Journey of disillusionment
The degeneration of a talented politician into a cheerleader for US imperialism and destroyer of a great Labour movement
By Dr Arif Azad
Britain's former prime minister Tony Blair, whether in or out of office, loves to be in the headlines. This obsession with headlines has been cemented with the release of his memoirs. The book titled "A Journey" is an exercise in self-mythologising and chameleonic reinvention. What follows, therefore, is not a book review but a very personal assessment of Tony Blair's career as a Labour politician and his last impact on the Labour Party.

probe
A view from London
Police is investigating the fatal attack on Dr Imran Farooq from a number of angles -- the political aspect being the strongest one
By Murtaza Ali Shah
The brutal assassination of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement's leader, Dr Imran Farooq, has shaken the British security forces to the core. Fully focused on tackling the threat posed by, what is called, the British Muslim "domestic" or "home-grown terrorism", the security services didn't give it much thought that rivalries related to the Pakistani secular politics will one day visit a quiet street of London where most of the residents are Jewish -- making the area relatively free of crimes and anti-social behaviour.

Who and why?
The killing could have extraordinary ramifications if the assassins are found to have links in Pakistan
By Amir Mir
Dr Imran Farooq, former convener of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement, who was stabbed to death in London on September 16, 2010 under mysterious circumstances, had a love-hate relationship with Altaf Hussain -- that led to his expulsion from the party twice and suspension for four times during his 25-year-long political career with the Mohajir party.

Bailing out higher education
Government promises to release Higher Education Commission's funds to woo back striking teachers
By Shaiq Hussain
Academic activities in the Pakistani universities came to a halt on Wednesday as hundreds of varsity teachers went on a strike against the government's decision to slash funds worth billions of rupees meant for higher education. Members of academic staff in around 70 universities announced to continue with their protest until the government revises its decision of massive cuts in the annual budget of Higher Education Commission (HEC).

 

 

Pragmatic politics and the Islamic state

Islam can only grow in a secular state because, historically, Muslim rulers have damaged rather than benefited the expansion of faith by using religion to their imperialist advantage. The debate on secularism and Pakistan goes on…

By Ayesha Siddiqa

Is Pakistan a conservative Islamic state like Saudi Arabia or a religious-secular country is a question which seems to have struck the imagination of our liberal elite in the past couple of decades. The echo of Taliban marching on to Islamabad and other places has made some people nervous.

It was thought that with former president Pervez Musharraf's enlightened moderation, the problems created by General Zia-ul-Haq's eleven years of Islamisation were over. The latter, a military despot with a preference for religion, coloured the country's social, economic and legal system green. He was an indigenously-trained army officer with a lower-middle class Punjabi background. More important, he was a pragmatist who saw religion and militancy as concepts that sold like hotcakes to Pakistan's prime patron, the US. Musharraf too was a pragmatist as he let his military sleep with the militants while he spoke of enlightenment.

Another pragmatist Zulfikar Ali Bhutto traded his liberalism for political advantage by introducing three legal-political changes which would make a Wahabi-Salafi-Deobandi ruler proud.

Today, there is not a single party which is unwilling to use religion or is not religiously conservative. If we were to treat the Jamaat-e-Islami as a movement rather than a party, it would become apparent that the JI sympathisers vote for the PML-N and the PML-Q. The JI, on the other hand, is known to provide cover to several militant groups in South Punjab including Lashkare Jhangavi. Although the PPP politicians are no more liberal than the rest, the party has an ideological tinge of liberal-secularism. There is no other difference. In fact, the PPP appears closer to the MQM which claims to be liberal but is actually a mixture of liberal and ultra-conservative people. Let's not forget that Zia's Islamisation and the Islamic social movements such as Al-Huda, Tableeghi Jamaat or militant movement like the Siphae Sahaba Pakistan (SSP) and Jaishe Mohammad (JeM) were as present and popular in Karachi and other urban centres of Sindh as other parts of the country.

Pulling the country back from the abyss of religious-conservatism or religious-radicalism is an improbability. The war on terror and the current flavour of global political intolerance has further exacerbated the problem. At this juncture, even the educated urban and affluent elite identify with religion more than they used to. Being religious is not the problem. The real issue begins when people stop introspection about what they believe in which has forced the Islam in most Muslim countries to deviate from its humanistic tradition. A few years ago, I happened to glance through the archives of Dawn newspaper from the 1960s. To my amazement, there were advertisements of cabaret and other dance shows in Karachi, something we cannot dream about today. But let me correct myself. Nor can we dream of living happily ever after with our religious minorities which is the actual crux of secularism.

