Posts Tagged ‘Ghairat Brigade’

Drones and Sovereignty

Friday, April 29th, 2011

The News (Jang Group)The News on Thursday includes a critical attack on political leadership by Vice-chairman Sindh National Front Ameer Bhutto. At issue for the former MPA is the response of politicians to ongoing drone attacks, which Ameer terms “nothing short of an open declaration of war against Pakistan”. But a closer look at the facts reveals something very different.

Under international law, a declaration of war is a formal announcement by one nation of intent to go to war against another nation, usually through a speech or proclamation document. Obviously the US has not ‘declared war against Pakistan’.

What Ameer Bhutto is referring to is more accurately described as a “Casus Belli” or an act by one nation justifying retaliation by the other. This would be the case for acts of aggression or invasion for which the attacked or invaded country would be considered justified in fighting back. Ameer would let his readers believe that Pakistan is being invaded or attacked by a foreign force via the drone strikes. But is this the case?

A report by international media group McClatchy last week revealed that Pakistan is allowing drone attacks to be launched from an airbase in Baluchistan.

Despite the tensions, however, the Pakistani military still is allowing the CIA to fly its remotely piloted Predator drones out of Shamsi Air Base, about 200 miles southwest of the Baluchistan capital of Quetta, U.S. officials said.

Asked about a Pakistani newspaper report that the Pakistani army had halted the CIA’s use of Shamsi, a U.S. counter-terrorism official replied, “That would certainly be news to us.”

Another reason to doubt Ameer Bhutto’s claim is described in a recent article in TIME:

The reasons for Pakistan’s sudden decision to end seven years of either tolerating or silently approving of the drones program remain unclear, raising questions about the nature of its current vehement complaint.

In fact, the ambiguity of the situation arises from the ranks of the Pakistani military — out of the public arena. For example, on March 23rd, Gen. Kayani played host to a clutch of senior retired generals and, amid the tea and collegial bonhomie, the conversation casually turned to Kayani’s statement a week earlier. Some of the visitors wondered why he had adopted such a sharp tone, describing the March 17 attack as an “unjustified and intolerable” violation of human rights. “These drones do have some use,” one of the retired generals said, according to someone present. “Yes, they do have a use,” Gen. Kayani was heard to reply.

Ever since the advent of the CIA program, the Pakistani security establishment has been content to at least tolerate the covert drones, and even come to discreetly approve of it. The very first drone strike in 2004 killed Nek Muhammad, a forerunner to the Pakistani Taliban. In 2006, when an airstrike killed some 80 people in Bajaur, provoking domestic outrage and the first major retaliatory suicide bombing, Pakistan maintained that its forces were responsible for the incident — not the U.S. And, over at least the past year, Pakistani generals have come to be impressed by the accuracy of the drones and their ability to limit militant movements.

Ameer Bhutto’s claim is also undermined by the briefing held earlier this year by Gen. Ghayur Mehmood, “Myths and rumours about US predator strikes” which was reported in Dawn:

General Officer Commanding 7-Division Maj-Gen Ghayur Mehmood said in a briefing here: “Myths and rumours about US predator strikes and the casualty figures are many, but it’s a reality that many of those being killed in these strikes are hardcore elements, a sizeable number of them foreigners.

In fact, one year ago Pakistan Army conducted an effective test that proved the capability to target drones with Radar Directed Orlikon Anti-Aircraft weapon as part of the Excersize Azm-e-Nau III.

Considering the facts of the case, neither does it make sense to claim that drone strikes are an act of war, nor does it make sense to declare that they are a violation of sovereignty. This does not defend the practice of drone strikes nor does it mean that the practice should continue. But if Pakistan military is cooperating and consenting to the drone attacks, then it cannot, by definition, violate sovereignty.

And here we must ask the obvious question: If Pakistan military is complicit in the drone strikes, why does Ameer Bhutto take out his venom on the civilian politicians? According to Ameer’s article,

The incumbent lot has learnt the lesson from the fate their predecessors suffered that if you want to save your necks and your hold on to power, prostrate yourselves before the foreign masters and deny them nothing. Compromise national sovereignty. Compromise your principles, integrity and commitments to the people. Compromise everything, but keep the gora sahibs happy. Thus, they have handed the country over to them on a silver platter. In return, the foreign masters prop them up in power and give them free reign to run the country into the ground with their corruption and incompetence.

