Two years after Bugti, divisions and disunity

By Malik Siraj Akbar

Balochistan is marking the second death anniversary of its former chief minister and governor, Nawab Mohammad Akbar Khan Bugti, today (Tuesday).

The actual causes of the death of the 79-year-old Baloch tribal elder are still shrouded in mystery but its relations between the Centre and the country’s largest province continue to degenerate. The late Nawab, who also headed the Jamhoori Watan Party (JWP), a purely political organisation that had representation in the provincial legislature, the National Assembly and the Senate of Pakistan, was forced by security forces to take shelter in the mountains of Balochistan. Until his last breath, Bugti insisted that neither he nor his tribe had waged war against the State but had been merely defending themselves against a powerful army.

What is known is that Bugti was killed in the midst of intense clashes between security forces and the Bugti tribesmen. Though the government announced on television that Bugti had been killed in an open battle, it continued to change its version of the events. Initially, it was said that his death took place in an open battle between the security forces and tribesmen but later on they said he died when a cave collapsed. What was unexplained, however, was how his watch, sunglasses and ring remained intact in the collapse. As if to make matters worse, the government refused to hand over his body to his family. It is perhaps not surprising then that the already angry people in the province were incensed and separatist thought became more popular among the younger generation of the Baloch.

Bugti, born on July 12, 1927 in Barkhan, dominated the political scene in Balochistan for nearly six decades. He was educated at Oxford University UK and succeeded his father Nawab Mehrab Khan Bugti as the chief of the Bugti tribe. He was a staunch sub-nationalist who challenged the rule of Generals Ayub Khan and Pervez Musharraf. He was a member of the Shahi Jirga that voted for the accession of British Balochistan to the newly formed Pakistan in 1947. He was a member of the AGG Council for many years as well.

During the 1950s, Bugti lost against Dr Khan Sahib, the elder brother of Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan in the Constituent Assembly polls. He later joined the Republican Party and worked with Prime Minister Feroz Khan Noon as his minister of state for defence from September 20, 1958 until Ayub’s coup in 1958. During the same period, he played a key role in the Pakistani government by securing the return of Gwadar from Oman on September 8, 1958.

Following the imposition of martial law in 1958, a military tribunal convicted Bugti of murdering his uncle, Haybat Khan, in 1960. He was disqualified from holding public office and was sent to Mach jail. His death sentence was, however, revoked in the coming days but despite this, he could not participate in the 1970 polls.

Bugti did not see eye-to-eye with Sardar Attaullah Mengal, the first-ever elected chief minister of Balochistan and a candidate of the National Awami Party (NAP). As the rift between Bugti and Mengal grew, Bugti went into self-exile to London until Mengal’s dismissal from office on February 14, 1973. At this point, Bugti joined Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s government as the governor of Balochistan on February 15, 1973. He remained in office until January 1, 1974 when he resigned because of differences with Bhutto on the PM’s Balochistan policies. But the nationalists led by Mengal and Khair Bux Marri never forgave him for siding with Bhutto even briefly.

In 1985, Bugti boycotted the Urdu language and only spoke Pakistan’s regional languages and English. In the meantime, his son Saleem Akbar Bugti and son-in-law Mir Humayun Marri participated in the non-party based elections of 1988 and won. After these elections, Bugti was inducted as the chief minister of Balochistan on February 4, 1989. He was a candidate of the Balochistan National Alliance (BNA) and remained CM until August 6, 1990 when the provincial assembly was dissolved. At this point, he formed his own political party, the Jamhoori Watan Party (JWP), and in 1993, was elected to the National Assembly.

In the last years of his life, Bugti stopped participating in active politics and retreated to his tribal abode in Dera Bugti. However, he resurfaced in January 2005 when Bugti tribesmen fired several hundred rockets on gas installations, following the alleged gang rape of a Pakistan Petroleum Limited doctor, Shazia Khalid, by a captain of the Defence Security Guards (DSG).

With tensions mounting in Dera Bugti, the government deployed troops in his native area. The turning point came on March 17, 2005, when a clash between troops and Bugti tribesmen resulted in the death of 77 civilians, mostly Hindus. Since then, Bugti tribesmen have engaged in a guerrilla war with the security forces. The mistrust between the government and the Nawab also hindered the progress of the Parliamentary Committee, headed by Mushahid Hussain Syed, that was attempting to find solutions to problems such as the National Finance Commission award and provincial autonomy.

