It seems that Pakistan’s leaders will never realise and never admit their detrimental effect upon the nation and its standing in today’s world.

Throughout the election campaign, very little has been said by our aspiring leaders to uphold the freedoms that are now expected to exist in a civilised and democratic state. On April 30, the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) released its 2013 annual report. Found to be one of the worst countries in the world when it comes to an abundant lack of tolerance, it was recommended that Pakistan be designated as a “country of particular concern”.

As related by Foreign Affairs on April 30, in a write-up by the director of policy and research at the USCIRF: “An array of repressive laws, including the much abused blasphemy law and religiously discriminatory anti-Ahmadi laws, foster an atmosphere of violent extremism and vigilantism. The growth of militant groups espousing a violent religious ideology who undertake attacks, impact all Pakistanis and threatens the country’s security and stability.” He suggests that the report allows facts to speak for themselves and uses this quote from it:

“The Pakistani government failed to effectively intervene against a spike in targeted violence against the Shia Muslim minority community, as well as violence against other minorities. With elections scheduled for May 2013, additional attacks against religious minorities and candidates deemed ‘un-Islamic’ will likely occur. Chronic conditions remain, including the poor social and legal status of non-Muslim religious minorities and the severe obstacles to free discussion of sensitive religious and social issues faced by the majority Muslim community. The country’s blasphemy laws, used predominantly in Punjab but also nationwide, target members of religious minority communities and dissenting Muslims and this frequently results in imprisonment. The USCIRF is aware of at least 16 individuals on death row and 20 more serving life sentences. The blasphemy law, along with anti-Ahmadi laws that effectively criminalise various practices of their faith, has created a climate of vigilante violence. Hindus have suffered from the climate of violence and hundreds have fled Pakistan for India. Human rights and religious freedom are increasingly under assault, particularly women, members of religious minority communities, and those in the majority Muslim community whose views are deemed “un-Islamic”. The government has proven unwilling or unable to confront militants perpetrating acts of violence against other Muslims and religious minorities.”

We expect only silence on religious freedom from President Asif Ali Zardari and his men and women of the Zardari PPP as they have shown a remarkable consistency over the past, really distasteful, five years in ignoring and keeping firmly away from any hint of doing away with or even amending laws that are directly confrontational towards the freedom of religion and even of thought.

Some other leaders’ records are also not exactly shining when it comes to any let-up on religious intolerance and bigotry, but perhaps, one did expect more from the great Khan rather than the stand taken on the Ahmadis. After all, the first objective of the PTI constitution is: “To make Pakistan an egalitarian, modern and Islamic welfare state that upholds the fundamental rights of the people in which all citizens, regardless of gender, caste, creed or religion can live in peace, harmony and happiness.” The MQM, to give it due credit, is the sole party that publicly makes the right noises.

The wholesale pandering to the religious right, whether through fear, power-lust or conviction, is reprehensible and can never, in any way, further the cause of this republic.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 11^th, 2013.

Army generals are always in the news — they make news. The current chief of army staff has always been the man most heeded in this nation — a fact that tells us much and indicates the follies and faults of both political and other classes.

What is most unfortunate, indeed, even unseemly, is the present witch-hunt being conducted against a former army chief. General (retd) Pervez Musharraf made mistakes, even grievous errors, but that does not justify vengeance. One of his most deplorable acts has been bypassed in the hullabaloo that now surrounds him. As the architect — together with external and internal allies — of the truly unconstitutional NRO, he must shoulder much of the blame for the fiasco of the past five years. However and nevertheless, at some point, we must hope that justice coupled with common sense will prevail and that an even keel will be found.

Our current army chief, of late, has usually told things as they are, in addresses laden with home truths. In his GHQ address on April 30, near the beginning of his speech, he gently reminded us, “we have either not discovered the correct path or have not remained steadfast in our journey.” He would seem to be very correct on the former.

Early mention of the Siachen landslide casualties reminded us of the complete and utter futility of the totally destructive, murderous, senseless Siachen situation. One day, surely, both Pakistan and India will realise the downright stupidity of the stand-off on the roof of the world — “two bald men fighting over a comb,” as Stephen Cohen once put it.

