Who will fight back? - Cyril Almeida - January 7, 2011

Source : www.dawn.com

THE morning of the governor`s assassination, I found myself arguing there are no ideological divisions left in Pakistani politics anymore. `Right` or `Left` have lost all meaning, which is why the PPP can seek alliances with the PML-N, the ANP, the MQM, the JUI-F, the PML-F, Fata MPs and even the PML-Q, the `Qatil` League, to try and cling on in power.

The name of the game is power, and nothing else matters. But I was wrong.

At least in the public imagination, there does exist an ideological divide — and the PPP is on the wrong side of it. la deen`

Godless, secular, `, the PPP and its leaders are everything the Children of Zia loathe. Taseer`s killer, Mumtaz Qadri, born in 1985, is the quintessential child of Zia.

At least at the level of signalling, the PPP does confirm its public reputation. And privately, I find PPP leaders to be among the more sensible and warm, their worldview free of hate, their language couched in a kind of humanism difficult to detect elsewhere.

The ANP and the MQM come closest to the PPP in this regard, but there`s always a lingering suspicion of instrumentalism — about the lack of genuine belief in the values they publicly espouse — and their track records always give pause.

But here`s the difficulty with the PPP, too: even if you believe there is genuine unease in the party at the trajectory the country is on, the PPP has done no more or no less than other mainstream political players to help nudge the country along in that terrible direction.

ZAB of course desperately pandered to the right as the opposition from those quarters mounted. BB`s first term you can write off because it was so brief and she was so completely on the defensive that little blame can genuinely be attributed to her.

But what did she do in the second term? Naseerullah Babar`s notorious boast that `we` created the Taliban — factually incorrect as `we` came to the party after it had begun — quickly became a millstone around the PPP`s neck, and the country`s, too.

As for the great `Islamist` Sharifs? When the Sipah-i-Sahaba Pakistan tried to pop off the brothers during Nawaz Sharif`s second term, they smashed the SSP with the ruthlessness of an us-or-them conviction.

Sure, you could argue that just as the PML-N is more likely to go after `vulgar` plays in Lahore, the PPP is always more likely to issue more liquor permits in Sindh — but that`s not really where the war for the future of Pakistan is being fought.

When it comes to using state power, the major political parties have a pretty equal, and pretty awful, record of opposing the infrastructure of jihad.

Perhaps the worst of the lot so far in this respect has been Asif Zardari. Sure he says all the right things, in his glib, oily way, but what has he really done?

Taseer, his hatchet guy in Punjab against the PML-N, said and did all the right things as far as the boss was concerned, but when the chips were down what did Zardari do?

He didn`t publicly rebuke his flunky, Babar Awan. He issued no orders to prosecute, arrest or even plain investigate the agents of hate. And the friend of friends wasn`t even there to see his loyalist lowered into an early grave. The Guardian

Declan Walsh of has written that Taseer was left “swinging in a lonely wind” after the Aasia Bibi case became a “political football”. “Zardari was powerless to act,” according to Declan.

Possibly. That Zardari is often powerless to act is obvious enough. But at least you can admire a man who fights for something he believes in, who stands up for his friends when it matters.

Instead, we are left with the rumour of a president who is spending a few weeks by the sea at the suggestion of a soothsayer.

Then again, the full horror of what we are confronted with goes far beyond the non-battles of a single leader or political party.

A favourite sparring partner I refer to as a culture warrior has long argued for more public fierceness, for pushing back in ways big and small against those hawking the intolerance and hate the country is awash in.

The hate-mongers in the vernacular media are particularly malign influences. Having seen the ugliness up close and the slyness with which it is foisted off on an unsuspecting public, you can`t help but feel a little ill.

And let`s not forget the original sinners.

A friend who has witnessed up close the country`s slide over the past three decades sent me a note soon after Taseer`s slaying:

“This may be an individual act. But look at this: Governor shot dead by own guard; country in turmoil; Government lost majority two days back but moral authority long ago; Gilani doesn`t have support in parliament; Zardari is corrupt and discredited; economy is in meltdown; Sharif`s unable to provide alternative leadership. Who emerges as the sole survivor? Yes, you guessed it Kayani. Back to square one. (Expletive deleted) patrons of fundos will soon be back.”

