Understanding and combating terrorism

Huzaima Bukhari & Dr. Ikramul Haq

 

The blatant act of terrorism in Islamabad on September 20, 2008 targeting Marriott Hotel jolted the entire nation and world at large. This raised some important questions about the future shape of ‘war on terrorism’ and survival of modern day societies. Human societies secured freedom from political, economic and socio-religio shackles that have bound men for many centuries after a strenuous and protracted struggle during the last century. The 9/11 and subsequent incidents are creating serious apprehensions of losing freedom by these societies by every passing day. Terrorism like fascism is a self-destructive ideology.  If we want to fight terrorism we will have to understand it. Wishful thinking about military might and invincible air strike power will not help to win the war against something that relates to human behaviour. Use of brutal and ill-directed force against a few groups, dubbed as terrorists by United States and some of its blind allies, without eliminating the causes leading to “terrorism”, will be inadequate and self-defeating exercise in futility.

 

Humanization of world societies is the only effective tool to eliminate terrorism. Use of force and denial of peoples’ legitimate rights on the contrary is bound to provoke more terrorist acts around the world. The violent incidents in Afghanistan, Kashmir, Spain, London, Ireland, Iraq, Palestine, Beslan and elsewhere are self-evident. The doctrine of right of pre-emptive strikes and attack is only a short-term solution. In the long-term, the governments of the world will have to sit down and chalk out a comprehensive strategy to ensure that miscreants are dealt with a strong hand without disturbing the peace and tranquility of individual societies and the world as a whole. The most important question faced by humanity in the aftermath of 9/11 is whether we are afraid of freedom or want to preserve it for our future generations. All the terrorist attacks constitute a strike against freedom but at the same time are reflective of callous attitude of those who claim to be self-appointed guardians of free world, human rights, faith and freedom. In a unipolar world, after the debacle of communist oligarchy, the responsibility of western democracies increased manifold to assure the rest of the world that absolute power in their hands does not mean high-handedness towards others.

 

The mankind after much struggle and paying a heavy price learnt the principles of economic liberalism, political democracy, religious freedom and individualism in personal life. There are now certain forces having vested interest to push the mankind back towards the dark ages when inalienable fundamental rights were denied by the authoritarian rulers. There are debates inside the USA and elsewhere pinpointing the erosion of civil liberties on a massive scale in the name of defending the Frontiers of Freedom. Terrorism surfaced as a reaction towards growing “fascism” on the part of certain States is a human problem which needs to be understood. The analysis of character structure of a man is at the core of understanding the rising phenomena of fascism, fanaticism, fundamentalism and terrorism [which includes state terrorism]. The economic imbalances within a society and from global perspective, revival of religious movements (primarily a camouflage to manifest certain political aims) and imposition of will of the mighty on the weak have all given rise to what culminated in the shape of 9/11 in 2001 and events thereafter which have created worldwide turmoil and reign of fear.

 

Freedom of expression per se has been considered as sufficient fulfilment of the need to achieve a democratic society. The fall out of this fulfilment appears to be a misconceived notion on the part of individuals and groups that freedom of speech ipso facto gives them an authority or a license to impose their own ideas on others using money, power and physical force as means. They are not only intolerant towards others’ views but also suffer from the misconception that their ideas are the only truth through which the world can be changed into a wonderful place. The terrorists think their way of thinking is the correct version of life and the so-called defenders of freedom [who in substance are reincarnated fascists] are of the view that they hold the ultimate truth. Neither side is ready to open a dialogue. Both the sides have a non-comprising attitude when matter comes to ideology. This growing authoritarian thinking has led to a perpetual confrontational world in the 21st Century. In all the tumultuous areas in the world the main reason for unresolved disputes is this stubborn attitude on the part of the parties in conflict.

 

Lack of rationalism on the part of the powerful to be fair towards the powerless has converted our world into a place full of misery, destruction and unhappiness. The frustration of the powerless gets its vent in ghastly acts of terrorism and destruction. If we want to change this situation drastically, a balance has to be struck between the powerful and the powerless. If a large segment of the world lives in a state of powerlessness, the powerful will always remain the target of hatred and attack. The powerful want to transform the world as a machine where all others act as a cog while he has the master control. The cogs have their own way to develop malfunctioning to deprive the master from its absolute control.

 

This authoritarian thinking on the part of the powerful and mechanism adopted by him e.g. imposing economic sanctions is most illogical and irrational way to fight a war against fundamentalism and terrorism. The oppressed and powerless have their peculiar ways of reacting, which by no means can be expected to be according to the norms of internationally agreed principles. Their destructive tendencies (suicide bombings) are symptomatic of a sick world order. Our world is fast emerging as an authoritarian State reminiscent of fascist systems of the last century practices in Germany and Italy where the dominant role of authority in social and political structure rests with the dictators. The revival of dictatorial State orders in the name of security needs is a step towards fascist systems. On global level, there are now open expressions of superior and inferior statuses while entering into relations with different States and blind admiration of the unipolar force. This is like pushing the entire World to Ground Zero.

 

In devising military strategies to fight the forces of fanaticism and terrorism, the people at the helm of affairs should not overlook the human side of the whole problem. Freedom and democracy are inseparable. The right to express our thoughts clearly means something only if we are able to have thoughts of our own. If the media and state machinery is shaping the thoughts of everybody then where is freedom of expression? If one does not have his own thoughts what does democracy mean?  If the shape of the world is to be determined by a handful of people having known economic interests [who want to make oil and political maps right] then of what need is freedom for the common man? In the wake of 9/11 there is skepticism and cynicism towards everything. The future of freedom and democracy is at stake.

 

Looked at superficially, people in various societies may appear to be functioning satisfactorily in economic and social life: yet it would be dangerous to overlook the deep-seated unhappiness behind that comforting veneer. The loss of substantial human lives in brutal attack at Marriott Islamabad (named Pakistani 9/11) and atrocities committed by drone bombings in various parts of the country resulting into death of innocent civilians are interlinked, painful action-reaction chain. Human despair in the wake of these gruesome happenings is not an isolated individual experience of a community but a world-wide feeling on a political scale where dominant thought is losing of freedom at individual level at the hands of forces of obscurantism and fanaticism, which lack sanity and respect for human life. Those who are encountering it with military might are equally mindless of the fact that suppression of individuals and governments cannot win any agenda against terrorism. Erich Fromm in Free of Freedom rightly concluded, “The victory over all kinds of authoritarian systems will be possible only if democracy does not retreat but takes the offensive and proceeds to realize what has been its aim in the minds of those who fought for freedom the last centuries. It will be triumph over the forces of nihilism only if it can imbue people with a faith that is the strongest the human mind in capable of, the faith in life and in truth, and in freedom as the active and spontaneous realization of the individual self”.

 

The same is true for victory against terrorism. In order to secure triumph over the forces of destruction and disruption, the people will have to unite and convince the fellow human beings of faith in life, freedom and truth as the active and spontaneous realization of individual self. This in possible only in a world that is free of authoritarianism, exploitation and injustice.

——————————————————————————————————–

The writers (ikram@huzimaikram.com) are researchers, legal historians, tax advisers and authors of many books on tax laws, narco-terrorism, global heroin economy and socio economic problems relating to our present day international society.

 

 

Spectre of NRO

By Huzaima Bukhari & Dr. Ikramul Haq

The corrupt, crooked, fraudulent, deceitful, dishonest—looters of national wealth and plunderers of public money—are haunted by the spectre of NRO (National Reconstruction Ordinance, 2007) these days. They are uncertain of their future as the National Assembly prorogued on November 16, 2009 without considering the infamous NRO leaving it to die its natural death on November 28, 2009. The beneficiaries of this gruesome piece of legislature are the corrupt, rich, mighty, influential bureaucrats and politicians—some of whom hold key positions in the present government. They are not sure about their future as constitutional validity of NRO is sub judice in the Supreme Court. If this law is declared void ab initio—chances of which are very bright—the beneficiaries will have to face legal proceedings. This process—unless thwarted by yet another Ordinance of the same kind by the President, who himself is the prime beneficiary of NRO—may lead to a few very significant disqualifications. This will certainly be a nasty blow for the ruling party!

Though corruption is way of life in Pakistan—all institutions are affected with this malady—but the target of retribution is, as usual, the party that is enemy number one of the establishment. The sacred cows—military and judiciary—are again united to get rid of the peoples’ power. Strangely, nobody asks them to start accountability amongst their ranks and files. Accountability should be for all—selective one is as bad as for none. The ruling elite—indomitable civil-military bureaucracy, corrupt-inefficient politicians and greedy businessmen—perceives long term PPP rule as a threat to status quo. Pakistan has been victim of perpetual corruption—fiscal crimes, tax evasion, plundering and wasting of taxpayers’. No serious effort has ever been made by successive governments—civil and military alike—to crack down on the plunderers of the national wealth. The list of beneficiaries of NRO appearing in the Press and money involved—over Rs. 700 billion—is simply shocking. It proves that rampant corruption and unprecedented tolerance towards black money has made Pakistan a State where the very survival of public institutions is at stake at the hands of ruthless forces representing money power.

The man in khaki, surrounded by a herd of sycophants, in order to perpetuate his rule, promulgated in the late hours of October 5, 2007—just a few hours before the presidential elections—a law that was patently unconstitutional. It was rightly viewed by all sane persons as a step towards promoting and cementing the culture of loot and fraud. Those who got it done took great pride in striking a deal with a military dictator—their supporters in Washington called it a ‘victory’ for winning civilian support for military puppet. Musharraf had, however, a different sinister plan in mind. He was thinking of using this lethal weapon to secure lasting support and subordination of corrupt politicians. On availing amnesty, he was of the opinion, they would confess their guilt and would never be able to revolt against him. Musharraf was confident that the beneficiaries of NRO, as guaranteed by the Washington, would “cooperate” with him—accept him president for another term of 5 years at least, if not more. His plans met a disastrous end due to imprudent and foolish action of November 3, 2007—the USA was made to believe that apex court was supporting the Jihadi outfits. This was sheer nonsense—an unfounded, baseless allegation levelled to justify the most catastrophic decision in Pakistan legal history. In the wake of November 3, 2007 action, Shaheed Benazir Bhutto accused Musharraf of violating the terms of “understanding” reached through guarantors in Washington and London. She decided not to “negotiate” any further with Musharraf. The military dictator, totally isolated, took refuge somewhere else—found new partners to remain in power. But, he miserably failed to win the support of his angry masters. In the process of unlawfully perpetuating his rule, he deprived this nation of a great leader. The blood of that brave, immortal leader will keep on haunting all those who conspired against her—cheated this country and its people. History will take revenge–one day all the ugly faces involved in that Great Conspiracy will be exposed.

The NRO was ostensibly aimed at giving relief to persons “falsely involved for political reasons or through political victimization in any case initiated between 1st day of January, 1986 to 12th day of October, 1999. But in reality it was meant for pardoning the looters of national wealth. The owners of Mayfair property were aggrieved as they were excluded, but their adversaries—owners of Surrey Palace—were extended all benefits. In reality, both want to get same benefit! Non-discrimination is their main concern. They are now meeting to block any attempt from any side to unearth their collossal, filthy wealth.

Through NRO an amendment was made in the National Accountability Ordinance by inserting section 33A which provided automatic withdrawal and termination of “prolonged pending proceedings initiated prior to 12th October, 1999”. It says “Notwithstanding anything contained in this Ordinance or any other law for the time being in force, proceedings under investigation or pending in any court including a high court and the Supreme Court of Pakistan initiated by or on a reference by the National Accountability Bureau inside or outside Pakistan, including proceedings continued under section 33, requests for mutual assistance and civil party to proceedings initiated by the Federal Government before the 12th day of October, 1999 against holders of public office stand withdrawn and terminated with immediate effect and such holders of public office shall also not be liable to any action in future as well under this Ordinance for acts having been done in good faith before the said date….”.

The above provisions was an open admission that all the governments, prior to 12th October 1999, were involved in registering “false” cases under the National Accountability Ordinance against their political adversaries. If this was the case, the question is why did General Musharraf, knowing that these were false cases, spend huge money trying to convict them? It was claimed that since efforts for conviction did not succeed, all the persons, alleged offenders and the proven guilty filers of fake cases, were exonerated! It shows how state affairs were managed during Musharraf-Shaukat era. They admittedly spent hefty amounts from taxpayers’ money to first convict “innocent” people and later even pardoned those who were proved guilty of wrongdoings!

It is now the responsibility of the PPP to bring both Musharraf and Shaukat back home, try them and if found guilty punish them. If PP wants to avoid the wrath of people, it is imperative for it to start the process of accountability of all. Otherwise, everybody will be justified to hold it responsible for conniving with criminals like Musharraf and Shaukat. The politicians must show firmness while dealing with the issue of NRO and its beneficiaries. They should not protect the black sheep amongst them. It will tarnish their image further—besides the masses will lose whatever little faith they have left in the system.

PPP must realise that state-sponsorship of corruption and deliberate tolerance towards financial malpractices will destroy its political future. The worst consequences of such a policy are its pernicious effect on the general moral fabric of society. Such policies put integrity at a discount and place a premium on vulgar and ostentatious display of power and wealth. This shatters the faith of the common man of the dignity of honest labour and virtuous living. PPP must realise that democracy and corruption cannot co-exist. ___________________________________

The writers, tax lawyers, are members of Visiting Faculty of Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS).

Politics of “reconciliation” amongst looters

Huzaima Bukhari & Dr. Ikramul Haq

In the wake of February 2008 elections, the people of Pakistan thought that the rulers would respect their mandate by moving towards an egalitarian society—the essence of people’s rule. The ruling elite—unholy alliance of bureaucracy, politicians and businessmen—always resist any such change. When matter comes to surrendering their ill-gotten wealth—the main source of their power—for the benefit of masses, the privileged classes, despite their political/ideological differences, start showing “gestures of reconciliation”.  As soon as media start exposing their financial corruption, tax evasion, plundering of national wealth, they “unite” (sic)—immediately meeting at sumptuous dinners and talking about working together for “national interest” (sic) by bridging their “differences” (sic). They start feeling threatened with open public debates about their tax declarations and figures of loan write-offs.   

Tragically, the apex court has yet not decided the issue of loan-write-offs though suo moto action was taken twice—in 1996 and 2008.  In 2008, according to Press reports, the Supreme Court took serious notice of the fact as to how banks wrote off a staggering amount of Rs. 125 billion as “bad debts” during 2000-2006, against Rs. 30 billion written off during 1985-1999. According to reports, larger numbers of loans were written off under Circular No 29/2002, issued by the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP). It was admitted by SBP during the hearings that the major beneficiaries were leading politicians and industrialists.

