Business Recorder Column November 29, 2022

The season of swan songs

 

Rashed Rahman

 

Outgoing COAS General Qamar Javed Bajwa in an address to the Defence and Martyrs Ceremony at GHQ on November 23, 2022 made an unprecedented admission about the army’s unconstitutional interference in politics for 70 years, while criticising the political parties for their errors, which include being intolerant towards rivals. Most of the latter criticism was aimed at the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaaf (PTI) for crafting a “fake and false” narrative against the army and calling senior commanders names. In a rare show of magnanimity, General Bajwa said they were ready to forgive these trespasses and leave the controversy behind.

General Bajwa underlined the fact that the army often faced criticism because of “unconstitutional” “interference in politics” in various ways over the last seven decades. What General Bajwa admitted regarding the (dominant) role of the army in interfering in politics has remained a widespread phenomenon. Such interference includes dislodging civilian governments through coups and indirectly controlling weak dispensations. Political leaders are not blameless either. They readily ceded space to the military due to their weaknesses (and collaborationist tendencies to attain power), thereby allowing a breach of institutional boundaries (i.e. kowtowing to the real seat of power). General Bajwa even revealed the (recent) date of the military’s decision after intense deliberations no longer to interfere in politics. He put this at February 2022. It may be recalled that this was a period of intense open and behind the scenes political manoeuvring in the backdrop of then Prime Minister (PM) Imran Khan’s falling out with his erstwhile military backers (who brought him to power in 2018 as the third alternative to the two mainstream parties that had dominated politics since the 1990s) over the appointment of the new ISI chief and the buildup to the vote of no-confidence that removed Imran Khan and the PTI government from power.

While General Bajwa went on to say that the military was strictly adhering to its decision and would continue to do so, knowledgeable commentators by and large preferred to reserve judgement, saying only time will tell or the jury is still out on this development. Needless to say, even this declared stance of political ‘neutrality’ was enough to incense the deposed ex-PM Imran Khan into unleashing a torrent of abuse on the military leadership, steeped no doubt in his disappointment that the ‘lift’ into power hitherto available to him had now come to a grinding halt. Hence also the cries of ‘betrayal’ by Imran Khan and the PTI.

Dilating on the so-called foreign conspiracy to bring about regime change, he questioned if this were the case, would the military stand by and do nothing? The question seems logical, but with due respect, the military could theoretically go along with any such conspiracy if it accords with its own plans. That is not to say that was the case in this instance. General Bajwa referred to the wind being taken out of the sails of this leaky foreign conspiracy boat by none other than the authors themselves by now. No doubt obliquely referring to the unprecedented abuse the military top brass has been subjected to by Imran Khan and the PTI, General Bajwa said the army exercised restraint in the larger national interest despite having the resources and opportunities to respond to this barrage, but there is a limit. Even if we take General Bajwa at his word, he did not care to explicate whether the ‘limit’ had already been reached or what may constitute the unacceptable.

General Bajwa’s readiness to forgive errant parties such as the PTI may also, if reports and commentary in the media are to be believed, be motivated by the alleged risk of internal dissent within the military if Imran Khan is harshly dealt with. It appears the latter has been relying on supposed support within the military as a guarantee that his brinkmanship will not evoke an adverse reaction. But as on so many other issues, this may be the self-serving delusion of Imran Khan. If there is one thing the Pakistan military is known for, it is its internal cohesiveness, unity and discipline, especially when the institution itself, in the shape of its top commanders, comes under such verbal assault.

While there would be few dissenters with General Bajwa’s formulations in general, the fact is that the military has dictated matters in the country almost since Independence. If for this purpose in the early 1950s it relied on its unholy alliance with the bureaucracy, by 1958 it had assumed direct command of the affairs of state (to be repeatedly resorted to in subsequent years). The 1956 Constitution had already promulgated One Unit and since Independence, the military-bureaucratic oligarchy had conspired against a representative, genuine democracy that took due account of the undeniable reality that Pakistan was a multi-national state requiring a different state structure than a domineering Centre. Add to this the peculiarity of the new state having two wings separated by a thousand miles of hostile Indian territory. Instead of taking due account of these realities, the state attempted, again and again, to impose a unitary structure that militated against the rights of the smaller nationalities and even the majority Bengali majority!

