Will Military Courts Help Pakistan Eliminate Terrorism?: New Age Islam’s Selection From Pakistan Press, 2 September 2015
New Age Islam Bureau
2 September 2015
Pakistan’s Fight against Violent Extremism
By Senator Sehar Kamran
The Arab Reaction
By Rasul Bakhsh Rais
Appeasing the Baloch
By Syed Fazl-E-Haider
Counterterror In K-P And FATA: A Turnaround?
By Imtiaz Gul
Women after War
By Rafia Zakaria
Will Military Courts Help Pakistan Eliminate Terrorism?
By Sajjad Ashraf
Who Is Secular In Pakistan?
By Raza Habib Raja
------
Pakistan’s fight against violent extremism
By Senator Sehar Kamran
“War against terrorism and extremism is
being fought for future generations.”
– General Raheel Sharif, Chief of Army Staff
Command and Staff College, Quetta, 21st May, 2015
Contemporaneously, violent extremism has emerged not only as one of the most daunting challenges faced by Pakistan, but is in fact amongst the most formidable of challenges that bedevil the global community today. There is no easy remedy for a narrative that hinges on verge of insanity, and finds its following in appeals to frustrated, impressionable minds by creating a perverse connection between social taboos/extreme ideologies and a ‘difficult but righteous’ path.
Today, Pakistan is fighting a war for its very survival against this faceless enemy. It is working hard to overcome its wounds from the atrocities committed by extremists under various guises - atrocities that have shocked the world - be it in the form of the innumerable suicide attacks on government buildings, the taking hostage of innocents, as in the 2009 Police Academy attack or the culminated horror of the December 16, 2014 attack on the Army Public School, where 132 innocent school children were ruthlessly massacred along with other nine members of the school staff.
Pakistan has now been tackling the menace of extremism - specifically violent extremism - for decades. In the aftermath of 9/11 and as a repercussion of the US-led NATO invasion of Afghanistan, extremists in this region gained much strength and the state of Pakistan suffered great setbacks as well as perhaps one of the worst crises in its history. The invasion in a region where governance was not at its strongest inadvertently created a vacuum which provided space for these resurgent non-state actors to occupy, enabling them to better propagate their skewed narratives.
Instability in the region reached its peak when these elements felt confident enough to issue ‘diktats’ to the state. Of these non-state elements, one particularly difficult group which emerged was the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). The TTP, with its anti-state agenda, came into the limelight in 2007 and has since been involved in most of the terrorist activities inside the country in some form.
As a result the country has suffered some major set-backs. Political leaders and workers as well as military officials have been specifically targeted. Benazir Bhutto, the leader of one of Pakistan’s largest popular political parties, the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) was also assassinated in one such cowardly attack.
The first real headway against these groups only came as late as 2009 with ‘Operation Rah-e-Rast’, when Pakistan Army reclaimed the area of Swat. An even greater success, and on a larger scale is seen by the mega operation launched by the Army in 2014 - Operation Zarb-e-Azb. This operation has destroyed the communication lines of terrorists and today, for the first time in over a decade, relative peace prevails in the country.
Furthermore, to support the military operations, a focused de-radicalization project was launched by the Army in Swat, which aimed at rehabilitating confirmed militants. This project was the first to acknowledge the sensitivity required when attempting de-radicalization at this scale by working separately with various segments within a militant group. ‘Sabawoon’ is a facility that focused mostly on juveniles while ‘Mishal’ comprised work with adult detainees, and ‘Sparlay’ worked with the family members of detained militants. The programme has been fairly successfully and many former militants have been rehabilitated.
It is important to note here the vital role the de-radicalization project has played in preventing a resurgence of militancy in Swat, as the fact remains that unless the root causes behind emergence of extremism and its turn towards violence are identified, no permanent progress can be made towards fighting and eliminating it.
The use of violent acts for the pursuit of vested interests is the tactic most often employed by extremists groups, either for politically motivated aims or for ideological objectives. Recently, two major attacks occurred that once again highlighted this fact; the Safoora Goth incident and the suicide attack on Punjab’s Home Minister Shuja Khanzada.
