President Asif Ali Zardari is facing mounting pressure to relinquish many of his powers, raising the spectre of a damaging political fracas just as the nation battles the Taliban.
Only 15 months into his rule, Zardari is contending with rock-bottom public opinion, strained relations with the powerful military, a bloody insurgency and a vocal opposition party challenging his rule.
He has lost much of the public sympathy that helped his Pakistan People's Party (PPP) win elections in early 2008, soon after the assassination of his wife, the hugely popular two-time prime minister Benazir Bhutto.
Political tensions that have simmered for months bubbled to the surface over the weekend, when a legal amnesty protecting Zardari and key aides from corruption cases expired, plunging the nation into uncertainly.
‘At this point of time when the country needs undivided attention to face its challenges, the government could get entangled in legal battles and their future is so uncertain,’ said independent political analyst Talat Masood.
The corruption amnesty, known as the National Reconciliation Ordinance, was passed by former military ruler Pervez Musharraf in 2007.
It quashed charges against Zardari, Benazir Bhutto and other politicians in a gesture of political reconciliation as Musharraf faced increasing pressure to end nearly nine years of military rule and restore democratic elections.
Zardari spent several years in jail for corruption and is still referred to as ‘Mr Ten Per cent’ because of his reputation for allegedly taking kickbacks on deals.
Succeeding Musharraf as president in September 2008, Zardari has immunity from prosecution. But that immunity could now be challenged in the Supreme Court, opening the door for prosecution on outstanding cases.
Rasool Bakhsh Raees, a professor of political science at Lahore University of Management Sciences, said there were numerous grounds for challenging his immunity. And with so many foes, Zardari's position looked perilous.
‘The legal process is going to take its course, and if it does I see slim survival chances for the PPP leadership including President Zardari,’ he said.
Weathering the storm will take political savvy on Zardari's part.
The president on Saturday gave control of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal to Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, widely seen as a move to fend off criticism by making good on electoral promises to devolve greater power to parliament.
‘It is a signal to political parties and the army that he is willing to accept his reduced position as a figurehead,’ said Raees.
But this will unlikely be enough to appease his critics.
The opposition Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz is calling on Zardari to relinquish powers he inherited from Musharraf to dissolve parliament and sack the prime minister — the so-called 17th amendment to the constitution.
A key problem, Masood said, was that Zardari had very few allies left. ‘The media and military are not very supportive, which means his future is really uncertain and he will have to surrender his powers.’
Tensions have simmered between the army and Zardari for months, notably over a US aid package signed into law in Washington in October.
It earned a terse rebuke from army chief General Ashfaq Kayani, who expressed ‘serious concerns’ about strings attached to some of the funding.
Any political fracas will likely unnerve Pakistan's Western allies, who have been pressing Islamabad to expand a multi-pronged offensive launched earlier this year against Taliban militants across swathes of the northwest.
The offensives have sparked a wave of retaliatory suicide bombings by the Taliban, with more than 430 people killed in Pakistan in the past two months.
‘Politicians are not paying attention to real issues; the war against the Taliban, suicide bombings and the economy,’ said Hasan Askari, a visiting professor at Johns Hopkins University.
‘Pakistani politics is personalised, and only the issues which can pull down Zardari are being focussed on.’
A tale of two stories!
By Cyril Almeida
Military men have been up to some very bad things, we’ve learned this week. But the very different reactions to two seemingly unrelated stories in the media tell us at least one thing: things aren’t going to get better any time soon.
First, over to Jeremy Scahill, writing in The Nation, US: ‘At a covert forward operating base run by the US Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) in the Pakistani port city of Karachi, members of an elite division of Blackwater are at the centre of a secret programme in which they plan targeted assassinations of suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives, ‘snatch and grabs’ of high-value targets and other sensitive action inside and outside Pakistan.’
Before you reach for your pitchfork to skewer evil Americans up to no good inside Pakistan without our leadership’s knowledge — military or civilian — consider what else Scahill has reported: ‘He [a former senior Blackwater executive] said that Blackwater is also working for the Pakistani government on a subcontract with an Islamabad-based security firm that puts US Blackwater operatives on the ground with Pakistani forces in counter-terrorism operations, including house raids and border interdictions, in the North West Frontier Province and elsewhere in Pakistan.’
‘Government’ can be misleading since it implies the civilian side of the state, but the story makes it clear elsewhere who inside Pakistan is really working with Blackwater: ‘According to the executive, Blackwater works on a subcontract for Kestral Logistics, a powerful Pakistani firm, which specialises in military logistical support, private security and intelligence consulting. It is staffed with former high-ranking Pakistani army and government officials.’
The reaction to these revelations should be severe; we don’t need America’s version of non-state actors, mercenaries, really, running around our country, whatever their purpose or utility. The fact that the Pakistan Army — that so-called bastion of professionalism and custodian of our national security — has acquiesced in or enabled the activities of these non-state actors as opposed to elected representatives — the so-called ‘bloody civilians’, aka politicians — doesn’t make it any better or well-thought-out an idea.
But here’s the problem: the selective outrage of the media and the public enables military men to remain immune from accountability.
On Tuesday, a front-page headline in Dawn proclaimed: ‘Intelligence agencies looking into oil, gas deals’. The accompanying article goes on to report: ‘According to sources, a team of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Military Intelligence (MI) has collected record of the proposed transactions and interviewed the managing director of the Pakistan State Oil (PSO) and some senior officials of the petroleum ministry.’
Who authorised agencies run by the military to investigate commercial affairs? To whom is the ISI/MI team going to present its findings? To what purpose will the findings be applied? None of these questions have appeared to worry many here.
Fixated as the media and the public are on the corruption allegations that are churning the political waters at the moment, it seems to matter little who is probing corruption and why — just as long as someone is, there’s hope that the ‘dirty’ politicians can be drained from the swamp. It’s a simple, visceral reaction in a messy place where there are few good options: corruption, bad; those fighting corruption, good.
