Pakistan: Enigma of Change

0
112

Allah does not change the conditions of the people unless FIRST they change themselves.”

— (Al-Qur’an: Surah Al-Raad)

‘Change’ is a phenomenon and a discipline of life that people and nations adapt to as an aim of national policy to determine major priorities for the actualization of productivity, new ideas, challenging and innovative ambitions, creative horizons, societal development and a promising future, in a knowledge-based fast changing and information age culture. Pakistanis identity psyche appears unsettled at the grassroots of Islamic values and seem to discard phenomenon of ‘change’ in favor of the neo-colonial “no system” é a self-conflicting scenario to negate the relevance of the future. Masters are the supreme rulers, and the subjects are irrelevant and subservient creatures to the system. Corrupted military-political elite exploit the poverty-stricken oppressed masses. Corruption appears to be the single most dominant issue overshadowing the change and development objective in Islamic Pakistan. Islam is missing in Islamabad. When Muslims followed Islam, they were the pioneers of ‘change’ and civilization development across the globe, contributing to European Renaissance and Industrial emancipation.

Today, Muslims look tragically misinformed about the vitality of change and adaptability to a global culture of information-run changes, institutions, progress and accountability. Since Muslims left Islam and revered materialism for change, despite increased in numbers, their moral and political importance have diminished. Western proponents of ‘change’ with established institutions from thinking to planned actions, perceive and implement ‘change’ in major disciplines of social, educational, economics, political, information technologies and other domains as evolutionary and essential components of human development. ‘Change’ contemplates a sustainable “vision” complemented by able and committed leadership, accountable management system, teamwork and a rational policy agenda for the making of societal future. Most knowledgeable observers of Pakistan would agree on the flourishing culture of institutionalized corruption networks sustained by the politicians, armed forces, civil servants, police, court judges and other public officials where you can buy or sell anything from loyalties to trading of offices, titles right unto the President. Jinnah envisaged an independent Muslim Nation on sound democratic logic, Islamic values and living history. Today, Pakistanis defy the rationale of their nationhood when they use Islam and Jinnah in currency denominations for bribery “fees” and crime-ridden politics.

Under General Musharaf’s “no system” of military rule, the nation is trapped again in crises, conditions are replicated to suppress the young generations having sense of freedom, creative energies and aspirations for the future by forgetting past but insisting to build future, and nobody knows, how? Will he divide the besieged nation through “referendum” and try to forge the appearance of some sort of legitimacy to prolong his rule? Or will he jeopardize the Islamic ideology of the nation to ensure his Presidency and other accompanying financial dividends? A nation of collapsed institutions, no matter how and where you look for facts or reasons. Analytically viewed ‘change’ in the recent history of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, looks unthinkable, mostly sabotaged and betrayed. However, if change is pursued systematically, it can bring out the best and brightest of the Pakistani visionary leadership talents and statesmanship to challenge ingenuity, and to revitalize the value-based politics, economy, social justice and national survival and progress. A planned “change” can open up the new vistas of opportunities for the young and neglected ones, new intellectual and technological horizons, unknown to the dull and ignorant military Generals, and unexplored by the corrupted politicians of the past and present. In Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s vision, Pakistan should represent Islamic heritage and democratic principles of the postwar free world.