And yes, perhaps, now with General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani’s adamancy over the holding of elections, it will put paid to the continuous doubts expressed as to whether or not they will happen: “… general elections would be held in the country on 11^th of May. We must not harbour any suspicions or misgivings about it.” We have been told that “if we succeed in rising above all ethnic, linguistic and sectarian biases to vote solely on the basis of honesty, sincerity, merit and competence, there would be no reason to fear dictatorship”. The only problem here is what we have on the ground to be elected and what the outcome is likely to be. As General Kayani stressed, “The conduct of general elections is not an end per se but is surely an important means towards delivering us from our sufferings”.

He, more or less, reiterated what he told the nation at last year’s Independence Day parade at Kakul: “Today, extremism and terrorism present a grave challenge. We can claim that this menace is not of our making. This approach, however, will not solve the problem. It is important for us to clearly understand, what is extremism and terrorism. Misconceptions about these two terminologies can prove catastrophically divisive for the nation.”

Published in The Express Tribune, May 4^th, 2013.

As far as the Republic of Pakistan goes, April 16 was an unusually bloody day even by our high standards, due to one act of God and to acts of man. The battered, bruised province of Balochistan, 43 per cent of the land mass that makes up this bleeding country bore the main brunt — 80 people reportedly died in an earthquake which hit the Iranian border areas and an additional four died in a bomb blast targeting the electioneering of Sanaullah Zehri (one of whose brothers, Israrullah, distinguished himself as a senator in 2008 by upholding the tradition of burying alive women in the name of “honour”).

Eighteen were killed by a suicide bomber, also in an electioneering rally, in the deeply deadly province of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, targeting Ghulam Ahmad Bilour. In even more deadly North Waziristan, nine armymen were blown up by another suicide bomber. Down south, in Sukkur, Sindh, within the space of that one day, reportedly nine men and women were murdered to restore “honour”. Karachi’s daily toll of “targeted” killings by men on motorbikes was relatively low; a mere five.

And so, amidst the bombings and other killings that have become a routine feature of life in this country and which no longer appear to affect the local sensibilities, so inured are citizens to murder, mayhem, and violence.

Meanwhile, electioneering will continue, upheld by democracy under the expert guidance of the most honourable Supreme Court and the Election Commission, the efficacy and influence of both being highlighted in this publication on April 17 by a photograph of an Election Commission banner placed upside down in full view, in Islamadad, of the watchful eyes of the Supreme Court building.

The nonsensical bigoted kerfuffle raised by Articles 62 and 63 of the multi-mess made of the Constitution by its various amenders has retreated. One casualty, though he survived his appeal to the election tribunal after his disqualification by an inane returning officer, is Ayaz Amir who has since (at the time of writing) been dropped by his party. Much has justifiably been written blasting his disqualification by the Election Commission but somehow, he has earned the ire of the bigwigs of the PML-N. It is a great pity, indeed, that the political scenario will lose a rarity — a man who is materially and morally un-corrupt. Democracy’s revenge is extending its purview.

It is now high time for the PPP members of the committee, which produced the Eighteenth Amendment — and other party members — to admit that they have blatantly lied to the nation by declaring that by that amendment, the Constitution was returned to what it was in August 1973. Bunkum, it was not. Numerous articles remain affected by the pious, sagacious, righteous, non-profligate General Ziaul Haq — amongst them, 62 (qualifications to sit in parliament) and 63 (disqualifications).

Abridged 1973 qualifications: a) must be a citizen of Pakistan; b) for National Assembly not less than 25 years of age and enrolled as a voter; c) for the Senate, not less than 30 years of age and enrolled as a voter in any area in a province or the federal capital or Fata; d) possesses such other qualifications as may be prescribed by an act of parliament. That was it in 1973, innocuous and democratic. Clauses (e) to (j), which have caused all the mischief, were added by Ziaul Haq’s Eighth Amendment.

Disqualifications (abridged): a) of unsound mind and so declared by a competent court; b) an undischarged insolvent; c) ceases to be a citizen of Pakistan, or acquires the citizenship of a foreign state; d) holds an office of profit in the service of Pakistan other than an office declared by law not to disqualify; e) disqualified by an act of parliament. Clauses (f) to (o) were added.

So come on, Senator Raza Rabbani and your fellow PPP members, now that your untruth has been fully aired in public, own up, admit to it.

Published in The Express Tribune, April 20^th, 2013.

