Truths and dialogue
Javed Jabbar | September 16, 2021 | Published in DAWN. Truths and dialogue THERE are hard truths in both the polarised positions of the federal government and the non-state, multi-media sector on the proposed Pakistan Media Development Authority (PMDA). Convergence in communication technology merges print, electronic, cinematic and digital media content into a single stream available on all smartphones. Authentic information floats side by side with fake news and disinformation. They often overlap to become indistinguishable. Where one part of the flow is produced through reliable professional journalism, the other can be let loose by hostile forces to inject confusion. Or even by a single individual who forwards false claims that millions exchange within minutes. In between there are the lethal half-truths masquerading under the façade of ‘recognised’ but defective journalism. Regulating media in 2021 is a global dilemma. In another country that broadly shares with Pakistan a noisy, diverse civil and political society, even one as ‘advanced’ as the US, the private platform Twitter bans former president Trump because he tweets falsehoods. A strongly contrasting country like China does not even permit the abandon of Google, Facebook or Twitter. It sponsors local platforms like WeChat, TenCent, SinaWeibo. Virtually all content is controlled. In the media today, organised chaos as well as rigid limits are realities side by side with oceans of information, education and entertainment. Rigid limits coexist with information in the mediascape. Despite some valid reservations, freedom of expression in Pakistan’s media is far higher than reflected by global indices. Even sacred cows like the armed forces and judiciary are often assailed, openly or obliquely. But the government’s intention to legislate the PMDA law is conceptually flawed and operationally impractical. It seeks a monolithic response to multiplistic conditions. Post 18th Amendment, there are multiple legal, regulatory jurisdictions at the federal and provincial levels. Whereas the regulation of electronic media and telecommunication is federal, the regulation of print media is in the provinces. In addition to such vertical jurisdictional splits, PMDA attempts to ensure payment of wages to media workers. There are bound to be horizontal jurisdictional tangles too because civil courts, labour courts and trade dispute resolution forums operate at local, provincial levels. The MCC process conveys inappropriate authoritarianism through words like ‘summon’ and ‘call for explanation’. Some media workers often face delays in receiving due wages and suffer unfair conditions. This again raises the issue of multiple jurisdictions, eg how can a federally based MCC intrude into the purely provincial aspect of ensuring that a local newspaper in a province fulfils obligations? Several legal and procedural issues will obstruct such attempts. And the suggested media tribunals will supplant the high courts! Any such act of parliament would violate the principle of due process guaranteed by the Constitution and be struck down by the Supreme Court. The all-encompassing scope proposed for the Media Complaints Commission by PMDA is neither feasible nor advisable. A mandate for a new entity to cope with millions of bits of information generated every day becomes a recipe for a huge new bureaucracy — with potential in the worst aspects of such a structure. Perhaps the most unwelcome aspect of the PMDA controversy is that polarised opinions have shifted attention from where it is most needed ie honest, self-critical appraisal by media owners, content originators, editors, publishers and senior journalists on the need to enhance journalistic standards and for major internal reforms, especially in the electronic media. Regrettably, there are occasional reprehensible attacks on individual journalists, sometimes with grievous consequences. By one estimate, over 70 journalists have died tragically and unnaturally in Pakistan in the past 20 years. A few others are deprived of professional occupation and income. Covert pressure is also applied on media owners. Such episodes should not occur. The buck stops with the state. But there’s also the fact that independent private media are, for the most part, neither transparent in their financial interests (particularly in non-media sectors) nor accountable for numerous lapses in taste, balance, tone, accuracy and propriety in media content, and for sheer substandard journalism. The government should conduct a patient, sustained dialogue with all stakeholders and help shape a consensus on reform comprising new state regulation, new self-regulation and new social regulation. Pakistan is privileged to possess a large number of individuals in all categories of media, and civil and political society who have knowledge, experience, values and vision that can energise and validate a new progressive approach to the challenge of convergence, fair regulation and responsible freedom of expression. The writer is a former senator and federal minister of information & broadcasting. www.javedjabbar.net Published in Dawn, September 16th, 2021
The Two-Nation Reality Versus Theory
Javed Jabbar | December 23, 2021 | Published in DAWN. The Two-Nation Reality Versus Theory Just three days after Pakistan observes March 23 as the Pakistan Day to mark the anniversary of the adoption of the Lahore Resolution in 1940, Bangladesh observes March 26 as its own Independence Day. The proximity of these two historic dates — March 23 and 26 — highlights the contrasting contexts through which the two countries that once together represented a single entity view them. In 2021 there is special celebration because it marks the 50th year of that country’s independence. It was on that day in 1971, when General Yahya Khan, who was the president and the commander-in-chief of Pakistan Army at the time, committed the second catastrophic error of that year by launching Operation Searchlight. The aim of the operation was to crush the non-violent but also violent civil disobedience movement of the Awami League that had begun on March 1 in response to the first catastrophic blunder by the same general; the last-minute postponement of the first session of the newly-elected National Assembly set for March 3. That first error was compounded by the failure to specify a fresh date. This came five days later and set March 25 for the session. By then, however, trust had been totally shattered. For the record, the same General Yahya Khan took three wise, progressive actions in 1970. Two of them directly benefitted Bengali East Pakistanis. The first was the decision to hold elections on the basis of one-adult-one-vote. This would accurately reflect the fact that the majority of the country’s population lives in East Pakistan, a fact not previously electorally recognised. The second action was the conduct of the elections themselves in December 1970 on a free and fair basis which alone enabled the massive victory for the Awami