Home Blog Page 77

Program on Pakistani Cinema…!

1

Moeed Pirzada | FB Blog |

Regarding the Program on Pakistani Cinema: First it was not only about newly released film ‘Waar’; it was about the regeneration of Pakistani cinema and the phenomenal success of ‘Waar’ and its nationalistic theme was this program’s handle to talk about the factors that are leading up to this new trend of Cineplex Cinemas, and different movies like Khuda Kay Liye, Bol, Ram Chand Pakistani, Mein Hoon Shahid Afridi, Zinda Bhag and finally Waar and may soon be ‘Moor’ about Pashtun/Baluch culture…movies that are no more about the usual topics of love and marriage and class differences of parents but addressing issues that confront Pakistani society today…. “Waar” is a very ambitious and commendable effort to narrate the Pakistani saga with terrorism and how Indian agencies might be behind some of these “terror groups”…our program was a rare tv program that has tried discussing this issue…the fact that Maha Musssadiq had still not seen ‘Waar” was embarrassing but discussion was about Pakistani film industry and not exclusively about one film; and Maha is a correspondent that covers film, art and culture with Express Tribune a newspaper which covers these issues more than most others….and yes, we have less film critics in Pakistan and anyone who wants to add more names is most welcome….

But is ‘Waar” perfect? Can an art product be perfect? can we not criticize “Wag the Dog” and “Out of Africa” or “Dead Men Walking”..? So I am surprised by so many people upset about critical comments about the movie as this represented their one and the only son…why? Film Waar’s phenomenal success at the box office in the last ten days is due to the power of its narrative and its timing; this was much needed, hundreds and thousands of Pakistanis feel what the movie has attempted showing and saying; the power of the movie was in its message and then it was in its cinematography; the quality of shots, use of camera and light and some very good acting by Shaan…and off-course the use of weapons, graphic violence and good use of Cobra and MI-17 gunship helicopters…but was’nt the script lousy?

What was the story? Who was that politician, Ejaz Khan? did not he deserve to come out more strongly? Movie moved ahead in jerks as a collection of nicely shot action scenes but thread connecting them with each other was at best tenuous…”Bol” in comparison was better planned and had a script that had natural progression (though the element of propaganda for family planning and status of woman was far too obvious; good art form has to hide its propaganda which is not easy) Movie could not establish any characters; yes! Shaan developed life as a brilliant ex-army officer, a sword of honour at PMA, someone who lost his wife and child in terror attack, and now part of civilian anti-terror establishment but that is it; Producer need to develop him more which could not be done…but apart from “Shaan” none of the characters could come out very strong at all…even the terrorists need to be defined with some personality and character; art forms are not for just expressing your feelings without any art; where was the art? And making this film in English was a bogus idea; it exposed the amateurishness of the producer; Director – Bilal Lashari – has done a good job in technically patching up the different action scenes but the failure of the script, its inability to explain itself and the unfortunate use of English has to be leveled at the door of the Director, Dr. Hassan Rana..

Why English was a disaster? It’s not that Pakistani films cannot be made in English or the ambition to tap the international market should not be there. By all means Pakistani films – expensive films like Waar – and other films have to aim for the international market but first learn to walk before you can run. This movie’s script was far too local, far too nationalist; its dialogue were conceived in Urdu, its thinking was local but was being expressed in English; this unfortunate decision reduced the personality of most actors, it diminished them, it made them look unnatural….an intelligent use of English sub-titling with some dialogues in Pashto would have done better – also most Pakistanis can understand the movie instinctively because it relates to them and their pain, the missing part of the story which is not in script is inside the Pakistani minds and heads…the inner narrative inside our heads couples with the screen effect to complete the story but the same is not true for Americans, Europeans or Arabs etc….a movie to connect to them needed a different script with more nuanced story and intelligent dialogues, and it had to develop a more sharper focus on a single train of thought…

But this criticism does not mean that “Waar” is not a good movie; it is a great ambitious step, amazing use of camera and technology for a Pakistani film, a roaring public approval and it’s box office success will open doors for more such movies…Is it a nationalistic propaganda? Yes! it is, but every movie has an agenda and all Indian movies that have dealt with insurgencies in Punjab or Kashmir were pathetic virulent propaganda movies generously helped by the Indian state so what if this Pakistani film has for the first time hinted at Indian hand in creating ‘chaos’ inside Pakistan…that is only true…I wish they had worked more harder and intelligently on script…

Program on Pakistani cinema…!

