A Rhyme For Fools -- 1

Inquirer #13, {``Re: # 11, Chauhan, you are a Pakistani patriot!!!``}

Thanks, a patriot one day, a Paki tiger another day, an Indian Muslim one day, a Hindu Bihari Qadiani traitor on most other days. :)

#16 by sanjay

The Million-dollar question doing the round is whether General Musharaff is really going to conduct a free and fair elections in 2007 and step down or atleast give up his Uniform. Appears that the answer is a Big NO.

Although you have applied common sense in arriving at this conclusion, this is absolutely correct. Let me present the technical arrangement done to ensure this eventuality as proof:

Article 19 (7)(b) of the constitution, substituted by Legal Framework Order, 2002, now reads:

having received the democratic mandate to serve the nation as President of Pakistan for a period of five years shall, on relinquishing the office of the Chief Executive, Notwithstanding anything contained in this Article or Article 43 or any other provision of the Constitution or any other law for the time being in force, assume the office of President of Pakistan forthwith and shall hold office for a term of five years under the Constitution, and Article 44 and other provisions of the Constitution shall apply accordingly.

The term Notwithstanding inserted here renders Article 43 inoperative, (if the President wins a democratic mandate) which reads:

The President shall not hold any office of profit in the service of Pakistan or occupy any other position carrying the right to remuneration for the rendering of services.

So, Musharraf can keep his uniform as well as remain President constitutionally as long as he wins the assemblies` support. He won this support before and he will win it in 2007 as well. Some faces will though change at the top and Nawaz Sharif/Benazir combine may replace the Choudhery brothers who have outlived their utility.

This is why I had proposed the course of action I did in #2.

Feroze Khan Sahib,

You have made this movie running into 30 reels. You should have limited it to 18 or so reels. Anyway.

The Million-dollar question doing the round is whether General Musharaff is really going to conduct a free and fair elections in 2007 and step down or atleast give up his Uniform. Appears that the answer is a Big NO.

2007 is going to be a staged-managed show just like 2002.

The apparent danger which may or may not be(only time will tell) lurking on Pakistan is that it may face international isolation in case true democracy is not returned in 2007. As far as we have information here, the western block( though not the US) is going to take it very seriously in case Gen.Musharaff renegades from the promise he has been making to them from time to time.

Nothing can be said of now. But the chances that true democracy is going to return to Pakistan in 2007 are rather bleak. So dont celebrate now. Celebrate it when the cake is delivered to you.

Best of Luck.

Gobbledegook...

Democracy doesn`t require an educated citiznry. It requires a citizenry with balls. Something which is lacking within the Pakistani collective.

It requires a stomach to withstand the pain..to go through the taklas and and the bibi`s...but adhere to the process. Shortcuts, lack of willpower, lack of institutional fortitude are the issues. Pakistan needs motivational speakers, perhaps Tom Cruise and his scientology wierdos to get over the hump.

I agree with zeemax this article is jargon heavy and doesn`t break much in the sense of new ground (no offense meant as I am a frequent reader of ferozks work). I would like to make a few general points though..

fundamentally one has to realise Pakistans problems ( as a democrat) are not simply secular versus religion..there are multiple fault lines..sectarian and ethnic..at a democratic level there is the tendency of democratic groups to seek power through deal making or by blind subservience to the ruling class. Rather than seek political allies our culture has so developed that we seek alliances with whoever has the bigger stick and not with fellow politicians. The second is simple reciprococity (sp?)...this is basically common sense..it means that if one party is the largest elected you invite it to attempt to form a government ..irrespective of whether you like that decision or not..in return if the roles were reversed the other party does the same..the common sense extends to the law..yes parliament can pass a law declaring the earth flat..but common sense dictates it shouldn`t..so common sense says you dont declare it ok to extend the tenure of parliament because again thats wrong..lastly yes a leader can sign an agreement with an opposition and then break it..on the basis of his control over everything allows him to do so..but again common sense and human decency dictates he shouldnt...and lastly it is the hige divide between morality and legality in pakistan..unless that bridge is crossed the end result will not be pleasant.

Re: # 11, Chauhan, you are a Pakistani patriot!!!

Feroz:
The formality and abstruseness of your presentation justifiably led to cry for simplified statement of your concerns. Evidently, you are - a bit too much - according to my thinking - involved with the Rhymes (it is only -1, right now) than the Reasons. At Chowk, people do not have the desire and/or patience to carry through the involved (your way) argumentation. No doubt that led zeemax to ready the guillotines!!

I underwent the river of fire presented by you!! While the Rhymes you may shine light on are interesting, the important issue is to express on the understanding you have of the institutions (and their developmental modes) the would be needed to steer Pakistan through the self-created morass and quagmire by Jinnah, Liaqat and Co. This desperation is expressed well by rozaiba(#10).