Who will or won`t be back is hard to say. Easier, though, it is to find where primary responsibility lies for the horrors Pakistan is facing today: with the self-appointed custodians of the national interest.

And increasingly if there is anything we should fault Asif Zardari for, it should be for surrendering without a fight on that front.

The comeback the army has made, the total control it is exercising over national-security policy, the return to a position of singular prestige in the national imagination, all of that may eventually have come to pass anyway.

But because no meaningful resistance was offered, it has happened in double-quick time.

cyril.a@gmail.com

VIEW: Blood on our hands —Saroop Ijaz - Thursday, January 06, 2011

Source : www.dailytimes.com

Cowardice is not sensitivity. Neutrality now is immoral. Bipartisanship is spinelessness. Silence is criminal. We live in a society where condemning a daylight murder of a statesman by a religious fundamentalist lunatic requires ‘caution’

The assassination of Salmaan Taseer is profoundly tragic, not only because we have lost perhaps our only brave, vocal and liberal statesman but also because it is a sad commentary on how pathetic our society has become. The media discussions immediately after the horrific attack were very cautious, the political leaders economised their words, and condemnation of the incident was often followed by carefully structured clawback comments. A few of the leaders and media anchors went so far as positing the question of whether the assassination was justified or not. All of us should be repulsed.

The great historian, Arnold Toynbee observed that “civilisations die from suicide, not by murder”. Toynbee argues that the breakdown of civilisations is not caused by loss of control over the environment, over the human environment, or attacks from the outside. Rather, civilisations commit slow painful suicides. The murder of Salmaan Taseer and the reaction to it does signify the beginning of our suicide, and our suicide will be swift.

Media personnel and politicians are ostensibly being ‘objective’ about the issue. Those who condemn the incident refuse to comment on the blasphemy law issue that provided the impetus for the barbarism, as it is a ‘sensitive’ subject. Cowardice is not sensitivity. Neutrality now is immoral. Bipartisanship is spinelessness. Silence is criminal. We live in a society where condemning a daylight murder of a statesman by a religious fundamentalist lunatic requires ‘caution’. The Great Roman Empire fell because the Romans were extremely cautious of not offending the barbarians. We do not have the luxury of a huge empire to squander over centuries; Pakistan will fall in months.

Objectivity consists mainly of balancing out and accommodating the loudest voices. If our media and leaders are really suggesting that we should be ‘neutral’ on murder, this diabolical stance surely sets a new low for cowardice for our already less than gallant media and politicians. Politicians and the media were nowhere to be found when absurd fatwas were being issued against Mr Taseer. It is ironic that the same media personnel who have no qualms over inciting murder choose to tread carefully on medieval barbarism. Our society at large has been desensitised to the point of resignation. Human rights activists-lawyers, who in the past have been very vocal on human rights issues, do not want to comment on the reasons leading up to this murder. It reminds one of Habib Jalib’s verse, “Jinn ko tha zaban pay naaz, chup hain who zaban daraz” (Those who took pride in their voice, stand silent today). Most of us stood still and watched as Salmaan Taseer fought for some semblance of humanity to remain in our midst. All of us have blood on our hands. Commenting on the Holocaust, British historian Ian Kershaw once said, “The road to Auschwitz was built by hate, but paved with indifference.” The road to our destruction has already been built on bigotry and intolerance, and is now being paved with our apathy and cowardice.

The current blasphemy laws have no place in a civilised society. Let Salmaan Taseer’s martyrdom be the tipping point of bringing about a new social contract in Pakistan. As Nietzsche said, it is not enough to subsist; the function of man in this world is to exist. We are too timid to exist; we choose to lumber on with our pitiful subsistence. Worst-case scenario: we lose. But we would have fought, and there is honour in that. There is no honour in servitude.

We do not have the option now of being neutral to provide us a pretext for avoiding moral considerations. This moral blindness has to end now. Elie Wiesel said, “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.”

People are either for or against murder. People are either for liberty or for tyranny. Societies either survive or perish. It is a sin of omission to objectify massacre or maybe the most extreme blasphemy. It is time to proverbially draw the line in dust and throw the gauntlet to tyranny. Take your pick and stand up to be counted. Salmaan Taseer was not very cautious; he was brave instead. He stood and died for something he believed in. What do you stand for?

