May 11, 2013, left behind a watershed moment. It was the day when we witnessed the triumph of hope over fear. Defying the omnipresent threat of terrorist assault, Pakistanis came out in hordes and voted for change. It sounds really stupid but before this day, we never had civilian to civilian transition through democratic means. And yet, there is a significant part of our elite that is bent on delegitimising and discrediting the democratic process by shoving whatever passes as evidence of rigging in our face. And this leads us to a host of questions.

First, if there was widespread rigging, who was cheated out of victory? Was it the PTI or the incumbent PPP? You can fairly rule out the PPP because of its abysmal five-year performance and lack of proper election campaigning. That leaves us with the PTI. To ascertain if the PTI’s mandate was really stolen, let us see what was being projected before and on the Election Day. The Economist had already hinted that the PML-N seemed in clear lead. With a number of caveats, Gallup Pakistan had predicted that the PML-N would not only win but get a clear majority.

If you recall my piece “Towards a true democracy” that appeared on the Election Day, I had made two predictions and given one pointer. I wrote: “I see a huge turnout despite all odds. But contrary to general expectations, this voter surge will not benefit a single party… Secondly, I don’t foresee a hung parliament. With the help of pre-poll alliances, the front runner, I believe, will be able to conveniently form the government.” And the pointer was my own vote. I had pointed out that since it had come down to a choice between two conservative parties namely the PML-N and the PTI, I had decided to go for the former.

On that day, I had with me a meticulously prepared list showing the PML-N bagging 111 seats. This list was prepared with a conservative approach and the PPP and the ANP were shown doing slightly better. And yet, there was so much noise around us that I had to endure reluctance while mentioning this conservative estimate in our election transmission.

But if the verdict was that clear that it was visible to the naked eye, was there no rigging at all? Of course not. There was rigging and has always been there. Remember that three majors parts of the country are seriously troubled, namely; Fata, Balochistan and Karachi. Given the situation of law and order there, you cannot rule out the possibility of huge manipulation. But that’s a given and you cannot magnify it beyond proportion. With the passage of time, the situation will improve. And in the case of Karachi, even the protesting parties are to blame. In 2008, through our columns, people like me begged the PTI not to boycott the elections for it was being viewed as a serious contender. But Imran Khan, in his infinite wisdom, does not listen to anybody and hence, is partially responsible for what is happening in Karachi.

But if rigging was not that widespread, why are so many anchors and politicians making so much noise about it. The answer is that on May 11, unfounded expectations of some parties bloated beyond imagination dashed to the ground. A huge part of the elite was mobilised by the PTI, the kind whose voice is heard internationally. But this class mistook their support for the entire nation’s. On my polling station, I witnessed very vocal PTI voters who were quizzing the silent majority. If you revealed that you were not going to vote for their party, they would argue with you ad nauseam. And many ended up lying about their choices. As for anchors, I know there are some conscientious people too but many of our friends simply didn’t want the PML-N to win for one reason or another. When it did, they moved in to discredit the process. With time and due process, all anomalies and attitudes will be corrected. But the truth is that this day marked a huge transformation and we are a democracy today. We need to deal with it.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 25^th, 2013.

Regional peace, and to an extent, the peace of the world has been held hostage by India-Pakistan hostility for the past 66 years. Many in the region get a nervous stomach when they see the two nuclear rivals flexing their military muscles. And yet, most of us have given up on the hope of there ever being true peace. This is because both countries find themselves slaves of their history. When Pakistan was carved out of India, its creation was deemed an existential threat to India’s secular identity. And a newly created Pakistan was so vulnerable that it had to identify itself with whatever India was not. Indian virtues hence became vices for us and our vices were often celebrated. As a consequence, people on both sides had to suffer.

The biggest enemies of the two nations are common. Take for instance poverty, overpopulation, disease, natural calamities, terrorism and inefficient state apparatus. But we fail to come together to fight these menaces. On the contrary, this hostility has changed the very character of the two states. We have spent far too much energy in trying to weaken each other. As a result, India has not been able to realise its true potential and the Pakistani state has gone soft.

Saner minds, of course, understood the cost of this churlish behaviour and tried to fix the anomaly through talks. But the baggage is such that despite repeated attempts, we have failed badly. The best attempt came in the shape of the Lahore Declaration in 1999. Since then, whenever an opportunity has arisen, the state apparatus on both sides, and often non-state actors, have thwarted such initiatives.