My comments on your Rhyme-1 follow:

1. ``The importance of the 2007 elections, in the evolution of Pakistani politics towards a pluralistic polity, resides in its symbolic value and what they herald for Pakistan in the long term. ``
****Unless the elections are areligious they will fail to achieve the basic minimum.****

2. ``The national debate, which will eventually settle the outstanding issues facing Pakistan and its population, can only be held within an inclusive political environment and not on the basis of the politics of exclusion. ``
****This will require an unequivocal abandonment of the communal foundations on which Pakistan now rests.****

3. ``Political institutions help in the process of democracy by their ability to sustain a democratic process of politics and they do so by offering the paradigms of a political discourse within which a political debate can take place. The creation of political institutions, in Pakistan, which are free from political coercion and duress are desperately needed, because one of issues retarding the sustainability of democracy in Pakistan is the issue of political legitimacy.``
****The minimum required independence of the institutions can emerge only from a dedicated leadership which is willing to risk their present and future. It is the viability of this leadership which rests in the people, and effective action from them that help nucleate the MINIMUM NECESSARY CHECKS AND BALANCES on which democrcies like US, Britain and India are formed. Pakistan almost has an impossible task in this regard. But it has to be attempted to ward off anarchy which is knocking at the door.****

4. ``Pakistani politics has to learn the art of political tolerance, which gives respect to all political opinions and not just one particular opinion and it needs to articulate a sense of confidence, which does not feel insecure in the company of dissenting opinions. ``
****The fundamental question is: do the Pakistani people have the minimum tolerance that they are not expected to have from their origin. And then, do they have the guts to mend their ways. Because the government will be what people are.****

5. ``Transformationism, as a political thought, suggests the absence of a political philosophy and the lack of any guiding principles in the pursuit and the exercise of political power. ``
****You are giving a fancy name to simple opportunism and self-aggrandizement.****

6. ``Political flexibility advocates the attainment of political goals through acts of compromise and suggests that though the political goal or political philosophy remains constant, the means to achieve them may vary accordingly and may change over a period of time. Political transformationism, on the other hand, suggests a complete lack of a political philosophy or a political ideal and substitutes them with an argument that supports the politics of popular opportunism. ``
****Before the political flexibility can be viably practiced, the goals are to be unequivocally expounded and declared from the hill-top. Pakistan has not done that yet.****

7. ``the first step towards the revitalization of Pakistani politics into a democratically representative and responsive politics would be to create the necessary enabling infrastructure, which would expedite the universality of political idealism in Pakistani politics. ``
****Who can bell THAT cat?****

8. ``The urgency of creating political institutions in Pakistan’s politics is a prerequisite for ending the arbitrary nature of politics and to secure the principle of political accountability in Pakistani politics. The creation of political institutions are needed in Pakistan to stop the drift of politics into a convoluted expression of a religious nihilism and an exaggerated sense of secularism, which is progressively replacing the idea of political constitutionalism and liberalism as the legitimate forms of accepted political expression in Pakistan. ``
****In the current atmosphere of distrust and sectarian animosity, I will go out on a limb, and propose that an independent (of all Islamic sects) author has to be found. This can only be either a Hindu or Christian. But are there any left inside the Pak istan?****

9. ``Pakistani society has been so thoroughly brutalized by the politics of opportunism that it is incapable of expressing a coherent reason or a rhyme to articulate its raison d’etré. ``
****Pardon me, but is there a raison d`etre?****

10. ``One option suggests that Pakistani politics have become so mal-adroit in their intentions and ability, that there is no point in reforming Pakistani politics and it would be better to start anew.``
****I agree.****

11. ``If this prognosis seems grim, an even more unsettling question is whether Pakistan has the ability; the political will and stamina needed to adopt a creatively reformist approach to politics and replace the existing and crumbling edifice of its politics with a better one. The answer is in the negative, because the vast majority of the Pakistani population, across political, economic and social spectrums, is a status quo oriented society, which eschews any idea of altering the existing status quo and instead favors the politics of orthodoxy. ``
****I bet this does not make you popular any where in Pakistan or in its diaspora anywhere. You do try to reach the unreachable star!****

12. ``because democracy can only thrive in Pakistan when all the stakeholders in it share a common appreciation for it and respect it as the embodiment of their own aspirations instead of viewing it as a disembodied slogan.``
****Is there a way to achieve this when all leaders of Pakistan are illegal? There is a minimum need of a social revolution. How will it come without engulfing chaos, certainly beats me.****

Mr. F. R. Khan,
A very long and nicely written article that succeeds in ``beating around the bush.`` You have articulated all the ``motherhood and apple pie`` jagon that cannot be refuted but is difficult to comprehend within the context of Paki reality. All you had to say was:

1. Pakistan needs permanent, objective, and unbiased democratic institutions.
2. All four of Pakistan`s provinces need to be subdivided into a total of 12 or more smaller provinces that can be administered and governed locally.
3. Pakistan must be a secular state with iron-cald guarantees for freedoms of religion, expression, press, thought, movement, AND gender equality.
4. Pakistani citizenship must be recognized as a sacred, important, undeniable, and inalienable right of all those who claim to be Pakistanis because they live in Pakistan, or live in areas that constituted Pakistan, or are married to a Pakistani citizen.
5. All federal government positions must reflect the demographic composition of the country. This includes the military in Pakistan.

