Big Question: Should Centre run Karachi?

By Amir Zia

Monthly Newsline

October 2019

A grand consensus is needed among them to introduce the necessary reforms that must include bringing unity of command to manage the affairs of Karachi and giving the local government system administrative and financial powers.

Federal Law Minister Farogh Naseem created an unnecessary controversy last month by suggesting that Article 149 of the Constitution needs to be invoked in Sindh to improve Karachi’s deteriorating civic services and address its myriad problems.

And as expected, this mere suggestion of dragging in the Centre to manage Karachi – currently the domain of the provincial government – resulted in a short-lived emotional outburst from various stakeholders, which took the attention away from the festering civic problems of this mega-city and, instead, thrust a non-issue centre-stage – at least in the media. What’s more, this storm in a tea-cup wasn’t even worth it.

To begin with, the law minister’s statement was nothing but a half-baked proposal, which led to various interpretations, one being that the Centre was planning to take over the affairs of the city. If truth be told, it articulated the desire of the law minister’s own party, the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), which is a junior partner in the ruling coalition. But this proposal – if it can be called one – had no serious backers, even within the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI).

Most senior PTI politicians, including Prime Minister Imran Khan, know that even a symbolic attempt to give a special status to Karachi will be seen by the Pakistan Peoples’ Party (PPP) and other forces in Sindh as an attempt to divide the province – a highly emotive issue. And in these testing times, such a step would only stoke more trouble and instability. In essence, the law minister’s proposal was a non-starter from the word go.

The federal government bungled a laudable initiative – the formation of a committee by the prime minister to suggest short-, medium- and long-term steps for the uplift of the city – that should have taken off smoothly and brought some relief and good news for the country’s restive commercial and industrial hub.

The centre made this committee – headed by the law minister – controversial, as it did not include any representative of the Sindh provincial government in it. Had saner minds prevailed, this committee would have included the Sindh Chief Minister or his nominee (a provincial local government minister) as a member. But a myopic political mindset prevented the federal government from taking such a step. When a senior PTI leader was asked about the omission of a member of the Sindh government, he provided a flimsy excuse: “The Peoples’ Party is responsible for Karachi’s mess; what’s the point of including any PPP member?”

Today’s Karachi is a mega-mess. And all stakeholders, including the three main parties representing this city in Parliament, are responsible for its plight. Consequently, all stakeholders must be absolutely clear in their minds that none of them in isolation is in a position to solve Karachi’s problems.

A grand consensus is needed among them to introduce the necessary reforms, that must include bringing unity of command to manage the affairs of the city and giving the local government system administrative and financial powers. Of course these reforms should be strictly monitored by the provincial and federal governments, if they are serious about saving the city, which only recently has been ranked as one of the 10 most unlivable cities in the world by the prestigious The Economist’s Intelligence Unit.

Unfortunately, so far the politicians have only resorted to mudslinging against each other, instead of setting aside their narrow political and financial interests and putting their heads together for the sake of the city and its citizens.

Even now, the federal government can take the lead in fixing Karachi’s problems, but this task cannot be accomplished by staging a hostile take-over. A lot of give and take, political maturity and sagacity is required to bring all the stakeholders to the table and come up with tangible recommendations aimed at reforms and the betterment of Karachi.

Unfortunately, a sincere debate, discussion and the will to change is nowhere on the cards.

Ends

India’s Bloody Machinations

By Amir Zia

Monthly Hilal

October 2019

Pakistan has no choice but to match Indian brinkmanship with brinkmanship. The time to act is now because tomorrow will be too late to fight for this cause. It is now or never.

Round one of Pakistan’s diplomatic efforts aimed at highlighting the Kashmir dispute and Indian brutalities is over following Prime Minister Imran Khan’s speech at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) on September 27. Indeed, the Prime Minister’s UNGA visit ended on a high note as he forcefully presented Kashmir’s case at the biggest international forum, offsetting Indian designs of showcasing this protracted problem as an internal affair.