The Safoora Goth incident, which claimed lives of 45 people - mostly Ismaili Shias, was perpetrated by an engineering student and his group of friends, who had been systematically brainwashed into getting radicalized by elements with political agendas that have the know-how for specifically targeting such vulnerable youth. These same students were also involved in killing a prominent Karachi based activist.
Understanding the phenomenon from an un-skewed perspective therefore is very important. For the most part, groups that are at the root of events like the Safoora Goth incident do not have any ‘return address’ or a specific territorial identity. This transnational character along with easy access to mass media outlets eases the path for the propagation of their agenda, while simultaneously making decisive action against them a formidable task.
Violent extremism knows no borders, religion, or cultural boundaries. It is a global enemy. It is also multi-faceted, and as such demands a broad and comprehensive approach to tackle it.
Although there is a realization that exists today at the global level to identify the ideologies, the infrastructure, the recruiters and funders of violent extremists, it should also be understood that if discriminatory policies continue to exist across international platforms, such factors and factions will continue to thrive. Policies need to be reevaluated; long standing issues lead to long term grievances and provide a raison d’etre for manipulative extremist groups, providing them with the material to manipulate people with and incite them to violence in the name of some misplaced ideal of social justice.
It is vital, now more than ever, to agree on what the root causes are behind this menace in order to effectively tackle them. A coordinated response from all the stakeholders is our best bet in this fight. To build upon the successes achieved by Operation Zarb-e-Azab, it is vital to engage all affected parties in dialogue that transcends sectarian and religious divides. Moreover, resilience must be built into local communities to resist radicalization at the grass-root level alongside efforts towards the economic integration of the population that feels isolated or deprived. Most importantly, a counter-narrative that promotes tolerance is critical while concurrently working to curb the dissemination of hate speech and extremist ideas. The use of force has been shown to be insufficient on its own. In this era of globalization, only a common strategy devised with international consent can effectively meet this transnational threat. Today we face an enemy that is dynamic and evolves with the strategies we pursue to counter it. Only a broader and more creative approach will help eradicate this menace permanently.
Senator Sehar Kamran is the President of Centre for Pakistan and Gulf Studies (CPGS) and Member Senate Standing Committees on Defence, Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Human Resource Development & Overseas Pakistanis.
nation.com.pk/columns/02-Sep-2015/pakistan-s-fight-against-violent-extremism
-------
The Arab reaction
By Rasul Bakhsh Rais
September 2, 2015
The writer is a professor of political science at LUMS
Pakistan’s decision not to join the Saudi-led coalition in its Yemen war has not been received well in Riyadh and the UAE. They expected us to be on their side. They might rightly claim that they have been on our side in many difficult situations that we have faced in the past. Acknowledged. Never was it, however, a one-way generosity or affair. We did our part, for decades, in providing security training, intelligence cooperation, and during the deadly Iran-Iraq war, stationed our troops, advisers and trainers in Saudi Arabia. Pakistan has traditionally offered itself to Arab countries as their second home, and it should continue to do so, even after their reactive swing to India. Reactive posturing in foreign affairs doesn’t work much except for some temporary relief in getting even or having some satisfaction of stressing the other side. Actually, Pakistan shouldn’t be much concerned about how the UAE is going to develop its relations with India. It has big money and India is a big emerging market to invest. Let us wish them the best of luck.
The question is, was the move, coinciding with Narendra Modi’s visit, a search for an infrastructure market to invest or find a new strategic partner against their real or imagined ‘adversary’, Iran? It is quite puzzling that India has been as big a market as it is today for decades, and the UAE failed to see its potential to invest its surplus funds it holds in many safe places in the world. It will be as disappointed to see India refuse to support it in any endeavour against Iran, as it was when it expected Pakistan to support its war in Yemen. Rationally speaking, countries weigh costs and benefits, leave emotions aside and pursue a pragmatic path in foreign affairs. A conventional truth in this respect is that nothing is permanent, except national interests.
Pakistan did the right thing in not choosing any side in the Arab-Iran rivalry, which in recent decades has transformed into a sectarian conflict that has historically been embedded in their clashing national identities. This is not for the first time Pakistan made this choice. We stayed neutral during the Iran-Iraq war and adopted the same posture during Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait and during the first Gulf war to liberate Kuwait. We have been badly hurt by the Arab-Iran rivalry as both sides have been attempting to extend it through their religious proxies to other Muslim lands. The secret sectarian militias in our country have sources of funding, aspirations, advice and counselling in the rival capitals. Taking sides will have been internally divisive. We must stick with our good old policy of neutrality in wars between Muslim states.