According to data collected by New America Foundation drones database, drone strikes began in 2004. During this time there was a government led by Gen. Pervez Musharraf. The military has the ability to shoot down drones, but chooses not to. The military also allows drones to be flown from its airbases inside the borders – these are not cross-border attacks. Also the generals have said publicly that the drone attacks are useful. But the full amount of Ameer Bhutto’s venom is reserved for politicians only.

Actually, Ameer Bhutto claims that, “Khyber-Pakhtoonkhwa is held under some semblance of control only because of the heavy military presence there” as if military and not civilian politicians are the only institution able to protect the people. If this is true, then it logically follows that Ameer Bhutto should also support the military’s policy supporting drone strikes. Instead he simply uses public frustration with drone strikes as a pretext to launch into a political attack on civilian politicians.

In concluding his column, Ameer Bhutto complains that “If one talks about the compromising of national sovereignty, one is labelled as being ‘ultra-patriotic’”. This is simply not true. Talking about drone strikes being a violation of sovereignty when they are supported by our own military does not make one ‘ultra-patriotic’, it simply makes one misleading. Before accusing other people of “dishonest practices, lies, and deception”, Ameer Bhutto would be wise to more carefully consider his own claims first.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Jang, The News | 2 Comments »

Fauzia Yazdani: Nikki nikki dholki

Sunday, March 27th, 2011

I received a lovely joke this morning, which is that a Mirasi’s father was dying and the whole family was sitting around him in his final moments, which got prolonged. Made desperate by this somber wait-n-see, one of them said: “Jad tak aba nahin marda niki niki dholki na waja leye?” (‘While we await father’s death shouldn’t we play some music?’)

It struck me as an apt explanation for everything that’s going on around us. For example, see it against the media and political circus being carried out by the drama queens a.k.a. anchors and politicians, be it on the issue of Raymond Davis, Moonis Ellahi, Shah Mehmood’s conscience, the PPP in Punjab or the “revolution” in the Middle East. I like most telly tubbies hear and read about all this and more every hour of every day, and think to myself: aren’t they all playing niki niki dholki?

A large brigade of anchors and their guests are playing with people’s emotions, making ooohs and aaahs about issues of a national, regional and sometimes even global importance that require careful, thoughtful analysis and not this panting at all. Yet national “ghairat” rules the roost and no informed debate, especially in the Urdu press, is being generated for the larger public to understand these issues objectively. If one gets into the reasons for the same it will range from the Zionist to the Indian to the American agenda, and conspiracy theories to take over our nuclear assets and strip us of our religion, as if both these items are on sale on a roadside cart.

So why do they do it?

The answer, I think, is quite simple. The show must go on (literally, in the case of TV shows angling for ratings and advertisement revenue), and so each night, with limited knowledge of the topics at hand, all of us resort to niki niki dholki. No political party in its right mind can even think of taking over the government in the midst of external and internal crises; the country cannot bear, socially, economically or politically, a mid-term election; yet every night a 180 degree political turn is sought and predicted. Salvaging the situation, finding indigenous and sustainable solutions – forget it! That’s not on the menu for any self-respecting (ghairatmand?) TV channel.

This is also how they portray world events. Pakistan, according to our massively right-wing media, is a citadel of Islam with the most reverend and sensitive Muslims as its inhabitants. Therefore (and that’s all you need to say ‘therefore’) it’s more than likely that a youth revolution akin to that in the Middle East will touch our frontiers one of these days and to baptize. (Forget the fact that the Arabs are fighting societal and political stagnation of the kind we have never been unfortunate enough to experience.)

Fortunately, our economy cannot sustain a “revolution” and socio-politically we remain too divided to give it a due impetus.