But bad as corruption may be, the revelation of the ISI/MI probe is, or ought to be, equally, if not more, unsettling. It is yet another piece of evidence that the transition to democracy, already shaky because of the political sins of the politicians, is headed in the wrong direction, and that the military is perhaps quietly working to nudge it in that wrong direction.
A bold pronouncement? Consider this. It is an open secret by now that President Zardari and the army high command have rocky relations. Neither really likes the other and some of that dislike is personal and some policy-driven. But the publicly known disagreements so far have been about policy issues: who controls the ISI, what is our declared nuclear posture, what conditions attached to US aid are acceptable.
Inserting the ISI and MI into the civilian domain to probe corruption, however, is not about policy, it is about politics. Only the incorrigibly naïve would believe that the intelligence team was sent over to fight corruption in the system.
But the point here is larger than the fate of Zardari or the government. The point is this: a law unto itself, the army’s actions remain frighteningly immune from accountability — and the lack of public and media opposition to its ‘good’ but possibly illegal actions (such as sending its intelligence operatives to investigate a very narrow, specific case of alleged corruption that could affect the presidential camp) means that there is absolutely no chance that the army’s bad and possibly illegal actions can ever be stopped.
In real terms, there is virtually nothing that can be done to stop Blackwater and its ilk from operating here. Secret military operations are the blackest of black holes, and if the media and the public kick up a fuss over Blackwater, the army will quietly switch to some other opaque tactic. And if that is subsequently exposed, too, the army will switch to a third.
Meaningful civilian oversight of the army is obviously a distant goal, but it will remain a chimera — an impossible idea — if the public and the media and the politicians never push back against the army on the smallest of issues.
That’s exactly what the corruption probe by the ISI/MI team should be: a relatively small matter on which there should be no ambiguity in denouncing it and demanding it be shut down at once.
There is, of course, no straight line between the army’s corruption probe and its murky arrangements with Blackwater. But the two stories fit into a bigger picture of the army setting and playing by its own rules. And unless the army gets its knuckles rapped for minor misdemeanours, why should it ever worry about being held accountable for its major sins?
Military men have been up to some very bad things, we’ve learned this week. But the very different reactions to two seemingly unrelated stories in the media tell us at least one thing: things aren’t going to get better any time soon.
First, over to Jeremy Scahill, writing in The Nation, US: ‘At a covert forward operating base run by the US Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) in the Pakistani port city of Karachi, members of an elite division of Blackwater are at the centre of a secret programme in which they plan targeted assassinations of suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives, ‘snatch and grabs’ of high-value targets and other sensitive action inside and outside Pakistan.’
Before you reach for your pitchfork to skewer evil Americans up to no good inside Pakistan without our leadership’s knowledge — military or civilian — consider what else Scahill has reported: ‘He [a former senior Blackwater executive] said that Blackwater is also working for the Pakistani government on a subcontract with an Islamabad-based security firm that puts US Blackwater operatives on the ground with Pakistani forces in counter-terrorism operations, including house raids and border interdictions, in the North West Frontier Province and elsewhere in Pakistan.’
‘Government’ can be misleading since it implies the civilian side of the state, but the story makes it clear elsewhere who inside Pakistan is really working with Blackwater: ‘According to the executive, Blackwater works on a subcontract for Kestral Logistics, a powerful Pakistani firm, which specialises in military logistical support, private security and intelligence consulting. It is staffed with former high-ranking Pakistani army and government officials.’
The reaction to these revelations should be severe; we don’t need America’s version of non-state actors, mercenaries, really, running around our country, whatever their purpose or utility. The fact that the Pakistan Army — that so-called bastion of professionalism and custodian of our national security — has acquiesced in or enabled the activities of these non-state actors as opposed to elected representatives — the so-called ‘bloody civilians’, aka politicians — doesn’t make it any better or well-thought-out an idea.
But here’s the problem: the selective outrage of the media and the public enables military men to remain immune from accountability.
On Tuesday, a front-page headline in Dawn proclaimed: ‘Intelligence agencies looking into oil, gas deals’. The accompanying article goes on to report: ‘According to sources, a team of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Military Intelligence (MI) has collected record of the proposed transactions and interviewed the managing director of the Pakistan State Oil (PSO) and some senior officials of the petroleum ministry.’
Who authorised agencies run by the military to investigate commercial affairs? To whom is the ISI/MI team going to present its findings? To what purpose will the findings be applied? None of these questions have appeared to worry many here.
Fixated as the media and the public are on the corruption allegations that are churning the political waters at the moment, it seems to matter little who is probing corruption and why — just as long as someone is, there’s hope that the ‘dirty’ politicians can be drained from the swamp. It’s a simple, visceral reaction in a messy place where there are few good options: corruption, bad; those fighting corruption, good.
But bad as corruption may be, the revelation of the ISI/MI probe is, or ought to be, equally, if not more, unsettling. It is yet another piece of evidence that the transition to democracy, already shaky because of the political sins of the politicians, is headed in the wrong direction, and that the military is perhaps quietly working to nudge it in that wrong direction.
A bold pronouncement? Consider this. It is an open secret by now that President Zardari and the army high command have rocky relations. Neither really likes the other and some of that dislike is personal and some policy-driven. But the publicly known disagreements so far have been about policy issues: who controls the ISI, what is our declared nuclear posture, what conditions attached to US aid are acceptable.
Inserting the ISI and MI into the civilian domain to probe corruption, however, is not about policy, it is about politics. Only the incorrigibly naïve would believe that the intelligence team was sent over to fight corruption in the system.
But the point here is larger than the fate of Zardari or the government. The point is this: a law unto itself, the army’s actions remain frighteningly immune from accountability — and the lack of public and media opposition to its ‘good’ but possibly illegal actions (such as sending its intelligence operatives to investigate a very narrow, specific case of alleged corruption that could affect the presidential camp) means that there is absolutely no chance that the army’s bad and possibly illegal actions can ever be stopped.