Moeed Pirzada |

Regarding the Program on Pakistani Cinema: First it was not only about newly released film ‘Waar’; it was about the regeneration of Pakistani cinema and the phenomenal success of ‘Waar’ and its nationalistic theme was this program’s handle to talk about the factors that are leading up to this new trend of Cineplex Cinemas, and different movies like Khuda Kay Liye, Bol, Ram Chand Pakistani, Mein Hoon Shahid Afridi, Zinda Bhag and finally Waar and may soon be ‘Moor’ about Pashtun/Baluch culture…movies that are no more about the usual topics of love and marriage and class differences of parents but addressing issues that confront Pakistani society today…. “Waar” is a very ambitious and commendable effort to narrate the Pakistani saga with terrorism and how Indian agencies might be behind some of these “terror groups”…our program was a rare tv program that has tried discussing this issue…the fact that Maha Musssadiq had still not seen ‘Waar” was embarrassing but discussion was about Pakistani film industry and not exclusively about one film; and Maha is a correspondent that covers film, art and culture with Express Tribune a newspaper which covers these issues more than most others….and yes, we have less film critics in Pakistan and anyone who wants to add more names is most welcome….

Read more: Should Indian movies be banned in Pakistani cinema! Why?

By all means, Pakistani films – expensive films like Waar – and other films have to aim for the international market but first learn to walk before you can run. This movie’s script was far too local, far too nationalist; its dialogue were conceived in Urdu, its thinking was local but was being expressed in English; this unfortunate decision reduced the personality of most actors, it diminished them, it made them look unnatural….an intelligent use of English sub-titling with some dialogues in Pashto would have done better

But is ‘Waar” perfect? Can an art product be perfect? can we not criticize “Wag the Dog” and “Out of Africa” or “Dead Men Walking”..? So I am surprised by so many people upset about critical comments about the movie as this represented their one and the only son…why?Film Waar’s phenomenal success at the box office in the last ten days is due to the power of its narrative and its timing; this was much needed, hundreds and thousands of Pakistanis feel what the movie has attempted showing and saying; the power of the movie was in its message and then it was in its cinematography; the quality of shots, use of camera and light and some very good acting by Shaan…and off-course the use of weapons, graphic violence and good use of Cobra and MI-17 gunship helicopters…but was’nt the script lousy?

What was the story? Who was that politician, Ejaz Khan? did not he deserve to come out more strongly? Movie moved ahead in jerks as a collection of nicely shot action scenes but thread connecting them with each other was at best tenuous…”Bol” in comparison was better planned and had a script that had natural progression (though the element of propaganda for family planning and status of woman was far too obvious; good art form has to hide its propaganda which is not easy) Movie could not establish any characters; yes! Shaan developed life as a brilliant ex-army officer, a sword of honour at PMA, someone who lost his wife and child in terror attack, and now part of civilian anti-terror establishment but that is it; Producer need to develop him more which could not be done…but apart from “Shaan” none of the characters could come out very strong at all…even the terrorists need to be defined with some personality and character; art forms are not for just expressing your feelings without any art; where was the art? And making this film in English was a bogus idea; it exposed the amateurishness of the producer; Director – Bilal Lashari – has done a good job in technically patching up the different action scenes but the failure of the script, its inability to explain itself and the unfortunate use of English has to be leveled at the door of the Director, Dr. Hassan Rana..