During the self-acclaimed “transparent era” of Musharraf-Shaukat, loan write-offs in just seven years (2000-2006) crossed the figure of Rs.125 billion, whereas in the much-publicized “corrupt eras” of elected governments (1985-1999) it was merely Rs. 30 billion.  The country’s banks and other financial institutions wrote off an amount of over Rs 30 billion during the governments of Muhammad Khan Junejo, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif. During the two tenures of Nawaz Sharif (1990-93 and 1997-99) Rs. 22.35 billion loans were written off—during his first tenure, a total of Rs. 2.39 billion were written off and in his second, the amount went up to Rs. 19.96 billion. The written off loans during the two tenures of Nawaz Sharif constituted approximately 74.5 percent of the total of Rs. 30.18 billion, written off between 1986 and 1999. During the two tenures of late Benazir Bhutto, a total of Rs. 7.23 billion loans were written off, constituting 24.2 percent of the total written off loans—Rs. 494.97 million in her first tenure and Rs. 6.74 billion in the second term.

During the Musharraf-Shaukat era, an unholy alliance of bankers, businessmen-cum-politicians and bureaucrats managed to plunder public money through an amnesty scheme from SBP, though banks had liquid securities to recover the loans. The SBP submitted before the apex court that amongst the beneficiaries of Ccircular No 29/2002 were two sitting chief ministers of PML(Q) regime.

The ruling elite skilfully engineered the amnesty scheme to get the benefit of write-offs and a consequential concession in tax law for no-taxation of benefits derived, whereas their personal wealth kept on increasing. All these beneficiaries of loan write-offs still possess assets worth billions of rupees. The criminal culpability of successive governments in this matter has tarnished the image of Pakistan—worldwide known as a haven for the corrupt, plunderers and tax evaders.

Table A depicts the cumulative position of the non-performing loans and advances of banks and non-banking financial institutions from 1982 to 2008, which has been compiled from their published Annual Accounts. This shows not only the quantum of non-performing loans, but lack of political will to recover billions of rupees of deposit holders when the creditors are in possession of securities and through introduction of a simple foreclosure law, assets of debtors can easily be liquidated to recover the amounts due.

TABLE A

                                                 

1982                                                    Rs. 8 billion

1988                                                    Rs. 39 billion

1993                                                    Rs. 62 billion

1998                                                    Rs. 118 billion

1998                                                    Rs. 140 billion

1999                                                    Rs. 164 billion

2000                                                    Rs. 171 billion

2001                                                    Rs. 185 billion

2002                                                    Rs. 218 billion

2003                                                    Rs. 229 billion

2004                                                    Rs. 241 billion

2005                                                    Rs. 255 billion

2006                                                    Rs. 265 billion

2007                                                    Rs. 269 billion

2008                                                    Rs. 274 billion

The Supreme Court of Pakistan, way back in 1996 (Reference: Dawn dated 16^th October, 1996), taking suo moto cognizance under Article 189 of the Constitution of Pakistan, took up this issue of loan write-offs and expressed intention of studying all the governing laws in this regard. The apex court vowed to make authoritative pronouncement that “would eliminate the chances of misusing the laws for siphoning of public money”. There is, however, no track as to what happened to that public interest litigation case, it appears the same is still pending even after a lapse of 13 years.

The said public interest litigation originated from a reference filed by then President, Late Ghulam Ishaq Khan against a PPP, MNA, Rao Rasheed Ahmad, who as a member of loan write off committee, blatantly ordered to write off a loan of his wife. There have been many such examples where the rich and mighty managed to plunder the savings of the have-not (small depositors) in a shameless manner. An unholy alliance of bankers, businessmen-cum-politicians and bureaucrats has destroyed the entire banking/financial system.  

The politics of writing-off loans in this country requires proper investigation and study as it will unveil many “big names”, who are responsible for failure of democratic process in Pakistan. The country lost billions of rupees as revenue as well because bad debts written off by the banks on specific directions of SBP were also exempted from income tax. The Government of Pakistan, SBP and Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) never considered the report of Auditor General of Pakistan in this regard issued far back in 1992, showing loss to public exchequer of Rs. 120 billion. It is a matter of record that the Board of Revenue despite this audit report from the Auditor General of Pakistan, issued another instructions on February 4, 1993 vide its letter No. 13(26)/IT-1/79 giving further concessions to the banks. The cases relating to plundering of public money to the tune of billions and blatant abuse of powers by rulers and their henchmen pose a serious threat to our democratic culture.

The unscrupulous businessmen (most of them are now politicians and elected members of parliament), state functionaries and corrupt bankers have joined hands to deprive this nation of billions of rupees of public funds and colossal loss to public revenues. The big bosses of the State Bank and FBR should be summoned by the apex court—Public Accounts Committee will not do so to protect fellow members—to explain who had forced them to issue “administrative instructions” in gross violation of law for loan write- offs and allowing unprecedented tax exemption to the beneficiaries. The inquiry into loan write-offs will not only reveal the modus operandi through which public money is siphoned off but can unveil the real beneficiaries. If we want to establish true democracy in Pakistan, public money looted by these criminals should be recovered, they should be disqualified permanently from holding public offices and all those who facilitated them should be given exemplary punishment.

___________________________________

The writers, tax lawyers and authors of many books, are visiting professors at the Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS).

Death pills from IMF & World Bank

Huzaima Bukhari & Dr. Ikramul Haq

 

In recent days, the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) have suggested a number of changes in our tax statutes that are highly controversial and debatable—these intend to burden the less privileged segments of society whereas the rich will remain unaffected. Implementation of these proposals, without any public debate and assessing their impact on the poorer segments of society, will have ramifications—destroying the cherished goals of self-reliance, social justice and equitable distribution of income and wealth. The prescriptions of IMF and World Bank for our ills are not based on correct diagnosis. Their sole stress is on enhancing regressive taxes that take small portion of the big income of the rich and very large slice of the scanty income of the poor.

 

In none of its studies prepared for Pakistan, the World Bank has bothered to assess the incidence of Value Added Tax (VAT) on various income groups of society. No critical evaluation is made about what impact VAT will have on our ailing economy. The only point highlighted is that VAT—levied across the board—will generate extra revenue of Rs. 400 billion. The so-called experts of IMF and World Bank have no idea about our real tax potential which is not less than Rs. 4000 billion. Instead of suggesting restoration of progressive taxes—wealth tax, capital gain tax, estate duty, gift tax etc—that were once in existence in Pakistan, these institutions are supporting continuance of pro-rich tax policy. By levying fair and equitable taxes and withdrawing exemptions given to the rich, we can easily generate Rs. 4000 to 5000 billion per annum. But our ruling trio—crooked civil-military bureaucracy, shady politicians and greedy businessmen—resists any such move for obvious vested interests. Sadly, though understandably, the IMF and World Bank have also been working to further their cause.           

 

World Bank-funded tax reform process (sic) has failed to yield any positive results. This is evident from the fact that after five years of Tax Administration Tax Reform Project (TARP), the basic ideas (e.g. introduction of VAT and formation of Inland Revenue Service) are still being discussed. It is strange that things that had to be done in 2004 when 5-year TARP was started are at discussion stage in 2009. It confirms that from 2004 to 2009 borrowed funds of millions of dollars have been wasted. This is the sordid story of tax reforms in Pakistan. Now with the establishment of Inland Revenue Service, they think wonders will be achieved. This is just a change of nomenclature—cosmetic change. Unless mindsets of officers change, nothing will change. Process of change requires change of minds and hearts, something which is completing missing in FBR—the officers are incompetent, inefficient and corrupt, both financially and intellectually. No suggestions have been made by IMF or World Bank for curing this malady. Skilled tax administration is not possible with the existing lot sitting in FBR. 

 

In this milieu, the IMF and World Bank are insisting for enforcement of VAT that requires documentation at all levels. VAT is a specific turnover tax levied at each stage in the production and distribution process. Although VAT ultimately bears on the individual consumption of goods and services, liability for VAT is on the supplier of goods or services. VAT utilizes a system of tax credits to place the ultimate and real burden of tax on the final consumer and to relieve the intermediaries of any final tax cost. VAT is calculated by applying the applicable rate at a taxable stage to the appropriate taxable base of goods or services; it is then reduced by the VAT (as indicated on the invoices delivered to the purchaser), which has directly affected the cost of the various elements constituting the price of goods or services.

 

We wrote in these columns in 2000, “in Pakistan there are substantial deviations from pure form of VAT (as in vogue in Europe and some other developed industrial societies), because of exercise of various tax rates, exemptions and concessions for certain goods and services and specific provisions governing importation and exportation. It is therefore not VAT but VAT-type tax in Pakistan”. Now in 2009, the World Bank has just reiterated it in its “research study”—this is height of complacency. In its “research study” (sic), the World Bank did not tackle the most import issue: how VAT will be enforced in Pakistan where more than 50 per cent of economy is undocumented. IMF-World Bank experts say it will take us five years to enhance tax-to-GDP ratio to 15% [presently it is just 9%]. They are oblivious of the size of existing monstrous black economy, which if taxed at current rates, will enhance our tax-to-GDP ratio to 19 percent in just one year! Such taxation will expose the ruling trio that is the real owner and beneficiary of this black economy. Why do IMF and World Bank not suggest asset-seizure legislation to bring entire undocumented economy in tax net? They know it will end their control over our affairs—resource mobilization through these steps will make us self-reliant and end debt enslavement.   

 

The issue in Pakistan is not that of lack of revenue resources as wrongly portrayed by IMF and World Bank, but documentation of economy—ending the culture of tax evasion and fiscal frauds. The forces representing bazaar [different associations of traders], unscrupulous industrialists, absentee landlords and corrupt civil-military bureaucrats are the impediment. These segments are not ready to pay personal taxes on their colossal wealth and income—in most cases created from undeclared sources. They are not worried about VAT knowing that they can pass its burden to consumers. As under sales tax regime, they will not record honestly each and every transaction under VAT. If they will do so, their personal incomes in the process will get documented. Resultantly, they would have to pay income tax from their own “pockets”—incidence of direct taxes cannot be passed on. There has been a perpetual policy of appeasement towards these forces by successive governments—military and civilian alike. The IMF and World Bank want continuation of this policy. They have not suggested any measure to increase the share of direct taxes—presently dismally low at 23% in our total tax collection. In fact, they want that through VAT, the poor keep on paying taxes to fund the luxuries of the rulers.

 

The prescriptions given by the IMF and World Bank will not solve our problems rather further compound them. The rich and mighty segments, identified above, will pass on the burden of VAT on poor people and will still avoid personal taxation—they know how to grease the palms of the corrupt tax officials. In 1990s, IMF and World Bank caused a crushing deathblow to our industry when on their advice we introduced exorbitant sales tax rate of 21 per cent—within a short span of 2 years we had hundreds of sick industrial units. Later on rate was reduced to 18%, then 15% —again raised to 16% in 2009— but the fact remains that heavy indirect taxation has pushed 45 million Pakistanis below the poverty line. IMF and World Bank, fully aware of this fact, are still insisting on VAT. The agenda is obvious: destroy our industry and push more and more people below the poverty line. VAT will be a death pill for us. We can generate extra revenue of Rs. 800 billion by just taxing speculative transactions in shares, real estate and collossal income of absentee landlords. This taxation will also not involve any complicated enforcement issues that is the case with VAT due to constitutional distribution of taxation rights between the Centre and provinces.

————————————–

The writers, tax lawyers, are visiting professors at Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS).

8th anniversary of 9/11: Ugly reality of ‘war on terrrorism’

Huzaima Bukhari & Dr. Ikramul Haq

 Eight years after the wanton attack on New York’s twin towers—masterly planned and executed to create a pretext to invade Afghanistan—majority believes that the United States and its allies have pushed the world into a frenzied quagmire. The perpetuation of terrorism since 2001—coupled with mishandling of the entire issue by US and its allies—has been posing serious threat to international peace. In the name of fighting terrorism, so-called proponents of “peace”, “democracy” and champions of human rights are colonizing oil and mineral rich countries, conspiring to topple some “unwanted” governments and lending support to drug trade and mass acceptance of fascism in the name of reforming the world.

 

The US intervention in Afghanistan is as disastrous as were its earlier actions in Cambodia, Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Nicaragua, Grenada, Panama, and elsewhere. The purpose behind all these interventions has been the same: prevention of egalitarian social change, bringing into power retrograde elements, leaving the economy in ruins, and pitilessly laying waste, many innocent lives. Purportedly, the invasion of Afghanistan was due to the reason that the Taliban were providing sanctuary to Al-Qaeda, who claimed responsibility of 9/11 shameless aggression. Nobody raised the question as to why Clinton or Bush administrations did not ever place Afghanistan on the official State Department list of states charged with sponsoring terrorism, despite the acknowledged presence of Osama bin Laden as a guest of the Taliban government.  Obviously, such a “rogue state” designation would have made it impossible for any US oil or construction company to enter an agreement with Kabul for a pipeline to the Central Asian oil and gas fields.

 

Very few people know that really compelling—though less advertised—reason for plunging deeper into Afghanistan was ownership of oil and gas reserves of Central Asia. A decade before 9/11, Time magazine (18 March 1991) reported that US policy elites were contemplating a military presence in Central Asia. The discovery of vast oil and gas reserves in Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan provided the lure, while the dismemberment of the USSR removed the one major barrier against pursuing an aggressive interventionist policy in that part of the world. US oil companies acquired the rights to some 75 percent of these new reserves. A major problem was how to transport the oil and gas from the landlocked region. US officials opposed using the Russian pipeline or the most direct route across Iran to the Persian Gulf. Instead, they and the corporate oil contractors explored a number of alternative pipeline routes, across Azerbaijan and Turkey to the Mediterranean or across China to the Pacific.

 

The route favored by UNOCAL, a US-based oil company, crossed Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean. The intensive negotiations that UNOCAL entered into with the Taliban regime remained unresolved by 1998, as an Argentine company placed a competing bid for the pipeline. Bush’s war against the Taliban rekindled UNOCAL’s hopes for getting a major chunk of business. Zalmay Khalilzad, Condoleezza Rice, Hamid Karzai, all had established link with UNOCAL.

 

It is a matter of record that much before 9/11, the US and its NATO allies decided to invade Afghanistan. The decision to this effect was taken in Berlin during the joint meeting of Council of Ministers held in November 2000.  It exposes the claims of US and coalition partners that 9/11 was the sole reason for invading Afghanistan. The actual cause was apprehension regarding Turkmenistan Gas Pipeline Project in which powerful corporate entities who in reality, rule US and other capitalist countries, had financial interests. It was not the existence of so-called Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan that forced US and its allies to invade Afghanistan but the “financial terrorism” of US and its blind allies was the main cause of action. Till the said time Al Qaeda was a weapon in the hands of US policymakers to put pressure on Islamic States having enormous oil, gas and mineral wealth to toe its line and extend financial benefits uninterruptedly or face the onslaught of “fundamentalists’.

