Recently, I had a chance to visit Pakistan. During my short stay there the hot news was of MMA planning a country-wide strike to protest against the government using the pretext of the infamous cartoons of the Prophet (PBUH), news of a bomb blast near US consulate in Karachi a day before the arrival of US President to Pakistan and President Bush’ visit to Pakistan. To gauge the reaction of the Pakistani people to the American President’s visit, I met with a number of people from different walks of life. I also had a chance encounter with Professor Dr. Manzoor Ahmed, ex-chancellor of Karachi University and a renowned intellectual with deep understanding of Pakistan. I talked to taxi drivers, shopkeepers and businessmen to get their perspective on the socio-economic and political situation of Pakistan. It will be difficult to share all those experiences in this article but I will try to paint a picture of things there- the way I saw them.
Karachi was as chaotic as always. Several under-construction projects were noticeable in all parts of the city; work was in progress on Lyari expressway; Clifton has an underpass; and overpass is planned at various congested points in the city. Other things that I found to be different were the abundance of small cars on the roads, almost everyone carrying a cell phone, and mushrooming of billboards throughout the length of the main roads. The latter has hugely tarnished the aesthetics of the city. People told me that the city has decided to tear down all these eyesores and issue licenses for pre-selected sites.
A positive development visible was the proliferation of a large number of television channels documenting almost all aspects of social life in Pakistan. There were main channels like GEO, ARY and PTV. Then there were many music channels, some ethnic channels, western channels and also Indian channels. Business Recorder has also started a business channel called Aaj. It seems that the nation is gripped by talk-show frenzy. Local bureaus of these channels allow common people to come on air and inform the viewers about the problems faced by them whether it was theft of electricity in their neighborhoods, seeping sewerage lines, lack of drinking water, broken roads or corruption of officials. This is a positive trend. But here I would like to quote Manzoor Ahmed: “ Pakistan’s intellectual depth is limited to the discussions on television channels. We lack formation of think tanks that could guide policy makers in forming future vision for social, economic and political development.”
In Lahore, I had a chance to meet with some young, successful businessmen. Their view about Pakistan’s economic future was quite discouraging. They felt that Pakistan’s major export, textile, was not ready to compete in the global market against China, India and Bangladesh after the abolition of tariffs and quotas in January 2004. They said that almost 30 textile composite plants that they know off were heading towards bankruptcy because the business models were based on quota and kickbacks. They also were of the opinion that no new industry has been installed in Pakistan to diversify its export base and that a credit based economy has emerged creating an inflated demand for consumer goods without creating employment opportunities thus moving the country towards large scale personal bankruptcies. They also felt that middle class is wiped out altogether from the country, which is considered a backbone of any fundamentally strong and growing economy.
As for the strike, well, one of my friends who is an active member of Jamaat-e-Islami and was involved in the planning of the MMA strike, to be held on March 3, maintained the view that peaceful strike is a democratic way of agitating against a government that is not truly representative of the people. He was not hopeful that 2007 elections would be fair and unbiased since, according to him the recent district council elections were widely rigged to bring to power those who could help the government achieve a substantial majority in 2007 elections. Then why was MQM, which is a majority party in Karachi and government itself, supporting the strike? I asked. My friend did not have a very convincing reply to their quiet support. The way it goes in politics, it could be that the government wanted to show to the US president that fundamentalists are still a threat to moderate government of General Pervez Musharraf and MQM, which is openly supporting General Musharraf, went along this line. Another view could be that General Musharraf wants to allow the situation to deteriorate so that he has a premise for early elections keeping the old Pakistani tradition of dissolving elected governments before their term expires.
Before the day of the strike I spoke to some shopkeepers, taxi drivers and day laborers. I asked them whether they would participate in the strike, and if yes, would they do so to support MMA’s cause or for the fear of violence and risk to their life and property. Almost everyone opined that strikes are not good for a poor country and that they are participating because they don’t want to risk their life and assets. Majority of them said they considered Maulanas to be hypocrites using religion to further their own brand of Islam and gain political power in the country with no visionary program for the nation. The strike was held peacefully throughout the country.