My favourite Frank Sinatra song is painfully apt to Salmaan Taseer’s departure:

“For what is a man? What has he got?

If not himself — Then he has naught.

To say the things he truly feels,

And not the words of one who kneels.

The record shows I took the blows,

And did it my way.”

The writer is a Lahore-based lawyer and can be reached at saroop_ijaz@hotmail.com

Gunning for the PPP - I.A Rehman - January 6, 2011

Source : www.dawn.com

WHILE Governor Salman Taseer was paying with his life for standing up against fanaticism in Islamabad, also in the capital Mian Nawaz Sharif was moving towards joining the pack that has been gunning for the party with whose leader he had signed the Charter of Democracy not so long ago.

These two events on Tuesday, Jan 4, 2011 summed up the most critical crisis confronting the state of Pakistan — an ungainly squabble for power among political factions who were quite oblivious of the arrival at their door of extremists determined to destroy all of them and their system. In a way the scene was reminiscent of the situation in Baghdad many centuries ago when learned clerics were debating the possibility of a camel`s passage through the head of a needle while a Mongol horde was about to sack the capital of the great Islamic empire.

The gravity of the state`s crisis can be gauged not only from the refusal of religious parties to condemn the brutal murder of Salman Taseer and the audacity of some of them in condoning the foul deed but also from the PML-N supremo`s decision to tighten the siege around the central coalition.

Only a short time earlier Mian Nawaz Sharif had taken a sound political stand when he had said that he would neither vote in favour of the Gilani government nor join the move to topple it. On Tuesday he still ruled out supporting a move to oust the central coalition, but at the same time he issued an ultimatum to the prime minister that if he did not answer the PML-N`s call within 72 hours (later on the period was extended to six days) the PPP would have to quit the Punjab ministry. The fact that his demands could not be met by anybody did not deter him.What happened during the intervening days to persuade the patriarch of Raiwind to modify his stand? He certainly came under pressure from the hard-liners in his kitchen cabinet who concealed their impatience at being out of power under the plea that the party was losing ground by appearing to be helping the PPP-led coalition to stay in power. Another factor might have been the need to counter the prospect of a PPP–PML-Q axis taking shape. Or, like the well-informed leaders of the MQM and the JUI, the PML-N chief had chosen to take a bet on the widely rumoured possibility of the PPP`s coming to grief by March this year.

Be that as it may, it should not be difficult for Mian Nawaz Sharif to realise that the best course for him to improve his credentials as a democrat and also his party`s electoral prospects is to let the present government complete its term. Any other course will either lead to an early election, which most of the parties do not want, or force the PML-N into the thorny embrace of the MQM and JUI.

In this situation the PPP still has some time to benefit from the opportunities freedom from troublesome allies has provided. It will lose little, and possibly gain something, by giving up the policy of appeasing its erstwhile allies and calling the bluff of the MQM and JUI both.

Much more dangerous than winning back the support of the MQM and JUI at any price will be the PPP coalition`s reliance on the PML-Q for making up a majority in the National Assembly. The PML-Q is a divided house and its nominal controllers do not seem capable of delivering to Mr Gilani all the 50 votes in the National Assembly the party is supposed to have.

Besides, the PPP should not be unaware of the risks in aligning itself with Gen Musharraf`s protégés. In any marriage of convenience between the two neither will the PML-Q be able to help the PPP stay afloat nor will it be possible for the PPP to resuscitate the PML-Q whose ability to survive the next election is questionable. The only possible result might be that the odd couple will sink together.

The only honourable way for the PPP to scramble out of the hole is to make up its mind that it prefers the loss of power now to saving its government at the cost of a total debacle a few months later. Many people, however, doubt the PPP leadership`s capacity to look away from narrow, personal greed and realise the long-term gains in pursuing people-friendly politics.

If a minority government accepts the reality that it cannot have the freedom and advantages parliamentary majorities enjoy, it can through wisdom, prudence and honesty not only survive but also broaden its support among the people. Such opportunities are available to the Gilani coalition too.

The government will no doubt have difficulties in getting its legislative proposals adopted by parliament, especially proposals that adversely affect religious or business groups` interests. But the government could defeat or at least embarrass a more numerous opposition by bringing up, for instance, a tough accountability law, or a broader social security plan, measures that nobody could oppose without paying a political price. However, to be able to improve its standing with the people the government will have to come down heavily on corruption in high places and plug all possibilities of wrongdoing through abuse of discretionary powers, resort to secretive functioning and disregard for merit in the various spheres of life.