Film Waar’s phenomenal success at the box office in the last ten days is due to the power of its narrative and its timing; this was much needed, hundreds and thousands of Pakistanis feel what the movie has attempted showing and saying; the power of the movie was in its message and then it was in its cinematography

Why was English a disaster? It’s not that Pakistani films cannot be made in English or the ambition to tap the international market should not be there. By all means, Pakistani films – expensive films like Waar – and other films have to aim for the international market but first learn to walk before you can run. This movie’s script was far too local, far too nationalist; its dialogue were conceived in Urdu, its thinking was local but was being expressed in English; this unfortunate decision reduced the personality of most actors, it diminished them, it made them look unnatural….an intelligent use of English sub-titling with some dialogues in Pashto would have done better – also most Pakistanis can understand the movie instinctively because it relates to them and their pain, the missing part of the story which is not in script is inside the Pakistani minds and heads…the inner narrative inside our heads couples with the screen effect to complete the story but the same is not true for Americans, Europeans or Arabs etc….a movie to connect to them needed a different script with more nuanced story and intelligent dialogues, and it had to develop a more sharper focus on a single train of thought…

Read more: Pakistani Cinema’s Future: Issues beyond Raees, Mahira & Shahrukh Khan

But this criticism does not mean that “Waar” is not a good movie; it is a great ambitious step, amazing use of camera and technology for a Pakistani film, a roaring public approval and it’s box office success will open doors for more such movies…Is it a nationalistic propaganda? Yes! it is, but every movie has an agenda and all Indian movies that have dealt with insurgencies in Punjab or Kashmir were pathetic virulent propaganda movies generously helped by the Indian state so what if this Pakistani film has for the first time hinted at Indian hand in creating ‘chaos’ inside Pakistan…that is only true…I wish they had worked more harder and intelligently on script…

 

Moeed Pirzada is prominent TV Anchor & commentator; he studied international relations at Columbia Univ, New York and law at London School of Economics. Twitter: MoeedNj. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Global Village Space’s editorial policy. This piece was first published in Moeed Pirzada’s official page. It has been reproduced with permission.

Sheikh Rasheed Exclusive interview on Tonight with Moeed Pirzada – 16th October 2013

Sheikh Rasheed in Exclusive interview on Tonight with Moeed Pirzada. The program was recorded on 16th October 2013. Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed, Leader of the Awaami Muslim League sees seven families controlling the entire system of Pakistan, these seven families in the name of democracy are expanding their personal interests rather country’s national interest. Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed while talking to Dr Moeed Pirzada sees ousting of NADRA’s Chairman by PML N government as this government is not ready to conduct a “VOTE AUDIT”. Sheikh Rasheed  also criticized Leader of the opposition Syed Khursheed Shah as he was not representing the oppositions case in the National Assembly of Pakistan.

Media Training Seminar,PTC, Serena Hotel, Islamabad, 2nd October 2013

0

Dr. Pirzada participated in a seminar “Media Training for PTC” held at Serena Hotel Islamabad on 2nd October, 2013. It was organized for Pakistan Tobacco Company to familiarize its officers with media dynamics and how to interact with Print & Electronic Media during crises while conveying information about events & polices.

Dr. Pirzada also explained the techniques of effective presentation and confident public speaking with the help of humorous slides & videos.

Peacebuilding in Pakistan, Conflict Challenges, Lessons learned and Opportunities for Collaboration, Search For Common Ground (SFCG), Serena Hotel, Islamabad, 1st October 2013

0

peace buildingDr. Pirzada moderated a seminar, “Peacebuilding in Pakistan: Conflict Challenges, Lessons learned and Opportunities for Collaboration” supported by “SFCG” and “Danida” at Serena Hotel, Islamabad on 1st October, 2013.

The key objective of the event was to share field information about target communities attitudes and perceptions on issues of conflict, violence and peace in Pakistan.Key stake holders were engaged for an informed discussion on key findings and their meaning for contextualizing current conflicts and corresponding peace-building and stability efforts in Pakistan.

The inaugural session was chaired by Danish Ambassador Jesper M Sorensen, Senator Mushahid Hussain Syed, Secretary General, PML Q, Johan Sorensen, EU Charge d’Affaires, Ammara Durrani, Country Director, SFCG and Dr. Abid Qaiyum Suleri, SDPI, the seminar’s second session featured a robust discussion on the ongoing violence and its linkages with political and religious ideologies, terrorism, security challenges, social justice and cohesion, poverty and access to education and basic amenities.