In real terms, there is virtually nothing that can be done to stop Blackwater and its ilk from operating here. Secret military operations are the blackest of black holes, and if the media and the public kick up a fuss over Blackwater, the army will quietly switch to some other opaque tactic. And if that is subsequently exposed, too, the army will switch to a third.
Meaningful civilian oversight of the army is obviously a distant goal, but it will remain a chimera — an impossible idea — if the public and the media and the politicians never push back against the army on the smallest of issues.
That’s exactly what the corruption probe by the ISI/MI team should be: a relatively small matter on which there should be no ambiguity in denouncing it and demanding it be shut down at once.
There is, of course, no straight line between the army’s corruption probe and its murky arrangements with Blackwater. But the two stories fit into a bigger picture of the army setting and playing by its own rules. And unless the army gets its knuckles rapped for minor misdemeanours, why should it ever worry about being held accountable for its major sins?
Increase in US troops may make Pakistan’s situation worse
ISLAMABAD: Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said increase in US troops in Afghanistan might lead to a spill over of militants inside Pakistan and make the situation worse. Hence, western countries should evolve a joint strategy against the Taliban on the Pak-Afghan border, he said.
In an interview with German Press Agency ahead of his first visit to Germany as the prime minister, Gilani stressed the Obama administration would have to formulate the military strategy for Afghanistan in consultation with Pakistan.
Responding to a question, Gilani said we have highlighted our concerns about the possible increase in US forces in Afghanistan. Our fear is that if the troops are increased, the militants might spill over to Pakistan, he added.
The prime minister said Pakistan was taking an all out action against the terrorists, which was being recognised also, however, the international community should enhance co-operation with the country.
In an interview with German Press Agency ahead of his first visit to Germany as the prime minister, Gilani stressed the Obama administration would have to formulate the military strategy for Afghanistan in consultation with Pakistan.
Responding to a question, Gilani said we have highlighted our concerns about the possible increase in US forces in Afghanistan. Our fear is that if the troops are increased, the militants might spill over to Pakistan, he added.
The prime minister said Pakistan was taking an all out action against the terrorists, which was being recognised also, however, the international community should enhance co-operation with the country.
pkinside.blogspot.com, A Site covers Pakistan
A weblog (Blog) has started namely PKInside which covers news items about Pakistan Political Situation, Entertainment, Mobile World, Health etc.
http://pkinside.blogspot.com
http://pkinside.blogspot.com
Have a heart, you are the president, Mr Zardari!
By Shaheen Sehbai
WASHINGTON: When an elected head of the state, who is also the head of the largest political party of the country, the Supreme Commander of the country’s armed forces and (at least on papers) the man with his finger on the country’s nuclear button, cannot venture out of his bunker in the presidency, a five-star prison of sorts, and attacks a TV channel, a newspaper editor or a talk show anchor, he must be seriously in trouble or scared to death with insecurity.
It was a great day in my professional career to get so much attention on live TV, nationally and throughout the world, with the country’s president talking about me (why did you not name me) in a furiously threatening tone, foaming and frothing as if he would shoot me if I had been somewhere close to him at the time. I have just landed in Washington to spend a few days with my family on Eid ul Azha and the first thing I hear on TV is my head of state calling me names. It was a unique welcome to the festival of sacrifices.
I heard Asif Ali Zardari’s speech, his first major political address in months, which dealt with no other burning issue of the country, many times wanting to find out what message he had for the country, other than saying that he was a brave man, he was ready to offer sacrifices and he would not be coweddown and would prefer to leave in an ambulance rather than walk out of the presidency under duress. The more I heard his rants, the more loudly I laughed, again and again.
Here is the strongest man in the country so rattled by a few reports and articles by me, or a few talk shows by Dr Shahid Masood, that he forgets to mention anything about the infamous NRO, the shame of the Kerry Lugar Bill, the gross charges of corruption, money laundering or misuse of power against him and his cronies. He did not mention the issues of sugar, atta, electricity and unemployment. He did not praise the soldiers and people fighting the deadly terrorists. He and his few people now sharing power were only worried about their own fate, with the loud spoken Zulfikar Mirza declaring to the world that he would use the Sindh Card, if worse comes to worst.
Zardari referred to me by frequently mentioning someone with “an American passport”. He also said I was not a Pakistani national. He has to get his facts right. But carrying an American passport is not something he would like to turn into a disqualification as bulk of his own cronies are exiles who have acquired foreign passports, including US passports, and they would be the ones to jump the ship first. I am a Pakistani and work in Pakistan and will continue to do so.
His biggest accusation against me was that I wanted him “to leave the presidency in an ambulance”. I think he knows better as he has been telling many who meet him in his bunker that he would not quit and people will have to take him out. This is what he reiterated in his speech on Wednesday night.
But he is wrong on this count as well. I had only quoted his own words on Nov 4 in my column: “The contours of a changed, unwritten script” in these words: “This assessment will purely be an analysis and conclusions drawn up by a journalist....So my analysis is that he will fight back. Some who still have access to him claim that he has expressed these defiant views many a time saying he would never resign and if someone wanted to remove him, he should send an ambulance because he would not walk out on his own two feet.” This is where ambulance was used. In his speech he confirmed what I had written that he would not go away.
In the same article, my opinion was: “All stakeholders agree, and this I can claim after meeting almost all of them in the last few days in Islamabad and Lahore, that President Asif Ali Zardari will have to either step down with dignity, hand over his presidential powers to the PM through a fast-track constitutional amendments process, or become a figurehead and stay within his bunker for as long as he does not create any nuisance.” I was seeing him as a figurehead as long as he behaves. This does not mean his murder, though it could mean a political suicide.
