in Kolkata, using Taslima Nasrin’s visa extension controversy and the violence in Nandigram as excuses to ignite a communal conflagration,” a police source said.

So far the Muslim population of West Bengal has not voted en bloc on communal lines in elections. The division of the Muslim vote has been on political and ideological lines primarily among candidates of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), the Congress, the Trinamool Congress and the Forward Bloc. Extremist right-wing politics, whether Hindu or Muslim, has not found any large-scale support among the West Bengal electorate until now.

Not surprisingly, the present turmoil, created on relatively trivial issues, portends a sinister political game plan of polarisation of the Muslim vote on communal lines against the CPI(M)-led Left Front government. One cannot ignore the fact that for the first time a fundamentalist group like the Jamait-e-Ulema-i-Hind tried to get into the political bandwagon on the Nandigram issue.

It has been estimated that illegal Bangladeshi immigrants are in a position to influence the outcome in 18 per cent of the total number of Assembly seats in West Bengal, or 52 of the 294 seats. In the urban area, a sizable portion of the votes belong to non-Bengali, Urdu-speaking Muslims and they form a crucial factor in determining the winner in constituencies in and around Kolkata. The menace of communal politics, unless tackled politically by the saner elements among the political players, bodes ill for the State. Given the secular nature of West Bengal, the violence of November 21 was the first of its kind in the State, but police sources fear it may not be the last.

In spite of the dangers its geographical position poses, West Bengal is perhaps singular in the absence of terrorist strikes. The only time there was a terrorist strike in the State was on January 22, 2002, when the American Centre in Kolkata was attacked by armed militants linked to the HuJIB.

According to intelligence sources, the chances of a terrorist strike in the State remain doubtful, as any such act would endanger what is for the militants a convenient hideout and a relatively safe passage to and out of India. But the radicalisation of certain sections of the Muslim community by outside forces has already taken place, these sources say.

A.K. Maliwal, Director, Security, West Bengal, told Frontline: “Those who are seeking a safe shelter in Kolkata would also be looking to expand their base in the region; for that they would have to create conditions conducive to an unhampered stay. The larger the number of people that can be converted to their cause on this side of the border, the greater the security for them.”

The arrest of a leading member of the HuJIB in Lucknow in June provided further evidence of the presence of the outfit’s operatives in West Bengal. Jalaluddin Molla, alias Amanullah Mandal alias Babu Bhai belonged to South 24 Parganas district and is believed to have played a key role in the abduction of Parthapratim Roy Burman, the owner of the Khadim Shoe Company, in July 2001.

Bangladesh, an acknowledged international refuge of Islamist militants, shares a 4,095-kilometre border with India, 2,216 km of which is with West Bengal. Fencing of the border began a few years ago and has so far covered only a little over 500 km. Between August 2006 and April 2007, 10 militants belonging to the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), the Hizbul Mujahideen and the Jama’atul Mujahideen of Bangladesh were caught trying to cross over into West Bengal.

On August 14, 2006, the Border Security Force (BSF) caught two militants of the LeT and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) using the “cattle route” (through which cattle is smuggled across the border) to enter India.

In June this year, the Kolkata Police arrested three militants suspected of having ties with the HuJIB. Police sources said two of the militants confessed to receiving training in Pakistan.

More recently, three Jaish-e-Mohammad terrorists arrested in Lucknow in connection with a plot to abduct Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, reportedly confessed that they tried to use the West Bengal-Bangladesh border to enter the country.

The Left Front government has repeatedly apprised the Centre of the situation. According to a police source, adequate measures are yet to be taken, both at the Central and at the State level, to deal with the problem. “We have the resources to deal with the problem, but identifying those resources and committing them for specific purposes is a problem,” the source said.

In that context, one has to take into account the 367-km riverine border that West Bengal shares with Bangladesh in the Sunderbans. According to informed sources, the water border is a vulnerable one and allows easy passage to armed militants.

“Until this year, the Centre has sanctioned 74 coastal police stations in States that have a coastline. Five of these have been sanctioned for the Sunderbans but not even one is operational as yet,” the source said. “As for the security network in West Bengal, the State government is addressing with great urgency any lacunae that might exist. Recently an e-mail threat to kill Pakistani cricketers touring India and to blow up the Eden Gardens cricket ground in Kolkata put the police and the State security apparatus on high alert. The e-mail was from the ID yes_boss@yahoo.co.in from a group that calls itself “Indian Mujahideen.”

An unprecedented four layers of security check were enforced at the stadium during the India-Pakistan Test match from November 30 and at the hotel where the players stayed. For the first time, hidden cameras and decoy buses were used while ferrying the players to the stadium and back.

Maliwal said: “The increasing terrorist strikes in the hinterland by foreign-controlled modules, particularly strikes where the intent matches the opportunity, have already attracted the attention of national security managers and efforts are on to counter them. While the foreign-controlled modules will continue to promote their intent, denying them the opportunity is the responsibility of the security managers.” •

To read full article go here

We are afflicted by two movements which are openly against the idea of national sovereignty. The first is Islam whose followers comprise 15 per cent of India’s population. The Muslim’s first, second and third loyalties are to Allah the Merciful, the Holy Prophet and to the ummah or the world community of his religion. In the words of Maulana Mohamed Ali, the Khilafat movement leader, we (Muslims) are not nationalists but super nationalists, and I as a Muslim say that God made man and Devil made the nation. Ali further said, he belonged to two circles of equal size which are not concentric – one is India and the other is the Muslim world (Gandhi by B.R. Nanda, OUP, page 390). The Khilafat maulanas had insisted and Gandhiji had conceded that the Muslim soldiers of the Indian army would not fight in the event India was invaded by a Muslim army. Early in the 20th century, a Russian inspired Afghan invasion across the Hindukush was considered a live threat. Long before its Pakistan resolution, the Muslim League had endorsed this principle that Muslim will not fight Muslim, no matter whose national he may be.