The newly founded state lost its first Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan in an assassination scheme overtaken by a combination of bureaucrats-military and greedy politicians making ways for national disorder and corruption. Political chaos at its apex, General Ayub Khan ousted his buddy President General Sikander Mirza, postponing the scheduled elections and restoring law and order for a strong federal government. Linkage to global economy, regional and Western security pacts and World Bank developmental loans kept afloat the General made Field Marshal Ayub Khan in power both in short and long terms. Often mature Pakistanis recall relative peace, national unity and economic development programs for which Ayub Khan should be credited. Not to mention his successful 1965 War with India over Kashmir, Ayub encountered 10 times larger India with courage and foresight. Many will proudly mention Ayub’s vision for national development starting with a strong central government, the new capital Islamabad, friendship with the People’s Republic China, favorable security and economic ties with the United States of America, normalization with the USSR and greater cooperation with the Islamic world. Time and Newsweek cited Ayub as Charles DeGaulle of Asia. Ayub wrote and believed in Friends Not Masters. Under Ayub’s Five Years National Development Plans, had there been educated and responsible people in public offices for decision making, national integration and effective economic and political program implementation, change could have been understood and managed properly leading to institutional building, social and political integration between East and West Pakistan and for the good of common people. Time and history did not favor Ayub Khan over an emotional and chronically disgusted people enflamed by self-centered political immature like Bhutto and Majub Ur Rehman. General Yahya Khan replaced Ayub Khan by force as often military conspirators do, beginning the era of moral, economic and political bankruptcy.

For the national elections under General Yahya Khan’s Presidency in 1970-71, two competing figures emerged prominent, Sheikh Mujib Ur Rehman, the leader of the Awami League, and Z.A. Bhutto, Leader of the PPP and former foreign minister under Ayoub. General Yahya Khan ‘s theatre of the absurd is well known to have surpassed corruption and moral degradation in history of the nation, yet nobody dared to change the course of events consequently leading to military surrender to India in East Pakistan and helping Bhutto to assume the leadership of the remaining West Pakistan. Change was sabotaged by large extent, the silent spectators, be it the thinkers, other political actors and most religious establishments in waiting for the forthcoming dismemberment of East and West Pakistan as one country whose diversity was the essence of nationhood and democratic principles. The opportunity for change was misjudged and mishandled by the military decision makers. Had there been intelligent and responsible political practitioners, the emerging political developments should have paved the way for a strong and sustainable Pakistan. Military leaders are known to be one-way thinkers and doers: do or die, and nothing more. They are devoid of nation building. A nation was defrauded and dismembered of its existence by its own leaders to fulfill their power grabbing ambitions.

Bhutto, Yahya and Mujib all were eager to be leader of a nation whose strategic weaknesses and political handicaps were too well known to India, the chief enemy. Pakistani masses failed to sense the inevitable leadership crimes and its aftermath, how badly they were misinformed and misled by Bhutto, Yahya and Mujib than rival India. Bhutto and Yahya, it seems, were the main culprits of making the surrender to Hindu India changing the record of the sub-continent history. Bhutto while at the UN Security Council Meetings and as a member of the Yahya Government, ensured the military surrender to India enabling him to assume the leadership role in West Pakistan. History shall witness, a nation’s own chosen leaders undoubtedly divided and defeated the nation. If there were solid public institutions of policy making and accountability, and change was in place, and accordingly, the power was transferred to the Majority Leader Sheikh Mujib Ur Rehman, all factual indicators should have pointed out clearly that military defeat and surrender to India could have been avoided in East Pakistan. There were no thinkers and no leaders left to mourn the loss of a united Muslim nation in Pakistan. Dr. Ishtiaq Quershi (Editor Urdu Digest, Lahore, 1972), noted in his article ” Skoothée-Dhaka say Purdah Uttha Hey” that “Bhutto and Yahya and Mujib were competing for power by any means whereas Pakistan lost its destiny in their egoistic power grabbing goal.” At this critical juncture in history, was the collective conscience of the Pakistani nation alive to understand the implications of emerging developments? Perhaps, the nation was too emotional to recognize and understand the plain truth.

If the nation was sensitive to the minds of the military-political actors, it could have in consequence learned and realized the final truth and wickedness of its so called leaders and their role-play. History facilitated the opportunity but it was ill-defined and mismanaged by the military rulers and betrayed by the political accomplices. Fantasy prevailed over forbidden truth to bring Bhutto into power. The beleaguered nation did not learn from series of political disasters and military defeat. Pakistanis in general and the elite in particular, must share the obvious guilt for failing to know and understand the importance of ‘change’ in nation-building. If change was perceived and transformed into actions through proactive plans for the evolution of a conducive political culture, moral emancipation, institutional development and national integrity, the outcome could have been different Emotional in character and psychologically immature Bhutto as the Chief Martial Law Administrator and President, lacking Islamic values and vision, made fun of the nation as do most actors on screen é a good time soap opera staged to entertain the bleeding masses out of countless losses and military defeat in East Pakistan. History and Change do teach us that leaders create leaders. Any Martial Law or military dominated political rule is a ready made recipe for disorder, disaster and failure.

