Engineering a new MQM

So what is the story behind the ‘sudden’ arrival in Karachi of two former MQM leaders who were very close to Altaf Hussain and were powerful in the party hierarchy; Mustafa Kamal, Karachi’s former and admittedly exceptional nazim of Karachi and Anees Qaimkhani, the former deputy convener of the MQM’s Karachi Tanzeemi Committee (read: militant wing)?

For over a decade the MQM’s policy in Karachi – the good, the bad and the ugly – was implemented also through these men. This included giving Karachi the best mayor it ever had, reducing parts of Karachi to a killing field on May 12, 2007, putting on fire the Baldia garment factory which left over 250 innocent dead, executing hundreds of target killings and collecting billions as extortion money… the list is endless. These two men have now returned, not as suddenly as they claim but likely as part of a plan. Mustafa Kamal was employed reportedly with Malik Riaz in Dubai and has returned to a rented house in Karachi’s DHA area.

Why this plan? Two reported reasons – one the army does not want to see the MQM return to its pre-operation ways and two that Altaf Hussain may name Nadeem Nusrat, alleged to be the point-man for RAW in the MQM, as his successor.

What is the plan? It is to create a new MQM, with a new leadership but with the same following and in the same geographical spaces (primarily Karachi and Hyderabad). The key people tipped for joining Kamal include Hammad Siddiqui, Raza Haroon and others. Dr Sagheer is already in the new camp. Beyond the known MQM leaders the plan envisages MQM supporters, including militants, to move to Mustafa Kamal in large numbers. This the planners hope to achieve by inducting Anees Qaimkhani and Hammad Siddiqui who led the MQM’s militant wing, and by promising amnesty to militants who switch to Mustafa Kamal’s camp. The governor of Sindh is a key advisor of the planners.

The objective is to seize control of the MQM from its leader Altaf Hussain, whose deadly and almost diabolical mode of leadership is a long established fact. In Pakistan mostly verbal charges by politicians, police officers and intelligence agencies against Altaf Hussain for his links with Indian intelligence agency RAW go back to the early nineties. Neither has the state prosecuted the MQM for such links nor has the MQM provided information on workers it claims developed links with RAW and were ousted from the party.

Interestingly, the interior minister has already said publicly that the RAW allegation is not backed by any evidence and that if Mustafa Kamal has evidence he must present it in court. Meanwhile, Mustafa Kamal said in my in my TV show that he had stated what he had to, that he is not part of law-enforcement person, the government should now take up the RAW issue in Court.

The plan envisages knocking out Altaf Hussain from his leadership role using five elements. One, by making his close confidant publicly repeat already-known charges against him. Two, by example of men who were politically leading the workers and those who were leading the MQM militant cum killer squads, try to take out the fear factor from MQM supporters. Three, by offering amnesty to the MQM’s militant squads. Four, by widely spreading news of a critically-ill Altaf Hussain’s early demise. Five, offering an alternative leadership to MQM followers. This alternate leadership seeks to overcome its highly unlawful track record, by presenting itself within a repentant, patriotic, religious and populist fold.

The trouble with this plan is that this engineering attempt, outside of the constitutionally established parameters within which state and government must engage in law enforcement and governance and society in politics, will neither win it peoples’ legitimacy nor effectively wean people away from the troubling leadership of Altaf Hussain.

Additionally, to the other errant and blundering men and women in positions of authority and influence, this extra-legal initiative to wrest the MQM away from Altaf Hussain’s control, will provide an opportunity to hide behind assertions of double standards, selective justice, convenient amnesia etc. The law enforcement and reform agenda is made suspect by double standards and is liable to lose public backing. We have seen that happen repeatedly in Pakistan. The establishment’s plans in the past to decapitate the PPP, decimate the PML-N, and outlaw provincial and ethnic parties almost never succeeded. This deflects the focus from critical issues and towards cynicism and propaganda creating messiahs and villains, heroes and zeros in society.

Like in politics we have experienced the backlash of selective justice, of ignoble means justifying a ‘noble’ end, and of extra-constitutional role played by institutions to promote national interest in security matters too. Whenever extra-constitutional steps are taken to promote cliques, play favourites and protect proxies, the outcome has been a weakening of institutions and an undermining of rule of law.

Any plan that will manipulate the legal process, extend selective amnesty, undermine the political process and position the establishment to yet again engineer the political process may be fraught with risks. Going by past record at such attempts, there is a low probability of ‘success’. Other downsides of such attempts are the army continuing to play an extra-constitutional role; ans also in mentoring politicians by ‘engineering’ their cleansing they are preparing the political thugs of tomorrow. Also what will it take for the PPP’s corrupt men to cleanse themselves? How is laundering of one set of politicos allowed and not others? Uncomfortable questions.

Hence best to stay away from cleansing and covering those who have operated outside constitutional parameters. Pakistan’s policies that have gone bad on proxies in politics and security offer classic textbook examples. Should we not learn from such examples?

The argument to refrain from covert engineering, even for ‘supreme national interest’ compulsions is therefore neither idealistic nor moralistic. It is simply a practical argument, based on our own historical experiences. We need to play the political game within legal and constitutional parameters not only because of our history but also because it is the only way forward in the current context.

State and government in this digital age are confronted with unprecedented access, information and articulation bringing new pressures on state and government to play it fair and on a level playing field. Credibility is, therefore, an essential pre-requisite for establishing credibility of the actions that are taken to reform Pakistan’s deeply State, government and politics.

If then the time is up for guiding or engineering democracy then does this mean that Pakistanis will have to suffer prolonged spells of Altaf Hussain’s deadly leadership, of endless corruption by men and women in high civil and military positions, of elites and influential circumventing accountability etc? No. It means that operating within constitutional and legal parameters to enforce rule of law, to promote good governance and to promote contemporary, intelligent and people-friendly is the only wise way forward.

The success of the clean-up process underway in Karachi, led by the military within constitutional parameters and supported, even if grudgingly, by the elected is a case in point. After this the MQM will never be a militant party again – provided no establishment player decides to mentor its monstrous activities as was done by some in the past.

The writer is a national security strategist, visiting faculty at NUST and fellow at Harvard University’s Asia Centre.

Email: nasimzehra@gmail.com

Twitter: @nasimzehra