This is not to suggest that secularism is about certain habits or hobbies. Similarly, in Pakistan personal vices have not stopped due to excess of religion. Homosexuality, for one, has not become redundant because of the society's religious radicalism. There are hardly a handful of people in Pakistan who define secularism correctly as the necessary separation between religion and state rather than the disconnect from religious-cultural values or utter lack of faith. Secularism is about a state's ability to let people of different faith live in harmony. And this is probably what Mohammad Ali Jinnah had on his mind when he gave his famous August 11 speech in which he encouraged people of all faiths to feel free in the new state of Pakistan.

Jinnah was as much of a pragmatist as any politician. He had managed to negotiate deals with all sorts of political leaders to represent a movement for a separate state for Muslims as its 'sole spokesman'. In pursuing the political objective for an independent state, he aimed to bring together, what renowned political scientist Hamza Alavi stated, as three classes of Muslim elite in India: (a) the progressive urban-based 'salariat' who wanted a modern state for Muslims where they could prosper well, (b) the traditional elite, who wanted a state because they felt financially threatened by the Hindu elite, and (c) the ulema that were divided between those like Allama Iqbal who saw an independent state as a necessary tool for Pan-Islamism, and others like Maulana Mawdudi who differed with the idea of a separate state being antithetical to the global vision of Islam.

1947 essentially indicates the breakdown of the elite consensus. The bulk of Muslim leadership felt insecure in a united India. The urban-based Muslim elite were conscious of the idea of the lack of opportunities they may encounter in a united India much before the elite in other regions which later became Pakistan. The carnage which took place in 1947 represented the pragmatism of the elite in Sindh and Punjab, who, like their counterparts on the other side, committed intellectual murders to establish a reign of terror so that the Hindu capitalist to whom they owed money would not return. The same happened on the other side. Although the founding father was shocked, there wasn't much he could do about the consequences of the bargain he had struck with the landed-feudal lords of Sindh and Punjab.

Jinnah didn't live long to see the country evolve as an Islamic republic. Although it is believed that the foundation stone of an Islamic republic lay in the Objective Resolution 1949, the question which must be asked is that could even Jinnah have wished the state away from its religious identity? The original ideological theoreticians of Pakistan like Sir Allama Mohammad Iqbal had not dreamt of a liberal-secular state but of an Islamic state based on orthodox religious principles. Although Iqbal also pleaded for modernization of views or ijtihad and to bridge the gap amongst various sects, this part of his call fell on deaf ears. According to political scientist Farzana Sheikh, who has authored two books on Pakistan, Mohammad Iqbal did not want Sufi Islam but orthodox Islam, which was considered better-suited to form a modern state. Indian Subcontinent's Sufi Islam was an amalgam of religion and various local cultural traditions, which in Iqbal's view, depressed the project of a separate identity for Muslims. The hundreds of Sufis that came to India in the footsteps of the conquering hoards of Muslim rulers from Central Asia adapted local traditions to make Islamic faith more palatable, and to soothen the impact of the harsh treatment of the rulers. Of course, Jinnah was neither a party to Iqbal's ideological agenda or that of Maulana Mawdudi -- both thought in terms of pan-Islamism.

Although it is too late to ask the question, it is still a necessary query if Jinnah thought that the state and its functionaries would continue to use religion pragmatically. Not to forget that the religious-ethnic divide encouraged by the Muslim leadership seemed to have started the initial fire in East Bengal at the time of partition. The same religious fervour was used later to gather tribal warriors as part of the military expedition into Kashmir.

More critically, how could any of the leaders including Jinnah think of a religious-secular state when the educated elite had surrendered the right to contribute to the religious discourse? Even the traditional religious elite i.e. those representing Sufi Islam de-educated themselves off religion and now have no capacity to turn the society around towards secularism which is basically the separation of politics from the state.