But PM’s hectic diplomacy during his week-long stay in the United States and the UNGA’s address serve only as the first step in the long, hard and difficult struggle which lies ahead for Pakistan and especially for Kashmiris suffering at the hands of Indian occupation forces. 
Currently, India has the advantage as it took the Kashmir initiative at a time and date of its choosing. Before nullifying its Constitution’s Articles 370 and 35A, India had further beefed up troops in one of the world’s most militarized zones. Article 370, which had already been diluted, served only as a fig-leaf and gave a false semblance of “special status” to Jammu & Kashmir (J&K). 
Although Pakistan and Kashmiri leadership – demanding the right of self-determination for Kashmiris – never accepted this controversial article, at least the mirage of “special status” gave an excuse to handful of pro-India Kashmiri politicians to operate under New Delhi’s umbrella. But the Hindu extremist government has moved to assimilate Kashmir in the Indian Union, violating UN resolutions, its agreements with Pakistan, guarantees provided to Kashmiris and ditching India’s Kashmiri allies. 
The Hindu extremist agenda is clear; it wants to transform the Muslim-majority in Kashmir into a minority by settling outsiders in the name of bringing in investment and boosting development. 
On its part, India has unilaterally settled the Kashmir dispute in its favour and now the only challenge is managing the fallout of its decision, which New Delhi is trying to do through a multi-pronged strategy. 

Firstly, it is using brute force to quash protests and resistance within the valley. Increasing the number of security forces, the continuing curfew, spate after spate of raids and arrests of youngsters and community and political leaders, torture and extra-judicial killings are part of the high-handed approach to break the will of Kashmiris and create space for the Indian state.
Secondly, India plans to spend big money in the occupied region – not for the benefit of Kashmiris, but to build sanctuaries for settlers. Before the annulment of Article 370 and 35A, non-residents were barred from buying land in Kashmir. Big businesses, corporates and Indian state governments are now being encouraged to buy land in Kashmir. The Maharashtra government has already announced plans to buy land for two resorts in the occupied Himalayan region. India is also promising jobs to Kashmiri youth to blunt their vigour for freedom.

Thirdly, India has intensified pressure on Pakistan in an attempt to keep Islamabad away from helping Kashmir’s indigenous freedom movement by portraying it as terrorism. The sustained propaganda, branding every act of militancy Pakistan-inspired, -backed or -sponsored is part of a well-thought-out strategy akin to putting the onus of the safety of the occupying Indian troops advertently on Pakistan. The latest example of the Indian attempts to redefine redlines is its response following the Pulwama suicide attack, which killed 40 plus security personnel. India had sent fighter jets across the Line of Control and bombed a deserted area inside Pakistan in an unprecedented escalation. Though Pakistan gave a befitting response to this adventure by downing two Indian fighter aircraft, in the South Asian context New Delhi did lower the threshold for a conflict. The post August 5 threats hurled by Indian civil and military leaders that they are eyeing Azad J&K are also aimed at keeping Pakistan under pressure. 
Fourthly, Indians expect a muted world response to its Kashmir adventure, especially from the Western capitals. New Delhi has also launched aggressive diplomacy to at least neutralize some of the long-standing Pakistan allies by using the size of its market and economy.
Overall, New Delhi’s Kashmir gamble is based on the premise that as the time goes by, India will be able to strengthen its hold over Kashmir, leaving no other choice for Kashmiris and the world but to accept its occupation of the disputed region. Apparently, in the amoral world of international diplomacy – where might is considered right – India’s plan makes sense. New Delhi thinks that its huge market is enough to make the world fall in line with its Kashmir adventure, while an under pressure Pakistan and oppressed, unarmed Kashmiris lack the means and power to thwart its game plan.
However, India has ignored the fact that resolve, determination and courage of a nation – even if smaller in size – has the potential to put a spanner in its design and derail the extremist Hindu juggernaut. 
Conventional diplomacy, with all its limitations, has been effectively used by Pakistan in the first phase to expose Hindu India’s extremist agenda and the way it threatens regional peace. Pakistan has also called attention to Indian human rights violations and Islamabad’s desire for a negotiated settlement of the dispute in line with the aspirations of Kashmiris and the UN resolutions. The country also managed to internationalize the Kashmiri demand for the right to self-determination, which had been on the backburner for the last few decades. 

