Understanding Balochistan

As tensions flare in Balochistan and the government alleges foreign involvement in the nationalist movement there, Dawn.com talks to Sanaullah Baloch, the Central Secretary Information of the Balochistan National Party – Mengal.

Your name was placed on the Exit Control List (ECL) and your brothers were reportedly abducted by the agencies during the Musharraf government. Have you considered filing charges now that the judges have been reinstated?

My entire family, including my parents, was placed on the ECL. Our assets were frozen, my brother was abducted and kept in an illegal detention centre for six months, and I was physically attacked by Musharraf’s agents during a conference in London. My website and 36 other Baloch websites were blocked by Pakistan Telecommunications Authority.

As for filing charges, several Baloch political parties tried to file charges against Musharraf, but the country’s institutions lack the will or courage to accept our plea against him.

You advocate a non-violent, political struggle to accomplish BNP (Mengal)’s goals, but it was the Balochistan Liberation United Front that succeeded in pressurising Islamabad…

Unfortunately, our deaf regimes and policy makers are not used to logical arguments. They only understand the language of power, force, guns and canons. That is why several resistance movements in Pakistan have taken on an increasingly violent character. Unfortunately, this becomes the culture in states governed by dictatorial regimes.

However, I don’t think that the non-violent aspect of the Baloch struggle has been nonproductive. Our political struggle, media campaigns, diplomacy, extensive inquiries on Baloch deprivation and its expression has widened our support beyond Balochistan and Pakistan.

In that case, why did you resign from the Senate?

From 2002 to 2006, as an active member of the Senate, I did my best to highlight the Baloch people’s plight. I was elected by the people to protect their rights, but we could not stop Islamabad’s assault on Balochistan. We could not protect the innocent Baloch from disappearances, torture, displacement and we could not stop our resources’ unabated exploitation. That is why we decided to quit the parliament. It is better to be among the people and tell them the truth as opposed to giving them false hope.

You have previously said that the National Security Council (NSC) can ensure that Balochistan has greater autonomy over its resources. But you also emphasise on electoral politics. If the NSC is the deal-breaker, why bother with political deliberations?

Unfortunately, it is a reality in Pakistan that the corridors of power are outside the Parliament. The NSC is basically the visible face of the establishment that consists of civil-military elites. They approved the military operation against Balochistan and, without their consent, no political regime can undo their policy of continued suppression.

In Swat, the government has negotiated a deal with the Taliban. What message does this give to groups aspiring to a more autonomous Balochistan?

The establishment in Pakistan has always felt comfortable with religious groups as they do not challenge the centralised authority of the civil-military establishment. The demands of these groups are not political. They don’t demand economic parity. They demand centralised religious rule which is philosophically closer to the establishment’s version of totalitarianism.

Islamabad’s elite are stubborn against genuine Baloch demands: governing Balochistan, having ownership of resources, and control over provincial security.

Some people believe that Baloch nationalist groups are materially supported by India in its bid to destabilise the Pakistani federation. How do you respond to this allegation?

Unfortunately, this has been the culture in Pakistan that all legitimate political movements against injustice have been labeled as foreign machinations and leaders of those movements have been called traitors and agents. Even the credibility of the lawyers’ movement was questioned by the establishment. Human rights defenders have also been labeled foreign agents. These are old tactics that all despotic regimes use to undermine legitimate political movements.

The Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) has promised resolving the Balochistan issue and President Asif Zardari recently announced a Rs 46.6bn package for Balochistan. Can the government shift the current Balochistan policy?

I am not optimistic about the PPP’s Balochistan policy. Musharraf promised and even spent more money to expand Islamabad’s strategic control over Balochistan. He pumped billions and officially decentralised corruption at all levels in the province to buy artificial sympathy, but failed. Millions were spent on media campaigns to prove that the central government is spending billions to develop Balochistan, but years of defective policies have further deteriorated the masses’ lives. Poverty only increased in Balochistan during Musharraf’s rule. According to one study, rural poverty in Balochistan increased 15 percent between 1999 and 2005. The only ‘development’ Balochistan has witnessed during Musharraf’s rule is the 62 percent increase in police stations.

Meaningful development can only occur if there is political empowerment, adequate healthcare, educational and employment opportunities and peace. At this moment, there is no spending in these sectors.

You have listed eight confidence-building measures that the federation can adopt to ease political tensions with Balochistan. Have any been implemented?

No. Displaced people are still living in appalling conditions, disappearances are still occurring, the military operation has only intensified and more senior Baloch nationalists are being intimidated, harassed and killed.

In a more autonomous Balochistan, how might the life of an average Baloch improve?

Political and economic empowerment will bring positive social change. It is unfair to blame the Baloch or tribal system for illiteracy, violations of women’s rights and poverty. How can people benefit from the existing system when there are more soldiers than teachers, more military cantonments and naval bases than universities and colleges, more police stations than vocational training centres?

In December 2008, a group in Quetta circulated pamphlets directing women to observe purdah. How will the BNP-M ensure security and respect for women?

We condemn all kinds of discrimination against women. Historically, Baloch society has been liberal when compared to other groups settled in and around the region. We have maintained a moderate identity since 1920 and have never used religious slogans to gain public support. However, the establishment has used religious groups to change Balochistan’s social fabric. There is no restriction and control on the Taliban in Balochistan, but agencies continue to intimidate Baloch nationalists.

Some analysts say that Baloch groups have been inconsistent in their struggle…

I can call it a gap or a pause rather than inconsistency. There has been suspension in the movement for many reasons. But as compared to other nationalist movements the Baloch struggle is surviving after continuous state suppression. Moreover, there are forged nationalist groups that have recently been created by the agencies to continue their policy of dividing and ruling.

Instead of always blaming Islamabad, why don’t Baloch leaders claim some responsibility for the current state of Balochistan?

There has been no fair opportunity for Baloch nationalists to govern Balochistan. The first Baloch government headed by Sardar Ataullah Mengal was toppled in 1973 just before completing nine months. The second coalition government of Nawab Bugti worked for 18 months. The third, of Akhtar Mengal, was removed after 14 months. Not a single Baloch government was allowed to continue for a complete parliamentary period. That is why we hold Islamabad responsible for the Baloch people’s plight. Without giving authority to genuine Baloch leaders, we cannot blame them for the appalling state of affairs in the region.

Where were you, dear sisters?

Much has been said about the shameful performance of our parliament on April 13 when it approved the controversial Nizam-i-Adl Regulation without much of a murmur.

The two members who protested, MQM’s Farooq Sattar and the PML-N MNA from Chakwal, Ayaz Amir, have received much-deserved accolades — albeit given grudgingly to the MQM. But why did the others lose their voice? What happened to the women?

Why could not there be a full-fledged debate on an issue that promises to have a profound impact on the future of Pakistan? Its devastating implications for women have already started manifesting themselves, as demonstrated by reports from Karachi of men walking up to women demanding that they cover themselves ‘properly’. A woman even complained of having been threatened with a gun. These incidents vindicate the fears that have been expressed in women’s circles about the tidal wave of Talibanisation sweeping the country.

It was the failure — or helplessness — of our parliamentarians that was disturbing. It is now clear that military rule and pseudo democracy under the patronage of the army have wrought untold ravages on Pakistan’s political institutions over the years, undermining democratic structures so badly that even the restoration of democracy has not revived their working fully.

The failure of their representatives to articulate public concern on that fateful day has upset women all over the country. It has prompted an angry email from Lila Thadani of the Sindh Adyoon Tehrik, Sukkur, charging Bushra Gohar and Nafisa Shah (MNAs from the ANP and the PPP respectively) of acting for the sake of party ‘loyalty and transitory power.’

She says, ‘Remember dear sisters, your parliamentary slots will not remain for life. You will have to climb down and be with the rest of us. How will you be able to face us and the true reality after selling your soul to power? … Speak up or ship out, now. You are better outside than inside that pointless white cube of a parliament on Constitution Ave.’