General Bajwa’s attempt to whitewash the military’s role in the 1971 debacle by calling it a political, not military failure, fails to convince. General Yahya Khan was in power at the time, and despite Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s role arguably in ensuring the debacle, the military cannot, force imbalance with the enemy notwithstanding, justify its genocidal massacre and women’s rape on a mass scale. If anything, it is a reason for all of us to hang our heads in shame.

Whether 1971, before or after, the military’s penchant for running the country directly or from behind the scenes has yielded nothing but disaster. If the appropriate lessons have been learnt without shrinking from the truth, and General Bajwa’s successors in the military’s command adhere to his statement of policy of no more interference in politics, that may offer a glimmer of hope that Pakistan may finally be headed for civilian, democratic supremacy. But sceptics will not so easily be convinced, given our history and the military’s track record in this respect. They will no doubt be watching closely and relying only on the judgement of time.

 

 

 

 

 

rashed.rahman1@gmail.com

rashed-rahman.blogspot.com

Business Recorder Column November 22, 2022

Historic accord

 

Rashed Rahman

 

The climate summit COP27 in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, has produced a historic accord on funding to help vulnerable countries cope with the devastating impacts of global warming. This positive outcome was not arrived at easily. The negotiations dragged on for two weeks, appearing at times to be teetering on the brink of a collapse, with the last two days seeing round-the-clock efforts. The major breakthrough is on setting up a fund for “loss and damage”, which Pakistan has been advocating for three decades. Pakistan has hailed the outcome as the UN conference responding to the “voices of the damaged”. However, all was not sweetness and honey despite this breakthrough as there was anger at the failure to push further on cutting emissions, believed to be the main culprit fuelling global warming and climate change.

Credit must go to Prime Minister (PM) Shahbaz Sharif, Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari and Climate Minister Sherry Rahman for the success of the effort. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres must also be lauded for his support to the climate talks, although he too bemoaned the lack of consensus on the urgent carbon cutting needed to tackle global warming. “Our planet is still in the emergency room,” is how he characterised the threat facing the whole world.

So while we celebrate the setting up of the loss and damage fund, we should note that the world is still far from the desirable commitment to reducing, and finally phasing out, fossil fuels that are the main culprits upsetting the delicate ecological balance of our living planet. At best COP27 held to the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius over pre-industrial levels. Scientists say global warming is at 1.2 degrees Celsius so far, and even at this level the world has been afflicted by a cascade of climate-driven extremes that threaten developing countries with escalating disasters, energy and food prices crises, and ballooning debt. Imagine if their forecast of the world heading for 2.5 degrees Celsius at present comes true.

The loss and damage fund will be geared towards developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change. Examples of such countries are island and coastal areas threatened by rising sea levels because of the melting of the polar ice caps and other disturbances in weather patterns. Pakistan has this year suffered devastating floods brought on by enhanced melting of mountain glaciers and above normal monsoon rains that have drowned one third of the country and destroyed the lives and livelihoods of 33 million people. Pakistan, with a struggling economy even before the natural catastrophe, fought hard at COP27 for help to mitigate the effects of the disaster. Some 134 countries are expected to benefit from the fund. However, many thorny questions still remain unanswered, which will be dealt with by a transitional committee, expected to report to next year’s climate meeting in Dubai to get the funding operational.

Inevitably, these unanswered questions include who will contribute how much, what is the desired size of the fund, what will be the criteria to disburse funds in what priority to the most stricken countries? That indicates there may still be many a slip between the cup and the lip. Interestingly, the ‘resistance’ of developed countries to any notion of liability and compensation was acceded to.

