Why only Pakistanis?

It may well be that the London bombings happened only because of Britain's pillion-rider" (according to the think-tank Chatham House) status in the US assault on Iraq. It may well be that Muslims are enraged at what is happening to their own across the world. But why is it that most of the terrorists who go about the world trying to bomb themselves and others to oblivion have the deepest linkages to Pakistan? From Reid the shoe-bomber to three of the four London bombers, all of them had their teachers and guides in Pakistani madrassas? Why?
I ask because it is not as if we stand out in any way amongst the Ummah: it is not as if we are the most aware among our co-religionists; it is not that we are the best 'Muslims' that we should so 'stand up' for the down-trodden Iraqis and Afghans; neither is it that we as a people are the most politically sensitised. So why are we in the forefront of terrorism across the world? For those who would make the point that the three London bombers were born, brought up and educated in Britain and so their being of Pakistani descent is neither here nor there, I would ask why there aren't any Lebanese or Syrians or Libyans or Moroccans or Tunisians born, brought up and educated in England among the suicide bombers? Indeed, why aren't there any Iraqis and Afghans among them? Why?
Simple: Pakistan is the hub of terrorism it is due to the thousands of un-regulated madrassas teaching the poison that we saw spewed in London. All due to the fact that clerics can do in Pakistan what they want, in blatant disregard of the law no matter how loud the talk and how visible the posturing. Just listen carefully to what the mullahs say in their Friday sermons in the mosques and you will know what I mean. Every single khutba is laden with hate and rancour.
As I suggested last week, the mullahs are cosseted by the Establishment which goes back a long way with them. Do we not remember well the fact that the Establishment quite shamelessly used these pet obscurant mullahs and clerics against its enemies whenever it felt at risk: even internally against democratically elected civilian governments?
Indeed, so deep is our Establishment's involvement with terror that all manner of desperado and yahoo has been allowed to breeze into and out of our country, on his journey towards some dastardly act or the other: witness the beauty of Something or other Reid, who tried to blow up an airliner over the Atlantic, and who visited the Land of the Pure three or four times within the space of a year or so. How come? Let me ask for the umpteenth time: how did this man get a visa to travel to Pakistan considering the fact that he was a no-good petty criminal, a dirty, filthy, bum who lived on the mean streets of London? I mean it takes sifarish to get my Brit friends Pakistani visas longer than one month's duration, so how come Reid walked into and out of the country at will?
If the Big General REALLY wants to sort out the supporters of terror within the corridors of power in Islamabad the Beautiful, he should order an immediate inquiry into the granting of visas to Reid. I'll bet he'll find the godfathers of most of the bad boys who go about giving our country a bad name.
As an aside shouldn't we be grateful to the British for granting at least some Pakistanis five-year multiple-entry visas when we allow their citizens, very respectable ones too, just one month single-entry visas? Somebody in the FO/Interior Ministry wake up please: our visa officers in London should turn cart-wheels at every application to visit the Islamic Republic, considering the 'soft-image' getting softer and all.
More posturing: The Big General is quoted thus in our press, saying to General Abizaid the C-in-C Central Command and lord of all he surveys from Iraq to Afghanistan: "Now, we want our borders to be respected in the war of terrorism and will not put up with future border breaches." Obviously as a reaction to the Americans crossing the border in pursuit of the Taliban and killing 20-something of them two weeks ago. Of course, this was an action against Taliban whom we said were not there in the first place, when our various spokesmen locked horns with Zalmay Khalilzad, the ill-selected US ambassador to Afghanistan now despatched to Iraq.
How the General will enforce his warning to General Abizaid, a slightly BIGGER General than any of ours, commanding an Army a little more powerful than ours, we don't know. Could it be that our 'bum' gives him heart? Or the fact that he is a tight buddy of Dubya's? Neither will help I am afraid, which prompts me to say that this is yet another example of loud talk which can never be matched with action should the Americans decide to, say, cross the border another time or, say, bomb Parachinar tomorrow. Far better, is it not, that we try and keep our noses as clean as possible? And hope for the best?
Bushism of the week: "I think younger workers -- first of all, younger workers have been promised benefits the government -- promises that have been promised, benefits that we can't keep. That's just the way it is" – President George W. Bush; Washington, D.C., May 4, 2005