Two years after his death, not much has changed in Balochistan. While Islamabad refuses to change its policy towards the province, the Baloch leadership remains embroiled in infighting. Bugti’s killing pushed the Baloch movement into a great leadership crisis which will be felt for a long time. He was a man who could unite the Baloch. Today, his own family remains divided on a number of issues. The Baloch nationalists are further divided on the issue of either participating in parliamentary politics or supporting armed groups such as the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA). The polarisation has reached such an extent that Islamabad can easily play a divide-and-rule game in the exploited province.

http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=20088\26\story_26-8-2008_pg7_67

Crossing the rubicon By Munizae Jahangir

(Courtesy: The Friday Times, Lahore)

The establishment has been forced to forget the sins of Asif Zardari and Nawaz Sharif, but other politicians have not been so lucky. One such politician is Khair Baksh Marri’s son, Gazain, who has been living in exile in Dubai for the last eight years. When I finally meet him in the lobby of a hotel, Gazain is a man in his late 40s, worn out and frail. He greets me nervously and gestures towards a corner table, where we sit. After the pleasantries, I ask him how life changed for him when President Musharraf took over in 1999.

“My wife and children have been shuttling back and forth from Pakistan. I have seen my children grow up as refugees,” he said. Gazain was Home Minister of Balochistan in Benazir Bhutto’s second government, but was forced to go underground after President Musharraf overthrew Nawaz Sharif’s government in 1999. There were several charges leveled against him, one of them held him responsible for the Nishtar Park blast in April of 2006. “But I was in Abu Dhabi at that time, and that too under arrest by the Abu Dhabi security forces!” Marri told me. “My only crime is that I am fighting for the rights of the Baloch people,” he said. Gazain Marri was arrested in March 2006 by Interpol’s state security when Pakistan asked for his extradition. “For 15 days they kept me in a dark room in solitary confinement. I was charged with killing 190 people, destroying two helicopters and firing 300 rockets.

“But now there is hope. Asif Zardari has also struggled for Baloch rights; he opposed Bhutto’s military action in Balochistan. After all he is a Baloch,” Marri told me. The Zardaris, although settled in Sindh for centuries, are originally a Baloch tribe. Recently Gazain Marri’s name was removed from Interpol’s wanted list and his passport was returned by the PPP government. According to Marri, Benazir Bhutto actively campaigned for his release with the UAE authorities. “When she was killed, I was as grieved as when my brother Balach was martyred.” Balach was killed mysteriously last year, on the border between Balochistan and southern Afghanistan. The Marri’s blamed the government of Pakistan; the government claimed that he was a wanted terrorist who fell victim to an internecine feud.

Balochistan has a long history of “martyrs” who died fighting for the Baloch cause. The trouble began as early as March 1948, when the then Khan of Kalat agreed to accede to Pakistan on the condition that Balochistan would enjoy autonomy from the federation. Under the British Raj, the princely state of Kalat enjoyed a unique position. The British were never able to completely conquer Balochistan and therefore ruled it through treatise with local sardars. They paid taxes to the Khan of Kalat, and the state had the right to have diplomatic relations with other countries. In fact Balochistan gained independence from the British six days before Pakistan, on August 8, 1947. Jinnah’s promise of autonomy was never honoured and four insurrections followed in Balochistan against Pakistan. Several local sardars who had taken up arms were executed by the Pakistani state on charges of treason. Some were called down from the mountains on false pretences for negotiations and killed in front of their own children.

The latest in the long list of Baloch martyrs is Nawab Akbar Bugti. The most famous scion of the Bugti tribe, Nawab Bugti was killed in a military operation in September 2006 and his body was hurriedly buried by the military. His family never saw the body and accused the government of shooting to death the ailing Nawab who was more than eighty years of age at the time of his death.

A few months before his death, I interviewed Nawab Bugti. At the time, he had taken refuge in the mountains close to Dera Bugti, after his home was bombarded by the military. From the mountains the Nawab had waged a guerilla war against the Pakistan army. There were sporadic uprisings in Dera Bugti and Kohlu against Pakistan and parts of Balochistan had become no go areas for journalists. But we managed to get access to the area by tagging along a HRCP fact finding mission. The journey came with its dangers; on the way to Sui and Dera Bugti we were shot at by unidentified gunmen. Despite the warning, we carried on. When I reached Sui I realized why journalists were being kept away from the area. The locals accused the army of building cantonments only with the intention of exploiting their natural resources, without giving them their share. I was astounded to see that Sui town which provides Pakistan all its gas, had no piped gas connection. In fact most of Balochistan is without gas, clean drinking water and electricity. “Hamare liyeh ‘sardari nizam’ theek hai, Pakistan neh hum ko ab tak piped gas nahin diyah, aur kya deh gah?” a young man had angrily said, when I asked him why he preferred the traditional tribal system over the Pakistani state. At Dera Bugti women showed me pictures of bombings by the military, in which at least 33 civilians, including women and children were killed.

