Of course, there are people whose loyalty to the two leaders at the sit-ins in Islamabad is absolute, and there are also people who are resolutely determined to protect the Sharifs-in-power whatever it costs. But they are not many in number; they are mere fringes of the huge majority of Pakistanis who stand in between these two extremities, bewildered and disappointed at the role model persona that Imran Khan and Tahirul Qadri have assumed. Thanks to the ubiquitous media presence at the sit-ins - despite a rough treatment it sometimes receives at the hands of the ardent followers of these role models - an unmistakable contradiction has begun to appear between what they say and what they are. An impression has begun to crystallise that both grossly underestimate the intelligence of the wanting to lead it up the garden path to sign up their agendas of "Naya Pakistan" and "Green Revolution".
Qadri argues that; his is a peaceful protest; he commits to respect rule of law and constitutionalism. But he has arrived at the gates of parliament and Supreme Court as the head of a highly-charged crowd; threatens to storm the Parliament building and turn it into a massive graveyard. This saviour of the poor enjoys the comforts of five-star hotel in his custom-made container while his zealous devotees including women and children are exposed to humid days and rain-drenched nights of Islamabad. His fellow-travelling role model, Imran Khan, never tires of sermonising people on merits of constitutionalism and rule of law, but wants to bring down an elected government by mere show of force; seeks forgiveness in the contempt case but doesn't take a minute to repeat the same cardinal sin; and exposes his ignorance of national interest to the limit of ridicule. How come you order civil disobedience against your country's national interest by asking overseas Pakistanis to commit crime of sending home remittances through illegal channel of 'hundi', or 'hawala' encourage people to make a run on banks, bankrupt the national kitty by refusing to pay taxes and utilities' bills. Consider, the respect the Quaid-e-Azam had for law and constitutionalism that he parted company with the Indian Congress in 1920 when Gandhi gave a call for civil disobedience. And Qadri should know what one of the greatest-ever revolutionary, Mao Zedong, said of a revolution; 'A revolution is not a dinner party...A revolution is an insurrection, an act of violence by which one class overthrows another', he had said.
The women and children, who form the vanguard of Qadri's revolution march, hardly make for the grist the revolution wants. This being the persona of the so-called role models of our national politics, there is no question that these sit-ins and devotional pantomime put on show every evening at the D-Chowk, make for a cruel joke with the silent majority of Pakistanis. The sooner it is over the better for democracy in Pakistan. Yes, it is very much possible that the government had gone wrong at a number of places and in myriad ways. The brutality the Lahore police inflicted on Qadri's workers in Lahore is simply unforgivable. Likewise, the inordinate delay on the part of the government in conducting verification of votes remains unjustified. As to what punishment the government deserves it is for the courts to decide and in no case by the firebrand Imran and a fire-breathing Qadri; the duo must not raise the ante of bloodshed on the streets of Islamabad. They are here occupying vintage places on Constitution Avenue only because their demand to hold sit-ins is their constitutional right. But this does not mean that they should exploit that right by violating the same very constitution - which clearly predicates the exercise of their right to assemble anywhere with the proviso that they should assemble 'peacefully and without arms, subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interest of public order'.
This is so because, as the saying goes, 'your right ends where my nose begins'. The fact is that for over 10 days or so with sit-ins in progress - the Red Zone cordoned off while most of the city on high alert - life in Islamabad has come to a standstill. The authorities should not have allowed sit-ins at the D-Chowk even when mediators had given assurances. For example, even in the mother-country of democracy, Britain, only a well-marked out corner of the Hyde Park is available for such protests. What farce the sit-ins leadership should draw sustenance from wild allegations like the ones one Afzal Khan has made. He should have revealed the 'truth' when he came to know of it, and if not then it was only fair on the part of a person who was part of the Election Commission for such a long time he should have gone to the court instead of endearing himself to the PTI crowd. Insofar as Imran Khan is concerned, he is required to play it safe with these bundle of allegations.