League. The third positive action was the abolition of One Unit in West Pakistan and the restoration of the four provinces in what at the time was West Pakistan. The first of the two dates, March 23, is a landmark in the continuing evolution of Muslim nationalism in South Asia and the struggle for a new nation-state in Muslim-majority regions, East and West. The Lahore Resolution was formally introduced by Fazlul Haq, a veteran leader of Bengal. The second date, March 26, is when the descent into disintegration began of the nation-state established on August 14, 1947. This occurred nine months later on December 16, 1971. That change was enforced only because India’s armed forces — hugely outnumbering the under-resourced Pakistani forces — blatantly violated the territorial sovereignty of East Pakistan on November 21, 1971. Yet, despite that surgical separation, there remains a binding umbilical cord between the two parts that were previously together for over 24 years. That chord is the basic thematic synergy between the two dates. They have become enduring milestones to mark the predominantly Muslim national identities of both Pakistan and Bangladesh. Though there are multiple definitions of what constitutes a ‘nation’, there is also unanimity that nations certainly exist. Even before the violent conflict of nine months, Bengali East Pakistanis had justifiably felt they were the victims of discrimination by West Pakistanis. Though significant development took place in East Pakistan after independence, the quantum was not enough to make up in only 24 years for the long neglect of Bengal for about 200 years — first by the British East India Company and then by the British government itself. Rejection of state, not Muslim identity On March 26 and December 16, 1971, East Pakistan rejected the state structure of the original edifice of Pakistan. However, by becoming Bangladesh, the people of what once used to be East Bengal reaffirmed with passion their abiding belief in the Two-Nation Reality; that Muslims and Hindus are two distinct, separate nations. Neither in 1971 nor today in 2021 does Bangladesh want to reunite itself with Hindu West Bengal. Nor does it want to be absorbed into India. The pride the people of Bangladesh feel about being Muslims is fully evident in Article 2A of their Constitution. While aptly recognising the equal respect owed to other religions, Article 2A begins with the categorical statement: “The state religion of the Republic is Islam …” By dictionary-definition, a theory is a “supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something …” In practical terms, reality comes before theory. Because a theory seeks to ‘explain’ what already exists. Gravity, for instance, existed long before Newton formulated the theory. Muslims of South Asia — notwithstanding their numerous internal diversities of languages and ethnicities — were long possessed of a sense of being a nation, co-existing with a broad Hindu nation — with its own vast internal diversities — in the same region. Historic origins The evolution of the Two-Nation Reality has been taking place in two major dimensions and phases. The first dimension is territorial and pre-Muslim. It began about 7,000 years ago with Mehergarh in Balochistan preceding Moenjodaro in Sindh by about 2,000 years as part of the Indus Valley civilisation, which gave way to the ascent of Buddhism as seen in Taxila and Swat. Except for about 700 years (Mauryan BC — Turko-Mughal-British) the areas that now constitute Pakistan were autonomous, locally-ruled or mostly dominated by forces from West and Central Asia. The second phase commenced about 1,300 years ago. It added a new religious Muslim dimension to the territorial, ancestral, cultural heritages already there, later blending with mass migration from the east of the Indus post-1947. The advent came with the first Muslims moving into South Asia in the 7th and 8th centuries, be they newly-converted Arab Muslim traders setting foot on the Kerala coast of south-west Asia or, a few decades later, Muhammad Bin Qasim’s invasion of Sindh. As early as the 11th century, the sharp contrasts between Muslims and Hindus in the region were noted by the formidable Persian scholar-traveller, Abu Rayhan Al Biruni, who visited South Asia in 1017 and then
Saving the Quaid
Javed Jabbar | December 25, 2020 | Published in DAWN. Saving the Quaid In a country where the name and the face of Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah is ubiquitous — on currency notes, stamps, portraits on office walls, media — is the title of this reflection at all pertinent? The personality is so widely visible and continuously accessible that, in one way or another, he is present in everyone’s life, from collective memory to individual mind, in virtually every pocket, but, more importantly, in virtually every heart. So why should someone with such a pervasive presence require ‘saving’? Perhaps the proliferation of his persona is precisely the reason why the core of his real persona needs to be retrieved and protected. To map the path of our search, seven threats can be identified. Each of them represents the paradox of how the massive popularity of a deceased human being enhances the vulnerability of his identity to the diverse impacts of time and history. Killing Me Softly: Ironically, the first danger that Mr. Jinnah faces comes from the ceremonial expression of abundant affection for him. One is reminded of the name of a song that says it all so well: ‘Killing me softly’. The fixed, predictable regularity for the formality of homage objectifies and freezes him on national and landmark days. The ceremonial dimension is intrinsic to the act of honouring beliefs, persons and ideas which communities and nations hold dear and indispensable. Yet, where ceremony highlights principal features, ‘ceremoniality’ often obscures other characteristics that are awkward or inconvenient to recall or revive on the record. Though special reports, like the one in hand, fulfil a vital function of providing information and insights, the harsh fact is that such reports are the least read sections of a newspaper because the readers tend to assume that they already know what is likely to have been written and has been published about a figure they think they know so well. Making Him A Deity: The second danger is in a neck-to-neck race with the first. Deification. To a considerable extent, this has already taken place. Without becoming a heretical deity, Mr. Jinnah has received unrivalled adulation. This depth of adoration is made all the more notable because it began before the creation of Pakistan. The admiration for him swelled and inspired tens of millions even as he combated the ravages of disease for the 13 months in which he was able to live in the independent country. Unlike some other countries where the foundation of in dependence was shared in equal, or in varying measures between two or three leaders, in the case of Pakistan there was a phenomenal singularity of leadership. Such dominance