Thanks,

Feroz:

You should have outlined what the institutions are which need to be allowed to grow.

If institutional collapse is at the center of it all, what specific institutions would you like to see given power (again)?

The past 20 years has clearly shown the lack of institutional power to be the real problem. So which institutions do you want to see put up?

- An independent, election commission, judiciary, parliament and an accountability board are often cited. These are central. What`s tragic is that it`s so simple.

I do not really see an `evolutionary` process taking place in Pakistan unless the above institutions are being revived.

As zeemax pointed out, it`s all a matter of laying guidelines that everyone follows. Be it the 1973 constitution in its original form or the LFO even - point is everyone follows them without inhibitting the above institutions. But if an entity refuses to follow the rules, and thereby negates the above mentioned institutions from tbe beginning, it is foolish to think there`s an evolutionary process going on in the Pakistani state. It`s just going in circles beating around the bush.

re: nasah # 8

Sure.

As the situation stands presently and unless it changes drastically, there is no hope for Pakistan ever healing its present self-inflicted wounds.

re: bullukhan # 6

Bullu, the problem in Pakistan is not a rejection of democracy but its the lack of an agreement for whom is democracy being preached in Pakistan?

The people or the rulers?

I think you are placing too much of an importance on Islam in Pakistan. The disdain for a western style democracy comes from within the ranks of the Pakistani people themselves, who do not want it. Pakistani society is a status-quo society and it is only interested in a status-quo which allows it to practice its own rules of a non-accountable behavior.

The vast majority of Pakistanis are perfectly happy to live under a feudal system of goverance and the trappings of feudalism can be seen in all the basic functions of the state of Pakistan and its style of goverance.

re: bjkumar # 4

I agree with you on most issues you have raised.

The issue of contradicting Islam in Pakistan is only a phantom issue, because Islam is daily contradicted in Pakistan in the manner in which it is practiced and Pakistanis have abused the teachings of Islam more systematically and more consistently than any non-Muslim.

It is often an over looked fact in Pakistani politics, but the primary committment of the clergy in Pakistan is towards the maintaince of their own status-quo and they use Islam for only their political reasons.

re: Mantolives # 5

Thanks and I agree with you - We are living in a Chinese curse! ;)

Ciao

My dear FR Khan -- I know you have lot of good things to say -- you research them well -- and you say it well -- and I would like to read them --

but can you ever say your thoughts in fewer words -- please

getting ready to read your column is like getting ready to climb Mount K2-- I would definitely like to conquer the summit -- but right now the height is unnerving......

Re: # 5
[....This is why you and I are living in the most exciting time in the Indus region`s 5000 years of history...]

5000 year history?... the history started whe ghori ``arrived`` around 1000 AD(?) - that gives you only about 1000 years.... didn`t you read pakistan studies textbooks?....

``The problem in Pakistani politics is not a lack of an agreement on democracy as the best form of governance, ``

This premise is incorrect and hence needs to be discussed thread bare before the argument can be approached............I find an alarmingly great retrogressive opinion against `western-style` democracy within Pakistan which is outcome of the dominent Islamist political discourse ....... this is clearly evident in the manner Musharaff has never seen the type of uprising in Pakistan as we have witnessed in Nepal against for democracy.......I was not even aghast to see people distributing sweets when NS was toppled in the coup.........and the main reason for is that there is an increasingly sophisticated propaganda from the military-mullah ruling elites who have pushed the propaganda that democracy is an alien concept responsible for corruption in the ``pure ideals`` of Pakistan........So, first you require a massive counter discourse against this propaganda only then you can think of democracy getting accepted by the Pakistani masses as a viable polity............

An excellent article.. as usual.

``because democracy can only thrive in Pakistan when all the stakeholders in it share a common appreciation for it and respect it as the embodiment of their own aspirations instead of viewing it as a disembodied slogan.``

This is- as it has been everywhere - an evolutionary process. This is why you and I are living in the most exciting time in the Indus region`s 5000 years of history.

Author, elections do not change the hearts and minds of the population. Those in power are unlikely to relinquish it - if they do so because of circumstances beyond their control, their replacement is not likely to start thinking different. The question is - is there really room for a variety of thought processes without contradicting Islam as it is perceived and practiced in Pakistan - including the thought on whether Islam must reign supreme there. As long as the answer is left ambiguous - as it appears to have been done by design at the time of its violent birth - the rest of the cycle is perhaps inevitable. There is no other way to buy democracy - except by paying even its minimum price - that which is required by its definition. Institutions, even political ones are composed of individuals - and such institution can not emerge strong if the building blocks remain vacillating and weak. All politics is always local. Nobody doubts the utility of strong political institutions - one only doubts the practicality of imposing them without questioning the mindset which created the country to begin with - a mindset of obtaining questionable objectives through force and disregarding the essential equality of all individuals! The article is well-intentioned, though.

Please, Can you cut this entire colomn to just 500 words buddy? It would help all of us to read.
Kamath