Change in Question

“Ignorant and wicked leaders imply ‘fear’ and perpetuate ‘conflict’ to stay in power but never learn to change. They view people as an object of digits and numbers to play with and nothing else.”

A nation whose creative energies, positive thoughts, solid beliefs and moral and political institutions have been dismantled by continuous Martial Laws and the secular military rulers over the forty years, looks desperate to change and to a new political system based government for its identity and survival. Whenever history provided a window of opportunity, military-political alliance criminally subsided its vulnerability. People and nations learn by comparing similarities and differences between success and failure because in an analogical context, a military defeat and a political victory are not the same in implication and consequences. Nobody raised organized voices to reason the unreason. Leaders implied fear and perpetuated conflict to extend their power base. Apparently educated but wicked in thoughts and practices, Zulfikar Bhutto, Yahya Khan and other army Generals collaborated to undo the necessities for political change – a change for a new system of institutions and government representing fairly the East and West Pakistan, national interests, unity and progress for social, economic and political developments.

The inherited ambiguities and conflicts amongst the leadership were discovered within few years. There was “no system” to incorporate change into the political lifeline of the nation for emerging realities of diverse political identities. The nation was misinformed and treacherously misguided making ways for a morally and politically corrupt culture to flourish. Six years of corrupted rule under Bhutto, General Zia ul Haq had to intervene to install another Martial Law to restore the order into a practically lawless national crisis situation. There was once again, an opportunity for real change and to cope with the issues of corrupted politicians, but the nation ignored its relevance and importance. Time and history must have laughed at the self-perpetuated ignorant nation as to where it was heading to under the “no system”- of martial law administration. Many appraised the change as positive under a military ruler than genuinely corrupt politicians, welcoming another Martial Law replacing chaos and disorder. Soon after, Zulfikar Bhutto was tried in a civil court and hanged on the known murder charges but his unknown crimes against the nation remain a hidden asset of the Bhutto family. This could have included power greed, collaboration with Indian leaders, dismemberment of Pakistan, planned surrender to India to assume the presidency and rising sectarianism in the country. Under General Zia ul Haq, another decade of one man rule drained out all the creative thinking, human energies and national unity. Institutionalized violence and corruption bred fast under the disguise of martial law. Many observers of Pakistani politics will assert that Bhutto family with other accomplices in all probabilities, seem to have arranged the plane crash of General Zia and other top brand of the military officials, once again changing the political landscape in favor of Bhutto family and installing Miss Benazir Bhutto to the throne. Perhaps, General Zia had some positive intentions but his professional discipline and limited intellectual and political foresight did not allow him to be conscious of the exit door.

A Nation without ‘Thinking’ for the Future

Leaders lead and robbers rob, were they leaders or robbers? Why Pakistani Generals and Politicians are afraid to face the Mirror?