by one individual alone did not detract from the valued support rendered by several of his colleagues, most prominent of whom was Quaid-i-Millat Liaquat Ali Khan. But the Quaid-i-Azam was regarded by all — even by some of his worst detractors — as being in a class of his own. Justly deserved profound respect brings with it the pleasures as well as, more disturbingly, the perils of mythification; the congenital twin of deification. The figure becomes so supreme as to assume perfection. While such a condition should certainly remain an ideal for all human beings, it is sobering to remember that, after all, we are talking of mortal beings. While there is a view of Mr. Jinnah’s role that dissents from deification, convictions about him and attitudes to his role are overwhelmingly reverential. And this is exactly the danger that he should be protected from. Instead of putting him on a pedestal, he needs to be seen as the first among equals; Pakistan’s first and foremost citizen: unshakable in his determination, deliberately ignoring, if not concealing the devastating impact of his illness in order to protect the people of a fragile, awkwardly constructed new nation-state from further insecurity, and facing death with unflinching dignity. Saving Him Physically: A brief diversion beckons. Because the episode was about the attempt to physically save the Quaid — as distinct from now when we consider saving him for future history, one should periodically re-read the slim but revealing book With the Quaid-i-Azam in his Last Days (OUP; 2011), by his physician Lt. Col. Dr. Ilahi Bakhsh, to realise afresh how heroic and human he was to the very end. It is another tragedy altogether with regard to how a quasi-deity had to endure rudimentary disregard by those who should have shown far greater responsibility for his comfort during his last journey and on his last day of life. Even though senior government functionaries had visited him in Ziarat in the last week of July and early August, 1948, and were aware of the extremely fragile condition of the Quaid, and even though they and others knew that he was being rushed to Karachi by special aircraft in the afternoon of Sep 11, not a single cabinet member was present at the Mauripur Airport to receive him on arrival. His military secretary greeted him. The discourtesy then becomes nightmarishly bizarre when the ambulance supposedly meant to speed him to the Governor General’s House has an engine failure after covering only about 6.4 kilometres of the 16km distance. As the ambulance did not display the flag of the governor general, trucks and cars passing the stranded vehicle did not stop. Nor could his doctor risk transferring a rapidly weakening Mr. Jinnah to a new vehicle. By the time another ambulance arrived and the group managed to reach the destination, it had taken almost two hours to get from the airport to his residence. And all this while, there was no sign of any government figure around. This inexplicable and inexcusable failure to ensure personal presence when the head of the state — leave alone a quasi-deity — was virtually at death’s door remains a shoddy mystery. Did this tragic finale have any connection to certain aspects of the Quaid’s views about how some of
Single National Curriculum – Multiple perceptions
Javed Jabbar | October, 2020 | Published in Narratives. The formulation of a Single National Curriculum (SNC) initially for schools and madressahs in all segments of Pakistan’s education sector is being conducted by the Ministry of Federal Education for about the past 2 years. The process reflects, as of the time of writing this text on 15th September 2020, dimensions of both a consensus as well as controversy and contradictions. The SNC is a prominent part of the 2018 election manifesto of PTI. There is perhaps an unspoken yet real desire to complete the process of formulation and its implementation by the next election in 2023. While the aim of attempting implementation within an electoral term is understandable, it is hoped that an accelerated pace is not pressed purely for partisan electoral purposes. This subject is of crucial importance for the present and future generations of Pakistanis. From 2006 to 2020: It is pertinent to note that the Government led by President Pervez Musharraf in 2006 had introduced a National Curriculum from which the new version derives significant parts. Implementation and monitoring of the 2006 NC was derailed by the events of 2007-2008 that ended the tenure of Pervez Musharraf. While about 60 per cent of the 2006 NC has been rightly retained in the 2020 SNC, the section of the 2020 SNC dealing with subjects such as Computer Science has introduced about 70 per cent new material in order to reflect new developments in science and technology over the past 14 years. Formidable challenge: The individual leading this process in 2020 is Shafqat Mahmood, the Minister of Federal Education, Professional Training and National Heritage. He has demonstrated qualities of balance and moderation. He is willing to listen with patience and respect for critical and sceptical comments on the process and the draft text of the SNC. He is ably assisted by Rafiq Tahir, Director General in the Ministry. The task is unenviable: to reconcile viewpoints that are polar opposites on basic issues and to forge a consensus between the Federal Centre and the 4 Provinces and Regions as also a consensus between sub-sectors and institutions within the 5 broad sectors of one Federation, four Provinces and Regions. For example, between the civil and the military spheres of school education, between public sector and private sector (further sub-divided into high-fee schools and low-fee schools), between conventional systems and diverse religious madressah systems. Many mis-perceptions: Some principal perceptions — or mis-perceptions — are being presently projected in the discussion unfolding in both print and electronic media. One is that the SNC is being imposed by the Federal Centre on the 4 Provinces. This perception blithely ignores the fact that, particularly after the 18th Constitutional Amendment of 2010, the Federal Centre does not have the power and authority to arbitrarily impose the SNC on any Province. This mis-perception also strangely ignores the hard fact that, from the start of the process in end-2018 to date in 2020, all 4 Provinces have willingly participated in deliberations. Provinces and regions retain full discretionary powers to interpret the implementation of the SNC when they, in turn, formulate their respective Schemes of Studies which take the process of implementing the SNC to a brass-tacks level. Provinces have already contributed their comments. In the case of Sindh, total, unqualified endorsement has been withheld on some aspects. This last reservation is reportedly related to the religion-related content proposed in the draft SNC. But this should not come as a surprise. Even when, in 2017, before the initiation of the on-going consultative process of SNC by the PTI