We visited the Nawab’s famous fort where Bugti tribesmen stood eye ball to eye ball with security forces. His grandson, Tabish Bugti greeted us. Like most Baloch he was tall and well built, but he seemed like a troubled man. “How are you going to fight an organized army?” I had asked. I thought I would now hear another tirade of how gallant the Baloch had been. Surprisingly he sighed and said, “We can’t, I know we can’t. But they have left us no choice. They are bombarding us. Either we fight back or die.” After Nawab Bugti was killed, Tabish’s mother convinced him to leave Pakistan and made him promise never to return. She says she would rather never see her son, than to have him killed, in the manner her father, Nawab Bugti was.

The journey to meet Nawab Bugti was another dangerous adventure. Tabish had bundled us into a camouflaged jeep and taken us at high speed over rugged mountains, to meet the Nawab. After driving for over half an hour, we reached a small mud hut, surrounded by heavily armed tribesmen. In that shack was a frail, 80 year old Nawab Bugti, who walked with the help of a zimmer frame. It had made me laugh at the time to think that he was the most wanted man by the Pakistan army, and that thousands of troops were deployed to hunt him down. Nawab Bugti had stood up to greet us. Within minutes of our conversation, it was clear that his spirit had not been broken. “They have imposed this war on us. The General himself visited Kohlu and they dropped some grenades there. He considered this a personal affront and stated that he would take revenge. So now, he is taking revenge. There was an attack on the General in Islamabad twice, but he did not attack or drop bombs on Islamabad. But here, they are giving collective punishment to the Baloch people. That is the fundamental difference between the rest of Pakistan and us. They are taking revenge from all Baloch and particularly Marri and Bugti,” said Nawab Bugti. He was surrounded by his grandsons who sat silently listening to him. Among them was Brahamdagh Bugti who kept a vigilant eye with his fellow fighters. Tall and handsome, he resembled Nawab Bugti. But unlike the Nawab, Brahamdagh had a quiet charisma.

Has the government approached you for negotiations, I asked the Nawab. “No, they have not. They are negotiating through the barrels of their guns. They have given instructions that Nawabzada Balach Marri and I should be wiped out,” he said. It was to be his last interview. A few months later, Nawab Bugti’s words proved prophetic; he was killed in September of 2006. Balochistan was on fire as gangs of youth took to the streets burning government property. I flew down to Quetta to report on the violence. One angry fourteen year old, who was protesting against Bugti’s killing asked me, “You are Punjabi. You tell me, if we killed your leader, what would you do to us?”

Nawab Bugti was once considered a “traitor” by Baloch hardliners, for voting for the creation of Pakistan in 1947 and then going on to become Governor and Chief Minister of the province during the second Baloch insurgency in the 1970s on Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s watch. But in his death, Nawab Bugti cleansed himself and became another hero for Baloch nationalists. After his death, the insurgency was led by Balach Marri, until he was killed in November last year. Now Nawab Bugti’s grandson, Brahamdagh Bugti is leading the insurgency.

Back in Dubai I ask Gazain, “What will it take to stop this insurgency and violence?” Gazain tells me that the Baloch want “withdrawal of troops from Balochistan, recovery of all those picked up by the intelligence agencies. Dismissal of all cases filed against the Baloch and breathing space for the leadership to devise a future strategy”. While this older generation of Baloch are willing to give peace a chance, younger people want nothing short of secession and independence, a la Bangladesh. Gazain Marri’s nephew, Noordin Mengal is one such. He is the grandson of both Nawab Khair Buksh Marri and Sardar Ataullah Mengal. Like many Baloch youngsters, Noordin is wary of politicians, who he believes have failed the Baloch. Strikingly handsome, Noordin looks European and one would never guess from his bitter talk that he is only 21. Unlike most men his age, Noordin has no time for fun and spends most of his time working for what he calls “the Baloch cause”. He has lived in London for many years and is a British citizen. When the APDM meeting was held in London last year, Noordin represented the BNP(M), because the leaders of the party in Pakistan were not allowed to travel abroad by the Musharraf government. Noordin’s first exposure to Pakistani politics was disappointing. He complained of how the issue of Balochistan had been overshadowed at the APDM meeting, by the bickering between the PPP and PML(N). But now with a sympathetic government in power, Noordin says for the Baloch, life under democracy is no different. Balochistan has been put on the backburner again. Perhaps the Baloch have more breathing room than before, but for young Noordin, it is too little too late. In Balochistan many young Baloch who were aligned to nationalist parties have delinked themselves and come together under the leadership of the Baloch Student’s Organization. After Nawab Bugti’s killing a BSO leader told me in Quetta that they once believed in a political solution for Balochistan. But after the way Nawab Bugti was killed, they feel that Pakistan has pushed them into a corner and they have no choice but to resort to the gun.