It will also have to stop making foolish and politically suicidal declarations such as a recent statement that the government has nothing to do with the increased burden on the people caused by a sharp increase in POL prices. It is like telling a victim of robbery that the government has nothing to do with the acts of a robber who is not subject to its discipline. The plain fact is that regardless of the domestic and international pressures the government must do something to protect the people against hardships caused by a greater rise in the cost of living than any increase in wages.

Further, it is time the government started dispelling the 20-year-old impression that PPP-led governments rely more than others on IMF surrogates and have sometimes been keen to offer international finance organisations more than what is demanded by them. This is not a suggestion for economic adventurism, it is only a plea for a firmer commitment to defend the people`s interests and a more resolute search for the means to do that.

There is no denying the gravity of the challenge the government is facing and many are unlikely to pin hopes on a team that could not consolidate itself while enjoying majority support. Still, there is no point in giving up the ghost before any shots are fired.

Who are we dying to please? - Jawed Naqvi - January 6, 2011

Source : www.dawn.com

THE condolence message from Hillary Clinton notwithstanding, did Salman Taseer go down fighting a good fight against Muslim fanatics to win applause from the Americans or did he die for the survival of Pakistan?

The question should be posed to Rahul Gandhi in the neighbourhood. India`s Congress party scion had made a valid point about the threat to his country from Hindu extremists — just as Pakistan is being wrecked by Muslim bigots — but instead of telling his countrymen about it, he whispered his worry into the ears of the American ambassador in Delhi. Nothing could be as self-defeating as not trusting your very own in the battle to defend your core ideals.

In a curious way, the fact that the young Gandhi mentioned the Hindutva threat to US ambassador Tim Roemer, in fact, added to his credibility. A public statement would in most likelihood be pounced upon by his detractors as a populist and a potentially communal ploy to curry favour with Muslims and so forth. That particular worry should, of course, be no reason to keep the nation oblivious of an ominous possibility.

Right-wing Hindus expectedly pooh-poohed Gandhi`s remarks to Roemer, which would probably never have surfaced but for the WikiLeaks` revelations. He contended that the Hindutva upsurge posed a greater threat to India than did Muslim extremism. The view appeared to be based on a simple and compelling logic. Muslim extremists threaten Pakistan because they are or were part of the state structures thanks to Gen Zia`s policies. Likewise, Hindutva and not so much Muslim bigots challenge Indian secularism.

The reason is not difficult to comprehend. Although homegrown Muslim fanatics in India, even those having links with Lashkar-i-Taiba from across the border, have a stake in destroying India`s secularism, they remain handicapped in their mission because of their total absence from the levers of state power.

Hindutva forces, on the other hand, like their counterparts in Pakistan, have penetrated nearly all the sectors of state that matter. Parliament is the only place where so far they cannot carry out subversion. Of course, it may not take long before they are emboldened to contemplate doing just that. Hindustan Times

Even as I write, a front-page report in the says that investigators are probing the proximity between the Hindu revivalist Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Swami Aseemanand, the main suspect in the bombing of the Samjhota Express and a clutch of other outrages for which Muslims were blamed.

Also, Digvijay Singh, a close advisor to Rahul Gandhi, has been in the news for suggesting that the anti-terror police chief of Mumbai, Hemant Karkare, faced a threat from Hindutva groups before he was killed in an ambush during the November 2008 attack on Mumbai by Pakistani terrorists.

This week Singh produced telephone records of his conversation with Karkare hours before he was killed in which he had expressed apprehension about Hindu extremists. There has been speculation that Hindutva groups may have used the chaos unleashed by the terrorists to settle scores with Karkare as he was closing in on their own terror links across the country.