It was, therefore, seen as a weak and belated rescue attempt when a female voice was raised in the house the next day. Sherry Rehman, the PPP MNA who recently bowed out as the information minister, made a spirited speech on a point of order expressing strong reservations about the implementation of the Nizam-i-Adl Regulation 2009 in Swat. Conceding that this system had been in force in the valley in the 1990s, she pointed out that circumstances were different then.

The state had executive control over the land unlike today when the writ of the ANP government doesn’t run there. She had a point when she said angrily, ‘I ask the ANP, which pressured the government to pass the regulation in the National Assembly, to tell us who will protect the rights of women in Swat now.’

Sherry also asked for a debate on the flogging incident, saying this act had been in clear violation of the laws of the land and pointed to the danger of people being subjected to Taliban vigilantism and public brutality. Yes Sherry’s fear is spot on — for this is exactly what worries people, mainly women, today, but not the parliamentarians who have yet to debate the flogging incident. Why the delay?

This question is to an extent answered by Aurat Foundation’s report, Performance of Women Parliamentarians in the 12th National Assembly, launched recently. It sheds some light on the attitudes of our lawmakers and confirms the non-role of the National Assembly in Pakistan’s system of governance. Sifting through a mountain of National Assembly records to collect data and statistics, Naeem Mirza and Wasim Wagha, the authors of the report, have made a monumental contribution to the recording of parliamentary history.

No analysis is needed to show the shoddy performance of the Assembly that functioned in 2002-2007. Figures speak louder than words. Here is some striking statistical information taken from the report: The assembly held a total of only 43 sessions in five years and met on 608 working days. It failed to fulfill the minimum requirement of 130 days in the final year when it met on 83 days.

This information does not reveal the entire truth for each day’s session on an average lasted for less than an hour in the first year and two hours in the following years. Sixty-eight times the quorum was not complete and only 50 bills were passed in five years (mostly without a debate) of which 38 became acts. The 12th assembly may have operated under the shadows of a military dictatorship but this does not exonerate parliamentarians for their indifferent performance.

The report focuses on women and their efforts to preserve the public space they have created for themselves in politics. It sheds light on the grit of a handful of women parliamentarians (60 on reserved seats and 13 on general seats) in a house of 342 who took bold initiatives and struggled against heavy odds to make their presence felt. The assessment of women parliamentarians is purely in quantitative terms.

They emerge as an active lot who spoke prolifically (3,698 interventions), questioned sensibly (2,724 questions) and took their responsibilities seriously. But who were these women? The report grades the first 25. And is it surprising that of these 22 were from the opposition parties? Now that the boot is on the other foot their parliamentary activism has been muted. The MMA women who continue to sit on the opposition benches admit that they do not believe in challenging the male public space.

What is needed is an analysis of the role of women parliamentarians in the context of the freedom allowed to them. Evidently at the root of the problem is the flawed mode of election of women legislators on reserved seats. Appointed from party lists, they are denied a constituency while their fate is in the hands of the party leadership, predominantly male. Since women parliamentarians are unwilling to join hands across party lines on issues concerning women there is no hope that their problems will be resolved through political processes.

Pakistan giving up to militants

WASHINGTON: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Wednesday she believed the Pakistani government was abdicating to the Taliban and other militants.

In a testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Mrs Clinton warned that nuclear-armed Pakistan was becoming a ‘mortal threat’ to the world.

‘I think that the Pakistani government is basically abdicating to the Taliban and to the extremists,’ Mrs Clinton said.

She was referring to a deal Pakistan concluded with the Taliban militants in Swat, which gives them complete control over the valley. On Tuesday, the militants also took over Buner, just 60 miles from Islamabad.

Mrs Clinton also urged Pakistanis, living both in and outside the country, to realise how terrorism threatened the very existence of their state.

‘Pakistan poses a mortal threat to the security and safety of our country and the world,’ Mrs Clinton said.

‘And I want to take this occasion ... to state unequivocally that not only do the Pakistani government officials, but the Pakistani people and the Pakistani diaspora ... need to speak out forcefully against a policy that is ceding more and more territory to the insurgents.’

Mrs Clinton said the Pakistani government had to deliver basic services to its people or it would find itself losing ground to the Taliban, whose influence had spread in northern Pakistan and had raised concerns about the stability of the country.

‘The government of Pakistan ... must begin to deliver government services, otherwise they are going to lose out to those who show up and claim that they can solve people’s problems and then they will impose this harsh form of oppression on women and others,’ she said.

‘(We) cannot underscore the seriousness of the existential threat posed to the state of Pakistan by the continuing advances now within hours of Islamabad that are being made by a loosely confederated group of terrorists and others who are seeking the overthrow of the Pakistani state,’ Mrs Clinton said.

‘I don’t hear that kind of outrage or concern coming from enough people that would reverberate back within the highest echelons of the civilian and military leadership of Pakistan,’ she said.

Congressman Howard Berman, the chairman of the committee, also raised serious concerns about the state of Pakistan.

‘In recent weeks, extremists based in the western border regions have turned their guns on the Pakistani state, launching dramatic suicide attacks in the population centres of Islamabad and Lahore,’ Mr Berman said.

‘Equally troubling, the Pakistani government has cut a deal with the extremists that overran the Swat Valley — the latest in a string of failed agreements that has only emboldened the radicals.’

Mrs Clinton said President Obama’s new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, unveiled in March, included a focus on flushing Al Qaeda sanctuaries in Pakistan and on boosting civilian efforts to build up both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Also on Wednesday, the top US military commander Admiral Michael Mullen arrived in Islamabad from Kabul for meetings with Pakistani officials.

Another US general, David Petraeus, told a Harvard forum on Tuesday that the ‘military situation in Afghanistan will probably deteriorate in the near term’. He said: ‘We do believe we can achieve progress, but it’s going to get worse before it gets better. ... There will be tough months ahead.’

Admiral Mullen told NBC news he was concerned about the prospect of both Afghanistan and Pakistan descending into chaos. ‘Pakistan — it’s a country that has nuclear weapons. My long-term worry is that descent ... should it continue, gives us the worst possible outcome there,’ he said.

US ‘Af-Pak’ strategy inadequate

WASHINGTON: US Senator John Kerry, who returned from a visit to Islamabad earlier this week, has said that the Obama administration does not seem to have ‘a real strategy’ for Pakistan.

In an interview to USA Today, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said the Obama administration's plan for that volatile country, rolled out last month with great fanfare, ‘is not a real strategy.’

‘Pakistan is in a moment of peril. ... And I believe there is not in place yet an adequate policy or plan to deal with it,’ he said.

Senator Kerry's comments amounted to one of the most serious criticisms leveled by a Democrat at President Obama on foreign policy.

The newspaper noted that Senator Kerry's remarks were a change from his initial reaction to Obama's announcement of his plan for the region in a speech March 27, when Mr Kerry issued a statement calling it ‘realistic and bold.’

‘Obviously the president disagrees with the chairman on this, and the issues he raised are being aggressively worked in the president's new strategy,’ White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said in an e-mail to USA Today.

The senator advised the Obama administration to stop using the term ‘Af-Pak,’ to describe a unified strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, because ‘I think it does a disservice to both countries and to the policy. The two governments, he said, are ‘very sensitive to it’ and ‘don't see the linkage.’

Senator Kerry's spokesman, Frederick Jones, told reporters that the presidents of Pakistan and Afghanistan are scheduled to embark on a rare joint visit to the US for meetings in May, and Mr Kerry plans to host them for lunch on May 7.

As an example of how he believes counterinsurgency strategy is lacking, Senator Kerry cited the example of a recent Pakistan army operation in Peshawar.

‘The army went in, they expended a lot of energy for us, some lives, and you know, nothing came in underneath it — absolutely nothing. So you're going to wind up with a bunch of folks who are going to hate you.’

