2009 June 17 | PKColumns | Paksitani Columns, Urdu Columns, Pakistani editorials

Catastrophic results by Dr. A Q Khan

17 June, 2009 (0) Comment |

Print This Post |

Email This Post |

Share on Facebook

June 17th by Dr. A Q Khan.

In continuation of last week’s article on the same topic, the first unfortunate episode I would like to mention here is a decision made by Field Marshal Ayub Khan. Right from the time he was made commander-in-chief of the Army, he was reported to have been conspiring to usurp government powers. Lord Cockcroft, head of the British Atomic Energy Commission and father of Britain’s nuclear weapons programme, mentions in his autobiography that once, while passing through Karachi in the early fifties on his way to Australia, he met Ayub Khan at a state banquet.

He wrote that he was shocked to hear Ayub Khan openly declaring that all the local politicians were incompetent and unfit to rule the country, and that he had no option but to do something about it. All the facts about his intrigues with Ghulam Mohammad and Iskander Mirza are now well-documented. His ungrateful and insulting treatment of his benefactor, Iskander Mirza, is given in detail in Shahabnama written by Qudratullah Shahab, one time ambassador to Holland (and my witness at our marriage at the Embassy in The Hague in March 1964). When Ayub Khan took over, the Army had its heyday and many persons became rich overnight.

The particular decision of long-lasting consequences to the history of our country that I am referring to happened in 1962 when India and China went to war in NEFA. China and India had previously been bosom buddies and members of the Non-Aligned Movement. Nehru’s arrogance (“I have asked the Army to throw out the Chinese from our territory”) led to full-scale war. The Indians were defeated and demoralised and fled. China occupied a large part of Assam, which it later peacefully vacated. It was at this point that Ayub Khan made a major mistake. Many people had asked him to grasp this golden opportunity, send troops into Kashmir and close that chapter once and for all by presenting a fait accompli.

Our Army was very strong at that time and we could have taken Kashmir in a week; but to do something like that you need a Bulent Ecevit of Turkey or a Khalid Bin Walid (RA) type of personality. Instead of taking immediate action, Ayub Khan is reported to have sent a message to Nehru asking him to withdraw Indian troops from our borders and promising not to take any hostile action in return. Pakistan lost the golden chance and would not get another one like it. Had there been a democratically elected government, things would have been different, as we saw during the decision on the nuclear tests. According to international analysts, we would then not have suffered defeat in 1965, would not have faced the ignominious defeat in East Pakistan and would not have been forced into surrender on Dec 16, 1971. When the Indians got a chance in 1971, they used it efficiently and ruthlessly, and inflicted the humiliating surrender of 92,000 troops. The Indians openly bragged that when Pakistan got a golden chance, they foolishly failed to utilise it, while when they got such a chance, they used it most efficiently and wisely.

The debacle of 1971 was a direct result of Ayub Khan’s follies, the appointment of Yahya Khan as his successor and the corrupting of the Army by bringing it into politics. Since then many adventurists have usurped power and got away with it without being held responsible. Ayub Khan was the son of a Subedar Major and was only a matriculate. Military training in England was just that – military training – it had nothing to do with wisdom and maturity. The results are there for everyone to see.

Equally unfortunate for democracy in Pakistan is Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s decision, upon the advice of his close aids, to appoint Pervez Musharraf as COAS. When the topic came up with the father of Mr Nawaz Sharif and myself once while I was there, I even told him that it would be Mr Nawaz Sharif’s undoing. Mian Sahib had no plausible answer. Sorry to say, but my forecast came true and Mian Sahib paid heavily for that decision. The penalty was paid not only by him but by the whole country. The dictatorial rule that was subsequently enforced led to the disintegration of the national fabric, ever-growing corruption and nepotism. One telephone call from US deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage was enough to lead to unilateral submission resulting in Pakistan becoming a partner in the death of almost two million Afghans and thousands of our own nationals.