Like many emerging nations in the 20th century, why there were no proactive thinkers, competent politicians and farsighted decision makers and institutions of law and justice to warn the nation of its slippery and decaying path and to hold the corrupt leaders accountable for their treacherous policies and conduct of behavior? General Zia like other military rulers implied “fear” and conflict to extend his power base. Crisis in Afghanistan and the USSR military occupation served as blessings in disguise for the General. In 1981 while in North America, I asked a rational question from General Zia ul Haq: “what would our history say, why there were no Iqbal, Jinnah, Liaquat, Mushirqi and Moudoodi born in Pakistani culture except corrupt politicians and egoistic Martial Law Administrators who kept the nation afloat under law and order gimmick?” To my surprise, some months later while in Toronto, I received a large registered envelope from the Pakistan Embassy in Ottawa. Inside, there was a letter from General Zia ul Haq, thanking for the sincerity of the question but failing to offer an explicit answer to the question posed. The reminder bore no attention from the General. If one would happen to see the communication record of the Forum of Concerned Pakistanis (Canada), strenuous efforts were made to share proactive “visions” and specific plans with General Zia ul Haq, PM Nawaz Sharif, General Karamat, General Pervaz Musharaf and others for problem-solving and nation-building but seemingly they all ignored voices of reason. Facts and reasons remained in dry files and continue to live in denials. Dummies never listen to voices of reasons. Pakistan and its future once again is held as hostage, paving superb opportunities for Miss Bhutto, Sharifs and others to enjoy life outside, as a fruit of their institutionalized political deception, personal wickedness and financial robberies. General Musharaf is the sole beneficiary of this unparallel tragedy in human history that continues to unfold and progress for another major disaster to come. I ask you again as I did from General Zia ul Haq more than 20 years ago:

Are there any educated, honest and intelligent Pakistanis left to think of Pakistan as the homeland of an Islamic nation?

Is Musharaf a Hope or Problem for the Nation?

General Musharaf is not a dynamic leader but a pawn on the Western chessboard, and a committed secularist with no relationship to the Islamic ideology and values of Pakistan. America and India believe that Muslims are “terrorists.” Musharaf appears to be a faithful follower of the American and Indian political agenda to remain in power.

Aware of the perpetuated conflicts disguised as Islamic “terrorism” and emerging contradictions of the Afghanistan war, the nation seems trapped under General Pervaiz Musharaf for some time to come. Musharaf is not a leader but a military General and an accidental President for the name and fame game. He is a committed secularist lacking basic know-how of Islam and appears no different in thoughts and practices than any of his failed predecessors. They manufacture the ENTRANCE into national life but do not know the EXIT except catastrophic ends for the country. Neo-colonialism is dead. A NEW THINKING for a NEW ISLAMIC VALUES based POLITICAL SYSTEM is needed if the national interest and survival of Pakistan are to be safeguarded. General Musharaf holds no vision, and by virtue of his professional background, cannot offer any hope to the present or future generations of Pakistanis. Self-made military President and his collaborators are wasting time, resources and opportunities for change. Opportunities lost, are never regained. Musharaf and his associates entered the national scene through conflict and his strategy to survive depends heavily on conflict-making and conflict-keeping. After two decades, history once again facilitated a major crisis in Afghanistan to General Musharaf as it did to General Zia ul Haq. Both will share a common record to have used it for their own survival and extension of power. America will impose its dictate to utilize Musharaf and his collaborators to eradicate the Islamic values and political influence from this region. Osama Bin Laden and Talaban are the readily available myths which are being used by the Western world and the Americans in particular, to check and stop the popular Islamic influence for a future state. An opportunity is there for American military strategists to control Pakistan ‘s nuclear weapon capability to pave the way for political colonization of the region. American leadership will never dare to question the Indian strategic upper hand vis a-vis the real Pakistani stance.

