Pakistan: five years after Iraq invasion

Ishrat Saleem

The US invasion on Iraq in 2003 was disastrous in several ways. Apart from dealing a forceful blow to the international system of conduct among nations devised after strenuous efforts of over nearly six decades, it destabilised the entire region, with serious consequences for Pakistan. The US and its major ally UK completely bypassed the UN in attacking Iraq, spreading insecurity among the countries whom the US had labelled as its enemies in the past. The popular reason for attacking Iraq was that the Saddam regime possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). The US went on to attack Iraq despite testimony by United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission head Hans Blix that he had found “no smoking gun” during his inspections to suggest that Iraq possessed the WMDs. Instead of serving as a warning, it has strengthened the perception among smaller countries that in a unipolar world, without possessing the deterrent of nuclear technology, their survival is threatened. The American bully with war technology can go to any length to achieve its ’strategic’ objectives.The occupation of Iraq and the break down of state structure has incredibly strengthened the considerably weakened al Qaeda and provided the most conducive environment for the growth of extremist groups within Iraq which have made their presence felt by holding the populace hostage to their archaic interpretation of Islam and deadly suicide attacks. Impartial observers view US invasion of Iraq as a move to preserve strategic oil reserves in the region and remove a grievous threat to Israel in the form of Saddam Hussain. The failure to discover any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has exposed that this war had less to do with terror, which was merely used as a ploy, and more to do with the vested interests of the US.The elements that were drawn into Iraq conflict from Afghanistan successfully experimented with improvised explosive device (IED) and suicide bombings in a power vacuum created by the fall of Saddam Hussein. The law and order breakdown presented them with a wonderful opportunity to strengthen their toehold. Iraq served as a laboratory for them to experiment with novel methods of guerilla warfare, which were essential for defeating a superior enemy in a hostile environment. The suicide bombings were refined through practice, increasingly inflicting heavy casualties on civilian population, causing embarrassment to the occupying forces and its handpicked Iraq government. This success gave al Qaeda elements the confidence to employ these techniques at other places where they were embattled. It took little time for the phenomenon of suicide bombing to be exported to Afghanistan. Since 2003, we have seen a steady rise in suicide attacks in Afghanistan.It is no coincidence that in later months and years, Pakistan, with military operation in the tribal areas at its peak, was hit in its soft underbelly by suicide bombers. Important public figures as well as strategic facilities were aimed at with precision. President Musharraf himself was a target of a suicide attack which he survived, as he did two other assassination attempts. In March 2006, a suicide bombing behind the US consulate killed an American diplomat along with three others. In April, an Eid Miladun Nabi congregation at Nishtar Park was attacked, killing more than 60, including the entire leadership of the Sunni Tehrik (of the Beralvi school of thought). In July the same year, Allama Hassan Turabi, head of Islami Tehrik and provincial chief of Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal, was killed along with his nephew outside his residence in Karachi. In later months, several attacks took place throughout Pakistan, including the capital. The sporadic but consistent suicide attacks that started in 2006 saw a sharp increase after military operation against Lal Masjid in July last year. Military installations, police personnel, and political rallies — whoever was seen as an opponent — were singled out and attacked with precision to give a strong message of resistance to the war against terror. Benazir Bhutto, who had taken and unequivocal stance against terrorism, became a victim of one such bombing in Rawalpindi. The head on collision of the the protege — the jihadists with their mentors — the military establishment —  seems to suggest that terrorists think they are strong enough to take over their own country.

Extremist violence thrives on a conducive environment in Pakistan. The terrorists’ outreach, number of casualties and success in targeting high profile figures are indicators of inadequacy of the Pakistan government in fighting this phenomenon, both in terms of will and human and technical capacity. Here, there are strong pockets of support for the jihadis in the establishment coupled with a confused public opinion. The government’s writ is thin in various parts of the country while the densely populated urban areas provide these elements the necessary cover to hit and run. The failure of Pakistan to pre-empt suicide bombings by busting terror networks from inside the way other countries like Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan, Spain, Australia and Britain have done, speaks of its double-mindedness in uprooting the networks that it so carefully cultivated during the Afghan war and afterwards.

