War Of Narratives

By Amir Zia

Monthly Hilal

The Pakistan Armed Forces' Magazine

September, 2015

The pseudo liberals criticize Pakistan and its security establishment for the alleged support to the religiously-motivated Afghan militants, while the religious extremists condemn and target the country exactly for the opposite reason; for fighting the Al-Qaeda-linked or inspired militants and destroying the safe havens of all foreign terrorists.

Two small, but motivated rival forces have long been trying to rule the public opinion in Pakistan. They are zealously pushing their competing narratives in schools, colleges, universities and seminaries to capture young minds. They are battling it out with each other in the mainstream media in an attempt to thrust their agendas. And they are trying to exploit the reach of the new media to propagate views and put across their messages. Despite deep fissures and countless variances within each of these forces, the westernized pseudo liberals and the religious extremists are two distinct groups, struggling to seize the national narrative.

But their ideological differences apart, these rivals also share some common traits.

For example, they both in their essence remain opposed to Pakistan and its basic idea apparently for conflicting reasons, yet aiming to achieve the similar outcome. If the so-called liberals think that the creation of Pakistan and the partition of British-India was a slip of history, the religious extremist, too, think in the same manner albeit under a different pretext. The religious extremists denounce the Freedom Movement and its achievement – Pakistan – because it clashes with their parochial, intolerant and theocratic worldview. Their rivals – the pseudo liberals – try to undermine the demand for a separate Muslim homeland in South Asia as a mere British conspiracy aimed at dividing India. By this naïve assertion, they ignore the strong demands of political, economic and social rights of Muslims, which culminated with the creation of Pakistan. The two rivals also appear on the same page in their criticism of Pakistan’s founding fathers and heroes of the Freedom Movement – from Sir Syed Ahmed Khan and Sir Allama Muhammad Iqbal to Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah. If for the religious extremists these leaders were too open-minded, progressive and modern, their rivals declare them conservative, communal and pro-British.

In today’s context, these forces remain bitterly opposed to the Pakistan Armed Forces. For pseudo liberals, the security forces are the main stumbling block in their designs to make frontiers between Pakistan and India irrelevant. They justify their argument in the name of the so-called shared values, culture and history between the two states. The religious extremists stand at the other side of the pendulum and propagate that the armed forces are allies of the West and therefore, resorting to acts of terror against them remain justified.

The pseudo liberals criticize Pakistan and its security establishment for the alleged support to the religiously-motivated Afghan militants, while the religious extremists condemn and target the country exactly for the opposite reason; for fighting the Al-Qaeda-linked or inspired militants and destroying the safe havens of all foreign terrorists.

One can draw several other such parallels and dig deeper into the ideological stances of these two extreme views, which in a nutshell may appear contradictory, but aim to weaken and destroy Pakistan.

Many pseudo liberals, who also have been joined in by the leftists of yesteryears, will certainly raise eyebrows on what they might say the “audacity” of drawing similarities between them and their violent ideological rivals. Some can rightly say in their defence that unlike the religious extremists, they do not stand guilty of resorting to suicide bombings, explosions and acts of terrorism and sabotage, while others may like to draw attention toward their services for the EU-inspired human rights causes.

All this may be true, but the thrust of the argument is to highlight the commonalities of the two rivals. As far as actions are concerned, besides ideology, they are the result of many other factors, including strategy, the class and social backgrounds of activists, their political orientation and commitment.

The pseudo liberals overwhelmingly comprise mainly of the westernized and well-off middle, upper middle and elite classes, while the religious extremists draw most of their foot soldiers from the lower classes, especially from the rural areas and bank on select motivated individuals from the middle and upper-middle class as their ideologues, masterminds of complicated operations.

Both these rivals enjoy much more reach and clout in the traditional and the new media than their actual size in the society. For instance, pseudo liberals dominate the English-language press, which despite the small size, is seen influential because of its reach in the corridors of power. The so-called liberals freely run propaganda campaigns against the core national interests from undermining the Kashmir cause to that of the criticism on the country’s nuclear programme mainly in the English-language press, which serves as the main vehicle to highlight their small protests, conferences and other activities. They resort to propaganda against the country’s security agencies and the armed forces and try to portray them as rouge institutions. They also indulge in foreign-inspired advocacy campaigns in the name of human rights – by which they basically mean rights of criminals and terrorists. The organized, EU-backed campaign against the resumption of death penalty after last December’s barbarity at the Army Public School Peshawar is a case to point. As the national consensus stood solidly behind awarding capital punishment, the self-styled rights’ groups launched a drive to save the life of the child killer Shafqat Hussain by twisting facts and distorting evidence to prove that he was a juvenile when he kidnapped a seven-year-old boy and murdered him after sexual abuse. Their aim was to undermine Pakistan’s judiciary. Due to public pressure, the child killer was finally hanged to death in Karachi after evading death warrants at least half-a-dozen times.