The fact is that the unbridled exploitation of natural resources and fossil fuels for capitalist industrialisation and its unlimited appetite for maximising profit even at the expense of the world’s natural habitats for the last three centuries has rendered the globe ecologically disturbed. And because developed countries too share the same planetary home, they have not been spared extreme climate change and accompanying natural catastrophes. Were that not the case, perhaps the developed world would not have acceded to the worldwide demand for help to vulnerable developing countries like Pakistan. The issue of emissions cutting, which is at the heart of the effort to rescue the planet from the adverse effects of three centuries of unbridled fossil fuel burning, deforestation and the destruction of natural habitats that has rendered many species extinct or threatened with extinction, is a tough nut to crack because it involves the switchover from fossil fuels to non-polluting renewable energy sources. Although the technology to bring this about now exists, the costs of the switchover, possible disruptions to economies and other roadblocks make the target not easy to accomplish. First, there has to be a global agreement or plan how this will be carried out, in what timeframe, who will pay (or share) the costs involved. It seems logical that the greatest resistance and attempts to slow down and delay the phases of this process will come from the developed world and their corporate sector.

However, the globe can no longer be left to the ‘tender’ mercies of global corporate capitalism, not only but also because the people of the entire world, including the developed world, now lie in the path of the destruction already caused, and that will continue till a final change in the way industry and commerce functions, how it obtains its energy, etc, are sorted out. This promises a fairly lengthy process of international conferences, negotiations, hard bargaining and, hopefully, in the end, agreement in the interests of all peoples of the world. Anything short of this spells doom-laden scenarios of incrementally catastrophic natural disasters and their concomitant human and material cost.

 

 

 

 

 

rashed.rahman1@gmail.com

rashed-rahman.blogspot.com

The November 2022 issue of Pakistan Monthly Review is out

The November 2022 issue of Pakistan Monthly Review (PMR) is out. Link: pakistanmonthlyreview.com

Contents:

1. Tapan Bose: Widening inequality, increasing human suffering and Human Rights.

2. Sara Kazmi: The Marxist Punjabi Movement: Language and Literary Radicalism in Pakistan.

Rashed Rahman

Editor, Pakistan Monthly Review (PMR) (link: pakistanmonthlyreview.com)

Director, Research and Publication Centre (RPC) (on Facebook)

Business Recorder Column November 15, 2022

Master of U-turns

 

Rashed Rahman

 

Whatever other foibles Imran Khan may be accused of, consistency is not amongst them. Ever since his ouster through a no-confidence motion in April 2022, he has attempted to craft a narrative of a foreign conspiracy, backed if not initiated by the US, to bring about regime change. As proof of his allegations, he brandished a piece of paper at a rally, purportedly a cipher (coded) message sent by our ambassador in Washington reporting on a conversation with a senior US official. Veteran Pakistani diplomats when asked have weighed in with the view that such conversations and ciphers do not necessarily mean much and are better ignored.

Imran Khan, however, in his bullheaded approach to all matters, constructed his conspiracy theory around the cipher. Despite resort to the typical Goebbelsian tactic of repeating a lie enough times to make it appear true, Imran Khan has failed to convince anyone other than his fanatical following of the verity of the charge of a foreign regime change conspiracy against him. In the process, the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) coalition government has been attempting to redress some of the damage Imran Khan’s government inflicted on our relationship with the US (and other countries).

Now, in one more of his by now familiar U-turns, he has disavowed the foreign conspiracy theory to the extent of wanting to leave it in the past and move on to repairing his relationship with Washington. This he has stated in an interview to the Financial Times. He now claims in the next breath that the US-Pakistan relationship is a master-servant or even master-slave relationship, and that he ‘only’ sought a dignified one in Pakistan’s best interests. It is amazing how Imran Khan selectively picks points to argue his case without a nod even to the facts of life that are no secret from anyone. Who does not know that Pakistan is dependent on US goodwill, not only for bilateral advantage, but also to clear the decks for the IMF and other international lenders to provide Pakistan’s sick economy with the ‘drip’ of loans and finance to stay afloat (in addition, it may be added, to other multilateral and bilateral borrowing without which Pakistan’s economy would likely collapse). Of course, economics is not all there is to the US-Pakistan relationship, which encompasses strategic, and therefore military ties. To arrive at the destination of an honourable relationship with the US (and all other lenders) would require a complete departure from the model of dependent development pursued by Pakistan almost from its inception.