We need a just, unbiased and pluralistic public opinion facilitator, and not a 24/7 high-voltage oven that keeps thrusting half-baked cookies at its viewers. The media has to generate debate and accept that politics is about processes and not deadlines. It has to accept that accountability is not only for politicians and the bureaucracy but for the army and judiciary as well. It has to say that the right to be a Pakistani is irrespective of caste, creed, religion and other prejudicial categories. It has to go through self-assessment and introspection in order to achieve these things. Until then, all it will do is continue to play nikki nikki dholki.

This piece was originally published in The Friday Times of 25 March. Fauzia Yazdani is an independent policy researcher and analyst

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments »

Return of the Celebrity Mufti Show

Saturday, January 22nd, 2011

According to Express Tribune, ‘Four million flood victims still homeless’. The security situation in Karachi continues to be fragile. Terrorists continue to target with suicide bombers. Of all of the many social ills that cry out desperately for attention, which is the most pressing for Kamran Shahid to feature on his news programme? Veena Malik.

Actress Veena Malik crying after being abused on Front Line.

Actress Veena Malik crying after being abused on Front Line.

If you have not already heard about Friday night’s episode of Front Line with Kamran Shahid, you have probably been hiding under a rock. On what is allegedly a hard hitting news talk show, the topic of discussion was an actress’s appearance on the reality show Bigg Boss. What actually took place was an attempted public humiliation of a woman thrown to the wolves of celebrity muftis. It was painful to watch as a the actress suffered baseless accusations against her character and her reputation, all with complete lack of evidence on the part of her accuser.

While the worst behaved on the program by all counts was Mufti Abdul Qawi in his treatment of Veena, special consideration should be given to Kamran Shahid. After all, the host cannot pretend that he could not expect this outcome as only one month ago he invited Mufti Abdul Qawi to appear to discuss the same topic in what turned into another media circus.

Just as he has in the past, Abdul Qawi accused the actress of embarrassing Pakistan and Islam in the eyes of the world with her behaviour on the set of Bigg Boss. But on demand to explain specifically what actions she had done to bring shame to her country or her religion, the Celebrity Mufti was left at a loss.

That is not to say that Pakistan and Islam did not receive a black eye. In fact, what was probably expected to be a bit of juicy entertainment by exploiting the religious sentimentalities of the masses behind the veil of Urdu has become an international scandal. And it is not Veena Malik who is the villain but Kamran Shahid and Abdul Qawi.

Saturday morning, Americans in Los Angeles the location of the Hollywood movie industry picked up their newspaper The Los Angeles Times to see the smiling face of Veena Malik and read an article about her appearance on Front Line and the abuse heaped upon her while the host sat quietly watching. The story was also published by The Associated Press which syndicates reports to newspapers across the world.

We have chronicled on this blog previously how journalists wear two faces in the media – a liberal enlightened mask for their English-language audience, and a right-wing pseudo-fundamentalist mask for Urdu. They believe that they can keep up this charade because they will not be exposed between the two audiences.

Yet more and more we are seeing these cynical media exploiters of the masses exposed. The barriers between language are not solid walls, and just as we move fluidly between English and Urdu, so we are able to notice the tricks that these so-called journalists are playing.

Kamran Shahid, make no mistake, is solely responsible for last night’s programme. He had interviewed Abdul Qawi on the same subject matter only one month prior, so he could expect the result. Kamran Shahid could have chosen any number of pressing topics, and any number of guests. He chose Abdul Qawi for a reason. But that does not in any way excuse this celebrity Mufti for his own actions. Just because a circus chooses to hire a clown, the clown is still responsible for his own performance.

Mufti Abdul Qawi’s treatment of Veena Malik would be considered abuse on a civilized news programme. Sana Saleem describes the setting perfectly for Dawn Blog today:

Throughout the hour-long programme, the host kept attacking Veena by using words such as “oryan,” “fahash” and kept insisting that Veena had brought shame to Islam, Pakistan and our culture. The Mufti on the show was asked to judge Veena’s presence on Bigg Boss in the light of Islam. Here, I must also add that the host tried his best to emphasise that the Mufti had the right to impose a fatwa on Veena for her actions.