Government, the Compulsory Reading of the Holy Quran (Nazira-e-Quran) law was enacted during the PML(N) Government both at the Federal and Provincial levels, Sindh was the only Province which did not enact the law that requires the mandatory reading of the Holy Quran to be initiated from Class-I. Thus, the draft SNC currently being discussed in 2020 has to be read in conjunction with a legally-mandated provision inherited from the previous Government. Without proposing memorization, fully authenticated sections of the Hadith are required to be read. Presumably due to the engineered hyper-sensitivity about anything to do with Islam, the PTI Government at the Centre, in Punjab and KP and its allies in Balochistan have not attempted to amend or reverse the Nazira-e-Quran law. Sindh remains consistent in its reservations. A second mis-perception about the draft SNC is that it seeks to arbitrarily uniformize and regimentize the content of education and thereby suppress the rich diversity and pluralism that is an intrinsic element of Pakistani society. A perusal of the draft SNC will conclusively establish that this is an incorrect and mis-leading contention. There are several explicit acknowledgements of the cultural, linguistic, ethnic diversity within the Pakistani nation. At the same time, just as in other countries, there is advocacy for the building of a broad, basic, irreducible, unifying national identity. It is possible for the co-existence of pluralism and of singularity as long as they are aptly contextualized. Curriculum, NOT a Cure-All: A third mis-perception being projected is that the SNC claims to address — or does not address? — all the crucial, fundamental problems that afflict education in Pakistan. For instance: training of teachers; severely inadequate physical infrastructure in government schools; emphasis on rote-learning; deficiencies in educational aids; flaws in evaluation aspects et al. At no point in the draft is there an attempt to either ignore or to promise resolution of these problematic issues because these are beyond the scope of the SNC. The vital operational facets need to be addressed separately and urgently by each government entity concerned. Further, contrary to the allegations about undue standardization, the draft SNC repeatedly stresses encouragement of critical and creative thinking and for the first time offers ways to tangibly assess the impact of education through Student Learning Outcomes and through evaluations of teacher performance. The religion dimension: There is then the assertion being made, especially in sections of English
The Ideology of Pakistan….ambivalent, dynamic, evolving
Javed Jabbar | June-September, 2020 | Published in Scholarly Journal Criterion Quarterly. September 30, 2020/0 Comments/in Articles, Beliefs, Capitalist, Dogma, Equality, Fraternity, History, Ideas, Ideology, Islam, Islamization, Liberty, Nationalism, Pakistan, Progress, Radical, Religion, Socialist, Theory, Vol 15 No. 3 / Javed Jabbar* *The writer is a former Senator and Federal Minister; author of, among other books: “Pakistan — unique origins; unique destiny?” and “What is Pakistaniat?”. www.javedjabbar.net. Abstract (In this paper the author traces and analysis the evolutionary journey of the ideology of Pakistan which is “a true work-in-progress.” – Editor) Let us commence with definitions of the term “ideology”. The plural is deliberately used. Like beauty, ideology often lies in the eye of the beholder. Or the formulator. Or its user. Or its adaptor. Or its practitioner. The multiplicity is inevitable. Which should not deter us from noting a few definitions that illustrate the range of approaches to the word. Historian E. H. Erikson writes: “(Ideology)… is an unconscious tendency underlying religion and scientific as well as political thought: the tendency at a given time to make facts amenable to ideas, and ideas to facts, in order to create a world image convincing enough to support the collective and individual sense of identity.”1 Yugoslavian philosopher Mihailo Markovic explains: “Ideology is… the ensemble of ideas and theories with which a class expresses its interests, its aims and the norms of its activity.”2 After citing both of them, South Asian analyst, Asghar Ali Engineer, summarizes: “Whereas science establishes what is, ideology establishes what ought to be.”3 Scholar Dr. Fazlur Rahman in referring to religious orthodoxy as a prime source of Islamic ideology, writes: “Islamic orthodoxy…is characterized by an indistinguishable blend of reinvigorated fundamentalism and progressivism; it develops not by self-propulsion, so to say, but by watching, adjusting and absorbing within itself that which moves within it.”4 With specific reference to ideologies in the Middle East and Pakistan, as studied by them up to about 1987, Fred Halliday and Hamza Alavi observe: “…ideologies denote sets of beliefs concerning social and political issues… which purport to explain why the world is as it is, how it came to be so, and what the goals of political action should be”. They further state that, in developing societies, “… ideologies have an enhanced role as the articulators of uncertainty and of contesting demands, both internally and internationally, as well as serving to instill acceptance of new and apparently arbitrary political entities.”5 Two definitions of ideology in the Oxford English Dictionary are: “A system of ideas and ideals, specially one which forms the basis of economic or political theory and practice.” And: “The ideas and manner of thinking of a group, social class, or individual.”6 From psychology to history, from theology to economics, from facts to myths – past, present, future – ideologies embrace them all. In turn, ideologies are changed by the embrace. Every nation-state has an ideology. It may not be formally termed an “ideology” in every case. In the form of a Constitution, or by a declaration, or through laws, judicial verdicts, even unwritten yet accepted conventions, together or individually, a set of principles and parameters serve as the defining portrait of a country, its heritage and its hopes. In many cases, ideologies are partly or wholly derived from religions, as the major belief-systems of humanity. This is true even of states that stress their secular, non-religion-oriented character. Icons as well as ideas about faith are adapted or absorbed into texts, flags, ceremonies, phrases: in subliminal yet unmistakable ways, religion is a prime source for the charters of states. The cross has been widely used in modified form as the leitmotif for the flags of major western, ostensibly secular but pre-dominantly Christian countries. The crescent appears on the flags of several Muslim nations. In recent decades, in some western countries, in sections of academia and public discourse, the concepts of ideology and nationalism have come to be regarded with scepticism, and often with outright hostility. As a fall-out from the causes and consequences of World War II and the Cold War, the destructive excesses of