It needs to be remembered that President Bush appointed former aide to the American oil company UNOCAL, Afghan-born Zalmay Khalilzad, as special envoy to Afghanistan nine days after the US-backed interim government of Hamid Karzai took office in Kabul. This appointment underscored the real economic and financial interests at stake in the US military intervention in Central Asia. Khalilzad was intimately involved in the long-running US efforts to obtain direct access to the oil and gas resources of the region, largely unexploited but believed to be the second largest in the world after the Persian Gulf.

As an advisor for UNOCAL, Khalilzad drew up a risk analysis of a proposed gas pipeline from the former Soviet Republic of Turkmenistan across Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean. He participated in talks between the Oil Company and Taliban officials in 1997, which were aimed at implementing a 1995 agreement to build the pipeline across western Afghanistan. UNOCAL was the lead company in the formation of the Centgas consortium, whose purpose was to bring to market natural gas from the Dauletabad Field in southeastern Turkmenistan, one of the world’s largest gas reserves.

The multi-billion project involved a 48-inch diameter pipeline from the Afghanistan-Turkmenistan border, passing near the cities of Herat and Kandahar, crossing into Pakistan near Quetta and linking with existing pipelines at Multan. An additional $600 million extension to India was also under consideration. Khalilzad also lobbied publicly for a more sympathetic US government policy towards the Taliban. Four years ago, in an op-ed article in the Washington Post, he defended the Taliban regime against accusations that it was a sponsor of terrorism, writing, ”The Taliban does not practice the anti-U.S. style of fundamentalism practiced by Iran.”

”We should… be willing to offer recognition and humanitarian assistance and to promote international economic reconstruction,” he declared. ”It is time for the United States to reengage” the Afghan regime. This ”reengagement” would, of course, have been enormously profitable to UNOCAL, which was otherwise unable to bring gas and oil to the market from landlocked Turkmenistan.

Khalilzad only shifted his position on the Taliban after the Clinton administration fired cruise missiles at targets in Afghanistan in August 1998, claiming that terrorists under the direction of Afghan-based Osama bin Laden were responsible for bombing US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. One day after the attack, UNOCAL put Centgas on hold. Two months later it abandoned all plans for a trans-Afghan pipeline. The oil interests began to look towards a post-Taliban Afghanistan, and so did their representatives in the US national security establishment.

Born in Mazar-e Sharif in 1951, Khalilzad hails from the old ruling elite of Afghanistan. His father was an aide to King Zahir Shah, who ruled the country until 1973. Khalilzad was a graduate student at the University of Chicago, an intellectual center for the American right-wing, when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979. Khalilzad became an American citizen, while serving as a key link between US imperialism and the Islamic fundamentalist Mujahideen fighting the Soviet-backed regime in Kabul—the milieu out of which both the Taliban and bin Laden’s Al Qaeda group emerged. He was a special advisor to the State Department during the Reagan administration, lobbying successfully for accelerated US military aid to the Mujahideen, including hand-held Stinger anti-aircraft missiles which played a key role in the war. He later became Undersecretary of Defence in the administration of senior Bush, during the US war against Iraq, and then went to the Rand Corporation, a top US military think tank.

After George W. Bush was installed as president by a 5-4 vote of the US Supreme Court, Khalilzad headed the Bush-Cheney transition team for the Defence Department and advised incoming Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Significantly, however, he was not named to a sub-cabinet position, which would have required Senate confirmation and might have provoked uncomfortable questions about his role as an oil company advisor in Central Asia and intermediary with the Taliban. Instead, he was named to the National Security Council (NSC), where no confirmation vote was needed.

At the NSC, Zalmay Khalilzad reported to Condoleezza Rice, then national security advisor [later became US Secretary of State] who also served as UNOCAL consultant on Central Asia. After serving in the first Bush administration from 1989 to 1992, Rice was placed on the board of directors of Chevron Corporation and served as its principal expert on Kazakhstan, where Chevron holds the largest concession of any of the international oil companies. The oil industry connections of Bush and Cheney were well known, but little was said in the media about the prominent role being played in Afghan policy by officials who advised the oil industry on Central Asia.

One of the few commentaries in the America media about this aspect of the US military campaign appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle on September 26, 2001. Staff writer Frank Viviano observed: ”The hidden stakes in the war against terrorism can be summed up in a single word: oil. The map of terrorist sanctuaries and targets in the Middle East and Central Asia is also, to an extraordinary degree, a map of the world’s principal energy sources in the 21st century…. It is inevitable that the war against terrorism will be seen by many as a war on behalf of America’s Chevron, Exxon, and Arco; France’s TotalFinaElf; British Petroleum; Royal Dutch Shell and other multinational giants, which have hundreds of billions of dollars of investment in the region.” This reality is well understood in official Washington, but the most important corporate-controlled media outlets—the television networks and major national daily newspapers—have maintained silence that amounts to deliberate politically motivated self-censorship.

The sole exception was an article which appeared December 15, 2001 in the New York Times business section, headlined, ”As the War Shifts Alliances, Oil Deals Follow.” The Times reported, ”The State Department is exploring the potential for post-Taliban energy projects in the region, which has more than 6 percent of the world’s proven oil reserves and almost 40 percent of its gas reserves. The Times noted that during a visit in early December to Kazakhstan, “’Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said he was particularly impressed with the money that American oil companies were investing there. He estimated that $200 billion could flow into Kazakhstan during the next 5 to 10 years.” Secretary of Energy, Spencer Abraham also pushed US oil investments in the region during a November visit to Russia, on which he was accompanied by David J. O’Reilly, chairman of ChevronTexaco.

Former Defence Secretary Rumsfeld also played a role in the oil pipeline maneuvers. During a visit to Baku, capital of Azerbaijan, he assured officials of the oil-rich Caspian state that the administration would lift sanctions imposed in 1992 in the wake of the conflict with Armenia over the enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh. Both Azerbaijan and Armenia aligned themselves with the US military thrust into Central Asia, offering the Pentagon transit rights and use of airfields. Rumsfeld’s visit and his conciliatory remarks were the reward. Rumsfeld told President Haydar Aliyev that the administration had reached agreement with congressional leaders to waive the sanctions.

The White House released a statement hailing the official opening of the first new pipeline by the Caspian Pipeline Consortium, a joint venture of Russia, Kazakhstan, Oman, ChevronTexaco, ExxonMobil and several other oil companies. The pipeline connects the huge Tengiz oilfield in northwestern Kazakhstan to the Russian Black Sea port of Novorossiysk, where tankers are loaded for the world market. US companies put up $1 billion of the $2.65 billion construction cost.

The Bush statement declared, ”The CPC project also advances my Administration’s National Energy Policy by developing a network of multiple Caspian pipelines that also includes the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan, Baku-Supsa, and Baku-Novorossiysk oil pipelines and the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum gas pipeline.” There was little US press coverage of this announcement. Nor did the media refer to the fact that the pipeline consortium involved in the Baku-Ceyhan plan, led by the British oil company BP, is represented by the law firm of Baker & Botts. The principal attorney at this firm was James Baker III, Secretary of State under Bush’s father and chief spokesman for the 2000 Bush campaign during its successful effort to “shut down the Florida vote recount”.

The subsequent invasion of Iraq by US and its allies using the myth of weapons of mass destruction [which proved to be a hoax] and appointment of Zalmay Khalilzad as US Ambassador proved beyond any doubt that the reality of ‘war on drug’ is nothing but quest for OIL. Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele [TIME, May 19, 2003] remarkably exposed the dark side of American oil policy from classified government documents and oil industry memos, involving a pair of Iraq’s neighbours, Iran and Afghanistan. The aim of controlling Iranian oil forced Americans for 25 years to spend more than $20 billion in U.S. taxpayers’ money as military aid and subsidized weapons sales for the Shah’s most undemocratic rule, its oppressive armed forces and ruthless intelligence apparatus SAVAK. These policies lead to takeover of Iran by anti-U.S forces in 1979. Resultantly for two decades, American oil companies were barred by the U.S. government from doing business with Iran.

 

In Afghanistan the story was even more bizarre as in 1977 the CIA “sounded an alarm on the Soviets’ faltering energy prospects in a secret 14-page memo titled: The Impending Soviet Oil Crisis.” President Jimmy Carter, in the wake of Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, concluded that the Soviet Army was passing through Afghanistan to seize the Middle East oil fields and “any outside attempt to gain control of Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America…” Soon after Reagan took office the CIA began one of its largest, longest and most expensive covert operations, “supplying billions of dollars in arms to a collection of Afghan guerrillas fighting the Soviets”. The arms shipments included Stinger missiles, the shoulder-fired, anti-aircraft weapons that were used with deadly accuracy against Soviet helicopters—these are now in circulation among terrorists who fight US and NATO forces in Afghanistan. Among the rebel recipients of U.S. arms was Osama bin Laden, who is now considered as Enemy No.1 in ‘war on terrorism’.

 

At the same time the USA was moving into the Persian Gulf militarily and supplying Afghan rebels, all based on a faulty CIA oil assessment, it was also secretly supporting Saddam Hussein—in 1982 when the State Department removed Iraq from its list of countries supporting terrorism. The root of all this folly was the U.S. government’s officially sanctioned version of faltering Soviet oil production, which was at odds with reality. In fact, Russia today is the world’s second largest [oil] producer, after Saudi Arabia. Instead of becoming a major buyer of Middle East oil, as the CIA had warned, Russia ships 3 million bbl. a day to other countries, including the U.S.  As all this makes clear, the former Soviet Union was not running out of oil. Neither is the world. The one exception: the USA, which was the Saudi Arabia of the first half of the 20^th century, is finally running out. As a result, thanks in part to American policy that put an emphasis on foreign intervention rather than domestic conservation, Americans are more dependent than ever on imported oil.

 

The second myth that Taliban was not able to effectively curb poppy cultivation and drug trade is equally false. According to The Economist (August 16-22, 2003), the Taliban regime clamped down on poppy growing with an iron fist, and banned it completely in 2000. Production collapsed from its peak of over 4,500 tonnes in 1999 to 185 tonnes in 2001. However, the ban did not cover trade, and opiates kept on flowing into Central Asia. After the downfall of the Taliban, poppy cultivation re-appeared with a vengeance, in spite of a fresh ban imposed by US-installed Hamid Karzai’s government.

According to UN estimates [United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime] production increased to over 8,000 tonnes in 2007. Afghanistan once again dominates world production of opium, with almost 80% of the total annual global yield. About 70-80% of Afghans depend on what they can grow. But Afghanistan lacks water and cultivable land. Even in the halcyon 1970s, less than 5% of the land was irrigated. The war halved that. Then during the seven-year-long drought in some places, most of the livestock died and staple crops failed. In the south and south-west of the country, water-tables are dangerously low. Even with the best possible governance, that part of Afghanistan is a poor proposition.

In post-Taliban Afghanistan, drought, drugs and insecurity started to feed off each other. Three of the country’s five big drug-producing provinces – Helmand, Uruzgan, and Kandhar – remained unsafe and parched. In today’s Afghanistan, poppy cultivation is spreading to new areas, and with it insecurity. The nightmare is a new Colombia: a place where drug lords capture and wreck governments and the economy alike—the return of butcher likes Rashid Dostum in August 2009 elections proves the point. The drug trade in the post-Taliban Afghanistan is becoming institutionalized. Opium is now being processed into morphine and heroin inside Afghanistan. That means a lot more money for warlords and militia commanders on the ground, something made apparent by the switch-over to ever more expensive jeeps. Self-styled, US-hijacked, NATO-sponsored democracy (sic) in Afghanistan plays in the hands of more sophisticated naro-enriched criminals—these include members of parliament, warlords and militia commanders.

Obama administration like that of his predecessor is not interested in democracy in Afghanistan. On assuming power Obama promised more military operations in war-ravaged country.  In fact, no US administration has ever engaged in any ‘war on terrorism (sic).  In reality, they have launched “oil and war bonanza” around Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan with multiple objectives: ensuring continuous enormous profits for war industry, control over oil and gas rich countries and containment of China by physical military presence in its nearby areas. The statement of Bush on September 8, 2008 declaring Pakistan “a major theatre” in ‘war on terror” and Obama’s AfPak Policy, followed by wanton attacks on civilians inside our territories, should be viewed in proper perspective: the purpose is to forewarn new democratic government in Islamabad not to deviate from the commitments given by ex-ruler Musharraf—with House of Saud acting as a guarantor—or results would be disastrous.  

Had Unites States been really serious in uprooting the causes of drug trade and terrorism, it could have played a useful role by acknowledging and supporting the efforts of Iran – whose policy on narcotics trafficking is in many ways more intelligent – and by cracking down on warlords and commanders. However, the American stance is diametrically opposite. Clinton, Bush, Obama et al have been levelling baseless allegations against Iran and of late Pakistan of supporting militants whereas CIA covertly keeps on aiding these elements. It unveils the hidden agenda of USA and its allies in Afghanistan and elsewhere to promote war industry, grab oil and gas resources, protect drug trade, use religious fundamentalism to threaten undesirable States and enforce mass acceptance of its policies of fascism for its own self-interests and economic benefits of certain corporations in which the ruling elite has substantial interest.

_____________________________________________

The writers, tax lawyers, authors of many books and articles on narco-terrorism, are visiting Professors at Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS).

Afghan election: cocktail of arms, poppy and politics

Huzaima Bukhari & Dr Ikramul Haq

American-sponsored elections in Afghanistan today—amidst inveterate attacks by the Taliban—are going to have serious impact for the entire region in the coming days. The war-ridden country—occupied by NATO-US troops—no matter who wins—though Hamid Karzai is said to win again—is certainly to be run by a puppet regime. With sham democracy in Afghanistan, the United States wants to justify its occupation—the main object of which is to keep the spectre of al-Qaeda and Taliban alive. If this policy continues for another few years, Afghanistan—and adjacent tribal areas of Pakistan—will become central stage for military conflicts. And this is what the US wants.

The strategy of US and its allies is simple; to induce Russia, India and China in military conflicts. This will destroy their growing economies—posing serious challenges to capitalist monopolies created by US and its Western allies. The containment of China—real agenda behind Obama’s Af-Pak policy—is not possible without using extremist elements—they are covertly funded and supported by US. These militants will be used ultimately for creating troubles in Muslim areas of China as part of US long-term foreign policy.  