Many within the Republic are now looking at themselves and at the state of the nation, and arriving at the conclusion that all is not well (not that it ever has been).

Last week, when we were witnessing the demeaning to the nation spectacle of the Election Commission of Pakistan, indulging in an attempt at “weeding out” election candidates (The Guardian editorial, April 7) — not because they have robbed, plundered, lied, cheated and paid no taxes to the state but because they allegedly oppose an undefined and unacceptable “ideology of Pakistan” or that they cannot recite religious teachings — comments were made in the British and US press on “Pakistan: chequered progress” and “Pakistan’s precipitous decline”.

We should all be hanging our heads in shame, particularly members of the last elected National Assembly who, with great aplomb, passed the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution, firmly keeping in place provisions of the Eighth Amendment — so it serves them right when it bounces back to bite them, no sympathy to be wasted.

And it is ludicrous to blame Maulana Fazlur Rahman for the mess made. What was his hold over the honourable members of both, the committee formed to come up with the Amendment and the men and women (292 out of 342) who more or less rushed it through the assembly?

The Guardian rightly tells its readers that there is progress in the fact that elections are taking place (so far so good) and that under the (somewhat dictatorial as opposed to democratic) five-year rule of Asif Zardari, “there has been no political victimisation” — that is something we must all acknowledge and give him due credit. But “alas, the good news peters out there”. Discussed is “the Orwellian task of reciting prayers as proof of religious belief”. Criticised is Nawaz Sharif’s Muslim League which has “a less than glorious record” and for its footsie-playing electoral deals with various extremist groups. Rightly feared is “an inconclusive result” and a then weak hamstrung coalition.

The International Herald Tribune on April 5 carried a column by William Milam, a former US ambassador to Pakistan. Again, the only accomplishment of the past government was that it served out its term, though that good news is “drowned out by the horror stories that continue to emanate from Pakistan”. One of these being the fact that “[a]nyone who does not meet a narrow and exclusive definition of “Muslim” as defined by religious fundamentalists, has come under increasing attack”.

One most apt point concerns his colleague, a British ambassador, who had it that the half-full or half-empty metaphor does not appropriately apply to Pakistan. It should be looked at through the image of “a glass too large”, “a country constantly overreaching”, trying, says Milam, to punch above its weight. And now, the too-large glass “is filled to overflowing with problems that Pakistan cannot handle” (we all know them too well to bear repetition), resulting in “an accelerated decline towards state failure in this key, nuclear-armed country”. No punches pulled there, and no denying it all.

Afterthought: The federal government at the moment has a cabinet of 14 (plus two vacancies); Punjab has six. But what gives with Sindh and its caretaker chief minister? He chooses to sit on a cabinet of 16 at the moment, plus three advisers. Now, after a meeting of the cabinet called by the president of the Republic and held at Bilawal House, Karachi, the chief minister has seen fit, reportedly to “expand” his already overlarge cabinet by roping in seven additional ministers and a couple more advisers. Shame on him, and shame on those who call the shots.

Published in The Express Tribune, April 13^th, 2013.

The late-lamented (solely by its adherents) government of the PPP-Z, on numerous occasions, has boasted that its famously breathtaking Eighteenth Amendment of 2010 restored the 1973 Constitution to its original form. And this, notwithstanding the fact that it remained, post-Eighteenth, littered with articles dating back to — much-hated by our democrats and liberals — General Ziaul Haq’s Eighth Amendment of 1985 (then 25 years ago), which defaced virtually over half of the articles contained in the Constitution, annihilating its original spirit and distorting it to the extent of incomprehensibility.

To restore the Constitution to its original form, if that is what the Eighteenth Amendment intended, then should not all the previous 17 amendments to the sacred document have been scrapped? Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s original seven, as has been discussed time and time again, were all drafted in bad faith.

The Parliamentary Committee on Constitutional Reforms (“that came out with a historic document”, according to one press report) held 77 meetings, all of which were attended by its chairman, Senator Raza Rabbani (one member was Raja Pervaiz Ashraf, then a not-so-simple minister, but little could have been expected from him). How is it that Senator Rabbani allowed, in particular, pernicious articles of the Eighth Amendment, and the other amendments, to be retained and why was he economical with the truth when he insisted on telling the people that the Constitution was rendered by the Eighteenth Amendment to what it was in August 1973?