At the time of Iraq invasion, Pakistan was faced with the critical question of sending its troops to Iraq. Popular opinion against such decision compelled the leadership to refrain from any such move. With hindsight, it has proved to be a sagacious decision, because it would have given another cause celebre to the extremist forces within Pakistan bent on overthrowing the state.

If the US is contemplating attacking Iran even as a remote possibility, it should rethink. Any such measure will give a new lease of life to the al Qaeda and open another Pandora’s box of terrorism which the US it is trying to cap in Afghanistan and Iraq. Essentially, the law and order breakdown in Iraq provided the green pastures to the badly mauled al Qaeda after Afghanistan. If Iran too is attacked, it would stretch the conflict zone from Iraq right up to Pakistan, paving the path for a great war in which the US’s own long-term interests would be threatened.

Lawyers’ movement – one year on

Ishrat Saleem 

March 9, 2007 was the day when President Musharraf called the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, to his camp office in Rawalpindi and asked him to resign from his post. To the surprise of many, departing from the tradition of judiciary’s compliance, Justice Iftikhar refused. A bevy of high officials including the prime minister and the heads of intelligence agencies, set on the task of first coaxing and then threatening the Chief Justice with moving a reference against him in the Supreme Judicial Council. The CJ said that he would face the reference. Justice Iftikhar was prevented from going to his office and held incommunicado at his residence till the first hearing of his case on March 13, 2007. He was manhandled and humiliated when he tried to walk his way to the Supreme Court on his first hearing, the footage of which was taped and repeatedly run by several electronic media outlets. The judges and the lawyers were indignant. The military’s image crumbled in the minds of the people who saw it as an instance of ‘might is right’.

Our political parties may be confronting leadership crisis, which has been made more acute with the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, but the lawyers were fortunate to have people like Munir A. Malik, Ali Ahmad Kurd, Hamid Khan and Aitizaz Ahsan among them. The immediate response of the lawyers’ community to their call and the admiration and enthusiasm of the general people throughout Pakistan made them aware of the historic opportunity that had presented itself, to settle the issue of supremacy of the constitution and the independence of the judiciary once and for all. The indefatigable resolve of these icons inspired millions and induced the hope that organised and sustained action holds the key to the people deciding their destiny. The first victory of the lawyers movement was the restoration of the Chief Justice, when a nine member bench unanimously dismissed the presidential reference.

The imposition of the emergency and deposing of about 60 superior judges was a major setback, but it did not dampen their resolve and reinvigorated the lawyers to take to streets. However, this time they were not alone. Students from across Pakistan spontaneously poured out on campuses and expressed their agitation. Pakistani students in foreign universities also networked and organised protests around the world against the illegitimate military regime. For the first time, the judiciary realised its strength and responsibility towards the people of this country. The judges who refused to take an oath under the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO) earned the honour and respect of the people. Nonetheless, the lawyers deserve the most credit. They united across the class divide and refused to appear before the PCO-judges, forgoing their livelihood. They were one against the establishment and called on the people and the political parties to rise against the illegitimate rulers.

Munir A Malik, the former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, who provided the essential leadership to the lawyers’ community in organising against the regime, shared his insights of the year long struggle. Last year, at the height of public campaigning for restoring the Chief Justice, Munir A Malik had stated that the objectives of the lawyers’ movement are raising awareness among the general public, the political parties and the superior judiciary itself on the issue of civilian supremacy and the supremacy of the constitution. When asked how far these objectives have been achieved, he said, “We have made considerable gains in the first area. The awareness that has been created among the public is irreversible. We have also succeeded in sensitising the honest and true judges to the plight of the people. There have been setbacks on November 3, but this was a defeat in a minor battle in a long drawn out war. We are confident that in whatever way the judiciary is restored, it will emerge as an independent organ of the state. As far as the political parties are concerned, we have to go a long way in that area.”

