Cover Story
Wanted: Grit
The Pakistani State need not retreat --- as in the past.
Does the secret agreement between the Federal Government and Tehreek-e-Labbaik-e-Pakistan (TLP) and the initiation of talks with the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) represent two more steps back by the State of Pakistan in the face of violent religious extremists? Is this tendency to cede ground to fanatics a relatively recent post-Ziaul Haq era (1977-1988) trend?
Fortunately, history offers instances where the State has stood firm against armed bigots. In 1953 when a few thousand zealots threatened Qadianis with death in Lahore and attempted to bring the city to a halt, then-Major General Azam Khan took determined military action to crush the threat. He even went to the extent of imposing martial law in particular areas --- without the prior approval of the then-Prime Minister Khawaja Nazimuddin in Karachi. For several years thereafter the example set by Azam Khan became a reference point. In his Report on that episode, Justice Munir condemned the failure of the local civil administration to act promptly which would have effectively stalled defiance on a small scale well before it spread to larger areas that then required military force.
Despite the contrast between civil ineptitude and military competence, the State asserted and established its credibility and capacity to reject threats from extremists. In the early 1960s, ignoring and facing down religious orthodoxy, President Ayub Khan introduced the Family Law Ordinance which made it mandatory for a married man to obtain the written consent of his first wife before he could enter into a second marriage. Without the issue stirring violence, the clear signal given out by the State to enforce women’s rights was sufficient to prevent obscurantists from blocking social advancement.
Notwithstanding the belated, clumsily-conceived and yet effective action against the extremists in Lal Masjid, Islamabad in 2007, the State once again showed the ability to take required measures. Similarly, but on a far larger scale, and once again belatedly rather than on a timely basis, when the TTP had terrorised Swat and was threatening to move towards the Federal capital, military action forced the extremists to flee to then-FATA and across the border to Afghanistan from where, with continued covert support from India, they maintained their anti-state activities. In erstwhile FATA, once the decision was taken to prevent the country’s territory from being used as a haven for attacks on Afghan and NATO forces across the border, most of the region was cleared of the bases of extremist operations.
Joining the civil and military segment in their periodic demonstration of will, the superior Judiciary upheld the death sentence against Mumtaz Qadri, the assassin of Governor of Punjab Salman Taseer in January 2011 and ensured that the killer was executed --- even as thousands marched to protest and to demand his release by ludicrously elevating him to the status of a holy ghazi who slew an alleged blasphemer. In the related context, the Judiciary also declined to be cowed down by extremists when the Supreme Court overturned the guilty sentence against Asiya Bibi for allegedly committing blasphemy. This enabled that poor Christian woman to obtain refuge and citizenship in Canada. This last fact shames us for allowing bigots to create conditions in our country where a daughter of the soil feels so unsafe in her own home that she has to seek permanent asylum thousands of miles away in another continent and culture.
Though no individual in Pakistan has ever been legally executed for blasphemy, several persons, including a university professor who was obviously maliciously and wrongly accused, are presently, most unjustly imprisoned on mere allegations of committing blasphemy. Fortunately, the tendency of the Lower Judiciary to entertain charges without detailed deliberation and deliver harsh sentences of death have always been overturned by a more mature, better-informed and capable superior Judiciary.
While all 3 official pillars of the State i.e. Legislature, Executive, Judiciary –– and civil society and media as unofficial pillars –– should act as a bulwark against extremism and religion-based violence, it is unfortunate that in each of these 5 pillars there exist segments which themselves enable extremism to survive --- through inhibition, or incompetence or even covert biases.
Where the vast majority of the people are respectful of pluralism and diversity but are passive rather than active in resisting mobs of zealots and fanatics, their political maturity –– despite illiteracy and poverty –– is eloquently evident in their voting preferences. In all 11 general elections held between 1970 and 2018, the overwhelming majority of Pakistani voters, women and men, have always prevented religion-based parties from gaining more than 10 per cent of the vote. Except for the MMA’s stint in the then-NWFP (KP) government between 2002 and 2007, no religious parties have ever been in power at the Federal or Provincial levels. The people are far far ahead of the State and of governments which continuously overestimate the threat from extremists and underestimate their own ability to overcome such threats.
The statement by Federal Information Minister Fawad Chaudhry on 18th November, 2021 to the effect that the State and Government have retreated in the face of violent extremists is a rare and refreshing acknowledgement of a systemic malady. While one may strongly disagree with him on the policies of the PTI Government about plans for the Pakistan Media Development Authority and decry its inability to work patiently and constructively with the Opposition, this particular Minister’s periodic outspokenness reveals the existence of a mindset within the political realm that is willing to call a spade a spade and stimulate internal debate on the need for firm and assertive actions by the State.
As we wait for the fulfillment of the promise by the Government to publish the secret agreement, it must surely comprise all or most of the following:
1. TLP will abandon violence and disruptive street agitation.
2. TLP pledges to work as a political party bound by the Constitution and all applicable laws.
3. The top TLP leader will be released (already done).
4. TLP activists detained for rioting and violence to be released without the pursuit of charges or the withdrawal of charges.
5. If the killers of the 7 policemen who lost their lives to TLP brutes and those TLP workers who willfully tortured and seriously injured several dozens of policemen are proven to be culpable, they will stand trial. Or worse: the killers and the sadists will be let off and the crimes ascribed to “Unknown” persons.
In one sense, the fog of secrecy may be more invidious than the smog that has afflicted Lahore in the winter of 2021. Sometimes, the State is obliged to maintain secrecy in both external affairs and some aspects of internal affairs. But it is difficult to find examples where the State enters into a secret agreement --- albeit temporary, for a length of time unknown --- whereby the other signatory is an organization whose verbal and physical behaviour violates both national and global norms and values. The PTI Government should be guided by those episodes and phases of Pakistan’s history where both political and military leadership demonstrated grit and enduring will.
The writer is a former senator and federal minister and is a member of the longest-running Pakistan-India Track II Dialogue known as the Neemrana Initiative. www.javedjabbar.net
Leave a Reply