Fascism, National Socialism and Communism in the Soviet Union and China, and now in a post- Communist Russia, and the rise of an ugly populism, ideology and nationalism are seen as potentially sinister threats to individual liberty and democracy. We should guard against succumbing to this view, while remaining vigilant against chauvinistic forms of national assertion. Self-centered individual liberty and systemically flawed democracy, in turn, themselves threaten cohesion and stability of nation-states that are capable of using ideology to mobilize energy for constructive goals and to focus on human advancement. Ideologies have categories: A categorization of ideologies is also relevant before we address the specific question of the ideology of Pakistan. In this writer’s view, there are five broad types. First: Theological ideologies, based on, and driven by religious beliefs. With such beliefs being interpreted or practiced in diverse ways by adherents and sects of the same faith. Zionism and Israel are examples. Second: Sociological ideologies, shaped by territory, ethnicity, cultural chemistry. Switzerland ‘s sense of Swiss singularity while containing treble internal diversity: German, French, Italian. And on the other hand, Bangladesh with dominant internal homogeneity. These are contrasting, yet illustrative in a shared category. Third: Economic ideologies: Socialist, Communist, Capitalist. Phases of Scandinavian eras, former USSR, China, USA are pertinent. Fourth: Liberationist ideologies. As in Algeria, Vietnam, South Africa. Fifth: Hybrid ideologies. Comprising one or more features from the other four. Pakistan is a prime example, shaped by parts – but not wholly – of the first category, and certainly by parts of the others. Other examples abound where there is overlap between the five niches. Some changes are inevitable: All ideologies change with time and with the experience of conditions created by forces beyond the control of a particular ideology’s proponents. They also change due to conditions resulting from the ideologists’ own
Into the Future via the Past
Javed Jabbar | August 14, 2020 | Published in DAWN. PERHAPS the ideal way to go forward is to turn around and go back. Not as a retreat, but as a rediscovery in order to re-energise and to create a better tomorrow. The prevalence of the pandemic today should neither befog our vision for the future nor our remembrance of the past. There is a need to step away from the present — which is too much with us. The 24-hour news cycle of electronic media and the anarchy of social media justify a brief drone-borne-like overview of certain yesterdays. Generations born in the 1930s, 1940s and early 1950s who lived through those days are receding. Successive generations of Pakistanis, especially the young, deserve to be informed about the times when Pakistan was also truly young. See: Pakistan — a history through posters, papers and assorted paraphernalia The tragic disintegration of the original Pakistan in 1971 has obscured our recall of the first 24 years of the country’s life. That phase is generally seen as though the newborn state was simply tip-toeing toward a disaster foretold at its birth by ill-wishers in India, such as Sardar Patel who had given only about six months for our survival. The political instability reflected in seven prime ministerial changes in 11 years from 1947 to 1958, while India continued with the single same person as PM, the brewing tensions in East Pakistan due to West Pakistan’s insensitive disregard for the majority, the imposition of One Unit, and the shift from civil democracy to military dictatorship in 1958 have diverted attention from a virtual miracle — the early years of Pakistan. A virtual miracle Of about that initial quarter-century, the 18 years between 1947 and 1965, in particular, deserve reexamination. Though the September 1965 war with India was fought only on the West Pakistan front, that conflict deepened the inter-wing distrust, accelerated the pace toward the break-up and, in the context of this brief essay, distorted the human-made miracle born on August 14, 1947. For in those years, there were two parallel tracks travelled by the Pakistani train of time. Also read: A look at some of the historic moments that have shaped Pakistan The visible, far more remembered track featured the tumult and turbulence cited above. Though occasionally referred to, the other track has tended to fade from vivid public memory. On this track, often quietly, sometimes audibly there were those elements which fueled the engine of Pakistani resilience. This quality, despite being sledge-hammered in 1971, enabled the residual part of the original state to rapidly revive the momentum set in the early phase. Almost half-a-century later, Pakistan is acknowledged as a country of regional and global geopolitical significance; notwithstanding our several flaws and failures that receive incessant, if not excessive, attention every day and night. Let us always remember the conditions of our commencement. Incomparable disadvantages in physical infrastructure and resources because the areas that were rightly — but in other areas, also unjustly, arbitrarily — allotted to India possessed most of the well-developed infrastructure from pre-1947 years. Only 10 weeks’ advance notice was given for the establishment of a whole new State in which about 70 million people would be citizens. The Plan was announced on June 3, 1947. Independence came August 14, 1947. Two wings with approximately equal populations were separated by 1,000 miles of hostile territory. Over-flights to connect the two wings by the shortest route were subject to approval by the hostile neighbour. As a perverse bonus, there was a second hostile neighbour in Afghanistan which became the sole UN member to briefly oppose our application for membership. The new state was swamped by about 8-10 million refugees within the first 12 months. This shift represented the largest-ever migration in contemporary eras in so short a period. While the original residents of Punjab and Sindh in particular opened their lands, hearts and homes to accommodate the bulk of refugees until new housing became available, in East Pakistan too, thousands of refugees from Assam, West Bengal and Bihar were welcomed and settled. Within 10 weeks, we were obliged to protect Kashmir from being completely and illegally usurped by India. Direly needed equipment and funds from a pre-agreed share were deliberately withheld by India which also, temporarily but menacingly, stopped water flows into Punjab. Those are some reasons why Pakistan is the single most uniquely-created nation-state in world history. And why it was compelled to become a security-oriented state from the outset. A new chemistry On the parallel track, more than one engine powered the infant state onward. Those engines were the qualities of tenacity, ingenuity, the will to work, generous compassion, and blind faith in the capacity to survive against all odds. Overnight, millions of strangers became