There are new kinds of wars emerging in the Middle East and in our immediate neighbourhood i.e., in Afghanistan — civil wars. They have all the combustible elements in them — tribe, ethnicity, sect and religion. All of them feed on the fire of hate and extremism, and they have to some degree, singed us in the face. Disregarding what our Arab friends think or how they react to our neutrality, we must pursue this course. We have served our interests well by staying out of the bloody wars of the Middle East. The internal and external costs of being part of the Arab coalition would have been staggering.
Our Arab friends made some serious miscalculations about Pakistan’s policy, or may be our diplomatic communications were weak or signals were not read well on the other side. We are a big state, very diverse and endowed with natural resources and we should be making independent decisions in our national interest. This is exactly what we have done.
tribune.com.pk/story/948926/the-arab-reaction/
---------
Appeasing the Baloch
By Syed Fazl-e-Haider
September 2, 2015
Brahumdagh Bugti, the grandson of slain veteran Baloch leader Nawab Akbar Bugti, has shown willingness to resolve the Balochistan conundrum through political dialogue with the government. The present situation demands political statesmanship and a delicate balancing act from Islamabad to bring separatists into the mainstream and convert the geo-strategically located province into a land of opportunities.
Balochistan has been facing an insurgency-like situation for the last decade. After more than 10 years of violence, the self-exiled Baloch separatist leader ultimately realised that the issue could only be resolved through peace negotiations. Now, it is up to the government and the security establishment to engage the separatist leaders in a dialogue process and effectively pursue the policy of appeasement in the restive province. Sadly, our authorities tend not to wake up from deep slumber to address an issue until a lot of blood is shed. Balochistan was deliberately kept backward and underdeveloped during British rulers and this policy has been adopted by successive governments in Islamabad, neglecting the development of the province.
The least developed province of the country has paid heavy costs in terms of collateral damage, economic slowdown, social instability for the operation launched in 2005 under the government of Pervez Musharraf. Quelling an insurgency is a zero-sum game. The two-sided gory game of death continues unabated in the insurgency-hit province. On the one hand, separatists are targeting people indiscriminately, and on the other, there are those who have suffered immensely in the most brutal of manners. Balochistan is witnessing its fifth insurgency. Every insurgency took the province a decade back, socioeconomically. Presently, the province is far behind the other developed regions of the country. Socioeconomic indicators put it in the category of the least-developed and most backward province.
Rich in natural resources, Balochistan is situated at the crossroads of South Asia, Central Asia and the Middle East. According to one estimate, out of the country’s estimated 25.1 trillion cubic feet of proven gas reserves, 19 trillion are located in Balochistan. The Sui Gas field in the Bugti tribal area is still the single largest and the pioneering gas-producing field in the country. The strategically-located Gwadar port has the potential to emerge as the mother port of the region. It is ironic that a geo-strategically located province with world class gold mines and tremendous energy resources is stuck in medieval times with donkey-fans still in use in the hot summer months in Jaffarabad and Dera Murad Jamali areas. People still travel on camels in Jhal Magsi district and burn wood and coal for fire.
Education can be instrumental in combating backwardness in the province as it is the only tool that can produce the required human capital to develop the province’s vast natural resources. Job vacancies often remain unfilled due to lack of skilled, qualified and trained personnel in the province. This is why the unemployment and underemployment rates in Balochistan are higher than the national rates for these indicators. A lethal combination of militancy and poverty continues to frustrate any improvements in the education sector.
Dialogue is welcome at a time when billions of dollars are being spent on the province by China for the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and the province is set to emerge as a new economic frontier for the country. No mega project will, however, bear fruit for the national economy given the state of security in the province. The law-enforcement agencies should make way for political dialogue. The authorities must stop repeating the mantra of ‘all is well’ in Balochistan and conduct serious and productive parleys with Baloch leaders. The genuine grievances of the Baloch people must be addressed and their apprehensions vis-a-vis mega development projects underway in the province should be allayed. Locals must be the primary beneficiaries of the ongoing development schemes.