The second great threat to national sovereignty is the communist movement which considers the nation state an instrument of exploitation in the hands of the rich to keep down the poor. The communist manifesto exhorts the workers of the world to unite. The Internationale is the anthem of the movement. While the Left Front rules the three states of Kerala, Tripura and West Bengal, the Maoists are the violent vanguard of Marxism. And they have moved to some 200 or one-third of India’s districts.

The then undivided Communist Party of India had supported the League’s demand for Pakistan. For the rest of India, it had a two-fold prescription. First, to have an undivided Bengal with a Muslim premier; presumably so that Pakistan could have the whole of Bengal to support it rather than a part as it transpired in 1947. Secondly, to recognise 16 nationalities in the rest of India with each of them having the right to secede from the Union a la the Soviet constitution!

How can Ms Albright and her country ensconced between the Atlantic and the Pacific Oceans expect other countries to allow their sovereignty to be overridden by disasters like Nargis or tsunami?

(The writer can be contacted at 145, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi-110 003.)
http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=243&page=11

There are too many personal axes being ground into the mud, there are too many angles, obtuse and acute, there are too many chips on too many shoulders — and this applies not only to the writers and commentators but to the media barons themselves, many of whom are compromised by their own personal interests and leanings.

Minds need to be opened up and refreshed. We need to stop attacking, picking on old bones, and do a bit of cool analysis, criticise objectively and, if possible, constructively, point out the wrongs without forgetting the rights, and hope that someone or some persons who are in a position to act and come up with some solutions to this sorry mess are out there heeding.

What has happened to the grand reconciliation scheme? It has faltered. It has been one person and several other linked persons-specific. It has not been and is not evenhanded.

Unelected unrepresentative Asif Zardari, in his interview with the Washington Times published on May 29, reiterated several times that it is now ‘time for reconciliation’. Having had his substantial reconciliation, thanks to that unconstitutional and unlawful ordinance thrust upon the country through the machinations of Benazir Bhutto and President Pervez Musharraf in thrall to the US and its ‘national interest’, it is time that he himself applied his mind and persuaded his wilting coalition partners and his own party people to enter into the spirit of national reconciliation.

How is it that President Musharraf is omitted from this grand process? How about a bit of reconciliation where he is concerned? His sins, largely, are no greater and no less (though they may be different) than the sins of those who have so illegally and un-evenhandedly benefited from the NRO. After all, it is he who is partly responsible, in hand with his American friends, for having cleared Zardari and his friends of the many charges (some iron-clad) levied against them many years ago. Reconciliation, if it is to be with us, should apply all round — to Musharraf, to the Mian of Lahore and his party people, in fact to us all.

It is Zardari’s wife’s assassination, and only and simply that, which has shot Zardari into the position where he now finds himself — unelected, having no constitutional nexus, but almost the sole spokesperson in this flailing Republic, sought out by locals and foreigners for his words of wisdom and policy. If miracles do happen, then Zardari can certainly claim one in his case.

Now, let us return to the objectivity factor and the state of the nation. For many a year, the American journalist, a true professional, Paula Newberg, has watched and commented on Pakistan and its peculiarities, its usually nefarious and occasionally comical doings, and its infrequent ups and very frequent downs. She writes for various US and international publications and has her wits about her. The comments she comes up with are valid and should be pondered upon. Posted on the Internet newspaper The Huffington Post on May 27 was Newberg’s article ‘Pakistan’s governance imperative’. It is lengthy and comprehensive. But she says it as it is from the opening paragraph right up to the bitter end.

“After the kind of year that no country ever wants, with its government in crisis, repression replacing even the most remote notion of good government, political assassination, and terror standing in the wings, Pakistan elected a new parliament in February.” A coalition was formed of three parties “previously deemed outcasts” which quickly agreed, at least in public, on a “daunting political agenda”. Then things went into reverse gear and it stands now broken down on the various issues facing it.

As of now, “Domestic politics and foreign policy alike are fair game for ambitious politicians long removed from power.” The “long removed from power” should make us all stand back and absorb shame. What sort of a nation is it that cannot, in the long period of eight years, throw up some new faces and new minds, untainted by past doings and failings? The voters cannot be blamed, they had little choice.

The blame must be laid fairly and squarely in front of Musharraf’s boots for it was up to him to find, nurture and bring out to the fore men and women of integrity, substance and ability who could lead this county into the 21st century. For his own selfish and myopic reasons he thrust upon us some of the most discredited men in this country’s political history and introduced into the political system others who are complete rogues and vulgar vagabonds. That he had no choice but to then bring back the relics of the 1990s and throw them to the voters is thus not surprising.

So where are we now? “The recent blur of pronouncements, plans and policies reflects this history as it touches on Pakistan’s perennially sensitive topics: jumbled electoral rules, imbalances between provincial powers and central government authority, political corruptions long deemed acceptable, and a testy relationship between parliament and the president ... daily life in Pakistan is increasingly punctuated by targeted, violent incidents and a prevailing insecurity that has not diminished since Musharraf’s government was defeated.” A sad commentary on all the euphoric rhetoric and pronouncements of glory to come with which we were inundated in February.