Yet by his own admission, Mufti Abdul Qawi has not actually watched episodes of Bigg Boss that he is so virulently criticising. At this point in the programme, Kamran Shahid should have removed this Celebrity Mufti from the set and apologized to Veena Malik. Instead he chose to press for a fatwa on her.

It is not a brave man that beats a defenseless woman. It is even more shameful to be the man who orchestrates such a beating. That Kamran Shahid tried to encourage this celebrity Mufti to not only abuse Veena Malik but to impose a fatwa crosses the line from irresponsible to dangerous. It should be asked whether in doing so Kamran Shahid intentionally or unintentionally attempted to incite violence and lawlessness against Veena Malik. PEMRA would be justified to launch an immediate investigation.

Here again Sana Saleem again makes an important point:

Veena Malik is just one example how certain factions of our media have resorted to moral policing and even advocating fatwas on anyone and everyone. Never mind that we have never pushed for fatwas against suicide bombings, honour killings and many other heinous acts justified in the name of Islam.

From Ansar Abbasi’s pseudo-religious diatribe against Fashion Week in Jang to Talat Hussain’s attack on Angelina Jolie in Daily Express, so-called journalists are building careers out of exploiting religion and attacking women. This is not journalism. And do not be mistaken – this cynical game is not being played in a private parlour but on the world’s stage.

The greatest insult to Pakistan and Islam comes not from the behaviour of an actress on a reality TV programme, but the vicious abuse she receives when she comes home.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Express News, PEMRA | 2 Comments »

Why The Urdu Press Loves Veena Malik

Tuesday, December 28th, 2010

For a group of people so offended by Veena Malik, the holy talking heads certainly can’t stop thinking about her. A couple of weeks ago, we wrote a piece critical of Kamran Shahid’s Front Line circus on the subject. But the ever enlightening Raza Rumi has taken to task ‘the grand opinion setters of the Urdu press’ as a whole for their treatment of the issue and the banality of the entire subject.

(more…)

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Urdu Media | 1 Comment »

Ahmed Quraishi, Most 'Weird' Pakistani Journalist, Takes Propaganda to New Lows – Turns Computer Glitch at WH into Conspiracy Theory

Sunday, October 17th, 2010

Ahmed QuraishiAhmed Quraishi seems to have an unnatural obsession with Ambassador to the US Husain Haqqani. It seems that Quraishi pays attention to little except following the Ambassador’s every move and trying to invent some conspiracy of one form or another. In his latest attempt, Quraishi distorts a computer error at the White House by suggesting that Haqqani was “denied entry” and “abandoned at the gate”. Legitimate news reports about the incident, however, tell a different story.

According to reports on CNN, the incident was caused by a data processing error that was sorted that evening.

The White House has another party protocol problem on its hands after as many as 30 diplomats were stopped at the White House gate and not allowed into a Tuesday evening party being held in the diplomats’ honor.

As many as 30 senior diplomats were denied entry initially, CNN was told.

Several ambassadors who spoke to CNN after the reception said they were barred from entering the reception for Chiefs of Mission and Charges d’Affaires because the information on their identification didn’t match the names and dates of birth on the check-in list. The ambassadors asked not to be named to preserve relations between their countries and the White House.

The party, an annual White House diplomatic reception, is a “must-attend” on the Washington diplomatic social calendar.

White House spokesman Ben Chang acknowledged that “a few” guests were delayed at the entrance to the White House due to “an error in processing their personal data.”

Ahmed Quraishi claims in his article that Haqqani was “denied entry to the White House” because he is not well connected in Washington. This is simply not supported by the facts of this story.

First, one must recognize that Haqqani was not denied entry. Actually, there were 30 Ambassadors who were asked to wait while the data error was sorted. Are we to believe that all of these diplomats are not well connected – including the Ambassadors from Russia and Saudi Arabia? It defies common sense to believe such a thing.

Also, according to the influential newspaper Foreign Policy, while the complete list of nations is not known, the error appears to have been related to the alphabetical order of the countries affected.