Speaking of President Bush’s visit, he arrived for a two-day visit to Pakistan after making a surprise visit to Afghanistan and a historical visit to India in which he signed a landmark nuclear treaty with the latter to cooperate in civilian nuclear technology. Pakistan was looking for a similar deal to maintain the balance of power in the region. But the government realized they would not gain anything when the news reached that Afghan President Karzai has complained to the US President that Pakistan is responsible for the current turmoil in their country. It was evident to Pakistan government that President Bush’s visit to Pakistan will be dominated by the clarification of Pakistan’s sincerity, loyalty and desire to fight terrorism in the region. Before the US President embarked on his journey he was looking for an scapegoat to avoid a nuclear treaty with Pakistan while insisting on Pakistan’s importance to them without really giving anything in return. Afghan President Karzai, who lived in Quetta, Pakistan, for almost 25 years forgot the sacrifices of Pakistani people during Afghanistan’s struggle against Russian aggression; forgot that it was Pakistan, who despite its own scarce resources, provided accommodation to 3.5 million Afghan refugees when no one else was willing to accept them. The infiltration of Afghan warlords destroyed the peaceful Pakistani society and obliterated it with weapons and drugs. But Karzai forgot all this and played in the hands of Indian diplomats to embarrass Pakistan. The fact is that Afghan insurgents, that are not controllable by Afghan border patrol, support current hostilities in Balochistan and Waziristan.
During the press conference of Musharraf and Bush, the body language of both presidents suggested that there has been tension during their discussions. The US did not offer any special treatment, economic aid or military assistance to Pakistan. The only consolation prize was formation of Reconstruction Opportunity Zones (ROZs) that need to be approved by the US congress before it can be implemented. Goods manufactured in these ROZs will be allowed duty free import into the US. All political analysts were of the view that India won this diplomatic round and Pakistan has to reconsider their approach in the region. Some pundits also suggested that President Musharraf got wind of what was to come and decided to visit China a week before the visit of the US president to seek help from China to counter the new equation formed between India and US.
Ground reality in Pakistan is much different from the rosy picture painted by the government. Leaders in power should take revolutionary steps to put the country on the path of sustainable progress in both economy and political fields. The opposition should understand that it is in the larger interest of the country to let the current elected government complete its term and not play in the hands of the government to find a reason for dissolution of assemblies. Intellectuals should come together to form think tanks to guide the elected representatives in formation of strategy and policy.
A Visit to Pakistan Recently, I had a chance to…
March 15, 2006 at 11:37 pm · Filed under Political Commentary
A Visit to Pakistan
Recently, I had a chance to visit Pakistan. During my short stay there the hot news was of MMA planning a country-wide strike to protest against the government using the pretext of the infamous cartoons of the Prophet (PBUH), news of a bomb blast near US consulate in Karachi a day before the arrival of US President to Pakistan and President Bush’ visit to Pakistan. To gauge the reaction of the Pakistani people to the American President’s visit, I met with a number of people from different walks of life. I also had a chance encounter with Professor Dr. Manzoor Ahmed, ex-chancellor of Karachi University and a renowned intellectual with deep understanding of Pakistan. I talked to taxi drivers, shopkeepers and businessmen to get their perspective on the socio-economic and political situation of Pakistan. It will be difficult to share all those experiences in this article but I will try to paint a picture of things there- the way I saw them.
Karachi was as chaotic as always. Several under-construction projects were noticeable in all parts of the city; work was in progress on Lyari expressway; Clifton has an underpass; and overpass is planned at various congested points in the city. Other things that I found to be different were the abundance of small cars on the roads, almost everyone carrying a cell phone, and mushrooming of billboards throughout the length of the main roads. The latter has hugely tarnished the aesthetics of the city. People told me that the city has decided to tear down all these eyesores and issue licenses for pre-selected sites.
A positive development visible was the proliferation of a large number of television channels documenting almost all aspects of social life in Pakistan. There were main channels like GEO, ARY and PTV. Then there were many music channels, some ethnic channels, western channels and also Indian channels. Business Recorder has also started a business channel called Aaj. It seems that the nation is gripped by talk-show frenzy. Local bureaus of these channels allow common people to come on air and inform the viewers about the problems faced by them whether it was theft of electricity in their neighborhoods, seeping sewerage lines, lack of drinking water, broken roads or corruption of officials. This is a positive trend. But here I would like to quote Manzoor Ahmed: “ Pakistan’s intellectual depth is limited to the discussions on television channels. We lack formation of think tanks that could guide policy makers in forming future vision for social, economic and political development.”