Newberg is right when she states that it is not the names of individuals which should dominate government and the headlines. It is political parties and parliament which must lead the government. Institutions are in a shambles. “Pakistan’s politics has almost always been in conflict with major state institutions ... no state institution has escaped the high-handedness of party rule ... the simple concepts of representation, political participation and honest constitutionalism are so eroded that Pakistan’s history is usually narrated as a contest between those who seek power and those who wield authority ... the space between them ... has nurtured corruptions of many sizes and shapes.”

What we need are leaders “to defy their own, and the world’s low expectations” for Pakistan’s success. For now, this or any government must demonstrate that after living for decades with coercion, the citizens of Pakistan, the grand awam, “have claims on the state that the state can and will honour”.

arfc@cyber.net.pk

Over the last 60 years or so, starting from the time when millions of people in Asia and Africa were able to cast off the yoke of colonialism and take responsibility for their lives and for their future, development experts have continued to come up with recipes that would help release nations from poverty.

Some countries, most notably those in East Asia, succeeded. Some failed and continue to fail. Most of those who are still struggling are in the region known as Sub-Saharan Africa.

Pakistan’s own record has not been dismal. Not given much of a chance of success, it has clocked a fairly impressive record of growth over the last six decades. The gross domestic product has grown, averaging at more than four per cent a year over this period. There are only a score or so countries around the globe that can claim to have sustained such a record of growth over such an extended period. During the same period, the population has increased five and a half times, from only 30m in 1947, the year of the country’s birth, to an estimated 165m, 61 years later.

The proportion of people living in absolute poverty has declined from about 60 per cent in 1947 to around 30 per cent now. The size of the urban population has increased twelve-fold, from five million at the time of independence to around 60m in 2008. The structure of the economy has changed as well. At the time of its birth, Pakistan was an agricultural economy with no industry of any significance. More than half the gross domestic product was contributed by agriculture. Now the share of agriculture in GDP has declined to a bit over 20 per cent. Instead of agriculture, the service sector — both traditional and modern — has become the largest contributor to GDP.

The trajectory of growth Pakistan has followed over the last 60 years was not smooth and even. There were at least three periods of rapid economic progress and modernisation — in the 1960s, in the 1980s and in the early 2000s. Each of these periods ended in economic and political chaos. Why was the path to relative progress such a halting one? Why has Pakistan experienced so many jerks and jolts in its economic life? These questions are not easily answered and are better left to be dealt with by historians who investigate and write about these matters.

What concerns me today is another important question: what should the policymakers do now at a time of another halt to progress, another jerk in the move forward?

The fact that Pakistan is currently faced with an extremely serious economic crisis does not need repeating. The fact that the country’s new political masters need to quickly develop an approach for dealing with the stresses and strains under which the economy is operating at this time does not need to be repeated either. But what should policymakers do to address the problems the economy faces?

Economic theory is attempting to find an answer to this question at a time where the entire world — not just a few developing countries such as Pakistan — is having to deal with a sudden turn in the wheel of fortune. One group of development experts who recently contemplated this issue was led by the Nobel Prize-winning economist Michael Spence. It recently issued its report to the public.

Spence and his colleagues argue that the Washington Consensus that became the guiding economic philosophy in the late 1980s and the 1990s is now dead. The Consensus was built on three pillars: stabilisation, privatisation and liberalisation. These are the pillars on which the economic team recruited by President Pervez Musharraf built the country’s economic structure. Prodded by the IMF, to which the Musharraf team turned in the first three years of military rule, Islamabad emphasised stability over growth, privatisation over state control and liberalisation over state management.

There were two problems with the way this structure was built, it neglected growth for the time when the economy was being stabilised and it made no attempt to develop a medium-term strategy for ensuring uninterrupted growth. It is not surprising that the structure the team built came crumbling down.

What does the Spence group advocate for a country in Pakistan’s situation. No single recipe will ensure sustainable and rapid economic growth. Each country must devise its own strategy, given its own circumstances. However, one ingredient must always be present in the strategy: an active government that strategises. Governments “are sometimes clumsy and sometimes errant but active, pragmatic governments are indispensable”, say the authors of the report. Pragmatism means dispensing with ideology and focusing on what the situation demands at any given time. This is one of the salient features of the Spence group’s report.

The other is the emphasis it places on growth itself. Without adequate growth in the economy and without sustaining it over time, improvements in human well-being are impossible. The report looks at the experience of 13 developing countries that have managed economic growth of seven per cent or more a year for at least 25 years.

Two lessons are drawn. One, fast and sustained growth “requires long-term commitment by a country’s political leaders”. Two, high and sustainable growth depends on deep engagement with the global economy. Engaging with the world requires developing an understanding of where it will end, where it is going. During the Musharraf period, Pakistan had the first but not the second. There was a singular lack of understanding about the structure and evolution of the global economy among the policymakers.

What about the role of the state that was downgraded by the Washington Consensus? Spence and colleagues argue that no country was able to achieve rapid economic growth without high rates of investment in infrastructure, education and health. They also emphasise that “growth strategies cannot succeed without a commitment to equality of opportunity”. Once again, Islamabad during the Musharraf period failed this test.

The Spence Commission’s findings come at an opportune time for Pakistan where a new political order is taking shape. As the new leadership begins to look at what the economy needs it would do well to study the findings of Spence and his colleagues and build them into a strategy for adjustment and growth that needs to be put quickly in place.

