Red, White and Black

The second International Lahore Marathon is scheduled to be held tomorrow. It is a mixed marathon and thus it is damned in the eyes of our religious and moral police.

They say it is inappropriate for a woman to run in front of male spectators. A woman ends up compromising her dignity and self respect. And if you ask them how - of course they would say that it is unislamic and against our culture. *deep sigh*

It's one thing to oppose such an event. You don't want to be part of it - fine keep your women out but why are you ruining the event for everyone else. Why the heck are you making such a fuss out of it? And by the way, since when did we appoint you as guardians of our morals? If the liberals are godless immoral people, let them be. They will burn in hell, not you.

But why disrupt public life? I have heard accounts of the cars of passerbys being damaged by the protesting moral police! And what was their crime, please?

Lock them up, I say and let the women run.

Stumbled across a talk show today. The topic of the discussion was 'the internet and the youth'. It featured a showdown between a group of teenagers and a panel of parents, teachers and adults of the society. The crime of the youth was that they over-indulged in all internet-related activities - be it research, surfing, downloading or chatting. The youth of Pakistan is just spending too much time in front of the box called a computer. These activities are not only 'anti-social in nature', but implied an 'overload of information' that the youth is not yet ready to absorb.

More often than not, the discussion gravitated towards the 'evils of chatting'. The parents were irked by the fact that their children were making 'cyber' friends - they were concerned about the influence these 'cyber' friends would have on their kids. Interaction with the opposite sex, came up repeatedly. And so did the possibility of exposure to porn and the likes (but of course in minced words) . Some of the young adults asked why would you want to be friends with someone you can't feel or see?

Come to think of it, 'chatting' is looked down on in our society. Over time it had become synonymous with seeking out 'girlfriends' and 'boyfriends' - a concept largely taboo in the Pakistani society. And it is also true that it is the prime means for 'making friendship' amongst the boys and young men alike. It has become an addiction of sorts.

This raises two important questions for me.

One, why is the interaction between opposite sexes such a taboo matter? Why is it still the forbidden fruit which the youth is tempted to test? More than debating the evils of chatting, the elders of our society need to address the constrictive nature of society. There is nothing wrong with the intermingling of genders - it is but a natural part of our lives. So why do we have to make such a lot of hue and cry over it? Why do we curb the interaction between the two gender from the tender age of 10? Why is it just so taboo?

Two, what are the other modes of entertainment for the youth? There is not much for the young to do with their spare time. Either they have the option of sitting at home watching TV and cable (which is considered equally bad an addiction) or of becoming the slaves of the computer machine. Cricket is probably the only game that is played on a somewhat organised level. But that's about it. Where would you go to hang around with your friends and mingle with others, if there are no other avenues available? Can we really blame the youth over this count? Is it not the responsibility of parent ans society to ensure they are able to spend their time in a constructive yet fun way?

Having said all of this, I also think that the concerns of the elders of our society are also a little exaggerated. Their concerns about being exposed to too much information (and inappropriate matter too) at young ages is total crap. If they deem it to be so bad, then is it not their responsibility that they become part of their children's world? Forget the concept of becoming a 'friend' to the child, ought they not to do it jsut for guidance. Maybe through such efforts they will be able to find some common ground and discover that the world of the internet is not so evil after all.

Over the last week or so, I have been reading Bapsi Sidhwa's collection of writings on Lahore : Beloved City.

Given that it was a collection by Sidhwa, I always had high expectations of it. And I have not been disappointed. The book is a delightful collection of historical accounts, personal narrations and fictional stories. The collection is arranged by the Eras that Lahore has seen and one gets to know the ancient city from the times of the Mongol pillagers to the troubled times of Partition.

The historical accounts include writings on the Lahore of Akbar, the Lahore of Ranjeet Singh and of Kipling's Lahore. The writings look at both the glamour, glitz and the fables of the Mughal Lahore and the turbulent history of the city as invaders came and left. The British came to Lahore and we live through the taming of the city. And yet the collection doesn't neglect the romanticism of the city within the thirteen gates, of Anarkali and of Hira Mandi. Every single piece has been tastefully selected and that doubles the worth of the journey.

But it is the writings on the Lahore of the Partition that have truly touched the chords of my heart. The collection from that time period is composed largely of personal accounts and thus lends a very humane touch to the cold 'Partition' of the history books. Not only do the accounts provide a real sense of life to the city, but they also highlight the attachments of many a people to a place they called 'home' as kids or young individuals. These accounts make you question the cruelty of political decisions and how they ended up altering so many lives. At the same time, they highlight the prowess of the political and communal forces that turn neighbours on each other, subordinates on their masters and even family members against one another.