In Lahore, I had a chance to meet with some young, successful businessmen. Their view about Pakistan’s economic future was quite discouraging. They felt that Pakistan’s major export, textile, was not ready to compete in the global market against China, India and Bangladesh after the abolition of tariffs and quotas in January 2004. They said that almost 30 textile composite plants that they know off were heading towards bankruptcy because the business models were based on quota and kickbacks. They also were of the opinion that no new industry has been installed in Pakistan to diversify its export base and that a credit based economy has emerged creating an inflated demand for consumer goods without creating employment opportunities thus moving the country towards large scale personal bankruptcies. They also felt that middle class is wiped out altogether from the country, which is considered a backbone of any fundamentally strong and growing economy.
As for the strike, well, one of my friends who is an active member of Jamaat-e-Islami and was involved in the planning of the MMA strike, to be held on March 3, maintained the view that peaceful strike is a democratic way of agitating against a government that is not truly representative of the people. He was not hopeful that 2007 elections would be fair and unbiased since, according to him the recent district council elections were widely rigged to bring to power those who could help the government achieve a substantial majority in 2007 elections. Then why was MQM, which is a majority party in Karachi and government itself, supporting the strike? I asked. My friend did not have a very convincing reply to their quiet support. The way it goes in politics, it could be that the government wanted to show to the US president that fundamentalists are still a threat to moderate government of General Pervez Musharraf and MQM, which is openly supporting General Musharraf, went along this line. Another view could be that General Musharraf wants to allow the situation to deteriorate so that he has a premise for early elections keeping the old Pakistani tradition of dissolving elected governments before their term expires.
Before the day of the strike I spoke to some shopkeepers, taxi drivers and day laborers. I asked them whether they would participate in the strike, and if yes, would they do so to support MMA’s cause or for the fear of violence and risk to their life and property. Almost everyone opined that strikes are not good for a poor country and that they are participating because they don’t want to risk their life and assets. Majority of them said they considered Maulanas to be hypocrites using religion to further their own brand of Islam and gain political power in the country with no visionary program for the nation. The strike was held peacefully throughout the country.
Speaking of President Bush’s visit, he arrived for a two-day visit to Pakistan after making a surprise visit to Afghanistan and a historical visit to India in which he signed a landmark nuclear treaty with the latter to cooperate in civilian nuclear technology. Pakistan was looking for a similar deal to maintain the balance of power in the region. But the government realized they would not gain anything when the news reached that Afghan President Karzai has complained to the US President that Pakistan is responsible for the current turmoil in their country. It was evident to Pakistan government that President Bush’s visit to Pakistan will be dominated by the clarification of Pakistan’s sincerity, loyalty and desire to fight terrorism in the region. Before the US President embarked on his journey he was looking for an scapegoat to avoid a nuclear treaty with Pakistan while insisting on Pakistan’s importance to them without really giving anything in return. Afghan President Karzai, who lived in Quetta, Pakistan, for almost 25 years forgot the sacrifices of Pakistani people during Afghanistan’s struggle against Russian aggression; forgot that it was Pakistan, who despite its own scarce resources, provided accommodation to 3.5 million Afghan refugees when no one else was willing to accept them. The infiltration of Afghan warlords destroyed the peaceful Pakistani society and obliterated it with weapons and drugs. But Karzai forgot all this and played in the hands of Indian diplomats to embarrass Pakistan. The fact is that Afghan insurgents, that are not controllable by Afghan border patrol, support current hostilities in Balochistan and Waziristan.
During the press conference of Musharraf and Bush, the body language of both presidents suggested that there has been tension during their discussions. The US did not offer any special treatment, economic aid or military assistance to Pakistan. The only consolation prize was formation of Reconstruction Opportunity Zones (ROZs) that need to be approved by the US congress before it can be implemented. Goods manufactured in these ROZs will be allowed duty free import into the US. All political analysts were of the view that India won this diplomatic round and Pakistan has to reconsider their approach in the region. Some pundits also suggested that President Musharraf got wind of what was to come and decided to visit China a week before the visit of the US president to seek help from China to counter the new equation formed between India and US.
Ground reality in Pakistan is much different from the rosy picture painted by the government. Leaders in power should take revolutionary steps to put the country on the path of sustainable progress in both economy and political fields. The opposition should understand that it is in the larger interest of the country to let the current elected government complete its term and not play in the hands of the government to find a reason for dissolution of assemblies. Intellectuals should come together to form think tanks to guide the elected representatives in formation of strategy and policy.
Permalink