Although world powers have so far given a muted response to India’s war mongering and atrocities in Kashmir, for the first time in recent history New Delhi is facing criticism from human rights groups and the western media. 
It goes without saying that these moves are not enough to make India feel the heat, but this is a good beginning from where Pakistan can try to mount further pressure on New Delhi using both conventional diplomacy and some innovative and out-of-the-box measures. 
The Indian strategy of using state terrorism has so far failed to break the will of Kashmiris or crush their dream of ending the Indian rule. The continuing curfew and brutalities are a manifestation of this fact. But certainly, time is of utmost important. The longer the Indian grip stays over Kashmir amidst moves to change the demography of this Muslim-majority region, there is a serious danger that Kashmiris will be marginalized, diluted and crushed on their own land. Therefore, Pakistan needs more urgency and aggression to highlight the plight of Kashmiris, mobilize world opinion, unite the Kashmiri diaspora around the world and give all possible diplomatic, moral and political support to the freedom movement.
The colonization of Kashmir in the name of investment and development also needs to be fought tooth and nail on every platform. Only the vigour and strength of Kashmiri freedom movement can keep Indian vultures and their big money away from Kashmir and from exploiting its resources and marginalizing the indigenous people. 
Going forward, Pakistan’s leadership needs to shun its new-found apologetic attitude towards the armed struggle of Kashmiri freedom fighters. Pakistan must carry the cross and explain to the world that a legitimate freedom struggle cannot be equated with terrorism. Kashmiris – denied of their fundamental and democratic rights, including the right to stage peaceful protests and exercise their right to self-determination – have no option but to fight for their rights with all available means. 
Pakistan can only offset the Indian pressure by mounting counter pressure. Our civil and military leadership have given a clear message that Pakistanis will stand up against the regional bully with all its might. There is a need to walk the talk. Pakistan’s battle-hardened armed forces and the resilient nation have the capacity and ability to defend their motherland. Indians should have no iota of doubt in their minds that their aggression will get a similar response.  
On the diplomatic front, the silence of world powers and some of our friends should not come as a surprise. This should have been anticipated and has been factored in. Pakistan is already keeping them engaged without showing any apparent flexibility on the Kashmir cause. There is a need to stay the course, to keep hammering and driving home the point that reckless Indian policies are pushing the two nuclear-armed South Asian neighbours towards a full blown conflict.
The Indian move of repealing Article 370 and 35A has pushed Kashmir’s freedom struggle in a decisive phase. If Pakistan acts, and acts fast, this crisis can be transformed into an opportunity. Pakistan has no choice but to match Indian brinkmanship with brinkmanship. The time to act is now because tomorrow will be too late to fight for this cause. It is now or never.

https://www.hilal.gov.pk/eng-article/india%E2%80%99s-bloody--machinations-in-ioj&k/MzcyMA==.html

Ends

The Big Question: Has Pakistan failed Kashmir & the Kashmiris?

By Amir Zia

Monthly News

September 2019

As far as the Indians are concerned, they have settled the Kashmir dispute for good in their favour. Now they have to manage the fallout of their decision. The Indians are convinced that as time goes by, the world will accept Kashmir as an integral part of India and they will be able to bully their way into the lives of Kashmiris – if not win their hearts and minds.

  

In times of crisis, one should not dwell on the past. It is akin to deflecting the real issue and evading the fundamental question of what needs to be done now?  Therefore, I will rephrase the question from, ‘Has Pakistan failed Kashmir’ to, ‘Should Pakistan abandon Kashmir?’

My two-word answer: “No, never.”

Pakistan should never abandon the Kashmiris in their struggle to end the Indian occupation and demand the right of self-determination, in line with UN resolutions. Standing up and fighting for Kashmir is our moral duty and a national cause. We need this kind of sharp clarity of mind, emotional belief, conviction and an unyielding commitment to stand up for Kashmir as a nation – come what may.

With one stroke of the pen, India’s Hindu extremist government, has unilaterally changed the status of Occupied Kashmir: it has divided and made this Muslim-majority state part of its union territory, without taking into account the will of the Kashmiris and violating the United Nations resolutions and its bilateral agreements with Pakistan.

This criminal Indian move to assimilate occupied Kashmir is an open act of war. And it must be seen as such. Resorting to pseudo-intellectual debates revolving around ifs and buts or discussing the past, is a futile exercise. Yes, we know that Pakistan faces an economic crisis and diplomatic challenges. We know our constraints. Let’s now zero in on our enemy’s limitations and weaknesses.