The younger generation of Baloch have crossed the rubicon and given up on a political solution. But the state should be wiser, given that it is on the brink of failure. Pakistan’s leaders, political and military, have a choice. They can either adopt the Nelson Mandela formula of reconciliation, and that is reconciliation for all, not a select few, or they can continue to treat Balochistan like a colony. If the Pakistani state takes the latter course, it is only a matter of time before Balochistan goes the way of Bangladesh.

Munizae Jahangir is NDTV Correspondent in Pakistan. She is also the correspondent at Geo (English)TV

The fall of Musharraf —Rasul Bakhsh Rais

President Pervez Musharraf has departed, having resigned to escape the humiliation of impeachment. Yet another painful chapter of Pakistan’s political history has been closed, ending the political uncertainty the country has been facing for the past five months.

Why painful? It may be considered a polite expression for an era when the General-President overthrew an elected government to save his position as the Chief of Army Staff. At least in previous military interventions there was a political crisis and some kind of government breakdown. That was not the case on October 12, 1999.

The ruling party had a comfortable two-thirds majority in the National Assembly and all political parties with remarkable consensus had passed the 13th Amendment to the Constitution. Pakistan was on the road to democratic recovery but with the usual traits of autocracy that are embedded in the country’s political culture.

Musharraf came to power and ruled the country only as COAS, like his three predecessors. His uniform was his first line of defence and the army an instrument of self-empowerment and control. The day he doffed his uniform, he was no longer the master of his or the country’s fate.

The loss of the army’s institutional power was effectively the beginning of the end. Musharraf kept the uniform as long as he could, given the simmering resentment inside the army and outside, there was no option but to let go of that office.

Like Ayub Khan and Zia-ul Haq, Musharraf did three things to ensure his political survival: strengthened the power of the presidency through amendments (Ayub wrote a new presidential constitution); attempted to gain popular legitimacy through a rigged referendum; and created a political party — the PMLQ. As we can see from the unfolding of political events since his stepping down as COAS, and also in light of what happened to former military rulers, the manufactured political arrangements did not lost very long.

With the fall of Musharraf, Pakistan will be reverting back to a parliamentary form of government for the third time. It is remarkable that Pakistan’s democratic forces have a national consensus on three structural aspects of the political system: sovereignty of parliament, federalism and representative democracy. All these aspects have suffered greatly and our growth as a democratic polity has been stunted during the three long spells of military rule.

Disruption of democratic politics prevented the formation of a natural balance among institutions and the firming up of constitutional politics. The rise of ethnic conflict, sectarianism, militancy and extremism are some of the troubling legacies of military rule in Pakistan.

It bears repeating at this point what I have mentioned quite often in these pages: military rulers have left Pakistan in worse shape than when they took over.

So what really pulled Musharraf down from his throne? Perhaps his own follies are responsible for his ignoble exit, as he begged foreign powers to help him get an honourable way out.

One constant theme in human history is that arrogant rulers always underestimate their opponents and have unwavering belief in their power to destroy anyone who crosses them or stands in their way. History is replete with many examples how the weak and the ordinary finally threw the tyrants out, with some meeting more humiliating ends than others. Our own history contains many lessons; but who really cares when everything is bent to the will of the ruler, including the Constitution, the courts and all state institutions.

The threat of brute force, political manipulation, use of for-sale political opportunists, and manufactured consent have proven temporary and weak instruments of power. In our culture, we often blame the victim — when military rulers capture the state, we unfairly find faults with the Pakistani society.

All military regimes have been a common enterprise between an ambitious COAS and political opportunists willing play along to enjoy privileges of power.

