Elections 2013: Defeat of ANP and Policy Options

The defeat of ANP in the May 2003 Election is interpreted differently by different people. According to the  party‘s  official stance,  ANP was defeated due to the  targeting of the party cadre in the period  leading up to the  polls and the resultant inability of the party  to conduct an election campaign and    connect with its voters. This is the most plausible argument   as ANP was attacked more than 31 times during the period and 61 party workers were killed as  a result of these attacks. Prior to these attacks TTP‘s  spokesman Ihsanullah Ihsan had  threatened the people not to vote for ANP, PPP and MQM, the ruling coalition  that won the  February 2008  Elections. These parties are generally perceived to be secular in nature and anti-Taliban. The coalition government in Islamabad in general and the ANP led government in the province had directly confronted the TTP which also included a civilian-backed military operation in Swat that resulted in the ouster of the Fazlullah led Tehrik-e-Taliban Swat from the Malakand division.

Conversely, the ideological workers in ANP  also  attribute its failure to internal reasons. Khan Baba who has been running an pro-ANP E-Hujra for the last 10 years and who has  been very  active on  social media  recently said that ANP‘s failure was the failure of its leadership. According to him Asfandiyar Wali Khan should not have shifted to Islamabad after a suicide attack on him in his Hujra in October 2008. This led to a leadership vacuum and the party  was left to remain  disconnected from the masses in the absence of its leadership. It should be remembered that ANP enjoys its core membership owing to the legacy of Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan alias Bacha Khan and Khan Abdul Wali Khan, the grandfather and father of Asfandiyar Wali Khan respectively. In the absence of Asfandiyar Wali Khan, the  center of power within the party shifted to Mardan, the home constituency of former Chief Minister Khyber Pakhtunkhwa  Amir  haider Khan Hoti and nephew of Asfandiyar Wali Khan. In the capital city Peshawar,  power remained with  the Bilour  Brothers,  who were against the award ofChief Minister‘s slot to Amir  haider Khan Hoti. One of the Bilour Brothers,  Bashir Ahmad Bilour was later  martyred in a suicide blast  while campaigning for the general election. After Asfandiyar Wali Khan shifted to Islamabad, in his home constituency Charsadda (Hashtnaghar in Pashto), two powerful people ran the affairs of the party: the inexperienced Aimal Wali Khan, the son of Asfandiyar Wali Khan and Mr. Masoom Shah Badshah. While Aimal Wali Khan could not fill up the vacuum created by the absence of his father due to security reasons and due to his inexperience, Mr. Masoom Shah enjoyed very high ranking among the party workers in Charsadda.

Masoom Shah was a competent politician  and he consolidated his position in the party when he left Af tab Ahmad Khan Sherpao and joined ANP. In 2008 Elections, he along with Afrasiab Khattak  were targeted  by the TTP leaving several dead and injured in Shabqadar, Charsadda.

Mr. Masoom Shah, commonly known as SMS, enjoyed a privileged position not only within Charsadda but almost in the entire government circle owing to his position as an advisor to the Chief Minister. Soon after his appointment, public image of  Masoom Shah took a nose dive  as both the party workers and the general public accused him of corruption. Neither Masoom Shah nor ANP leadership paid heed to anti-Masoom Shah hatred and by extinction a general perception of corruption spread which added to the wide spread  propaganda of Easy Load Baba—  a derogatory term used for the alleged corruption of Mr. Azam Hoti, the father of CM KPK Mr. Amir  Haider Khan Hoti. The elder Hoti was once released by the Government after his deal with the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) for his alleged corruption when he was Federal Minister for Communication.

It is difficult to tell when the party workers began to get  alienated or  at what stage  the party leadership got disconnected from the masses. Till the crisis of Swat and the subsequent military operation, ANP enjoyed not only the support of a large section of intelligentsia but also other political parties due to ANP‘s  bold stance against militancy. It might have been a slow and steady process, First Asfandiyar Wali Khan‘s shifting to Islamabad, second ANP‘s provincial president Afrasiab Khattak‘s  over-engagement in Islamabad in the preparation of 18^th Amendment and thirdly due to the party‘s three disjointed groups Hotis, Bilours and Masoom Shah enjoying powers in  Mardan, Peshawar and Charsadda respectively. At a time when the province was faced with security issues due to terrorism, natural disasters like the flood in 2010 and other governance issues, ANP government and the party largely remained disjointed, less focused on its workers and away from the masses. The threats during May Elections 2013 only served as the last nail in the coffin of ANP‘s traditional people-centered politics.

