The future government of Pakistan – by Nazir Naji
Related post: صحافیوں کی نگران حکومت: ندیم سعید کا کالم
Daily Times – Saturday, June 21, 2008
Two particular encounters on two TV channels Thursday night revealed the mind of the “misplaced or hostile anchor” in Pakistan. The first was a discussion among a group of TV journalists on the accusation levelled against them that they are no longer impartial in their conduct of talk shows and tend to favour a political stance. The “consensus” was that encroachments on institutions of representative democracy by military rulers could not be viewed with impartiality, and that a show of partiality was dictated by the anchors’ loyalty to the Constitution. One opinion was that this obligatory partiality must be accompanied by “objectivity”; but it was not clear how the state of being “objective” could be reconciled with the state of being “partial”.
The other discussion was an interview with Pakistan’s ambassador Mr Hussain Haqqani by a TV journalist noted for his acerbity of approach and bias. The topic was the attack made by NATO-ISAF forces inside Mohmand Agency which resulted in the death of 13 Pakistani troops, souring Pakistan’s relations between Washington. The ambassador, while acknowledging his duty to bring the umbrage of Pakistan to the notice of the Washington Administration in the most forceful of terms, also charged the TV person with the obligation of looking objectively at the situation in which Pakistan found itself. He asked him if he took account of the ground realities in the Tribal Areas where the war against terrorism was clearly in the national interest of Pakistan. The ambassador argued for “realism” in the handling of such crises as the one resulting from the attack in the Mohmand area. But the TV anchor demanded that Pakistan approach the United Nations for a solution to the problem of the growing breach of Pakistan’s “sovereignty” and “territorial integrity”. The ambassador pointed out that the Security Council was an arena of power play, not a kind of Supreme Court where all plaintiffs were equal. The TV anchor then fell back on the argument of “national pride” and claimed to represent the people of Pakistan, arguing in favour of Pakistan opting out of the international war on terrorism. He had no answer, however, to the question about what Pakistan would do after that, after its various trouble spots are bombed by a combination of forces united inside the US Security Council.
The patriotically “partial” TV anchors began by opposing a military ruler and are now caught in a situation of political bias under democracy because of the dictates of their partiality. The 2008 elections have delivered a political battlefield where elected parties are trying to move together despite their different recipes and solutions. What should the TV anchors do now? Normally, they should have moved back and become neutral, letting the discussions be fairly judged by the viewers, but they continue to pose as arbiters and decide on their own such matters as the “mandate” of the 2008 elections, the “immorality” of the NRO, and the rough dismissal of President Musharraf from his job. But when matters are in dispute between elected parties and in parliament, it is the duty of the media to remain impartial in order to allow the people to make their own judgements.
While highlighting the “complaints” against the TV channels, one must be clear, however, about the over-all role played by our electronic journalism. Despite their early “philosophical” gropings, the TV channels are a sine qua non of our lives and their foibles of “partiality” are dwarfed by their achievement of creating awareness among the people on all other economic and social matters. For example, in Punjab, Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif is taking action, correctly, after watching TV reports on the malfunction of government institutions.
A sense of pride and sovereignty may take nations into war and humiliate them without making them understand what went wrong. This happened to Germany in the Second World War and in recent times to Serbia whose people, proud and sovereign, hate the world today for not understanding why they were killing Bosnians and Kosovars. But states don’t only feel aroused emotionally. They can also be cold-blooded. They can be motivated only by their self-interest whose pursuit might negate the state’s pride and sovereignty. When Iran and America confront each other, both tend to fly off the handle. In contrast, in Europe, where many nationalist wars were fought in the past, few feel as aroused.
Why shouldn’t a state feel emotional? Because being emotional may be contrary to its national interests. These interests are almost always economic. This is perfectly understandable because as long as a nation is prosperous and not dependent on outside creditors, its pride and sovereignty remain intact. But if a state is neglectful of its economy and pursues other emotional goals either unrelated or hostile to its economy it is bound to impose suffering on its people through the growth of poverty. And nothing removes pride and sovereignty from a nation more cruelly and quickly than poverty. Let us not forget that the organisation which kidnapped and beheaded the American journalist Daniel Pearl in 2002 called itself National Movement for the Restoration of Pakistani Sovereignty.
Really on one side Americans and Nato forces and other side Indian forces have encircled Pakistan and in this situation we must unite ourselves irrespective of our political differences. We should not exploit ourselves and if we did, it would definitely offer ourselves for exploitation. Why our Politicans are being exploited by the foreigner agents. The prestige and honour of our army is also at stake. We must stand by the Army. If we are united, no body in the whole of this world could cause any damage to Pakistan.