It is true that civil society, democratic forces and the media in the past have been weak, and the opportunist syndicate faced little and fragmented opposition. Only the political and civil society groups of the smaller provinces put up consistent and tough resistance to the military regime. They faced a double peril: loss of constitutional rights and provincial autonomy.

There will be debate in Pakistan on who really defeated Musharraf and his regime. The two major political parties of course will stake a bigger claim than others for the mandate they received in the elections and the political oppression their leaders and workers faced during the Musharraf years.

The real credit for causing Musharraf’s fall goes to civil society and the media, both new actors on Pakistan’s social and political scene. In all new democracies, where the transition from military to civilian rule has taken place, these two actors have proved catalysts of political change, and the agenda-setters and messengers of political forces.

The birth of issue-based civil society activism goes back to the rule of another military dictator, Zia-ul Haq when urban, middle-class women organised protests and changed the women’s movement forever.

This time around, removal of the Chief Justice of Pakistan and his detention along with his family members ignited the protests and demands for his restoration. Unlike the past, the lawyers and civil society groups had no provincial or urban-rural boundaries. It was a truly national movement, driven by the demand for an independent judiciary.

The dream of democracy and constitutional rule is as old as the Pakistan Movement. What Ayub Khan and his followers, right down to Musharraf, did was to rob the nation of its original ideals. Taking the dreams of nations and peoples and substituting them with personal interests is perhaps a greater offence than even their legal and constitutional crimes.

Pakistanis have consistently attempted to take their ideals and their country back by launching democratic movements; a fact frequently ignored by students of politics and history.

The current movement, the fourth in our history, has finally succeeded with two remarkable positive gains: power has been passed on directly to parliament and elected political parties; and this transfer has taken place through the agency of peaceful protest, legal and constitutional battles, and under the eye of an open and free media. With success and confidence, these are the factors that will refine and develop democracy in Pakistan.

(Dr Rasul Baksh Rais is author of Recovering the Frontier State: War, Ethnicity and State in Afghanistan (Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books 2008) and a professor of Political Science at the Lahore University of Management Sciences. He can be reached at rasul@lums.edu.pk)

Wait a little, please

I know many of you have visited my blog to read the latest Exclusive Interview I conducted with Nawabzada Bramdagh Bugti. Actually, I was taking a little time to come up with the whole text of the interview on my own blog. I will try to bring you that interview as soon as possible. Wait a little please. Hey guys, its just a matter of a few days.

The first and comparatively the smaller part of the interview was printed in my newspaper, Daily Times. [I am reproducing it here for you]. Even there was a little misunderstanding between my readers and the Daily Times website. They found the piece too short. Actually, Daily Times carried two related pieces. One was a the jest of the interview in shape of a news story while the second one was the real interview in Question and Answer formate. Many of my friends who visited the site soon sent me an SMS that the Daily Times story was too short. The truth is even many of you missed the second part which was published in Daily Times.

However, for the time being I am uploading the interview which appeared in Daily Times today and will soon come up with the longer text. Here is the interview:

We are fighting for Balochistan’s liberation, says Bramdagh Bugti

By Malik Siraj Akbar

When 79-year old Baloch nationalist leader Nawab Muhammad Akbar Khan Bugti was killed in 2006, many in Islamabad thought it was the end of the Baloch armed resistance. Soon, Islamabad hunted another charismatic Baloch fighter Nawabzada Balach Marri. But the Baloch resistance seems to have transformed into a more complicated state as the leadership shifts to the younger lot.

Twenty-seven-year-old Nawabzada Bramdagh Bugti, a grandson of late Akbar Bugti, is a leading Baloch guerilla leader. Waging a battle against Islamabad for the “liberation of Balochistan” from the rocky hills of the province, a steadfast Bugti spoke to Daily Times in an exclusive interview.

DAILY TIMES: Why have you spurned Islamabad’s offer for negotiations and reconciliation?

NAWAB BRAMDAGH BUGTI: Firstly, we believe the so-called democratic government is absolutely powerless. It is the military that is directly involved in Balochistan. The new government is not powerful enough to challenge the army. While the government is extending a hand of reconciliation, a contingent of the Pakistan army consisting of 200,000 men has unleashed a new phase of military operation in Balochistan. The deployment of forces has been enhanced recently. Talks are impossible amid military operation. We will not talk on gunpoint.