Some perceptions are also propagated in the media and political circles that ANP lost the elections due to its poor performance during its five year rule in KPK. This argument does not appear to be based on reality.  It should be noted that ANP didn‘t lose election due to its bad performance. By all means ANP‘s provincial government‘s performance was relatively better as compared to its predecessor,  the Muttahida Mjalis e Amal (MMA) government or any other government in the Past. ANP‘s election slogan in 2008 was to bring peace to the province. Judging against this sole yardstick, ANP  performed very well. The government restored ordered to Swat, pushed back militants takeover of Peshawar and other parts of the province and sacrificed more than 800 party workers which included Bashir Bilour, Mian Rashid Hussain, MPA Alamzeb, Fazal e Ghani Lala and many others. The ANP changed the name of the province, passed the 18^th Constitution Amendment, decentralizing powers to the provinces, increased the number of public-sector universities, increased the role of Civil Society, empowered artists,  artisans and craftsmen, created spaces for women in politics and other fields, supported the students and the needy and  took positive steps in  many other  areas. And finally to quote just one example ANP had the most vocal, energetic and popular Information Minister  Mian Iftikhar Hussain who stood  like  a  rock and  displayed unprecedented leadership skills.

So where did things go wrong for ANP? Should we remain complacent with the argument that ANP failure was mainly because of its disconnection from the masses?  For most people this argument would be sufficient. However, for a more informed reader, we need to dig deeper and look for how social changes shape perceptions and why it is important in politics to give more heed to perceptions than reality.

Perceptions are largely the expectation of the people about their well-being. ANP‘s good performance did not leave a permanent impression on the people. All the good work that ANP did was not owned by the people or perceived as such. The party workers could not link renaming of the province to the material well-being of the people. The universities established were not properly managed or merit was not ensured so people could not trust the good intentions. The sacrifices of  ANP‘s workers were largely ignored and the  people  rather  linked them  with ANP‘s support for the US policies in the region.

Democracy is all about people‘s perceptions. The new media such as electronic media and social media have been instrumental not only to shape these perceptions but also to appeal to the popular perceptions. Criticism on government policies is one of the pastimes of modern media. It is generally difficult for the democratic governments to live up to the media expectation and in transitional democracies like ours the government is always in the negative ranking. The popular watchwords on media mostly favour the opposition. It is no surprise that PPP or ANP lost the popularity because of these factors. However, ANP‘s  dismal  performance has many other contributing factors too.

It is understandable that voters in elections looked for alternatives. Traditionally ANP has no single party alternative but parties like Jamet Ulema e Islam(JUI), Qaumi Watan Party(QWP), Paksitan People‘s Party(PPP), Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz(PML-N)  and Jumat-e-Islami(JI)  won against ANP on constituency level or through political alliances. In the recent elections the voters were relatively more aware and they were focused more on issues. This was the most favourable time for ANP. However, the Paksitan Tehreek e Insaf (PTI) factor swept ANP from the province. The ANP mostly undermined the PTI.

Under the impression of the media,  youth from PTI launched a very affective campaign by raising the expectation level of the voters and offered a more participatory and pro-people politics. ANP on the other hand remained complacent with its constituency and candidate-based politics. Asfandiyar Wali Khan used to say that elections are 70 percent candidate and 30 percent party. Social and political realities change and elections 2013 have proved this change.   The virtual elimination of secular and nationalist parties from the political power corridors does not auger well for the people of KPK at large and particularly for the Pashtuns. It‘s time that the leadership of ANP  carry out in-depth analysis of the factors leading to its complete ouster from the political landscape ( at least for now) and put in place corrective measures in time for the next elections right from now on. One aspect that would require special attention is to attract the youth through concerted and imaginative efforts at the grass roots level.

by Muammad Arif

(Published in SAHAR   JULY 2013)  

Scientific logic: The way I understand it

Personally I find no comprehensive meaning in phrase like “the Philosophy of Science”. I believe science as the best software for thinking we ever had or have. I also believe that philosophy has wasted much of our time through history and it has been responsible for retarding scientific growth. Otherwise most of the development in human history is made possible due to bold scientific hypothesis and theories.