Well, the Eighth Amendment has come round (what goes round comes round) now at election time to bite the hands of those who ignored it, obviously willfully. Articles 62 and 63 are Ziaul Haq concoctions, purely in his regime’s disastrous and rather wicked self-interest.

The Election Commission is fully occupied with a process of  “ruthless” scrutiny of those filing nomination forms to become — once again, in many cases — miserable servants of the people, their representatives in the new dispensation. As a front-page headline ruefully told us on April 2, “Poll scrutiny turns into Islamic studies test”. Article 62 lays down the “qualifications” for members of parliament. In its madness, it requires, inter alia, men and women to have adequate knowledge of religious teachings, to practise obligatory duties prescribed by religion, to abstain from major sins (minor being acceptable), to be sagacious, righteous, non-profligate, honest and ameen, and not to have “opposed the ideology of Pakistan” (does anyone know exactly what is this latter, when and where has it been defined and by whom?).

That the much-lauded chief of the Election Commission, otherwise a reasonable man with the normally accepted human failings, has allowed his commission members to quiz candidates on their practice of religion is not readily comprehensible. Do we really need our representatives to be versed in Islamic teachings? And if they must be, then which particular brand of Islam are we looking at? Indeed, we hope (merely hope) that they can be honest and ameen, but to expect them to be righteous (“guiltless, sinless”) is akin to asking for the moon.

Before asking for the undesirable and the irrelevant, Chief Election Commissioner Fakhruddin G Ebrahim, in this context, would do well not to forget that famous paragraph from the Munir Report on the Punjab disturbances of 1953, penned by Justices M Munir and MR Kayani:

“No two Ulema have agreed before us as to the definition of a Muslim given by the Ulema. If we attempt our own definition as such learned divine has done and that definition differs from that given by all the others, we unanimously go out of the fold of Islam. And if we adopt the definition given by any one of the Ulema, we remain Muslims according to the view of that alim, but kafirs according to the definition of everyone else.”

Published in The Express Tribune, April 6^th, 2013.

For a long time, it has been lamented by some here in the Islamic Republic that it is credibly obvious that there is a paucity of leadership material. Whatever leadership material does exist, clad in whatever hue, is sub-mediocre or, at best, mediocre. In light of experience and history, this would seem optimistic given the reasoning that mediocrity is less of an evil than corruption and ineptitude, which invariably, in this country’s case, have gone hand in hand when it comes to leadership and the resultant non-governance — or worse, misgovernance.

The fact that this last democratically freely and fairly elected government died an unusual natural death has been lauded to the skies by all and sundry — with an equal amount of ‘zeal and fervour’ generally reserved for the celebrations of religious or national festive occasions — and has, in a way, turned out to be meaningless.

Caretaker governments, in our experience, have been formed after the unnatural deaths of various governments and assemblies which have been dismissed by generals and presidents, armed with due constitutional power, for a variety of insalubrious reasons. The measure of mistrust in this past PPP-Z government, due to its predilection for corrupt, dishonest, selfish, nepotic practices is glaring. Having served out its natural lifespan, had it been all that it should have been, could we not have expected sufficient integrity from it for it to be able to organise and oversee an election? No, it could not be — the trust deficit or any signs of democratic maturity were way, way out.

So, here we are with the main caretakers now in position, the leading one being the prime minister, an octogenarian, who in tandem with another octogenarian, the chief election commissioner, is expected to outwit the riggers and rotters and provide the country with a clean, spanking shiny National Assembly packed with those who are, inter alia, non-violators of Islamic injunctions and who abstain from major sins (what constitutes the acceptable minor sins has not been constitutionally defined).

The paucity of honest, acceptable leadership manpower in a country of almost 200 million — of whom some 40 per cent are statistically stated to be under the age of 40 — is shaming in that octogenarians are expected to lead the way. Or, is it precisely because they are octogenarians that they have been placed where they are, at the behest of the erstwhile ruling party and its skilfully manipulative defacto chief, who has outstripped all his political competitors by far?

According to the latest TFT editorial, “The battleground will be the Punjab”, which now has a PPP-Z nominee as its chief minister. The Lahore-based TFT also predicts that the coming election “is about traditional arithmetic”. Well, drat it — then we can wave goodbye to any hoped for “change”.