Secondly, the Baloch are neither begging for favours from the federation of Pakistan nor willing to share anything with Islamabad. Our demand is not provincial autonomy as believed by some people. We are fighting for complete independence of the Baloch land. The Pakistan army is determined to usurp our land, coast and natural resources. We are unwilling to give even an inch of our motherland to Pakistan. However, if the army completely withdraws from Balochistan then we will consider participating in negotiations with Islamabad.

DT: But what are you
fighting for?

NBB: Our struggle is for the liberation of the Baloch land. In Pakistan, we have been treated as slaves for the last 60 years. Though Balochistan’s accession with Pakistan was forceful, our elders still tried to co-exist peacefully with Pakistan. Our ancestors participated in parliamentary politics and hoped to get their rights through a peaceful democratic struggle. But that did not work out. Military operations were inflicted on us five times. Our resources were brutally exploited. Pakistan is solely dominated by the Punjab province.

DT: Recently you were accused of taking shelter in Afghanistan and being financed from India. Is that true?

NBB: I am very much present in Balochistan. However, I keep changing my location due to security reasons. If I get a chance to escape to another country – which would help me highlight the Baloch issue internationally – then I see nothing wrong with it. After all, we are an oppressed nation. If Islamabad can use American weapons to crush the Baloch people, then why should we be blamed if we seek international support? As an oppressed nation, we will wholeheartedly welcome all external support, from India and the rest of the world.

DT: If you believe in an armed movement, why did you recently form the Baloch Republican Party (BRP)?

NBB: You see we are not terrorists who have delightedly picked up guns. We are purely political people, fighting for a political cause. While some of us are fighting in the mountains, our political party would, at the same time, strive to create awareness among our people for their political rights.

DT: Is your movement supported by all the Balochs or only the members of your own Bugti tribe?

NBB: The government of Pakistan has always discredited our movement by saying that the armed movement is confined to only one district of Balochistan. This is disinformation. Not only is the common Baloch our well-wisher but he is also practically participating in the armed movement.

DT: Do you think the current circumstances are favourable for an independent Balochistan?

NBB: We cannot wait for favourable circumstances as much as we cannot live as slaves inside Pakistan.

DT: What will happen to your movement if you are killed?

NBB: I am 100 percent confident that our resistance movement would continue even if I murdered. Movements of national liberation do not hinge on individuals.

DT: You were recently quoted as saying that the integrity of Balochistan was more important for you than that of Pakistan. What did you actually mean?

NBB: Any Baloch who says that the integrity of Pakistan is important to him would be speaking unrealistically simply to please the government of Pakistan. We have lived in Balochistan for thousands of years. I am a Baloch. I am concerned about the future of my people. I shall not be sad but exuberant if Pakistan disintegrates.

DT: Do you support the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA)?

NBB: Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) is not the only armed group operating in Balochistan. There are others such as the Balochistan Liberation Front (BLF) and Baloch Republican Army (BRA). I fully support the existing armed groups and those which are in the process of joining our ranks.

DT: Do you have the moral support of the international community?

NBB: I only wish to inform the international community that the weapons given to Pakistan to fight Islamic terrorists and Taliban are now being used against the Baloch people and somebody should take notice of it. I would like to invite the international media and human rights organisations to witness the gross violation of the human rights by the army.

We will miss you Nazia Hassan!

Nazia Hassan was my childhood crush. Today, it was her 9th death anniversary. By the time I became a fan of hers, I came to know that she was suffering from cancer. The day I got the news of her tragic demise, I cried a lot. It was the first time in my life I had cried so much, of course in a closed room. I remember how I had made a large file comprising of newspaper/ magazines clippings, reports and interviews of Nazia.
We will miss you Nazia

Remembering Mir Ghous Bakhsh Bizenjo

By Malik Siraj Akbar

The 20th death anniversary of former Balochistan governor and leading Baloch nationalist leader Mir Ghous Bakhsh Bizenjo is being observed across the province today (Monday).

Widely remembered as ‘Baba-e-Balochistan’ or the father of Balochistan, late Bizenjo was involved in relentless political struggle for the rights of the oppressed people. He was the cardholder of the Communist Party of India since his student days in Aligarh. He retained his membership till his death in 1988. He was a member of the politburo of the party.

For his strong connections with the Communist Party of India, Bizenjo, the then Balochistan governor, refused, for political reasons, to accompany President Zulfiqar Bhutto to India to broker the Simla Accord. However, he recommended that NWFP governor late Arbab Sikandar Khan Khalil be included in the delegation representing the defunct National Awami Party in the talks.

Bizenjo was an activist seeking ouster of the British colonial rule from India for which he was off and on arrested too.