The fact of the matter is that Islam as a faith, like any other religion, can only grow in a secular state. Historically, Muslim rulers have damaged rather than benefitted the expansion of faith by using religion to their imperialist advantage. A secular state encourages the development of the inner discourse without any obsession with preservation of personal power. However, for this correct notion to spread it's the liberal and the educated who will have to embrace the faith and its discourse.

Journey of disillusionment

The degeneration of a talented politician into a cheerleader for US imperialism and destroyer of a great Labour movement

By Dr Arif Azad

Britain's former prime minister Tony Blair, whether in or out of office, loves to be in the headlines. This obsession with headlines has been cemented with the release of his memoirs. The book titled "A Journey" is an exercise in self-mythologising and chameleonic reinvention. What follows, therefore, is not a book review but a very personal assessment of Tony Blair's career as a Labour politician and his last impact on the Labour Party.

Hence let me begin with a very personal note. In the 1997 election which returned Labour Party, I was a footsoldier, knocking at the voters' doors, canvassing for the Labour Party. I felt very much a part of the general intoxication which the '97 landside had brought for Tony Blair after a long stretch of conservative rule. "A heady cocktail of happy days are here again and things can only get better" lifted me, like all Labour supporters, into an unflagging high. The world looked pregnant with possibilities and a transformative era was around the corner. Labour supporters, jaded by long years in parliamentary exile, were happy to be in power.

Yet there was a lurking fear among most traditional Labour supporters that Tony Blair's ideological lightness might erode Labour's core values. Such fears came true when Tony Blair began to hack away at the party's hallowed principles one by one. Barring initial days when a couple of initiatives like imposing windfall tax on corporations that were vintage Labour policies, he rushed headlong into moulding the Labour Party to his political beliefs.

Blair's first act on coming to power was inviting Margaret Thatcher to 10 Downing Street which constituted Blair's approval of Thatcherism agenda. This alarmed progressive and left wing sections of the party. Though a beneficiary of anti-Tory wave which resulted in his elevation, he set about changing the Labour Party root and branch. In pursuit of modernising zeal, he built a clashing narrative between old and new labour -- with Blair as the flag-bearer of new Labour. This binary was to play out in ways inimical to traditional Labour politics. As a direct corollary of this, Blair began to strip the Labour of its past and soul in order to clothe it into a new garb of his choice appealable to middle class voters.

The cardinal act of betrayal was to axe clause 4 of the party constitution which had preserved Labour's age old commitment to common ownership of means of production. As if this was not enough, Blair went a step further by moulding the party into a purely new virtual PR party. Moreover, inherent in the logic of binary construction of new and old Labour was the deeply ingrained motive of fostering a new perception of Labour among voters as the new Labour Party was totally different from the old which was stuffed full of unreconstructed left-wingers.

This drove him into the arms of media managers and image polishers who made the Labour Party into a PR machine rather than the vital social movement it once was. As a result, the Labour Party's annual conferences, which were forums for open and raw debate, became a controlled affair, with potential dissidents kept out of conference halls. In all this, he was helped by his past which was shorn of any attachment to Labour movement or its traditions.

Crucially, Tony Blair represented a new breed of Labour MPs who had never been part of the Labour movement. In time, he collected more and more such parachuted, Labour-free MPs equally unacquainted with the history and tradition of the Labour Party. This was to have profound consequences for the parliamentary Labour Party which was gradually denuded of Labour stalwarts with experience either of foot soldering in the Labour movement or real-life experience in professions or trade union movement. Their place was supplanted by novice, fresh skin, Oxford graduates with no experience (dubbed Blairites) of the rough and tumble of Labour politics. This changed the Labour Party from a formidable grass-roots machine that it once was into a party of ambitious political upstarts looking for parliamentary seats. That the Labour Party acquiesced into erosion of its souls for the sake of winning elections, with Tony Blair as the best electable leader, needs to be noted here.

As the Labour Party was reshaped in the light of lessons learnt from Clinton and his campaign, Tony Blair looked to America for his political grandstanding. The much-awaited opportunity for an international exposure came in the wake of 9/11 when he became a cheerleader for the US military intervention, particularly in Iraq. With cue from Washington, he pulled out all stops to convince the rest of the world about venality of Saddam's regime and its fictional possession of weapons of mass destruction. In the run up to invasion of Iraq, Blair firmly put himself in the crusade brigade led by George Bush. Though he won the pro-war vote in the House of Commons debate in a masterly parliamentary performance, he was deeply wounded by swelling anti-war opinion outside the house.