Fighting TTP, Challenges Beyond Negotiations ?

0

Moeed Pirzada | The Nation |

The latest terrorist attack in Qissa Khwani Bazaar, Peshawar, on Sunday, third within the bloody week, since the attack on All Saints Church may now make Imran Khan and PTI look like political buffoons; but the way ANP – in its bid to politically capitalise on the tragedies – and some media commentators are gloating over PTI’s apparent disconnect from the seriousness of situation creates the impression as if these geniuses had some solution at hand which is not being implemented only for the intransigence of Imran Khan and PTI.

No denying that Imran Khan and PTI will have to grasp the fast-changing situation in their own selfish interest; they need reflection to come up with more convincing and persuasive arguments, than hitherto displayed, that can provide them a connect with their support base and wider public, otherwise PTI’s popularity can melt away the way frozen butter does in the sun. But the fate of Imran Khan and PTI are far less important than the fate of Pakistani nation, state and society, and this is what should concentrate our minds.

Negotiating with the TTP for peace, controversial to begin with, has now started to look far less promising to even those like PM Nawaz who had initially signaled his support in APC – and who really matters more than anyone else. However, it is important to understand that the nature of endless debate centered on “negotiations and pace”, “drone strikes”, “our war or American war” that has raged in Pakistan not for the past several months but years and its counter-debate with its own buzz words “this is our war”, “good Taliban bad Taliban”, etc has dangerously sidelined a far more important issue. And that is: irrespective of any negotiations for which we can continue to argue and disagree; state cannot abandon the responsibility to defend its cities, people and its vital strategic interests, but this is precisely what we have done in Pakistan.

Unfortunately both sides of the debate in Pakistan have been arguing from a maximalist position. Those who have been arguing for negotiations with TTP; pulling out of the US war, end of drone strikes and withdrawal of Pakistan army from the tribal areas – Imran Khan, Maulana Fazalur Rehman, Munawar Hassan for instance but many others in rank and file of PMLN – have created this impression as if once these conditions are met, most conflict or terrorism will end. This argument, irrespective of its merits, has an unintended consequence; and that is that we don’t need to develop modern sophisticated counter-terrorism ability for what we need is essentially a broad political settlement with our own estranged people.

On the other hand, a tiny but influential bunch of liberal theorists – mostly united in their love for whisky, hatred against Imran Khan, and other Islamist parties and genuinely afraid of the broader consequence of the growing ultra-religious conservatism – have tried to use this “war against terrorism” to advocate a broader agenda of fighting Islamism, and the societal tendencies that flow from it. Their buzz word is often “clarity” but they end up creating the impression that unless we decide to change the character of Pakistani state, its curricula, delete Objective Resolution from the Constitution, take forceful steps to neutralise the Kashmir-related militants and redefine our interests in Afghanistan, nothing can be achieved. Most issues this group agitates are vitally important considerations, have long-term implications but may not be readily achievable or even desirable to help in our immediate struggle against terrorism. The bottom line is that both sides of the Pakistani debate see an all or none kind of situation.

Both these absolutist or maximalist points of view need to move towards convergence. Together these ferociously opposing points of view – “our war” and “American war” – have not allowed us to focus seriously and sufficiently on increasing our capacity to protect ourselves. We have to realise that there can be no sudden or dramatic breakthrough in achieving peace; what we face today is “anarchism” and we will have to increase our ability to prevent ourselves and to fight it back. Without our ability to protect and hit back, militant groups or their “masters” will have little incentive to sue for peace. This is not a philosophical issue; most of that ability has to be technical, structural and legal. We need to gain greater control over the movement of men and material across our bridges, highways, and entry and exit points. For instance we should immediately introduce a concept of “registered keeper” for all vehicles. Only the registered keeper or his notified persons (family members or drivers dully notified to police) can operate a vehicle.