On his return from Aligarh, he was appointed the leader of the house in the House of Common of Kalat State.

Bizenjo joined the Kalat National Party, a front organisation that fought for the independence of Balochistan from Britain. He was arrested and expelled from Kalat on the Kalat prime minister’s orders. He spent his days of exile in Karachi where he was active in nationalist politics of the Baloch people.

He also assisted local intellectuals in bringing out weekly and monthly newspapers and magazines working without any remuneration. He wrote reports and articles both in Balochi and Urdu.

Popular: He was equally popular among the people in the Iranian province of Balochistan and he always fought for their democratic rights in Iran.

Bizenjo helped normalise relations between the late Shah of Iran and the Baloch sardars who had fought against the Iranian forces for decades. He was invited to Tehran by late Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, the then president of Pakistan, for consultations on Pakistan-Iran relations.

To the surprise of many, Bizenjo was received at the Meharabad Airport by the Shah of Iran himself. “It was a shock to the Pakistani establishment and to Zulfiqar Bhutto who was leading the delegation to Tehran seeking economic assistance from the Shah following the dismemberment of Pakistan in 1971,” Siddique Baluch, the then personal secretary of late Bizenjo, told Daily Times.

Some pro-establishment politicians and officials were offended with the reception Bizenjo got in Tehran and they launched a vilification campaign against him dubbing him as SAWAK agent. It is on record that it was Bizenjo who launched a counter-attack on the Shah of Iran that Iran would invade Balochistan and occupy it if security of Pakistan was threatened. His statement was carried by hundreds of newspapers worldwide.

Finally, Bizenjo played a very important role in the constitution making process. He concluded constitutional accords between the NAP and Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) for framing a progressive constitution in which maximum provincial autonomy was ensured.

However, senior elements within the NAP, led by late Khan Abdul Wali Khan, opposed the approach to have an alliance with the PPP and Bhutto thus the constitutional accords were shelved compelling Bhutto to rely heavily on the clergy and rightwing political parties to frame the “Islamic Constitution” of Pakistan in 1973.

Bizenjo, as a protest, voted for the 1973 Constitution while the three remaining NAP representatives in the Constituent Assembly did not. Therefore, it is wrong to claim that the 1973 constitution was drafted on the basis of consensus. Balochistan had virtually vetoed it by not casting votes in its favour. When the 1973 Constitution was promulgated on August 14, 1974, the PPP government arrested all the top Baloch leaders. They were released six months after a martial law was imposed by General Ziaul Haq, overthrowing Bhutto’s government.

Peace Delegation

I am in Islamabad these days enjoying the marvelous rainy days here. ActionAid, an international NGO, is sponsoring the delegation of Balochistani politicians and professionals to interact with the civil society to highlight the Balochistan crisis.

The delegation includes Habib Jalib, secretary general of the Balochistan National Party (BNP), Kachkol Ali Baloch, former leader of the opposition and a key leader of the National Party (NHP), Mr. Malik Abdul Wali Kakar, former acting president of the BNP, Mr. Abdul Khaliq Hazara, centeral secretary general of Hazara Democratic Party. Besides, Wahid Rahim, the central chairman of the Baloch Students’ Organization (BSO-Pajjar), Yar Jan Badani, editor-in-chief of Balochistan Today, are with us as a part of the delegation.

We have had a few excellent interactions with the civil society representatives. The best, I found out, was at the Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI). The audience out there was very competent and curious too. It also included representatives from the British High Commission.

During the interaction, the audience was apprised about the prevailing situation in Balochistan where I, once again, argued, that the friends of democracy in Balochistan were quickly being replaced by the armed groups.

I am not so optimistic that Balochistan would soon be getting independence. However, I think if the government fails to maintain its writ in the province, a civil war would soon follow.

Dear [Ahmed] Faraz,

Way back in 1964, we met in Peshawar in the office of Yousuf Lodhi (the great political cartoonist Vaiell). That night we talked about politics, literature and made small jokes about contemporary writers. That was the start of our friendship; you and my husband Yousuf Kamran became even more friendly as both of you were very glamorous. I know the way girls used to write letters, as the phone was not a common communicating system back then. Read More

http://dawn.com/weekly/books/books1.htm

Defending the Media - By Najam Sethi

Before you start reading the below given editorial of The Friday Times, I think the best thing for the Pakistani media to express solidarity with Daily Aaj Kal would be to reproduce the controversial cartoon in all the Pakistani newspapers on the Danish model. We have to take such bold initiatives if we are determined to fight religious fanaticism.