The State Department continuously campaigns against its “hidden allies”—but overt adversaries, Al-Qaeda and Taliban— that drug money is their main source of funding. According to so-called experts (planted) the total annual income from narco-trade by the Taliban is about $300 million—independent experts put the figure at $100 million. We challenged it and unveiled (see Ugly face of narco-terrorism, The Post, October 18, 2008) who are the real beneficiaries of $4-6 billion narco industry of Afghanistan. Richard Holbrooke, the US Special Envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, in a Press conference in Islamabad, confirmed our report admitting that “drugs accounted for less of a share of Taliban coffers than was previously thought”. Holbrooke told reporters that “he would add a member of the Treasury Department to his staff to pursue the question of Taliban funding”.

One wonders if Holbrooke will ever look into his own backyard for this. There is credible evidence (see references below from articles, Life, Death & Taliban by Jean MacKenzie and Funding the Pakistani Taliban by Shahan Mufti in Global Post, August 07, 2009) to confirm that the Taliban are receiving huge money from the following sources:

1. “Major contractors, funded by US and Western countries for rehabilitation projects, pay the Taliban their “due share” and it is in the knowledge of Afghan government.
2. The manager of an Afghan firm with lucrative construction contracts with the U.S. government builds in a minimum of 20 percent for the Taliban in his cost estimates. The manager, according to Press reports, has told friends privately that he makes in the neighborhood of $1 million per month. Out of this, $200,000 is siphoned off for the insurgents. “If negotiations fall through, the project will come to harm — road workers may be attacked or killed, bridges may be blown up, engineers may be assassinated”.
3. One Afghan contractor, speaking privately, told friends of one project he was overseeing in the volatile south. “I was building a bridge,” he said, “one evening over drinks, the local Taliban commander called and said don’t build a bridge there, we’ll have to blow it up”. I asked him to let me finish the bridge, collect the money — then they could blow it up whenever they wanted. We agreed, and I completed my project.”
4. In the south, no contract can be implemented without the Taliban taking a cut. One contractor in the southern province of Helmand was negotiating with a local supplier for a large shipment of pipes. The pipes had to be brought in from Pakistan, so the supplier tacked on about 30 percent extra for the Taliban, to ensure that the pipes reached Lashkar Gah safely. Once the pipes were given over to the contractor, he had to negotiate with the Taliban again to get the pipes out to the project site. This was added to the transportation costs. “We assume that our people are paying off the Taliban,” said the foreign contractor in charge of the project.
5. In Farah province, local officials report that the Taliban are taking up to 40 percent of the money coming in for the National Solidarity Program, one of the country’s most successful community reconstruction projects, which has dispensed hundreds of millions of dollars throughout the country over the past six years.
6. Many Afghans see little wrong in the militants getting their fair share of foreign assistance. “This is international money,” said one young Kabul resident. “They are not taking it from the people, they are taking it from their enemy.” But in areas under Taliban control, the insurgents are extorting funds from the people as well.
7. In war-ravaged Helmand, where much of the province has been under Taliban control for the past two years, residents grumble about the tariffs. “It’s a disaster,” said a 50-year-old resident of Marja district. “We have to give them two kilos of poppy paste per jerib during the harvest; then we have to give them Ushr (an Islamic tax, amounting to one-tenth of the harvest) from our wheat. Then they insisted on Zakat (an Islamic tithe). Now they have come up with something else: 12,000 Pakistani rupees (approximately $150) per household. And they won’t take even one rupee less.”
8. A report by the Center for Public Integrity in Washington published in June 2009 claims that millions of dollars are also ending up in Pakistani Taliban coffers from its control of the trade in counterfeit cigarettes. The report estimates that profits from the illicit cigarette trade may account for as much as 20 percent of total funding for these terrorist groups. “After poppy, tobacco is probably the biggest revenue generator,” for the Taliban, said Ikram Sehgal, who runs one of the largest private security firms in the country.
9. The environmental protection agencies in Pakistan are blaming the “timber mafia” — illegal loggers — for funding the militancy. Last year the Taliban took over a dormant marble mine near the Afghan border, which then reportedly generated tens of thousands of dollars for it every month. It all adds up, of course. But all things are relative: if the Taliban are able to raise and spend say $1 billion per year — the outside limit of what anyone has been able to predict — that accounts for what the United States is now spending on 10 days of the war to defeat them”.

Holbrooke, during his four-day visit to Pakistan (August 15-18, 2009) monitored Afghan elections and used Pakistani “clout” to refrain the Taliban from disrupting the electioneering process substantially—Mr. Nawaz was specifically helpful in this endeavour for his intimate links with Jihadis. Holbrooke now acts like de facto ruler of Pakistan—suggesting all kinds of prescription for all our problems. The political leaders (sic) of this country feel proud to “meet him and follow his instruction”—this is a state of shamelessness.

Holbrooke knows who is funding the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He is well aware of the involvement in drug trade of Ahmed Wali Karzai, the younger brother of Hamid Karzai—the puppet President—as his name appeared in the official International Narcotics Strategy Report 2008 issued by State Department. Who knows better than him that the policies of US and its coalition partners bring warlords into an alliance with terrorists—many criminal warlords like Rashid Dostum are back to support Karzai! It was not possible without the consent of US policymakers. The US has never been interested in rebuilding Afghanistan. Its plan of colonizing Afghanistan had three motives: to attain strategic supremacy over China by holding key points in South Asia; use of Afghan Card against Central Asian States if they refuse to toe US policy interests; and to control drug-for-arms trade.

Today’s election in Afghanistan will provide yet another opportunity to warlords to hijack ‘American-sponsored democracy’. In coming days, the entire region may witness a new wave of terrorism that becomes insurmountable—posing security challenges to Pakistan, India, China and Central Asian States. This is the core aim of Af-Pak policy. The rulers and masses of this region must understand this conspiracy. If they want to get rid of religious obscurantist, ruthless militants and warlords, they need to kick out foreign interventionists and the Taliban simultaneously—they are allies though pose to be adversaries.

_________________________________________________ 

The writers, visiting professors at Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS), have written numerous articles on narco-terrorism and reality of ‘war against terrorism’.

How to democratize governance?

 

 

Huzaima Bukhari & Dr. Ikramul Haq

Civil servants performance reflects the performance of government. Your role must be that of “enablers” and “facilitators” rather than just “regulators” — Prime Minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, addressing 90th National Management Course and 5th Senior Management Course at National Management College Lahore on July 25, 2009.

In our Land of the Pure, the poor masses are subjected to heavy and cruel taxation — cumulative incidence of various indirect taxes alone is as high as 40 percent—to finance the luxuries of the politicians, civil-military bureaucracy and the rich and mighty — who enjoy all possible facilities at subsidized rates. The way they waste and plunder the taxpayers’ money is no secret — shamelessness is the most appropriate word to explain their conduct. No serious effort since independence has been made to reform our mighty civil-military complex and its henchmen — the corrupt politicians and businessmen. On the contrary, numerous committees and commissions were constituted to “rationalize their pays and perquisites”. The politicians, who openly and vehemently profess differences on all the major national issues, always unanimously vote for manifold increases in their pays and lucrative perquisites.

Prime Minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani while speaking to grand gathering of senior bureaucrats asked the Pay and Pension Commission, notified on 6 April 2009, to come up with concrete suggestions for a reasonable pay and pension package for the government employees. Our worthy prime minister has not established any commission to assess the unbearable incidence of taxes and cost of basic services to the ordinary citizens and how to give them relief. But he is very concerned to give further benefits to the mighty bureaucrats, enjoying unfettered powers and making the lives of common people miserable. It is a strange form of democracy where the privilege classes do not pay due taxes but want more and more share in taxpayers’ money. In other democratic countries, the rich are taxed for the benefit of the poor. In Pakistan it is the other way around.

Our civil servants and politician feel that they are economically deprived! They always look for enormous emoluments and fringe benefits!! The sense of economic deprivation is certainly true for the majority of low-paid employees—though most of them are also involved in corruption — but the top-notches have enormous assets and money — hidden kept outside or within the country in the names of others. They have legitimate right to get the reasonable pay and security of job. The State must fulfill its duty of good Pay master towards them. They in turn should be the public servants in real sense of the word and not the Gora sahibs—the legacy left by the colonial masters.

A system of check and balance — under which asset and tax declarations of civil servants, judges, generals and politicians are open to public — is a sin qua non for the establishment of a true democratic culture and polity. The monetizing of all the fringe benefits available to the government employees, judges, generals, ministers, advisers must be done forthwith — it will not only be cost-saving but a first step towards the democratization of governance. It is the high time that the government should devise and implement a well-thought-for programme for democratization of governance.

The other day a powerful officer in Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) — known as seasoned bureaucrat and extraordinary tax administrator — was complaining about rude and incompetent politicians. He commented: “governance is not the politicians’ cup of tea they all are law violators by nature. Look at their election expenses and declaration the file with the Election Commission”. He said “double salary given to FBR employees is just peanuts when compared with “huge money” wasted on “worthless” elected members—each one is costing over Rs. 4 million per year. Besides, the money they plunder from various schemes and funds allocated to them as political bribes.

Total budget sanction for National Assembly and Senate for fiscal year 2009-2010 is about Rs. 1.5 billion and Rs. 0.7 billion. This does not include perks and perquisites of ministers, state ministers and advisers. This poor country has army of ministers, state ministers and then advisers! A minister enjoys salary, allowances, financial benefits, rights, privileges and concessions. There are ‘equipment allowances’, travelling expenses for the minister and his family, cost of transporting personal servants, cost of transporting house-hold effects, sumptuary allowances, a furnished residence, travelling allowances for touring in Pakistan, Business Class air fare for him/her and his/her spouse, travelling allowances for tours abroad, First Class air fare, unlimited medical allowances and reimbursements, police escorts, fuel expenses, security, personal staff, office staff, utilities, entertainment allowances, entitlements of staff and telephone allowances—the list is yet not exclusive.

The total amount spent on military establishment — not for defence needs but for the luxuries of the generals and other high-ranking officers — is nearly Rs. 125 billion. The cost of running the offices of president, prime minister, ministers, all the ambassadors-at-large, advisers and governors (supported by huge staff) in a year is between Rs. 130-145 billion — 60 percent of it is extending a host of fringe benefits. The entertainment budget alone of Prime Minister and President House is Rs. 70 million and Rs. 95 million respectively.

One minister costs around Rs. 60 million per year; whereas we spend Rs 144 per Pakistani per year for health; and Rs 145 per Pakistani per year for education! We beg money from all and sundry — its use for non-productive purposes is more painful. No sustainable growth has been achieved even after borrowing billion of dollars. People are dying of hunger — majority is living in miserable conditions — and our privileged public servants (sic), public office holders, generals and judges are not ready to give away their perks and benefits. Why they cannot live like ordinary people?

According to a Press report, “in the locality sprawls over an area of 1,514 kanals of Mozang, Lahore, the largest house in the area, over 52 kanals, is the designated house for the Lahore High Court Chief Justice. The Commissioner’s House is the second largest house covering 26 kanals. The Chief Secretary’s House covers 12 kanals and the Chief Minister’s House covers 5 kanals.

“The Punjab government has earmarked Rs 841.52 million in the Annual Development Programme (ADP) at the disposal of the Services and General Administration Department (S&GAD) out of the total outlay of Rs 160 billion. The S&GAD would complete 51 ongoing schemes at the cost of Rs 475 million and Rs 366.4 million would be used to initiate and execute 25 new schemes during the next fiscal year commencing from July 1. The lion’s share of the funds would be used for the renovation, alteration and landscaping of GOR-I to facilitate the civil, police and judiciary officers living in the residential locality. The government has allocated Rs 10 million to construct 13 residences in GOR-I for officers in BS-20 and above. The renovation of Punjab House in Islamabad, Karachi, Murree and Rawalpindi is also a part of the budget. The government has allocated Rs 28.39 million for upgrading a gymnasium in GOR-I, Rs 0.66 million for the improvement of parks and playgrounds, Rs 0.39 million for the renovation of external water supply lines, Rs 1.16 million for the construction of cabins for security, Rs 5 million for the construction of an over-head water reservoir and installation of a turbine, and Rs 5.23 million for the installation of a diesel generator to ensure uninterrupted water supply to GOR-I”, the Press report reveals.

The government has also allocated Rs 27 million for the construction of the Chief Minister’s (CM) Secretariat at 8-Club Road in GOR-I, Rs 2.5 million for uplifting the facade of the Punjab Civil Secretariat and to build a gymnasium there for secretariat officers. The government has allocated Rs 1.2 million for installing a diesel generator for uninterrupted power supply to Punjab Hall and the Chief Secretary’s Office, and has set aside Rs 20 million for furnishing the Minister’s Block at the Civil Secretariat”, the Press report further adds.

 

This is the story of good governance in the Punjab—where the Chief Minister prefers to be called Khadim-i- Aala (Chief Servant)! The situation in other provinces and the federal government is no different—rather worse. Huge sums are wasted for providing privileges to the high-ranking government officials and politicians. The situation is same in the military establishment. The style of living of our generals is unmatched in the world. In the post-colonial period they became not only political masters but also the main beneficiaries of country’s major resources [see facts in Military Inc by Ayesha Siddiqa]. In the prevailing scenario, democratization and decentralization of governance in all institutions, including the army and judiciary — two scared cows in Pakistan — is vital if we want to progress.

While the government servants blame politicians for plundering and wasting the money, they allege that bureaucracy is the root cause of all the ills. They claim that a secretary of government costs at least Rs. 500,000 per month to national exchequer with lot of facilities and perquisites in kind. If rent-free accommodation given to him in Islamabad alone is evaluated on market basis, the benefit is not less worth Rs. 150,000 per month. In addition, he exercises unfettered powers and defy the orders of elected members of parliament and even sometime of ministers.

The politicians complain that bureaucrats do not implement their orders and keep on tarnishing their image in the public. The expense of monstrous government establishment — at federal and provincial levels — is very high and on top of that corruption and rent-seeking is the order of the day. The following details will certainly be eye-opener for public at large and extremely painful for the honest taxpayers, who are fleeced to pay for the luxuries of the mighty government servants and the rich:

Out of total consolidated current expenditure of Rs. 2066 billion for fiscal year 2008-2009 of federal and provincial governments, the amount spent on perquisites and benefits of government servants was enormous; Federal government spent Rs. 140 billion, Punjab Rs. 55 billion, Sindh Rs. 40 billion, NWFP Rs. 17 billion and Baluchistan Rs. 12 billion.

184 high ranking officers inhabit 12,644 kanals of land for their palatial residential buildings. Sitting in these palaces, these people consider themselves Gora sahibs above any accountability. They decide the fate of Pakistani people on the streets.

