Diabetes Diet in Urdu

Secularization of the state and society

Before discussing secularization let me clear a few things. I consider secularization a process wherein both the state and society are neutral in deciding the faiths of the people. Hence in secular states and societies there is religious harmony and people are allowed to profess freely whatever faith they have. 

Islamic civilization as developed from the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) times onward envisioned a secular society. During his time the prophet lived with the Jews and Christians and never forced them to convert to Islam. Later on Islamic civilization passed through many phases and politics took precedence over religion: hence we can see persecution of religious minorities. However, during the Golden period of Islamic rulers societies remained very progressive with spectacular worldly achievements in many fields.

The problem of secularization of Pakistan is to be seen in the Islamic context. The forefathers of the country were secular people who lived secular lifestyles. Soon afterwards the country was ruled by civil and military bureaucracy who used religion to sustain their regimes. They defaced the constitutions, invented hatred for Hindus and other religious minorities and promoted religious militancy. These cunning people deceived the masses in the name of Islam as they offered the hope for Islamic justice through their lip services. The most lethal weapon they used was the education system that trained generations of bigots and people who blindly accepted the abstract and perverted state narratives of patriotism.

While constitution of Pakistan and state education policy is largely secular (with the exception of a few laws against minorities or laws devised from time to time by different regimes to get support of the masses) there is a need for asserting the secular values enshrined in both. However, this alone is not sufficient. Our rulers, civil and military bureaucracy and other influential people must set an Islamic example of pro-people governance, rule of law, self-accountability, transparency and development.  Nothing influences more the people than concrete measures aimed at solving their problems.

What makes PTI?

 Pakistan Tehreek e Insaf (PTI) is the most popular political party in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.  The credit for all this goes to the charismatic leadership of Cricketer turned politician Mr. Imran Khan whose charismatic personality has been inspiring the youth since his early days in cricket. Mr. Khan was also successful to establish one of the first welfare cancer hospitals in Pakistan with donations.

The PTI had a simple and pragmatic political agenda of reforming institutions, eradicating corruption and providing justice to the people—all these combined into a single political slogan of change. Since 2013 elections and onward the party was not only successful to form government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa but remained a dominant voice on the national political landscape.

For the last three years the party has been struggling with diverse issues. The party government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has failed to bring any significant change to governance in the province. On national level, the party is presenting itself as a solo opposition to the PML N federal government despite the fact that party has very limited number of MNAs and Senators. This has probably forced the party to rely on street politics, dharnas and media outlets.

Over the time, the party suffered from the same problems which other political parties in Pakistan are suffering from. In fact the party received harsh criticism for its highly ambitious claims and its realpolitik. Major failures of the party include lack of democratic culture, failure to deliver on good governance and setting up a good model of political culture in the country.

Why is PTI still one of the most popular political parties in Pakistan? This is partly due to the fact that the party has a very active presence on media and huge resources and new technologies and strategies to reach out to the people and partly because of the youth who hope to expect revolutionary changes from the party. It may be noted that the party did not snatch vote bank from other political parties. The party politicized youth and the so-called “silent majority” or the people disillusioned by other political parties.

The rotten political culture with feudal, family, territorial, ideological and religious strands has always given an excuse to the military to intervene. The masses who have remained indoctrinated by military governments and religious leaders through education system, mass media and all other popular propaganda outlet are mostly apolitical and are fed up with the conventional politics. Such people have been termed as “silent majority” or the people who do not vote or take part in active politics. As the trend may suggest such people either side with the military or they curse the politics. In the case of PTI such people mostly support the PTI.

There are so many other things which need to be discussed like the many turncoats that joined PTI or military support for PTI. But most important thing to discuss is that all other political parties are still the same with no hope of change. Unless and until other parties change, expand and reach out to the people PTI will remain a popular voice.

اسکے خواب

Political struggle

The struggle for the oppressed is the struggle for human rights

For marginalized Baluch the key to get their rights is separation and freedom from the state. For marginalized Pashtuns and Sindis a genuine federation may ensure their rights. For marginalized Punjabis it is a question of law and its implementation. For many ethnic and religious minorities, struggle for human rights is far more complicated.