Dawn

While domestic factors are to blame for substantially lower growth in the manufacturing and agricultural sectors, escalating global oil and food prices have skewed the fiscal balance. The budgetary gap and the current account deficit are set to rise to seven per cent and just below eight per cent of GDP respectively. Price inflation is running into double digits, adding to the economic woes of the common man, and other economic indicators have deteriorated sharply. Though the situation may look quite dismal as the current economic impasse seems to be bordering on stagflation, all is not lost. The economy isn’t going to unravel any time soon. The problem could still be salved. A policy focus, as suggested by the SBP, on regaining macroeconomic stability through corrective measures could quickly reinvigorate growth momentum. That requires the government, in the short term, to cut down unproductive expenditure and reduce its dependence on borrowings from the SBP for financing the budget, as well as to address structural weaknesses hampering the expansion of the industrial and agricultural sectors. The budget for the next financial year will be a test of the government’s commitment to addressing the increasing fiscal imbalances and reviving the economy.
Dawn

Speaking at the National Defence University after presentation of a national strategy paper on governance of especially administered areas (Fata and NAs) and their impact on national security on Monday, he said that issues of economy and terrorism must not be politicised because that might harm the national interest.

The event was attended by NWFP Governor Owais Ghani, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee General Tariq Majeed, Chief of the Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and Air Chief Marshal Tanveer Mahmood.

“I hope the government moves forward politically for the salvation and putting back on track the derailed situation. It is doable and achievable,” the president added.

He pointed out that billions of rupees had been lost during the recent slump of stock exchange and the exchange rate after staying stagnant for the past eight years to around Rs60 had touched Rs70 per dollar. “The country loses Rs28 billion with the increase of single rupee.”

He said: “If correct and bold measures are taken then all issues confronting us are solvable — whether political or economical, including energy, water and food”.

The president said that the three-pronged strategy of addressing military, political and socio-economic aspects was the way forward for addressing the situation in tribal areas.

“Military is certainly and is never the solution as it only creates an environment, the solution is always through political measures,” he added.

He said that apart from the peace deal done two years back, the current deals had been done from a position of strength, particularly in Swat and South Waziristan.

He said that an important aspect would be to ensure that there was no linkage with Al Qaeda or foreign elements and there must not be cross-border activities.

He said that there should be no politics in dealing with terrorism and the tribal region should be brought to the mainstream by providing socio-economic development to the area.

The president said he would not agree that the problems facing Afghanistan could be resolved with the withdrawal of coalition forces. “I don’t think so,” he said, adding that it could destabilise Afghanistan and also Pakistan.

Also on Monday, during a meeting with a US delegation, the president said that stable and broad-based relationships between Pakistan and United States were in the interest of the two countries and also vital for lasting peace in the region.

Dawn

ONTARIO, Canada—In last 100 days, after 18th February elections, the leaders of Nawaz League, Peoples Party, lawyers, judges, civil society, ex-servicemen and leaders of the parties who didn't take part in the general elections, like Qazi Hussain Ahmed and Imran Khan have literally taken the country to a bankruptcy and height of frustration.

Top of that, American leaders, press & media, Congressmen, Senators, Think Tanks, NGOs and other civil organizations in the United States have played with the Pakistani politics like a prostitute. There is not a day, when some a****** from the United States lands in Islamabad uninvited, struts around on the streets of Pakistan as if he’s in a nightclub, meets government, opposition leaders, personalities of their choice and freely woof and yap like a rabid dog and flies back to Washington.

The interesting part of all this is, the same Nawaz leaders, lawyers, civil society, ex-servicemen, the same Hamid Mir, Geo, Jang, anti-Musharraf commentators and analysts, who curse the United States day and night for supporting President Musharraf, now publicize and quote their statements just because now these are against President Musharraf. World knows that the United States has only one agenda for Pakistan, "to destroy Pakistan as soon as possible by a bloodbath through a civil war".
The limit is that Pakistan has been hostage through the hands of lawyers, retired and deposed Judges and wasted interests in the country for the last 15 months (after 9th March 2007) and President Musharraf did everything opposition demanded from him but they come out with one point or the other. It is 110% correct that every single one of the people mentioned above is practicing the hypocritical politics of personal agendas, personal vendettas and selfish goals.

The most hypocritical, mean, selfish and ugly politics are being practiced by Asif Ali Zardari and Nawaz Sharif. While Nawaz Sharif has put the country at stake because of his animosity with President Musharraf, Mr. Zardari is avenging the dead bodies of Z.A Bhutto and Benazir Bhutto. Plus, he has no interest whatsoever in Pakistan as he has pocketed hundreds of millions of dollars and cleared all of his criminal cases through the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO).

Yusuf Raza Gilani is a ‘Yes-Sir’ prime minister. He is worse than Rafiq Tarar and Phajja Chaudhry. He did nothing in last three months except raise hands for prayers, perform inauguration ceremonies and act as a "Statement Issuing Machine". The real power sits with Asif Zardari and Nawaz Sharif.The country is not only in confusion, turmoil and uncertainty but is quickly heading towards poverty, hunger, lawlessness and disintegration.

The point is, if everyone is working to cut Presidential powers but is saying nothing about the prime ministerial powers, since they want the Prime Minister o be a 'jackass' and Nawaz Sharif and Asif Zardari would hold the all the prime ministerial powers by remote control. Question is: In case of both these fail, who would bring the balance when the President is castrated and Army is not taking part in politics? The ultimate result would be that people on the streets would rule their neighborhoods by looting, robbing, burning people alive, killing and ambushing others.