The fact that Punjab Governor Salman Taseer had opposed Pakistan`s notorious blasphemy laws has emerged as a key factor in his murder by a religiously driven security guard. This poses a huge but not insurmountable challenge to a bill moved by former information minister Sherry Rehman to repeal the mediaeval law. It is in any case a fight that India can do well to learn from and Rahul Gandhi has done well to grasp the point. But what can he do to avert a situation that Pakistan`s poet Fahmida Riaz had noted a while ago? Tum bilkul hum jaise nikle ab tak kahaa`n chhupe thay bhai? Wo ghaamadpan, wo jaahilpan jisme humney sadi ga`nwaaee — ab pahonchi hai dwaar tumharey? Aray badhaee, bahot badhaee

Fahmida Riaz recited her poem in Delhi when the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) was in power and wreaking havoc in Gujarat. “!” (And so you too turned out like us, brother? How well you masked your bigotry. The easy ignorance, the rabid delinquency we nurtured for decades [in Pakistan], is knocking on your doors. Well done my friend, what else can I say?)

Of course, any claim such as the one made by Rahul Gandhi (and played down by his party not the least because it is crawling with closet Hindutva acolytes) would not be taken too seriously by India`s mainstream media. In any case, goes the argument, the BJP, which is the most likely political vehicle to usher full-blooded religious fascism in India has never secured more than a third of the active votes. This is a fallacy. The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich

The story of how Hitler became a dictator — , by William Shirer, gives a good account of it — may hold a lesson.

In the presidential election held on March 13, 1932, there were four candidates: the incumbent, Field Marshal Paul von Hindenburg, Hitler and two minor candidates, Ernst Thaelmann and Theodore Duesterberg. The results were: Hindenburg 49.6 per cent; Hitler 30.1 per cent; Thaelmann 13.2 per cent; Duesterberg 6.8 per cent. In other words, almost 70 per cent of the German people voted against Hitler, causing his supporter Joseph Goebbels, who would later become Hitler`s minister of propaganda, to lament in his journal, “We`re beaten; terrible outlook. Party circles badly depressed and dejected.”

How it turned into an overwhelming majority for Hitler, not without deft manoeuvres to eliminate key opponents, are elements that Indian polity is only too easily exposed to.

The other route to power, which is being attempted in Pakistan, is through religious terrorism. That is what the remaining 70 per cent Indians have to be inoculated against. And that particular vaccine will come from India`s native strength, not from the American embassy in Delhi. Ditto for Pakistan.

Moreover, Rahul Gandhi should realise that his chosen interlocutors have a dubious history of courting rather than challenging religious bigotry, be it in India or Pakistan and practically everywhere in the world.

The writer is `s correspondent in Delhi.

Dawn jawednaqvi@gmail.com

COMMENT: Salmaan Taseer’s martyrdom —Aisha Sarwari - Thursday, January 06, 2011

Source : www.dailytimes.com

The murderer of Salmaan Taseer points to a growing minority that is more powerful than the elite in this country. It rules over the elite through the zest of holy orders that descend from minarets everywhere. More than dispensaries and schools, mosques form the unregulated educational channels across the country

The execution of the governor of Punjab in the capital has caused riot among the masses. The ruling party is upset, so are his opponents but there are also those who are gladdened. Vocal in their online comments on social media like YouTube, they say he deserved it for calling the blasphemy law a black law and for siding with Aasia Bibi for the allegations that she committed blasphemy.

Salmaan Taseer’s brutal murder in broad daylight is not only meant to spread fear in every common man but actually attack the symbol of liberals and progressives across Pakistan.

He reinvented the concept of Orwellian clarity of speech. He used even wit and insult to tell his political opponents what he really thought of their schemes. He spoke his mind, rested only when the point was made.

He had come to be the only man who defined the fight that is the only fight worth fighting – between the mullahs and the progressives. Before him, no one had dared vocalise the fact that there remains an ideological divide in Pakistan. On the one hand, you have the Fazlur Rehmans from the religious parties who call Salmaan Taseer an extremist for showing support to Aasia Bibi and cannot differentiate this act from the act of terrorism. On the other hand, you have Salmaan Taseer who may not use the most appropriate language when formulating official memos but is overall a self-made man. Someone who builds wealth and enjoys its fruits. Someone whose children are invested in this country and who has himself rooted identity economically, culturally and in terms of posterity. These are the two sides among which there must be war for Pakistan to proceed from this stalemate.

It is more moral to stand by your country because it is the right thing to do, as opposed to driving a divine mission based on a conditional obsession as the religious right-wing does.