neighbours and friends. Overcoming all the problems, a new chemistry of co-existence fizzed and bubbled. A new sociology fused ancient soil with new souls. A functioning structure for an awkwardly-placed state was swiftly assembled like a Meccano set. The system began to work quickly and well. The forefathers of a now much-maligned bureaucracy worked with frugal means, but with fevered determination. Many without desks, chairs, papers and cars nevertheless ensured efficient administration and competent management. Policy-makers defied British and Indian pressure to devalue the rupee in 1949 following devaluations by those countries. India retaliated by suspending trade. But soon, the Korean war, which began in 1950, opened new opportunities for the export of commodities. In 1952-53, our GDP growth achieved the brief, yet spectacular rate of 10.22pc while the average rate up to 1958 was 3-4pc, a very steady, healthy rate in those conditions. Between 1958 and 1965, GDP growth moved up to 5pc and even 9.3pc per annum. So impressive was Pakistan’s economic performance that India’s comparatively sluggish pace was labelled “the Hindu rate of growth” by some of India’s own analysts envious of the Muslim neighbour’s progress. On a visit by this writer to South Korea a few
As we Pakistanis isolate the virus, and reassert our resilience — let’s smile awhile
Javed Jabbar | April 09, 2020 | Published in DAWN. Perhaps more than at any other time in recent and contemporary history, and without any disrespect for the departed and with best wishes for the infected, we could do worse than to refer to universal human resilience in general. And to reflect briefly on the Pakistani people’s resilience in particular. Some familiar bad news first. Our country ranks abysmally low in several vitally important global indices. In the Human Development Index — ironically, brilliantly initiated in 1990 by our very own Dr. Mahbub-ul-Haq — Pakistan ranks 152 out of 189 countries. In the related maternal mortality rate, with 178 mothers out of every 100,000 perishing at, or soon after bringing forth a new life, we rank at 149. That is about a whole bus-full of our women of child-bearing age, at least about 30 human beings, falling fatally into a ravine every single day, every day of the year. When it comes to the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Index, we have plunged almost to the bottom with a place at 151 out of 153. Though only somewhat better in other areas such as Transparency International’s corruption index — at 120 out of 180— and the World Press Freedom Index — 142 among 180 — Pakistan is obliged to become the world’s 11th largest importer of arms because our belligerent neighbour India still deploys about 70 per cent of its forces in a Pakistan-centric direction. Before the rationale for this comment’s title, I wish to record deep my scepticism about the veracity of one of the indices cited above. Even while acknowledging the gross failure to adequately invest in health, education and improved access to basic services, through conditions observed first-hand during travels in numerous developing countries, specially other Muslim and some Arab countries, the indicators used by WEF to rank the status of Pakistani women near the bottom in 2019 are misleading and distortive, and therefore quite absurd. Of about 100-105 million Pakistani girls and women, the large majority do suffer oppression and deprivation. But accounting for the country being the fastest-urbanising in South Asia, and noting the increased and rapidly growing visibility of millions of girls and women at all levels of education and in a wide range of professions, the country’s rank in gender equity certainly deserves to be far better than several other countries that have been inexplicably placed higher. These include one glaringly well-known example in which, even today in 2020, women do not have fundamental political rights, nor is there any form of the vigorous democracy that throbs in Pakistan. Yet global indices in general do have a reasonable, minimal credibility — especially if they place our tormented, beloved Pakistan higher than expected. Two of these are my current favourites. First is the World Happiness Report which places Pakistan at 66out of 153 countries. Though 65 countries are ahead of us, our rank makes us virtually far higher and happier than all other South Asian countries. One says “virtually” because the global ranking curiously does not include Bhutan, the country that heralded the concept of Gross National Happiness (GNH) as a more appropriate measure to use than the Gross National Product (GNP). Second in South Asia comes the Republic of Maldives at 87. Then there’s Nepal at 92, Bangladesh at 107, Sri Lanka at 130. India came second last — at 144, and at the end came Afghanistan — at 153. We even outrank a more economically prosperous Muslim country from another region — Malaysia ranked 82 — that many Pakistanis have been attracted to partially adopt through its “Second Home” programme. In West Asia, Pakistan flies higher than Turkey at 93 and Iran at 118. In the Gulf region, Saudi Arabia, with its entrenched political restrictions on women’s participation still in place notwithstanding recent social relaxations, is notably higher at 27. The explanation could possibly be that the spill-off from oil wealth helps gloss over some crude realities. And finally, it would be awkward for us to leave our all-weather friend China trailing us at 94. The happiness report was initiated in 2013 by the Sustainable Development Solutions Network led by eminent economist Jeffrey Sachs and a few others soon after a high-level meeting at the UN inspired by Bhutan’s proposal. Of the 10 leading institutions associated with the Report, three are the respected Universities of Oxford, Columbia and British Columbia as well as the reputed pollster Gallup. Asking respondents as to how they perceive themselves in social, urban and national environments, the survey elicited answers in the social context on whether they had someone to connect with, their sentiments on generosity and trust and on having a sense of freedom to make key decisions. Though the last of these queries — for most women and the poor in Pakistan — must have received responses mainly in the negative, reactions to the other queries must have been possibly better. A basic question comprised as to where, on a ladder of 10 rungs, with zero being the lowest and 10 the highest, the respondent placed herself/himself in terms of the “best possible life”? With a representative sampling, Pakistanis emerged higher than 87 other nationalities. How does one reconcile this pleasant, positive status determined by independent, impartial overseas sources with the low level of self-esteem and cynicism abundant among many intellectuals, the media, and other prominent opinion leaders in our country? One recalls the remonstrative remarks of the award-winning British journalist Peter Oborne made at the 2019 Adab Festival Pakistan held in Karachi. He bewailed the intensity and volubility with which many in Pakistan conduct self-denigration whereas he sees a nation that epitomises rich human and cultural values and other dynamic qualities. Several foreign visitors have also noted this tendency among some Pakistanis. The second index one notes with pleasure is for the Global Gig Economy. The gig economy refers to value produced by individuals who are not full-time 9 to 5 employees but