[For reference study Edward De Bono]

Perhaps the early Greeks had this confusion more obvious. That is why we find a mix of religion, philosophy and science in their theories. Russell had this confusion when he presented a linear model of putting philosophy before religion and after science. Wittgenstein had made it narrower when he restricted philosophy to the study of language. And we still believe in the “philosophy of science” as something which may provide more grounds for advancements in science.

I think science as the best common sense tool and software for brain has been underestimated since ancient times. A possible explanation might be that we practice science and take for granted its usefulness. But when we think we make leaps of imagination and somehow desire to solve the mysteries (unknown, unseen). This might also be called a contradiction between what we know or should know and what we want to know.

Stephen Hawking suggests in his book the “Brief History of Time” that:

“Up to now, most scientists have been too occupied with the development of new theories that describe what the universe is to ask the question why. On the other hand, the people whose business it is to ask why, the philosophers, have not been able to keep up with the advance of scientific theories. In the eighteenth century, philosophers considered the whole of human knowledge, including science, to be their field and discussed questions such as: did the universe have a beginning? However, in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, science became too technical and mathematical for the philosophers, or anyone else except a few specialists. Philosophers reduced the scope of their inquiries so much that Wittgenstein, the most famous philosopher of this century, said, “The sole remaining task for philosophy is the analysis of language.” What a comedown from the great tradition of philosophy from Aristotle to Kant!” http://www.fisica.net/relatividade/stephen_hawking_a_brief_history_of_time.pdf

Closely related to this discussion is the problem of logic. The irony is that despite having scientific logic as software for the brain since time immemorial and despite the fact that we have been practicing it, philosophers have mostly remained obsessed with inventing logic. The Greek logicians discovered some rigid principles which held in high disdain scientific hypothesis and which later on facilitated Scholasticism and influenced (though negatively and to an extent retarded scientific thinking) the later course of scientific advancement. The logic evolved through time but it remained something which has been focusing on truth value (absoluteness of truth), Critical thinking of violently attacking the point of view of other and a coarse way of debating which mostly ends in a win-lose situation. Perhaps Edward De Bono is one of the best writers I ever read and understood who helped me getting rid of the slavery of logic.

To me science is something which simultaneously allows for bold conjectures and hypothesis and restricting us to scientific theories which have been developed on evidences. To understand Science we need to understand what a scientific theory is. Both Popper and Hawking have explained them in great length.

“…a theory is just a model of the universe, or a restricted part of it, and a set of rules that relate quantities in the model to observations that we make. It exists only in our minds and does not have any other reality (whatever that might mean). A theory is a good theory if it satisfies two requirements. It must accurately describe a large class of observations on the basis of a model that contains only a few arbitrary elements, and it must make definite predictions about the results of future observations. For example, Aristotle believed Empedocles’s theory that everything was made out of four elements, earth, air, fire, and water. This was simple enough, but did not make any definite predictions. On the other hand, Newton’s theory of gravity was based on an even simpler model, in which bodies attracted each other with a force that was proportional to a quantity called their mass and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. Yet it predicts the motions of the sun, the moon, and the planets to a high degree of accuracy.

Any physical theory is always provisional, in the sense that it is only a hypothesis: you can never prove it. No matter how many times the results of experiments agree with some theory, you can never be sure that the next time the result will not contradict the theory. On the other hand, you can disprove a theory by finding even a single observation that disagrees with the predictions of the theory. As philosopher of science Karl Popper has emphasized, a good theory is characterized by the fact that it makes a number of predictions that could in principle be disproved or falsified by observation. Each time new experiments are observed to agree with the predictions the theory survives, and our confidence in it is increased; but if ever a new observation is found to disagree, we have to abandon or modify the theory.”  Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time

http://www.fisica.net/relatividade/stephen_hawking_a_brief_history_of_time.pdf

 It is, therefore, important to understand science as software for thinking and a way of doing and behaving. I have underlined some important points of scientific logic which may further be developed.