Mainstream political parties like PML N and PTI are directly concerned with people’s perceptions in Punjab. PPP is more federalist and sensitive of the national diversity. ANP,MQM, PMAP and other nationalist parties are focused on ethnic lines. Religious parties like JI and JUL are more concerned about the so-called Muslim Umma. Communist parties focus on workers and laborers and their rights.

Then who are supposed to be the oppressors? The religious parties think the so-called Judio-Christian culture and governments of the West are anti-Islam and local power holders are puppets in the hands and therefore, the cause of all miseries. The communists term the same so-called phenomenon as global capitalist imperialism and local elites as their cronies. For Balauchs, a predominantly Punjabi civil and military bureaucracy (called establishment) is subjugating them. PPP, PML N, PTI, ANP, MQM, PMAP and other parties think all problems are rooted in lack of democratic process (though differences are there as what key issues need to be addressed to ensure the true spirit of democracy).

Many regions in Pakistan like FATA, Baluchistan, Chitral, Gilgit Baltistan and rural districts of the country are more marginalized. Smaller ethnic and religious minorities have quite little or negligible political representation. Within a patriarchal society women are almost out of the political process. The diverse society of Pakistan is least sensitive towards the plight of women, child abuse, suppression of religious and linguistic minorities, the poor, the diseased and the physically and mentally disabled.

This is the country that is plagued by post-colonial interventions of the great powers and the influence of Saudi Arabia with its Wahabi terrorist ideology, a country that is ruled by military generals and their puppets and a country that has a feudal class history. Here political structure is hierarchical and those who enjoy naked powers are at the top.

Governance

Our governance system is caught between colonial practices and the rising pressures and demands for modern studies in the field of management sciences. This has created a vicious cycle that has been retarding administrative institutions since long.

It should be noted that institutions take a long time to build or retard. Take for example Islamia College Peshawar. It has been successful to resist all the negative influences that have been tearing apart all other institutions. Similarly, many of our institutions are yet to find a standard because they could not evolve due to initial flaws in design. The later is very true of most of our prominent state institutions.

What inherently are responsible for the failure of institutions? Or to take a simpler views what is the essence of institutions? The essence of institutions is human resources. If we are able to manage these resources pragmatically we may transform these institutions. Two most important things in this regard are 1) Looking for the fittest person for a specific job 2) And ensuring that the person has the right aptitude for the job.

Then we come to the leadership issue. Who are to be the leaders? What qualities do we see in the leaders? We have university level courses in leadership and we have a historical knowledge of major successful leaders of the world. But it should be noted that what is true for one society may not be successful for another or what succeeded for one generation may not succeed for another. Therefore, all existing leaders and head of institutions are required to look for what is best for their own people. In this regard popular perceptions about leadership are to be taken into consideration.

People perceptions of leadership and their expectations form leaders are very important. For example, in Pakistan, people want their leaders to be as humble and down to earth as possible. Whenever, people criticize leaders they compare them with Hazrat Abu Bakar and Umar not in the religious sense but the social services they provided to the people. This is the main reasons why do leaders like Baacha Khan, Edhi, Akhar Hamid ur Rahman and similar others won the hearts of the people and brought visible transformation in their lives. These leaders were humble, dedicated and extremely positive towards their cause and the people.  

ANP and PMAP

ANP and PMAP

Traditional Pashtun nationalism or hardcore version of it was centrifugal (if we avoid the word separatist). Its ideology was predominantly in favour of Afghanistan and anti Durand Line though annexation with Afghanistan or a separate Pashtun state of Pashtunistan was never so explicit. To be more exact Pashtun nationalists have been suffering from the contradiction of Great Afghanistan or Pashtunistan idealism versus federalist realpolitik within Pakstan. 

With the passage of time hardcore version of it diluted and the nationalists themselves are now actively seeking more space in the Pakistani politics and demanding more power share through constitutional means.  Apparently this makes them no different from other mainstream Pakistani political parties. 