‘If the army's going to take the risk of going in there, for God's sake you have the civil component coming in, so you win something for it,’ Mr Kerry said.

The Massachusetts senator has sponsored a bill that would steer $1.5 billion a year in aid to Pakistan. He said he opposes language in a companion bill in the House requiring the president to certify that Pakistan does not support terrorists. Pakistanis consider that ‘insulting,’ he said.

Late, Senator Kerry called a USA Today reporter to clarify his comments, saying he did not mean to criticize President Obama. ‘I was not blasting the president,’ he said. ‘What I'm saying is that the details have not been fleshed out. We're working hand in hand on it.’

Senator Kerry praised President Obama's stepped-up attacks against insurgents in Pakistan by unmanned US drone aircraft, saying they had driven ‘bad guys’ into Yemen.

‘I think it has had a dramatic impact, and I think that is one of the reasons why people are screaming about it,’ he said, adding that he did not think there have been inordinate civilian casualties.

Pakistan under siege

I cannot recall another time when there was such widespread despondency in the country. That this has happened within a year of the restoration of democracy is disappointing, but not surprising.Many of today’s problems are the legacy of history, in which global politics, regional considerations and bilateral rivalries, have all played a role.

Also disastrous have been the long spells of authoritarian rule that looked to foreign powers for legitimacy, while destroying institutions of state, crippling infrastructures and breeding anger and alienation among people especially in the smaller provinces. Neglecting social sectors such as health and education, and promoting an economy geared to enriching the rich, it drove millions into the cesspool of militancy.

The manner in which the government recently caved in to the demands of the Swat militants has spawned frightening scenarios. Irrespective of the merits of their case, no government can permit any individual or organisation to challenge its writ and get its demands accepted at gunpoint. That such an initiative should have come from the ANP and be embraced by the PPP is more painful.

Worse, this ‘deal’ has come at a time when the country is facing unprecedented challenges, internally and externally. The government, however, appears unaware of the double whammy to which it is vulnerable: the militants at home and western capitals losing faith in our will and capacity to confront them.

When former national security advisers, Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski, begin to air their Cassandra-like prognostications, it is time for our leaders to wake up. Recently, both spoke of Pakistan’s collapse as not only inevitable but imminent, with Kissinger describing Pakistan as ‘a country that has numerous nuclear weapons but no government’. He also advised the US to discuss with China, India and Russia how to handle the post-dismemberment scenario.

Brzezinski was no less blunt, warning that the current situation in Pakistan ‘puts us in a complicated situation’ as to how long America could ‘back such a democratic government which is passing through internal chaos’.

Many of us are given to blaming ‘foreign powers’ for the malaise that afflicts us. Given our geo-strategic importance, proximity to the world’s energy fields, access to the Indian Ocean and possession of nuclear weapons, it is not unlikely that some foreign agencies are involved in stirring up trouble. But blaming foreign powers does not absolve us from taking measures to deter them while ensuring good governance at home.

Some Pakistanis claim to be disappointed with Obama’s policies. This betrays a failure to understand the complex nature of the US system of checks and balances. Obama’s speech may not have satisfied us but it certainly was a skillful mix of old and new, revealing the many competing interests currently swirling around Afghanistan.

Though rejecting the call of fellow Democrats who opposed deeper involvement in Afghanistan, he promised to use ‘all elements of our national power’ to ‘disrupt dismantle and defeat Al Qaeda’. He also abandoned his predecessor’s goal of nation-building, while offering a plan for increased US military strength and massive injection of resources. There was no reference to the earlier flirtation with an exit strategy, but a greater focus on reaching out to the ‘moderate’ Taliban. This represents a well-thought-out approach keeping all options open.

It is, however, the policy of continuing with drone attacks that is causing deep heartburn among Pakistanis. As their frequency increases, so does the intensity of anti-American sentiments, making the government look both confused and ineffective. The drones may occasionally net a few Al Qaeda terrorists, but the collateral damage is deep and long-lasting, adding to the impression that the Obama administration is as callous as its predecessor and our own government as subservient as the authoritarian regime. A more acceptable option would be to carry out joint operations with the Pakistanis. This would also force the government to ‘own’ this policy, rather than seek refuge behind unconvincing excuses.

In the meantime, there is mischief afoot in the House Foreign Affairs Committee, where it appears that the Indian lobby has been most active. This is evident from the language of the Pakistan Enduring Assistance and Cooperation Act of 2009. After its approval, the bill will go to a House-Senate conference committee, along with the Senate’s Kerry-Lugar bill, for a compromise bill to be thrashed out. But rather than wait for that stage, it is incumbent on us to engage in a vigorous lobbying exercise to ensure that these demeaning provisions are taken out.

The other issue which has given rise to deep misgivings in Islamabad is the manner in which the Obama administration has modified its much celebrated ‘regional approach’. The expectation of US support for Pakistan-India normalisation as well as a satisfactory resolution of the Kashmir issue had renewed hopes for the region’s peace and development, as well as easing some of Pakistan’s concerns on its eastern frontier. But few in Washington could anticipate the intensity of Indian lobbying that constrained the administration to restrict Holbrooke’s mandate to Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Emboldened by this success, New Delhi appears to have also convinced the administration to pursue the Bush administration’s flawed policy of promoting India as the regional hegemon. Holbrooke’s remarks in Delhi may have been music to Indian ears, but offensive to Pakistan.

Obama has promised more troops and greater resources to Afghanistan. But this will not win the hearts and minds of the locals, unless there is an effort at genuine reconciliation within Afghanistan. In this context, he needs to reach out to moderate Taliban, who may ‘have taken up arms because of coercion or simply for a price’. The US would be making a grave mistake in making no distinction between Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Journals such as the Economist, have also emphasised that ‘for most Taliban fighters, the ideology of global jihad is less important than other things: Pakhtun nationalism, opposition to western invasion, desire to defend conservative Muslim values’, etc.

Admittedly, these measures would help us, but militancy is primarily our problem and we have to deal with it. It is not yet too late for the government to bring all political parties on board, to arrive at a consensus on a multi-faceted approach, whose objective must be to confront the militants not by force alone, but through a mix of dialogue, development and deterrence. It is not enough for our leaders to travel to foreign capitals and beg for aid on the plea that ‘if we fail, you too will be the victims of terrorism’. It would carry far greater conviction if such exhortation had been accompanied by a resolute leadership at home.

A dangerous change

Back in the spotlight are the country’s controversial blasphemy laws. The reason: the Supreme Court’s Shariat Appellate Bench dismissed an appeal against a 1990 Federal Shariat Court judgment which decreed that under Article 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code blasphemy against Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) should be punished with death, and not the alternative of life imprisonment.

Because of non-prosecution by the appellant the Supreme Court did not go into the merits of the appeal, but the result is that the FSC judgment is now operative: the death penalty is now mandatory under Article 295-C. Having opposed the penalty — although there is no doubt that the commission of blasphemy is deserving of the most stringent punishment — we regard Tuesday’s decision as regrettable.

Unfortunately, when it comes to the blasphemy laws there is a tendency to debate the issue from a religious perspective — but that is not the main issue here. From a purely technical perspective, the blasphemy laws contain too many loopholes to be considered soundly drafted in legal terms. Consider Article 295-C, which states: ‘Whoever by word, either spoken or written, or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) shall be punished with death …’ The wording is vague and over-inclusive. Conceivably, someone belonging to another religion asking about the details of Islam or expressing his own religion’s position could be booked. Surely that is not something that should fall in the category of ‘blasphemy’.

The point is that vague laws always create opportunities for abuse and that the dangers increase manifold when vagueness is linked to something as extreme as the death penalty and as inflammatory as blasphemy. Pakistan’s experience with the blasphemy laws suggests they are potent tools of oppression that have been used to victimise the innocent. Score-settling, petty property disputes, personal revenge — all have been linked to blasphemy cases registered over the years. Upping the ante by making the death penalty mandatory in certain cases will only increase the already horrifying leverage that the unscrupulous have over those they wish to target.