Merely announcing an economic or financial package for Balochistan will not appease its people. The development process must bring a positive change in the socioeconomic and political milieu of the province. If the people feel socially alienated, economically frustrated and politically discriminated, then infrastructure development alone cannot change the current state of affairs.
Syed Fazl-e-Haider is the author of The Economic Development of Balochistan (2004)
tribune.com.pk/story/948933/appeasing-the-baloch/
--------
Counterterror in K-P and FATA: A turnaround?
By Imtiaz Gul
September 2, 2015
The writer heads the independent Centre for Research and Security Studies, Islamabad and is the author of Pakistan: Pivot of Hizbu Tahrir’s Global Caliphate
The writer heads the independent Centre for Research and Security Studies, Islamabad and is the author of Pakistan: Pivot of Hizbu Tahrir’s Global Caliphate
Flanked by tribal areas from three sides, the Peshawar region experienced death, destruction and trauma between 2009 and 2013. During this turbulent period, terrorists, militants and criminals piled misery on the city as state security institutions were in retreat. Recurring violence forced most senior police officials to give up their designated areas of duty and retreat into the police lines in the heart of Peshawar — more or less the way paramilitary forces had opted to give up control of many of their installations in Waziristan in those traumatic years.
But the last 18 months have seen a remarkable turnaround as the military pounded and degraded the TTP-affiliated groups spread all over Fata and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P), and the police in K-P regained considerable ground it had lost to the TTP and the dubious Lashkar-e-Islam.
Terrorist incidents in the first eight months of 2015, for instance, have gone down from a total of 383 in 2014 to 153. Casualties as a result of terrorist violence in K-P stand at about 75 compared to the 145 in 2014. This marks a decline of 60 per cent and 70 per cent, respectively. Similarly, abductions for ransom have decreased by 45 per cent. The combination of surgical military operations in Fata as part of Operation Zarb-e-Azb, and a proactive police force led by an autonomous police chief — Nasir Durrani — appears to have considerably dented the ability of terrorist and criminal gangs. A combination of defensive and offensive measures has helped the authorities preempt, prevent and discourage non-state actors who once operated without much fear. This may be the proverbial lull before the storm but residents of Peshawar, Dera Ismail Khan, the second largest city in K-P, acknowledge the improved policing. Both the military and the police in K-P also suffered because of Haji Mangal Bagh, the head of the double-gaming Lashkar-e-Islam nestled in the Khyber Agency. But the anvil and hammer — the military acting as the latter — strategy seems to have worked.
Some 11,329 search operations, arrests or interrogation of 36,000 suspects including detention of 454 hardcore militants, and nearly 5,000 cases against home and hotel owners who failed to report tenants to the police, are all part of the offensive strategy that the K-P police began chalking out after Durrani took over. As many as 192,000 houses have been searched and owners of many reprimanded or charged with non-compliance of various regulations. Nearly 1,250 arrests for violation of the Loudspeaker Act, or of persons involved in hate speeches, and the blocking of 1,735 CNICs, also underscore an entirely new policing strategy that rests on the NADRA for personal or vehicular verifications. Police in K-P, says IG Durrani, has suffered as much as the military and the civilians in K-P and Fata. However, he salutes the rank and file of the K-P police, who at times refused to leave posts even though injured. The K-P police, in effect, had to be prepared for the blowback from Operation Zarb-e-Azb because terrorists usually escape into big towns once confronted in peripheral areas such as Waziristan.
The counterterrorism experience in K-P is instructive; it proves that despite legal handicaps, a politically empowered and an operationally independent police can stand up to terrorist gangs and criminal syndicates. No interference by the provincial government and unhindered support by the apex committee, the joint governmental body that acts as the watchdog and guide on security matters, has allowed the provincial police to not only recover from the devastating wave of terror that it faced until late 2013, but also created a niche for itself as a civilian force which can plug crime and terror if given space.