India shares democratic institutions and values with the West, and Americans are aware of the inherent limitations what they can tell to Indian political leadership. Pakistan’s body politics consists of fractured bones and dry skeleton, with all its lifeline and energies sucked by a coalition of military-political corrupted rulers over the four decades. In a society with “no system” as a system, and one man rule, all powerful foreign forces can dictate their interests at best. To date, Musharaf has proven to be a committed subservient to both America and India as far as the national interests of Pakistan are concerned.. In sharp contrast to General Zia, Musharaf appears enthusiastic to follow the Indian and American foreign policy agenda on Kashmir, regional security and more so, on Islamic militancy and Islamic propagation activities in the region. India and America believe that “Islam breeds terrorism” and freedom fighters in Kashmir, the Middle East and elsewhere are seen as terrorists. This policy agenda has been assigned to Musharaf to wage a proxy war within Pakistan, more conflict will foster regional animosities and fighting within the provinces and to further drive the Muslim nation into chaos and uncertainty. Western strategists foresee Musharaf and his associates to be occupied in killing their own people rather than fighting against secular India on Kashmir. Time and history will speak out, how Musharaf betrayed and misused the hopes of the masses. In view of the complex and important global developments with direct impacts on Pakistan, the nation needs an intelligent and educated Muslim leader, certainly not a “stupid Musharaf.” Pakistani masses deserve to have new political institutions and reason for optimism with Islamically responsible leadership from the young and educated generation. Pakistan cannot be reformed by the logic of military power, but its social and political fabric can be reconstructed by the Islamic values, power of logic, and restoration of social justice to the people. Could the military dictators THINK of the goodness of the masses as their top priority? Musharaf is fast challenging the limits to reason in a society where even a prostitute was called General Rani under Yahya Khan regime.

Musharaf is a byproduct of the same elite military culture. Being a General itself does not render credibility to the General. For political correctness, time and opportunities do not wait for anybody. Time and history favor those who hold vision and are honest and accountable. General Musharaf could argue that he saved Pakistan from economic bankruptcy and political mismanagement. After a planned surrender to India in East Pakistan, Yahya Khan was ready to defend his continued Presidency and Zulfikar Bhutto claimed to have ensured the integrity of remaining Pakistan. Zial ul Haq used the same scenario to extend his Presidency. General Musharaf’s motives were well known and any systematic change was not part of his thinking process. He assumed power to check the corruption and hold Sharifs and Bhuttos accountable for their crimes and redress the national grievances, but in reality, preferred compromises and personal adaptability over the national interests and priorities. He attempted to discredit Bhutto and Sharif but now seems to follow their blueprint to foster disharmony and conflict within the nation. Who could dare to question Musharaf while in power, he is not yet fully proven traitor or anti-Islamic protagonist because he claims divine authority and claims that “people love him.” His self-appointment to the Presidency and 130% salary increment complemented by a comprehensive retirement package, that is not against the law because Musharaf is the law and order of the day.

The statistical data so far available, confirms that he is an ignorant and greedy General, and such characteristics of the Pakistani leaders, are not forbidden under the Pakistani laws in a lawless culture. He refers to the 1973 Constitution of Bhutto regime and could well articulate a strategic argument that his rapprochement was based on necessity, not intended submission to American and Indian political agenda but to safeguard the integrity of the ‘remaining Pakistan” as did Bhutto in 1971. After all, ignorance and wickedness are not defined by the 1973 Bhutto’s manufactured Constitution, therefore, may be adopted by the Cabinet as perfectly common legal stipulations and working moral and political norms to substantiate the logic of referendum for Musharaf’s Presidency. General Musharaf failed to carve a respectable self-image within the nation and he desperately wants “referendum” to facilitate that self-made illusion of being a “public” President. His conscious perception projects an evil design, an evil that Musharaf does not confess because he does not wan to believe in it, so he has to create it. He claims, if people say “No” in the referendum, he will leave the self-appointed Presidency. Will he? And how? What alternate and systematic mechanism did he put into practice for the transfer of power to leave the office within next few weeks? The Election Commission and General Musharaf are the two sides of the same paperwork, and indeed a joke to the intellect of conscientious Pakistanis. The nation will mourn the loss of time and opportunity for change, only after Musharaf is either replaced, killed or exiled.