The brutality of this murder lies in the casual and trusting day Mr Taseer was to have if those 27 odd bullet wounds would not have settled in him. He was having a fun day. Pakistan’s bigger tragedies are that it is boring. The youth, which now forms over 65 percent of the country, are out of options to have a good time, with freedom and access to clean entertainment. Salmaan Taseer was a leader who had a pulse on the youth and emulated the spirit of youth and vitality.

A Twitter addict, he kept a watch on the Punjab government, engaging with thousands of students and professionals and getting them to participate and become more aware. This was the beginning of a new era of democratic forces at work. The forces of obscurantism however are faster than the cluster of internet users. The educational divide in Pakistan remains every true leader’s biggest challenge.

The murderer of Salmaan Taseer points to a growing minority that is more powerful than the elite in this country. It rules over the elite through the zest of holy orders that descend from minarets everywhere. More than dispensaries and schools, mosques form the unregulated educational channels across the country.

With the war in Afghanistan, an insurgency in Balochistan and the Kashmir freedom struggle, there is enough cannon-fodder to go around. Impressionable minds will grow to the thousands, as fewer economic opportunities and a dearth of positive influences exist. Pakistan needed a courageous governor like Taseer but even more it needed a governor to know his terrain.

The space for progressive liberals is smaller today as a Salmaan Taseer-shaped hole is carved in the universe today, but there is still room to breathe. Until then, we will keep saying that the blasphemy law needs to be repealed because it is a flawed law and because it is a catalyst of minority persecution and a reason for religious frenzy and misplaced accusations.

We will continue to cry out for what we feel is right and wait for our turn. This will be our way of honouring Mr Taseer.

In an interview, Mr Taseer himself reciting Faiz Ahmed Faiz said, “Aaj bazaar mein pabajolan chalo/ Aao phir ham hee qatl ho aayein yaro chalo” (Let us walk in the bazaar in shackles, let me go to be executed).

The writer is based in Lahore. She can be reached at aisha_sarwari@yahoo.com

COMMENT: Salmaan Taseer: assassinated on a perilous path Dr Mohammad Taqi - Thursday, January 06, 2011

Source : www.dailytimes.com

Salmaan Taseer dedicated his personal fortune to the cause of publishing the unvarnished truth and the people’s right to know this truth. It would not have been possible for this paper’s editorial board to carry itself independently were it not for Salmaan Taseer’s personal commitment to not only this project but to the very freedoms of speech and expression

“The sorrowful smell of the mist,

Lingering over the Indus,

Gentle waves of rice, dung and rind,

This is the salt cry of Sindh,

As I die let me feel,

The fragrance of tears” — Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai.



“It was a Sindhi poet, Shah Abdul Latif, who captured the forlornness of his country in this haunting verse,” wrote Salmaan Taseer in the opening chapter of his 1979 book, Bhutto: A Political Biography. I have read these words many times but had never once thought that the forlornness might get deeper than the deepest depression one could feel. But the assassination of Salmaan Taseer has left many of us even more devastated and depressed than what Shah Latif could depict.

I do not mourn Salmaan Taseer alone but I also mourn those who have been killed before him on the perilous path of speaking their mind, and those who will be killed in the future on this journey. Ayesha Siddiqa, Kamran Shafi, Nadeem Farooq Paracha, Pervez Hoodbhoy, Sherry Rehman and so many others are living on borrowed time. It is not a matter of if but when an indoctrinated bigot let loose by the deep state will get to them or, for that matter, any of us who decline to follow the rotten creed that it has been peddling for decades.

However, I have a feeling that Salmaan Taseer would not have wanted to be remembered with melancholy. His illustrious father, Dr M D Taseer, once said:

“Parwana jal kay dil ki muradon ko pa gaya

Aur shama reh gayi rukh-e-zeba liay huay” (Translation: The light-loving moth has died caressing the candle flame. The candle thus remains alone in all its elegance).

It is nearly impossible to accurately translate the above Urdu verse, which my father, Malik Rahat Ali, had quoted while writing Dr M D Taseer’s obituary for Edward’s College, Peshawar’s magazine Tajjali (light) in 1951. The obituary was titled ‘Aik raushan dimagh tha, na raha’ (an enlightened mind is no more). It is amazing how references to light and progressive thought keep popping up when discussing the Taseers and in the work of the Taseers themselves. Pakistan, and the liberal thought within Pakistan, is the candle that Salmaan and M D Taseer loved to the extent that to see it remain alight, they would dedicate their lives to it.