And let’s not waste time waiting for the world conscience to wake-up or international organisations like the United Nations to take any practical steps to help the Kashmiris.

The bitter fact is that there is no justice in history and no room for morality in politics and foreign relations. History is overwhelmingly made by the mighty and the powerful on the blood of the weak and the oppressed, while politics and international relations are driven by national objectives and interests. The moralist sloganeering is best left for peace times. In the real world of politics, it never works.

It is up to the Kashmiris and Pakistanis now to choose to act or not to act against the backdrop of the Indian design to make Kashmiri Muslims a minority in their own land.

As far as the Indians are concerned, they have settled the Kashmir dispute for good in their favour. Now they have to manage the fallout of their decision. The Indians are convinced that as time goes by, the world will accept Kashmir as an integral part of India and they will be able to bully their way into the lives of Kashmiris – if not win their hearts and minds.

Indian calculations are based largely on the presumption that internationally, the tailwind remains in their favour because of the size of their economy. They expect a muted response to their move from the world powers; they expect them to act only to keep the two South Asian nuclear powers at bay from an all-out war.

Secondly, Indians think that the crisis-ridden Pakistan will not go beyond mounting conventional diplomatic efforts, which may earn Islamabad some useless brownie points but will not change the situation on the ground. Empty words and meaningless statements or resolutions will not help the Kashmir cause. Neither will our demonstrations in Pakistani cities and some western capitals hurt New Delhi nor our jihad on the social media, the virtual world and on the local television screen. And New Delhi knows this.

By lowering the threshold of their response to the armed struggle of the Kashmiri mujahideen and using forums like FATF, India has cleverly kept Pakistan under pressure. They assess that without Pakistan’s active and practical support, they will be able to crush any political or armed uprising of the Kashmiris.

The Indian game is apparently flawless.

Pakistan can only put a spanner in India’s plans and attempt to turn the tide by resorting to unconventional means and restrained brinkmanship. This does not mean abandoning conventional diplomatic and political efforts, but Pakistan has to up the ante – if its leadership is serious about Kashmir.

To begin with, Pakistan must shun their apologetic attitude as regards the armed resistance of Kashmiris and provide active diplomatic, political and moral support to this indigenous movement. At the same time, Pakistan should adopt an uncompromising defensive stance – in case India strikes, using the bogey of terrorism. Pakistan should make it clear to the world that it will climb the escalation ladder swiftly and deliver the hardest blow possible in case India resorts to adventurism on the international frontier or at the line of control.

The Pakistan government has to look within to draw for strength and bank on its armed forces and people for the country’s defence, sustenance and survival rather than towards the western capitals and our “brotherly” Muslim countries.

Pakistan does not seek war. A war between two nuclear-armed neighbours would be sheer madness, but if it is thrust upon us, then let’s give India a war instead of settling for a bad peace.

Pakistanis and Kashmiri need to be clear on one score: if we are not able to stand up for Kashmir now, we will not be in a position to do so a couple of years down the road, when the Indian grip on Kashmir will have been consolidated and demographic changes been orchestrated. It is now or never. 

ENDs 

Saffron Terrorism

By Amir Zia

Monthly Hilal

July 2019

The dominance of hardline Hindu nationalism in Indian politics is not just acting as a destabilizing factor within India, but threatens peace in South Asia and beyond.

When on June 30, the Indian cricket team appeared at Edgbaston to face England in the Cricket World Cup 2019 tie, it donned a new “away kit” – a bold splash of orange (saffron) on the shoulders and back of the players’ shirts. The change of colour in the kit – from traditional blue to the splattering of saffron, one of the three colours in the Indian national flag, is perhaps a sign of times, coinciding with the second consecutive victory of Hindu extremist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in India’s April-May polls. 