Addicted to stirring up the political pot every day, Imran Khan then goes on to assert that Nawaz Sharif is ‘not allowing’ his younger brother Prime Minister (PM) Shahbaz Sharif to hold early elections, the demand around which Imran Khan’s politics has now converged after many detours since his fall from power. Is there any evidence that the PM disagrees with Nawaz Sharif’s (presumed) opinion that early elections are not in the interests of the ruling PDM coalition? None that one can see. The PDM coalition government, despite, or even because of, having lost political capital because it inherited an economy devastated by the Imran Khan government’s incompetence and faulty policies, sees no alternative to sticking to the course of serving out its term till August 2023, in the hope that by then economic indicators may improve and bolster its political position going into the next general elections.

Meanwhile Imran Khan’s dual policy of at the same time attacking the establishment and wooing it to restore him to power has produced contradictory effects. On the one hand, speculation revolves around the ‘division’ in the establishment (pro- and anti-Imran) that seems to be at work in the relatively kid glove treatment being handed out Imran Khan. On the other, division or no division, the establishment, as is its wont, has closed ranks in the face of Imran Khan’s unremitting attacks to safeguard the internal unity and discipline of the state institution at the heart of the establishment, i.e. the military. Much hullaballoo has also been created by Imran Khan around the question of the next army chief. Institutional and government views may or may not be coinciding so far in this regard. If so, the decision will probably also reflect the desire of the military establishment to control the damage to its reputation at the hands of the wild accusations of Imran Khan. The attack on him in Wazirabad is condemnable, but to fling wild accusations without a shred of evidence or proof against the PM, Interior Minister and a serving General does no service to even Imran’s own cause. His ally, Punjab Chief Minister Parvez Elahi has tried to persuade Khan of the error of such tactics, but it seems to no avail. The Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaaf (PTI) has now approached the Supreme Court (SC) in all its principal seats to have an FIR of the attack registered along the lines Khan wants. This is yet another example of the burgeoning trend of the judicialisation of politics that has been in play for years now.

If Imran Khan and the PTI continue on their present aggressive course, civil strife and possible bloodshed looms. That would bring extra-political forces into play, who may, even reluctantly, have to reverse outgoing COAS General Bajwa’s pledge that the military intends to retreat from interfering in politics. If, as is familiar from the past, the perception grows that the impasse between the two sides of the political divide is an impassable obstacle, the establishment may feel compelled to intervene in some form or the other. If that unfortunately transpires, the damage to democracy and civilian rule can and will be placed squarely at the door of the right wing, populist, proto-fascist PTI and its leader Imran Khan.

 

 

 

 

 

rashed.rahman1@gmail.com

rashed-rahman.blogspot.com

Commemorative Conference for Hasan Nasir at RPC

 Progressive Writers Association (PWA) is holding a Commemorative Conference to pay respect to Communist revolutionary Hasan Nasir on the anniversary of his martyrdom.

Place and time: Research and Publication Centre (RPC), 2nd floor, 65 Main Boulevard Gulberg, Lahore (next to Standard Chartered Bank, above Indesign showroom) at 3:30 pm, Saturday, November 12, 2022.

Rashed Rahman

Editor, Pakistan Monthly Review (PMR) (link: pakistanmonthlyreview.com)

Director, Research and Publication Centre (RPC) (on Facebook)

Business Recorder Column November 8, 2022

Twists and turns

 

Rashed Rahman

 

The gun attack on Imran Khan’s container during the Long March in Wazirabad evoked condemnation across the political divide as well as by all right thinking people in the country. Pakistan has been witness to assassinations of political leaders from 1951 (Liaquat Ali Khan) to 2007 (Benazir Bhutto). The truth behind these assassinations is still not known. By their very nature, such ‘enterprises’ are shrouded in layers and layers of obfuscation. In the present circumstances, one can only thank God that Imran Khan was only wounded, along with other Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaaf (PTI) leaders on his container truck, although one worker paid with his life.