This book is highly recommended to both die-hard lahoris and curious world dwellers. I am not yet through with my encounter with Lahore through this book, but I have already come to cherish my city in ways that I never have before!

P.S. You must read through the excerpt of the book provided by Books and Authors here. :P

The isolation of President Musharraf had prompted many to join the political bandwagon against Kalabagh Dam, including the PPP in Punjab. Since the PMLN has always been in favour of the Dam (“provided it is backed by national consensus”) it will stand to lose support at the home base if it cavils with what has been decided now. This will put the PPP, the largest party in the country, on the spot. It simply can’t afford to blunt its opposition to President Musharraf by appearing to agree...On the other hand, the MMA will have to rely on the trouble in FATA to retain the intensity that Qazi Hussain Ahmad seems to favour more than Maulana Fazl ur Rehman.

Incredibility will be the crutch to lean on for politicians in the opposition. Where will the money come from for the five dams to be completed by 2016? ... Indeed, the preparatory works for Basha (building high roads for heavy machinery, etc) might cause another political storm that future governments might find difficult to face. People like Imran Khan might be tempted to take this line.

President Musharraf’s promise to “twin” the NFC award with Kalabagh Dam has been partially made good with the new dispensation of the divisible pool and subventions to the provinces. This too is a measure that will be opposed by the enemies of Musharraf only at great risk to their own standing in the country.

The retreat on Kalabagh has been clever. Coupled with the “softeners” of the NFC award and the post-earthquake reconstruction, it will give President Musharraf the second wind he needs to face the 2007 election and probably once again to refuse to take off his uniform. What he has done now may be a tour de force; but what he might do in 2007 by not fading away might be folly.

--------

And then more on Bajur and the aftermath. US Senator McCain declared:

Musharraf has decided to defer the controversial Kalabagh Dam till the country is able to the achieve a consensus on the issue. He said that he respected public opinion and thus will not push it for the time being. His speech from last night was quite concilliatroy in nature:

Gen Musharraf said there were “misperceptions and reservations” about KBD, particularly in the NWFP and Sindh, where people were not supportive of the project. “I respect this public opinion,” he said, but resolved to remove the reservations of the people of Sindh and the NWFP about KBD.

Gen Musharraf hoped that with the announcement that the government will be building Basha Dam first, normalcy would return to the country and those creating unrest on the issue of major water reservoirs would be silenced.

It also highlighted the fact that he is treading a very tight rope and has realised that he has to give in at some point. But I hope he also he realises that the way to "change the opinion of the Sindhis" is not through coercion but by helping rebuild the confidence between the estranged provinces and the also between the center and the provinces. The only way to do this is to involve the locals in any feasibility and analysis studies that are carried out on the Kalabagh dam. Transparency should be introduced to prevent this from becoming political boilpot. But still I think Musharraf has read the situation well this time around.

This gesture will help bring back some sense of normalcy to the National affairs, but only if the opposition is a willing player too. So far thiss has been judged as a 'retreat' for Musharraf. The MMA chief went to the extent of declaring:

Illustrative catroon by Zahoor today at the Daily Times. I wonder what's in store for Musharraf now- he has vowed to emerge victorious on every front. But the fronts are just one too many: Kholu, Dera Bugti, Kalabagh and now Bajur too. And elections are due this year. Last time we saw the emergence of the MMA and given the mess now I shudder to think what will happen this September.

As it is evident- I had made up my mind to do anything but serious work. So after trying many templates, I reluctantly settled on this - only because I wanted a change.

One of these days, I might be bothered to design and tinker up one myself. One of these days, I might be that bored.

Dr Ahmad Faruqui writes...

What would happen if Mohammad Ali Jinnah were to return to Pakistan, the creation of which is considered his miracle, inspiring one biographer to compare him with Salahuddin and another with Moses?

Jinnah’s death has spawned a myth that is now firmly entrenched in Pakistani culture. It asserts that, but for his early death, Pakistan would have been a brilliant success.

It is true that Jinnah died much before the necessary civilian machinery had fallen into place. After a rocky political decade, the army took over. Military rule brought a few years of stability but it did not allow for the development of an independent legislature, judiciary, bureaucracy or media.

But the converse — had Jinnah lived longer, Pakistan would have been a brilliant success — is a myth. By challenging it, one can lose friends quickly.

So here are my five doubts about the myth.

First, why did Jinnah choose to dilute the authority of the post of prime minister by not taking that position, like Nehru had done in India?