In Hinduism, saffron is the most important colour. No wonder the BJP and its allied groups are all out to paint “Bharat” orange. Yes, it is for the first time in more than thousand years of history that the Hindu extremists are firmly in power and in a position to assert themselves and promote their hate-ideology as they could have never done in the past.  
So if Indian politics has turned saffron, it makes sense for cricket to follow suit – the money-minting game for which there is more passion in India than providing toilets to the teeming masses.
Therefore, for promoters of Hindutva, cricket is just another means to showcase Hindu-ness and muscle-power of their country rather than sport and a gentleman’s game. Falling in line, wicketkeeper Mahendra Singh Dhoni felt the need to display a military logo on his gloves at the World Cup. Mercifully, the International Cricket Council barred him from doing this, though many feared that the big money clout of Indians may force it to bend rules. 
And prior to the gloves’ controversy, Indian cricketers shocked the world of sports by wearing army’s camouflage caps during the 3rd One-Day International match against Australia at Jharkhand. 
However, saffron coloured kit, gloves with the military logo or the camouflage caps in cricket hold only a small symbolic value in the big picture of India. The real cause of concern for the world should be Hindutva’s ominous and scary agenda being unfolded with a rapid speed on the domestic and external fronts following Modi’s re-election.
The BJP’s second innings in power has started off with a sharp spike in anti-minority mob violence and rhetoric, particularly against Muslims – raising the mega question about what does the dominance of Hindutva mean for the so-called world’s largest democracy? It is also important to analyze how the Hindutva agenda would impact the region, particularly India’s immediate neighbours? And where this unbridled rise of politics of extremism and hate could lead to?  

Targeting Minorities
In India, the frequency and ferocity of attacks by the Hindu extremist vigilante mobs targeting followers of the minority faiths continue to increase. 
According to the New York-based Human Rights Watch report – released in February 2019 – radical cow protection groups have killed at least 44 people and injured around 280 in more than 100 attacks carried out between May 2015 and December 2018. Out of these 44 slain victims, 36 were Muslims.  
Following Modi’s re-election, vigilantism has shown an upward trend. And media – by design or default – reports only tip of the iceberg of all the discrimination, harassment, exploitation and violence meted out to the members belonging to the religious minorities and people belonging to the so-called lower castes. 
For example, in Jharkhand a 24-year-old Muslim, Tabrez Ansari, was tortured to death by a Hindu mob. The video clip of this horrific incident appeared on June 22, showing Ansari begging for mercy as he was being tortured and forced to chant “Jai Shri Ram” and “Jai Hanuman” by the mob.    
Two days after the Jharkhand incident, a 26-year-old Muslim cleric, Hafeez Mohammed, was pushed out of a train in West Bengal by a mob chanting “Jai Shri Ram.” Luckily, Hafeez escaped death, but sustained some minor injuries.
Countless such incidents can be quoted underlining the fact that Hindu extremists are out to further squeeze space for people belonging to the other faiths in their bid to transform India in line with the Hindutva ideology. 
India’s national identity is being defined only as Hindu identity by the BJP and its allies like Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Hindu Mahasabha. 
For a country, where one-fifth of the population comprises non-Hindus, this push towards establishing a Hindu state is seen widening its fissures.

Discrimination
The BJP government has either taken or plans a series of highly discriminatory and controversial actions against the minorities by changing the constitution and the law. 
The most inflammatory plan is to abolish the special status of the disputed region of Kashmir – the only Muslim majority state of Hindu India – and scrap all its constitutional guarantees.
If this plan materializes it would diminish all possibilities for a peaceful solution to this protracted conflict in which Kashmiris have been forced to turn to armed and unarmed resistance in the wake of growing atrocities and human rights violations by the Indian forces. 
The BJP is also changing India’s refugee and citizenship policies to make them more discriminatory and anti-minorities. Under this plan non-Muslim refugees will get Indian citizenship more easily than Muslims.
Hindu hardliners are also pursuing their agenda to falsify and distort history by rewriting textbooks, changing names of places and pressuring Muslim institutions to amend their charters. 
This sort of discrimination is not just isolating the religious minorities, especially the Muslims, but is likely to force retaliation. 
Abdul Basit, Pakistan’s former high commissioner to India, said that Hindutva’s extremist ideology is intrinsically dangerous as it is heavily inspired by Nazism. 
“Savarkar, the founder of Hindutva, was critical of Jews for retaining their separate identity in Germany and compared them to Indian Muslims. It is, therefore, hardly surprising what is happening to Muslims in India under the BJP and Modi.”
According to Air Vice Marshal Shahzad Chaudhry (R) India's declaratory policy of Hindutva has sharpened the divide in this multi-cultural state. “It has placed communities on warpath inside India, while it has spawned similar polarity of sentiment in the neighbourhood.”