The writer is a retired army officer and a freelance columnist

VIEW: In the cross-hairs

—Kamran Shafi
I shudder to think what we might have done if four Brits had bombed people in Islamabad. By golly we would have gone on a mad killing spree and done tikka-boti of any Brit we could lay hands onSo then, there goes the government (or non-government, whichever you prefer to call it) of the Land of the Pure, stumbling into knee-jerk reaction after knee-jerk reaction just as soon as our country was named as the conduit through which passed at least three of those who blew themselves up and took at least 56 innocents with them: call them religious extremists, Islamic terrorists, bigots, whatever; and there goes the Big General, once more announcing the Fatherland’s nth arrival at the good old cross-roads. This as a direct upshot of the latest handiwork of the brain-washed and angry young men who are indoctrinated into committing the worst atrocities ie, killing the defenceless, their own co-religionists among them: this time around the dastardly London bombings. While we have been here before, at the cross-roads that is, many, many times since the General seized power, this may be the very last time that we find ourselves here. Judging from the world’s reaction to the London outrage, we are not going to be allowed to loaf around at the cross-roads as we have done heretofore, for very much longer. For, the time is finally here for the regime that holds us by the throat to deliver or else face dire circumstances in the immediate future. In actual fact, the Islamic Republic, far more than arriving once again at the cross-roads which we know so well, is in the cross-hairs like it has never been before. The reason for our present travails is not difficult to find: we have lived rather dangerously and at the very edge for very many years now, virtually spitting in the world’s face. Consider: How many times has the General held out the promise that he will take firm steps against the bigoted obscurantist? How many times has he proclaimed that “Enlightened Moderation” is the way forward? How many times has he indicated a roll-back of the awful laws brought in by the quite awful Zia ul Haq? And how many times has he made his much practised u-turns on all of the above? How many times has he taken the side of the backward mullah rather than that of the moderate? Each and every time strengthening the extremists and the obscurantists even further, to the detriment of most of us? Really, it is so infuriating!But does the General really think he is fooling anyone at all now that the wheel has come full-circle? He obviously thinks so judging from what he said to the gathered police officers at Islamabad the other day. From what I could glean from the Net editions of our newspapers for I am abroad at the moment, the General made it seem as if he was the most surprised at the “news” that the extremist organisations he had banned were back in business under assumed names. Really, sir? Well, lots and lots of us, all lay people with no access to the sort of “intelligence” you have at your disposal knew perfectly well that all the banned outfits renamed themselves on the very day they were banned, and were back in business the very next day. As a matter of fact the news of this sudden metamorphosis was splashed in all of the country’s newspapers repeatedly; as another, it was repeatedly commented upon by many of us who write in the press. So why are you so “surprised”, pray? Or was I always right when I said that you have long been isolated from reality by those you have chosen to surround yourself with? Indeed, if the intelligence wallahs are keeping the news from you, are the information wallahs doing likewise?It is also no good to exhort policemen to take action against the extremists when the State itself protects them with all facility through its pet, the establishment, and the “agencies”; it will do no good when his own junta not only made it convenient for the cleric to come to political power by making it impossible for the mass-based political parties to stay in the political arena and fight him, it needs the mullah’s help even now to stay in power. I mean which stone was left unturned to ensure the mullah’s ascendancy? I mean the truth is that the mullah and the military are fellow-travellers, isn’t it?Meanwhile, the British in keeping with their most famous national trait are facing the post-bombings situation with stoicism and resilience. And a sense of fair-play despite the extreme provocation. I shudder to think what we might have done in like circumstances: if four Brits had bombed people in Islamabad. By golly we would have gone on a mad killing spree and done tikka-boti of any Brit we could lay hands on, indeed of any gora. Let me leave you with this short story sent to me by an old and treasured friend: “My niece’s brother-in-law (20) has joined AL-DAWA. He disappeared recently. Her father-in-law requested X to accompany him to MANSEHRA where the boy was supposedly ‘under training’. He wanted his son to return home. They managed to reach the camp but after a dreadful experience returned post haste to Islamabad without even setting eyes on the boy. Weeks later he returned and told his parents that they should accept his decision or he will never return home. He is to be paid a stipend of rupees 1500/-month. The “worker” (they have an Arabic name for recruiters which translates into ‘a worker’) who recruited him lives with his two wives in a plush apartment in F-11, and will reportedly get Rupees 0.7 million when they feel that the recruit is a confirmed Jihadi. Not a bad bargain for luring and brainwashing someone else’s child. But the question is: how can this be going on in a country like Pakistan where nothing moves without the consent of Rawalpindi (GHQ)?”So there you have it, gentle reader!

Bushism of the week: “The relations with, uhh — Europe are important relations, and they’ve, uhh — because, we do share values. And, they’re universal values, they’re not American values or, you know — European values, they’re universal values. And those values — uhh — being universal, ought to be applied everywhere.” — President George W Bush; press conference with European Union dignitaries; Washington, DC, June 20, 2005. Kamran Shafi is a freelance columnist

The Great Khan and the General —Kamran Shafi

Please get out of politics of which you understand neither head nor tail, set up a cricket academy for the children of the disadvantaged, and divide your time between your hospital and the academy. What a name you will make for yourselfWashington Post had a story the other day, also reported in this newspaper by Mr Khalid Hasan, that quoted Imran Khan going after the Big General hammer and tongs, calling him names such as “jackal”, and making statements to the effect that his party would do well in the coming elections etcetera. This was part of his strategy to try and fill the vacuum created in Pakistani politics by the Establishment-engineered exclusion of the two largest political parties and their leaders from the arena, and by positioning himself as the leader of the forces that are anti-the General.

Before we go any further, let me once again state where I stand: I am for fair and free elections in which no one is excluded, not Nawaz Sharif not Benazir Bhutto, not indeed Imran; and now because he is very much a politician, neither the General himself; elections which are held under an independent election commission that has the approval of all the political leaders of the country; after which election power is handed in an orderly manner to the political party(ies) that win the largest number of seats in the legislatures. After which, it goes without saying, the army returns to the barracks and pulls its nose out of politics irrevocably, forever. Now then, is this the time that “all good men must come to the aid of the party” as that old typing lesson read? If it is, and if the choice is between the General and Imran Khan we must look hard at the both of them.