The bottom line, if the destiny of this country is Martial Law, "why to bring it when nothing is left, why not today"? President Musharraf may not hold the office of the Chief of the Army Staff, but he is still the Supreme Commander of the Arm forces. The entire 3 forces are under his control. To hell with 52-B,C.D,E,F,G,H…Use Martial Law and save the country!

IT'S NEVER TOO LATE TO DO A GOOD THING MR. PRESIDENT!

Mirza Aslam Baig
Is A fired Cartridge

Politics for retired and old farts in Pakistan is a hobby, entertainment and passing time in a Recreation Club. Issuing statements in newspapers, taking part in talk shows on TV channels, attending conferences and meeting dinners everyday for these retired bureaucrats and generals is a pleasure occasion. These people are passing their leisurely time that way.

Mirza Aslam Baig is just one of the members of that RETARDED CLUB called the Ex-Servicemen Association. While on duty for over 30 years, that OLD FART did not do a single thing to be remembered and just served for his pay checks. These retired a******s are yapping regarding President Musharraf's exit for the last 15 months but nothing happened. Everyday, these old farts along with a bunch of journalists like Nazir Naji, Sethi, Hamid Mir, Qasmi and many more come out with a new lie on TVs and newspapers but on the same old pattern. The Chief Minister of Punjab Khosa, a political ‘puppy’, came out with a new idea that President Musharraf's name should be put on the Exit Control List. I cannot believe how a couple of hundred thousand people in Pakistan are behaving but I wouldn’t be surprised if they meet their end one by one taking the dream of President Musharraf's resignation in their chests.

ONLY THE STATE ARMY
COULD PROTECT THE
INTEGRITY OF PAKISTAN

The naïve and innocent people of Pakistan are helplessly watching crooks and thugs of politics, press, media and judiciary twisting facts and realities of political game for their personal designs.
Asif Zardari, an ordinary man of Sindh won two lotteries in his life, first when Benazir Bhutto came in his life and second when Benazir Bhutto went out of his life.

People close to Asif Zardari would verify my statement that before marrying Benazir Bhutto, Asif Zardari's life was confined to wine and women and chased wealth his whole life. He was an average, mediocre punk from Sindh and part of a bunch of people who gather together every night for drinking and debauchery. Asif has no education, no training and no grooming of being a political leader, statesman, patriotic Pakistani with nationalistic approach etcetera. If my statement is not correct, why Benazir Bhutto kept him away out of her political career and family life for most of her married life specially, last 10 years? Asif was just a MAN in Benazir's life and nothing more.

Peoples Party leaders basically come from opportunist agriculturists, industrialists, student leaders, Bus Adda men, Ghunda Tax Collectors and people from mediocrity who rose from earth to sky just because common masses are easily to fool. If Z.A Bhutto was a sincere leader and had there been honesty in his leadership and intentions, he would not have been thrown out after 5 years of his rule.

My statement could be honestly judged and tested that, "if Bhuttos were sincere, they would have been a real political force in Pakistan instead of following each other to the grave one by one.What Asif Zardari and Peoples Party men call "four sacrifices" in fact was the revenge of the 'Mother Nature' which took away everything from Bhuttos. No matter how hard Peoples Party claim and try to make world understand that all FOURS were killed by conspiracies and are martyred but if they were honest, they would be living to serve the people gracefully. I mean, "this is not a time of Prophet Muhammad or Khulfa-i-Rashdeen that God wanted to take some religious work from Bhuttos through shooting on the road (Murtaza Bhutto), hanging in a murder case (Z.A Bhutto) and an accidental car lever hit (Benazir Bhutto)!

I am a firm believer that Asif Zardari's jugglery would not last longer and the Mother Nature would strike soon. I don't know what is agreed between Mr. Altaf Hussain of MQM and Asif Ali Zardari but I can foresee Asif fooling many people on many times. Calling MQM backed Sindh Governor to Manzoor Watto's gathering in Punjab is nothing but to avert the risk of any mishap while Ishrat-ul-Ibad is present. Coalition in Sindh with MQM is again just a piece of pie to the people who could risk the entire pie for the Peoples Party. Mr. Altaf Hussain must keep in mind that Asif Zardari has many enemies and does not want to fight with all of them ( President Musharraf, Army, Intelligence Agencies, Establishment, MQM, Sindhi Nationalists, Sindhi population, Nawaz Sharif, poverty, hunger, sky rocketing prices, Stocks etc.) by opening many fronts. His strategy is to fight one at a time.

One day MQM’s turn will come on Asif’s list, if he survives many of his opponents!
Asif must me a happy camper with the disguised support by the press and media. But remember, the hypocrites and crooks always need an opposition group to play their roles. What will happen when Musharraf is gone. Today, no one remembers Shaukat Aziz. Same way, one day, might be after months and years, when Musharraf is gone, the same cannons of Geo and Jang would be pointed at Asif Ali Zardari (not at Nawaz Sharif because of ethnic reasons, unfortunately).
LAST WORD
In the above game of 'Hide & Seek', the main role is of Uncle Sam. He is closely watching to wind up the table.

I warn wasted interests: you might survive Musharraf, Army or the Establishment but when the White Elephant would be loose, Pakistan might lose its frontiers and the destiny of 160 million people would be ocean of bloods.

HUSSAIN HAQQANI'S
APPOINTMENT

When Asif Zardari can marry Benazir and in a snap hijack the Peoples Party and declare himself a co-chairman, then nothing is wrong in Husain Haqqani becoming our ambassador to the U.S. This all is a part of U.S. game. Everyone is in the line of a slaughterhouse. It depends, who is next?