Non-intrusive defensive measures such as legislation for compulsory reports of tenants and hotel guests’ digital, personal and vehicular verification have all helped in significantly curbing terror and crime. Forceful implementation of existing laws, such as the Loudspeaker Act, or the transformation of the provincial Counter-Terrorism Department (CTD) into a fully empowered entity, seems to have yielded unexpected results. The CTD force has been authorised with performing tasks related to intelligence, interception, internment (of suspects) and preparation of court cases. Fighting terror, it seems, is not all that difficult given political will at the highest levels.
tribune.com.pk/story/948932/counterterror-in-k-p-and-fata-a-turnaround/
------
Women after war
By Rafia Zakaria
2 September 2015
TECHNICALLY, the war in Sri Lanka has long been over. The over 25-year-long conflict between Sri Lankan government forces and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) ended in 2009, after the loss of some 80,000 lives. In the Northern Provincial Council elections in 2013, the Tamil National Alliance won 30 out of 38 seats.
The development promised that conditions for the long beleaguered minority in Sri Lanka’s north would improve. Conditions for women, it was expected, would also get better, a cessation in sexual violence born of post-war reconciliation.
A recent report authored by scholar activists Nimmi Gowrinathan and Kate Cronin-Furman, The Forever Victims: Tamil Women in Post-War Sri Lanka, reveals a more complex reality, one in which the very means of reducing violence against women have become progenitors of further subjugation.
While the military’s presence ensures political peace in the public sphere, it seems to encourage violence in the private sphere.
Focusing on how the maintenance of Sri Lanka’s precarious ‘peace’ influences formerly embattled communities, the report offers unique insights into how post-war efforts in torn communities fail women in particular. Given Pakistan’s own conflict in the northwest and the displacement and killing of thousands, the lessons from Sri Lanka can be considered premonitions — that is, of course, if and when the fighting ends.
When Sri Lanka’s war ended, over a quarter of a million Tamils believed by the government to be either fighters or sympathisers were held in ‘rehabilitation’ camps and villages that were supposed to de-programme them away from their supposedly terrorist agendas. These included women taken into custody if their men had been killed in the fighting or because they were themselves believed to be fighters.
In any case, this group of women, by far the most vulnerable, was cut off from all other family members and the larger community. The bar on media access further meant that none of their stories would get out. By 2012, the camps had largely been dismantled; but the burden of memory carried by those who lived through it is a heavy one. The words of one survivor related in the report sum it all up: “I did what I had to do to get out of there, I cannot talk about what happened to me inside of that place.”
As per the maxims of transitional justice and post-war reconciliation, these memories must be filed away for peace and for a better future. An end to the fighting means an imposed and accepted forgetting.
The peace that exists in Sri Lanka as a result of this forgetting is maintained by a continuing military presence. A reported 160,000 soldiers were stationed in the north in 2014. Their presence creates its own incentives and hazards. As with military camps elsewhere in the world, the presence of armed forces creates fear in communities, with women’s freedom of movement in their own communities compromised.
Since the military officers or the civilian peacekeeping forces that are deployed in the areas rule the day, few can object to what they do. In less dire scenarios, other economies are created owing to the presence of soldiers. In many places, women, particularly those who no longer have male family members to protect them, often need to exchange sexual services for access to, for example, electricity. The villages do not often have electricity; the military camps do.
At the same time, while the military presence maintains political peace in the public sphere, it seems to encourage violence in the private sphere. While accurate statistics are not available because of bars on reporting, the beginning of peace has not meant an end to violence against women within the family. The end of fighting, for women at least, has not meant an end to war within; the frustrations and traumas of the past haunt them behind closed doors. The enforced ethic of silence, so practically useful in constructing peace in Sri Lanka, has also imposed its quietude on the intimate crimes that proliferate under its power.
There are many lessons from Sri Lanka’s story. The most obvious among them is that the entrenchment of military forces, however benevolent or well-intentioned, alters communities forever. Women, at the heart of all communities, bear the burden not only of war but also the peace that follows. The bloodshed may end, but women, as the carriers of memory, bear these scars for far longer and pay in silence the price at which peace has been bought.
An analysis of what has happened in Sri Lanka and what is happening in Syria and in Pakistan’s own northwest reveals the paucity of military definitions of war and peace. In technical terms, hostilities begin on specific dates and end on others; the eliminating of the insurgency and the skirmish, of the leader or the fighting network, the brokering of ceasefires and surrenders, all bode an end.