Earlier, in the 1960s, Harold Wilson, the Labour prime minister, refused US request for landing British troops in Vietnam. This singular act alone continues to haunt Blair and besmirch his legacy which he justifies, ad nauseum, on the basis of his convictions and instincts. For his pains in pushing the US-led war on Iraq, he was rewarded with the position of peace envoy for the Middle East.

In the title word "A Journey", I read the journey of a closet conservative to the elevation and destruction of a Labour movement. I can only see the journey of talented politicians to global neoconservative elite after having extinguished a great social democratic party. In "A Journey", I can also see the journey of a pacifist to a war-monger. On the domestic front, he presided over the growing gap between the rich and the poor.

My journey with Blair is a journey of disillusionment in which I observed the degeneration of a talented politician into a cheerleader for US imperialism and destroyer of a great Labour movement. Tony Blair changed Labour to such unrecognisable proportion that it looks a confused hulk of its past self. In the 2001 election, I did not vote for Labour and stayed away from the new Labour for most of the time till Tony Blair exited the British scene. His journey represents triumph of form over substance.

The writer is the chief executive of the Network for Consumer Protection

 

probe

A view from London

Police is investigating the fatal attack on Dr Imran Farooq from a number of angles -- the political aspect being the strongest one

By Murtaza Ali Shah

The brutal assassination of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement's leader, Dr Imran Farooq, has shaken the British security forces to the core. Fully focused on tackling the threat posed by, what is called, the British Muslim "domestic" or "home-grown terrorism", the security services didn't give it much thought that rivalries related to the Pakistani secular politics will one day visit a quiet street of London where most of the residents are Jewish -- making the area relatively free of crimes and anti-social behaviour.

While there is a live police investigation into the murder of Dr Imran Farooq and dozens of forensic experts and Scotland Yard detectives from anti-terrorism command unit are looking at the evidence, it is too early to speculate on the causes of the murder.

Three weeks before his killing, I met Imran Farooq in a local market and we talked about general matters including, of course, the Pakistani politics. The former student leader, who was a close associate of Altaf Hussain when he launched the All Pakistan Mohajir Students Organisation (APMSO) and subsequently the MQM, talked as a calm and happy man.

I asked him why he was not active in politics to which he replied, without revealing much, that he was busy doing a lot of things, including studying international affairs extensively. He, however, did mention to me that he considered Altaf Hussain as his hero. When I met him last year at an annual MQM event near the party's International Secretariat in Edgware, which was also attended by nearly all the Rabita Committee members, Imran Farooq came to the event with his wife and was reminiscent of those times when, in his words, the foundations of the party were laid in very difficult circumstances in 1978.

The man, who was once hunted and remained underground for seven years, sprang up in London in 1999, giving every impression that he had been living safely. But nobody would have imagined that a life so much immersed in changing the shape of the Pakistani politics would be cut short in such a horrific manner.

While the street -- and nearly seven adjoining streets -- where Imran Farooq lived with his wife and two children remained cordoned off at the time of filing of this report, forensic experts and Scotland Yard detectives from anti-terrorism command units were trying to find clues, and there was every indication that the killing was carried out by a highly professional hitman. The killer knew the timings of his prey and the route he took on daily basis and lay in waiting for him while the street was still bustling with life. A visit to the local area suggests that the killer was helped by a team and he could not have succeeded in his mission by acting alone.

Although conspiracy theories already abound from a possible Taliban-hit to the export of Karachi gang violence to the streets of London, it will be premature to speculate on anything with certainty. The investigation agencies are keeping mum about the development in their investigations, but a police source has told TNS that police has been able to unearth vital information.

After the post-mortem was done in a local mortuary, the police have said it's probing the fatal attack from a number of angles -- the political aspect being the strongest one. Shumail Farooq, Imran Farooq's wife, who is living in police protection at this stage, will provide key information to the police and it will not be an exaggeration to say that her statement to the police will form the bedrock of the investigation. Also important will be the boxes of papers, phone records and his personal computer the police have taken away.