Police officers should have hand-held devices connected to central data systems from where identity of vehicles and registered keepers or notified persons can be checked within minutes. We need procedures to restrict, regulate and control vehicular entry into places of extreme public congestion like the Kisa Khwani or Liberty market, etc where a bomb explosion can create maximum impact. This is just one example; we need a whole regimen of procedures and capacities and that is simply not possible until we connect and guide all our assets of policing and intelligence from one platform like the National Counter Terrorism Authority. This is what Prime Minister Nawaz should think on after the Sunday attack in Kissa Khwani Bazar. Without this national ability – to protect and hit back – his desires for regional peace, investments, highways from Gawadar to Kashgar and his energy and water plans will remain pipe dreams.

Nightmare at All Saints Church, What Next?

0

Moeed Pirzada | The Nation |

The senseless massacre of innocent Christian worshippers – men, women and children – at the gates of ‘All Saints Church’ in Peshawar is unprecedented not only in Pakistan’s troubled Odyssey with TTP and other medieval reincarnations but also inks with blood and flesh a totally new chapter of Muslim Christian interaction in South Asia. Yet usual knee jerk apologies or explanations laced with jargon like: “terrorists have no religion”, or “fiery speeches by mullah “X” or anchor “Y” from pulpit or TV screen” etc will be misleading. Some papers and news agencies were quick to remind readers of “Gojra” or “Rimsha Masih” and “growing discrimination” against Christians. All such ills do exist and are a matter of shame for us but parading them as reasons for these acts of terrorism only help those who perpetrate these “crimes against humanity” and end up dividing and polarizing society and a political order that has to find a workable, sustainable counter strategy.

Many, me included, were always skeptical of the arguments advanced, the reasoning given and the understanding of underlying issues that crystallized in the form of political leadership’s APC on 9th September. Skeptics thought that the time for negotiations had not arrived; APC approach sends wrong signals and will have grave implications; brilliant analysis offered by Ejaz Haider (Defining this War, Tribune, 17th Sept) and Brig Imran Malik (A Monumental Folly, Nation, 22 Sept) said it all. We also cynically suspected that perhaps politician’s approach can be described as “Ahtemam-e-Hujat” (preparation to create the excuse).

However the assassination of Gen. Niazi (GOC Swat) and the mass murder at the ‘All Saints Church’ – both highly symbolic in nature apart from tragic – reveals something far more intriguing: it demonstrates, once and for all, that irrespective of all our reservations against APC – naivety displayed by politicians like Imran Khan, confusion by rank and file of PML-N, surrender to populism by Nawaz and rather sheepish behavior by the military establishment – there also existed a “strategic mind set” somewhere out there that was determined to defeat the reconciliatory political mood that lead to APC and was reinforced by it. And that too in a rush; But why?; answer to this strange question may be important for all of us, for the skeptics of APC wanted a well defined, orchestrated “counter-insurgency plan” a strategy to defeat these “medieval militants” and to end the reign of mayhem and chaos. But could the “strategic mind set” that is literally forcing us to pick up the gun and fight is also looking for the same end?

The events of the past two weeks since APC, were proof again, if one was needed, that TTP and other militant groups loosely aligned with it or just using its brand name as an “umbrella franchise” have no coherent, defined existence, shared ideology, political goals or consensus; the only thing that unites them from time to time is a common agenda to spread divisive hatred, instability and chaos. And if anything their antics, their behavior – for instance TTP’s inability to distance itself from the murder of GOC SWAT – gives credence to the argument that they are not even sovereign in their acts, and some or many of these may well be proxies of other forces around – Whether they take responsibility for an event or not is immaterial; for innumerable entities exist and new keep on emerging with fantastic names and with dizzying speed to take credit for the latest act of barbarity.

Much TV and media driven debate and even civil society discourse on TTP misses out these points for it attaches too much importance to the behavior and belief of the suicide bombers. But these bipedals are merely foot soldiers and that too: dehumanized zombies; human tools and products of a war machine that walk and identify their targets like newly-invented robotic creatures with limbs, optic and audio features. Israeli efforts to understand the phenomenon may be of help to us; while Muslims, British and European Left and many human right groups around the world kept on pointing towards the “human conditions” in West Bank and Gaza that lead to the creation of suicide bombers, Israeli analysts were adamant that “reaction theories” have little relevance; foot soldiers are irrelevant and pale into insignificance as compared to the role of “master trainers, financial sponsors and political support.