In reality, the altered communities left maimed by displacement and death are likely to breed misery many decades into the future. Villages may be re-populated and air strikes may cease but the communal mechanisms that ensure that the most vulnerable in a community, widows and orphans, are not left bereft and desperate are perhaps gone forever.
In the new set-up, marriages are negotiated in desperation, lived in frustration, the checks and controls that worked before are all broken and failing those that counted on them. In the forcible proximity of camps, every man becomes a predator and every woman a victim; the crimes that occur between them are considered inconsequential and uncounted against the greater imperatives of a politically viable peace.
The fear and silence that hangs over Tamil women in Sri Lanka is but one iteration of what millions of others, in Pakistan and Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, are also facing. The vast disruptions of war and violence that have swept over them in the past five years have left them vulnerable to the worst, preyed upon by their own and then again by others.
As in Sri Lanka, peace will come, politically brokered and publicly pandered — and hiding the shreds of broken communities, their burdens resting on the shoulders of the women left behind by war.
Rafia Zakaria is an attorney teaching constitutional law and political philosophy.
dawn.com/news/1204308/women-after-war
--------
Will military courts help Pakistan eliminate terrorism?
By Sajjad Ashraf
1 September 2015
In August 2015, Pakistan’s Supreme Court, which has a history of validating military takeovers under the ‘doctrine of necessity’, upheld the 21st amendment to the constitution allowing military courts to be established parallel to the existing civil judiciary for two years.
The amendment allows civilians ‘claiming [to] or [who] are known to belong to any terrorist group or organisation using the name of religion or sect’ to be tried by the military courts provided their cases are referred by the federal government. This formulation presented a civilian façade but, in reality, it will mean that the military decides who is to be brought before the military tribunal.
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, during one of his rare appearances in the parliament, reiterated that such extraordinary times needed extraordinary steps. The parliament passed the amendment in the wake of terrorist attack on the Army Public School in Peshawar in December 2014, which killed over 150 children and teachers.
The December mayhem shook Pakistan and, with public support behind them, the military assumed the lead in fight against terrorism. Despite early rumblings by some mavericks in the parliament, no one could withstand pressure from the army and voted in support of the amendment. Pakistan has lost over 58,000 people in terrorist related incidents since 2003. Thousands more have been killed in sectarian and targeted killings. And, according to the 2014–15 Economic Survey, Pakistan has suffered US$107 billion in economic losses since the 11 September terrorist attacks. Against this backdrop, military courts seemed like the right solution.
The 900 page judgment on the constitutional amendment, and the dissenting notes, demonstrates a deep divide over key questions ranging from how to define a terrorist and how the states should treat them, to concerns over the legality of government responses to the menace of terrorism. In light of these divisions, the Supreme Court chose the middle ground and decided to allow military courts — while still retaining judicial review over their decisions.
Judges dissenting with the majority opinion — including Justice Jawwad Khawaja, the incoming Chief Justice — believe that the parliament does not have unlimited powers to enact amendments to the constitution. The amendment ‘is liable to be struck down,’ according to these judges.
As expected the decision drew mixed reactions. While politicians praised the decision, the jurists’ bodies and civil society organisations considered allowing military courts a blow to human rights and rule of law in Pakistan. Some have labelled the decision as a resort to the ‘doctrine of necessity’ under which the Supreme Court has legalised almost all military takeovers in Pakistan.
But most critics of the amendment do not appreciate that Pakistan’s criminal justice system has been unable to cope with the nature and number of crimes committed. The conviction rate, in a country ridden with terrorism, remains below 10 per cent according to an International Crises Group report. And a 2011 State Department Report considered Pakistan incapable of prosecuting terror related suspects.
Civilian review processes can lead to frustrating delays in eliminating terrorism. Various interest groups and bureaucratic manipulations can make the procedures cumbersome, grounding the process to a halt. In the backdrop of civilian leadership’s earlier dithering, the army and the people of Pakistan have increasingly refused to accept any impediments to the effective dispensation of justice and closure of cases.
There has been a perceptible decline in terror cases since the army action began and the military courts have taken over the judicial process. Except for some muted civil society voices, the public at large seem happy with the army’s doggedness in pursuing terrorists.