INVITATION TO TERRORISM: After the unfortunate incident of 9/11 in America, the Americans made target to Afghanistan and then asked the then Dictator Mushraf either to surrender before America or ready for war. Mushraf who was basically a weak person surrendered himself and thus invited the terrorism to enter in Pakistan. Prior to 9/11 the situation in Pakistan was not at stake but after the entry of Americans in pakistan, in real sense, the terrorism activities were allowed to pull on Pakistan. Under the Supervision of the then Mushraf as is apparent from the circumstances, the Americans did every thing in Pakistan and ultimately bloodshed started in Pakistan not only the shape of terrorists attacks, drone attacks and suicidal attacks also in which thousands of innocent people have lost their lives and many disabled and also helpless families. Pakistan was created on the basis of two nation threory i.e Muslim and non Muslim and even before creation of Pakistan someone had asked Quaide Azam(our great leader) as to what would be the constitution of Pakistan and he replied very softly in the following words:
“Who I am to give the constitution to Pakistan as the constitution of Pakistan was given thousands years back by our Last Prophet (P.B.U.H) in the shape of Islam and that would be the constitution of our Pakistan.”
So it can be safely inferred that even our great leader was very much clear that this country was created in the name of Islam. It is the country which has got its own importance qua its geographical boundaries and the natural resources. Unfortunatley after Quaide Azam we could not get some leader like Quaide Azam and our political leadership is almost having lust of power. By the Grace of Almighty Allah, there are thousands of natural resources in Pakistan and even it is a state having its Atom Bomb. Americans initially used Pakistan in Afghanistan against Russia and by that time, the Americans were calling the fighters in Afghanistan against Russia as Mujahideen and when Russia was defeated, then the Americans changed its eye and the definition changed into Terrorists. Very strange. The persons who were initially called as freedom fighters or Mujahideen were subsequently called as Terrorists and slowly the Americans entered in Pakistan and thus by now Libyian Prsident Moammar Qadafi has also said that he does not intend to throw his country as like Afghanistan and Pakistan.
In broad day light, American Raymond Davis had commited brutal murder of two citizens from whose possession unlicenced weapon and other sophisicated material was recovered and after investigation, he has been found guilty by the Investigating Agencies. By the passage of time, it is also brought to picture by various newspaper and media, that Raymond Davis is CIA agent. Keeping in view the whole scenioro, it can be safely said that what is the aim of America. On one side America is claiming that it has good relation with Pakistan and it is allegedly helping Pakistan but when seen with the aforesaid circumstances, it is clear that Americans are killing Pakistani through naked bullets. What kind of relationship, we must all review the whole affairs.We must unite ourselves and I have the ray of hope that Inshallah, the people or country who have evil eye on Pakistan must face the music. At the same time I may also say that our politicians ruling in Federal as well as Provincial level must mend their ways and avoid confrontation for the sake of country. The government at top level must show response and terrorists like Raymond Davis who are roaming in our country must be caught and either tried according to law in Pakistan or immediately ousted from this sacred country. As far as Raymond Davis is concerned he must be tried in Pakistan and send to gallows. The only option with Americans is to get pardon from the legal heirs of the deceased persons and that through negotiation and any coercive or forceful method would not be acceptable to Pakistani nation.
THANKS THROUGH DRONE ATTACK: According to the sources and media reports, Raymond Davis, murderer of two innocent citizen of Pakistan was a CIA agent, having so many identity cards, illegal ammunition and other devices. Since ever the Americans have been declaring that he has got the immunity on the basis of being related to embassy office and when such alleged immunity was refused, they hired our agencies and rulers and ultimately succeeded in getting the offence of murder compounded through the statements of legal heirs of deceased persons. When Raymond Davis stood acquitted and left Pakistan there and then, thanks has been said by Americans through drone attack resulting into death of about 44 innocent citizens of Pakistan and many injured. What a great thanks and what precious lives we have Pakistanis. How long our rulers including Army would wait for such attacks. Please stop it. It is better to die due to hunger rather to die due to such attacks.
REFERENCE OF INVITATION TO TERRORISM: I have already written on 25th February, 2011 on this site that the best way for Pakistanis and Americans to compound the offence of murders of two innocent persons at Lahore by Raymond Davis to get pardon from legal heirs of the deceased. But the manner and mode adopted in this situation does not appeal to logic and reasons and appears to be in mysterious way. If it is true that factually the legal heirs have waived their right of Qisas and Diyat, the Americans should not have thanks Pakistanis by Drone Attack.
We truly appreciate your own piece at work, Wonderful article. chakras