His party leaders have also been objecting to my use of the word ‘martyr’ for Zardari and one Minister, Dr Babar Awan, had the temerity to ask me in a TV show to name the people who would kill Zardari, as if I had been plotting his murder or martyrdom with these people. There has to be a limit to sycophancy and toadyism.
My words in my Nov 7 article were: “Zardari will have to make his decision very quickly on whether he wants to exit with dignity or become a martyr. The days, as they say, are in fact numbered.” It is clear for anyone who understands English what is meant here is a ‘political martyr’ and not dead in the physical sense. If someone cannot understand the language, a very handy Prof Husain Haqqani can help any time.
Other than these references in Zardari’s speech about me, what I can guess is that he is rattled because I have been criticising his style of governance, his failures in taking successful political decisions, his U-Turns at every critical time, his arrogance and stubbornness and lately his indecent manner of speech with his own prime minister.
Neither the president nor the PM have denied any of the contents of my article about Zardari using insulting words against Gilani. In fact, my sources say, when PM Gilani was asked about my article and whether there was a tiff between him and the president, Gilani’s very diplomatic reply was: “I am not angry with the president.” He decided not to comment on what he had heard from Zardari and in what tone.
It is the right of every writer and journalist to criticise the rulers on their policies, their decisions and their actions. This is exactly what I have been doing during my 42-year-long career. I have criticised every ruler, without fear or favour and whenever the political rulers were out of office and struggling to come back, I happened to be one of their most favorite journalists and had even developed personal friendships with them. This is also true in the case of Zardari.
When he was arrested in 1990 by Jam Sadiq Ali and thrown in the Landhi jail, I and my friends Nusrat Javeed, Mohammad Malick, Shakil Sheikh and a couple of others had confronted Jam Sadiq and forced him to allow us to visit him in the jail. That was the first move in his political comeback. Then I wrote a series of seven articles in which I had questioned Ghulam Ishaq Khan and Jam Sadiq. When in 1993 Benazir and Zardari again came to power, he offered me political jobs and only one journalist, Azhar Sohail, accepted his offer. Sadly he then paid for his life and his family’s ruination three years later.
Once again when Zardari was in power I wrote against his corruption in 1994-95 and then as well he had threatened me and others. I did what I had to do then and faced the consequences.
It was Zardari and Benazir Bhutto who became very friendly to me during their days of wilderness in the Nawaz Sharif/Musharraf eras. In his years in New York, Zardari was particularly friendly and even attended my son’s wedding in Washington. He should be ashamed of now pointing accusing fingers at me for holding a US passport. Can’t he come up with anything better to accuse me? What he was doing in US himself during all those years is also known to people who were in the knowledge. My fault is that I again refused his offer to join his government in 2008 although it is totally wrong that I was ever offered to become Pakistan Ambassador in Canada. Neither had I ever asked him for a political or diplomatic job.
I am totally satisfied that even despite such anger and frustration that the president has expressed against me publicly, without any reason, he has not been able to point any single small or big finger of accusation against me for misusing my professional position or getting any benefit from his or any other government. The charge of dubbing me and others as “political actors” is ridiculous and laughable because if this is all he can come up with, it is pathetic case against me with no legs to stand on. His speech was 90 per cent rhetoric, based on shallow looking claims of pursuing Bhuttoism and the rest 10 per cent was attacks on me, Geo TV and Dr Shahid Masood.
If his corruption, amassed wealth and grabbed lands are questioned, it is pure and simple journalism in the interest of the people and the country and no one can deny us that right. He says he will not listen to any criticism except from his political rivals. What a lame statement is that. Where does he place the others pillars of state, the judiciary, the media, the civil society, the ‘ghairat’ and ‘izzat’ brigades? His political colleagues are easy for him to handle because many of them are in the same boat of looted wealth and plundered resources. But he will have to listen to all of us and hiding in a bunker while claiming to be a brave man, will not wash away his sins or wish us away from the scene.
The real issue is that since the previous government I and my colleagues in the Jang group have been highlighting important issues concerning the constitution, governance, independence of judiciary, rampant corruption and ever-increasing prices. These issues have made miserable the life of common man in Pakistan. Neither the previous government nor the present government could tolerate the Jang Groups’ decision to highlight those issues that affect the lives of ordinary people.
WASHINGTON: When an elected head of the state, who is also the head of the largest political party of the country, the Supreme Commander of the country’s armed forces and (at least on papers) the man with his finger on the country’s nuclear button, cannot venture out of his bunker in the presidency, a five-star prison of sorts, and attacks a TV channel, a newspaper editor or a talk show anchor, he must be seriously in trouble or scared to death with insecurity.
It was a great day in my professional career to get so much attention on live TV, nationally and throughout the world, with the country’s president talking about me (why did you not name me) in a furiously threatening tone, foaming and frothing as if he would shoot me if I had been somewhere close to him at the time. I have just landed in Washington to spend a few days with my family on Eid ul Azha and the first thing I hear on TV is my head of state calling me names. It was a unique welcome to the festival of sacrifices.
I heard Asif Ali Zardari’s speech, his first major political address in months, which dealt with no other burning issue of the country, many times wanting to find out what message he had for the country, other than saying that he was a brave man, he was ready to offer sacrifices and he would not be coweddown and would prefer to leave in an ambulance rather than walk out of the presidency under duress. The more I heard his rants, the more loudly I laughed, again and again.
Here is the strongest man in the country so rattled by a few reports and articles by me, or a few talk shows by Dr Shahid Masood, that he forgets to mention anything about the infamous NRO, the shame of the Kerry Lugar Bill, the gross charges of corruption, money laundering or misuse of power against him and his cronies. He did not mention the issues of sugar, atta, electricity and unemployment. He did not praise the soldiers and people fighting the deadly terrorists. He and his few people now sharing power were only worried about their own fate, with the loud spoken Zulfikar Mirza declaring to the world that he would use the Sindh Card, if worse comes to worst.