Whether the PPP-Z can claw its way back in, or is pipped at the post by the PML-N, makes little difference. The latter and its leadership are old hat — far too old — and the thought of their return, which is forecast, is enough to give one the willies. The former, under its new leadership, is a far cry from what the party originally was and its five years in disastrous power may have dented the enthusiasm of the once party faithful. The spoiler in the background, Imran Khan’s PTI, simply represents “change” but on its present showing, it seems too long a way behind the leaders. Though Khan has been politicking for over a decade, he is new in comparison. But then, in common with so many, he tends to dwell far too much on “I”, “me” and pretentiously, even on God.

Anyhow, and whatever be the outcome, the members of the PPP-Z and its coalition partners at the centre, and the rest of those in the provincial power seats, all had a good and lucrative innings and are now surely laughing their way to their respective offshore banks.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 30^th, 2013.

So, here we are, it has been achieved at any and all costs — the serving out of the constitutionally mandated term of the precious assemblies. Does the end justify the means? To many, yes. Pakistan’s faltering democratic process has been lauded to the skies, here and there, for its lasting powers, for it having triumphed over and above expectations.

To delve into the state of the nation as it finds itself after five years of democratic (in name) rule by those who claim democratic credentials despite all pointers, past and present, to the contrary would be superfluous. The man in the urban street, or the equally filthy village, knows the reality of life in the Islamic Republic. And behind all the praise showered for the great achievement lies the knowledge that Pakistan is in a status quo of excessive blatant corruption, growing poverty, growing intolerance and militant religiosity, an economic meltdown coupled with incredibly greedy and grabby self-serving politicians, crippling power shortages, and above all, a total absence of governance and law and order, which has resulted in the most terrible forms of violence. Politics, the famous ‘system’, has been saved at the expense of the state. The justification: that there is no alternative to electoral democracy.

Fine and dandy. But democracy must be made to work and seen to be made to work. The quality of the electoral process must be improved, but the election commission, the body which can do so, is facing stiff resistance from the politicians who are bent on perpetuating a failing “system” rather than reforming it, solely with the motive of perpetuating themselves in lucrative power seats. There is no concept of serving either the state or the people — it is all “me”.

To what do we look forward? The media has persuaded all and sundry that we are in for another round of Nawaz Sharif, the would-be amirul momineen, the gentleman who has survived in politics since the early 1980s. He has assiduously, in opposition, refused to rock the “system” boat, he avoided playing the part he should have played for exactly the reason that he finds himself where he is today. He cleverly let it all go to pieces, so that at the end of the famous five years, he would emerge as he has — the potential conqueror.

The PPP, bereft of the Bhutto lustre, with a little bit of help from friends and enemies, and through the skilful manipulations of Asif Zardari, did well to last the course. The powerful army with its tradition of loyalty to the chief, was kept relatively in safe mode by the three-year extension given to the army chief which, if he was all that he is said to be, should have promptly been turned down. Not that the army did not hold its own, up to a point. It did; it kept its strategic asset, the militant organisations, safe and healthy, and it had its say in foreign policy matters.

But the real threat was neutralised, though there were some rather bumpy rides, and full marks to Asif Zardari, the actual ruler, who dominated cabinet and government, rendering the constitutional function of his prime minister (and even his ministers) into a national joke. His powers were clipped, de jure, under his Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution, but de facto they blossomed. And he is with us, whether with clipped wings or not, until August, at the least.

The “historic milestone” is behind us, we march on. The question is, to what? Is there hope of change? Can Imran Khan realistically take on the big boys? It would really be a “historic milestone” if it could be shown that yes, there is new under the Pakistani sun.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 23^rd, 2013.

Just one set of front-page headlines on March 10: “Mob loots, torches Christian colony in Lahore”; “Five killed in Peshawar mosque blast”;  “PM prays at Ajmer Dargah for peace in Pakistan”; and the best of all, “Protection of life, property govt’s top priority : Zardari”.

Another headline in another publication: “Mob wreaks havoc in Christian town”. Yet another, “Mob rule in Lahore”.

Very correctly, in this publication in his column of March 13, Ejaz Haider has asked: “Where did the mob come from? Who is attacking shrines and imambargahs, if not the pious awam?” His answer: “ ‘Normal’ people; average Pakistanis; people going about the business of life; you and me.”

