In Pakistan, PML-N leader's remarks on minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi are a more serious threat to national security than minister Fawad Chaudhry claiming a terror attack.
The year of the rat continues to be obsessed with the year that was, 2019. That was when the enemy pilot Abhinandan came, had chai and left. He left, but like any jilted ex, the conversations continue about why he left us. He didn’t say, “It’s me, not you”. But for Pakistanis, it still remains an unfinished agenda even in 2020, the year that is actually all about being Modi’s yaar and Pakistan’s ghaddar.
This is Pakistan in a nutshell.
On Wednesday, Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader Ayaz Sadiq shared on the floor of the National Assembly how the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) government was panicking to release Abhinandan Varthaman because it feared an attack from the Indian military. The conversation referred to a parliamentary briefing held after the capture of the Indian pilot in February 2019, an exchange that Prime Minister Imran Khan was not a part of even as Army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa was present. Sadiq explained that Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi was jittery with a sweaty forehead when he told those present at the briefing, “Khuda ka wasta hai ab isko jane dein (for god’s sake let him go),” referring to Abhinandan. According to Sadiq, India was going to attack Pakistan at 9pm.
Hum bhi hain josh mein
It was as if Qureshi would turn into a pumpkin if Abhinandan wasn’t released before 9pm. Tea was still fantastic, 9pm or 9am. There is still no news on the fictitious Israeli pilot that Pakistan caught. Probably he is still having tea somewhere here.
Shocking revelation? Not really. The mention of an Indian attack was already made by PM Imran Khan during his address to the Assembly on February 28. He had said that there were fears India might launch a missile attack on Pakistan, but the situation was later defused.
What came as a real shocker was Science and Technology Minister Fawad Chaudhry’s response to Ayaz Sadiq. In josh-e-khitabat, the minister went on to claim Pulwama terror attack, which killed 40 Indian soldiers, as a huge victory of Pakistan under the leadership of Imran Khan. “Humne Hindustan ko ghus ke maara hai (we hit India in their home). Our success in Pulwama was the success of the nation,” Chaudhry said, berating the PML-N leader.
Chaudhry just fell short of breath, otherwise the flow in which he was, he might as well have taken credit for crashing planes into the World Trade Centre on 9/11. It was only after he had made all the confessions that he thought he should modify his boast a bit, which is what he did: “Pulwama ke baad humne ghus ke maara” — the modification being ‘after Pulwama’.
Priorities you & I won’t understand
The minister’s ramblings were astounding and could have serious repercussions for Pakistan. But what woke the military spokesman up from deep slumber was Ayaz Sadiq and not Fawad Chaudhry. Even repeated allegations of political engineering against Qamar Bajwa by former prime minister Nawaz Sharif didn’t sprung DG-ISPR into action. But here he was. Now a pro at rejecting stuff from political leaders, Babar Iftikhar held a presser to reject the statement that Abhinandan was released owing to perceived threat of an Indian attack.
Only in Pakistan are the remarks on an opposition leader a more serious threat to national security than a sitting minister’s 60 seconds of claiming and celebrating a terrorist attack. This is the reason why PTI ministers are taken as seriously as they are around the world. And the same set of ministers now want a criminal charge against Ayaz Sadiq. Him revealing that Qureshi’s legs were shaking and he was sweating is tantamount to outing State secrets?
A campaign to brand Sadiq a ‘traitor’ is now on, with posters coming up on the streets of Lahore. Sadiq is shown wearing an Abhinandan-like moustache with both Modi and the Indian pilot in the background. ‘Mir Jaffar, Mir Sadiq…Ayaz Sadiq’ is the tagline.
The excuse for the extreme reaction is to point towards “how Indian media is having a field day with Ayaz Sadiq’s statement”. But the same people choose to look the other way when Indian media is amplifying Fawad Chaudhry’s remarks and bringing more attention. If coverage in Indian media is the parameter of bringing bad name to the country, then where does PM Imran Khan stand over his several interviews and conclaves that he attended in India, where he said the most controversial things? Where does he stand over the Indian media’s rather extensive coverage of PTI’s dharnas when he was in the opposition?
Imran Khan’s simple rule
The entire episode reflects the simmering tension between the PTI and the opposition parties ever since the anti-government protests began. It is clear that when confronted with the ghaddari (traitor) allegations, the leaders of PML-N and even other parties reply in the same coin. If the previous PML-N government will be blamed for Kulbhushan Jadhav’s case in the International Court of Justice (ICJ), its leaders will hit back with PTI going out of the way and making concessions for Jadhav now.
The world may have moved onto dealing with more pressing concerns brought about by the Covid-19 pandemic, or bothering about who will be the next president of the United States. But what matters the most to the government of Imran Khan is the continuous labelling of his political opponents as pawns of India. In Khan dreamland, whether he’s in opposition or in power, his opponents remain traitors. He vehemently believed that whenever Nawaz Sharif was in trouble, tension along Pakistan’s borders and terror attacks increased. Now as prime minister, he still gives out certificates of working with ‘Israeli and Indian lobby’ to the opposition. For Imran Khan, it works like: heads I win, tails you lose.
https://theprint.in/opinion/letter-from-pakistan/pakistan-still-obsessing-over-abhinandan-how-about-an-update-on-israeli-pilot-army-caught/534554/
No comments:
Post a Comment