Second, would Jinnah have been able to prevent the conflict with India that would lead to half a century of armed conflict and drain Pakistan of much needed economic and financial resources?

Third, would Jinnah have been able to prevent the gradual estrangement of the eastern wing that ultimately led to its secession in 1971?

Fourth, would Jinnah have been able to resist US pressure to join the Baghdad Pact (which later became CENTO) and SEATO in the early-to-mid-1950s and keep Pakistan non-aligned during the Cold War?

Fifth, would he have been able to prevent the rise of the Pakistani Army as the country’s dominant political institution?
....

Being an honest man, Jinnah might conclude that he had opened a Pandora’s box by injecting religion into politics and that his August 11, 1947, speech had been unable to undo that. He might realise that by not leaving behind competent successors, he may have prevented the development of potent civilian institutions. And he might admit that by constantly reminding the Muslims of the threat posed by Hindu domination, he had established the primacy of the military.

Only a state that has succumbed to regimented thinking would fail to see the contradiction in calling for the people of Kashmir to be given the right of self-determination for 58 years, while continuing to deny its own people the right to elect their own government.

Jinnah would conclude that Pakistan had failed him. But will the barrister, who was once the ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity, call for the annulment of Partition? That is the $64 million question.

Family plans had been made two weeks ago to go and watch the third day of the play of the first test between India and Pakistan.

But it was not to be - the day dawned with overcast skies and the play started late. But they only played for a while and then took bad light and off they went! Play resumed after lunch and we thought- yaaaay, we can go and watch the game!

But. As we were leaving it was called off again! Only 15 overs were bowled all day long and we were stranded at home staring at our tickets!

So much for watching an Indo-Pak encounter. :-<

Pakistan and India have been indulging in some rhetorical banter (at least, I hope so) over the last the ten days. The two countries seem to have developed some liking for the phrase "internal affairs".

First, the Indian foreign ministry decided to express its concern over the spiralling violence in Baluchistan. This brought a strong rebuke from Pakistan which cautioned India against equating Baluchistan with Kashmir. The two countries had a brief exchange of words and thankfully left it at that. But I am still wondering - why did India choose this time to chide Pakistan over Baluchistan. Why was it still unable to maintain a stony silence over the issue? In any case, does India even have the right to comment on Baluchistan? I don't quite understand how even reputed Indian foreign affairs experts fall for this mis-comparison:

The spokeswoman in Islamabad, Tasneem Aslam, said she was “intrigued” by the Indian provocation “at this time when the two countries are engaged in the peace process to address all issues including the Jammu and Kashmir dispute”.

But it is precisely the Pakistani attitude on J&K that might have set off the Indian comments. In recent weeks, Pakistan appears to have been carried away by its own rhetoric on J&K. Its leaders have been demanding “demilitarisation” and “self-governance”.

Moreover, the justification that is provided is this:
He drew yet another scathing response from India:

Yesterday, Lahore experienced the coldest day in 39 years! So it wasn't just me... I had four layers on, was sitting in a warm enough room and yet the cold-induced numbness wouldn't just go away. Little wonder...

PS. It's still pretty cold!

Came across some rather disturbing piece of news today. Jamaat-e-Islami's youth wing - the IJT - actually caused the disruption of an internal fashion design exam. The incident took place at Lahore College for Women University, which also happens to be my alma mater. I was rather perturbed by the following:

As the article mentions - this is highly irregular for a place like LCWU. From the two years I spent at the place, it was completely devoid of any such activism. I am pretty shocked by the fact that they have been able to entrench themselves deeply enough- that they feel comfortable over rigging this disruption. Moreover these were women activists! Traditionally, all the Jamiat activity was limited to a more masculine group and women activism in this area is rather unheard of it. And this incident also comes at a time when the Jamiat is being systematically rooted out of Punjab University (a stronghold for such activities). So I am really surprised by these developments.

I just hope that the authorities at LCWU are able to limit such activism, for it does not set a good precedent.

Edit: Ummm... the link.

I think, for once, Times of India may not be speculating. The Saudi king will want to invest in other avenues as well. In Pakistan we have seen ample demonstrations of this ploy. Under the guise of helping out, the Saudis have been able to successfully inculcate the radical and the vitriolic ideology of Wahhabism in Pakistani society. I may wish to believe that the Saudi intentions here are noble, but past experience tells me otherwise. It would thus be advisable for India to tread carefully on this offer. The Jamaa-e-Masjid should be renovated, but not at the cost of the Indian society. If this offer goes through, close monitoring of the Saudi funds will need to be carried out.

Arrggh... damn the fact, that the Saudis have the money but not the appropriate ideology to export to the world.