Now, in this particular case of mob rule, the media, by and large, ‘protects’ the mob by shifting all blame on to the blasphemy laws, the Punjab government and the police force. This, despite the fact that it was a Muslim mob, some have it 2,000-strong, which inflicted the disgraceful damage upon the livelihood and property of those living in an area inhabited by non-Muslims. Reportedly, the pious mob was egged on by a few people’s representatives from the Punjab government and one from the federal government, all from the political party now tipped by many to be the conquerors in the upcoming, somewhat controversial, elections.

This was not an isolated incident, nor should it engender much surprise as it — even worse — has happened in the past on many an occasion. Mobs of vigilantes are commonplace, not only in issues involving the blasphemy laws, but even on occasions when would-be robbers have been nabbed by members of the public and have been dispatched by an easily assembled mob of vengeance-seekers. However, it is the blasphemy laws which cause, in the main, mob violence. The cult of false religiosity, bigotry, hatred imbued by brainwashing that inflicts not only the beloved awam, the great unwashed, but also those who have received some form of education, probably warped.

To commit blasphemy in this country (and in a few other Muslim lands), one must be insane, or as is reported in this latest case, drunk to the extent of being out of one’s senses. But what did the Christian sanitary worker say to his fellow imbiber, the Muslim liquor-peddler, a violator of the prevailing law? We are told when the alleged blasphemy committed involves the defiling or burning of the Holy Quran, or the improper use of religious-related phrases by members of the Ahmadi community, but we are never told of words that have allegedly been blasphemously spoken. Why? Would repetition of such words be treated as blasphemy? Well, it is not enough to merely say that a man or woman or child verbally blasphemed — in what manner, we would like to know.

And as for the mob, as Haider has written, they themselves were blasphemers. They burnt and desecrated Bibles and crosses, apart from destroying some 200 buildings. But no action will be taken, as is usual, because governments and law enforcers are too paralysed by fear, or perhaps, in many cases, are of like mind with the mob.

Blasphemers are apparently rarely given bail, for their own protection, against murder by a mob, and in jail, are often in solitary confinement for the same reason. Those occasionally acquitted can only go into hiding or flee abroad, as is the case with any judge, who has the gumption to acquit — most do not, even when it is blatantly obvious that the charge is false.

Removal or amendment of the blasphemy laws may not help. The national mindset is such and there is the penchant for mob violence on any excuse — in Lahore and Karachi, protesters against the Badami Bagh incident themselves resorted to violence in answer to violence. It is only the amendment to the national mindset that can cure the evil. But who is there willing or able to even set forth on that mammoth task?

Published in The Express Tribune, March 16^th, 2013.

Democracy’s revenge has not been sweet for the thousands of innocent deprived Pakistani citizens murdered or maimed by acts of terrorism that have strangely multiplied over the past five years. Calculated is the fact that over 2,000 poeple were killed last year and if we look at this year, when well over 300 have reportedly lost their lives through terror attacks in less than three months, what total are we heading for in 2013?

“It is always a paltry, feeble, tiny mind that takes pleasure in revenge.” (Juvenal, 2^nd century AD). Is it this to which the party in power has reduced democracy?

The government and establishment’s refusal to even attempt to deal with bombings and so forth, to protect the state’s citizens, which both institutes are expected to do, and to not even dare to name the perpetrators identified by the media, is the most blatant form of collective cowardice.

The man appointed to head the ministry — which is in place and paid to deal with internal security — the one and only, Interior Minister Rehman Malik, has proven that the Goebbelsian theory of the bigger the lie and the more repeated, the more it will be swallowed by the public does not hold true in the Pakistan of the 21^st century.

Malik came in for a most amusing pasting in London’s The Guardian on February 28. He is quoted as having proclaimed to that publication last December that “We have given a good beating to the terrorists. We have been able to break their back, we are in a position now to fight, to fight and fight.” Says The Guardian, “He has found fame through his almost daily television appearances, usually made at the scene of the sort of catastrophic attacks that would end the career of a home secretary.”

And the best, “For many Pakistanis the interior minister, with his designer ties and purple-hued hair, is the face of the government.” Whatever be the reason that he is where he is, his, as he terms it, “psy-war” is not paying off. Under this “face of the government” too heavy a toll has been taken of too many citizens.