1.       There are no absolute truths in science;

2.       There are only theories;

3.       Theories are accepted as long as they work;

4.       A theory may potentially be disproved for when we cannot disprove it; it may tend to be considered an absolute truth;

5.       Theory may work in one place but it may not work in another place;

6.       While critical thinking is a more informed judgment upon an existing judgment, scientific thinking may allow suspension of judgment;

7.       There is easy flow of ideas in scientific thinking;

8.       Critical thinking may not allow room for emotions but scientific thinking owing to its descriptive nature may allow for emotions;

9.       Critical thinking may become rigid, hence, not allowing creativity and restructuring of ideas; a scientific thinking believes in hypothesis and provide enough room for creativity and possibilities.

Looking forward for your feedback,

Muhammad Arif

   

The Implications of Pakhtuns’ Stereotyping

It would not be wrong to claim that the people inhabiting both sides of the Durand Line are peace-loving people who entertain a secular worldview and who hold in high esteem aesthetic practices. This is evident from centuries old Pashto language, literature, music, arts, architecture, crafts and customs and traditions.

The rich and enviable cultural heritage of Pakhtuns is still surviving in an extremely antagonistic environment of conflicts, religious fanaticism, political and cultural dominations and corporate regional and global interests.

The Pakhtuns as social group remained resilient in Great Games and have so far survived British colonialism and post-colonial Cold War. One could directly observe this resilience in the current wave of Terrorism in which Pakhtuns are at the front-foot for fighting global terrorism along with the international community. The good thing about Pakhtuns is that they have mostly remained non-violent and they retaliate only when there is aggression done to them.  

The negative stereotyping of Pakhtuns begins with the British colonial period when the British India failed to subdue Afghans—a name alternatively used for Pakhtuns. During the Three Anglo-Afghan Wars and scores of skirmishes with the tribal Afghans, the British received heavy losses and failed to establish their complete writ in Afghanistan and among the Pakhtun tribes. Consequently they portrayed Pakhtuns as “barbarians” to provide a cover for their shameful defeats in the most ruthless colonial expeditions they had ever undertaken.

The negative stereotypes were further exaggerated in the Cold War period when the US with all its might of capitalism and with the support of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan designed a Jihad in Afghanistan to defeat communism and the Soviet Union. It was a billion dollars project to make a force of Islamic militants who would fight the Soviet forces in Afghanistan. This was an imposed power game on the Afghan soil and Pakhtuns had very little power to resist it. Thus Pakhtuns were stereotyped as “Mujahideen” or holy warriors. This label remained dear to all the capitalists as well as dictators in the Muslim countries who predicted disintegration of the Soviet Union and finally a defeat for communism.

The third phase of this stereotyping is the Taliban—a Pakhtun dominated puppet regime installed in Afghanistan. The Taliban upheld predominantly Wahib/Deobandi interpretation of Islam and they marginalized other sects. Their propaganda machine widely portrayed them as Pakhtuns in order to give the so-called movement a semblance of Pakhtun nationalism and to brush aside any impression that the Taliban came to power with some foreign support. The Taliban close association with Al-Qaeda made them enemy of the US and consequently it was deduced that Pakhtuns shared all the traits of the Taliban.

In the course of history foreign aggression, imposed radicalization of the society and political disempowerment made the Pakhtuns vulnerable to negative stereotyping and even Pakhtuns were made to believe in the partial truth these stereotypes might carry. Those in the power circles or media who looked at the resilience of Pakhtuns with awe found an opportunity to malign them. The excessive stereotyping of Pakhtuns in the Pakistani media as “Chowkidars” speaking Urdu in Pashto accent and using masculine for the feminine and feminine for the masculine is one example how brilliance can be converted into shame through unbridled power. Similarly, thousands of SMS’s are circulated on daily basis in which the traditional stereotype of stupid Sardar is deliberately replaced with Pathan. This mockery is racism in other words; which could greatly damage inter-culture harmony and could possibly depredate the productive potential of Pakhtuns and Pashto culture for transmuting other cultures positively.

Together, these stereotypes have developed a negative image of Pakhtuns across the world and a discourse has been evolved through the years which has been forcing the world to believe that Pakhtuns are terrorists and that they support Taliban and other militant groups such as Al-Qaeda. Such thinking is not only cataclysmic for the collective survival of a historically tolerant people (Pakhtuns) but it has also been posing grave threats to the ongoing war against terror in the region.

خپله خاوره

مزلونه