Again we see the results of the background (the son of a clerk promoted to a section officer at the fag end of his career) and limited formal education (Intermediate) leading to lack of political acumen and wisdom. It is quite clear that there is no substitution for good, solid education. Field Marshal Ayub Khan, Gen Yahya Khan, Gen Zia-ul-Haq and Gen Musharraf, all confirmed the rule that army training is no substitute for a good university education. However, even university education is no substitute for wisdom, good character and a solid family background. Leadership, wisdom and foresight are gifts from Almighty Allah and good manners and good character come from family background.

One by one, personal decisions had devastating consequences, each in its own way, but all to the detriment of the country. Ayub Khan’s decision led to a missed opportunity to solve the Kashmir problem once and for all. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s decision led to the breakdown of democratic institutions and complete submission to the US. Unfortunately, we cannot always foresee what dire consequences our decisions might have. All the more reason for politicians to stop and think and take well-considered decisions for the benefit of the country.

Categories : Dr A Q Khan, English Columnists Tags :

Reflecting the overindulged mindset by Shireen M Mazari

17 June, 2009 (0) Comment |

Print This Post |

Email This Post |

Share on Facebook

The budget revealed the continuing disconnect between the rulers and the ruled despite the advent of civilian rule and apparent democracy. Why else would the government have put even more burden on the poor through growing indirect taxation and actions that will make the basics of survival ever more expensive? The carbon surcharge is going to make Pakistanis pay more than any other citizen in the world for POL and CNG – despite the temporary freeze on POL prices imposed later! But then, Shaukat Tarin is clearly living in his own world with no connect to the reality that is Pakistan.

Why else would he have suggested, Marie Antoinette style, that “the masses (he did not say we Pakistanis) should use the fuel efficiently and rationally,” including travelling on buses? What a cruel joke, since if there had been a proper public transport system everyone would be using it! But, then, Mr Tarin, in his tinted-glass, official gas-guzzling vehicle and its escort, would hardly know that there is no proper public transport system; so people are compelled to risk their lives by carrying the whole family on motor bikes, by riding atop overloaded buses, and so on. Tarin’s statement only reflected the overindulged decaying mindset of the rulers. After all, why raise the pays of MNAs, MPAs and the cabinet? Even more questionable is the need to have a huge cabinet that really gives little inputs into decision-making at a time of economic crisis. Again, why raise travel allowances of our leaders when they achieve little on their foreign trips that they cannot do through their diplomats or through inviting the foreign leaders to this country? In any case, why not cut the travel allowances and compel the leaders to stay in cheaper accommodation when abroad? Even the hosts are often scandalised by the display of opulence by our leaders in foreign lands.

The assumption that this is an agriculture-friendly budget is laughable, since agriculturalists are being deprived of water and basic electricity for 10 to 12 hours a day, so tube wells cannot be used at all. Moreover, water from the canals is still not being distributed fairly and southern Punjab continues to find itself deprived of its share of this water. So, with no water, how will agriculture survive? Would it not have been more rational to divide the power cuts more equitably between the rural and urban areas? As for the increase in the BISP, it will be countered by the increase in cost of living, especially of basic foodstuff, as a result of the indirect taxes and the carbon surcharge – despite a temporary retreat on that count two days later. So what “relief” the government is supposedly giving to the poor with one hand, it is taking away with the other.

All in all, the budget has no “human face” to redeem it – although it has shown the human face of our politicians and their ingrained lotaism when Ms Khar went on to rubbish the very same economic policies she had supported while a minister in the Shaukat Aziz government! What was truly offensive was Mr Tarin’s arrogant conduct at his press conference. But to understand Mr Tarin, one needs to look closer into where he is coming from. It appears that there is an interesting linkage between our present ruler and Citibank bankers Tarin and Salim Raza, now governor of the State Bank of Pakistan. The linkage is described in detail in “The US Senate’s Minority Staff Report for Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations Hearing on Private Banking and Money Laundering: A Case Study of Opportunities and Vulnerabilities,” Nov 9, 1999. Amongst other things, the Report makes an interesting reading of the way multinational banks work in developing states. On checking up, it seems that Shaukat Tarin was the Dubai banker not mentioned by name in the Report while Salim Raza is mentioned by name. Now, a man like Mr Tarin cannot be expected to have a genuine interest in the poor people of Pakistan when he is occupying the position he is in purely as a reward for services rendered earlier.