Although the religious extremists do not have a direct clout on the traditional media, their apologist and allies in the mainstream religious and political parties help support their narrative. They urge for talks with terrorists – responsible for killing thousands of Pakistanis, including officers and soldiers of the armed forces – in the name of peace. There also are blatant attempts in the media to justify taking up arms against the state and arguments to support the policy of appeasement and reconciliation with the local and foreign terrorists, trying to run a state within the state. Such voices have bigger influence on the Urdu-language media, which has become a tool to propagate hate speech, intolerance, conservative ideas and ideals and twist the vision of Pakistan by attempting to paint it as a theocratic state. Such ideas are also reinforced by many pulpits and seminaries as well as big and small religious groups. Their narrow, myopic, flawed and confrontationist interpretation of the sacred religion of Islam creates favourable ground where extremist ideas breed and grow.

The extremists also have an organized propaganda machinery of their own and have mastered the art of using the new media. They are not just banking on the written word to disseminate propaganda, but use audios, videos and photographs through dedicated or third party websites and countless fake accounts on the social media. If any of these accounts get blocked, a new one is created under another fake identity.

However, the pseudo liberals and the religious extremists remain a minority in this country of more than 180 million people. Yet they have managed to create a lot of dust, which tarnishes Pakistan’s image and creates despondency, negativism and anger in the society. Ironically, the rational Pakistani nationalist narrative is missing from both the traditional and the new media. Even if it exists, it is disorganized and finds little space, though it articulates the aspirations and will of overwhelming majority of Pakistanis. What does this nationalist narrative mean in a nutshell given Pakistan’s present day challenges?

Firstly, it represents modernity rooted in our tradition, culture and religion. The same way, Pakistan’s founding fathers conceived and articulated it by investing in the modern education starting from Aligarh, Sindh Madrassatul Islam, Islamia College Peshawar and other modern education institutions, which in turn became the vanguard of the freedom struggle.

Secondly, it means rising above the bigoted sectarian, ethnic and provincial divide and promoting national cohesion and unity. This again remains the crux of the message of Pakistan’s founders, who managed to unite Muslims of South Asia for a single cause regardless of their class, ethnic, sectarian or provincial background.

Thirdly, it is establishing the writ of the state and rule of law in the country. This means zero-tolerance for armed groups and bands of non-state actors operating under any pretext. The state should ensure its monopoly over violence. The Operation Zarb-e-Azb and the crackdown on criminals and terrorists in Karachi are aimed at achieving this goal. Support to these causes is vital in the battle of ideas to achieve the goal of a peaceful and stable Pakistan as envisioned by its founders.

Fourthly, it should aim at making Pakistan’s defence impregnable against any direct aggression as well as the indirect soft invasion diluting our national cohesion and unity. This means unflinching support for the guardians of Pakistan’s frontiers – the armed forces – and countering those individuals, commercial organizations and media ventures working against Pakistan’s core interests.

And fifthly, it should promote the idea of economically prosperous, progressive and strong Pakistan to ensure not just the wellbeing and upward social mobility of citizens, but also guarantees peace and stability in the region. This was the dream of Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali and his companions. The first key to achieve these goals is to aggressively and unapologetically dominate the battle of narratives and counter those tiny organized minorities of pseudo liberals and the religious extremists, who are trying to weaken Pakistan. It is time for the Team Pakistan to rise, make a difference and win this battle.

The Reckoning

By Amir Zia

Monthly Newsline

July 2015

Security officials say that the major political and religious parties are the “patrons, protectors and pals” of the criminal-cum-terrorist mafias operating in Karachi. “The military leadership, including the Army Chief, General Raheel Sharif, raised the issue countless times at the provincial apex committee and other relevant forums. But, barring some laboured lip-service, the provincial government failed to initiate any meaningful steps.”

It is not yet an all-out declaration of hostilities but the long lingering distrust between the Asif Zardari-led PPP and the military establishment is in the full media glare now. Whether it will lead to any change in the power equation in Sindh in the near- or midterm or culminate in another uneasy political stalemate remains a pertinent question. One part of the answer to this question depends on the flexibility of Zardari, who is called a doctor by some of his admirers for his pragmatic solutions to grave problems. The other rests on how far top security officials are willing to push the envelope in their attempt to fix Sindh, and particularly Karachi, where crime and politics go hand-in-hand.