Threat to Regional Peace
Indeed, the dominance of hardline Hindu nationalism in Indian politics is not just acting as a destabilizing factor within India, but threatens peace in South Asia and beyond.
India’s tense relations with Pakistan over Kashmir is an old story. But under the BJP’s adventurous policies, they have aggravated and fears of a full-blown conflict increased as witnessed in February this year when the armed forces of the two nuclear-armed states briefly locked horns following the violation of Pakistan’s airspace by Indian fighter jets. The retaliatory action by Pakistan Air Force had downed two Indian aircraft.    
Any miscalculation amidst this kind of Indian brinkmanship and war-hysteria fanned by its leadership could prove catastrophic for the entire region.
“The BJP is an extension of the RSS, which sees Kashmir dispute not as a political but religious one,” says Dr. Syed Rifaat Hussain, who specializes in international relations with a focus on South Asia, arms control and proliferation.
With all their temples and some holy places, they even consider Kashmir as a sacred Hindu land and therefore, are not ready to open talks on the disputed Himalayan region. “Congress also had the same problem, but it was not averse for talks,” he said.  
According to Mr. Basit, now even engaging with Pakistan by India is considered a concession.  “Indian leadership wants their country to become an economic hub by isolating Pakistan… they want to keep Pakistan under pressure. Even if they talk, they will not talk on Kashmir… in the current situation, at the most conflict between the two countries can be managed, but not resolved.”  
While Kashmir remains an old problem, India is using Afghanistan to stoke ethnic tensions, terrorism and violence in Pakistan. The arrest of Commander Kulbhushan Jadhav – a serving Indian naval officer – by Pakistan in 2016 is a living proof of how India is responsible for terrorism in Pakistan.  
Other disputes between Pakistan and India including on Sir Creek and Siachen Glacier also remain unresolved due to New Delhi’s belligerence and obstinate attitude.
Mr. Basit said that one can see how Hindutva agenda is working to damage bilateral relations between Pakistan and India, as well as impeding regional cooperation. “India's bullying tactics vis-á-vis SAARC is [a] clear manifestation of the latter.”

A Regional Bully  
Pakistan is not the only South Asian country which has tensions with India. Almost all the other South Asian neighbours have maritime, border or water disputes with India, which is trying to establish its hegemony in the region in all spheres – from trade to military power.
For example, Bangladesh’s relations under Prime Minister Hasina Wajid’s rule have improved in recent years, but Dhaka has not been able to convince its big neighbour to ensure its water share during drier season and manage its flow during monsoon to avoid floods. 
The construction and operation of Farakka Barrage by India over Hoogly River is a key bone of contention along with the distribution and management of the waters of River Ganges. 
India and Bangladesh also have problems on their porous frontiers as the Indian Army shoots to kill Bangladeshi villagers, branding them illegal immigrants or terrorists. 
Land-locked Nepal often remains the target of Indian belligerence. In 1962, India forcibly occupied Kalapani, which is still claimed by Nepal. Similarly, disputes over Susta and Lipulekh are also unresolved. Indian interference in the affairs of its small neighbour can be gauged from the fact that in 2016, it tried to topple down the Nepalese government.  
In 2015, India created a humanitarian crisis in Nepal by blocking its supplies as New Delhi supported the Madheshis population against the Nepalese government. 
Pakistan’s former envoy to India, Mr. Basit also said that the world had seen how India under Modi tried to bully Nepal by imposing an economic blockade for months. 
“One must commend the people of Nepal for refusing to compromise their sovereignty and national dignity,” he said, adding that despite being a Hindu majority country, Nepal, too, remains apprehensive of the regressive worldview of Hindutva.
India’s controversial intervention in Sri Lanka’s civil war is also a case in point. Initially, the Indian Army supported Tamil Tigers despite being peacekeepers and then changed track. 
Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination in 1991 by Tamil Tigers was in response to this change of position. 
In recent years, Sri Lanka has moved closer to China, yet maintaining good relations with India. 
AVM Chaudhry said that even the recent communal troubles in Sri Lanka remain an extension and a manifestation of the trend in its closest neighbourhood India. “It is time for the world to take notice and pine for greater inclusiveness as a sine qua non for social and political stability in the region.”
Similarly, despite billions of dollars of trade, India’s relations with China remain distrustful and complicated. While one of the main bone of contentions is India’s dispute with China over Aksai Chin and Ladakh regions, New Delhi’s growing strategic relations with the United States are fundamentally aimed at containing Beijing. 
India wants to ensure that the Indian Ocean becomes its domain, but it is not in a position to counter China and its influence. Therefore, it has partnered with Australia, Japan and the U.S. to achieve this end. In an attempt to dominate the sea lanes, India and its allies are trying to establish their influence and control over islands stretching from Maldives to Diego Garcia and beyond by placing fighter aircraft, sea and air surveillance, naval ships and listening posts. India will gain the most if this happens.  
If this happens, not only maritime interests of China and Pakistan will be threatened but Gulf States, Indonesia and Malaysia and even Russia will be hurt. 
Pakistan and China have to develop a strategy to counter this move in which they have to ensure that Maldives maintains its autonomy and independence and doesn’t fall prey to India’s expansionist designs. New Delhi is trying to influence. Maldives and its politics through diplomacy as well as using its intelligence. It is trying to change the Islamic character of Maldives and create a negative image about Pakistan.  