When thinking of Salmaan Taseer, two images come to mind. One is of a political activist and the second is of a patron of progressive and liberal thought. Perhaps senior members of the Indo-Pakistani leftist movement will recall that Dr M D Taseer, along with Abdullah Malik and Rajindra Singh Bedi had pioneered a liberal publishing house called Sangham Publishers in 1947, before the partition. I would not be wrong in assuming that the Daily Times and its media affiliates came into being due to Salmaan Taseer’s desire to follow in his father’s footsteps.

In his patronage of liberal publications, Salmaan Taseer’s image merges with that of the greats like the late Mian Iftikharuddin and Mazhar Ali Khan, the latter having been a beneficiary of the radical study circles conducted by Salmaan Taseer’s father. Many criticised Salmaan Taseer for his opulent lifestyle but, like Mian Iftikharuddin and his Progressive Papers Limited, Salmaan Taseer dedicated his personal fortune to the cause of publishing the unvarnished truth and the people’s right to know this truth. It would not have been possible for this paper’s editorial board to carry itself independently were it not for Salmaan Taseer’s personal commitment to not only this project but to the very freedoms of speech and expression.

Indeed, Salmaan Taseer was one of the very few people who had mustered the courage to criticise Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (ZAB) during the latter’s heyday. In the aforementioned biography of ZAB, Salmaan Taseer wrote, “During his first years of power I found myself, like many of my countrymen and many foreigners, torn between breathless admiration and violent antipathy for the man.” It is pertinent to note that he had started interviewing ZAB in 1976 for the book and by then was a known critic of several of ZAB’s policies. But on the whole he remained in love with the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and remained involved with organising the agitation against the Islamo-fascism of General Ziaul Haq.

In the mid-1980s, he also made his mark as an op-ed columnist writing in the Urdu daily Jang, after the junta had muzzled the PPP-affiliated papers Musawat and Amn. After the 1988 elections, he became the deputy opposition leader in the Punjab Assembly and, along with the opposition leader Rana Shaukat Mahmood and many others, faced imprisonment and torture at the hands of the then Punjab government. It was this activist-intellectual image of Salmaan Taseer that inspired not only the workers of his own party but many in the Movement for the Restoration for Democracy (MRD) as well. Not only that but it encouraged many of us to disagree with his politics in the second phase of his political career the way he did not agree with ZAB.

However, people like Salmaan Taseer never consider disagreements to be incompatible with democracy. The only thing incompatible with the democratic process is a fanatical belief in one’s moral and religious certitude. What makes such certitude more ominous is its deployment by the forces, which try to trip democracy at every step. Some are drawing parallels between the assassinations of ZAB and Salmaan Taseer. But to me, Salmaan Taseer’s murder is a déjà vu reminder of Murtaza Bhutto’s killing. Despite the current federal government turning into a minority regime it would have plodded along for a while, so those who have derailed every democratic government in Pakistan opted to expedite things.

A lone assassin killing the governor of the largest province is a theory that most will not buy and I suspect that we will never know the truth. But one thing is clear: a seasoned politician, a courageous fighter and a distinguished leader of the PPP died for a principled cause. He may have said in the words of his uncle, Faiz Ahmed Faiz:

“Karo kaj jabeen pe sar-e-kafan, meray qatilon ko guman na ho

Keh ghuroor-e-ishq ka bankpan pas-e-marg hum ne bhula diya” (Translation by Sarvat Rahman: Let the shroud be jaunty on my brow, so my assassins never doubt, That the grace, which pride in love gave us, even in death was not betrayed).

The writer can be reached at mazdaki@me.com

Volunteerism in decline - Zubeida Mustafa - January 5, 2011

Source : www.dawn.com

THERE are two seemingly unrelated issues which have been the subject of public debate time and again that need to be viewed from a holistic perspective.

One is the common complaint that volunteerism is dead in Pakistan. People no longer want to give time to those in distress who stand to gain from the attention and care of the better-endowed.