Ambassadors from Oman, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, and several other countries were held at the door, while European diplomats from France and Finland were allowed in. This led several ambassadors to speculate that it was an alphabetical problem — countries with names in the latter half of the alphabet were somehow affected by a registration error. Neither the administration nor the State Department would provide a full list of the countries affected by the SNAFU.

One should also consider that having his entry to the event delayed, Husain Haqqani left. I fully expected someone like Ahmed Quraishi to praise the Ambassador for standing up for the nation’s honor? Surely if the Ambassador had stayed put like many of the other diplomats, Quraishi would have condemned him for allowing Pakistan to be insulted?

Furthermore, this latest conspiracy theory is actually a direct contradiction of one of Ahmed Quraishi’s usual themes which is that Haqqani is a US agent. Surely if Husain Haqqani was US agent, he would have been able to skip the usual protocols and avoid the problem altogether.

It seems that this is another situation in which an official is ‘damned if you do and damned if you don’t', and political opportunists posing as journalists are standing in the wings ready to make whatever argument serves their agenda, facts be damned.

What makes the story even more weird is Quraishi’s apparent obsession with the Ambassador. In the past, Ahmed Quraishi tried to peddle the ridiculous idea that Haqqani gave a visa to American bin Laden hunter Gary Faulkner because he believed the man was an agent of CIA. He also accused Haqqani of providing lavish accomodations for the Foreign Minister on a trip to New York City, only to be shamed when it was discovered that the poor man was in Pakistan attending to his own mother’s funeral.

In fact, Ahmed Quraishi has been publicly embarrassed before when the influential newspaper Foreign Policy reported that Quraishi’s article of 2009 that claimed Haqqani was to be fired was a misrepresentation of the facts.

In the Nation article, however, writer Ahmed Quraishi, shown at right, states without evidence that the Pakistani source was “close to Ambassador Haqqani,” and states without evidence that Haqqani is “contemplating going public with embarrassing Pakistani official documents.” Neither allegation was part of the article in The Cable.

The title of Quraishi’s article goes even further in misrepresenting the reporting in The Cable, and reads, “If fired, Haqqani threatens to unveil ‘reams’ of Pakistan’s secrets.”

(Quraishi also mislabeled the author of The Cable as “Bill” Rogin; not sure where he got that one.)

Ahmed Quraishi’s obsession with creating conspiracy theories around Husain Haqqani is even more bizarre when one realizes that in the past Quraishi has called Haqqani “one of the best” Ambassadors in the world.

It’s time for political operatives to stop pretending to be journalists in order to hawk their insults, rumours, and conspiracy theories. It is especially ironic that these people who are always itching to humiliate Pakistan’s leaders are the same who claim to be self-appointed nationalists. One might ask that if they really love their country so much, would they please stick to the facts and stop peddling conspiracies invented only to insult the nation’s officials. That is not journalism, it is only political propaganda.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

The Nation's Economic Conspiracy Theory

Wednesday, February 3rd, 2010

The Nation never fails to impress us with the some of the conspiracy theories that they publish. Today is no different as the editorial writers venture into the world of economics. Unfortunately, rather than ask an economist for advice and explanation, the editorial writers chose to create a conspiracy theory to explain what they do not understand.

The editorial explains this bizarre conspiracy when The Nation talks about “the real trap.”

However, the real trap the government needs to escape, is that of the IMF, which is only offering aid because Pakistan is helping the USA, which is allied to Europe, which names the IMF Managing Director, in its War on Terror. The IMF conditionalities, combined with government extravagance, are causing the unchecked growth in debt by a government which never tires of its concern for the poor. While Pakistan might need assistance to tide over the difficulties it may be facing, such assistance should not be at the cost either of the national economy, or of national honour and dignity. As the increase in the debt burden under the PPP-led government shows, turning to the IMF has meant not just the sacrifice of national honour, but a worsening of the national economic situation.

Let me see if I can sort out this tangled mess of conspiracies.