But this ‘consensus’ did not last long. For one, Imran Khan came out guns blazing against Prime Minister (PM) Shahbaz Sharif, Interior Minister Rana Sanaullah, and Major General Faisal Naseer, the last named currently reportedly seconded to the ISI. Not surprisingly, Imran Khan’s accusing the three without any investigation or proof immediately soured the short-lived across the board condemnation of the attack. Things rapidly reverted to conflict mode, with both sides of the political divide once again going hammer and tongs at each other, an unfortunate phenomenon introduced into our politics by none other than Imran Khan and the PTI.

Before things reverted to the familiar, and by now sickening, diatribes against each other by both sides, the government and the opposition, PM Shahbaz Sharif had suggested writing to the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) to set up a full court judicial commission to probe the attack on Imran Khan. The latter too endorsed the suggestion but with the proviso that the three accused named by him resign before a credible investigation can be mounted. That of course is unlikely to happen. Reports suggest CJP Umar Atta Bandial is deliberating on the matter with his brother Supreme Court (SC) judges. However, obstacles in the path of a full court commission include the workload of the apex court, which may not afford the diversion of the entire court’s time and attention to one, albeit important, matter. Other paths to approach the SC, as well as suo motu jurisdictions do exist, however. The idea behind the PM’s suggestion was meant to take the wind out of the PTI’s ferocious accusation sails by reference to the highest judicial forum, whose word, irrespective of past controversial decisions in our history, still commands respect and obedience, if not always concurrence.

The military’s ISPR has bristled at the naming of a senior military officer amongst the names being touted by Imran Khan. It has asked the government to take appropriate action against the accuser/s for defaming the institution by such tactics. So far at least, it is not clear how the government intends to proceed in this matter.

Meanwhile Imran Khan has announced soon after being discharged from hospital and retiring to his Zaman Park residence in Lahore that the PTI’s Long March will recommence from the exact same point where it was attacked in Wazirabad, led by Senior Vice President Shah Mahmood Qureshi. The march is expected to reach Rawalpindi in about two weeks, from where Imran Khan is scheduled to lead it into Islamabad, hopefully by then having recovered from his injuries. The Islamabad police was a tad too quick in declaring one day that the extra police forces it had deployed from Sindh, etc, were no longer needed (implying the long march may be delayed or even peter out), only to reverse itself the very next day in anticipation now of the march being resumed. Neither the Islamabad administration nor the judiciary have as yet allowed the PTI to hold a rally/sit-in anywhere in the capital, pending perhaps the outcome of the tussle in the SC regarding the May 25, 2022 PTI ‘offensive’ against Islamabad, which potentially could attract contempt of court.

One very interesting aspect of the episode is the video ‘confession’ of the attack perpetrator, which was leaked and led to the suspension of the entire police station in question. He appeared disconcertingly calm, without a crease on his brow as he confessed to a ‘lone wolf’ attack on religious grounds. The whole show lacked credibility and added further layers of mystery and unanswered questions surrounding the whole episode. Inevitably, such lack of clarity and even confusion added its own conspiracy theories to further thicken the thicket of unknowns around the author/s of the attack and his/their real motivation.

Well meaning commentators have been bleating for seeking middle ground for a peaceful solution of the dangerous collision course the country seems embarked upon, but all their well reasoned pleas have gone abegging so far. On the contrary, Imran Khan and the PTI’s unrelenting attacks on political opponents and the military establishment are indicative of the ‘system’, such as it is, imploding into an ugly, perhaps violent path whose end outcome is extremely unpredictable. None of the possible scenarios post-collision promise a good result. The political rules of engagement of a parliamentary democracy have been shredded by Imran Khan and the PTI. He seems bent upon what he has described as a ‘revolution’, either through the ballot box (early elections, which he seems confident he will win) or through bloodshed. However, if the protests mounted by the PTI after Imran Khan was attacked are any indicator, the PTI badly lacks the political organisation or even theoretical understanding of what a revolution is really about. It is a total change after the overthrow of the existing order, not a reinstatement by a military establishment that is by now embarrassed at having brought Imran Khan to power in the first place, and seemingly at a loss to counter his rhetorical and unprecedented assault on it, perhaps, it is being suggested, because Imran Khan enjoys some support within the institution.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

rashed.rahman1@gmail.com

rashed-rahman.blogspot.com