Is it possible that this time when Nawaz Sharif returns to power, we can see a peace road map that cannot be sabotaged that easily? I think it is. I believe that a window of opportunity will exist immediately after government formation in Pakistan and before the Indian elections next year. Leaders on both sides need big achievements in the immediate future to build their legacy and if thorny issues like Kashmir are resolved, they may even end up winning the Nobel Peace Prize.

But is it not merely wishful thinking? We know that the constituency of hostility on both sides is bigger than the constituency of peace. Then why would such elements let peace prevail? I think it is because of the changing nature of regional and national challenges. Both countries are energy hungry, struggling with poverty, terrorism and growing populations. In such circumstances, emphasis shifts from border disputes to new opportunities of acquiring more resources. Unfortunately, due to our mutual hostility, the landlocked Central Asian Republics have not been able to export their natural resources through peaceful trade routes. As the date of US withdrawal from Afghanistan approaches in the absence of a broader India-Pakistan settlement, there is fear that such projects will remain mere pipe dreams and their absence will cause more poverty across the region. However, if both countries can settle their differences before that and keep economic matters away from politics, there are enough benefits for both of us to last a lifetime.

Both countries have compromised a lot in order to fight each other. Perhaps, we have always approached the issue of peace from the wrong angle. In order to build peace, it seems we will have to be ready to build a partnership. After all, we have done it in the past with China where we resolved our border disputes and became partners.

Such a solution will help India tap the Central Asian resources and give Pakistan an opportunity to build its economy through developing new trade routes. As an added benefit, it will afford us more time to fight and get rid of non-state actors.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 18^th, 2013.

By the time you wake up to read this paper, please expect everything to have changed. And it is not the change a political party is promising. On the face of it, it is a risky transformation. After witnessing the broad daylight abduction of Ali Haider Gilani and deadly attacks on several other candidates, we do not know how much damage the terrorists can do on this day. On a political level, too, it seems a choice between the inept and the obscurant at best. But don’t let these petty issues crush your spirit. Today’s change has bigger significance than that, for today we prove that we have finally become a true democracy.

It was for this day that we had to endure the unfounded allegations of being apologists of an incompetent if not downright corrupt government. As the first civilian to civilian democratic transition of our history materialises before our eyes, we can tell ourselves that any mistake we make in choosing our representatives today can be corrected by the end of the new term, as long as we firmly uphold the democratic principle. That might not be enough for the impatient among us but to this scribe, it is epoch-making in essence.

From General (retd) Pervez Musharraf’s departure to his return, the tiff between the judiciary and the executive, the antics and semantics of Tahirul Qadri, the never-ending reign of terror, disasters and conspiracies, the new democratic order has proven that it can sustain any shockwave and still prevail. And here we should give full credit to the army and its chief, after the people of Pakistan, of course, to help us maintain the course.

But that doesn’t mean that we have the luxury of making grave mistakes today. As hinted above, it is a sad commentary on the state of politics in this country that we got landed with the worst set of options possible. The two serious alternatives are decidedly soft on matters of national security as crucial as terrorism. Also, the amount of negative political advertising and trash talk we came across during this campaign was enough to leave one disgusted. In an angry nation, more heat doesn’t bode well for national harmony.

And what we had in the last five years was an unmitigated disaster. When incompetence wrapped in hubris is sold to you with a smug smile, the helplessness you feel cannot be described in words. And when remaining in power becomes an end in itself, this is to be expected. But if I were to make a choice between the four major coalition partners, what passes for liberal parties in this country, the Awami National Party (ANP) would have invariably been my only choice. The ANP has not only sacrificed profusely for the values it professes but from a party often accused of being anti-Pakistan, it has transformed its image and become a true voice for a strong federation. But unfortunately, right now, it is not a national player. I can only hope and pray it becomes one soon.

This leaves us with the centre-right parties, namely the PML-N and the PTI. One hopes that once in power, these parties will address this country’s national security concerns. To be honest, I was fairly undecided only until a week ago. But then Imran Khan fell from the lifter and everything changed. For someone who has always admired Imran Khan as a cricketing legend and a great philanthropist, his messianic talks after the sad episode were nothing short of a rude awakening. So, between the devil you know and the devil you don’t, I have decided to go for the former. But that is a personal choice. You have every right to differ with me.

And finally, a couple of predictions about election day. I see a huge turnout despite all odds. But contrary to general expectations, this voter surge will not benefit a single party. When one party mobilises its supporters on election day, others manage to do exactly the same. Secondly, I don’t foresee a hung parliament. With the help of pre-poll alliances, the frontrunner, I believe, will be able to conveniently form the government.

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

Between heroism and history, exist such blood-soaked gashes that can drive any person crazy. In an impressive ceremony commemorating Youm-e-Shuhada (Martyrs’ Day) this year, these latent scars hiding in the vestiges of our collective subconscious were brought back to life. And my young nation, my nascent underdeveloped overburdened nation, has been through such horrors that cannot be summed up in just a piece or a ceremony. And yet, here it was, all pomp and style, the memory of those who had passed, nerve-shattering sobs of a mother and a rich tribute paid to Bashir Bilour shaheed.

It was a welcome relief to listen to our chief of army staff speak so vociferously in support of democratisation and against terrorism. To an outsider, an army chief commenting on political matters might be incomprehensible but a student of Pakistani history, acquainted with the anatomy of our civil-military relationship, can appreciate the true potential of this watershed moment. And if there was any doubt about the army’s resolve to fight terrorism, it was cleared in a heartbeat. It was a befitting rejoinder to the apologists of terrorism who keep insisting that it is not our war.

However, as we gingerly approach the polling day, fear mounts that our counterterrorism agenda may come in direct conflict with the democratic process, as our two major political parties have time and again shown aversion to the war. And other major parties keep bringing up crimes of the past as the sole cause of our present-day woes. Call them crimes if you will but to this scribe, they were and still are desperate moves of a desperate state. It is a measure of our bewildered sadness, perpetual isolation and tragic history that we have not been able to confront the demons of our past and pledge renewal.

But the lives of 40,000 martyrs cannot just amount to nothing. Battle-scarred as we are, we cannot afford to become a prisoner of the Stockholm syndrome and end up bonding with our own assailants. War fatigue is one thing but not to notice the existential threat posed by the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) is downright criminal.

Yet, let us not trivialise the programmes of the parties hinted above. These parties have presented good answers to a number of national questions. It is only in this crucial sector that they have been reluctant to advance some cogent solutions. There is a serious chance that these two parties may adopt a more prudent course of action against terrorism once they rise to power. But with only seven days remaining in the elections, I implore the leaders of these parties to not let petty thugs of the TTP define who they are. The TTP have already dealt a deathly blow to these parties’ campaigns by implying that there exists an understanding between them and the terrorists. The people of Pakistan, after all, are not fools and can identify the enemies of this country. They also value the blood of their 40,000 brethren killed by the terrorists. The party, viewed as an apologist of terrorists, I am afraid, will not be given the mandate to rule the country, no matter how many people attend its public gatherings.

We also need to appreciate the genuine desire to bid farewell to arms and build peace. But peace cannot come when negotiated from a position of weakness. In order to bring the enemy to the dialogue table, one first has to bring it to its knees and squeeze it so hard that it fails to see any other option but to throw in the towel. Leaders of major parties may not think much of each other but to a common voter, they are all national leaders of huge stature. If they really want to do justice to the expectations of their constituents, they need to take ownership of this war and bring it to its logical conclusion. If you don’t want to listen to folks like me, pay some heed to the chief of your own army. And the army also needs to value those who categorically support its struggle.

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

Judging by the quality of national debates on the eve of fresh elections, one cannot help but wonder whether our distant ancestors made a horrible mistake in deciding to come down from the trees. Evolution, after all, works best on those who are serious in change and progress. We, on the other hand, have done nothing to prove that we deserve it.

Exactly at a time when the polarisation of society and the nefarious plans of the terrorists have brought the political class under pressure, instead of uniting against the forces of retrogression, our politicians are trying their best to be jolly part of them. Instead of giving a message of peace and prosperity, we are told what violence can be unleashed when an arrow, a tiger and a cricket bat are put together.

And if you were looking for solace elsewhere, pray, don’t even bother. There is an entire class bent on complicating the situation further. The grand showman from Canada came to stage a tamasha in front of the elected parliament, then announced his boycott of the elections threatening to sabotage the electoral process by staging sit-ins on polling day and has now declared the process un-Islamic. Next thing you know, he might issue an edict against the state of Pakistan.

Then, there is a class, shrinking but influential, that would have us focus solely on General (retd) Pervez Musharraf’s return if it could help it. Since his return, this class has embarked on a vilification campaign against state institutions and the military, defending the former army chief. Hang on for a moment, sir. If he is that great an asset of the country, why did he return home to put more pressure on a state already teetering on the brink of oblivion?

And then there is the threat of the terrorists. The Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, a ragtag band of petty thugs, keeps issuing threats to three major political parties, bringing their election campaigns to a grinding halt. And the funny thing is that we have not heard a word of sympathy from their political opponents. Forgive me, but this indicates some degree of complicity if not outright collusion. But does anyone honestly believe that three major political players can be defeated by just limiting their movement during the campaign process? This may even help rehabilitate their image before a people that have endured their bad governance for five years. Our voters are already known for their ability to defy the tricks of dictators. The only difference is that this time, the dictator sits not in a military uniform but in the middle of militant outfits.

And amid all this chaos, where is our federal interior minister? The man, instead of boring us with a list of his favourite candidates, should either tell us what exactly is being done to safeguard precious human lives or else resign. His careless statements have made him controversial already.

I am well aware that pontificating is one exercise gone quaint but our political and religious elite need to have mercy on its constituents. They are already reeling under the ungodly weight of hopelessness. This country can do with some more hope and less hate, especially when our soldiers and policemen are writing new tales of gallantry in order to protect what is left of this nation. Stop hate-mongering; you cannot build your own image by insulting someone else or by insulting the intelligence of your own voters. Better focus on your respective programmes instead.

And what about the elections? All this uncertainty should now abate and we should vow to ensure that the process will not be derailed. Whatever comes out of the elections, no matter how tampered, will be better than what we have right now.

Published in The Express Tribune, April 27^th, 2013.

Such is the order for hearts, the sanctuary/

As the stones are captive, the dogs run free — Faiz

Who rules Pakistan? This question is often casually tossed around at parties, functions and events to express dissatisfaction at the state of affairs. Rhetorical as it often might be, it is, nevertheless, an important question for its answer eludes even the sanest ones. Originally, some naïve souls thought that it was run by a breed of tactless, talentless politicians. However, when it was observed that the speed of deterioration never slowed even in the absence of those inept politicians, this idea was abandoned. The seers of the republic then postulated that there was a half hidden force called the establishment micromanaging the affairs of the state from a distance. But as is widely known, the establishment only protects its own interests and intervenes only in extreme situations, so the realisation grew that there must be someone else responsible for the sorry state of affairs. After all, there is bound to be a force that does not just protect its own interest but also everything that ought not to be protected.

Then it dawned on some that there is a group that keeps working even when politicians and dictators are not around. In common parlance, they are called babus or bureaucrats. Amazingly, from the prime minister’s office to the defence ministry, they are everywhere. And while their style of oratory has changed since the time of Sir Humphrey Appleby of “Yes Minister” fame, their world view remains unchanged.

Even though there are a few bright exceptions, this class, generally, has one or two chips burnt or missing in the circuit boards of the standard model. We are lucky to have among the federal caretaker ministers, at least one distinguished example, nowadays in charge of the interior ministry. Whenever he opens his mouth, he creates new controversies. It is queer that when the thrilling tale of General (retd) Pervez Musharraf’s brave escape from the courtroom is told and retold, every government department is criticised but this man. Yet, why be harsh on the poor man alone? This class generally abhors out-of-the-box thinking, dotes on new methods of repression and is miffed at the slightest suggestion of imaginative solutions.

Just consider this. An unfortunate comment is made by a guest on a television channel. Instead of accosting the said guest, or slapping a fine to discipline the editorial team, they take the entire channel down. A deplorable and insensitive video is placed on YouTube and instead of finding ways to block the said video, they block the entire website and that, too, for months.

This sick mentality and the characteristic lack of imagination speak volumes about the sorry state we are in. No wonder, then, that the actual culprits in most cases go scot-free while only petty criminals and lesser thugs languish in jails. This is precisely why no terrorist to date has been brought to book through due process. And we either keep blaming the courts for their leniency or else criticise the politicians for not codifying fresh laws to ensure speedy trials of terrorists. Ineptness, when accompanied by boorishness and corrupt outlook, proves to be an unmitigated disaster.

This is exactly why the state’s writ keeps waning. That is why our historical narratives will always be based on hallowed fiction rather than facts. And that is why an overwhelming majority of beneficiaries out of around 8,000 names on the NRO list were babus, not politicians. And that is why only politicians were blamed for it, not babus.

What is really heartbreaking to see is the contagious idealism and optimism of the young bureaucrats joining the service. Then, they all gradually transform into your average, everyday babu. Please don’t conclude that I believe that no one else is responsible for all this mess. Politicians are directly or indirectly responsible for all of this, too. They pay no heed to the merit system and prefer sycophancy and complacency over competence while transferring and promoting bureaucrats.

But the bureaucrats of the republic function as the central nervous system of the country. If this country has to see a better day, this class will have to change.

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

A generation is missing from politics. It is my generation. Of course, there are politicians of my age and even younger, too, but none of them is a national figure. While growing up, the national leaders we had were young and energetic. When Benazir Bhutto became prime minister, she was 35. When Nawaz Sharif assumed power at the centre, he was a little over 40. And Imran Khan lifted the World Cup at the age of 39.

Now, take a look around. Imran Khan is 60, Nawaz Sharif 63 and President Asif Ali Zardari 57. General (retd) Pervez Musharraf is pushing 70. They are all either running for the top office or, as in Zardari’s case, are in public office already. Why has our country failed to produce new leaders in the last 20 years?

Of course, there are young faces. Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari plans to start his political career soon. But he will be 25 this September. Between 25 and 60, there clearly is a tier missing. What happened to it? Where did the young national leaders go? I have little doubt that young politicians, some among them exceedingly bright, had to endure discrimination bordering on apartheid solely because of their age. Then, there is the matter of Musharraf’s almost eight-year-long military rule followed by five years of transition back to democracy. In these 13 years, prospects of young leaders emerging were further stymied. I am sure the brain drain had its impact, too. In the absence of a truly charismatic and selfless leadership, the youth was exposed to countless conspiracy theories, reactionary ideologies and unnervingly tumultuous circumstances. An empathetic, well-informed, honest and dedicated leader would have guided the youth through these troubling times. But alas, truth and empathy were sacrificed at the altar of political expediency. The result is an unmitigated disaster. The new breed of politically motivated youth has been brought up on half-baked truths, pessimism, paranoia and xenophobia.

This perception has been further reinforced by the exhaustive first Next Generation Voices report presented by the Next Generation Task Force under the aegis of the British Council. It has the second largest survey sample after Gallup Pakistan’s Political Weather Forecast for Election 2013 and is unique in the sense that it focuses entirely on young citizens between the ages of 18 and 29.

The findings are quite disturbing. Thirty-two per cent of our youth prefers military rule over democracy and another 38 per cent believes that Sharia is the best political system. Only 29 per cent still have faith in democracy. Of all these, the most frustrating was the bit about Sharia because it proves that we have not even been able to teach our youth how to distinguish between a political system and a code of justice. In the age of television media lacking in substantive discussion and dominated by the likes of Zaid Hamid, this was bound to happen.

The impact of television and the rest of the media is given special attention. While two minorities are either active online or totally disconnected from the media, a majority watches television, with music, news and current affairs shows popular with men. Only 11 per cent have an unfavourable perception of the media. So, if there is something wrong with the youth’s understanding of developments around them, the media, especially television channels, have a lot to do with it.

This, after all, is not any ordinary youth. Around a quarter of all young interviewees have either been directly affected by violence or have personally witnessed a serious violent episode. Three out of four women and two out of three men consider themselves religious or conservative. Employment is another concern as only one among 10 has a stable job and a third are still students, self-employed or underemployed. Just imagine their frustration when no clear explanation, let alone a solution, is offered either by the state or the national leadership.

The fact that Bilawal, Maryam Nawaz and many others are ready to join active politics is most welcome. Imran Khan’s decision to offer tickets to young candidates is even better news. But the youth deserves more than that. Above everything else, it needs truth and honesty from its leaders and some grooming.

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

This country can do with some fresh ideas. After all, what is the point of repeating the same mistake over and over again? If you are overawed by the new ruthless scrutiny regime before the elections, try to recall Ayub Khan’s Elected Bodies Disqualification Ordinance (EBDO) through which a politician could be disqualified for eight years and kept in detention without trial for 12 months. Or perhaps, General Ziaul Haq’s Martial Law Order 53, allowing the death penalty for anyone indulging in “any offence liable to cause insecurity, fear or despondency amongst the public”, may ring a bell. General (retd) Pervez Musharraf’s memories are only too fresh to be recounted here.

So, has anything really changed today? For the past 54 years, our deep state has been busy trying to reform our political class with incrementally poorer results. Another project was to hone new national leadership. The hanging of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and the exile of Nawaz Sharif prove that even here, it did not have much luck. If still in doubt, please look around. Does it look like this country is in any better hands today?

Perhaps, the problem lies not with the political class but with the deep state itself. We are told repeatedly that every major political party relevant today was born in our establishment’s nursery. Is it not prudent then to shut this nursery down for good, rather than experiment further with the genetic modifications that come back to haunt you?

If truth be told, it is our establishment that is broken and all this talk of reform is mere hyperbole. Musharraf tried to reinvent it, for the sheer sake of self-preservation, and ended up breaking it into two halves. Right now, on one hand you have what remains of Zia’s establishment, and on the other, a new, rather vitriolic one, invented by Musharraf. The latter felt cheated out of its destiny when Musharraf was sent packing owing to the former’s coup and has waited long enough to get back at it. In a marriage of convenience, both sides have formed a momentary alliance to first teach politicians a lesson, who abandoned both from time to time. Once politicians have been sorted out, the real fight will resume.

The returning officers, so priggishly devouring politicians, are unwittingly working for Zia’s gang. Both sides insist that this exercise is absolutely essential to bring the house back in order. However, whatever the nature of this grand design, it will only lead to one catastrophe after another. Reason?

In short, our new establishment is battle-fatigued and the older one adamant that fighting terrorists was never a good idea. As the time of US withdrawal from the region comes closer, many believe the latter may prevail. So, just for the sake of homework, the liberals, the moderates and the secular-minded are the new target practice. Many of our foreign friends watch quietly under the illusion that this may lead to something close to an Arab Spring. It won’t. Instead, what you will get is a deeply radicalised headless monster.

And where is General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani in all of this? Unfortunately, nowhere. While the old establishment has no love lost for him, the new one is not over Musharraf yet. What else do you expect when a general is allowed to remain the head of state and the master puppeteer of the government for almost a decade, while retaining his uniform and strongly backed by western powers? For every officer promoted during this period, loyalty to the nation, institution and Musharraf was bound to become synonymous. This is a deep-seated conditioning that can only be healed by time. And now that Musharraf is back in the picture, this complicates the situation further. For what it’s worth, General Kayani has the right kind of ideas about the role of the army and the future of democracy. But what can you do in such a deeply conflicted and delusional polity?

The purpose of this piece, dear readers, is to remind you that things may get even uglier and that the moderates and liberals of the country are on their own for now.

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

Between hope and history lies the gaping mouth of an abyss. It is no place for the faint-hearted.

Pakistan, it appears, is falling down this bottomless pit. No rescue is forthcoming though rescue was never too onerous.

What was needed was just an iota of initiative, wisdom, determination, ownership and moral courage.

And this is exactly where our political leadership has failed.

We complain only where there is still some hope. Terrorism is one spectre that has left no one unaffected. Politicians, armed forces personnel, intellectuals, artisans, bureaucrats, journalists and the business community have all lost precious lives to the terrorists.

When the PPP came to power, Benazir Bhutto had already been assassinated. The PML-N was already cognisant of the threats posed by the militants; it was the party that introduced Pakistan’s first anti-terrorism laws and complained to the Afghan Taliban about absconding Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ) terrorists hiding in Kabul during its last stint in power. Other parties, too, had thoroughly been exposed to the peril and knew its true nature.

If some among our political elite still suspected that the country’s armed forces were not on board, they should have first tried to confirm this impression and if proven right, should have worked to change it.

Instead of reaching out and seeking to convert the unconvinced, a secretive and closed-door mode of governance was adopted which gave further credence to the rumours of a sell-out. General (retd) Pervez Musharraf sought to bring a huge ideational paradigm shift and left it in the middle. T

he army had to shoulder the burden alone for almost a decade and then came democracy. Absence of the healing touch from the politicians and a lack of clear direction have allowed terrorist apologists to breed in every branch of government like an infestation.

The PML-N’s record has been no better. The chief minister of Punjab went to the extent of reminding the Taliban that their foreign policy goals and those of his own party were no different. Then we saw reports of growing ties between Punjab’s law minister and the LeJ’s whitewashed reincarnation, the Ahl-e-Sunnat-Wal-Jammat (not to be confused with the name of the sect so blatantly used to cover up hideous activities of a fringe party).

The saddest part is that all political parties have now shown their readiness to talk to the terrorists twice and all of this is being done ostensibly to win the elections.

Sirs, you are democratic leaders. You do not need to appease the terror apologists to win votes. Instead of cutting deals with petty thugs, you need to stand tall and speak the truth. You all have enough influence over hearts and minds now to convince your constituents once you open your mouths. Yet, you are nothing without the people and the state of Pakistan. Instead of providing shelter to the butchers of your voters, it is time to identify, sever ties with and act against such corrosive elements. If you do so, you will be rewarded beyond your imagination.

Finally, a word about anti-terrorism legislation. The government has introduced the Anti-Terrorism (2nd Amendment) Bill in the parliament. While there is little time left, if this bill is passed into law, it will make it impossible for banned terror outfits to re-form with new political names. If the parliament can do this much, it will make life much easier for the citizens.

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

The guessing game is on. Everyone awaits the names of finalists for the position of caretaker prime minister. In an established democracy, these things would hardly assume such importance. But not in Pakistan with its long-chequered history of the electoral process. In the first ever civilian to civilian democratic transition of power of history, everything matters.

Amid the boring long list of candidates, some brilliant names, too, have surfaced.

The first is of Mahmood Khan Achakzai, a towering politician and a conscientious democratic figure. The only thing is that the jobs of caretakers are supposed to be their last before retirement and he has a political party and a political career before him. The fact that his party had boycotted the general elections in 2008 makes it harder for him to stay away from politics for six months. If he can sacrifice this much, he is indeed the best candidate for the job.

The second name that popped up was of Asma Jahangir. At one point, she seemed to be emerging as a consensus candidate. But then three parties, namely the JUI-F, the JI and the PTI expressed their dissatisfaction on her name, followed by a vicious campaign against her. The word has it that her candidature is unacceptable to the country’s powerful security establishment. However, she has told the media that she is not interested in holding the post. Had she made it to the position, she would have ensured that the upcoming elections could not be stolen.

A late entrant into the race is former finance minister Dr Abdul Hafeez Shaikh. His name surfaced shortly after his resignation from the cabinet. While he is a man of unimpeachable personal integrity, some of his detractors have made some good points. In an environment of paranoia where speculations are always rife about possible if not probable derailment of democracy paving way for a prolonged technocratic set-up, his name has been associated with such rumours for a long time. As if that was not enough, he has served first as finance minister of Sindh and then as a federal minister under General (retd) Pervez Musharraf. If he is chosen for the job, he will have to work hard to convince people that the elections will be held in time.

But some of the criticism is downright unfair. He cannot be called a failed technocrat just because he could not reintroduce the existing General Sales Tax in a VAT mode, nor should the nosedive of rupee be considered his fault. For the former, please recall that Dr Shaikh was not the one who negotiated the last standby arrangement with the IMF. Shaukat Tareen, the man in charge of the negotiations, threw in the towel in frustration ages ago. In a nascent democracy, it is hard to work against cartels and pressure groups. And the then prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, never gave the new finance minister autonomy needed at the time. However, despite everything, I know one thing for a fact. Had Dr Shaikh not been there, the situation would have been much grimmer.

I don’t know whether the IMF will even work with him if he becomes the caretaker prime minister or whether he enjoys enough rapport with influential quarters in Pakistan. I am not even sure if a caretaker should undertake any reform agenda. These lines should not be considered an endorsement of Dr Shaikh in any case, for they are not. Nor is it my place to do something of the sort. However, while objecting to someone’s credentials, we should know what we are objecting to. Many accepted defeat and left where he, at the very least, kept things afloat.

Published in The Express Tribune, February 27^th, 2013.