Few points to remember:

1. Musharraf could use 52-B.
2. An absolute Martial Law could come in the next few months. I wish, at least 50,000 are killed.
3. Some well known leader/personality could be killed to derail the system or as a Trump Card.
4. That jerk Iftikhar Chaudhry would die with the wish in his heart to be Chief Justice again.
5. If I was President Musharraf, 100 days were enough to test the present government where they have done nothing and I would have kicked it out.
6. This is God's wrath on Pakistan that the nation is trapped in the middle of an ocean of problems.
7. America is well on target to bring bloodshed and civil war in Pakistan.
8. Asif Zardari is posing himself as the most intelligent person in Pakistan. But he is not.

9. Why do people forget a TRUTH of Mother Nature where it makes the best judgment? Look for a second on Z.A. Bhutto, Indira Gandhi, Shaikh Mujib-ur-Rehman who literally lost their patriarchs and were left with leftover women.
10. Asif, Nawazoo, you are not smarter than Bhuttos, Indiras and Mujeebs. If they lost everything, you are simply a pawn of chess and whatever wealth you have collected of Bhuttos, you would not be able to use.

Mr. Khan is a Pakistani commentator based in Canada. The views expressed here are his own. He can be reached at shafiqkhansindhi@gmail.com

“(Musharraf) supports democracy. He is very frank (and) straightforward,” Gilani said in an interview with a private TV channel. He, however, said among leaders, he liked Asif Zardari most because of his political insight and facile style. Gilani agreed with President Musharraf’s statement in his memoirs, In the Line of Fire, that governing Pakistan was the most difficult job in the world.

Asked about his opinion on Musharraf’s policies, Gilani said he approved of many of those that conformed to the manifesto of the PPP. He said the PPP supported him on issues such as the Women’s Protection Bill and women’s representation in assemblies.

Gilani said he had changed the previous policy on the war on terror by focusing on finding the root causes instead of on the use of force. He said the filing of a reference against Iftikhar Chaudhry cast a negative impact on his political goodwill.

``Musharraf has to go,'' Farhatullah Babar, spokesman for the Pakistan Peoples Party, the main group in the coalition government, said in a phone interview today. ``It is his choice whether he wants to go in a dignified manner, or wishes to be impeached.''

Musharraf denied a report he would resign in a television appearance last night, blaming the speculation on ``a malicious campaign to create uncertainty.'' The dispute threatens to hamper efforts to combat terrorism and improve living standards for the nation's 163 million people, half of whom can no longer afford sufficient food, according to the United Nations.

``If this remains unaddressed, it could lead to real instability in coming months,'' said Talat Masood, a retired general who works as an independent consultant in Islamabad.

The Bush administration has called Musharraf its key ally in the battle against Pakistan-based militants of al-Qaeda and the Taliban. The U.S. has encouraged Pakistan's main parties, led by former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, ousted in a 1999 coup by Musharraf, and Asif Ali Zardari, to keep him in office even after their victory in parliamentary elections in February.

Rudderless Government

Pakistan's key stock index has tumbled 23 percent this month, the biggest decline among 89 global benchmarks tracked by Bloomberg. Brokerage officials flew to Islamabad this week to urge the coalition to take action to restore confidence and about 100 investors and brokers gathered outside the Karachi Stock Exchange yesterday, shouting anti-government slogans.

The sense of rudderless government has put the Karachi Stock Exchange 100 index on course for its biggest monthly decline since May 2000. The central bank stepped in on May 23, raising its benchmark interest rate to tame inflation at a 25- year high.

``There is the perception that nobody is actually in command to address the real issues and take the country forward,'' said Habib-ur-Rehman, chief executive of Atlas Asset Management Co. in Karachi.

The equity benchmark dropped as much as 2.6 percent to a nine-month low this morning before recovering. The index gained 1.4 percent to 12,401.53 at 2:45 p.m. as some investors judged the recent decline as excessive and brokers ended their protest outside the exchange.

Economy Blossomed

Pakistan's economy has blossomed during Musharraf's years in office, reaching an average annual growth rate of 7.5 percent over the past four years. Foreign investment reached a record $8.4 billion in the year ended June 30.

The government predicts growth will slow to 6 percent this fiscal year, after 14 months of political turmoil since Musharraf's attempt to sideline the chief justice in March 2007.

International rating companies -- Standard and Poor's and Moody's Investors Service -- downgraded Pakistan's government bonds for the first time in nine years. ``Investors' confidence has declined and capital flight has started,'' said Rehman, who manages the equivalent of $80 million in stocks and bonds.

Musharraf resigned in November from his most powerful post, commanding general of the army. His chosen successor, Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, has pulled the army back from politics, withdrawing officers from civilian government posts and ordering them to avoid involvement with politicians.

Speculation that Musharraf would resign arose yesterday after an English-language daily, the News, suggested that Kayani had pushed Musharraf to quit during a meeting the previous night. Musharraf denied yesterday that any divisions had arisen between himself and Kayani.

Clinging On

Musharraf's attempts to cling on to power were bolstered this month when the governing coalition started to unravel because of a dispute over judges. The president had sacked the justices last November because they were preparing legal challenges to his tenure.

Zardari's Pakistan Peoples Party last week proposed a constitutional amendment to strip Musharraf's most important remaining powers, the ability to dissolve parliament and appoint military service chiefs.

Support from Sharif's Pakistan Muslim League would ensure the two-thirds majority required to pass the amendment in the National Assembly. The debate would then move to the Senate where he'd need defections among Musharraf loyalists to make it law.