Those watching this case are optimistic that the British police will dig out the truth and MQM leader Altaf Hussain has already appealed to the police to do everything it can to find the killers and has assured the police of his party's assistance. It's only a matter of time before the police extended the area of investigation and included a lot of people in the probe. The final outcome of the investigation might have huge ramifications for Pakistan's political landscape.

Email:ams0409@gmail.com

 

 

 

Who and why?

The killing could have extraordinary ramifications if the assassins are found to have links in Pakistan

By Amir Mir

Dr Imran Farooq, former convener of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement, who was stabbed to death in London on September 16, 2010 under mysterious circumstances, had a love-hate relationship with Altaf Hussain -- that led to his expulsion from the party twice and suspension for four times during his 25-year-long political career with the Mohajir party.

Investigations carried out by Scotland Yard show that Farooq was stabbed mostly in the skull with a sharp dagger. Reports emanating from London do not rule out the possibility of Scotland Yard also interrogating the top MQM leaders to understand the nature of differences they had with Farooq.

Altaf Hussain was celebrating his 57th birthday the day the murder was committed. He was quick to describe Farooq as Shaheed-e-Inqilab, despite the fact that his former deputy and once most-trusted associate did not have normal relations with the party leadership, especially after being removed from the MQM convener's slot.

Farooq was among the few individuals who laid the foundation of the Mohajir Qaumi Movement in 1984, along with Altaf Hussain, and was considered the brain behind the party's rise as the fourth major political force in Pakistan.

The murder for the time being is shrouded in mystery. Rumours suggest: Farooq was contemplating to launch his own party faction, Aman Pasand Group, along with some other Mohajir leaders who were no more willing to endorse Altaf's style of politics; or he was about to launch a new political party with the name of Mohajir National Front, with the backing of several top MQM leaders; or there were chances of him joining hands with London-based General (retd) Pervez Musharraf.

The doctor-turned-politician had almost faded from the public memory for most Pakistanis in recent years as he had abandoned politics and was working at a pharmacy in London to earn bread and butter for his wife and two sons.

Imran Farooq was deposed as the party convener by the MQM's Central Coordination Committee in May 2007 after being accused of violating the party discipline. Then, it was rumoured that Farooq had developed differences with Altaf Hussain after the May 12, 2007 killings in Karachi -- the day Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Chaudhry landed in the port city to address a lawyers' meeting. The MQM insiders say Farooq was sacked from the coveted party slot because Altaf Hussain believed he had simply failed to defend his party during a live Geo debate with Tehrik-e-Insaaf Chief Imran Khan on May 17, 2007 in London. The debate was held a few day after the Karachi carnage and Imran Khan's subsequent move to approach the Scotland Yard and the British Law and Justice Department, seeking action against Hussain for his alleged involvement in the brutal killings.

Some other circles claim Imran Farooq actually fell out of favour with the party leadership when he started challenging the veto power of the MQM supremo in the party's decision-making process. Nevertheless, a central MQM leader in Karachi, requesting anonymity, rubbished the rumours of an intra-party rift in the MQM. He added that despite having been deposed as convener, Dr Imran Farooq was still in touch with the party leadership. "The day he was martyred, Imran Bhai was to attend the 57th birthday celebrations of Altaf Hussain, which were being held at the MQM central secretariat in London," he claimed, adding the murder seemed to be a message to "the Quaid-e-Tehrik that he and his associates were not safe even in London".

Imran Farooq, who was the MQM's Secretary General in 1992 when the Pakistan Army decided to launch a ruthless military operation in Karachi, managed to slip out of the country on a fake passport and under an assumed name in 1999. He was subsequently appointed convener of the MQM Coordination Committee -- the top slot in the MQM organisational structure which at the time fell vacant after the removal of Senator Ishtiaq Azhar. Farooq was unanimously elected as the party convener on September 9, 1999. But three years later, on November 7, 2002, he was suspended by Altaf Hussain who decided to take direct control of the party affairs. He had declared then that "Farooq was a hero but he failed to mend his ways despite repeated counseling."

The MQM supremo had claimed that he had sent six emissaries to Imran Farooq; all of them returned with indications that he was inclined to repent. "Imran later rang up one of the six emissaries and misbehaved with him. I am not sure at whose behest Imran Farooq had allegedly adopted such an attitude. If he publicly apologises before the party workers, I am still ready to forgive him", Altaf Hussain was quoted as saying by the Pakistani media on November 8, 2002.