In case of Pakistan, TTP itself might only be a “multi-headed zombie” providing robotic limbs, eyes and ears to its master “strategic mindset” for inflicting another “thousand cuts”. As we prepare to fight – for no option is left – this aspect – that someone also wants to push us into this inferno at this moment in history – needs to be kept in mind; since we need to battle at multiple levels and that not only includes logistics, political will and finance but also managing diplomatic relations and communication strategies internally and externally. Not to forget reforming and adjusting the legal milieu and giving some “reality inducing injections” to our human right organizations so that they wake up to realize that flight from Brussels is over.

Whereas human right organizations and liberal pundits of fashionable “hate & mullah theories” “abolish death penalty” etc have to close ranks with the rest; one politician that desperately needs good amount of hot coffee is: Imran Khan. Though countless others – known and unknown mortals – can be blamed for naivety but Khan has been the biggest proponent of the “reaction theory”; he was again airing it in Peshawar when he expressed surprise that why something happens whenever peace is given a chance. The answer might come from the world of medical science. If you diagnose ‘meningitis’ as ‘meningeal cancer’ or ‘appendicitis’ as ‘gastroenteritis’ then the results can be disastrous. Nawaz, in London, has ably distanced himself from APC; it’s now time for Imran and his top advisers to huddle together in the pavilion – just like it is important for liberal anti-religious pot smokers to reflect on their mumbo jumbo- and realize that theories of “reaction” by “innocent self-respecting tribals” and “cruel drone strikes” have serious limitations in terms of defining and diagnosing TTP and all what it stands for.

Responsibilities and Ethics of Reporting in Disasters

0

National Disaster Management Authority invited Dr. Moeed Pirzada on August 5 2013 to give a lecture on “Responsibilities and Ethics of Reporting in Disasters”

Dr Moeed discussed very valuable point which were informative for the participants.

Egyptian crisis on the rise…!

Moeed Pirzada |

Egyptian Crisis is increasing! though by now there is little doubt that the US was behind creating this “military coup” (while US and EU are still trying to reinvent English language and dictionary by not admitting that “coup” is a “coup”) I suspect Obama Administration will have to surrender Gen. Sissi as a “hot potato” or “used condom” at some stage to make way for a “new solution”.

Read more: Is Trump condoning General Sissi’s terror on Egyptians?

We need to follow and understand the dynamics not for the love of Egypt or Islam or Arab world but because certain very fundamental principles of democracy are involved and are being reshaped; definition of democracy is being revised; whereas we know that Egyptian Liberals and Civil Society’s fears and frustrations have been exploited by the US, Israel and Army to push an agenda of their own, the failure of Muslim Brotherhood and Morsi is that they were not inclusive enough, they were not wise enough to understand that they have to take every one along, they had to take all stakeholders along; and the stakeholders are not only the Egyptian liberals but also the United States and Israel.

Islamists agenda often focuses disproportionately on forbidding Alcohol, controlling women, severe medieval era punishments, restrictive codes of dress and lifestyles that they are unable to be understood as anything else but “primitive”

Before your hands go for gun to kill me, let me add more; politics of high stakes is not black and white, it needs understanding and adjustments; Muslim Brotherhood knew that, they tried accommodating Israeli and the US concerns by accepting Camp David, by using military against Islamist groups in Sinai and by resisting Salafi demands to incorporate overt Islamic injunctions in the Egyptian Constitution, they tried many things to calm down the fears about them but they still failed for the reason that they had to accommodate their “Islamist support base” and this is where the real problem lies for all Islamists across the Muslim world including Pakistan.