Term Limits

The Muslim League, which withdrew its cabinet ministers on March 13 because of the judicial dispute, will meet today to discuss Zardari's proposals. A key sticking point may be conditions that would weaken the restored judges, including a term limit for the chief justice.

Zardari, whose wife Benazir Bhutto was assassinated in December, spent eight years in prison under Sharif and Musharraf on what he says were politically motivated corruption charges. Musharraf canceled further prosecution against Zardari last year as part of negotiations that persuaded the then PPP leader Bhutto to return to Pakistan where she was killed after an election rally.

Sharif opposes restrictions on restored judges because his party won votes in February by promising unconditional reinstatement. The party feels it will lose support in future elections if it backs away now, said Muhammad Mehdi, a Muslim League coordinator on foreign affairs.

The two parties seem closer to agreement on the president's future. Zardari last week joined Sharif's call for Musharraf to step down, calling him ``a relic of the past.''

``If he resigns voluntarily, it is good for everyone,'' said Babar of the Peoples Party. Otherwise, ``he will be kicked out.''

-- Editors: Bill Austin, Stephen Foxwell

To contact the reporter on this story: James Rupert in Islamabad at jrupert3@bloomberg.net.

WASHINGTON: In a show of solidarity with President Musharraf, whom he has described in the past as his “tight” friend, US President George Bush assured his Pakistani counterpart that he looks forward to working with him in his (Musharraf’s) “continuing role in further strengthening US Pakistani relations.”

According to White House spokesperson Dana Perino, “He (President Bush) did this morning have a call with President Musharraf of Pakistan. This was a follow up to the meeting he had in Sharm el Sheikh with Prime Minister Gilani. The President reiterated the United States’ strong support for Pakistan, and he indicated he looks forward to President Musharraf’s continuing role in further strengthening US-Pakistani relations.”

She said while reiterating the points President Bush had made in his meeting with Prime Minister Gilani in Egypt, Bush also “emphasised in his telephone call to President Musharraf that ‘It’s important for all in authority in Pakistan to work with each other to benefit the Pakistani people.’ ”

The phone call from Washington should lay to rest speculation in some quarters in Pakistan and elsewhere that the US had decided to “dump” the Pakistani leader.

There are three major areas which the Higher Education Commission (HEC) programmes are trying to address. The first is to widen the access to higher education which has been dismally low. Five years ago when HEC was formed,[ only about 2.5% of students between the ages of 17 to 23 had access to higher education. This has now improved by 50% and it presently stands at 4.1% of students of 17 to 23 years who have access to higher education. However the biggest and more difficult problem to solve is that of the quality of higher education. This is linked directly with the number and quality of highly qualified faculty in Pakistani universities. Out of some 16,000 faculty members, only about 4,000 have PhD degrees. Thus about 75% of our faculty is not adequately qualified. The HEC has therefore devoted most of its funding to giving scholarships to the brightest students for foreign and indigenous PhDs. Some 2,500 scholars are now studying abroad and about 3,500 scholarships were offered to scholars for studying within Pakistan at the PhD level.

These students are selected from a very wide pool with about 15,000 students appearing in national tests, every 2-3 months. The best 300-400 are short listed and are interviewed by foreign professors from the countries to which the students will be eventually going for PhD level studies such as Germany, France, Italy, Sweden and USA etc. The world’s largest Fulbright Programme, a US$ 150 million programme has been initiated also to send 640 students to Ivy League universities in USA.

Of 2,500 students who are presently studying in foreign universities, some are beginning to return after completing their doctoral degrees. About 50 students returned last year, and 265 are expected to return this year.

One of the most exciting initiatives of HEC has been the digital revolution that it has brought about in the universities. All public sector universities of Pakistan are now connected with high speed internet access and various departments have been computerized through the Pakistan Education Research Network established by HEC. One of the finest digital libraries in the world has been launched on this platform which now includes 23,000 international journals from the world’s major publishing houses and 45,000 text books and research monographs from 220 international publishers.

Another exciting milestone which has been achieved by HEC has been the establishment of an international video lecturing programme under which lectures are being delivered daily from top institutions in USA, Europe, Australia and Japan and are being listened to in a live and interactive mode by students and faculty members in Pakistan. This is now being developed into full-fledged courses so that students will be able to have diplomas by attending lectures from faculty members from abroad. The emphasis on research which is being made by HEC through access to research grants in different disciplines has resulted in a huge increase in research output from Pakistan. Thus in the 1990s the number of publications coming out in science and engineering at an international level from Pakistan were only 400-600 per year. In December 2007 Pakistan had 1913 publications which represents an increase of 360% over the last four year period.

The programmes of the Higher Education Commission have been independently assessed by education experts of the World Bank during 2007 and a 110 pages book was produced by the World Bank in June 2007. The experts have praised the HEC for having brought about “A Silent Revolution” and have appreciated HEC for launching an attack on the “twin challenge of access and excellence.” There has been resistance to some changes brought about after 50 years of stagnation. Two Centres in Pakistan have won the Islamic Development Bank Prize coming as the best science institutions in the Islamic World. These are the International Centre for Chemical Sciences, at the University of Karachi and the Centre of Excellence in Molecular Biology, University of Punjab, Lahore. The leading scientific journal Nature has published two articles praising the development of higher education in Pakistan.

The First Five Year plan gave a 3:1 allocation for education, with three parts going to the low level education and one part to higher education. However with successive governments an erosion of funding for higher education was witnessed with the result that the universities became low level colleges and there was little creativity for research. The international norms for education which is three is to one, also diminished rapidly so that it came down to about seven parts to the lower level education and one to the higher level education.