Knowledge vs ‘Nowledge’
Javed Jabbar | January 20, 2020 | Published in DAWN. The advent of radio and TV in the 20th century and the rapid expansion of the internet and social media in the first two decades of the 21st century have shaped a new phenomenon. Perhaps this can be best described by omitting the letter ‘k’ from the spelling of ‘knowledge’. Phonetically, the two can be made distinct by continuing to use the conventional pronunciation of ‘Knowledge’, while using the pronunciation of the word ‘now’ for the new species of ‘Nowledge’. Original Knowledge is a body of distilled information. For most of human history this was primarily preserved in print, particularly in paper books. Knowledge is seamless in time and has been added to over decades and eras. Slow, gradual and incremental, it has been verified and cross-checked for authenticity by extensive research. It leaves room for acceptance of contrary, contradictory or challenging counter-theses. And it is respectful of variance and diversity in sources of information and interpretation. It is calm and attentive; willing to listen, to be sceptical and admitting to self-doubt. Knowledge is content in its own validity, yet conscious of its vulnerability to change in the light of new knowledge. Personified by humility, Knowledge is concerned only with the search for truth; even if only one, or a handful, or just a hundred others share in this search. Knowledge is sober and solemn. It is about sanctity for proven facts, wide reading, deep reflection and writing. Mature and resonant, Knowledge is seasoned and stored like the finest wine. Slow and steady of gait, Knowledge has the grit of a long-distance marathon runner. It is understated yet self-assured. It is confident about substance and assertions. Over the past 150 years, in addition to books, Knowledge has also been well-served by some newspapers, magazines, radio, TV, cinema — especially documentary cinema — and other informative, descriptive material. Holistic in scope, Knowledge encompasses the past, the present and the trends that may determine the future. Nowledge contrasts sharply with Knowledge in multiple dimensions. Virtually born with electronic media and catalysed by digital technology and social media, Nowledge is instant, daily, recent and transient — as in the 24/7 news cycle. Immersed in immediacy and the moment, this step-sibling has thrived with mobile media through computerised, chip-based laptops, tablets, cell phones and smartphones. The internet and digitisation have enabled unprecedented storage and push-button dissemination of Knowledge. Yet, Nowledge — rather than Knowledge — and the internet are far more synonymous because of the mass popularity of platforms such as Google, Facebook, Wikipedia, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, WhatsApp and others. Devices such as Kindle provide on-screen books which epitomise Knowledge. So it can be said that, on the internet, Knowledge and Nowledge converge. But the moment-to-moment, simulative, sensory impact of Nowledge, and the broad nature of the internet, make Nowledge the dominant dimension of the World Wide Web — compared to the quiet, concentrated richness and sustained character of Knowledge. Nowledge reproduces Knowledge, substantively but also superficially. The basic nature of Nowledge and its exchanges makes it cursory and fleeting, and sometimes unethical — as in the practice of cut-and-paste plagiarism. Instant access often lacks insight. The prime focus of Nowledge is on raw data — including unverified data, rumours, fake news, disinformation, misinformation, presumption, defamation and sensation. While Knowledge includes proven, scientific evidence, Nowledge is abundantly speculative. Casting aspersions on character, Nowledge floats innuendos and suspicions. These are massaged into gossip, dressed up in costumes which, on the basis of mere visibility, claim credibility. Before fictive ‘facts’ are exposed as fabrications, Nowledge has successfully implanted acceptance of falsehoods — so firmly, that evidence of the original content being fake fails to reject the falsehood. Nowledge gets a particularly invidious dimension because of its capacity to morph, to superimpose faces on to bodies to which they do not belong, to transpose voices and words from one person to another person. The revelations, in 2013, of secret global surveillance by the US National Security Agency — by the courageous Edward Snowden — underline how ‘Nowledge’ has converted the basic goodness of Knowledge and the initial benevolence of the internet into exploitative, inimical malevolence. Without authentication, Nowledge is circulated instantly and revels in going viral. Obsessed by numbers, the more people receive a message, the more Nowledge claims legitimacy, regardless of veracity. It is fragmented, opinionated and impatient. In etiquette, Nowledge can be loud, curt, nasty, dismissive and abusive. Nowledge brims with tittle-tattle, mumbles, murmurs and babble. Although Nowledge may also require reading (mostly on electronic screens) it is primarily verbal and oral, and image- and icon-based. Nowledge is a 100-metre dash; a fast, fevered sprint. It has a short attention span compared to the sustained focus of Knowledge. Marked by distraction, Nowledge threatens to reduce mass reading of paper books. Being noisy, bumptious and even aggressively insistent, Nowledge makes opinion as important — if not more notable — than hard facts and correct information. Tweets by US President Trump perhaps best symbolise this particular feature. Obliquely, if not directly, Nowledge seems to influence many decisions at the highest level. Over the past three decades, during meetings with heads of states, heads of governments and other important public officeholders, one has noted with concern that opposite to their desk is a switched-on TV set. Such continuous distraction reduces single-minded concentration. Perhaps this partly explains the poor and erroneous decisions taken by some such individuals. Instead of using the depth of Knowledge to take sound decisions, the unceasing exposure to Nowledge leads to rapidly reactive, defective and even disastrous actions. Even as Knowledge grows exponentially to benefit people’s lives in wondrous ways, an ambivalence of this growth is evident in information entropy. This signals the severe stress that humanity faces in coping with enormous volumes of new data produced every minute in every sphere. In comparative terms, one seeks solace in the hope that Knowledge is the ultimate tortoise that will outpace the hare of Nowledge.
