Click here to download Harris Khalique Wednesday, May 14, 2014 From Print Edition
It is said that truth is the first casualty in a war. Since we are at war of one kind or another, within and without, physically and psychologically, the truth continues to get overshadowed by falsehood and then forgotten by most. Political myths are created and perpetuated. People are made to believe in these myths through multiple means of propaganda, be it curricula developed over years or public messages through mainstream and alternative media.
Let me begin with Quaid-e-Azam’s famous or infamous speech made in 1948 in Dhaka. He declared Urdu the state language by saying that every state needs a lingua franca. He categorically said that every province, including East Bengal, had a right to choose its language to conduct its business. There was no mention of a single ‘national’ language in his speech or replacing other languages with Urdu in their respective habitats.
However, both sides – the West Pakistanis and the East Pakistanis – used the Dhaka speech selectively to further their political agendas. Urdu was promoted as the only national language by the north Indian immigrant elite and their counterparts in Punjab to impose a unity on people while they continued to use English as the language of power.
East Pakistanis blamed Jinnah for the policies pursued by his immediate successors. We also forget that after a language rights movement that the central government cracked down upon resulting in activists losing their lives, Bangla was eventually declared Pakistan’s other national language. That was as early as in 1952.
But East Pakistan did not stay with us because the shabby treatment meted out to it did not end with Bangla becoming the other national language. Therefore, it is not just about the language, it is about equal rights, an equal share in resources, social justice and economic prosperity that make people seek freedom. Language serves as an identity marker for these people who want their rights to be realised or restored. But the popular myth continues that Bangladesh became a country only because of its forfeited right to use its language.
The other myth is about Liaquat Ali Khan, the first prime minister of Pakistan. Though I do not consider myself a fan of the policies he pursued and the decisions he made or chose not to make, the myth espoused about him, like most from the Pakistani left, of being unpopular in terms of electoral politics and having no constituency at the time of his assassination, was exploded a few years back.
My friend Mazhar Zaidi, a broadcast journalist and filmmaker from Lahore, made an investigative film on Liaquat Ali Khan which brought such information forward that makes one think that not only was Khan a popular leader at that time, his assassination helped postpone general elections. Therefore, while we had provincial elections in 1952, the first general elections for parliament could not be held until 1970. I am not sure if the film has been made publicly available by the BBC or not.
A political myth that continues to plague an average mind outside Balochistan even today is about Baloch tribal chieftains, the sardars and the nawabs, who want a bigger share in resources and decision-making, being against the development of Balochistan and its common people. They want these rights only for themselves. Some may well be like that but that is true for tribal heads and feudal lords anywhere else in Pakistan too. It is the state and not the Chaudhrys in Punjab or waderas in Sindh who have steered the process of whatever development we see in these provinces.
Baloch sardars, who were pushed to take up arms against the state, made eight demands to Gen Ayub Khan back in the 1960s when asked for a truce. All were about development in Balochistan, establishing schools and colleges, making roads and hospitals and creating jobs in the province. Readers who are interested may have a look at the very well-respected veteran politician Sherbaz Mazari’s autobiography, ‘A Journey to Disillusionment.’
Another myth most of us were led to believe in by some of our popular politicians – from the likes of Nawaz Sharif and Imran Khan, on the one hand, to Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan and Lateef Afridi on the other – was that we were on our way to the independence of judiciary, rule of law, justice and fair play. It did not take us long to realise that what had been restored was conservatism and egoism. The Arsalan Iftikhar case disillusioned many.
The lower courts, where most of our poor and dispossessed fail to get justice, remain the same after the end of that so-called golden era of judicial independence.
Lastly, let us speak about 1977. While people are debating different aspects of the high-pitched but dreary speech made by Imran Khan the other day – more about Geo/Jang and Mir Shakilur Rehman and less about the issues we face as a nation – what worries me the most was his reference to the general elections held in 1977.
Who wouldn’t agree with making the electoral process truly free and fair? But these reforms have to come through parliament where the PTI has a sizeable representation. In his stride, Khan mentioned that martial law was imposed on Pakistan in 1977 because the elections were rigged. To me, that is another myth. ZA Bhutto wouldn’t have been hanged if it was only about re-election. The movement of the Pakistan National Alliance did come about to challenge the results of the 1977 elections and may have provided an apparent alibi for military intervention.
Click here to download Harris Khalique Wednesday, May 14, 2014 From Print Edition
Post a Comment
Click to see the code!
To insert emoticon you must added at least one space before the code.