In Search of ‘Change’

Islam views change as an essential component of human development, material and spiritual progress and success but this precept either has been ignored completely in Muslim national politics and behaviors, or its importance and relevance to the contemporary world is left to conjecture and indecisiveness. To nations eager to foster societal development, change is seen as a lifeline goal for futuristic development, productivity and success. Pakistani nation was deprived of this goal by its leaders and neo-colonial system of government. Military establishment is a fixed institution with “do or die” mission to follow. Armed forces cannot promote human change, social order or moral and political development and national integration. They lack knowledge, qualities and abilities to play such a role in national life. Pakistani nation and its armed forces have lost more than forty years in this dilemma of ‘change.’ By forgetting past, future cannot be built. General Musharaf orchestrated change to manipulate his own gains over the national interest. Facts and reasons appear undeniable to assume that he is a person of dubious ideologies and character. A person cannot be detached as a factor from his real-world functional role-play. His capabilities do not include a proactive “vision” for the nation-building.

A General who thinks ‘terrorism’ emanates from Islam and sees Muslims as ‘backward’ and creatures of ‘darkness’ vis-é-vis modern scientific and technological advancements, is surely out of mind and out of touch with the real world affairs. In view of his recent public pronouncements, he may be characterized as an ignorant General, misfit to be a leader of the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Given his coercive policy behavior and anti-Islamic actions, he is undermining the public interest of the Muslim nation by degenerating its time and resources to the dictates and priorities of the Western Masters. His collaboration with India and the US on the so called ‘terrorism’ cleansing movements, and war in Afghanistan, clearly suggest his motives for anti-Pakistan and anti-Islamic agenda. After all, General Yahya and Bhutto had surrendered to India to stay in power. Pakistani nation must be alarmed to think and realize where it is heading? Under Musharaf, issue of Kashmir has been jeopardized and its support against Indian atrocities and occupation of the main valley, has been scaled down by disbanding the intelligence cells and providing India with confidential security data and cooperation. While the nation worries about ‘change’ from the axis of political evils, Musharaf has helped to reclassify the freedom fighters as “terrorist.” Military myth of effective leadership is alive, ‘change’ is dead. Would ‘change’ come out of nowhere? Or would it emerge out of planned thoughts, strategies and pursuit of actions for a different Pakistan under the new, responsible and educated generation?

How to Plan for ‘Change’?

Leaders create leaders. They were not leaders but oppressors who used people’s mind as weapon to oppress them. Military Generals and the politicians belong to the dead past and cannot be a hope for the future-building.

Discarding prevalent myths and professional wickedness, to plan and initiate the awareness scheme for systematic change of a neo-colonial obsessed culture; you will need educated, honest and young Pakistanis who are not part of the problem but may be viewed as part of the solution. Holding a referendum under the military rule, is not a free choice of political will and sense of freedom but a dictate of the authoritarian rule. It will negate reason and impose wickedness as an aim of the self-supportive presidency. To foster and indoctrinate a “solution-oriented” approach to change and reformation goal, General Musharaf MUST DO one or two of the following, if he has any rational sense of leadership honesty and accountability to the nation:

Should organize immediately a group of competent experts including Pakistanis from overseas, to plan a new political system and develop new political institutions based on Islamic values, and then hold the elections under the new system and abide by its results. In this scenario, he can stay in power for one more year; Should cancel the referendum and withdraw his claim to the Presidency; Should form and lead a government of national unity with non-political civilian members for one year to incorporate vital and systematic changes into the existing constitution and political infrastructures; Should resign and install a non-partisan, a non-political national government to conduct the elections after making the necessary changes as above.

A new ‘solution-oriented’ perception and a firm commitment to transform such a perception into living reality across the board will require a comprehensive vision, moral and political conscience and a deep commitment to the survival, development and integrity of Pakistan.
‘Change’ is planned and organized as an institution of the Government and discipline of public life; New people of integrity to be responsible with wide range of knowledge and experience to create the awareness and need for change; Short and long terms Issues and problems are selected; Plans are formulated and priorities are determined; People with New Ideas, methods, strategies, courage and commitment to cope with the ‘change’ phenomenon, its development and practical implementation; People with different ideas are to encouraged to be active participants, not necessarily part of any conventional establishments such as armed forces or civil services; People who can see and analyze change and development activities and results in varied contexts and propositions for the good of masses;

Action-oriented people who can show results within a given time frame and be accountable for their mission and tasks to the nation.