Majority of government functionaries lives beyond means spending far more than salaries it receives.

The above facts call for immediate right-sizing — closing down of all the unnecessary departments, divisions, sub-divisions and allied paraphernalia [see list in Capital Suggestions, The News, January 04, 2009, by Dr. Farrukh Saleem]. The list is long and astonishing. At Constitution Avenue, Islamabad, one can count 30 useless government establishments that are doing nothing but have imposing buildings and huge staff. The same is true everywhere — in all parts of the country one finds governments office, overstaffed, wasting money and time and making the lives of the citizens difficult. This is in nutshell the story of our civil service — the worst remnant of colonial legacy.

Living in sprawling bungalows with army of servants, the mighty bureaucrats and generals are least pushed to bother how the common man is living (or dying)—even totally indifferent towards their own fellow low-paid employees. The civil-military structure in Pakistan is class-oriented and against the basic precepts of democracy. They make policies while sitting in the air-conditioned rooms for poverty alleviation and what not. The other day, the FBR issued rules making it mandatory for all firms to file statements and returns electronically without realizing the non-existence of internet facility at the remote places of the country, and even in big cities for want of electricity supply!

All indicate that democratic form of governance is an alien concept in our peculiar socio-political milieu — State of Pakistan since independence is either directly run or controlled by a strong civil-military complex. It has proved to be crueler that colonial masters — in terms of oppression, denying the people their fundamental rights and being highly inefficient and corrupt. Since independence political elite, playing in the hands of civil-military complex has also shown strong indignation towards pro-people decentralized governance. Our governance model — under civil or military rules alike — has proved to be even worse than many developing countries where decentralized governance has brought benefits for the people at gross root level — during our recent visit to Chile we experienced the great advantages of democratization of governance with government official getting all the emoluments in cash and living as happily as their fellow citizens in same localities, using the same public transport and their kids going to public schools meant for all. Our elitist system has made civil servants, judges and military bureaucracy masters. The low-paid employees in civil service hardly meet the both ends but their bosses live like kings! Democratization and decentralization of governance needs serious consideration if we really want to move forward — democracy is not electioneering per se. One of its essential elements is rule for the person which is missing totally in Pakistan.

The first and foremost step towards democratization of governance should be undoing the legacy of Raj. The immediate action should be right-sizing of huge government machinery and monetizing of all the fringe benefits and perquisites in kind given to the employees [see detailed recommendations by Dr. Ishrat Hussain, Shahid Kardar, Nadeem Ul Haque and many others]. Democratization and decentralization of governance necessarily requires complete reform of our civil service and military establishment as well as accountability of public office holders. The State must withdraw from all its employees and public office holders all facilities like houses, cars, servants, telephones etc. All perquisites given in kind should be monetized. Let the government servants, especially the senior bureaucrats, live with the ordinary citizens of Pakistan and not in GORs or other posh colonies. It will give them real insight how the policies should be made and what are the real problems of the ordinary folk.

The government servants should construct their own houses or take residences on rent as other citizens do. Grand housing scheme by the State should be for all — no separate palaces for bureaucrats. The lucrative properties on The Mall in Lahore and elsewhere in the country are not the jagirs of bureaucrats. These belong to the masses and they should be the beneficiaries of their assets. Why the ministers live on the sprawling houses on The Mall and designated placed in Islamabad and in other cities. Why in GOR, The Mall, judges get huge bungalows. They should also live like ordinary people.

Why the Corpse Commanders have houses right in the cities in acres. Why the governor houses in all the four provinces are so huge. These questions are important from the standpoint of democratization of governance. The existence of such luxuries for the rulers and privilege segments of society is derogatory to Constitution and democracy. In other countries such buildings are open to public—as museums or functional places. In Pakistan, these are outbound for the common man. These should not be available as perquisites to anybody.

The government must revise pay structure of its employees but all fringe benefits/perquisites in kind should be monetized. This will be the starting point of change in society — beginning of the democratization of governance. It is the Constitutional duty of the State to treat all the citizens equally and provide them the facilities of education, health and transportation. Since all the money is spent on the luxuries of the rulers and their henchmen, the State has persistently been failed to fulfill its main responsibility. Those who manage and perform State functions — public office holders and civil servants — must be made part of the masses. The colonial concept of master and servants relationship must end now. 14th August 2009 — marking 62nd anniversary of independence—is close and it is the high time that we should make a beginning of democratization of governance.

 

 

 

“Slavery syndrome” and cronyism

Huzaima Bukhari & Dr. Ikramul Haq

 

Subjugation, physical or mental, creates disastrous results—crippling the subjugated to the extent they are neither dead nor alive. The agony of this state—perpetual despair and never-ending pain—is much worse than death. Death of an individual or annihilation of a nation is, in fact, deliverance—a relief from anguish and pain. But subjugation is unremitting punishment. History of subjugation and resistance presents vital lessons for humanity. Subjugation is the worst malady that inflicts long-term slave mentality in people. Resistance on the contrary kindles the hope of life—regaining of freedom being its prime goal.

The subjugators, after being defeated, struck back by creating a band of sycophants and cronies, who in the name of self-rule started exploiting their own masses. They continue serving their foreign masters and prove to be even worse rulers. This is the tragedy of most of the so-called independent states— Zulfikar Ali Bhutto called it Myth of Independence—in the post-colonial era. The subjugators are still ruling their ex-colonies— operating through their henchmen, local gumashtas (agents). Pakistan is a fit case study of this phenomenon. The country after independence in 1947 was soon subjugated, and many think that the death of Mohammad Ali Jinnah was the starting point.

 Except Zulfikar Ali Bhutto—one school of thought even doubts it—every ruler was to take command from the men in uniform who were hired by their foreign masters. The men in uniform started controlling all the organs of State from the very beginning through their lackeys in politics and civil bureaucracy. The role of political elite in the post-independent “security state” of Pakistan has been shamelessly anti-people. Calling themselves “leaders”, they serve the army and their neo-colonialist masters with great zeal. It is a matter of record that a sitting speaker of the National Assembly told a British royalty in his chamber “my ancestors were humble servants of the Majesty and we still are your loyal servants” [see detailed work of Hassan N. Gardezi, Neocolonial Alliances and Crisis of Pakistan] .

  In Pakistan, unlike other re-subjugated nations, everybody takes great pride being part of the “invitees’ list” of US and UK embassies in Islamabad. In other places, people will reject such invitations—but in this land of the Pure, even religious parties, claiming to be anti-USA and UK, feel annoyed if not invited by CIA-MI-run missions in Islamabad. Qazi Hussain or Munawar Hassan of Jamaat-i-Islamiare no exception. They tell US visitors: “Please deal withus alone. We alone have leverage to bring Taliban on terms withyou”. Perhaps, they do not know that US created these monsters and still have close liaison with them. The other day, a secret memo of US State Department, published in a leading New York paper, revealed that “no political figure in Pakistan has ever turned down an invitation of US Embassy in Pakistan to attend a private party where alcohol is served. In private they criticize us and in such parties ask for personal favours”.  

Daily we watch the media showing meetings of “foreign masters” with our military leadership, president, prime minister, ministers, political leaders, bureaucrats and even with city nazim! Once even the great Chief Justice of Pakistan fell victim to this undesirable ritual. They treat us as a colony [fault is entirely ours and not theirs—  beggars cannot be choosers] and we feel proud in taking their prescriptions for every ill, without realizing that most of the problems, are due to this subservience, which can be solved through public debates and political will and in much better ways. This “slavery syndrome” is one of the major reasons for our failure in becoming an independent polity and self-reliant economy. 

 Those who are commanding us, claiming to be champions of democracy and freedom (sic), have in fact created a chaotic world where might is right. The powerful that matter in the global politics want perpetuation of their control through hand-picked cronies and lackeys in different countries. They back only those who promote cronyism. Those who joined hands with the dictator were exonerated under the National Reconciliation Ordinance, 2007 [NRO]. This they called “political reconciliation”.  Many viewed the NRO, promulgated in the late hours of 5^thOctober 2007, just a few hours before the presidential elections (sic), a step towards further promoting and cementing the culture of loot and fraud in the country. They proved right as in the wake of February 18, 2008 elections, the beneficiaries of NRO started fooling the people again in the name of roti, kapra andmakan, while themselves holding wealth of billions of rupees out of the country and crushing the people under Petroleum Levy. They overnight became the defender of the military dictator. But as every crony does, as soon as they got relief from courts they started calling him a relic of the past. Its another thing that he rightly deserved that treatment; it was a perfect tit for tat.

 Mian Nawaz Sharif, who earlier joined hands with new Washington-approved “power”, then  criticized him for violating the terms of Meesaq-i-Jamhoriat, (Charter of Democracy), has now again started an era of “friendship” (sic) with the same man whom he called the most unreliable after meeting in Raiwind Palace on July 17, 2009.   The PML(N) is no different from PPP.  Leaders of both the parties hoodwink their sincere workers.  Zardari and Nawaz  are hungry of power and do not want to share their enormous wealth lying outside Pakistan with the masses. They have forged an anti-people alliance to protect their own vested interests.  In Punjab when power was snatched by Zardari, the Sharifs cried like anything and created a lot of hue and cry. Overnight they became “revolutionaries” and started reciting the poems of Habib Jalib.   Soon a deal was struck for elimination of all cases against the Sharifs and one by one the courts started obliging the rulers of the day again. This is unfortunate. Our judiciary always play in the hands of the mighty. Everybody knows the  track-record of the Sharifs, whenever they capture state power, they also start flouting rule of law  by showering unprecedented benefits to their cronies. After all, the Chaudhry brothers got all their loans written off when Nawaz Sharif was Prime Minister.

 The main cause of our present day pathetic socio-political and economic situation is existence of slave mentality and the culture of cronyism. The rulers are keen to win the support of Washington rather than serving the people who elected them. Resultantly, we have inefficient, corrupt, repressive and criminal institutions, which do not give a damn for the welfare of the common people. Successive governments’ policies of self-aggrandizement have reduced Pakistan to a State-in-perpetual-conflict. The worsening economic and law and order situation testify to the fact that prosperity and stability cannot be achieved by toeing the policies of the aggressor—getting some bucks for killing own people.

Obviously, if the system is not to sink into greater and greater chaos, corrective actions must be taken before Pakistan finds itself in the unenviable status of a corrupt banana republic (some think we have already achieved this status!). And the starting point is the clear recognition of the role of the State. It should devote its energies to enforcing the laws which protect the public from cheats and racketeers rather than reinforcing the system which encourages them. We need a reliable justice system to clean up the mess. Justice system does not work in isolation. Its establishment requires a bold and clean leadership which restrains the ballooning state and proclaims this unpalatable truth, and sets standards for the rest of the citizenry. And, that is what we lack. Great poet Faiz reminded us aptly:

Nijat-e-deeda o dil ki gharri nahin aayi

Challe challo ke who manzil abhi nahin aayi

So, people of Pakistan, keep on marching as your final destination has yet not arrived. The day the people defeat foreign masters and their cronies, make the leaders accountable and gain full control over the country’s resources, it will be the dawn of the new era of independence in the true sense of the word.

———————————————

The writers, tax advisers, are visiting professors at Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS). They can be reached through their website www.huzaimaikram.com

Faiz-Neruda: Great contemporary poets, friends and humanists

Huzaima Bukhari & Dr. Ikramul Haq

Pablo Neruda (1904-1973) and Faiz Ahmad Faiz (1910-1984)—contemporary poets, friends and outstanding humanists—have left lasting impression on the world of literature. Their works won global recognition—Neruda was honoured with Nobel Prize for literature in 1971 and Faiz won Lenin Peace Prize in 1962. Both Neruda and Faiz, like many others, notably Nazim Hikmet and Mahmoud Darwish, were essentially humanists, anti-colonialists and anti-imperialists. Their great struggle and works were interwoven—these were inseparable. Their work complimented their struggle and vice versa.

The life and work of Neruda has amazing similarities with that of Faiz.

Pable Neruda (1904-1973)

 

[i]Neruda (real name Neftalí Ricardo Reyes Basoalto), was born on 12 July, 1904, in the town of Parral in Chile. His father was a railway employee and his mother, who died shortly after his birth, a teacher. Some years later his father, who had then moved to the town of Temuco, remarried Doña Trinidad Candia Malverde. The poet spent his childhood and youth in Temuco, where he also got to know Gabriela Mistral, head of the girls’ secondary school, who took a liking to him. At the early age of thirteen he began to contribute some articles to the daily La Mañana, among them, Entusiasmo y Perseverancia –his first publication– and his first poem. In 1920, he became a contributor to the literary journal Selva Austral under the pen name of Pablo Neruda, which he adopted in memory of the Czechoslovak poet Jan Neruda (1834-1891). Some of the poems Neruda wrote at that time are to be found in his first published book: Crepusculario (1923). The following year saw the publication of Veinte poemas de amor y una cancion desesperada, one of his best-known and most translated works. Alongside his literary activities, Neruda studied French and pedagogy at the University of Chile in Santiago.

Between 1927 and 1935, the government put him in charge of a number of honorary consulships, which took him to Burma, Ceylon, Java, Singapore, Buenos Aires, Barcelona, and Madrid. His poetic work during that difficult period included, among other works, the collection of esoteric surrealistic poems, Residencia en la tierra (1933), which marked his literary breakthrough.

The Spanish Civil War and the murder of García Lorca, whom Neruda knew, affected him strongly and made him join the Republican movement, first in Spain, and later in France, where he started working on his collection of poems España en el Corazón (1937). The same year he returned to his native country, to which he had been recalled, and his poetry during the following period was characterized by an orientation towards political and social matters. España en el Corazón had a great impact by virtue of its being printed in the middle of the front during the civil war.

In 1939, Neruda was appointed consul for the Spanish emigration, residing in Paris, and, shortly afterwards, Consul General in Mexico, where he rewrote his Canto General de Chile, transforming it into an epic poem about the whole South American continent, its nature, its people and its historical destiny. This work, entitled Canto General, was published in Mexico 1950, and also underground in Chile. It consists of approximately 250 poems brought together into fifteen literary cycles and constitutes the central part of Neruda’s literary work. Shortly after its publication, Canto General was translated into some ten languages. Nearly all these poems were created in a difficult situation, when Neruda was living abroad. 

In 1943, Neruda returned to Chile, and in 1945 he was elected senator of the Republic, also joining the Communist Party of Chile. Due to his protests against President González Videla’s repressive policy against striking miners in 1947, he had to live underground in his own country for two years until he managed to leave in 1949. After living in different European countries he returned home in 1952. A great deal of what he published during that period bears the stamp of his political activities; one example is Las Uvas y el Viento (1954), which can be regarded as the diary of Neruda’s exile. In Odas elementales (1954- 1959) his message is expanded into a more extensive description of the world, where the objects of the hymns –things, events and relations—are duly presented in alphabetic form.