Why blame Tarin, though, when our civilian leadership continues on its merry way, bloated cabinet and all? Bullet-proof cars continue to find space in the budget as do the over-stuffed bureaucracies. Ministers battle each other and their bureaucrats, many of whom are accused of working for “foreign friends” – as was revealed by the prime minister’s adviser on petroleum and natural resources in connection with the Iran pipeline issue. Fifth columnists loyal to the US and some of our Arab friends are desperately seeking to destroy this strategic agreement, but who will take them to task? No wonder there seems to be no governance at all visible to the person on the street.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in relation to the ongoing military operation in Swat, which has now expanded to the FATA area – timed with the impending US military surge in Afghanistan. With no political strategy visible, the military is effectively being left on its own to clear and hold areas as well as hunt out the militants, while the civil order continues to abdicate its responsibility. While the military leadership goes to the front to sustain the morale of the soldiers, the political leadership seeks continuing jaunts abroad – giving legitimate nightmares to the professional diplomats of our whimsical leader straying off the script. As for the provincial leadership, it is also barely visible in the troubled areas – or in “cleared” areas.

So the military operations continue with no timelines in the offing, the indiscriminate strategy of heavy bombardment and aerial attacks is also revealing the growing civilian destruction and, despite a self-imposed media censorship, some accounts are filtering through, such as the woeful lament of Shahryar Khan of Lakki Marwat. Such accounts will increase over a period of time, especially when one sees no effort by the civil authorities to immediately move in with a well-planned strategy immediately after an area has been “cleared” by the military, so that a conducive environment is created for the displaced Pakistanis to return to their homes – at least what is left of them.

Now that the state has declared its intent of taking out the TTP leadership, specifically Baitullah Mehsud, a more discriminatory and targeted strategy for FATA relying on more effective human intelligence and local tribal support would not only be more effective in the long run but would have more sustainability and less negative fallout in terms of civilian casualties and material destruction – all of which have their own long-term debilitating impact. Already we are seeing the spread of terrorism across the country with an increasing intensity as well.

We also need to ensure that the growing number of displaced Pakistanis should not become a tinderbox of ethnic conflicts for the future. After all, it serves no purpose to rid ourselves of one group of brutal militants and their leaders only to find a new breed arising from the disaffected and angered amongst the populace. According to a report doing the rounds on the Internet, more than 130 Pakhtoon students of Sindh University in Jamshoro have had to leave because of violence, abuse and life threats by Sindhi ethnic parties, some of which stormed the Allama Iqbal Hostel where the Pakhtoon students were staying. May 28 was the deadline given to these students to leave. The majority of students who were forced to leave the university were from Swat, Dir and Buner.

Meanwhile, as to the puzzling question of why Baitullah Mehsud has survived for as long as he has, could it be old US links, especially through his spokesman Muslim Khan, who spent eight years in the US and still has relatives there? And is there now a deliberate attempt to fan sectarian violence and intra-Muslim hatred within Pakistan through brutal acts of terrorism and threats to Shia imambargahs across the country at the behest of Baitullah Mehsud and his followers – similar to what the US did in Iraq? There are strange linkages between our militants, criminal elements and our external detractors who seek to spread instability across the country – which is what is happening if we see the situation even in Karachi where the nature of the threat is political fascism rather than religious extremism. We are confronting a multiple-headed monster of terrorism which requires a subtle, multi-faceted strategy, not simply indiscriminate military action being conducted in a political void. For the short term, the terrorised population will go along, but in the long run such a strategy, functioning in a political vacuum, cannot be sustained without a growing backlash. With a dysfunctional government, a mindless economic tsar cosseted from the ravages of terrorism and budgetary hardships, the people of Pakistan face a long hot summer filled with mirages of public transport.