We have opposed the death penalty because given Pakistan’s broken judicial system there is always the likelihood of a grave miscarriage of justice. In the case of blasphemy, the possibility of a fair trial is anyway tremendously reduced — meaning now far more of the innocent may face the prospect of the ultimate penalty.

Abusing Islam and its teachings

The Holy Qur'aan and Sunnah are the only two sources for the essential beliefs of those people who call themselves Muslims. Among those beliefs the most important one is that there is no deity other than Allah. This is the first half of the attestation of every Muslim, the second half being that Muhammad is Allah's Prophet. There are a few other fundamental principles that a Muslim is required to accept. Thers are some people who have no attachment with Islam, still they insist on misusing the names of "Islam" and "Muslim" either intentionally or in ignorance. In this article, we will try to briefly show how many "religious" groups around the world who use the name of Islam are in fact clearly and absolutely in violation of certain basic principles contained in the Holy Qur'aan and Sunnah.

The followers of the Nation Of Islam believe in (all quotes taken from their homepage or their publications): ...one God (Allah) and that Allah (God) appeared in the Person of Master W Fard Muhammad, July, 1930; the long awaited 'Messiah' of the Christians and the 'Mahdi' of the Muslims.

However, the Holy Qur'aan states in chapter 4, verse 36, "Serve Allah, and join not any partners with Him." And according to Islamic belief Allah do not appear in any person's shape. Although it is a Hindu belief that God appears in shape of man, which they term as 'Avtar', but Islam denies that. The followers of the Nation of Islam further believe "in the resurrection of the dead -- not in physical resurrection -- but in mental resurrection. We also believe that the so-called Negroes are most in need of mental resurrection; therefore, they will be resurrected first." But the Holy Qur'aan states in chapter 20, verse 55, "From the earth did We Create you, and into it Shall We return you, and from it shall We bring you out once again."

Even more pointedly, the Holy Qur'aan also states in Surah 64, verse 7, The Unbelievers think that they will not be raised up (for Judgement). Say: "Yea, by my Lord, Ye shall surely be Raised up: then shall ye Be told (the truth) of All that ye did. And that is easy for Allah."

Besides the above two differences, the followers of the Nation of Islam also believe in other things contrary to Islam as defined in the Holy Qur'aan and Sunnah, such as: [We, the Black Muslims, believe] "in the truth of the Bible, but we believe that it has been tampered with and must be reinterpreted so that mankind will not be snared by the falsehoods that have been added to it."

The problem with this belief is that Islam says that Bible is adulterated but there has not been any mention of reinterpretation of Bible, because the Holy Qur'aan has replaced every previous Book and every human and genie has to ask guidance from the Holy Qur'aan in all matters.

Further, the Nation of Islam's says, "That we who declare ourselves to be righteous Muslims, should not participate in wars which take the lives of humans. We do not believe this nation should force us to take part in such wars, for we have nothing to gain from it unless America agrees to give us the necessary territory wherein we may have something to fight for".

The problem with this belief is that the Holy Qur'aan and Sunnah are crystal clear on the necessity of going to war when the situation demands.

The Nation of Gods and Earths (5% Nation of Islam) is apparently an offshoot of the so-called Nation of Islam. Like its parent, this group's beliefs clearly identify it as being fundamentally outside the pale of Islam. Specifically, and we quote (from their homepage): The original man is the Asiatic Blackman, the maker, the owner, the cream of the planet Earth, father of civilization, God of the Universe. ...the blackman is god and his proper name is Allah. Arm, Leg, Leg, Arm, Head.

This is in clear contradiction with one of the essential axioms of Islam, namely that Allah (God) is Creator and all else (including men -- Asiatic blacks or otherwise) is created. In chapter 25, verse 54 of the Holy Qur'aan, Allah says that He has created man, therefore it is logically impossible for man to be Allah. The second quote above is a prime example of a tendency of the "Nation of Gods and Earths" to conjure up beliefs that are, to a large extent, highly confused. Some examples of these beliefs that have nothing to do with Islam are "supreme mathematics and alphabet", an evil person named Yacob, a prophet named WD Fard, and a belief that black people are superior in some way.

The true Prophet of Islam, Hadhrat Muhammad (Sall Allaho alaihe wasallam), refuted this last racist belief in his Farewell Address, 'O people! Verily your Lord is one and your father is one. All of you belong to one ancestry of Adam, and Adam was created out of clay. There is no superiority for an Arab over a non-Arab and for a non-Arab over an Arab; nor for white over the black nor for the black over the white, except in piety. Verily the noblest among you is he who is the most pious.' For a deeper expose of this group and its parent -- Nation of Islam -- the interested reader might wish to examine the autobiography of the late Malik Al-Shabaz (Malcolm X).

The Ah Movement, which originated in the Indian subcontinent, espouses beliefs, which leave no doubt as to their apostasy from Islam.

Among their erroneous beliefs is their denial of the Finality of Prophethood of Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allaho alaihe wasallam), an article of faith endorsed by the Holy Qur'aan and Hadith, and reports as well as the consensus of the Companions and scholars.

The Holy Qur'aan states: "O people! Muhammad has no sons among ye men, but verily, he is the Messenger of Allah and the last in the line of Prophets. And Allah is aware of everything." (33:40)

The true Prophet of Islam, Muhammad (Sall Allaho alaihe wasallam), observed: "The tribe of Israel was guided by prophets. When a prophet passed away, another succeeded him. But no prophet will come after me; only caliphs will succeed me." (Sahih Bukhari)

The followers of the Ah Movement are followers of a certain Mirza, who lay claim to prophethood and used fabricated Hadith reports and twisted meanings of some Qur'aanic verses to support himself. The Mirza, quoting the verse of the Holy Qur'aan about the prophethood of Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allaho alaihe wasallam), wrote in his book 'Aik Ghalati Ka Izalah' (A remedy to an error): "Muhammadur Rasoolullah: In this revelation I have been 'Muhammad' and 'Prophet' also."

This means that he did not only claim to be Prophet Muhammad by himself but also to be a prophet. He also opined in his other books that he was the reincarnation of Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allaho alaihe wasallam).

However, the true Prophet of Islam warned of this danger explicitly, "The Hour will not come ... until nearly thirty "Dajjals" (liars) appear, each one claiming to be a messenger from Allah." (Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim)

Shortly after the death of Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allaho alaihe wasallam), a man named Musailamah, a claimant of prophethood, was fought against together with his followers for their apostasy. It is worth noting that Musailamah did not deny the prophethood of Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allaho alaihe wasallam) and nor did his followers. It is also worth noting that it was misinformation that led the tribe of Banu Hunaifa to accept Musailamah's false claims.

Nevertheless, the consensus of the Companions (Radhi Allaho anhum) was to declare them apostates and wage a war against them. This is evidence enough to declare the Ahmadis as non-Muslims. For a more thorough treatment of this subject consult this article.

Another example of the rejection of the Holy Qur'aan and Sunnah by the followers of this movemnet is their contention that Jesus Christ had died and the Mirza was a reincarnation of Jesus Christ. In fact, according to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1985, the Mirza claimed to be not only Jesus Christ but Prophet Muhammad, the Mahdi, and the Hindu god Krishna.

It suffices to refer back to the essence of Islam, which is the Uniqueness of God: any concept of man becoming god, worse yet a Hindu god who is one out of many, is false according to the Holy Qur'aan. On this, Islam is un-comprising, hence this error of the followers of the Ah Movement is the foremost indication of their exit from Islam.

