Never the twain shall meet

Z A Bhutto wrote in If I am Assassinated – a book he penned while in prison – that perhaps the real mistake he committed in his politics was to try to harmonise the interests of the upper classes with those of the downtrodden. This would never happen. Unfortunately, it seems that Bhutto was the second last mainstream popular Pakistani politician (Benazir being the last), who at least thought about the social, political and economic interests of the struggling classes.
The issue has been placed on the back burner now and there is no real distinction between the economic policies propagated or pursued by the major political parties. The discourse is all about who is more ‘efficient’ and less corrupt in implementing the same pro-rich economic paradigm that is supposed to serve the poor through a small trickle-down of surplus wealth by creating safety nets. The discordant interests of the rich and the poor, the haves and the have-nots, the elites and the commoners, have to be brought back into the mainstream. The fragile left may not be able to deliver on this count if a mainstream party does not take it up.
However, in the wake of religious extremism and brutal militancy over the past two decades, there is one relevant discourse – weak but persistent – alive in the country today. This discourse is about creating a modern state and a progressive society vis-à-vis an exclusive theocratic state and an orthodox society. In this current discourse, we see Imran Khan and the eclectic leadership of the PTI attempting to do the same that Bhutto did with the interests of two classes historically at odds with each other. For the PTI, it is between their socially liberal urban followers and the right-wing bigots.
Khan Sahib believes that he can harmonise their view of the world which happens to be his own view – created by an odd mix of personal experience, neo-conversion to parts of our faith (not sum, and one wouldn’t want to further indulge in this), limited understanding of human history and listening to the lopsided guidance provided by some short-statured advisers who come from the traditional right-wing politics in this country.
Bhutto could practice, understand and articulate what went right and what went wrong with his ideas and his politics since he had the ability, knowledge and capacity to reflect. He wouldn’t listen to the sane bits of advice either on many occasions from his aides who were also wiser than those of Khan Sahib today.
Compared to Bhutto, Khan Sahib himself is neither as politically suave nor well-read enough in the realms of politics and history to be able to appreciate his own failings. For him, if things go right, it will be his charisma. If things go wrong, it will be other people’s fault.
People like us will remain in the bad books of the PTI leader and his ardent, blinkered followers for some time to come – or maybe forever. It will take them many years to learn that their bitter critics were their best friends. Therefore, it becomes all the more important for Khan Sahib’s experienced and sagacious well-wishers – who mostly happen to be liberal bureaucrats, retired ambassadors and foreign service officers, company executives, bankers, army officers, retired or serving – to remind him of certain hard facts about religious extremism, terrorism and the importance of creating a plural society that we have collectively learned from history.
The Jamaat-e-Islami’s partnership with the PTI in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government may not let this happen but the PTI is not just a ‘good looking Jamaat-e-Islami’ as our talented singer and blogger Ali Aftab Saeed shows in one of his video songs. Or is it?
Khan Sahib should be told that what one of his MPAs from the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly said after a fatal bomb blast (that it was just a bomb blast and did not amount to doomsday) is something terribly serious. This statement coming from the ruling party’s MPA is an insult to the 40,000 Pakistani citizens and soldiers who were martyred over the past nine years at the hands of terrorists who are waging a war against Pakistan. Khan Sahib should also be asked to clarify his own and his party’s position on the assassin of Salmaan Taseer. When his MNA from NA-11, Mardan, Mujahid Ali Khan, demands an honourable release for Mumtaz Qadri, convicted by a court of law, it is the confusion in the party that is being reflected here.
Just to remind my readers, Khan Sahib himself condemned Taseer’s assassination while giving an interview in India. Very soon after, we were told that one of his party spokespersons participated in a rally held for Mumtaz Qadri in Lahore. This is no more a joke and the PTI just can’t evade answering these questions any more. Arif Alvi, the PTI MNA elected from NA-250, Karachi, clarified a little later that the statement from Mujahid Ali Khan that came out of the blue during the budget session of the national assembly was his (Mujahid’s) personal opinion. But what Arif Alvi himself said on a private television channel is no joke either. He sheepishly retracted, gave explanations and tried to clarify his position. The interview can be accessed online.
Arif Alvi is considered an old hand of Khan Sahib’s and a PTI stalwart from Karachi. After a major controversy, he was elected from a constituency that includes the two most affluent urban middle-class and elite neighbourhoods of Karachi – Clifton and the Defence Housing Authority. Alvi has categorically said that the Taliban’s demand for abolishing coeducation should be accepted. There are two immediate questions that are then raised. First, the schools that the Taliban were blowing up in Swat and other parts of Malakand were all girls’ schools and not coeducational facilities. I am not sure if in reality the Taliban are in favour of girls being sent to schools in the first place.
Second, Alvi apparently has no idea that almost all public schools in Pakistan, particularly in rural and peri-urban areas, are already segregated. Moreover, if there has to be no coeducation at any level in the educational institutions, why should it be limited to institutions in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa alone? Why should only Peshawar University be segregated? Why not start the process from Alvi’s own metropolitan city by segregating educational institutions in Karachi? Comparable to some neighbourhoods in Lahore, I can bet that most of the coeducational schools in Pakistan – if we map by NA constituencies – are in Alvi’s constituency and most of the higher educational institutions that are co-ed are in Karachi.
Alvi should also ask his party compatriots, the Kasuris, who run a large network of schools catering to high-income groups to abolish coeducation. But Alvi was with the JI before joining the PTI, wasn’t he? Old habits die hard. I am not commenting on the PTI’s coalition partners, JI, today. Otherwise, it is no less significant to mention that Sirajul Haq, the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa finance minister, has recommended a separate assembly for women.
My sagacious and experienced PTI friends that I am speaking to through this column know very well that until reaching the ripe age of 40, Khan Sahib was a sportsman. Forget about pushing him to learn lessons from history, politics or philosophy. One thing may well be reminded to him from the trade he used to be good at – those who prevail in any game are not just talented, they are also clearheaded. Those who are confused, unsure and wobbly, seldom win. Even if they do, their glory is short-lived.
Email: harris.khalique@gmail.com