First, the IMF is only offering aid to Pakistan because the USA wants it to, and the USA only wants it to because the USA is allied to Europe and Europe names the IMF Managing Director. Apparently there are some conditionalities involved with the IMF aid (as there are with all IMF aid), though The Nation doesn’t let us know what exactly they are. The Nation also tells us that there is some government extravagance (again, undefined). These mysterious conditionalities mix with the extravagence and cause massive increases in debt because according to The Nation PPP cares too much for the poor! All of this together, of course, hurts the national honour and dignity.

If you found that hard to follow, take no worries, dear reader. I have created a chart that explains it perfectly clearly.

The Nation's explanation for rising debt

Did that help explain? Don’t worry, I don’t understand either.

The national economy is not only a topic of debate but an issue that affects the lives of everyone. Because it is an issue of such seriousness, it deserves to have serious discussion. Making up some fantastic conspiracy theory by throwing in every bogeyman that you can think of (IMF, USA, Europe, War on Terror, “conditionalities,” poor people) and then saying that these are all mixing together to harm the national honor is a waste of time that could be better spent discussion real solutions to such important issues.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in The Nation | 2 Comments »

The Nation Report About Obama Speech Belongs On Opinion Page, Should Be Properly Sourced

Thursday, January 28th, 2010
American President Barack Obama Giving His Speech

American President Barack Obama Giving His Speech

Today’s The Nation includes a report by an anonymous person known only as “Special Correspondent” on American President Barack Obama’s speech to the American Congress last night which chastises him for not mentioning Pakistan specifically enough. While it is true that Pakistan was not mentioned by name in the speech, the article is clearly meant to suggest a snub against Pakistan and thus belongs more appropriately on the Opinion page of the newspaper. Moreover, the suggestion that a lack of a specific mention of Pakistan in a speech by the American President to the American Congress is a snub is really quite silly.

The Nation’s anonymous reporter begins the article by criticizing Obama for not speaking enough about Pakistan and India-Pakistan relations.

Declaring that the United States has strengthened partnerships with its anti-terrorism allies, President Barack Obama on Wednesday cited his adminitration’s effective fight against al-Qaeda militants but said nothing specific about close ally Pakistan.

Although Obama took note of partnerships in Asia, his first State of the Union address made no mention of Pakistan, a US ally in the war on terror. There was also no reference to India-Pakistan relations and their impact on regional stability. The contentious Middle East conflict was another
major ommission in the speech.

It is true that Mr. Obama’s speech did not mention Pakistan by name, but it also does not mention any other nations that are currently fighting against terrorists. Mr. Obama did mention partnerships broadly, but does not single out any specific nations. For example, he said:

We’ve prohibited torture and strengthened partnerships from the Pacific to South Asia to the Arabian Peninsula.

Actually, the reason that Mr. Obama did not mention Pakistan or India-Pakistan relations in his speech was not a snub against Pakistan but because his speech was mostly about US affairs only. In fact, the anonymous reporter for The Nation even admits this in his report:

Obama’s address focused largely on economic recovery initiatives that his administration is pursuing…

Additionally, while Mr. Obama did talk briefly about foreign policy challenges, including the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, he did so from an American perspective for his American audience. He did not mention any of the other countries with troops in those wars, not only Pakistan. The anonymous reporter from The Nation does not mention that Mr. Obama also does not specifically mention other nations that are fighting against terrorism, including:

  • United Kingdom
  • France
  • Canada
  • Italy
  • Netherlands
  • Poland
  • Australia
  • Spain
  • Romania
  • Turkey
  • Czech Republic
  • Denmark
  • Belgium
  • Norway
  • Bulgaria
  • Sweden
  • Hungary
  • New Zealand
  • Croatia

Even though they were not mentioned, none of the media in other countries are writing anonymous opinion articles suggesting they were snubbed and trying to pass them off as ‘news’.

The Nation has a well-documented anti-American position with regards to foreign policy. Obviously, they have the right to this position and it is their right to continue to publish anti-American Editorials and Opinion columns. But such political positions belong on the Opinion page, not in the  sections for actual news reporting. The column in The Nation is clearly meant to raise anger among those people known as the Ghairat Brigade. The fact that the report is sourced to an anonymous “Special Correspondent” makes it even worse than misleading, though, it’s simply unprofessional.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in The Nation | 1 Comment »