The Submitters are followers of the late Rashad Khalifa, a man who claimed to be a Messenger of Allah. This claim in itself is sufficient to remove the Submitters from Islam as the Holy Qur'aan clearly states: "O people! Muhammad has no sons among ye men, but verily, he is the Messenger of Allah and the last in the line of Prophets. And Allah is aware of everything." (33:40)

As quoted above from the Sahih Bukhari, Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allaho alaihe wasallam) informed the Ummah that the tribe of Israel was guided by prophets, when a prophet passed away, another succeeded him, but no prophet will come after Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allaho alaihe wasallam), only caliphs would succeed him.

Much of Rashad Khalifa's misguidance can be traced to his obsession with numerology, an obsession which has misguided many different people throughout history. Khalifa alleged that the Holy Qur'aan contained a mathematical code which revolved around the number 19.

Khalifa even went to the extent of removing two verses from the Holy Qur'aan, because according to him "the word 'God' ... is not a multiple of 19, unless we remove [it]", and the "sum of all verse numbers where the word 'God' occurs is ... 19x6217 ... If the false verse 9:129 is included, this phenomenon disappears."

By rejecting a single verse of the Holy Qur'aan, the Submitters bring themselves under the judgement of another verse, "Do you believe in part of the Book and disbelieve in another part? And what is the reward of those who do so save ignominy in the life of the world, and on the Day of Resurrection they will be consigned to the most grievous doom." (2:85)

It is interesting to note that Khalifa was a numerologist who did his blighted profession justice: he predicted the end of the world. However, Allah says in the Holy Qur'aan, "They ask you about the (last) hour, when will be its taking place? Say: The knowledge of it is only with my Lord; none but He shall manifest it at its time; it will be momentous in the heavens and the earth; it will not come on you but of a sudden. They ask you as if you were solicitous about it. Say: Its knowledge is only with Allah, but most people do not know." (7:187)

The Submitters also reject the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allaho alaihe wasallam) -- not part of it, but the whole of it. For the Submitters, the Sunnah is not a source of Islam.

The problems this presents are overwhelming, for by doing so the Submitters have effectively destroyed their ability to perform: Salaat (obligatory prayers), the second pillar of Islam; Zakat (obligatory tax), the third pillar of Islam; Sawm (fasting), the fourth pillar of Islam; Hajj (pilgrimage), the fifth pillar of Islam. With four out of the five pillars of Islam removed, the Submitters have little to back their claim to being "Muslims". The true Messenger of Islam (saws) warned Muslims of falling into this trap, Narrated AbuRafi':

Prophet Muhammad (Sall Allaho alaihe wasallam) said: "Let me not find one of you reclining on his couch when he hears something regarding me which I have commanded or forbidden [i.e. from the Sunnah] and saying: 'We do not know. What we found in Allah's Book [i.e. the Holy Qur'aan] we have followed.'" (Abu Dawood)

Before they signed the Nizam-e-Adl bill

Even when the ink had not yet dried on the presidential signature on the Nizam-e-Adl accord, the two prime signatories proceeded to their next favourite and much expected moves. The president packed his luggage and left for Dubai. The Maulana made a statement that the judgements of Qazi courts cannot be challenged in any other court and his next goal is to implement the Nizam-e-Adl in the rest of Pakistan. After all, Islamabad is just 100 miles away from the home of the new Sharia country and the Maulana sees no reason why his brand of justice should not be shared by its neighbours.

Malakand Division, a region that encompasses more than one-third of the North-West Frontier Province is now under a Sharia system that will primarily be defined by two great "jurists-in-law" (father-in-law and son-in-law). One is Maulana Fazlullah, whose real skills lie in the fields of radio frequency (RF) engineering and mass murder. He did not just ask 80,000 girls to quit education, but also destroyed the 200 schools that were engaged in this process. He also waged a bloody war against the state of Pakistan, killing hundreds of soldiers and civilians, in some cases dragging their dead bodies on the roads. The other is Sufi Mohammad, who was in jail till a few months back for his excellence in raising private armies. He led some 5,000 young men into Afghanistan in 2001, most of whom never returned to fight another day.

We need to understand what Sufi Mohammad and company really want. ''We hate democracy," Sufi recently told the crowd of thousands of followers in Mingora.

"We want the occupation of Islam in the entire world. Islam does not permit democracy or election. From the very beginning, I have viewed democracy as a system imposed on us by the infidels. Islam does not allow democracy or elections," he told the German news agency DPA just days before the Swat Accord was signed. His role model of a government is the Taliban government that ruled Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001. He said: "I believe the Taliban government formed a complete Islamic state, which was an ideal example for other Muslim countries." The Sufi has no ambiguity on the nature of punishments that he intends to generously distribute. "Penalties, including flogging, chopping off hands and stoning to death, must be available to Swat's Islamic courts. These punishments are prescribed in Islam. No one can stop that. It is God's law," said Sufi Mohammad, sitting on the floor in his makeshift headquarters in Mingora.

The Pakistani state has surrendered to the Sufi and the Maulana-led militants for imposition of a despotic rule in Malakand. The lives, wishes and faith of thousands of men, women and children have been made hostage to the interpretations of a few individuals. The Sufi wants the regular courts in Swat to pack up and leave as the "shariat" courts with "qazis" will start functioning soon. These were not the democratic ideals this country was made for. The new "peace accord" may well have signalled the end of Pakistan as we know it.

What has caused parts of Pakistan (and perhaps the entire Pakistan at some stage) to begin surrendering to speedy justice and other promised social reforms by militants. Clearly, for all these years, the state could provide its citizens nothing but poor governance, delayed justice, lawlessness and massive corruption. These are fertile conditions that would make any people vulnerable and receptive to alternate options. A small band of fanatics can easily occupy the space vacated by a large peaceful majority. The political parties and the civil society (except for the MQM) have failed to take a clear position and have opted to watch the show from the sidelines. Clearly, no lessons were learnt from the famous words of German anti-Nazi theologian Pastor Martin Niemoller: "First they came for the communists [read Swat], and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist [read Swati]. Then they came for me, and there was no one was left to speak for me."

It is the responsibility of the state to guarantee the right to life, liberty and security of every citizen, without distinction of race, sex, religion, or the territory to which a person belongs. The state cannot hand over these rights to people who themselves have arrived at the scene by conquering a territory of Pakistan. The political leadership and the armed forces of Pakistan ought to be held accountable for this surrender. The survival of the state as a cohesive society is seriously threatened if it continues to overlook and patronise the urban militancy (such as the one witnessed at Shanakht Festival), as well as the religious fanaticism.

Pakistan would be on a self-destruct trajectory if the state was to become instrumental in enforcing any one or the other brand of a sect or a religion on all its citizens. One wished there was a short "Universal Declaration of Human Rights 101" course given to all our legislators before they signed the Nizam-e-Adl bill in such indecent haste.

Capacity building of clerical staff in educational institutions

CBM for clerical and non-clerical staff is an emerging phenomenon in Paskistan. This is about bringing positive change in offices and the officials

By Muhammad Ayub Buzdar

In order to achieve any goal in a systematic way the role of leadership and management is indubitably compulsory. In addition, the role of supporting staff is also unavoidable. One can often observe the role of subordinates and clerical staff in any office of educational and non-educational organisations. The job of the clerical staff is to facilitate and assist rather than slow down the pace of the educational program. They are responsible for the creation of professional and friendly environment in the offices. Besides their academic qualification, the personnel already working in the organisations also need latest knowledge, techniques, skills, methodologies and approaches to enhance their performance. All such professional expertise can be inculcated in them through 'Capacity Building Mechanism' (CBM).

CBM for clerical and non clerical staff is a new and emerging phenomenon. This is about bringing positive change in offices and the officials. All the well structured Organisations plan and implement numerous programs to enhance their staff's working capacity as a part of their Staff Development Program.

The goal of CBM is basically a positive and creative "CHANGE" in the workers' knowledge, behaviour, attitude and competence along with their skills, values and beliefs. This process is designed to improve job understanding, promote more effective job performance and establish future goals for career growth. According to Morphet, Johns and Reller (1959:431) the prime concerns of such programs will include these questions.