Zardari referred to me by frequently mentioning someone with “an American passport”. He also said I was not a Pakistani national. He has to get his facts right. But carrying an American passport is not something he would like to turn into a disqualification as bulk of his own cronies are exiles who have acquired foreign passports, including US passports, and they would be the ones to jump the ship first. I am a Pakistani and work in Pakistan and will continue to do so.
His biggest accusation against me was that I wanted him “to leave the presidency in an ambulance”. I think he knows better as he has been telling many who meet him in his bunker that he would not quit and people will have to take him out. This is what he reiterated in his speech on Wednesday night.
But he is wrong on this count as well. I had only quoted his own words on Nov 4 in my column: “The contours of a changed, unwritten script” in these words: “This assessment will purely be an analysis and conclusions drawn up by a journalist....So my analysis is that he will fight back. Some who still have access to him claim that he has expressed these defiant views many a time saying he would never resign and if someone wanted to remove him, he should send an ambulance because he would not walk out on his own two feet.” This is where ambulance was used. In his speech he confirmed what I had written that he would not go away.
In the same article, my opinion was: “All stakeholders agree, and this I can claim after meeting almost all of them in the last few days in Islamabad and Lahore, that President Asif Ali Zardari will have to either step down with dignity, hand over his presidential powers to the PM through a fast-track constitutional amendments process, or become a figurehead and stay within his bunker for as long as he does not create any nuisance.” I was seeing him as a figurehead as long as he behaves. This does not mean his murder, though it could mean a political suicide.
His party leaders have also been objecting to my use of the word ‘martyr’ for Zardari and one Minister, Dr Babar Awan, had the temerity to ask me in a TV show to name the people who would kill Zardari, as if I had been plotting his murder or martyrdom with these people. There has to be a limit to sycophancy and toadyism.
My words in my Nov 7 article were: “Zardari will have to make his decision very quickly on whether he wants to exit with dignity or become a martyr. The days, as they say, are in fact numbered.” It is clear for anyone who understands English what is meant here is a ‘political martyr’ and not dead in the physical sense. If someone cannot understand the language, a very handy Prof Husain Haqqani can help any time.
Other than these references in Zardari’s speech about me, what I can guess is that he is rattled because I have been criticising his style of governance, his failures in taking successful political decisions, his U-Turns at every critical time, his arrogance and stubbornness and lately his indecent manner of speech with his own prime minister.
Neither the president nor the PM have denied any of the contents of my article about Zardari using insulting words against Gilani. In fact, my sources say, when PM Gilani was asked about my article and whether there was a tiff between him and the president, Gilani’s very diplomatic reply was: “I am not angry with the president.” He decided not to comment on what he had heard from Zardari and in what tone.
It is the right of every writer and journalist to criticise the rulers on their policies, their decisions and their actions. This is exactly what I have been doing during my 42-year-long career. I have criticised every ruler, without fear or favour and whenever the political rulers were out of office and struggling to come back, I happened to be one of their most favorite journalists and had even developed personal friendships with them. This is also true in the case of Zardari.
When he was arrested in 1990 by Jam Sadiq Ali and thrown in the Landhi jail, I and my friends Nusrat Javeed, Mohammad Malick, Shakil Sheikh and a couple of others had confronted Jam Sadiq and forced him to allow us to visit him in the jail. That was the first move in his political comeback. Then I wrote a series of seven articles in which I had questioned Ghulam Ishaq Khan and Jam Sadiq. When in 1993 Benazir and Zardari again came to power, he offered me political jobs and only one journalist, Azhar Sohail, accepted his offer. Sadly he then paid for his life and his family’s ruination three years later.
Once again when Zardari was in power I wrote against his corruption in 1994-95 and then as well he had threatened me and others. I did what I had to do then and faced the consequences.
It was Zardari and Benazir Bhutto who became very friendly to me during their days of wilderness in the Nawaz Sharif/Musharraf eras. In his years in New York, Zardari was particularly friendly and even attended my son’s wedding in Washington. He should be ashamed of now pointing accusing fingers at me for holding a US passport. Can’t he come up with anything better to accuse me? What he was doing in US himself during all those years is also known to people who were in the knowledge. My fault is that I again refused his offer to join his government in 2008 although it is totally wrong that I was ever offered to become Pakistan Ambassador in Canada. Neither had I ever asked him for a political or diplomatic job.
I am totally satisfied that even despite such anger and frustration that the president has expressed against me publicly, without any reason, he has not been able to point any single small or big finger of accusation against me for misusing my professional position or getting any benefit from his or any other government. The charge of dubbing me and others as “political actors” is ridiculous and laughable because if this is all he can come up with, it is pathetic case against me with no legs to stand on. His speech was 90 per cent rhetoric, based on shallow looking claims of pursuing Bhuttoism and the rest 10 per cent was attacks on me, Geo TV and Dr Shahid Masood.
If his corruption, amassed wealth and grabbed lands are questioned, it is pure and simple journalism in the interest of the people and the country and no one can deny us that right. He says he will not listen to any criticism except from his political rivals. What a lame statement is that. Where does he place the others pillars of state, the judiciary, the media, the civil society, the ‘ghairat’ and ‘izzat’ brigades? His political colleagues are easy for him to handle because many of them are in the same boat of looted wealth and plundered resources. But he will have to listen to all of us and hiding in a bunker while claiming to be a brave man, will not wash away his sins or wish us away from the scene.
The real issue is that since the previous government I and my colleagues in the Jang group have been highlighting important issues concerning the constitution, governance, independence of judiciary, rampant corruption and ever-increasing prices. These issues have made miserable the life of common man in Pakistan. Neither the previous government nor the present government could tolerate the Jang Groups’ decision to highlight those issues that affect the lives of ordinary people.