During the last five years there has been a gradual improvement in this ratio. During the current year the amount allocated for education is about Rs. 255 billions of which Rs. 33 billion is going to the higher education and Rs. 222 billion is going to the lower education sector. Thus about 85% of funds are presently being spent on lower level education and 15% at the higher level education. The impression that has been created by certain quarters that too much funds are being given to the higher education sector is totally wrong as the above statistics prove. In fact still too little funds are being given to the education sector in general which is about 2% of GNP instead of 6% of GNP recommended by UNESCO for developing countries and within the education budget the funding allocation still remain distorted very much in favour of the lower level education sector. It is hope that in years to come this will improve to the standard ratio of 3: 1 which is being adopted by India, Korea and many other countries.

These exciting initiatives of the Higher Education Commission must be sustained and magnified as Pakistan is to transition from its largely agriculture-based economy to knowledge-economy including a project to set up nine engineering Universities of Engineering, Science and Technology Pakistan in partnership with foreign countries. Four projects for such universities in partnership with Germany, Italy, Austria and China have already been approved while others are in the pipeline. This single programme can have a huge impact on the future development of Pakistan especially in the industrial sector.

The above rapid developments in the field of higher education are a matter of concern to our neighbour, India. In an article published in Hindustan Times it was mentioned that a formal presentation was made by Prof. C.N.R. Rao, Adviser to the Prime Minister on Science and Technology in India to the Indian Prime Minister about the rapid strides that Pakistan is making in the higher education sector and how this can change the lead that presently India has in higher education, science and technology. A special concern to India was the fact that the changes in salary structures in Pakistan are now attracting the bright young men and women into the higher education, science and technology sector which can have far reaching impact on the development in Pakistan. If India is concerned that Pakistan is doing so well, then HEC must be doing something right!

—The writer is a Professor at University of Karachi.

It was sometime between the bombs and the violence that gripped the nation a few months ago that I realised how our media had failed us. We were under attack by a sinister power, one that believes in violence against innocents as legitimate. And yet no attempt was made by our media to unify us or boost our morale.

Instead, what we saw on our TV screens and read in our newspapers was the type of reporting one would expect from the foreign media; one in which the victims, on this side of the divide, are presented as numbers. Day after day, as the attacks continued, all we got were the facts. There was simply no attempt to portray the victims as being human.

There was no human interest story about the innocent gardener and his young daughter who were blown up in the Model Town bomb attack. There were no tear-jerking images or reports that would rally a nation under attack together. There was no coverage of little girls with teddy bears crying for their fathers or images of wives holding candle-night vigils as their husbands struggled for their last breaths in hospitals. There were no black and white slide shows of the murdered as children slurping ice cream or playing with the garden pipe. There was absolutely nothing on TV that made you identify with the sufferers.

I think of Kargil, of how the Indian media used this attack on its sovereignty to bring its nation together, and realise how we, as a nation, are inept at the art of unifying. After Kargil, the Indian media did what its government had been unable to do: unite people from all segments of society in a burst of patriotism. As movie stars sang patriotic songs on TV and held fund-raisers for the soldiers, private citizens held hands across the country in solidarity, the media was able to transform a negative into a positive by giving its people a cause to believe in.

Here in Pakistan there is no dearth of causes and, especially, disasters. But instead of using them to rally our people together, we use them to beat each other up. After the recent barrage of violence, the only response our media could muster up was to blame Musharraf and the US. And so, once more, instead of uniting, we divided. Instead of connecting, we separated. And the media, once more, used its powers to spread negativity instead of creating positivity.

For all due purpose, we were at war. But there was no identification of the opponent, no emotionally charged videos of Nur Jehan singing war songs, absolutely nothing to help us come together in this time of crisis.

After 9/11, when America attacked Afghanistan, there were very few American news networks that covered the anti-war rallies being staged across the world. As frustrating as it was for those of us who were taking part in those rallies, one has to appreciate the effort of the US government to do what it felt was in the best interest of its people.

And so the American media did what it does best: dehumanise the victim. After all, it is easier to beat up on those whom you have already declared sub-human. So while the death of one American soldier was a colossal tragedy to be mourned at an international level, hundreds of dead Afghanis were merely listed as “casualties”.

Dehumanising the enemy is an effective strategy that has long been used by oppressors, so it is no surprise to see the foreign media doing it to us. They are watching out for their own interests. But when we start doing it to ourselves, we have to wonder: whose interests are we watching out for? So used to being dehumanised by the Western media, we have started dehumanising each other.

This is the new imperialism. Brainwashed by centuries of colonial rule and now, the foreign media, we do not consider the deaths of our fellow citizens worthy of reporting but get teary-eyed at B-Grade movies such as Flight 93.

In his book The Heart of Darkness, Joseph Conrad speaks about a dead African, “a savage” who was of “no more account than a grain of sand in a black Sahara”. He was insignificant — just another ugly dead body. By failing to show the humanness of our own people, we too have shown that we think of ourselves as nothing more than grains of sand in a black Sahara. How can we possibly chide others for thinking the same of us?

Ayeda Naqvi has been a journalist for 16 years. She can be contacted at ayedanaqvi@yahoo.com

Daily Times

Looking at this evil backlog of issues, most people had welcomed the initiative taken by the leaders of both parties, in particular Mr Asif Ali Zardari, when they sought to forget old and recent grievances and to form a partnership for the governance of province. In the compromise that was put on the anvil there was mutual admission of a very tough