1. What behavior do we wish to change?

2. What is the present condition or level of behaviour we wish to change?

3. What is the desired condition we wish to achieve in personnel performance?

4. How can we link learning theory to staff development programs?

5. What type of training shall be employed (classroom, on-the-job, apprenticeship)?

6. What type of newer technologies shall be employed (computers, projectors, close circuit T.V, programmed text materials and video cassettes)

7. What indicators shall we use to evaluate the effectiveness of development programs?

Prominent universities of the developed countries like University of Leicester, University of Bath, University of Queensland Australia, University of California, University of Leads and Shepherd University have developed capacity building programs for their teaching and clerical staff. The chief aim of such programs is to assist the development of each individual and group to boost up organisation's performance through improving organisational efficiency and effectiveness.

COMPONENTS OF CAPACITY BUILDING MECHANISM

Honadle (1981) describes seven components that form the CBM for the development of any type of staff.

1. AN ANALYSIS OF THE SITUATION:

At first step it is to be analysed that:

(a) What the organisation is doing?

(b) How well is it doing it?

(c) What is the current level of activities?

2. ANTICIPATE THE CHANGE:

At the second step, the lessons learnt from the analysis of the first step are to be applied in the future activities, a change can be anticipated as a result. This change can be of any type ranging from the demographic, economic, political, operational, and professional and academic.

3. POLICY MAKING:

Consequence of anticipation is policy making. Policy is formulated on the bases of best available knowledge, manpower and infrastructure. Basic aim of policy must be to meet the anticipating change.

4. DEVELOPMENT OF PROGRAMS:

To implement the policies, creation and development of feasible and appropriate work plan and program is compulsory. This program will consist of the detail of required sources and services, their generation and steps to utilize these sources and services to achieve the goals.

5. ATTRACT AND ABSORB THE RESOURCES:

The Mechanism must have the ability to collect the resources and then absorb them. This includes the recruitment and/or selection of personnel, taxing and grants-man-ship. Absorbing the resources is to utilize these resources. Sometimes an organisation has the resources but lacks the ability to utilize them fully. MANAGEMENT OF RESOURCES:

The elements management resources are; budgeting, financial management, personnel relations and record keeping. Better resource management saves the wastage of human and material resources.

6. EVALUATION AND FEEDBACK:

Evaluation is the soul of all this process. Evaluation of the past and current activities provides true guidance to plan and implement future actions.

There are various factors which affect capacity building;

A) staff competence and capabilities,

B) salaries

C) service hours

D) dual employment and side business

E) personnel management

F) administration style

G) motivation

RETURNS OF CAPACITY BUILDING MECHANISM:

Development and training is an easy way to help your employees become more engaged. People choose to work with organisations that encourage development and stay with you if you continue to provide opportunities for development, whether formally or informally. People produce their best work when they are interested and committed to what they do. If they believe in their organisation's products and services, and they can see that the organisation values their contribution by supporting their development in concrete ways, they are very likely to be engaged.

ROLE OF CAPACITY BUILDING MECHANISM FOR CLERICAL STAFF:

Capacity building has become equivalent to full change. It plays an integral part in developing the institutions' philosophy, goals and expectations. Training and development activities increase professionalism, productivity and individual and organisational effectiveness. Examples of such activities include job related enhancement, change personnel attitude and behaviors, career development, instructional development, new, strengthened and refined skills and research and scholarships, when appropriate. The elements, which highlight the role of CBM for clerical staff, are:

A) IMPACTS ON STUDENT LEARNING:

Clerical staff is critically involved in learning process of students. It is to facilitate and manage the activities of students as well as other staff. It also creates a friendly environment in the institution. All these elements have impacts on students' learning. So any improvement in the clerical staff is bound to influence the student learning.

B) IMPACTS ON TEACHERS' PERFORMANCE:

For an effective functioning of the institutions, it is necessary that the teaching staff is provided adequate support in the following areas of work: (a) library (b) laboratory (c) clerical work and (d) non clerical work (Kapoor and Permi, 1988:73)

As described, clerical staff is to facilitate the teachers and to manage their activities Improvement in their abilities to assist, support the enhancement of teachers professional performance.

C) IMPACTS ON MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION:

The main aim of capacity building of clerical staff is to develop quality management and administration.

D) IMPACTS ON THEIR INDIVIDUAL CAREER:

Capacity building of clerical staff provides it ability and opportunity to get progress and growth in its career.

D) UNDERSTANDING OF RESPONSIBILITIES AND DUTIES:

Trough this mechanism a staff member understands the nature of his job, its needs and requirements, its purposes and his own role related to that job.

E) ORGANISATIONAL GROWTH:

Improvement in skills, behaviour, efficiency, competency and motivation of staff consequently gives the results of growth, development and expansion of an organisation.

F) COMPULSORY TO FORMULATE AND ACHIEVE FUTURE GOALS:

To formulate and achieve future objectives and goals, CBM provides knowledge of latest technology, required skills, required behaviour and attitude, required efficiency and required understanding of responsibilities.

To sum it up, while keeping in mind all the positive points regarding capacity building of clerical staff and the change it will bring in the long run, there are some challenges which continue to serve as a deterrent for such a process.

In Pakistan, organisations especially public sector organisations don't practice this process completely and comprehensively. Firstly, the existence of such mechanism is rare and secondly, the full concentration is on programs development rather than the situation analysis, objectives formulation, policy making and evaluation and feed back, which are compulsory to judge the levels of mechanism's achievements as well as overall program structure.

Another hurdle is the structure and environment of our offices. After the training, retraining, or any other type of Capacity Building Program like coaching, counseling, and monitoring, when an employee comes back in the office, it does not match theoretically, functionally or practically with the atmosphere which he observed and learned during his training.

Hence, he doesn't see his newly gained knowledge materialize into action. It is also obligatory for management to provide the staff environment and infrastructure according to its caliber and responsibilities. These steps will change office environment and employee behaviour, develop staff capacity and capability, and enhance teaching and learning system in the educations institutions.

Implications of the deal

The passage of the controversial Sharia regulation for Malakand division once again brought global and national attention on how this would impact on Pakistan’s future. Swat has been caught in violence for more than two years. The people were desperate for peace as they were caught between the militants and the military. Rough estimates indicate that more than 1,500 were killed, thousands injured and 250,000 were displaced in the previous two operations that were launched by the military against the Taliban.

The Swat deal was based on political expediency and appeasement but the people wanted to give peace a chance and the secular ANP was fully behind it. Then, as neither the ANP government nor the military was willing to stand up for another round, this was the way out. In any case this is a war involving hearts and minds. People for their own reasons took a sigh of relief that the peace deal may at least provide them security and a modicum of justice even if that is medieval. Clearly, there was a popular demand for the promulgation of Nizam-e-Adl in Swat and this goes back to the 1990s when Mohtarmma Benazir Bhutto had agreed to it.

In these circumstances, on the surface the passage of Nizam-e-Adl bill by the parliament and its assent by the president should be considered a welcome development. The context of the current deal is however more complex and problematic. The government has yielded under compulsion at a time when Talibanisation is sweeping the country and overwhelming the state. Fazlullah and Sufi Mohammad have exploited this genuine grievance and has used it brilliantly to expand their growing power. It is for this reason that it would have grave implications if their ambitions are not contained and a comprehensive policy is not devised and put into operation to reverse the tide.

Seeing an opportunity the extreme fringe led by Baitullah Mehsud, Mullah Fazlullah, and others who are spearheading Talibinasation in Pakistan are likely to press on. And if Muslim Khan, the spokesperson of the TNSM, is to be believed jihad in perpetuity is their motto.