In a nutshell, ‘Saffron’ India with its grand dream of emerging on the world stage as a major power, maintains from uneasy to outright hostile relations with all its neighbours. 
The dominance of aggressive Hindutva agenda, which is not a temporary phase in India, is widening cracks and fissures within the Indian polity as well as complicating and aggravating relations with neighbouring countries, threatening regional peace and stability. 

ENDS

The Other View

By Amir Zia

Monthly Newsline
July 2019

A slightly truncated version of this article was published in 'Monthly Newsline'.
https://newslinemagazine.com/magazine/the-other-view/

Surprisingly, it was under Gen. (R) Pervez Musharraf that the Pakistani media saw an unprecedented boom. The electronic media witnessed expansion, as he allowed private news and entertainment channels to open shop... At the insistence of Sheikh Rashid Ahmed, his information minister at the time, the military ruler also allowed cross-media ownership – a controversial decision that lead to the hegemony of select media tycoons. 

Is press freedom on the retreat in Pakistan? Are these the worst of times for those holding dissenting views in this land of the pure? Are visible and invisible hands out to gag the mainstream media?

A small, but influential group of individuals, including some prominent journalists, rights activists and frontline politicians, would like us to believe that the press remains under siege in the country. They claim that an unannounced censorship is at work and fear grip the media, as the number of red lines continue to increase. Similar views are echoed by the western media, which covers Pakistan in a superficial manner, and various foreign journalist organisations.

The local and the foreign critics feed one another to create an exaggerated and misleading impression about the alleged ‘sorry’ state of media and lack of press freedom in Pakistan.

Then, there are those who say that all is well and the Pakistani media enjoys an unprecedented level of freedom even to distort facts, push various political agendas, present half-truths and, sometimes, spew lies. According to this school of thought, the media remains overwhelmingly sensational: fake news and toxic arguments on social media are an example of the ‘limitless’ freedom of expression in the country.

Between these two extremes, lies a middle ground where one finds the situation neither that gloomy nor ideal enough to merit celebrations.

Absolute freedom of expression is a concept that is constantly being redefined, depending on the social, economic and political conditions of a country. A single yardstick cannot be applied universally.

Despite all the challenges of Pakistan’s struggling and flawed democracy, backward socio-economic order, conservative orientation and deeply religious roots, its media is vibrant, diverse, bold and candid.

It amplifies the voices of rights activists, ethnic groups, the oppressed classes and most religious minorities.

However, this remains an altogether different debate that genuine issues get trounced by sensational political statements, which dominate news channels and newspapers. But despite many flaws and skewed priorities, today the press in Pakistan is not in chains.        

Broadly speaking, there are two main yardsticks with which press freedom can be measured: historical and regional. The other finer details vary from country to country and region to region.    

Historically, press freedom has made huge strides in Pakistan since the country’s creation. Long gone are the days of the Press & Publication Ordinance (PPO) of 1962 that empowered the government to seize newspapers, shutdown media organisations and arrest journalists and editors.