For Zardari and his loyalists, the PPP is again being pushed to the wall as they accuse the ‘military establishment’ of overstepping its domain.

The reason behind Zardari’s concerns is the way the Rangers openly accused influential politicians from Sindh of having ties with criminal and terrorist mafias in a statement issued on June 11.

However, what angered and panicked many of the PPP stalwarts most were the follow-up actions by the Rangers that included a raid at the Sindh Building Control Authority and arrest of the alleged corrupt officials seen as being close to the PPP high command. “If you do not stop, I will come out with a list of generals [accused of corruption] since Pakistan's creation," Zardari said in a hard-hitting speech while addressing an oath taking ceremony of newly-elected office bearers from the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), in Islamabad, before a charged crowd of party followers. “The army chiefs come and go every three years, but the political leadership stays,” the former president said, raising the tension level with the security establishment.

Even for many senior PPP officials, Zardari’s harsh words targeting the military top brass appeared out of sync with the public image he has carefully carved out for himself as a leader advocating national reconciliation, following the assassination of his wife and party chairperson, Benazir Bhutto.

All the anti-establishment opinions which Zardari expressed in whispers, behind closed doors and in small unofficial gatherings, became official as he took on the mighty establishment brazenly and openly in the wake of renewed focus of the Rangers on corruption, along with fighting terrorism and crime in urban Sindh. However, Zardari’s anti-army tirade is being seen even by some of his close associates as the mark of desperation rather than a well thought-out strategy. 

The reasons for desperation and alarm are obvious, according to a senior security official. The ill-gotten money trail often ends at a powerful political house, he said, without stating the obvious. A number of provincial ministers, friends and relatives are involved in the racket directly or through their front men, he added.

The mood in military quarters, indeed, appears grim – thanks to the tales of mega-corruption and organised, systematic crimes in which many of the important politicians are involved. No wonder then, that in the aftermath of his criticism of the army, Zardari found himself the prime target of various political and religious parties – including the ruling PML-N – as each one of them distanced itself from the PPP and put all their weight behind the armed forces.

The MQM, already under fire and in the shadows for its alleged involvement in crime and militancy and ties with India, appeared as the only political force offering support to Zardari. However, for many political observers, both the PPP and the MQM stand on common ground as far as their friction with the establishment is concerned. This makes them turn to one another despite their own, often, frosty relations and clash of interests over the control of Karachi. The closeness of these two main political forces belonging to Sindh, in their attempts to ward off army pressure, definitely adds one more complication in the already complicated scenario of Sindh politics – if seen from the perspective of the security agencies.

While many senior PPP officials are trying to control the damage done by Zardari’s remarks, these fireworks are a sign of the troubled nature of the party’s relations with the army in recent years.

The Sindh government, in an apparent move to ease tensions with the army, announced giving 9,000 acres of forest land in the Shikarpur district to the heirs of martyred soldiers and wounded war veterans. However, PPP insiders reveal that friction between their leader and the army is far from over. For Zardari, he has always been the target of a “ferocious” and “unjustified” media trial.

Despite spending more than a decade in prison under corruption charges, the authorities could not prove any of the cases against him. The latest allegations, seen from his point of view, are just another attempt to tarnish his already mutilated image. But from the security establishment’s perspective, Zardari & Company are incorrigible. The charge-sheet issued by the Rangers is a manifestation of the fast-growing strains between the provincial government and the men-in-uniform in managing the affairs of Sindh and confronting the twin ghosts of terrorism and crime in its capital, Karachi.

“The statement reflects the growing frustration of the security establishment with the state of affairs in Sindh,” confides a senior official of the Sindh Police, requesting anonymity. “The ties between crime and politics are too deep and the network too broad. Nowhere else in Pakistan does such a complex challenge exist.”

Security officials say that the major political and religious parties are the “patrons, protectors and pals” of the criminal-cum-terrorist mafias operating in Karachi. “The military leadership, including the Army Chief, General Raheel Sharif, raised the issue countless times at the provincial apex committee and other relevant forums. But, barring some laboured lip-service, the provincial government failed to initiate any meaningful steps,” says a security official, privy to the meetings of the apex committee. The committee has been specially formed to bring the civil and military leadership on the same page in combatting terrorism and crime in Sindh. However, often these meetings – some of which are also attended by General Raheel Sharif, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and former president, Asif Ali Zardari – usually end on an uncomfortable note for the PPP leadership. In one such meeting, when faced with severe criticism, the Sindh Chief Minister, Qaim Ali Shah, offered to tender his resignation but was stopped by Zardari, who said he could only resign if asked by the party. However, these differences in the apex committee meetings have so far been kept at a manageable level.