This brings us to the evening of March 3 in Karachi and the bloody bombing of a predominantly Shia area, resulting in the death of over 48 men, women and children — a follow-up to the slaughter of over 200 Shias in Quetta in the first two months of this year. After the bomb went off, it reportedly took Karachi’s police some two hours to arrive on the scene. Symptomatic of the Sindh government’s wilful helplessness towards the killings that take place in this city was the fact that the police force in large numbers was posted around and probably beyond the Clifton area as the prime minister was in town and he and the Sindh chief minister were expected to “grace” a dinner hosted by an adviser to the Sindh chief minister for her own engagement. Their bodies were guarded; their routes were suitably, safely lined.

What qualifications the adviser possesses to advise on two subjects and be granted the status of a provincial minister is a separate issue. As is the fact that the celebrations were held on the grounds of a heritage site — and some hours after the bombing took place. Admitted is the fact that 500-plus security personnel were posted to guard 400 guests (normal, she said, nothing out the ordinary). One press report has it that she stated her intent to “wrap up the event as early as possible”.

Well, that’s how it goes. Those who have assumed VIP or ridiculously VVIP status, petrified of being victims, hog the security forces and to blazes with the rest. This is just one of the many examples of the attitude of the elected and non-elected representatives of the people of this nation.

Solution: Get rid of them, and find, if possible, honest and responsible replacements.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 9^th, 2013.

And so, it has come to pass, as predicted by Pamela Constable in her 2011 book, Playing with Fire — Pakistan at War with Itself. Despite the then doubts as to the survival of President Asif Ali Zardari and his regime, unpopular at home as it was, all that mattered was to allow him and it to survive, and serve out their term, so that, as she put it, “the counterproductive cycle of political or military intervention that so often aborted Pakistan’s still-nascent democratic experiment” would not be repeated.

“The only way to break the cycle that had bedeviled Pakistan for so long” was for the nation to swallow whole the revenge wreaked by Zardari’s, and his government’s, unique form of democracy. “So it comes down to this: ensuring that an unpopular, corrupt and indifferent leader (and his government) stayed in office for (their) full term was likely to be the single greatest political achievement in Pakistan’s entire 66-year existence.”

Well, the single greatest political achievement is upon us, but the question being asked by some is whether it has been worthwhile. Others have answered, agreeing with Constable, that any civilian or military coup would have been much worse for Pakistan than the continuing chaos and damage inflicted by Zardari and his regime.

Zardari, of course, will outlast this felicitously dying government with which we have had no option but to live with — or die with, as so many have done in the past five years. From the beginning, the Zardari regime’s silence on murders committed due to the blasphemy laws and on the death and devastation caused by its inactivity — its cowardly petrifaction — when faced by the numerous acts of terrorism and sectarian violence has been shameless in the extreme. What a price has been paid just to keep the wonky ‘system’ in place, to allow democracy to be practised in a warped, almost destructive form.

There is a further price to be paid by this unfortunate nation, as what will follow this Zardari regime can only either be a different form of democracy’s revenge with a second Zardari regime, or another revised form of Nawaz Sharif and his ameerul momineen ambitions. That would now seem to be the stark and simple choice foisted upon the Islamic Republic by the elections — vital if the ‘system’ is to continue to survive — now on the national agenda. The amount of faith put on elections considering what is likely to be their outcome is amazing — even the all-powerful army chief has told us, “It is my dream that free, fair and transparent elections take place on time.”

Free, fair, transparent? Well, going by the record, remembering past elections and despite the faith now being heaped upon the Election Commission of Pakistan and its mature chief, freedom, fairness and transparency, rather like the truth, are alien to the Pakistani psyche. The army’s protestations, excessive some might say, that it wishes nothing else than the flourishing of democracy (and even its revenge) would seem indicative of its helplessness to at least nudge those responsible into providing some form of governance. The three-year extension has taken its toll.

The closer we get to the blessed elections, the less is used the word ‘change’, which in the near past has been a firm factor that many have suggested is the only way forward. As time has gone by, any change is now a distant dream. The hoped for agents of change have been smartly out-manoeuvered and apparently have fallen by the wayside.

We are at the mercy of political relics, who have been in positions of power for longer than is decent in what is supposed to be a democratic dispensation. The relics may no longer be affordable in what is seen by some to be a state on the brink of failure — but they are all that is on the ground. Miracles, fresh faces, clean minds have no role to play.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 2^nd, 2013.