Court issues arrest warrant for Bhutta
Additional Sessions Judge, Islamabad, Muhammad Tanvir Mir, has issued an arrest warrant for Muhammad Shoaib Bhutta, publisher of a daily in Islamabad.
The judge summoned him on December 4 to ensure his presence in the court. The court issued an arrest warrant for Bhutta on the complaint of Abdul Aziz Mohmand, resident editor the Jang, The News and Geo editorial management, and on the basis of arguments and evidence presented before the court.
Abdul Aziz Mohmand in his application stated that in the best national interests, the Jang Group had played a leading role in the movement for an independent judiciary and rightly represented the masses. Besides, the Jang Group and Geo TV raised the issues of governance and corruption among the masses, due to which the group has to face serious challenges, he added.
He stated that the said person published defamatory, unfounded, false and baseless reports and financial charges in his newspaper against the Jang Group to damage its popularity and reputation among the masses.
The daily alleged that the head of the Jang Group editorial had sent a message to important personalities of the government that if they wanted end to one-sided campaign against them and personnel of the judiciary in the group newspapers, editorials and electronic media, they have to accept their demands. After the government refusal the group editorial head gave go-ahead to his workers and said that if the government is facing difficulties, then it should cut advertisements of other newspapers and electronic media to fulfil their shortage.
Abdul Aziz Mohmand maintained that the said publisher republished such baseless materials twice, and damaged the reputation of the group and tried to weaken its commitment.
The petitioner said that besides publishing baseless news against Geo TV, Daily Jang and The News the publisher Malik Shoaib Bhutta also printed posters and panaflex banners with logos of Geo TV, Jang and The News. The posters contained extremely contemptuous sentences against the Jang Group of Newspapers and Geo TV. When the workers of the Jang and well-wisher readers removed those banners and posters after the city administration failed to do so despite repeated complaints, the said publisher reported the next day, “the Jang Group could not tolerate few banners and posters against it”.
The same person also levelled baseless allegations against Jang Group during a talkshow on official TV channel. The petitioner requested the police to register an FIR against the accused, but the police neither responded positively nor registered an FIR.
Abdul Aziz Mohmand pleaded in his petition that this act was crime under section 499, 5000, 501, 502 and 502A of the Pakistan Penal Code. Additional Sessions Judge Muhammad Tanvir Mir accepted the petition for regular hearing on the basis of arguments and evidences and said it seemed that Mohammad Shoaib Bhutta had intentionally committed defamation, hence his arrest warrant were being issued. The court adjourned the hearing till December 4, 2009 and ordered to appear before the court.
The judge summoned him on December 4 to ensure his presence in the court. The court issued an arrest warrant for Bhutta on the complaint of Abdul Aziz Mohmand, resident editor the Jang, The News and Geo editorial management, and on the basis of arguments and evidence presented before the court.
Abdul Aziz Mohmand in his application stated that in the best national interests, the Jang Group had played a leading role in the movement for an independent judiciary and rightly represented the masses. Besides, the Jang Group and Geo TV raised the issues of governance and corruption among the masses, due to which the group has to face serious challenges, he added.
He stated that the said person published defamatory, unfounded, false and baseless reports and financial charges in his newspaper against the Jang Group to damage its popularity and reputation among the masses.
The daily alleged that the head of the Jang Group editorial had sent a message to important personalities of the government that if they wanted end to one-sided campaign against them and personnel of the judiciary in the group newspapers, editorials and electronic media, they have to accept their demands. After the government refusal the group editorial head gave go-ahead to his workers and said that if the government is facing difficulties, then it should cut advertisements of other newspapers and electronic media to fulfil their shortage.
Abdul Aziz Mohmand maintained that the said publisher republished such baseless materials twice, and damaged the reputation of the group and tried to weaken its commitment.
The petitioner said that besides publishing baseless news against Geo TV, Daily Jang and The News the publisher Malik Shoaib Bhutta also printed posters and panaflex banners with logos of Geo TV, Jang and The News. The posters contained extremely contemptuous sentences against the Jang Group of Newspapers and Geo TV. When the workers of the Jang and well-wisher readers removed those banners and posters after the city administration failed to do so despite repeated complaints, the said publisher reported the next day, “the Jang Group could not tolerate few banners and posters against it”.
The same person also levelled baseless allegations against Jang Group during a talkshow on official TV channel. The petitioner requested the police to register an FIR against the accused, but the police neither responded positively nor registered an FIR.
Abdul Aziz Mohmand pleaded in his petition that this act was crime under section 499, 5000, 501, 502 and 502A of the Pakistan Penal Code. Additional Sessions Judge Muhammad Tanvir Mir accepted the petition for regular hearing on the basis of arguments and evidences and said it seemed that Mohammad Shoaib Bhutta had intentionally committed defamation, hence his arrest warrant were being issued. The court adjourned the hearing till December 4, 2009 and ordered to appear before the court.
Loot sale of sugar mills continues unhindered
By Ansar Abbasi
ISLAMABAD: After an unsigned note led to the unhindered “loot sale” of Dadu Sugar Mills for just Rs90 million as against the previous offer of Rs400 million, efforts are now under way to dispose of Thatta Sugar Mills for peanuts.
Like Dadu Sugar Mills, the previous bidders in case of Thatta Sugar Mills had offered Rs235 million in November 2008 but now another singular bid of Rs80 million received by the Official Assignee is being considered for approval.
Secretary Industries Sindh Ali Ahmad Lund when contacted though said that Dadu Sugar Mills was sold last year before his appointment as secretary industries. In the case of Thatta Sugar Mills he argued that he had moved the summary for the chief minister giving all the facts. “Now it is up to the chief minister to approve its sale for Rs80 million or reject it,” he said, adding that the Sindh High Court had liquidated Dadu Sugar Mills and is also involved in the liquidation process of Thatta Sugar Mills. He, however, said that it is the government, which recommends the liquidation to the High Court.