The other issue being debated in academia is that universities are not focusing on the humanities. Their stress is on science and technology and business administration. How are the two interconnected? With most students no longer pursuing the liberal arts and philosophy, and commercialism and the rat race the order of the day, how can one expect them to recognise the worth of altruism?

Lacking familiarity with the pangs of hunger and the pain of sickness, the privileged few take for granted the misery of impoverishment. This seems strange because a whole chunk of society — very visible indeed — is steeped in poverty and the better-off don’t seem to even notice.

Can volunteerism thrive in this environment of apathy? Isn’t there a kind of contradiction in an education system that teaches students on the one hand to enhance their money-making skills and, on the other, exhorts them to put in voluntary work in the name of service to humanity? Is volunteerism possible without the infrastructure and the environment for it?

Only institutions, which are willing to welcome volunteers, not resent their presence on their premises and appreciate their services, can help inculcate the spirit of service in society.

In this context, the Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation’s (SIUT) Student Volunteer Programme (SVP) is something worth looking into. Last week it concluded its 21st training course, in which 128 youngsters from various Karachi schools participated.

Structured as a community-based activity, the SVP is basically designed to bridge the growing gap between the haves and the have-nots in Pakistani society.

In 30 hours of medical lectures, practical nursing and first aid, assigned work in the wards, training in emergency response and interacting with patients, the participants learn how the “deprived three-quarters” live, to quote Kaneez Rehmani, a social worker who helped launch this programme in 2006. She finds the involvement, commitment and enthusiasm of the students remarkable.

True, not everyone who attended will be converted to volunteerism or will want to make it a permanent part of his/her life. But Amna Shah, a student volunteer who has completed 100 hours of service, believes a majority of those who come (1,831 so far) find their outlook on life and work changed after they take the course.

This is of course just the beginning because only 40 have returned to put in 100 hours of service to qualify as ‘captains’. The paper chase attracts many initially — the certificate that is awarded can be a stepping stone to admission in prestigious universities abroad. But there is something more that keeps some glued to this place.

Amna Shah feels she now has a better understanding of people, especially the under-privileged. She is motivated to work for them and has emerged a new person — confident, articulate, selfless and extroverted.

Kaneez Rehmani conceptualised the programme when she found that voluntary work at various institutions had left her daughters feeling disgruntled and uninspired. They received barely any supervision or guidance at the places they visited for voluntary service. Moreover, Rehmani says that she felt that children could not imbibe ethical values if they did not experience them in their surroundings.

From that point of view, SIUT is just the place to give young students a lesson in love for humanity and make them aware of the ugly side of life in Pakistan. The institute has translated into reality the basic philosophy of director Dr Adibul Hasan Rizvi that healthcare is every citizen’s birthright.

Hence anyone can walk into SIUT for treatment free of charge and with no questions asked. Unsurprisingly, the poor flock here in large numbers and the manifestations of poverty are there in abundance. But one is also witness to generous doses of compassion.

With humanism and ethics the hallmark of SIUT’s practice of medicine, it has proved to be ideal for a voluntary programme that seeks to transform the participant’s perspective on life. The underlying objective of the SVP is not to train doctors-to-be, as most institutions offering internship programmes seek to do. The SVP’s mission is to instil empathy in the young volunteers and make them caring individuals.

That is what volunteerism should be all about. Martha Nussbaum, a professor of ethics, writes in Not for Profit: Why Democracy Needs the Humanities: “Nations all over the world will soon be producing generations of useful machines, rather than complete citizens who can think for themselves, criticise tradition and understand the significance of another person’s sufferings and achievements. The future of the world’s democracies hangs in the balance.”

Here is SIUT, an institution practising science and medicine, attempting to teach the essence of humanities to teenagers living in a world of affluence. Nussbaum, a strong champion of the liberal arts, says education should make students think more critically about what’s being fed to them and this capability should be good for their relationship with other people. The cultivating of relationships with other humans is at the heart of her concept of human welfare.

Now that our universities no longer teach our youth the philosophy of social justice or inculcate in them an altruistic mindset, it is inevitable that volunteerism has lost its charm. Not having come face to face with the conditions of poverty in which the majority in Pakistan lives, this generation is losing touch with reality.

SIUT’s students’ programme is a practical embodiment of what a liberal arts education should be. One can hope that the participants who receive training here find themselves equipped for life.

zubeidam2@gmail.com