The elections held on February 18 have changed the political dynamics of this movement. Now, the lawyers will be dealing with the erstwhile opposition parties, who have earned majority in the assemblies and have decided to form a coalition government, to get their demand for the restoration of the judiciary fulfilled. The single largest political party, PPP, appears evasive on the question of the restoration of judiciary. The other prospective coalition partner, PML (N), has taken the other extreme position, that the judiciary should be restored and it should decide the fate of the president. With political parties failing to agree on this issue, the future of the lawyers’ movement seems to hang in balance. It remains to be seen whether the lawyers’ adopt the path of confrontation with the newly-elected government, which will also serve the purpose of those who would like to see this government weakened, or adopt another strategy to press for their demands.

Talking about the future of the lawyers’ movement Munir A Malik said, “The coming few months will be critical. Our movement was anti-establishment and for civilian supremacy. There has been a slight change, which is manifest in the recalling of serving officers working in civilian departments on deputation. However, we must not forget that we are fighting an entrenched system that is 60 years old. There are also foreign pressures, we cannot ignore the advice of our ‘friends’ abroad. The lawyers also do not want the system to collapse because that will be against the very objective that we have been advocating. We need to bring a change in the real power structure to empower the people.”

Pakistan: women in parliament

Ishrat Saleem

 The 2002 parliament was a revolutionary in terms of the presence of women in the legislature. There were a total of 73 women in the National Assembly, out of which 60 came on women’s reserved seats, 12 were directly elected on general seats, while one woman was returned on minorities’ seats. Nearly 17 percent seats were reserved for women in Senate as well as provincial assemblies. This time the situation is even more encouraging. Fifteen women have won election on general seats this time. The Election Commission will shortly announce decision on the 60 reserved seats on the basis of the seats won by each party in the National Assembly. Political parties have already submitted the list of their nominations on women’s seats in order of priority. Several women who won elections on general seat were contacted to get their views on the changing pattern of women’s participation in elections and its prospects.

Although there is a section of opinion which argues that women who are not elected directly from constituencies by the people have only a cosmetic presence and are incapable of playing any significant role in the legislative process or for the rights of women. There is truth in this assertion, as is testified by a member of the National Assembly who was elected on a reserved seat in 2002, but the counter-argument is that in a highly conservative society where social dictates tend to confine women’s role in the house only, it is through measures like this that they will be encouraged to participate in political decision-making. This is precisely what Tehmina Daultan argued.

She said that the presence of a large number of women in the National Assembly on reserved seats is a very positive development. “I personally feel it has encouraged many women to contest elections on general seats.” Tehmina Daultana, one of the six vice-presidents of PML (N), was first elected to the National Assembly in 1993 from NA 169, Vehari-III, and became one of the four women, including Benazir and Nusrat Bhutto, in the National Assembly. She won this seat again in 1997 elections, which returned six women to the National Assembly. Tehmina feels that it is important that women get representation because laws are made for all citizens, of which 50 percent are women. But she felt that if a woman wants to join politics, she had to work doubly hard. She has to run her house as well as negotiate her way in a male-dominated power structure and prove her worth. She too believed women’s participation in politics was curtailed by their economic dependence. Politics is a full time job and also requires an election hopeful to be economically sound.

Samina Khalid Ghurki, who has been elected on NA 130, was of the view that contesting on a general seat is really tough. “In addition to the support of the party, women need support from the entire family, which has to work as a team. Then there is the issue of expenditure. Contesting an election in this country costs a lot of money. Reserving seats for women helps to overcome these hurdles and bring those women to the legislature, who have been affiliated with the party but do not have the wherewithal to contest elections.” Samina defeated another woman candidate Sadia Shabir who was contesting on the ticket of PML (N).

Samina Khalid Ghurki is correct to note that without family support women cannot run their election campaign. In reality, several women got a chance to enter politics when their male relatives were barred from running for election due to graduation condition. Samina herself was propelled into politics due to this very reason, because her husband did not meet this condition. Likewise, Hina Rabbani Khar was fielded as a candidate when her father Noor Rabbani Khar, an influential of the area and previous MNA, could not stand due to graduation condition. Saima Akhtar Bharwana is another example, who was fielded on a general seat when her father, Akhtar Bharwana, could not fulfill the graduation condition. In most areas, women’s campaign was run by their party and male family members. Even the election posters did not carry the pictures of the candidate herself but that of the father or husband.