Defending the Media
By Najam Sethi

First it was The Friday Times. Then it was Daily Times. Now it is Daily Aajkal. All three papers are at the receiving end of credible threats from radical religious extremists to change their editorial policies which espouse liberal, democratic, progressive and humanist values. The Taliban have forcibly stopped the sale of Daily Aajkal in FATA and hurled menacing warnings at the paper in Peshawar. The latest threats and incitement to violence come from the mullahs of the Lal Masjid and their network in Islamabad and Punjab.

The pretext is a cartoon in Aajkal of Umme Hassaan, the fiery wife of Maulana Abdul Aziz of the Lal Masjid. It shows her teaching the virtues of jihad and kidnapping to her students, a reference to her statements on the need to wage violent jihad and the kidnapping of five Chinese carried out by her Lal Masjid activists last year. Mrs Hassaan claims the cartoon is blasphemous like the Danish cartoons. But by so insisting, she is putting herself on the same pedestal as the Prophet of Islam (pbuh), which is truly blasphemous. Actually, she cannot stand the thought of being the object of satirical comment even though her brand of radical politics is much more objectionable than that of most double-dealing politicians who are daily lampooned by the media. The only difference is that while politicians take cartoons in their stride, as they should according to the rules of the democratic game, the self-righteous radical clerics are prone to use violent means to stifle dissent or adverse comment. This is what they did in Algeria and in Egypt where hundreds of journalists were assassinated in the 1990s because they dared to oppose their brand of extremist politics.

In the world of today where information is delivered on the second into every house via cable or satellite, everyone needs to be on the right side of the media. Two issues constantly arise – the extent of media freedom and its relationship with media responsibility. There are no hard and fast rules except one: media freedom ends only where someone else’s freedom is violated. This media “freedom” is defined by well known laws like the law of defamation and the law of contempt, and an independent judiciary is the final arbiter of who is right and who is wrong. But violence cannot be allowed to stifle debate or dissent.

In recent times, two major repressions stand out in particular. Nawaz Sharif lashed out at the Jang Group and The Friday Times in 1999. And General Pervez Musharraf pulled the plug on a number of TV channels in 2007, wounding the Geo/Jang group the most. But both strategies were doomed to fail as Mr Sharif and General Musharraf can testify.

Significantly, non-state actors armed with weapons and/or passionate ideologues are increasingly “using” the Pakistani media or “exploiting” it for the propagation of their ideas and interests. But serious problems arise when any section of the media doesn’t agree with their policies or seeks to expose their narrow interests or anti-state positions. In democratic societies, the law takes its course for the resolution of such disputes or differences of opinion. But in non-democratic societal cultures, like that of Pakistan, such non-state actors are often inclined to use threat of violence or actual violence to silence media critics or affect editorial policy changes to suit their goals.

The classic example that used to be given in Pakistan about non-state actors using violent means and direct threats to bring the media in line was that of the MQM in Karachi. The MQM is a cadre based ethnic party that has a criminal and fascist record even though it is avowedly secular. But the media has managed to survive despite its violent threats and practices. However, the latest menace to the media emanates from radical extremist fundamentalist religious belief that goes under the name of “political Islamism”. It is self-righteous, self-obsessed and intolerant. Various armed groups professing jihad and Talibanism are now trying to capture the imagination of the free media and mould it according to their view and version of world events. They are doing this largely by invoking fear and retribution. How should the media react to this latest threat to its integrity?

The primary responsibility of protecting the media lies with the armed state. But where the state abdicates such responsibility, either because it has a dubious relationship with such non-state religious groups or because it cannot defend and enforce its writ against them because of internal weaknesses, both of which are relevant in the case of the Pakistani state, the media has no choice but to band together and close ranks despite internal strains and stresses of personalities, egos and commercial interests. Indeed, when some of us are attacked thus, it is time not only to boycott the propagandistic activities of such non-state actors but to openly criticize them at every opportunity. When journalists can routinely threaten to boycott politicians and proceedings in parliament, and agitate against government for not accepting their demands, why can’t they unite and react similarly when these religious vigilantes threaten any of us?

Comments on this blog

Recently, I received a few comments which were very offensive of some ethnic groups. Therefore, I had to completely delete them.
I would request you all to kindly comment on the blog with some decency.
In the wake of these posts, I have now decided to moderate all comments that are posted on my blog before posting them on the blog.