But the ever-deepening crisis of governance in Sindh, stories of mega-corruption and the ties between politicians, criminals and terrorist mafias, have transformed Karachi into one of the most dangerous and lawless megacities of the world.

The ongoing Rangers-led operation against terrorists and criminals has managed to achieve only limited results because, barring the tough action and crackdown by the law enforcers, the civilian government remains unable to do its bit by introducing reforms in the police and the judiciary, providing honest and efficient governance and severing ties between crime and politics. The Rangers’ charge sheet against the provincial government, in fact, says nothing which was not already known before.

The involvement of influential political personalities in Sindh in the multi-billion rupee racket of landgrabbing and extortion in Karachi has long been public knowledge. How this ill-gotten money is used to fill the coffers of super-rich politicians and their lackeys and finance the bands of thugs, militant and terrorist groups is also an open secret. The mention of the Lyari gangsters in the charge sheet – based on the report of Director General of Sindh Rangers, Major General Bilal Akbar, to the provincial apex committee – was also no revelation at all. Neither was the DG Rangers’ assertion that donations (collected in the name of charitable works, including the money from sale of hides of sacrificial animals), were being used to fund criminal activities and for the upkeep of the armed militant wings of political and religious parties. The Sindh Rangers chief hit the bull’s eye when he said that, along with fighting criminals, there remains a need to destroy the terror-funding empire, which flourishes mainly through landgrabbing and extortion. Political parties, city district governments and administrations, police officials, construction companies and real estate agents with ties to high-profile influential political personalities – all remain part of the racket and share in the daily booty worth billions of rupees.

“The problem is that Zardari has changed the complexion of the PPP and transformed it into a giant moneymaking business-venture,” says an old party zealot, who has now been thrown to the sidelines by the post-Benazir Bhutto leadership.

For veteran political commentator and journalist, Zahid Hussain, the PPP’s woes signify that it continues to remaingood in the opposition and bad in the government. “Unlike the past, the PPP was allowed for the first time to complete its term under Zardari’s leadership at the centre,” he said. “This is its second continuous term in the Sindh province. The PPP should offer no excuses for its appalling governance and public perception about its involvement in corruption. In Sindh it got a golden opportunity to rule, which is being squandered away.”

However, even the harshest critics of the PPP and the MQM admit that the two parties – despite the widespread impression of corruption and charges of their alleged involvement in patronising criminals and terrorists – will mostly maintain their electoral turf. The demands from various quarters to reset and reboot the system, starting with Sindh, are indeed growing.

But if the past is any guide, a limited or broad direct military intervention has yet to bring about a sustainable change for the better. In a dysfunctional and flawed democratic order, the reluctance of the civilian stakeholders in pursuing any meaningful reforms proves deadly for the entire system. The one option echoed at various quarters calls for a swift surgical operation not just against criminals and terrorists, but also the corruption mafia and its patrons. Thus, the existing democratic order will remain intact and relatively clean politicians will be allowed to run the show.

Will the establishment be able to make this old dream a reality? The skeptics say no. Attempts to oust controversial leadership failed in the past. Even the most demonised civilian leaders – from Nawaz Sharif to Asif Zardari – managed to bounce back after spending years in the political wilderness. Pakistan’s imperfect democracy is intertwined with the resource-rich scions of the ruling elite, comprising feudal and tribal leaders as well as the super rich industrialists and business people. The interesting part is that they have all managed to expand stakes in each other’s domain. Therefore, despite the never-ending circus on the media, just a Sindh specific rebooting of the system appears unlikely. The aggressive posturing will be there, but in the near-term there appears little threat to the system – no matter how evil and malfunctioning it may appear.

Having said that, the fact remains that the patience of a vast number of people is running thin in the wake of a grim law and order crisis, collapse of governance and the giant socio-economic challenges. Will the politicians of Sindh read the writing on the wall and take it as a warning shot to improve and reform? The present state of affairs is untenable and cannot be allowed to continue. Those in the driving seat will have to change not just the perception, but the reality, in Sindh. 

ENDS