This is so obvious from the way they are going about the question of appointing Qazis and addressing administrative and legal issues. The operational part of the Sharia would be the most difficult part of the agreement. It is amply clear that Sufi Mohammed wants to retain the powers of having the final say in the interpretation of Sharia and appointments of Qazis and the final arbiter on all matters of Swat and perhaps of Malakand.

The spread of Taliban phenomena, albeit yet in pockets, is transforming the politico-social dynamic of Pakistan. Democracy and human rights will be the first casualties of Talibanisation.

If however peace was to prevail in due course as a result of the deal and the government regains control over the situation, then every effort must be made to integrate the militants into the political system so that there is a sense of ownership. In parallel, a major effort should be launched to assimilate the cadres into the economic and social mainstream. All this is only attainable if productive skills are developed and employment opportunities are created in these less developed areas. The key question is, does the government have the vision and the capacity to put this plan into operation?

It would depend on what stakes Fazlullah has in maintaining peace. If his agenda is to harbour the militant force, continue to expand his power base and spread radical Islam then obviously the peace deal is a sham and merely a ruse to consolidate and keep marching ahead. Frankly, this seems the most likely scenario. But if he is half as genuine and loyal a Pakistani that some of his apologists would want us to believe it provides him a unique opportunity to redeem himself and Swat could one day return to its original calm and serene beauty for everyone to enjoy.

There are profound social implications of this deal as well, notwithstanding the claims being made by the provincial government. With cinema, TV, art, music all banned the place is already becoming a cultural wasteland. If sports activity is all banned and even cricket considered taboo, the youth would channel their energies into destructive and militant activities. For women even visiting bazaars and going out unaccompanied is considered a sin. The most damaging aspect of Taliban ethos is the opposition to education, and especially of girls. If allowed to continue this would compromise the future of the younger generation and cannot be accepted under any circumstances. Bowing to such retrogressive forces would be an invitation to the dark ages.

A major contributor to Swat’s economy has been tourism that has virtually come to a standstill. No tourist would enter Swat if such stringent interpretation of Sharia bordering on draconian laws prevails.

How will Washington and New Delhi perceive our approach of pacifying the Taliban? Already the US has expressed its reservations and they are closely monitoring the situation. US view has always been that peace deals are counter-productive and end up strengthening the militants by allowing them to consolidate and expand their influence. They could be talked into it that unless there is massive military intervention with huge adverse consequences it was not possible to have handled the situation in any other way. Nonetheless, economic assistance, foreign investment and political support will only keep coming if the international community is convinced that Pakistan is committed in turning the corner and not willing to hand over the country to the Taliban.

Let us also keep reminding ourselves that nuclear power and Talibanisation are a dangerous mix that not even the best of our friends will tolerate.

Islamisation: cure of all evils

Complete Islamisation of Pakistan has been the genuine and long-standing demand of the overwhelming majority of Pakistanis. Not only that, it is also the appropriate answer to the lurking fears of Talibanisation, growing rapidly with every passing day, as a natural response to the suppression of this public demand at the state level.

This demand surfaced as soon as the inception of the country, since the driving force behind the Pakistan movement was the need for a separate country for Muslims where they could protect and practice their Islamic ideology. Consequently, the mounting public pressure led the Constituent Assembly to pass the Objectives Resolution, making a sacred covenant with the people of Pakistan that Quran and Sunnah will be the guiding principles of the constitution, legislation and policy-making of this land of the pure.

The British-trained establishment, including; the civil and military bureaucracy, were, however, averse to the idea of Islamisation and wanted to faithfully preserve the British system and the Anglo-Saxon system of government, besides the laws formulated by the colonial masters for subjects. Those people considered themselves the legitimate successors of the British colonial rulers and aspired to step into their masters’ shoes to enjoy the same powers and privileges exclusively reserved for the privileged class of British officers colonising the sub continent for over 200 years.

The ensuing tug-of-war between the small minority of feudals and capitalists led by the colonial bureaucracy trying to replace colonists, and the vast majority of people yearning to materialise the dream of Pakistan into reality, led the country towards the state of affairs it is presently beset with. This confrontation has not only caused serious damages to the country, including the progressive erosion of nationhood, decline in unity, solidarity and integrity among the federating units and putting the country on the verge of collapse, but has also led to its dismemberment. For the common people the independence of Pakistan from the British colonists was nothing but mere change of masters. The former British rulers were at least answerable to their British government and Parliament but their legacy of the local masters considered themselves as the ultimate authority and literally behaved like they were answerable to none but themselves.

The Pakistan movement leaders like Quaid-e-Azam and Liaquat Ali Khan were soon replaced by civil and military bureaucrats like Ghulam Mohammad, Gen Iskandar Mirza, Chaudhry Mohammad Ali and Gen Ayub Khan. In their quest for absolute power, these people destroyed democratic institutions and undermined the ideology of Pakistan for the sake of promoting the British culture, values and the English language.

The irrational resistance to the genuine public demand for Islamisation emanates from the imperialistic mentality adopted by our ruling elite. It stems from the mentality that drove the medieval master-slave struggle, and exposes the ruling classes state of mind.

The elite and intellectuals in the Roman Empire believed that the slaves and inferior class of people had neither the need to think about their welfare, nor the right to form any association or assembly to deliberate upon their problems and their solutions. It was the right of Romans to think and decide about the welfare of the slaves. The same ideology was adopted by the European colonists who declared that it was the right of the white masters to decide about the affairs of the coloured subjects. The basic idea behind that view was that the coloured races were of inferior capabilities and was incapable of running their own affairs and solving their problems. The Aryan Hindus were of the same belief that the upper-caste people had the authority to take care of the political, religious and economic issues of the whole society, while the lower castes, having lesser capabilities, were there to serve the higher-caste masters.

In the modern times, the much talked about theory of Clash of Civilizations by Samuel Huntington, professes the same ideology that the Western Civilisation is the superior ideology which has proved its supremacy and it was time other civilisations should be defeated and obliterated. The same belief was inculcated to the US authorities by former US president Richard Nixon in his book, Seize the Moment, that after the fall of Soviet Union it was the golden opportunity for the USA to impose itself all over the world as the sole superpower.

The New World Order doctrine of Bush Senior had the same ideology that no power centre opposed to the USA should be allowed to grow, and this new world order should be imposed on the whole world with the help of European nations, Israel and India, in order to protect and promote the US interests and civilisation. The crux of the Fukuyama’s doctrine of End of History was that the Western civilisation has completely dominated the whole world, and its impossible that any other ideology could now evolve against it. The Western democracy has brought the humanity to the end point of its socio-cultural evolution.

The entire debate that Islam should not be the system of governance in the country was the thinking paradigm of those who are mental slaves to the western culture and averse to the Islamic ideology. This is an undeniable fact that Muslims from the length and breadth of the subcontinent strove for the creation of Pakistan and rendered matchless sacrifices in human history. The proponents of the baseless argument that not Islam but economic reasons were the basis of the Pakistan movement have no answer as to why the Muslims of UP, CP, Calcutta, Madras and Bombay, etc., endeavoured for Pakistan despite knowing that their areas would not be part of Pakistan. Evidently, they were striving for the realisation of the dream of a separate homeland for Muslims to enable them practice Islam freely under the system governed by Quran and Sunnah.

Unfortunately, the state of Pakistan created after a historic struggle of Muslims was taken over by the agents of British colonists quite early. They kept weaving a web of conspiracies to consolidate their grip over the country and with the passage of time their clutches became so strong that now even the talk of Pakistan’s Islamic ideology hurt their ears.

Pakistan is not just any state based on geographical entities. It is the embodiment of a definite Ideology and religion. As the Father of the Nation, Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, put it: Pakistan came into being the very day the first Muslim set foot on the subcontinent. Pakistan is a result of the Two-nation Theory that clearly spells that the life of Muslims is governed by the Islamic system based on Quran and Sunnah. Until we harmonise our lives, economy, society, Constitution and legal system with Islam, our society will continue to suffer from internal strife and friction.