The decade of the ‘70s, which witnessed dismemberment of Pakistan and the rise and fall of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto -- our first and, so far, the last civilian martial law administrator – proved far from ideal, despite the presence of a democratically elected government. Bhutto opted for high-handed actions against dissenting voices, from political opponents to poets, writers and journalists. But it was the former military ruler, Gen. Zia-ul-Haq, who added more bite to the PPO in 1980s, empowering the authorities to prosecute publishers if published news was not to the government’s likings. During the Zia era, censorship was tough, brutal and direct. His regime did not hesitate to lash journalists and put them behind the bars.

After Zia’s sudden death and the return of democracy in 1988, the media started to open up. The notorious PPO was revised, but successive elected governments and various political, ethnic and religious parties continued to target the press and take high-handed actions against newspapers and journalists. For instance, in his second stint in power, Nawaz Sharif used the might of state machinery to punish a critical media and arrest journalists. 

Surprisingly, it was under Gen. Pervez Musharraf that the Pakistani media saw an unprecedented boom. The electronic media witnessed expansion, as he allowed private news and entertainment channels and radio stations to open shop. At the insistence of Sheikh Rashid Ahmed, his information minister at that time, the military ruler also allowed cross-media ownership -- a controversial decision as it created hegemonies of select media tycoons.  

Ironically, the media liberalization and openness eventually contributed to Musharraf’s own fall, during his confrontation with the judiciary. His half-hearted attempts to muzzle select media outlets during the peak of the lawyers’ movement proved too little and too late. The media contributed in destabilizing his government.

After the 2008 general elections and to date, media managed to guard its turf despite many ups and downs, taking on successive governments and the mighty state institutions. Some media organisations carried out organized propaganda against the Pakistan Armed Forces and Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). But maligning of state institutions is not allowed and tolerated even in the most open democracies.

This resulted into on- and off- tiff between the state institutions and some media groups, leading to the blocking of their transmission and putting in place of obstacles in newspaper distribution.

The impasse between state institutions and some media groups was aggravated due to the non-implementation of libel and defamation laws and higher judiciary’s benevolent attitude towards the press. In the absence of legal recourse and an established code of conduct within the media organisations, there was hardly any independent platform where any aggrieved party could turn for a fair hearing and dispute resolution. The regulator proved too weak and politically influenced to carry out this task. 

Yet the Pakistani media operates in a freer atmosphere compared to past decades. Yes, there are problems, obstacles and even setbacks, but the media has expanded its boundaries. Many subjects, once taboo, are now openly discussed and debated. There are hardly any holy cows left; be it the government or state institutions, all are under the microscope.

There are, however, cultural and religious sensitivities that have to be taken into account. Pakistani journalists operate in an altogether different world compared to their counterparts say in the Western Europe or the United States. Several social and religious issues, while kosher in the West, are either discussed in a hushed manner in Pakistan, or seen from a different perspective because of the country’s religious moorings and its semi-tribal and semi-feudal roots.   

As Pakistan remains engaged in its longest internal war against terrorism, since 2001-02, and has hostile eastern and western frontiers, there are conflict areas where the media faces obstacles in reporting. Any state, faced by such internal and external threats, takes measures which are not a norm in times of peace.

However, with the passage of time, Pakistani press has expanded its boundaries. Its record compared to the other regional countries also stands out.

The Pakistani press is less jingoistic, more diverse and aggressive in questioning those in power compared to its counterparts in India -- touted as the world’s largest democracy. Pakistanis should be proud that while the Indian media overwhelmingly promotes the government and the state narrative without questioning, the Pakistani media does the complete opposite.

Similarly, if the condition of press freedom in Pakistan is compared to its two western neighbours – Iran and Afghanistan – and the one in the north, our great friend China, we stand head and shoulder above them all.

Out of more than 50 Muslim countries, including democracies such as Turkey, Bangladesh and Egypt, there is more freedom of expression in Pakistan. Its scorecard is also better than the Far Eastern countries such as Malaysia and Indonesia as well as secular countries like Singapore and South Korea.

Pakistani press is indeed on the march. Yet, the press has a long way to go. While expanding boundaries of freedom is an endless business, the media should also review itself critically and overcome short-comings and unprofessionalism in its ranks. Only an objective, fair, balanced and factual media will be able to keep expanding its boundaries.

ENDs