Fauzia Wahab, Central Coordinator of PPP’s Human Rights Cell, emphasised that most women elected on direct elections are not career politicians and are young and inexperienced. Fauzia is a candidate of PPP on women’s reserved seats and was also elected an MNA in 2002. In fact, one news report in a national daily carried a headline, “Public-shy women win Toba bout”.

The report said Begum Farkhanda Amjad Warraich of PML-Q, running for NA-92, Gojra, and Begum Nazia Raheel of PML-N from PP-88, Kamalia, never joined the election campaign. However, we must not ignore the large number of women who may not have won, but stood for elections. This time, 64 women contested for the National Assembly, 33 as independent candidates, while a total of 116 women stood for the four provincial assemblies, with an overwhelming majority (81) as independent candidates. This is certainly an indicator, as Tehmina Daultana suggested, that many women have been encouraged to enter this profession as career politicians.

Fauzia Wahab pointed out several other positive aspects of women’s large presence in decision-making bodies. She said that this has helped bring women into mainstream politics. “They got important positions within the party. For instance, three women are serving as information secretaries in the PPP, one federal and two provincial.” In Fauzia’s view, the large public presence of women had helped in bringing down instances of women-specific crimes and improved their profile as capable of serious jobs. For the first time, a woman was appointed as Governor of State Bank of Pakistan on merit. “This was the imperceptible impact of women’s presence in the legislature and not due to any action taken in this regard.” Fauzia feels the most important task before the new government regarding the rights of women is their economic empowerment. “We want to enhance the quota of women in both public and private sector upto 20 percent. After the establishment of First Women Bank in 1988, many women have become successful entrepreneurs. More women need to be encouraged to become economically independent.”

Most women legislators elected on general seats feel they represent both men and women. Tehmina Daultana said her focus is not gender-specific. She would fight for the rights of the disempowered, both men and women. However, being a woman she is more accessible to women, who come to her office without hesitation and share all kinds of problem. “If there is some issue concerning a woman, I feel it more acutely and have always taken a firm stand,” she said. “But men don’t feel uncomfortable either in interacting with me because as an elected representative, one tends to lose one’s gender and is looked upon as a person.”

When Samina Ghurki was asked if women in parliament should work across party lines to work for the cause of women, she said that earlier her party was in opposition and its efforts to introduce women-specific legislation did not meet success. However, the PPP supported the passage of Women’s Protection Act 2007, which was introduced by the ruling party. “The new government will be a broad-based coalition and women will have the opportunity to work across party lines on the many issues concerning them. In some areas, women have not been allowed to vote, at others they are the victims of various customs. Our party will support legislation for improving the status of women.”

On the issue of reserved seats for women, Dr. Firdaus Ashiq Awan gave an interesting perspective, which testified to the problems indirectly elected women face. Dr. Firdaus was elected on a reserved seat in 2002 on the nomination of PML (Q). She said that the party did not give them a political identity. Indirectly elected women are expected to be grateful to party officials who nominated them. Bureaucrats’ attitude is also very discouraging. She said, “My proposals for the development of my area could not materialise because the party leadership listened to the directly-elected MNA and MPAs of my areas.” She said that she faced the tough decision of choosing between the label of an MNA and real power through the people’s vote. “This prompted me to join the PPP to be able to fulfill my agenda. I faced great difficulties, but in the end I was successful due to the people’s support.” Dr. Firdaus won election from NA 111 Bajwat-Sialkot, beating the outgoing speaker National Assembly, Chaudhry Amir Hussain.

Her top priorities are protection of working women from harassment at workplace; ensuring that women get their due share in property with dignity; career counselling and employment generation for youth and safe delivery and ante- and post-natal care for every woman. Asked if women legislator can work to develop a women’s caucus in the assembly, she said: “This is a good idea. But at the moment women legislator are not confident of their political standing and identity and cannot act independently. They are beholden to the male members of their respective parties. Hopefully, they will gain confidence with time and we see this idea materialising.” Fauzia Wahab agrees to this view that the idea of a women’s caucus is premature at the moment.