In July 1957, Neruda travelled to Colombo, Sri Lanka (then Ceylon) and took part in the Peace Supporters World Congress. He went to India and Burma together with Jorge Amado and Zelia Gattai. Later visited China from the Kuo-Ming province. During this trip he worked on his books Navegaciones y Regresos and Estravagario. He returned to Europe with Matilde and embarked on brief trips to the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia and East Germany. In September, he settled in Paris to continue working on Estravagario and Cien Sonetos de Amor.

In 1958, he was actively involved in Salvador Allende’s second presidential campaign and took part in the 11th Congress of the Chilean Communist Party. Neruda was elected member of its Central Committee during the September session.

 In January 26, 1959, he had encounter with Fidel Castro at Cuba’s Caracas embassy. He also made short trips through different areas of Venezuela, going back to Chile in April. In November Navegaciones y regresos was released by Losada publishers, Buenos Aires. In mid November 1959, he travelled to the cities of Rancagua, San Fernando, Parral and Linares with a Communist Party delegation. The next few years’ activities included travels to various countries, especially to then USSR in 1970 to take part in the deliberations of the Lenin Prize. The Book Canción de Gesta was published by the Imprenta Nacional de Cuba in a 25.000 copies edition. On March 30, 1960, he was given the grade of honorary academic member of the Universidad de Chile Faculty of Philosophy and Education. At the induction ceremony, he read a speech titled “Mariano Latorre, Pedro Prado and my own shadow”.

 In June 1965, Neruda travelled to the US with Matilde Urrutia. He offered recitals in New Yorok, Berkeley and Washington, also took part in PEN Club meetings, besides doing a record for the Congress Library. The same year on 31^st July, Cuban writers and intellectuals published “Open letter to Pablo Neruda”, in which they accused him of “having allowed being used by the United States of America. He responded: “… in the US and elsewhere I’ve been heard and respected for what I am and will ever be: a poet who does not hide his thinking and who has devoted his life and work to our people’s liberation”.

 On October 28, 1966, he married Matilde Urrutia in a simple and private ceremony in the Isla Negra House, with only a few very close friends attending. This year the Art Friends Society published in Santiago his Arte de pájaros with illustrations by Nemesio Antúnez, Héctor Herrera, Mario Carreño and MarioToral.

 In 1967, like every year, he travelled in May to Europe to attend the meetings of the Lenin Prize jury in Moscow. He also was declared guest of the Fourth Soviet Writers Congress. He received the International Literary Prize of Viaréggio-Versilia in Italy. This was the first version of the award, devoted to world personalities working for the culture and understanding among people.

 During his visit to Columbia in 1968, he participated in the First Latin-American Festival of College Drama in the city of Manizales. He refused to accept the San Carlos Order’s Great Cross from Colombian President Carlos Lleras Restrepo. He offered poetry recitals at the National University of Colombia and the Colombian Language Academy .On October 15 in the Bogotá campus of the Inca University, he received the grade of Doctor Honoris Causa from the Karl Mark University in Leipzig, GDR.

 In February 1969, he took part in the Communist Party legislative election campaign. He was made “Honorary member” of the Chilean Language Academy. On June 30, he gave a long TV interview for the show “Reunión con la Pernsa” on Universidad de Chile’s Channel 9. On July 12, he celebrated his 65th birthday in the company of secretaries of state, journalists, artists and intellectuals. On August 21 he received the grade of Doctor Scientiae et Honoris Causa from the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. On September 4, the Senate honoured him with the Illustrious Sons of Chile Silver Medal. On September 30, he was nominated as presidential pre-candidate by the Chilean Communist Party.

 On January 3, 1970, he abandoned his candidacy after the nomination of Dr. Salvador Allende as the Unidad Popular’s only candidate. Allende was elected President of Chile on September 4, 1970.

 On January 21, 1971, the Chilean Senate approved his nomination as Chile’s ambassador in Paris. In July that year, he experienced the first the symptoms of the disease diagnosed to him two years ago: the appearance of nodules and prostrate growth. On October 1, he was awarded the Literature Nobel Prize. On December 7, he arrived in Stockholm with Matilde Urrutia to attend the ceremony of the Nobel Prize presentation, held on 10th. In his memoirs, the poet remembers: “The old king shook the hands of everyone, gave us the diploma, the medal, the check (…) It is said (or so it was said to Matilde just to impress her) that the king spent more time with me than with other laureates, that he shook my hand with evident sympathy. It was perhaps a reminiscence of the old kindness of monarchs towards bards”.

 In March 1972, he attended as a guest the XIII Italian Communist Party Congress in Milan. On December 5, on his return to homeland, the Chilean people gave the poet a rousing welcome and great tribute at the Estadio Nacional. This proved to be his last public appearance. In early part of 1973, due to health difficulties, Neruda quited his position as Chile’s Ambassador in France. 12 days after the Coup d’état in Chile, he died at 10.30 PM in Santiago’s Clínica Santa María. On September 25, in an atmosphere of tension and collective mourning, a big crowd accompanied Pablo Neruda’s body to the Cementerio General. Once in the cemetery, provocative shouts in his honour and Salvador Allende’s were heard. He was provisionally buried in the Dittborn family’s mausoleum. 

 On December 11, 1999, Matilde Urrutia and Neruda’s remains were exhumed and carried to a ceremonial wake in the ex National Congress Honour Room. The next day, the poet’s wills was accomplished 19 years after his death: his body was buried in Isla Negra, facing the sea he loved and sang about so much. The ceremony’s only speech was pronounced by President Patricio Aylwin.

Neruda’s work is exceptionally extensive[ii]. For example, his Obras Completas, constantly republished, comprised 459 pages in 1951; in 1962 the number of pages was 1,925, and in 1968 it amounted to 3,237, in two volumes. Among his works of the last few years can be mentioned Cien sonetos de amor (1959), which includes poems dedicated to his wife Matilde Urrutia, Memorial de Isla Negra, a poetic work of an autobiographic character in five volumes, published on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday, Arte de pajáros (1966), La Barcarola (1967), the play Fulgor y muerte de Joaquín Murieta (1967), Las manos del día (1968), Fin del mundo (1969), Las piedras del cielo (1970), and La espada encendida.

Pablo Neruda, a basic anthology is published in England by The Dolphins Book. It is an excellent anthology for English readers put together by Robert Pring-Mill, friend of the poet and very familiar with his work. This selection also includes a long preliminary study, also by Pring-Mill. Alain Sicard’s La pensee poetique de Pablo Neruda, one of the most complete and deep studies on the poet’s work, is published in France. The Spanish translation, El pensamiento poético de Pablo Neruda, is published in 1981 by Gredos.

Faiz in young days

[iii]Faiz Ahmed Faiz was born in Sialkot in the Punjab, then a part of India under British rule. He hailed from a well-to-do landowner’s family. Faiz’s father was a prominent lawyer, who was interested in literature, and whose friends included several prominent literary figures, including Muhammad Iqbal (1873-1938), national poet of Pakistan. Faiz received his education at mission schools in Sialkot in the English language, but he also learned Urdu, Persian, and Arabic. He studied English and Arabic literatures at Government College, Lahore, receiving in 1932 his M.A. in English, and in Arabic from Oriental College, Lahore. Besides formal studies, Faiz actively participated in the literary circles, which held meetings at homes of established writers. After graduating, he worked as a teacher from the mid-1930s in Amritsar and Lahore.

In the 1930s, Faiz joined the famous leftist progressive movement under the leadership of Sajjad Zaheer (1905-1973). During World War II, Faiz served in the Indian army in Delhi, and in 1944, he was promoted to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. With the division of the subcontinent in 1947, Faiz resigned from the army and moved to Pakistan with his family. Alys Faiz (died in 2003), whom he had married in 1941, later published a book of memoirs, Over My Shoulder (1993). Faiz became editor of the English daily, the Pakistan Times. He also worked as managing editor of the Urdu daily Imroz, and was actively involved in organizing trade unions.

In 1951 Faiz and a number of army officers were implicated in the so-called Rawalpindi Conspiracy case and arrested under Safety Act. The government authorities alleged that Faiz and others were planning a coup d’état. He spent four years in prison under a sentence of death and was released in 1955. Faiz became the secretary of the National Council of the Arts, and in 1962 he was awarded the Lenin Peace Prize by the Soviet Union. After the military takeover of General Ziaul Haq on July 5, 1977, Faiz was once again under trouble and was forced to exile. After a period of exile in war-torn Lebanon from 1979 to 1982, Faiz returned to Pakistan and died in Lahore on November 20, 1984.

Faiz’s first collections of poetry, Naqsh-e faryadi (1943), Dast-e saba (1952), and Zindan Namah (1956), include his experience of imprisonment. Faiz describes his life behind the walls, in confinement, finding consolation in the thought that “though tyrants may command that lamps be smashed / in rooms where lovers are destined to meet / they cannot snuff out the moon…”

Faiz has written extensively. His contribution in poetry and prose is enormous[iv]. In Culture and Identity: Selected English Writings of Faiz, Sheema Majeed and Mohammad Reza Kazimi[v] have presented valuable work of Faiz.

Both Neruda and Faiz were actively involved in freedom movements.  Their poetry, musical, lyrical and inspiring, stem from the main theme of making their homelands and the world at large a better place for the downtrodden—‘the wretched of the earth’, a phrase masterly coined by Franz Fanon.

The remarkable thing about Neruda and Faiz was that in spite of their overwhelming revolutionary ideas, they never allowed ideological epiphany to burden their poems with shoddy rhetoric. They were masters of art and craft—a quality lacked by many revolutionary poets of their time. Neruda-Faiz legacy is universal and everlasting—both for nearly six decades inimitably articulated the suffering of their people, the agony of dispossession and exile.

Today, Ismail Kadare—winner of 2009 Spanish literary prize who considered as one of the greatest writers and intellectuals of the 20th century—narrates in the same masterly language and style the tragedy of his land (Albania), an incessant battleground. It is, in fact, not a story of one land alone. It is tragedy of millions of others as well—living in troubled lands around the globe where wars, civil strife, hunger, terrorism and militancy are posing problems of day to day survival. Today, Pablo Neruda and Faiz Ahmad Faiz are not alive, but the courage they demonstrated in their work is source of inspiration for all the leading poets and writers of the world.

Pablo Neruda and Faiz Ahmad Faiz were intimate friends, a fact little known in Chile and Pakistan. Chile and Pakistan are geographically far apart, but share amazing socio-political similarities in their post independence period. Both the countries produced charismatic leaders like Salvador Allende and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. Tragically, they met the same fate—deposed and eliminated by military dictators at the behest of their imperialist masters. Pablo Neruda supported Allende and served under his government as did Faiz Ahmad Faiz under Bhutto. Pablo did not survive long after the 1973 US-backed military coup by Augusto Pinochet attacking the presidential palace and killing Allende. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was arrested by General Ziaul Haq on July 5, 1977 and after a dubious kangaroo trial was hanged on April 4, 1979.

Since Allende and Bhutto pursued pro-people policies in countries long dominated by the military, they were overthrown by the collaborators of the neo-imperialists, killed at the behest of the military juntas of Pinochet and Zia and followed by long spells of repressive Military regimes which did not retreat until the Cold War drew to an end. Neruda and Faiz participated in the long-drawn struggle for freedom—both in colonial and post-independence eras—and their poetry is epitome of message of hope and commitment for creating a true democratic polity in which the forces of exploitation have no role to play. Their dream was common—to see human beings living in peace and tranquility. Neruda and Faiz were messengers of peace, equality and justice. Their commitment to their cause was infallible. Their poetry reflects the aspirations of masses. From literary point of view, they were masters of their craft. They were not mere revolutionary slogan-mongering who lacked in their work classical authenticity and modern sensibility. On the contrary, both Faiz and Neruda are considered even by their critics, great masters of poetic expression and authentic builders of new tradition of resistance in literature.  

In the post-independence period and during the Cold War era, both Neruda and Faiz were still struggling as oligarchy of the rich and mighty, created by colonial masters, captured power denying people their due rights. Both used poetry as a means of resistance against colonial and post-colonial legacy of control, exploitation and denial of rights to the masses. They remained active players in the entire struggle and not mere idealist poets, sitting on the other side of the fence, criticizing others. This makes them distinguishable from many contemporary poets and writers, who believed in “art for the sake of art” and sided with the rulers of the day, either by their silence or inactions.     

 Faiz during his exile, had a chance of editing the magazine, Lotus, of Afro-Asian Writers’ Association. In Lotus English translations of Pablo Neruda’s poems appeared frequently. Faiz, in his many editorials while paying tributes to Neruda, aptly called him poet of humanity, ‘great voice of our time’, ‘true representative of masses’ and ‘poet of all times to come’. The message of Neruda, according to Faiz, is not only meant for his countrymen but all those who were once subjugated and then struggled for freedom but soon realized their liberation was myth and not reality as colonial masters left behind their cronies who proved to be more cruel than their masters. The poetry of Faiz and Neruda is realization of this myth of independence—title of the book by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto—and how to win real freedom—to undo colonial legacy, defeat the forces of exploitation and establish a just system for all.

 How long will this struggle continue? The answer came from Edward W. Said, the great intellectual of our time. In an interview, while elaborating the legacy of Neruda and Faiz, Professor Said pointed out that “in a world so long might is right, the powerful in the global politics want the perpetuation of their control through handpicked cronies and lackeys in different countries, we will need poets like Faiz and Neruda to expose them and give us courage to fight against them”.  