The predominant fear among civil society groups is that the life of military courts might be extended beyond the current two years. But at the same time Pakistan’s civilian courts, including its Supreme Court, had been powerless in getting executive government to enforce their judgments. Now, the entire process is military controlled and carried out in complete secrecy, beginning with the appointment of military judges to the trial itself. Even death sentences are confirmed or commuted by the Chief of Army Staff, who moves with alacrity.
In a country that has lost thousands in terrorism related crimes it seems that societal peace, not secrecy, is the main issue.
Sajjad Ashraf is an adjunct professor at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore. He was a member of Pakistan Foreign Service from 1973–2008.
eastasiaforum.org/2015/09/01/will-military-courts-help-pakistan-eliminate-terrorism/
-----
Who is Secular in Pakistan?
By Raza Habib Raja
31/08/2015
In my article a few days ago, I tried to make a normative case for secularism in Muslim countries. I argued that given the rise of Islamic fundamentalism and growing sectarianism, there is a case of secularism in Muslim countries. A secular state is religiously neutral and actually would allow various sects in Islam and the minorities to practice religion freely. Moreover it would delink the religion with legal code and therefore laws would start reflecting contemporary realities. In my opinion, the idea should at least be entertained in our discourse as it merits serious deliberation.
And my own country, Pakistan, perhaps is in dire need of evolution towards secularism. Today as I write these sentences, Pakistan is embroiled in sectarian extremism and also suffers from misuse of several religious laws. As I pointed in another article of mine, thestate has used religion for strategic purposes also, which has ended up in causing more harm than good.
However, we also need to understand the ground realities as well as the impediments. I have a firm belief that Pakistan should become a secular state, but how realistic is that wish? In Pakistan for example, can the idea that religion be separate from the state take root? Does our history provide us some encouragement? Do seculars even exist in Pakistan?
While going through the various blogs and some English newspapers, at times one gets a rather misleading impression about secularism in Pakistan. One of the foremost impressions is that a reasonable number, if not a majority, is secular-minded in Pakistan. But even more misleading is the impression that some of the mainstream parties are secular (or quasi secular as some of the PPP loyalist journalists tend to use the term) and so is their vote bank. One of the logics given is that since Pakistan has not voted for ultra-religious parties, it is somehow amenable to the idea of separation of state and religion.
Much to my dismay, the unfortunate reality is that in a country like Pakistan, no material and influential institution is secular. This is a fact. Our courts, our establishment and even the "liberal" parties are not secular. The public opinion is definitely not secular as it actually wants Sharia law in the country.
As I also expressed in my last article, the case of secularism has never been presented in an effective manner and somehow the concept has been thoroughly confused and amalgamated with Atheism in Pakistan.
This has resulted in complete inability of even progressive people to argue that since religion and statecraft should be separate therefore some harsh laws should be repealed. For example Pakistan has a controversial anti-blasphemy law (known as Pakistan Peal Code 295C) which makes blasphemy punishable by death. This law has often been misused and has often ended up endangering minorities. Due to its controversial nature, it is under spotlight. However, its opponents do not argue that a religion-inspired law has no place in our society but rather that the law is contradictory to the real Islamic "spirit." To weave arguments around secularism in mainstream media is almost impossible and even if done would be counterproductive as far as repealing the blasphemy law is concerned.
In Pakistan, those who believe in secularism are a very tiny minority and they have an extremely uphill task. Some of these generally try to present it as Jinnah's vision for Pakistan (Jinnah was the founder of Pakistan). The central idea is perhaps the fact that since Jinnah is extremely revered and if the population becomes convinced that he wanted Pakistan to be secular then it would pave the way for the separation of religion from state.
However, this approach will not work mainly because even if Jinnah was indeed secular, the public has always been fed that creation of Pakistan was for implementation of Islamic law. Even during times when Jinnah was alive and the movement for Pakistan was unfolding, the public perception of Pakistan was not that of a secular state. Perhaps Jinnah was also cognizant of that and hence immediately before the creation of Pakistan, in his August 11 speech, he explicitly stated that religion was not to be the business of state, in order to remove the confusion. However, he did not live for long enough to actually ensure that Pakistan's constitutional framework was secular.
After his death, it has all been downhill. Pakistan has treaded along the path its elites and in fact even masses wanted it to.