Those who believe that Pakistan can be secularised by separating the Islamic system from its state are suffering from a serious fallacy. What they conveniently ignore in their bias against Islamic codes is that Islamisation of the country is not just the demand of what they call some extremists but is the strong desire of an overwhelming majority of the people, millions of whom are ready to sacrifice their lives to achieve this objective, like those who laid down their lives in the Pakistan Movement.

Though this majority is under the strong shackles of a tiny minority of western-slaves, the dawn of an Islamic revolution is round the corner. This is the era of a global Muslim renaissance as slavery’s shackles are breaking and the enemies of Islam are on the retreat after the huge fortresses of their military and economic might are coming down under the pure resistance and sacrifices of the believers.

Regarding the argument that promoting Islam would enrage Washington and the west, we would become isolated, and be dubbed as fundamentalists, etc., it must be kept in mind that alienating Islam will negate out existence and disintegrate the country. Islam is the basis of Pakistan, since it was created for Islam and not on the basis of some homeland.

Sharia regulation in Swat

In Swat, the duty to make law has been bestowed upon qazis who can declare what is and what is not in accordance with the Quran, Sunnah, ijma and qiyas. — AP/File Photo

NO one can deny the enormously serious political impact that the Sharia regulation will have. Our major political parties bury their heads in the sand when a meteorite hits our political landscape and jolts our whole constitutional infrastructure. Alongside the adverse effects it will have on the overall governance of the state, the Nizam-i-Adl regulation will have widespread legal repercussions.

A reading of the text of the Regulation 2009 indicates that members of our parliament hurriedly passed the resolution without exerting their right of reading and carefully studying several provisions of the regulation. The regulation lacks all the essential qualities of good legislation: clarity, accuracy and constitutionality. Ambiguity and vagueness ruin the very purpose of the legislation and are the two qualities that one may find floating on the surface of this law.

Had Mr M.D. Tahir been alive he certainly would have challenged this law under the constitution as it makes not only various constitutional provisions redundant but also marginalises the role of constitutional bodies, for instance, the Islamic Ideology Council, and even parliament.

According to the 1973 Constitution, as it was originally drafted, to legislate law in consonance with the Quran and Sunnah is the task assigned to parliament. Even when Zia amended the constitution and established the federal sharia court (FSC) and granted it the power to examine laws on the touchstone of the Quran and Sunnah (Article 203D), the FSC was bound to refer the matter to the president to make amendments in case the court found any law or its provision repugnant to the injunctions of Islam.

The FSC is not empowered to make law and proclaim that this law will now be applicable. In the absence of such a provision, when qazis will declare any law un-Islamic, they will also assert what the Islamic law is. Then, their version of Islamic law will begin to apply.

To pass on this burden of legislation to qazis is delegating their responsibility to individuals who will enforce their personal interpretation of Sharia on others. It is beyond comprehension as to how and on what basis the parliament can pass on its role of legislation to another body of the state, more so when the authority is passed to individuals, who have neither technical education nor the experience of dispensation of justice, keeping in view the fundamental human rights enshrined in our constitution.

Anyone who has not been educated about the Pakistani constitution and various other fundamental procedural statutes and their principles cannot dispense justice that is in consonance with our basic law and the treaties that Pakistan has signed in the UN. Sharia under Section 2 (j) of this Regulation means: ‘the injunctions in Islam as laid down in Quran, Sunnah, ijma and qiyas’. Now what are these injunctions? Where is codification of these injunctions? Most lay Muslims believe that whatever law, ritual and custom they practise in their everyday life, including wife-beating, killing in the name of honour, depriving women of higher education, are based on these four sources of law.

Sub-clause 3 of paragraph 6 of the Regulation enables qazis to deal with the cases on the basis of the ‘established principles of Shari’h’. Is there any definitive and exhaustive list of these principles that one may study and refer to? If there is no provision or clear legislation to interpret then qazis are, in effect, empowered to legislate what is Sharia and what are its established principles. This is not the application or interpretation of law, a specific role that is constitutionally assigned to the judiciary. In effect, this is lawmaking.

The sources of law cited in this regulation were employed by the great imams of various Muslim schools of law when they interpreted various commands of the Quran and Sunnah. Generally speaking, this was an exercise in ijtihad carried out by the imams of the majority sects of Pakistan. All of their fatwas, though based on the use of these four sources of Islamic law, are markedly different from each other. In modern times, and especially when we have elected national and provincial assemblies, the responsibility to legislate lies with these bodies, an exercise of the right of ijma. They are duty bound to lay down the law and provide clear legislation to the administration for its application. The judiciary then will make sure that the law is applied in letter and spirit.

According to this regulation the duty to make law has been bestowed upon qazis who would declare what is and what is not in accordance with the Quran, Sunnah, ijma and qiyas. Until a qazi, in a particular case, lays down a ruling the administrative machinery would not be certain if an individual or an agency is acting in accordance or in violation of the injunctions laid down in the four sources of Islamic law.

Even if the administrative authority does exercise its discretion and takes a view, there is no surety that the qazi or qazis above him will agree with that particular interpretation of the sources. This regulation will play havoc with people’s lives as there is no final interpretation of any Islamic injunction and since no one can claim any particular authority over others in a better understanding of the injunctions of Islam.

It was the function of parliament to legislate laws which do not violate the injunctions of Islam and treaties Pakistan is a signatory to. To delegate such an authority to qazis who enjoy ample discretionary powers will espouse sectarian interpretations of Islamic law and dispense injustice. It is a dangerous trend that will influence the members of the judiciary all over Pakistan and they will begin to legislate what they think is based on the ‘true’ interpretation of Islamic injunctions.

Another important character of this piece of legislation that shows its departure from the constitutional norms is the emphasis of the four sources of the injunctions. The constitution does not warrant that laws should be in accordance with the four sources cited in the Regulation. It clearly lays down that the laws must be in accordance with the Quran and Sunnah. The constitution does not permit that a law should be in conformity with one source only. It stipulates that a law be in conformity with both. That is why various legislations for instance, the punishment of stoning to death and consuming alcohol or intoxicants were challenged in the FSC, since both are based only on Sunnah.

The other two sources — qiyas and ijma — were available to the assembly of 1973 and their non-inclusion in the language of the 1973 Constitution means that the assembly was cognisant of the fact that the inclusion of these two sources would breed sectarianism and a polemical interpretation of Islamic laws.

Qiyas and ijma are defined differently not only by various scholars and sects but even the imams of five established schools of thought describe qiyas and ijma in dissimilar forms. Therefore, if an injunction is based on the Quran and Sunnah it may be acceptable to most Muslims but if it is based on qiyas and ijma it will not be acceptable to those who do not accept these two sources of Islamic law.

Israeli satellite to guard Indian borders

The satellite is meant to fill the need for India’s efforts of monitoring its borders, ‘especially infiltration by terrorist forces.’ - Reuters photo

NEW DELHI: India will launch an Israel-made all weather spy satellite on Monday, which is expected to enhance the monitoring of its porous borders, United News of India said on Sunday.

It said the 300-kilogram PSLV C12 remote-sensing model satellite will be launched from Sriharikota in Andhra Pradesh. The satellite was earlier scheduled to be launched in the first week of April, UNI said, quoting Israeli newspaper Haaretz.

The satellite is capable of taking images of the Earth under all weather conditions using radar technology. It can deliver pictures round-the-clock.

UNI said it will fill the need for India’s efforts of monitoring its borders, ‘especially infiltration by terrorist forces, surrounded as it is by a hostile neighborhood.’

The satellite would specially be useful as India seeks to keep a close watch on its maritime shores following last November’s terror attacks in Mumbai.

‘The radar-imaging espionage satellite, made by Israel Aerospace Industries, brings a new level in the growing relationship between India and Israel, especially in defence matters,’ UNI said.