Professor Said always admired Faiz for his courage and resilience. Faiz, while in prison, expressed remarkably the love for his homeland and struggle against oppression in the following poem:

نثار ميں تيري گليوں پے، اے وطن، کہ جهاں چلي هے رسم کہ کوئي نہ سر اٹھا کے چلے جو کوئي چاهنے والا طواف کو نکلے نظر چُرا کے چلے، جسم و جاں بچا کے چلےہے اهل ِ دل کے ليے اب يہ نظم ِ بست و کشاد کہ سنگ و خشت مقيد هيں اور سگ آزادبهت هيں ظلم کے دست ِ بهانه جو کے ليے جو چند اهل ِ جنوں تيرے نام ليوا هيں بنےهيں اهل ِ هوس مدعي بھي، منصف بھي کسے وکيل کريں، کس سے منصفي چاهيںمگر گزارنے والوں کے دن گزرتے هيں تيرے فراق ميں يوں صبح و شام کرتے هيں بُجها جو روزن ِ زنداں تو دل يہ سمجھا هے کہ تيري مانگ ستاروں سے بھر گئي هو گي چمک اٹھے ہيں ِسلاسل تو هم نے جانا هے کہ اب سحر تيرے رخ پر بکھر گئي هو گي غرض تصور ِ شام و سحر ميں جيتے ہيں گرفت ِ سايہ ِ ديوار و در ميں جيتے ہيں يونهي هميشه الجھتي رهي هے ظلم سے خلق نہ ان کي رسم نئي هے، نہ اپني ريت نئي يونهي هميشه کھلائے هيں هم نے آگ ميں پھول نہ ان کي هار نئي هے، نہ اپني جيت نئي اسي سبب سے فلک کا گلہ نهيں کرتے تيرے فراق ميں هم دل برا نهيں کرتے گر آج تجھ سے جدا هيں تو کل بهم هوں گے يہ رات بھر کي جدائي تو کوئي بات نهيں گر آج اوج پہ هيں طالع ِ رقيب تو کيا؟ يہ چار دن کي خدائي تو کوئي بات نهيں جو تجھ سے عهد ِ وفا استوار رکھتے هيں علاج ِ گردش ِ ليل و نهار رکھتے هيں فيض احمد فيض، ۱۹۵۳، دستِ صبا

I give my life to your alleys, o nation, where custom now dictates that one walk with head bowed, when a lover leaves on a pilgrimage to love, he must guard his eye, his body, his life.Here, then, is the new order of freedom, O heart Stones and bricks are in captivity and dogs run free.Many are the pretenses for the oppressor’s hand for the few who, in madness, take your name the ones crazed by lust are both the accusers and the judges who can we get to make our case? from whom can we seek justice?Yet the days go by for those who can, in your separation, turn dusk to dawn. Now that the prison’s window has turned off we know that stars must have decorated your hair. Now that these chains are sparkling we know that the day must has illuminated your face. And so we live, imagining dawns and dusks And so we live, gripped by the shadow of these prison walls Such has always been, this struggle between oppressor and oppressed Neither are their customs new, nor our paths new Such has always been, that we grew flowers amid fire Neither is their defeat new, nor is our triumph new. Which is why, we don’t offer complains to the sky Which is why, we don’t mourn being away from you If today we are apart, tomorrow we will be together this separation for a night is nothing, If today the rival’s sun is high, so what? this god for four days is nothing. Those who maintain their oath of fidelity to you they possess the cure for the circulation of night and day. Faiz Ahmed Faiz, 1953, Wind’s Palm.

The poems of Neruda are still a source of inspiration for many in Pakistan, as in the elsewhere in the world. In Pakistan, translations of his famous works have been made in different regional languages, Urdu, Punjabi, Sindhi and Baluchi. He is hero of all nationalist-revolutionaries who still believe to be working to regain freedom from the occupant forces. Wherever there is injustice, denial of rights of peoples and violence, Neruda is understood and cherished as epitome of courage and source of limitless encouragement. Anwer Zahidi (born July 9, 1946), a Pakistani, has translated Neruda’s autobiography, which is certainly an invaluable addition to Urdu letters. The following poem of Neruda is translated in almost all the local languages of Pakistan:

 

“Because I love my country
I claim you, essential brother,
old Walt Whitman with your gray hands.

so that, with your special help
line by line, we will tear out the roots
and destroy the bloodthirsty President Nixon.

There can be no happy man on earth,
no one can work well on this planet
while that nose continues to breathe in Washington.

Asking the old bard to confer with me
I assume the duties of a poet
armed with a terrorist’s sonnet

because I must carry out with no regrets
this sentence, never before witnessed,
of shooting a criminal under siege,

who in spite of his trips to the moon
has killed so many here on earth
that the paper flies up and the pen is unsheathed

to set down the name of this villain
who practises genocide from the White”

The lines of these poems written way back in 1973 are still relevant. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, genocides in various parts of the world, use of religion for killing others, exploitation of world resources by a few—no man can be happy on the earth unless forces in Washington stop their unjust policies. We need another Neruda—a poet with a “terrorist’s sonnet” to counter men with guns killing each other in the name of religion or self-assumed “national interest”(sic).

———————————————
The writers, ardent readers and admirers of Pablo Neruda and Faiz Ahmad Faiz, during their recent visit to Chile (June11-22) met people from cross sections of Chilean society and discussed with Mr. Burhanul Islam, Pakistan’s first Ambassador to Chile, various vistas of promoting cultural ties between the two countries highlighting past connections like that of Faiz-Neruda.

 

---

[i] Life sketch and details of work by Neruda have been taken from the website of Pablo Neruda Foundation.

[ii] According the following list,  they are not less than 55:

1. Crepusculario.
Ediciones Claridad, Santiago, 1923

2. Veinte poemas de amor y una canción desesperada.
Nascimento, Santiago, 1924

3. Tentativa del hombre infinito.
Nascimento, Santiago, 1926

4. El habitante y su esperanza.
Nascimento, Santiago, 1926

5. Anillos.
Ediciones Claridad, Santiago, 1926

6. El hondero entusiasta.
Empresa Letras, Santiago, 1933

7. Residencia en la tierra (I y II).
Ediciones Cruz y Raya, Madrid, 1935

8. Tercera residencia.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1947

9. Canto General.
Talleres Gráficos de la Nación, México D.F., 1950

10. Los versos del capitán.
L’Arte Tipográfica, Napoli, 1952

11. Poesía política.
Editora Austral, Santiago, 1953

12. Las uvas y el viento.
Editorial Nascimento, Santiago, 1954

13. Odas elementales.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1954

14. Viajes.
Nascimento, Santiago, 1955

15. Nuevas odas elementales.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1956

16. Tercer libro de las odas.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1957

17. Estravagario.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1958

18. Navegaciones y regresos.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1959

19. Cien sonetos de amor.
Editorial Universitaria, Santiago, 1959

20. Odas Canción de gesta.
Imprenta Nacional de Cuba, La Habana, 1960

21. Las piedras de Chile.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1961

22. Nuevas Cantos ceremoniales.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1961

23. Plenos poderes.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1962

24. Memorial de Isla Negra.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1964

25. Arte de pájaros.
Ed. Soc. Amigos del Arte Contemporáneo, Santiago, 1966

26. Una casa en la arena.
Editorial Lumen, Barcelona, 1966

27. Fulgor y muerte de Joaquín Murieta.
Editorial Zig-Zag, Santiago, 1967

28. La barcarola.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1967

29. Las manos del día.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1968

30. Comiendo en Hungría.
Editorial Lumen, Barcelona, 1969

31. Fin de mundo.
Ed. Soc. Amigos del Arte Contemporáneo, Santiago, 1969

32. Aún.
Nascimento, Santiago, 1969

33. Maremoto.
Ed. Soc. Amigos del Arte Contemporáneo, Santiago, 1970

34. La espada encendida.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1970

35. Las piedras del cielo.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1970

36. Geografía infructuosa.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1972

37. La rosa separada.
Éditions du Dragon, París, 1972

38. Incitación al Nixonicidio y alabanza de la Revolución Chilena.
Quimantú, Santiago, 1973

39. El mar y las campanas.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1973

40. Geografía de Pablo Neruda.
Editorial Aymá, Barcelona, 1973

41. Jardín de invierno.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1974

42. El corazón amarillo.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1974

43. Libro de las preguntas.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1974

44. 2000.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1974

45. Elegía.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1974

46. Defectos escogidos.
Editorial Losada, Buenos Aires, 1974

47. Confieso que he vivido.
Seix Barral, Barcelona, 1974

48. Cartas de amor de Pablo Neruda.
Ediciones Rodas, Madrid, 1974

49. Para nacer he nacido.
Editorial Seix Barral, Barcelona, 1978

50. Cartas a Laura.
Centro Iberoamericano de Cooperación, Madrid, 1978

51. El río Invisible.
Seix Barral, Barcelona, 1980

52. Neruda/Eandi, Correspondencia
durante Residencia en la tierra.
Compilación de Margarita Aguirre,
Ed. Sudamericana, Buenos Aires, 1980

53. El fin del viaje.
Seix Barral, Barcelona, 1982

54. Cuadernos de Temuco.
Seix Barral, Buenos Aires, 1998

55. Pablo Neruda, Prólogos.
Ed. Sudamericana, Santiago, 2000

[iii] The following write-up of Faiz Ahmad Faiz appears on the website of Faiz Ghar, a  project of the Faiz Foundation Trust, set up for the promotion of the progressive and humanistic ideas  of the great poet:

Faiz Ahmed Faiz (1911-1984) was one of the leading poets of Pakistan. Listed four times for the Nobel Prize of Poetry, he was often compared to his friend Pablo Neruda, revolutionary poet and Nobel Prize winner, of Chile. Of Faiz’s multifaceted personality, which led him to become, amongst other things, an activist for human rights and liberties, a famous journalist and editor of literary magazines, trade unionist, and film song writer, it is his poetry which will, no doubt, best survive the test of time.

Apart from inventing the modern Urdu love poem, Faiz revolutionized the classical form of Urdu poetry, the Ghazal, giving it a powerful socio-political resonance. He used ancient forms of poetry, such as the Qawwali and the Geet, to convey his message of humanism without reference to caste, colour or creed.

Faiz, a Marxist, was born in Sialkot in India in 1911, the son of a barrister adventurer, and a former Afghan ambassador to the court of St. James. He joined the newly formed Progressive Writers’ Movement in the 1930s, served in the Indian Army during the Second World War, becoming a Lieutenant Colonel, and after Partition- moved to Pakistan, where he became editor of the Pakistan Times, an English-language daily. He also worked as managing editor of the Urdu daily Imroz, brought out a highly popular news magazine Lail-o-Nahar, and was actively involved in the trade union movement.

In 1951 Faiz was accused of plotting a coup with a group of Pakistani army officers and, after four years on death row, was released in 1955 after worldwide pressure from such stars as Paul Robeson. Faiz was the first Asian poet to be awarded the Lenin Peace Prize, the Soviet Union’s equivalent to the Nobel Prize in 1962. He recorded for the Library of Congress in 1977 which has fifty two works by him.

As the Adviser on Culture to Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, the Prime Minister of Pakistan, Faiz set up the Pakistan National Council of the Arts and the Lok Virsa (Folk Heritage Museum & Cultural Centre) in Islamabad, which also has a road by his name. In later life Faiz was closely associated with Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Movement, and acted as Editor of the Lotus magazine in Moscow, London and Beirut.

Faiz published seven collections of verse. His poetry has been translated in many languages, and a number of books have been written on his life and work. Just as the poetry of Pablo Neruda was massively popular with ordinary Chileans – who regarded him as their national poet – so Faiz Ahmed Faiz was loved by millions of Pakistanis, who knew his poems by heart. His funeral in 1984 was a day of mourning for the whole country, and many Faiz poems have been set to music and are still widely sung.

After his death the Faiz Amn Mela (Faiz Peace Festival) has been organized annually to celebrate his birth anniversary. Recently over 40 civil society organizations, including political parties, professional organizations, radical social organizations, and trade unions, joined hands to organize the annual event. As the symbol of resistance his poetry has been revisited during the recent lawyers’ movement in Pakistan.

In the Lenin Peace Prize speech Faiz said: I believe that humanity which has never been defeated by its enemies will, after all, be successful; even now and at long last, instead of wars, hatred and cruelty, the foundation will rest on the message of Hafiz, an old Persian poet::”Every foundation you see is defective, except the foundation of love, which is faultless..”

[iv] The following is the list of his published work. A large part of his prose writing, especially journalistic contributions, is still not published:

• Naqshe Faryadi, 1941
• Daste Saba, 1953
• Zindan Nama, 1956
• Mizan, a collection of literary articles,1956
• Daste-Tahe-Sang, 1965
• Sare-Wadiye Seena, 1971
• Shame-Shehr Yaran, 1979
• Merey Dil Merey Musafar, 1981
• Nuskha-Hai-Wafa, 1984

•Nuskha-Hai-Wafa, 1984 (A collective work)
• Pakistani Culture, Urdu & English

[v] Sheema Majeed is a renowned literary researchers and bibliophiles of Pakistan. She has compiled and published more than fifteen books of  Pakistan’s best literati and intellectuals. Among some important literary treasures she has unearthed are the Baqiaat-e-Miraji as well as the Urdu literary criticism of Faiz under the title Maqalat-e-Faiz (Lahore, 1994) and Maqalat-e-Rashid (Islamabad, 2002).  Muhammad Reza Kazimi was born in Mumbai (1945) and migrated to Kolkata in his childhood, where he was able to witness the literary scene closely. Later in Karachi (1968 onwards) he published literary criticism such as Jadeed Urdu Marthia (1981), with a chapter on Faiz Ahmed Faiz; Taab-e-Sukhan (1994), a critique on literary critics themselves, and Nuqoosh-e-Josh (1995) studies of the revolutionary poet Josh Malihabadi. He is also the author of Liaquat Ali Khan: His Life and Work.

Remembering March 9, 2007: Revival of Constitutionalism

Huzaima Bukhari & Dr. Ikramul Haq

March 9, 2007—Day of Defiance— will always be remembered as an historic occurrence in the annals of our country. Events which followed that day, however, can best be termed as nothing but chaotic and disturbing. The struggle for rule of law and constitutionalism in the wake of March 9, 2007 is still going on between the forces of change and defenders of status quo, trying to defeat each other with full vigour. On July 20, 2007 (another historic day when the judiciary declared action of sacking Chief Justice of Pakistan by Musharraf as unlawful) the restoration of Muhammad Iftikhar Chaudhry ushered in a wave of renewed hope in Pakistan for an independent judiciary. As expected, the forces that were hard hit by this restoration retaliated by imposing Martial law on November 3, 2007. But this time, a seven-member bench of the apex court declared this move as unconstitutional. In the history of Pakistan, it was the first most courageous action on the part of our judiciary—disapproving repeated subversion of the Constitution by men in uniform.

The establishment was bewildered and baffled. It could not expect such defiance from its own hand-picked judges. As usual, they employed the notorious Colonial policy of ‘Divide and Rule’ and managed to perpetuate its unlawful rule by getting endorsement of its unconstitutional actions from the puppet parliament (sic) and through pro-establishment judges. Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto led all the political forces to exert pressure—using the lawyers’ movement—on the establishment to abdicate power and transfer it to civilians. This cost her, her own life. But her heroic struggle forced Musharraf to leave military post and hold elections. February 18, 2008 shattered all hopes of the King and his party to retain control over power. The establishment—on the behest of neo-colonial masters—decided to dump Musharraf and preserve status quo by hijacking Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP). Nawaz Sharif, oblivious of this Great Game, on March 10, 2008 signed the Murree Declaration with Asif Zardari, who later cheated him, but not before got himself elected as president. Few could comprehend and realise at that point of time that the establishment had decided to get back lost control through the auspices of Zardari.