Any myth of ‘change’ coming out from the military-feudal lords axis will not translate into reality. Issues are complex and workable solution are few in a nation whose thinking and constructive talents have been robbed by the neo-colonialists. In a planned change and development scheme of things, you must evolve a conducive culture to integrate individual mind into collective mind, One Thinking for the best of deprived and exploited nation. Deceitful behavior and inherit contradictions do not help to build a nation out of the moral and political ruins. Military Generals and their sponsored politicians belong to the past, and cannot be a hope for the future.
March for ‘Change’

“If Allah’s help is with you, nothing can overpower you.”

(Al-Quran: Surah Al-Imran)

“The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it.”

(Albert Einstein)

For decades, educated and the general masses under the corrupt leadership culture, preferred indifference over the national interest and future national integration. One wonders, why the common people were not on street when General Yahya Khan and Bhutto planned surrender to India in December 1971? What did Islam, people and democracy gained from a military defeat? Elections were held in one Pakistan, why the power was not transferred to Shaikh Mujib ur Rehman, the majority leader? Those leaders who orchestrated the national defeat such as Bhutto, General Yahya and other military commanders, why were they not held accountable and punished for their crimes against the integrity of the nation? Instead, Bhutto, Mujib and Yahya were rewarded by the defeated nation. Is it possible that the whole nation went banana in thoughts and practices? Pakistani Nation must bear the sole burden of guilt for its indifference. Such indifference to its ideology and national interests, could be translated as a ‘punishment from Allah.’ What lessons if any, did the Pakistani nation learn from such catastrophic tragedies?

Did people march on roads when Z.A. Bhutto rigged the elections or Sharifs, Ms. Bhutto and Zardaris looted the national treasures? Judgment stands loud and clear against the nation with lost opportunities and forty years of life time. The guilty nation that voted enthusiastically for Bhuttos, Sahrifs, Zardaris and the Military Generals under the disguise of “democracy.” Could anyone return this time span to the nation enabling her to change its future? Recently, Javed Chaudry (Zeropoint, Islambad, 2000) noted: “living people move, dead people have no sense. Indifference is sufficient, it is a punishment from Allah.”

The real question is, when would the masses be enlivened again for their thinking, concerns and priorities? Are they like eggs or chickens? Easy to break, easy to kill. Why is it quiet on the nation front when the military leaders are committing heinous and unpardonable crimes against Islam and its values? When would they be able to distinguish between the foes and friends within? When would they be organized and stand for Islam and nothing else? When would they be ready to ask for Allah’s help and truly Islamic Pakistan? Would they come out and rally peacefully in thousands, millions and millions to be HEARD LOUD and CLEAR in all parts of Pakistan:

“No to the Generals”

“No to Sharifs, Bhuttos and Other Criminals”

“Musharaf, How can you raise your Salary by 130% when the Nation is under Debts of 46 billion Dollars?”

“Musharaf, We need New Political Institutions and System of Government, Not Elections and Certainly Not you Fraudlent Referendum”

The Battle for God by Karen ArmstrongMuslims and the West by Mahboob A. KhawajaThe Failure of Political Islam by Olivier Roy, Carol Volk (Translator)Terrorism and U.S. Foreign Policy by Paul R. Pillar, Michael H. ArmacostColonizer and the Colonized by Albert Memmi, Susan G. Miller (Designer), Jean-Paul Sartre (Designer)

SHARE
Previous articleConfronting the Surreal Views of the U.S. Congress
Next articleThere is No News Today
Dr. Mahboob A. Khawaja specializes in global security, peace and conflict resolution with keen interests in Islamic-Western comparative cultures and civilizations, and author of several publications including Global Peace and Conflict Management: Man and Humanity in Search of New Thinking, Lambert Publishing Germany-May, 2012. His forthcoming book is entitled: One Humanity and the Remaking of Global Peace, Security and Conflict Resolution. He contributed this article to Media Monitors Network (MMN)