The sad fate of Sindh Sugar Corporation’s two sugar mills in Dadu and Thatta bear testimony to the claim that the like the state-owned land, the state owned assets too are being sold at throw away prices.
The PPP’s visionary chairman, Shaheeed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, founded the Sindh Sugar Corporation to open up the rural Sindh to industrialisation bringing employment to its poor inhabitants. In 1976, Sindh Sugar Corporation was provided a capital of Rs625 million to install two sugar mills in Dadu and Thatta. The Sindh province contributed Rs367 million while the French credit amounted to Rs259 million. The total cost on these plants was Rs329m on Thatta Sugar Mills and Rs297m on Dadu Sugar Mills. The government of Sindh also provided 276 acres and 146 acres for these mills respectively.
These plants, like many others set up with foreign loans, also ran into tremendous losses and by the year 1999, the losses rose to billions. The assessment made in 1999 had put the assets of Dadu Sugar Mills at Rs627 million and those of Thatta Sugar Mills at Rs716 million. The liabilities of these mills had reached more than Rs3.0 billion of which around Rs2.0 billion, which were provided by the Sindh government, were written off.
Sources said that other creditors also renegotiated and the overall liability was reduced to Rs620 million, while the assets were estimated at Rs1.343 billion. The Sindh government decided to dispose of these mills to recover whatever it could from its sunken investment.
In 2002, the Sindh Privatisation Commission began efforts to dispose of these two mills. The reserve prices of Rs465 million and Rs408 million were fixed for Dadu Sugar Mills and Thatta Sugar Mills respectively. The Privatisation Commission could not get more than Rs156 million and Rs50 million respectively in bids for these mills.
In 2005, the Sindh cabinet expressing its dissatisfaction over the progress made by the Privatisation Commission, decided that, in view of the experience of the Official Assignee of the Sindh High Court in disposing of sick/defaulting industrial units, these units should also be got auctioned by that office through liquidation process.
The Official Assignee initiated the process in 2007, and fixed Rs350 million as reserve price for Dadu Sugar Mills and Rs230 million for Thatta Sugar Mills. The highest bid of Rs250 million was received for Dadu Sugar Mills and Rs100 million for Thatta Sugar Mills. The provincial government declined these offers.
The process was repeated by the Official Assignee and this time the bid for Dadu Sugar Mills went as high as Rs400 million which was hotly contested by three other bidders with offers of Rs390m, Rs385m and Rs370 million. The bid for Thatta Sugar Mills also went up to Rs175 million followed by three other bidders at Rs147m, Rs140m and Rs130m.
The parties, which participated in these bids, were M/s Shahjehan Cotton Factory (the highest bidder for Dadu Sugar Mills), M/s Adil Enterprises, M/s Kohsar Enterprises, M/s Unique Trading Co. and M/s Sooraj Enterprises (the highest bidder for Thatta Sugar Mills). The matter was under consideration of the provincial government when it was time for new elections.
Come the PPP government in Sindh and a strange note from a top government functionary changed the entire scenario. The sources said that the note initiated by some anonymous writer had such a mysterious affect that Dadu Sugar Mills ended up in the hands of M/s Naudero Sugar Mills (which had never participated in earlier bids) for a paltry sum of Rs90 million.
The note, which was neither named nor signed by its writer, and which worked as a command or directive from the top government functionary, desired that the Sindh cabinet should urgently address the issue of privatisation of Dadu Sugar Mills (Assets Only) on fast rack basis. It also mentioned terms for its disposal.
The top government functionary marked this anonymous note to Secretary Industries on April 27, 2008 directing him to put up relevant papers immediately. Official Assignee invited fresh bid on May 11, 2008 and by July 4, 2008, Dadu Sugar Mills was handed over to the new bidder.
So, what took the previous Sindh governments and the cabinets almost 10 years to ponder over the prices, which went up from Rs156 million in 2002 to Rs400 million in 2007 for Dadu Sugar Mills, with five active parties pursuing the bidding process, was disposed of in just two and a half months for a paltry sum of Rs90 million.
This time, surprisingly, all the previous bidders who followed the process for so many years were made to vanish, their previous bids ignored and a new player’s singular bid of less than 25% of the last highest bid was accepted without any reservation. Unlike the previous governments, the Official Assignee was not requested to hold another bidding or to negotiate with the previous bidders. The complacent provincial government was happy with the bid of Rs90 million for an asset valued at Rs627 million and for which a bid of Rs400 million had been received only a year ago. The retired official of the Industries Department, who handled this case for his political masters, Mr. Murli Manohar, has been rewarded and reemployed as consultant.
The most worrisome news is that after the unhindered loot sale of Dadu Sugar Mills, efforts are now under way to dispose of Thatta Sugar Mills. Again, the previous bidders have been made to escape, who had bid up to Rs235 million (M/s Sooraj Enterprises during this government in November 2008) and another singular bid of Rs80 million received by the Official Assignee (M/s Kohsar Enterprises in October 2009) is being considered for approval.
“Let us hope some body stops them this time,” an official source involved in the process but feeling extremely perturbed said, wondering, “Will the Sindh cabinet or Sindh Assembly wake up, stop loot sale of Thatta Sugar Mills and retrieve Dadu Sugar Mills?” Judging from their past track record, he said, perhaps they won’t. “It would again be the judiciary which will have to come to our rescue,” the official source said.
ISLAMABAD: After an unsigned note led to the unhindered “loot sale” of Dadu Sugar Mills for just Rs90 million as against the previous offer of Rs400 million, efforts are now under way to dispose of Thatta Sugar Mills for peanuts.
Like Dadu Sugar Mills, the previous bidders in case of Thatta Sugar Mills had offered Rs235 million in November 2008 but now another singular bid of Rs80 million received by the Official Assignee is being considered for approval.