In the last two decades many Pashtun nationalists have been disillusioned with the ideology professed by Awami National Party (ANP) and Pashtunkhwa Mili Awami Party (PMAP). Many have been in the process of joining other mainstream Pakistani parties  such as PML N, PPP or the recent wave of PTI which has been successful to make inroads into Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. This also includes many nationalists who are changing their loyalties time and again. 

This doesn't mean that the vote bank of ANP and PMAP decreased. Both the parties have been successful not only to attract fresh blood but were successful to form governments in their respective sphere of influence. Hence there is a visible qualitative decline but quantitative jump for these parties as for as Pashtun nationalism is concerned.

Despite ideological compromises both ANP and PMAP have certain strengths which make them equal to or better than mainstream political parties in Pakistan. Both are democratic, progressive and secular in their outlook. Both represent the true spirit of federalism which only PPP can match. The parties leadership are experienced and well versed in national and international politics. Ironically, it is due to these strengths and not the ideology of Pashtun nationalism that these parties have been expanding within Pashtun population, to say the least. 

Are these two parties in a position to make a shift from ethnic Pashtun nationalism to a more inclusive political approach so that other ethnic groups are attracted towards them? 

Pashtun nationalism and the question of “oppression”

 

Whenever we talk about “oppression” we talk in a political sense. Oppression has mostly remained a political term used extensively by the communists and freedom fighters throughout history. If we look at big movements and revolutions of our recent history the popular slogans of freedom is meant to get freedom from a group of oppressors and to translate this freedom for a relatively larger group of people who are marginalized and whose human rights have been violated. Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther, Baacha Khan, Gandihi, Lenin, Mao and Khomeine are a few examples of such big movements from our recent history. “Oppression” in these cases is largely political or economic.

“Oppression" has also another connotation. Let’s call it social oppression. It may be defined as oppression of one social class against another or oppression of individuals within a society on the basis of religion, gender, ethnicity, economic and social status and so one. The contemporary desire for secularization of the state and society, feminism and social empowerment through other such means are aimed at emancipation of the relevant oppressed classes or individuals.  

The Pashtun nationalists see all kinds of social oppression as subsets of political oppression. They are of the opinion that if Pashtuns get their political rights all other social forms of oppression would be automatically addressed. There is a visible polarization within Pashtun society on this issue  where the traditional nationalist political parties ask for political emancipation while others are in favour of reforming the society from within. Thus Pashtun nationalism is mostly extroverted i.e. holding the outsiders responsible for the ills of Pashtun society.  

It is debatable whether different forms of social oppressions are subsets of political oppression. May be political oppression had been a spur and a reinforcing factor in the course of history. For example colonialism interfered in the indigenous political order and destroyed many of the good qualities of Pashtun social and cultural life. Successive autocratic governments in Pakistan reinforced colonialism, exploited Pashtuns resources and tried to change the very core of Pashtun identify. But it may also be noted that both colonialism and the state structure of Pakistan brought many good things for Pashtuns. Pashtuns were politicized. They achieved a legal status for themselves. They got civic rights, education and many other facilities. The list is not too short.

History may   be important to keep the things in the right perspective but more important than history would be to understand the current status of Pashtuns in Pakistan. The political oppression for majority of the Pashtuns (excluding FATA) is no more strictly political of the historical nature. It may be politically relevant in the sense that Pashtuns need more implementation of the already decentralization of the state. Both ANP and PMAP have formed governments in their respective spheres of influence and they have no great obstacles in doing politics. In this way they are already part of the state structure and strict political oppression is no longer there. The only major political oppression still remains is that the people of FATA are still politically oppressed due to their isolation from the mainstream constitutional arrangement.

There may be certain political slogans which are still relevant like CPEC or countering a more Punjabi oriented government but I think the rest of Pashtuns are socially oppressed. Our problems are becoming more internal as we have to address the oppression of women, children and the poor and the marginalized.