Friday, August 29, 2014
Pakistan: Unbecoming of role models
Of course, there are people whose loyalty to the two leaders at the sit-ins in Islamabad is absolute, and there are also people who are resolutely determined to protect the Sharifs-in-power whatever it costs. But they are not many in number; they are mere fringes of the huge majority of Pakistanis who stand in between these two extremities, bewildered and disappointed at the role model persona that Imran Khan and Tahirul Qadri have assumed. Thanks to the ubiquitous media presence at the sit-ins - despite a rough treatment it sometimes receives at the hands of the ardent followers of these role models - an unmistakable contradiction has begun to appear between what they say and what they are. An impression has begun to crystallise that both grossly underestimate the intelligence of the wanting to lead it up the garden path to sign up their agendas of "Naya Pakistan" and "Green Revolution".
Qadri argues that; his is a peaceful protest; he commits to respect rule of law and constitutionalism. But he has arrived at the gates of parliament and Supreme Court as the head of a highly-charged crowd; threatens to storm the Parliament building and turn it into a massive graveyard. This saviour of the poor enjoys the comforts of five-star hotel in his custom-made container while his zealous devotees including women and children are exposed to humid days and rain-drenched nights of Islamabad. His fellow-travelling role model, Imran Khan, never tires of sermonising people on merits of constitutionalism and rule of law, but wants to bring down an elected government by mere show of force; seeks forgiveness in the contempt case but doesn't take a minute to repeat the same cardinal sin; and exposes his ignorance of national interest to the limit of ridicule. How come you order civil disobedience against your country's national interest by asking overseas Pakistanis to commit crime of sending home remittances through illegal channel of 'hundi', or 'hawala' encourage people to make a run on banks, bankrupt the national kitty by refusing to pay taxes and utilities' bills. Consider, the respect the Quaid-e-Azam had for law and constitutionalism that he parted company with the Indian Congress in 1920 when Gandhi gave a call for civil disobedience. And Qadri should know what one of the greatest-ever revolutionary, Mao Zedong, said of a revolution; 'A revolution is not a dinner party...A revolution is an insurrection, an act of violence by which one class overthrows another', he had said.
The women and children, who form the vanguard of Qadri's revolution march, hardly make for the grist the revolution wants. This being the persona of the so-called role models of our national politics, there is no question that these sit-ins and devotional pantomime put on show every evening at the D-Chowk, make for a cruel joke with the silent majority of Pakistanis. The sooner it is over the better for democracy in Pakistan. Yes, it is very much possible that the government had gone wrong at a number of places and in myriad ways. The brutality the Lahore police inflicted on Qadri's workers in Lahore is simply unforgivable. Likewise, the inordinate delay on the part of the government in conducting verification of votes remains unjustified. As to what punishment the government deserves it is for the courts to decide and in no case by the firebrand Imran and a fire-breathing Qadri; the duo must not raise the ante of bloodshed on the streets of Islamabad. They are here occupying vintage places on Constitution Avenue only because their demand to hold sit-ins is their constitutional right. But this does not mean that they should exploit that right by violating the same very constitution - which clearly predicates the exercise of their right to assemble anywhere with the proviso that they should assemble 'peacefully and without arms, subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interest of public order'.
This is so because, as the saying goes, 'your right ends where my nose begins'. The fact is that for over 10 days or so with sit-ins in progress - the Red Zone cordoned off while most of the city on high alert - life in Islamabad has come to a standstill. The authorities should not have allowed sit-ins at the D-Chowk even when mediators had given assurances. For example, even in the mother-country of democracy, Britain, only a well-marked out corner of the Hyde Park is available for such protests. What farce the sit-ins leadership should draw sustenance from wild allegations like the ones one Afzal Khan has made. He should have revealed the 'truth' when he came to know of it, and if not then it was only fair on the part of a person who was part of the Election Commission for such a long time he should have gone to the court instead of endearing himself to the PTI crowd. Insofar as Imran Khan is concerned, he is required to play it safe with these bundle of allegations.
No comments:
Post a Comment