Jinnah and violence
Javed Jabbar | December 25, 2019 | Publish in DAWN. THE coupling of the Quaid`s name with a malevolent noun is done deliberately – to jar the senses like a mild electric shock. Only to highlight how the two words are antithetical to each other. The unnatural juxtaposition becomes urgently relevant after the bizarre episode on December 11, 2019, when a mob of lawyers vandalised and rampaged through the Punjab Institute of Cardiology in Lahore to settle scores with doctors. At least three patients in intensive care died and several were injured. Even in heaven, Barrister M.A. Jinnah must surely have felt a hellish pain. Occurring exactly two weeks before his birth anniversary, the episode also became a marker to map the dark depths to which some –fortunately not all – fellow citizens have descended in the 71 years since the Quaid`s demise. The verbal contortions and semantics of some senior lawyers attempting to explain or defend the December 11 incident would be – or are – hilarious, if they were not also outrageous. Merely in order to be seen in solidarity with their fellow practitioners and perhaps apprehensive of the negative consequences for the respect that they presently enjoying their fraternity, the senior denizens who, otherwise, preach ceaselessly on the sanctity of the law and the Constitution have been recorded making incredibly equivocal explanations to condone hooligans masquerading as advocates. To top it all, lawyers went on strike in sympathy for the marauders – to inconvenience thousands of innocent citizens. A brilliant, peace-prone lawyer The Quaid was a brilliant lawyer. A substantive part of his brilliance was shaped by his conviction that the mind should and could always have supremacy over muscle, that rationality in words and decency in actions are always superior to emotional ranting and physical aggression. As early as in 1907 in the Surat session of the Congress when moderates and extremists allowed their disagreements to lead to assaults and injuries, Mr. Jinnah condemned such behaviour and stressed that politics must be seen as a gentleman`s game. Almost four decades later, in protest against Viceroy Wavell`s decision to ask the Congress Party to form an Interim Government without also inviting the Muslim League, Mr. Jinnah declared August 16, 1946, as `Direct Action Day`. Alas, this declaration which involved the convening of peaceful public meetings in Calcutta and in other locations including some in Bihar to which thousands of Muslims were proceeding along with women and children were subjected to fatal violence by extremist mobs of Hindus and Sikhs. In three days of carnage, anywhere between 5,000 to 20,000 people perished in Calcutta and in Bihar. Mr. Jinnah reeled in horror at the killings and destruction that took place in Calcutta and elsewhere. He condemned the gruesome use of force against a purely political struggle for Muslim rights. It is worth reproducing his strong opposition to seeking revenge even for massacres – when on December 11, 2019, the lust for revenge for only being allegedly insulted led to shameful mayhem. Mr. Jinnah said: `I know that the Mussalmans have suffered heavily and are suffering…I condemn brutality in any shape or form, but the Bihar tragedy has no parallel or precedent in the record of cold-blooded butchery of the Muslim minority in various parts of the country committed by the Hindu community. `While I can quite understand that there is grave provocation and deep resentment among the Mussalmans of India, I wish to caution them that retaliation or vengeance in the Muslim-majority provinces for what has happened in Bihar, and is happening in other parts of India, will be a terrible catastrophe and a blunder on our part, both morally and politically, and we shall be only playing into the hands of our enemies. `If you really want to achieve Pakistan, I pray to God that Muslim honour should not be sullied by inhuman, degrading and brutal happenings of the kind that have taken place in Bihar. We should not sink low in the scales of civilisation, morality and humanity….If the Mussalmans lose their balance and give vent to the spirit of vengeance and retaliation, and prove false to the highest code of morality and teachings of our great religion Islam, you will not only lose the title to the claim of Pakistan but also it will start a most vicious circle of bloodshed and cruelty, which will at once put off the day of our freedom, and we shall only be helping to prolong the period of our slavery and bondage… Even as objective conditions dramatically changed from the start of the 20th century through to about 40 years later, the Quaid`s abhorrence of violence remained a consistent, categorical commitment. Composure as camouflage So deep-rooted was his antipathy to physical expressions of power or passion that he was considered to be `cold` and `unfeeling`. Yet, as the closely-observed and widely documented record of his life shows, that steel-like demeanour guarded an unseen yet authentic, sensitive sensibility. So private and so careful was he about his sensitivity to both the unseen and the visible dimensions of human relationships is the f act that only once in his entire public life did his eyes moisten and shed tears when his beloved young wife Rutti was being laid to eternal rest. He was also devastated by the orgy of communal violence unleashed just before, during and soon after August 14, 1947, as a result of Viceroy Mountbatten`s unforgivable haste in arbitrarily imposing a 10-week timeframe for the creation of two new independent nation states that inevitably required migration of millions of people in conditions of panic, hysteria and frenzy. Moral, not muscle, power Mr. Jinnah believed that the force of moral and ethical power would prevail over material and imperial strength. He confronted adversaries who vastly outnumbered his own supporters and resources with the pure, pristine power of concepts, facts, arguments, persuasive articulation and, most of all, sterling qualities of character and courage which did not need even an