Whilst this column and others have faithfully recounted the General’s shenanigans for five years now: the U-turns and the one-step forward, nine back manoeuvres that only he can execute, and the most ludicrous situations he lets himself get into for the sake of “buddies” — such as being photographed standing beneath a portrait of Chaudhry Zahoor Elahi the founder of the House of Zahoor much as others stand beneath the likeness of the Quaid-e-Azam — we must look at the evidence that goes against Imran too.While he is undeniably one of the greatest sportsmen ever, and while he has to be appreciated greatly for putting up a super hospital, all of the moves he has made since taking up politics were/are ill advised, even foolish and opportunistic. He spoke deprecatingly and loudly and often against “Brown Sahibs” ie, people who wear Western clothes in Pakistan while he himself did likewise when abroad, particularly while dancing the night away in nightclubs and joints such as the snooty Annabelle’s dressed in DJs. He wrote reams supporting Jirga justice, and against women working outside the home: he had the audacity indeed, to suggest that women were better employed having children and bringing up the next generation (of the super-race, on the lines of Hitler’s Nazi Germany?). There was also the matter of that paternity thing which, if handled in a straight-forward manner would have only raised Imran’s stature in the eyes of the majority of this country’s good and kind people. That is not all. He went blue in the face insisting against clear evidence, that Sir James Goldsmith was not Jewish, as if anybody gave a damn if he was. I mean if a case had to be made against an Establishment which might try and turn Sir James’ religion into a stick with which to beat Imran, he could have countered with invoking the name of Henry Kissinger out of whose hands the most powerful of the most powerful Pakistanis ate.

I mean, according to another recent report by Mr Khalid Hasan in the Dailytimes, even the present dispensation asks him for advice: Kissinger even suggesting to the Big General the term “Enlightened Moderation”. In any case Jemima Goldsmith was a well-liked figure in Pakistan — when did her father’s professed religion ever colour people’s perceptions of her?More than any other instance that shows us Imran Khan’s character is that in which he was caught red-handed poaching partridges in Chakwal along with several of his influential friends. Now, while the game-watcher who challaned Imran and friends for the crime and confiscated the shot birds insists he was the man who booked him, Imran has consistently stuck to stout denial. While there is over-whelming evidence, the man will simply not admit his fault and apologise and promise he will never poach again. It is another matter that the State failed to prosecute him at the time because the wheels of influence and back-scratching came into motion and brought the whole proceeding to a grinding halt. It is yet another matter that in a country where very few in government do an honest days work, a poor game-watcher did his with great courage. May I once more call upon the Big General to take note of the game-watcher’s diligence and award him a high civil award.Worse than any of the above of course, is Imran Khan’s putting his lot in with the backward cleric for political expediency. By far the worse.There is time, however, for Imran Khan to apologise for his past transgressions and redeem himself in the eyes of the people, just as there is time for others in public life. Such as Mushahid “Mandela” Hussain who should apologise for his: namely using foul language against his boss “Miansaab” Nawaz Sharif’s opponents; not lifting a finger to protect the press and innocent journalists from the wrath of the more royal than the king Saifur Rehman of Redco; and last but certainly not the least having the impudence of comparing, even in the slightest way, his three-star confinement of a few months to Nelson Mandela’s solitary, rigorous imprisonment extending over 27 years. There is still time for both of them.Let me end with sincere advice to Imran Khan: please get out of politics of which you understand neither head nor tail, set up a cricket academy for the children of the disadvantaged, and divide your time between your hospital (which really needs you, by the way) and the academy. What a name you will make for yourself.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Shiekh Rashid ‘Tulli’ has once again agreed 100 percent with whatever the General has said in the past few days, and has extolled his boss’s great efforts in the “larger national interest”. This came right on the heals of Private Banker Shaukat Aziz agreeing with everything the General told him in a meeting to prepare Shaukat for his turn at the Pakistani Flying Circus which will take him to four countries over several weeks, the climax of which will be a visit to the Mecca of all Pakistani “leaders” — Washington DC. By golly, the man has arrived — his drawing rooms across the world thenceforwards boasting signed photographs of Dubya. God is surely in His heaven and all is right with the world.But may one ask what the great story is in “Tulli” and Private Banker agreeing with the Biggest General of them all, when the two dare say boo to a colonel? Could they have disagreed with the Big General, even in their wildest dreams? Where’s the story?

Bushisms of the Week: “But if you’ve been laid off work, you’re 100 percent unemployed, and I worry about it”— President George W Bush; Green Bay, Wisconsin, September 3, 2001. “Just remember it’s the birds that’s supposed to suffer, not the hunter” — Advising quail hunter Senator Pete Domenici — Roswell, New Mexico; January 22, 2004.

PS: In the unlikely event that I vote in an election in which Imran and the General are the only candidates, my vote will go to the General.