We warned Nawaz and others well in time—much before the first session of National Assembly called by Musharraf on March 17, 2008. We suggested that soon after taking oath and formation of coalition government, the new parliament should table the following bills:

1. Bill for National Reconciliation Act 2008 (NRA)
In National Reconciliation Ordinance 2007 (NRO), 2007), Musharraf intentionally excluded cases registered after 12 October 1999 for ulterior motives to exclude Nawaz and Shahbaz Sharif. In order to create a genuine atmosphere of national reconciliation and put an end to political victimization, this new Act should be passed removing time-specific and person-specific provisions in NRO, 2007 extending its scope to all persons and also provisions in direct conflict with Constitution.

2. Bill for ‘Oath of Judges, Act, 2008’ (invalidating Oath of Office (Judges) Order 2007)
By Passing this Act, the National Assembly could pave the way for reinstatement of 2nd November 2007 Judiciary and nullify the judgement of apex court in the case of Tika Iqbal Muhammad Khan v General Pervez Musharraf and 2 others (PLD 2008 Supreme Court 6) holding that judges who were not given or refused to take oath under the Oath of Office (Judges) Order 2007 cease to be judges. With the passing of this Act, no judge in future could be removed through any executive order or through any law related to oath of judges.

3. Bill for ‘High Treason Act 1973 (Amendment Act 2008).
The National Assembly should amend High Treason Act, 1973 to the effect that in case of violation of Article 6 of Constitution, it would be incumbent upon the apex court to take immediate cognizance and direct the Attorney General of Pakistan to initiate trial of offender. Thus in future the apex court instead of validating violation of Article 6 would be legally obliged to punish the offenders.

Alas, as expected, our suggestions were ignored by all! What happened thereafter is obvious. Had the parliament sent a clear message to the imposer of emergency on November 3, 2007 to face trial for subversion of Constitution, removing judges and detaining them and their families, today Zardari would not have had the courage to impose Governor Raj in Punjab. Two years after March 9, 2007, we are still struggling for revival of constitutionalism. The intended Long March starting on March 12, 2009 leading to Dharna (sit-in) on Constitutional Avenue of Islamabad on March 16, 2009 is going to give a new excuse to the establishment to roll back the democratic political process. The game is well-planned, but our politicians appear in no mood to reconcile and foil this ugly design. On the contrary they are conveniently playing in the hands of Hidden Forces.

November 3, 2007 has proved to be a disgraceful day for our country. The ill-effects of that day’s event are still looming large despite the fact that people of Pakistan have given a loud and clear verdict against forces of status quo. It is the people’s will and power alone that can compel the usurper of power to renounce unlawful rule—as the lawyers’ ongoing movement in Pakistan has proved. Nowhere in the world has this task ever been performed by the judiciary. It is basically a political question and not a legal issue. Even if judiciary declares any coups detat illegal, how can it force the usurper to abdicate power? Judiciary itself has no power (physical) to get its orders implemented by force! The responsibility for failure of political leadership in Pakistan to counter intervention of civil-military bureaucracy cannot be shifted to the judiciary (though some individual judges have sided with usurpers). The result of lack of political wisdom of Pakistani leaders has been obvious—complete subservience before dictators, military or civil, hardly matters.

In the past, majority of the politicians, instead of leading the people and placing full faith in them, rather opted to win favours of the mighty in turn for unprecedented benefits. The same process continues in post-2008 election period. Political leadership is still treading on the old path and remains unwilling to work collectively for a sustainable democracy.

Behind the bizarre episodes of March 9, 2007, November 3, 2007 and February 25, 2009, there lurks a continuous struggle between the proponents of cronyism and advocates of rule of law. Pro-establishment forces, even in the wake of elections of 18th February 2008 want to subjugate their own people, deny them human rights and ensure that there is no room for judicial activism in this society as a means to empower the people. This is why Chaudhry Iftikhar and other independent judges are a great threat to them. They cannot afford independence of judiciary for obvious vested interests. The advocates of rule of law rightly argue that dispensation of justice through an independent and efficient judiciary alone can establish democracy, a responsible government and an equitable social order.

It is now the sole responsibility of democratic forces to galvanize and mobilize people to counter any extra-constitutional move by any present or prospective ruler. Courts are meant to interpret the law, whereas enforcing the will of people and countering any despotic rule is always a political question that cannot be resolved in the courts. Since our leadership has failed in the past on this account, the entire society is facing devastating effects of perpetual despotic rules—military and civilian alike. The main cause of our present day socio-political and economic chaos is ineffectual leadership, existence of inefficient, corrupt and repressive institutions, which are anti-people, thus least concerned with the welfare of the common man.

Imposition of Governor Rule in Punjab and ousting of judges, their house arrests and denying them right of free speech and movement are interrelated and should not be analysed in isolation. It shows that establishment still controls all the institutions—including the office of president. Even after 62 years of existence, we have miserably failed to abide by constitutional rule and democratic norms. At the heart of the concept of democracy is the assurance for the citizens that their affairs are going to be managed by a ‘Responsible Government’.
The constitution of a country is a living and vibrant document that determines the future direction of a nation, provided there is respect for the document and for rule of law. In a country where establishment controls all institutions, there can neither be democracy nor constitution. It is high time that the parliament should work for the supremacy of constitution and rule of law. In a democratic set-up, the electoral process ensures dominance of the people over those who hold political offices. In Pakistan, forces of status quo want to determine it through a president lacking support of the masses. This brand of ‘democracy’ is unknown to the students of constitutional law anywhere in the world. One wonders what useful purpose this unjust and unlawful process can yield! It is only bound to frustrate the verdict of people, forcing them to believe that the entire electoral process was just a farce. Earlier, Musharraf and his associates were challenging elected leaders on their promise of reinstatement of judges. Now Zardari has assumed the same role—this confirms dominance of establishment, its mind set and disrespect for people’s mandate.
Pervez Musharraf has portrayed himself In the Line of Fire as a great saviour of the nation, whereas the reality is that under his rule, the people of this country lost their lives in suicide bombings, deprived of basic needs and sufficient food what to talk of fundamental rights of access to free health and educational facilities, and dispensation of justice, things which are only possible under a true democratic structure. Attitude of Zardari and his cronies is not much different from any other dictator. Every dictator desires to perpetuate his unlawful rule proclaiming himself as the saviour of the nation and in this process destroys the very fabric of national cohesion.
It is now for the masses to resist the establishment and work for real democracy. Parliamentarians should work for the supremacy of the constitution in the country and all the state organs must discharge their functions within strict parameters and powers laid down in the supreme law of the land. This is the only way to sustain democracy, establish responsible government and protect the rights of masses guaranteed in the Constitution. Legislature is sovereign but the supremacy of constitution is above everything— legislators in fact exercise delegated powers given by the people within the framework of the Constitution. We need a new Pakistan where parliament is sovereign within which, the people of Pakistan are truly represented. To attain this goal, masses will have to demonstrate determination and unity. Pro-democratic forces, with the people’s strong support behind them, must wage an all-out war for establishing a representative and responsible rule, completely independent judiciary, responsible media playing positive role for vigorous accountability, socio-economic growth and justice for all.
———————————————
The writers, legal historians and authors of many books, are Visiting Professors at Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS).

2008: Year of wars and troubles

Huzaima Bukhari & Dr. Ikramul Haq

2008 has ended leaving behind many troubles and challenges—economic slowdowns, financial crises, rising unemployment, social distresses, regional armed conflicts and above all rapidly rising tide of cross-border terrorism.  At the fag end of the year, the world’s most worrisome melting pot remained Indo-Pakistan area as was the case in 2001—military buildups across the boarders and horrifying threats of war including nuclear strikes. From the Kargil misadventure of 1999 to Mumbai Carnage of 2008, both India and Pakistan witnessed many moments of “reconciliation” but each time certain hidden hands, using the ugly weapon of “cross-border terrorism”, damaged the peace efforts. These hidden hands—working simultaneously in both the countries—take dictations from their foreign masters, who arm, support and fund them. It is painful that leadership of both the states has miserably failed to counter these forces which always manage to dismantle normalization process between the two neighbouring but belligerent countries.

The root-cause of trouble in this region is “cross-border terrorism”, which has to be broadly defined to include state terrorism by India in Kashmir and use of force by occupant forces in Afghanistan. The issue of cross-border terrorism in this part of the world cannot be understood in isolation of the Great Game unleashed by imperialist and neo-imperialist forces in the historic perspective. The militant liberation movement in Kashmir and armed struggles by various groups in other states of India cannot be equated or compared with onslaughts of Jihadists in the wake of Talibanization of Afghanistan at the behest of forces that were keen to defeat the erstwhile communist USSR. Both India and Pakistan are victims of shortsightedness of policies they pursued in the aftermath of 9/11 by becoming allies of USA in the ‘war against terrorism’ (sic). They did not protest when the US started killing innocent civilians in Afghanistan in December 2001 by indiscriminate bombings under the pretext of annihilating Al-Qaeda operatives. In Bonn peace talks, the Taliban were kept outside, which was a grave mistake. Leadership of both the countries failed to take any lead in political settlement in the neighbouring Afghanistan. They did not ask UN mediators to marginalize Al-Qaeda by persuading moderate Taliban leaders to take part in the peace process and participate in future political setup. The ouster of Taliban from peace talks and brutal killing of innocent civilians in several villages in Tora Bora and near Gardez in December 2001 by US, sowed permanent seeds of hatred and revenge—this was the beginning of an unabated cross-border terrorism wave which has now turned into an insurmountable tsunami threatening the peace and tranquility of the entire region. 

Two nuclear states are now in a fix—captives in the hand of military hawks. The war-mongers on both sides are pushing things to an extent that paranoia of hate has begun to haunt the masses. Media is making things worse by over-publicizing, publishing and broadcasting irresponsible statements by imprudent politicians. The electronic media is vividly projecting war games and possible scenarios of mass destruction in the event of nuclear attacks. This shows deep penetration of war psychosis in both the countries—a lamentable attitude and nuclear mindset. There are some voices of sanity and peace-lovers across the borders, but they are weak and ineffective before the hawkish elements—agents of military establishments having control over state apparatus and popular media. Forces of terror and obscurantism are creation of those who exploited them for resisting Soviet occupation. They received generous American support, but in 1989, when Russian troops packed their bags and went home, American interest in Afghanistan waned. Once the Central Asian countries had become independent from the former Soviet Union in 1991, America concentrated its attention in the region on Soviet nuclear leftovers, the decommissioning of which it hailed as a great success. When the Taliban took over in 1996, the Americans did not seem overly concerned that the bearded rulers and their Al-Qaeda friends were supporting radical Islamic groups in Central Asia. Was CIA totally oblivious of Taliban-Al Qaeda nexus and their nefarious activities until 9/11? Why did the US government fail to counter their activities when they openly extended their actions into Africa and elsewhere? What lessons did the US learn when its embassies were bombed in Africa by Al Qaeda? What measures were taken to stop them when an Indian plane was hijacked in December 1999 from Katmandu and taken to Kandahar? How did the hijackers, agents of Osama Bin Laden manage to get freed, militants like Maulana Azhar and Ahmed Omar Sheikh from Indian jails? Why did US allow Musharraf for eight years to cheat everybody and keep on supporting the militants?   

The above questions and their answers will unveil the tragic happening of 9/11. George Bush and Dick Cheney had already planned, much before 9/11, invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. They supported Musharraf et al for implementation of their agenda. Now Barak Obama, even before occupying the Oval Office, is also talking of controlling Afghanistan through increased military presence.  What is the significance of Afghanistan in the new Great Game?  The answer is simple. The hidden agenda of US and its allies in Afghanistan and elsewhere is to promote drug trade, religious fundamentalism and mass acceptance of their policies of fascism for self-interests and economic benefits. India and Pakistan fail to realise that they are being sucked into a death trap by these forces. Certain forces in both the countries are waging continuous proxy war, funding and arming extremists within each other’s territory. This dangerous game is engineered and controlled by CIA that forced Hamid Karzai to give free hand to Indian agents on Pakistan’s western borders. It is an open secret that CIA operatives with the help of India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) have been funding the insurgency in Baluchistan. At the same time, these CIA agents are promoting a number of militant groups in Pakistan to help Maoists and other dissidents in India. The linkage behind troubles in both the countries is the same—US Central Intelligence Agency. Both the Indian and Pakistani governments are conveniently playing in the hands of their common enemy and ironically they are relying on US support.  For this occasion, Mir Taqi Mir, the great poet, very aptly said, Mir kai sada hain bemar huai jis kay sabab, usi attar kai londay se dawa latain hain (What a simple soul is Mir that he seeks prescription from the person who is cause of his illness). 

One wonders how easily our rulers are ignoring the obvious tentacles of the dirty game plan of the neo-colonial forces in this region. The main aim behind the bizarre scheme, prepared by neo-colonialists, is to push the armed forces of Pakistan to the wall using India as conduit, get the control of nuclear arsenals and use bogey of “Islamic terrorism” for the containment of China. George W. Bush Jr., now lame-duck President, before leaving the Oval, wants to ensure that the new man taking his place should have no option but to remain engaged in wars in various parts of the world. Ruthless bombing on the innocent civilians of Gaza on December 27, 2008 is evident of these nefarious intentions. One does hope that Indian and Pakistani leadership will understand this great conspiracy. It is high time Chinese, Indian and Pakistani leaders unite against the forces of neo-colonialism and foil their ‘Great Game’ plan. They must understand that “cross-border terrorism” is a ploy in the hands of US and its allies. It is the 21st century equivalent of the 19th century British gobbledygook.

American Late Neo-colonialism, as explained by Dr. Sachithanandam Sathananthan in his Great Game Continues, is using cross-border terrorism as political cover for intervening and, where necessary, invading resource-rich and strategic countries to overthrow nationalist leaders, install puppet regimes and savage the countries’ wealth. And of course the US is by far the most powerful terrorist force. This is the reality of “cross-border terrorism” and “war on terrorism”. The forces of obscurantism and imperialism appear to be real enemies, but in fact they are ‘friends-in-arms’ and their hidden agenda is to snatch away from the world, its peace and tranquility. The great challenge before the forces of peace is to get united for stemming the rising tide of terrorism, communalism, religious bigotry and obscurantism, which is designed, funded and controlled by neo-colonialist forces.

_____________________________________

The writers, historians, researchers and authors of numerous books, are visiting professors at Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS).