Whither an ailing Pakistan?

Early this year, a friend surprised me by asking a seemingly innocent question. “Who is the leading political figure of South Asia?” he asked. My thoughts rested momentarily on our own Prime Minister, Mr. Atal Behari Vajpayee, but then it also struck me that the gentleman across the dinner table would not be expecting such an obvious answer. I made a sweeping survey of neighbouring countries and their leaders and it struck me at once that in the aftermath of US operations in Afghanistan, one was expected to name General Pervez Musharraf as the most impressive leader in South Asia. Well, there was no harm in praising Musharraf. Wasn’t the West eulogising his rule too? And who could have objection to the Musharraf agenda that included ending support to militant groups in Afghanistan and Kashmir. And hadn’t the General resolved to stand with the US even if he traded the Taliban for closer ties with Washington.Musharraf, the darling of the West, had to be conceded respect even if grudgingly. One did not know then that a Western journalist, Daniel Pearl, would be kidnapped and murdered in Pakistan? No one could foresee the advent of suicide bombers in Pakistan or terrorist attacks like the attack on a church in Islamabad. These events force a closer look at Pakistan. A second look because these events are symptomatic of a phenomenon getting out of control and threatening the very existence of Pakistan. So bad is the law and order situation in Pakistan that it would appear that only American presence on its soil and Indian belligerence following the December 13 attack on Indian Parliament give that country its present self-definition. Pakistan is besieged with insecurity to the roots. It is also stated by some that the American presence in Pakistan is a bulwark against  “ Indian adventurism”. The real enemy, however, is the spectre of sectarian violence.

The genie of sectarian violence refuses to be bottled. Sectarian terrorism in Pakistan encourages observers to take a more pessimistic view of things .The picture has rapidly deteriorated since the time when one tended to praise the General and saw signs of a new beginning for Pakistan. A referendum plan to perpetuate him in power for the next five years could besmirch the General’s image and befog admiration for him. The Opposition in Pakistan rejects the referendum plan. It is generally said that the purpose of the referendum is to prolong the rule of General Musharraf through unconstitutional means. It is “action replay” of the referendum conducted by General Zia-ul-Haq.

Jehadi outfits in Pakistan are mainly responsible for the culture of violence there. And yet in making war on the Jehadis, Pakistan is somewhere at war with itself as Government institutions (the ISI?) and archaic and inefficient law enforcing agencies are blamed in no unclear terms as responsible for sectarian violence. More than once have fingers been pointed alleging that the country’s top secret agencies appeared involved to encourage terrorists.

Sectarian violence between rival extremist groups is complicated further by intra-Sunni rivalry, which also leads to violence, and this is compounded by the background presence of ethnic strife as in Karachi for instance. In the grip of ethnic strife since long, Karachi, the biggest city in Pakistan, now suffers the sectarian groups who have also been active there. A newspaper report tells us that Karachi police officials believe that a new chapter of “intra-Sunni” violence has been added to the prevalent sectarian tension in the country.

 So cancerous and complicated is the phenomenon of violence that a report suggested that “various Jehadi elements had broken ranks with their Jehad focussed organizations to form independent armed groups committed to settling scores with their religious rivals in the country.” It was earlier believed that the elements who participated in Jehad across the borders in Kashmir had never been involved in violence that relates to sectarian issues inside Pakistan.

And further, Jehadis add violence to intra-Sunni rift. It is reported that activists of different schools of thought fight on issues ranging from control of mosques to the collection of donations all across the country including Karachi.

Not only has violence grown of late, its scope has widened too. Over 200 persons were victims of sectarian violence during the last two years or so. And the new phase of violence as it is called targets worshippers, prominent citizens and professionals. Despite the government’s ban on two rival sectarian parties last August, the spate of killings remains unabated. Ten sectarian murders involving doctors, businessmen, scholars and even children of mostly one sect saw Shia leaders courting arrest in protest and demanding an end to violence. (The Dawn of September 14,2001)

According to yet another internal opinion, the spread of an armed culture is like the dragon’s teeth “that we sowed during the Afghan war and its effects we are experiencing now.” In other words, Pakistan’s past sins come home to roost.

The origins of religious extremism began in the eighties under the patronage of the Zia-ul-Haq regime. The Iranian Revolution and the Afghan conflict gave fillip to this trend and spawned a new generation of sectarian activists. Also years of inaction and appeasement   by successive governments emboldened sectarian outfits to strike with impunity.

Religious schools run by sectarian parties make their contribution too by “spreading poison” and “polluting” young minds, it is reported.

It is generally believed that the source of sectarianism is a group of so-called religious leaders who wield influence and maintain an army of brainwashed militants.

In the throes of such sectarian madness, Pakistan is not a safe place for investment. Pakistan’s international image stands badly tarnished by this ugly form of violence that has made even places of worship unsafe.

Sectarian violence has a direct bearing on Pakistan’s economic stability, as there is little or no incentive for domestic or foreign investment. The General himself has reportedly said so. Musharraf has emphasized in the past the need for foreign investment which is not possible without sectarian harmony. A bad law and order situation could bring Pakistan such feared labels as “terrorist state” or “ failed state”. There is an admitted lack of consonance between Pakistan’s status as a nuclear power and its status as an economic power. Economic weaknesses had led to the disintegration of the Soviet Union, it is pointed out.

There is now a frank admission in the Pakistan Press about the destructive role of Jehadi outfits. Newspapers in Pakistan have the least hesitation to blame them for sectarian violence. (The Dawn of March 17,2001). According to the paper, they (the Jehadi outfits) “are bringing death and destruction upon the people of Pakistan” in the disguise of Islam at home and Jehad in Kashmir.

In a BBC interview, Jamaat-e-Islami chief Qazi Huaasin Ahmed had described ban on sectarian groups “ a mere hoax”.

“It is a diabolic and Machiavellian politics which unfortunately our rulers both the present and past rulers have adopted,” the Qazi reportedly said.

Now Musharraf’s call for a modern, moderate state certainly promises Pakistan a new beginning but will the culture of violence allow the General enough manoeuvring space? This is a moot question.

New Delhi, March 26,2002.

.