I have heard a number of times that representatives reflect the will of the masses, and in fact this is projected as the strongest defense of democracy. But following this logic, the 1973 constitution, which made Islam the state religion and was unanimously passed, only reflects the will of the masses. Mind you democracy is not always liberal and that is why innovations like the first amendment, which tries to protect freedom of speech, secularism and minorities, exist in the American Constitution. This protection would even supersede any decision taken by the majority in the parliament if it is in contravention of the aforementioned principles. Although, in theory, the American Constitution can be changed but in reality it is almost impossible for it requires a two-thirds majority in both houses followed by ratification by the state legislatures.
So what about the political parties? A political party is secular if it openly denounces the fusion of religion with the matters of state. In democracies, political parties have to openly debate and therefore there is no concept of closet seculars. Even if you cannot publicly call yourself as secular, as some point out that in Pakistan it would be impossible to, you still have to adopt a secular approach (at least show progression towards that end). Yes, if you do not legislate to induce more Islam in the matters of the state, while keeping silent about the existing status, this would perhaps qualify you as a moderate party, not a secular party.
Eventually a political party speaks what its vote bank wants it to speak. Even PPP, a supposedly liberal party was the one responsible for the 1973 constitution and also for the controversial Second Amendment which declared Ahmadis non-Muslims. The vote bank of almost every party is religious though with varying degrees and unfortunately wants religion in the affairs of the state. They may not be voting clergy into power, but frankly they are also not raising enough voice to separate religion from state.
If anything, as urbanization grows in Pakistan, the fusion of religion with politics and worst still with the state is going to further increase. Until now, the relatively lower level of urbanization and predominantly rural nature of politics, which is centered around local issues at the constituency level, has, to some extent, controlled the religious influence in politics. With the increasing urbanization, the structure of the society will evolve in such a way that it will be more vulnerable to increasing the role of religion in culture, beliefs and politics.
When that happens, secularism which is underpinned by the idea of separation of religion and the state will become even more elusive. Political parties, including "liberal" parties will also start moving to the right and there are indications they have started to.
In a country where the general populace is of such character, the alternate would be a top down approach which can either be through a populist leader with sway over masses or through establishment institutions. In Pakistan, no leader has dared to do that and in fact the one who was most popular, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was in many ways originator of the present state of affairs. In fact, Bhutto manipulated religious sensitivities for gaining political mileage and after him, Pakistan has seen popular leaders like Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, but both of them did not take any material step towards removing religion from state.
Nawaz Sharif obviously caters to conservatives and therefore it was highly unlikely for him to take any step but even Benazir, despite being personally liberal and secular, could not take any concrete step towards this objective. One cannot blame Benazir, as by the 1990s too much ground had already been ceded to the quest of a "true' Islamic state. Needless to say that the current famous leader, the cricketer-turned-politician,Imran Khan, is never going to take any step. He is a worst kind of a reactionary and someone who defines his entire outlook through hyper religious and nationalistic angle.
And as far as other "pillars" of state are concerned, the situation is even worse and one cannot expect any hope of secularism from them or even progression towards that end. Ideologically armed forces are geared to hold up Islamic values, as well as Pakistani nationalism in terms of their orientation and identity. This ideological orientation, designed chiefly to ensure internal cohesiveness and combating zeal, is also identical with the general state nurtured ideology which tries to negate ethnic plurality. So whenever army is in direct power its ideological thrust amalgamates with and in fact reinforces that of the broader state's cultivated ideology. In fact, with every army rule, we regress as far as secularism is concerned.
Pakistan is not Turkey, and even Turkey had transformed only because of the humiliation of the First World War defeat which had thoroughly discredited Caliphate. The unique circumstances and presence of Ata Turk combined to enable Turkey emerge as a secular republic. The armed forces there are virtually indoctrinated in secularism unlike our armed forces which are completely opposite. There will be no "soft' revolution in Pakistan.
The task for people like me who firmly believe that religion belongs to private space is extremely uphill and it will take generations for us to even make moderate progress. This, to me, is the ultimate irony considering the desperate state of affairs Pakistan is in right now.
huffingtonpost.com/raza-habib-raja/who-is-secular-in-pakistan_b_8056036.html?ir=India&adsSiteOverride=in
12:14 AM
Moderate Islamist here
0 comments:
Post a Comment