On July 27, 2005, almost two-and-a-half-year after his suspension, Farooq was again brought back as the MQM's convener, to be removed from the slot once again in May 2007.

It remains unclear who killed Dr Imran Farooq. But it is clear that the assassination could have extraordinary ramifications, if the killers are found to have any links in Pakistan.


Bailing out higher education

Government promises to release Higher Education Commission's funds to woo back striking teachers

By Shaiq Hussain

Academic activities in the Pakistani universities came to a halt on Wednesday as hundreds of varsity teachers went on a strike against the government's decision to slash funds worth billions of rupees meant for higher education. Members of academic staff in around 70 universities announced to continue with their protest until the government revises its decision of massive cuts in the annual budget of Higher Education Commission (HEC).

"If the government needs funds, it should reduce its expenditure instead of slashing HEC funds. Continuity of the government's disastrous policies would bring irreparable harm to higher education," Dr Aitzaz Ahmed, President of Academic Staff Association Quaid-i-Azam University Islamabad, tells TNS.

The pressure built by academic staff perhaps worked and the government told HEC authorities on Thursday it was ready to settle the contentious issue with funds being released for different projects of the commission that are near completion and also to meet other necessary expenditure.

HEC Chairman Javed Leghari told a press conference later in the day (Thursday) that the issue stood resolved as the government had agreed not only to resume funds for the projects which are about to be completed but also to pay 50 percent increase in academic staff's salaries and 15 percent medical allowance. He hoped the government would fulfill its commitment.

Another official of HEC tells TNS that all now depends on the government's future course of action, adding "If the deadlock persists, teachers at universities across the country would boycott classes and go on a strike." He says the HEC immediately needed Rs5 billion to pay for rollover default from 2009-2010, Rs4.3 billion to finish projects which are 80 to 90 percent complete and Rs7 billion to keep up scholarship payments to students. "We will be ruined if we don't receive the required funds soon," he warns.

The HEC was allocated Rs15.7 billion during the financial year 2010-11 as compared to Rs22.5 billion in the previous fiscal year. The commission functionaries say that so far only Rs1.5 billion have been released to the HEC during the current financial year.

Teachers believe Pakistan's higher education has never been in such a bad shape. Rather, this sector flourished between 2002 and 2008 because of the unprecedented funding.

With the economy booming in the early 2000s, the Musharraf government, on the advice of academics like Dr Atta-ur-Rehman, formed the Higher Education Commission to ensure more funds for higher education, better wages for professors, more grants for PhD students and a boost in research funding.

President Musharraf had named Dr Atta as the first HEC chairman. Dr Atta, a chemist at the University of Karachi, set out to overhaul the nation's universities and managed to increase the annual research funding by 470 percent in the first year (2002) alone. It was between 2003 and 2009 that Pakistan produced 3000 PhDs -- matching the number of degrees Pakistan produced during the previous 55 years of its existence.

According to the HEC officials, well over 7000 PhD students are now under training at home and abroad and the number of scientific research publications has soared from around 800 in 2002 to well over 4000 in 2009.

There are, however, some critics who believe that the number of PhDs and research publications don't tell the whole story. They say that the flood of cash also led to profligacy, corruption and plagiarism. Whatever may be the case, the HEC also lost favour with the government with the ouster of General Musharraf in 2008. The recession that hit Pakistan, coupled with recent floods, brought huge financial problems for the higher education as the government resorted to massive budgetary cuts.

To make matters worse, the HEC became embroiled in a political scandal revolving around fake degrees of parliamentarians. The HEC has verified degrees of dozens of elected public representatives and the process has so far exposed many of cheats and turned the commission into a political lightning rod. All this has forced the HEC to put all of its projects on hold as it scrambles to find alternative sources of funding, including a loan from the World Bank.

Talking to TNS before the settlement of issue, HEC Chairman Javed Leghari fears that the entire system was teetering on the verge of collapse due to slashing of funds. "Funds are urgently needed by universities for development projects and for scholarships of students. Due to non-availability of funds, there is no possibility of starting any new project and no chance of students getting any scholarship this year. However, the students studying abroad would not be recalled," Leghari says.

|Home|Daily Jang|The News|Sales & Advt|Contact Us|


BACK ISSUES