Secretary Industries Sindh Ali Ahmad Lund when contacted though said that Dadu Sugar Mills was sold last year before his appointment as secretary industries. In the case of Thatta Sugar Mills he argued that he had moved the summary for the chief minister giving all the facts. “Now it is up to the chief minister to approve its sale for Rs80 million or reject it,” he said, adding that the Sindh High Court had liquidated Dadu Sugar Mills and is also involved in the liquidation process of Thatta Sugar Mills. He, however, said that it is the government, which recommends the liquidation to the High Court.
The sad fate of Sindh Sugar Corporation’s two sugar mills in Dadu and Thatta bear testimony to the claim that the like the state-owned land, the state owned assets too are being sold at throw away prices.
The PPP’s visionary chairman, Shaheeed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, founded the Sindh Sugar Corporation to open up the rural Sindh to industrialisation bringing employment to its poor inhabitants. In 1976, Sindh Sugar Corporation was provided a capital of Rs625 million to install two sugar mills in Dadu and Thatta. The Sindh province contributed Rs367 million while the French credit amounted to Rs259 million. The total cost on these plants was Rs329m on Thatta Sugar Mills and Rs297m on Dadu Sugar Mills. The government of Sindh also provided 276 acres and 146 acres for these mills respectively.
These plants, like many others set up with foreign loans, also ran into tremendous losses and by the year 1999, the losses rose to billions. The assessment made in 1999 had put the assets of Dadu Sugar Mills at Rs627 million and those of Thatta Sugar Mills at Rs716 million. The liabilities of these mills had reached more than Rs3.0 billion of which around Rs2.0 billion, which were provided by the Sindh government, were written off.
Sources said that other creditors also renegotiated and the overall liability was reduced to Rs620 million, while the assets were estimated at Rs1.343 billion. The Sindh government decided to dispose of these mills to recover whatever it could from its sunken investment.
In 2002, the Sindh Privatisation Commission began efforts to dispose of these two mills. The reserve prices of Rs465 million and Rs408 million were fixed for Dadu Sugar Mills and Thatta Sugar Mills respectively. The Privatisation Commission could not get more than Rs156 million and Rs50 million respectively in bids for these mills.
In 2005, the Sindh cabinet expressing its dissatisfaction over the progress made by the Privatisation Commission, decided that, in view of the experience of the Official Assignee of the Sindh High Court in disposing of sick/defaulting industrial units, these units should also be got auctioned by that office through liquidation process.
The Official Assignee initiated the process in 2007, and fixed Rs350 million as reserve price for Dadu Sugar Mills and Rs230 million for Thatta Sugar Mills. The highest bid of Rs250 million was received for Dadu Sugar Mills and Rs100 million for Thatta Sugar Mills. The provincial government declined these offers.
The process was repeated by the Official Assignee and this time the bid for Dadu Sugar Mills went as high as Rs400 million which was hotly contested by three other bidders with offers of Rs390m, Rs385m and Rs370 million. The bid for Thatta Sugar Mills also went up to Rs175 million followed by three other bidders at Rs147m, Rs140m and Rs130m.
The parties, which participated in these bids, were M/s Shahjehan Cotton Factory (the highest bidder for Dadu Sugar Mills), M/s Adil Enterprises, M/s Kohsar Enterprises, M/s Unique Trading Co. and M/s Sooraj Enterprises (the highest bidder for Thatta Sugar Mills). The matter was under consideration of the provincial government when it was time for new elections.
Come the PPP government in Sindh and a strange note from a top government functionary changed the entire scenario. The sources said that the note initiated by some anonymous writer had such a mysterious affect that Dadu Sugar Mills ended up in the hands of M/s Naudero Sugar Mills (which had never participated in earlier bids) for a paltry sum of Rs90 million.
The note, which was neither named nor signed by its writer, and which worked as a command or directive from the top government functionary, desired that the Sindh cabinet should urgently address the issue of privatisation of Dadu Sugar Mills (Assets Only) on fast rack basis. It also mentioned terms for its disposal.
The top government functionary marked this anonymous note to Secretary Industries on April 27, 2008 directing him to put up relevant papers immediately. Official Assignee invited fresh bid on May 11, 2008 and by July 4, 2008, Dadu Sugar Mills was handed over to the new bidder.
So, what took the previous Sindh governments and the cabinets almost 10 years to ponder over the prices, which went up from Rs156 million in 2002 to Rs400 million in 2007 for Dadu Sugar Mills, with five active parties pursuing the bidding process, was disposed of in just two and a half months for a paltry sum of Rs90 million.
This time, surprisingly, all the previous bidders who followed the process for so many years were made to vanish, their previous bids ignored and a new player’s singular bid of less than 25% of the last highest bid was accepted without any reservation. Unlike the previous governments, the Official Assignee was not requested to hold another bidding or to negotiate with the previous bidders. The complacent provincial government was happy with the bid of Rs90 million for an asset valued at Rs627 million and for which a bid of Rs400 million had been received only a year ago. The retired official of the Industries Department, who handled this case for his political masters, Mr. Murli Manohar, has been rewarded and reemployed as consultant.
The most worrisome news is that after the unhindered loot sale of Dadu Sugar Mills, efforts are now under way to dispose of Thatta Sugar Mills. Again, the previous bidders have been made to escape, who had bid up to Rs235 million (M/s Sooraj Enterprises during this government in November 2008) and another singular bid of Rs80 million received by the Official Assignee (M/s Kohsar Enterprises in October 2009) is being considered for approval.
“Let us hope some body stops them this time,” an official source involved in the process but feeling extremely perturbed said, wondering, “Will the Sindh cabinet or Sindh Assembly wake up, stop loot sale of Thatta Sugar Mills and retrieve Dadu Sugar Mills?” Judging from their past track record, he said, perhaps they won’t. “It would again be the judiciary which will have to come to our rescue,” the official source said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)