Islamists agenda often focuses disproportionately on forbidding Alcohol, controlling women, severe medieval era punishments, restrictive codes of dress and lifestyles that they are unable to be understood as anything else but “primitive”; Islamist discourse has very little available on how governance can be improved in 21st century, how education, civic sense, quality of life, economic production and distribution can be improved….how a republic can be made to work the standard of living and quality of life in a rational way, since these things are not part of the discourse or not very visible all what Islamists believe in the end is that things will improve once Islam is enforced but what does that mean? sadly the enforcement of Islam (which was one of the biggest original revolutions humanity has seen) now only means symbolic things like forbidding Alcohol, bodily punishments, women in hijab or certainly not sleeveless or skirts, more men with beards, men and women not meeting freely, no gender relationships no love possible without getting married but men marrying many times is Islamic etc…

Read more: How Egyptian Courts failed its Spring Revolution? Story of hopes betrayed

Focus remains on these non-issues and Muslim politics fails to define itself about anything else; Islamists thus have no solution or even substantive argument for the challenges of modern republics in 21st century; this creates fears amongst all those who don’t agree with them; the Liberals who were afraid of Islamists have thus joined forces for various external elements like the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia who all wanted Muslim Brotherhood to fail for their own different reasons (Israel afraid of political empowerment of Hamas and Hellebore & Saudi Arabia afraid of change itself) …result is a total disaster for Egypt; I leave with this, since this is too much for many of you to hate me…but you need to question how has definition of democracy changed for ever with the failure of all sides in Egypt; this is what matters to us in Pakistan….best…

 

Moeed Pirzada is prominent TV Anchor & commentator; he studied international relations at Columbia Univ, New York and law at London School of Economics. Twitter: MoeedNj. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Global Village Space’s editorial policy. This piece was first published in Moeed Pirzada’s official page. It has been reproduced with permission.

Egyptian Crisis on the rise…!

1

Moeed Pirzada | FB Blog |

Egyptian Crisis is increasing! though by now there is little doubt that the US was behind creating this “military coup” (while US and EU are still trying to reinvent English language and dictionary by not admitting that “coup” is a “coup”) I suspect Obama Administration will have to surrender Gen. Sissi as a “hot potato” or “used condom” at some stage to make way for a “new solution”.

We need to follow and understand the dynamics not for the love of Egypt or Islam or Arab world but because certain very fundamental principles of democracy are involved and are being reshaped; definition of democracy is being revised; whereas we know that Egyptian Liberals and Civil Society’s fears and frustrations have been exploited by the US, Israel and Army to push an agenda of their own, the failure of Muslim Brotherhood and Morsi is that they were not inclusive enough, they were not wise enough to understand that they have to take every one along, they had to take all stakeholders along; and the stakeholders are not only the Egyptian liberals but also the United States and Israel.

Before your hands go for gun to kill me, let me add more; politics of high stakes is not black and white, it needs understanding and adjustments; Muslim Brotherhood knew that, they tried accommodating Israeli and the US concerns by accepting Camp David, by using military against Islamist groups in Sinai and by resisting Salafi demands to incorporate overt Islamic injunctions in the Egyptian Constitution, they tried many things to calm down the fears about them but they still failed for the reason that they had to accommodate their “Islamist support base” and this is where the real problem lies for all Islamists across the Muslim world including Pakistan.

Islamists agenda often focuses disproportionately on forbidding Alcohol, controlling women, severe medieval era punishments, restrictive codes of dress and lifestyles that they are unable to be understood as anything else but “primitive”; Islamist discourse has very little available on how governance can be improved in 21st century, how education, civic sense, quality of life, economic production and distribution can be improved….how a republic can be made to work the standard of living and quality of life in a rational way, since these things are not part of the discourse or not very visible all what Islamists believe in the end is that things will improve once Islam is enforced but what does that mean? sadly the enforcement of Islam (which was one of the biggest original revolutions humanity has seen) now only means symbolic things like forbidding Alcohol, bodily punishments, women in hijab or certainly not sleeveless or skirts, more men with beards, men and women not meeting freely, no gender relationships no love possible without getting married but men marrying many times is Islamic etc…

Focus remains on these non-issues and Muslim politics fails to define itself about anything else; Islamists thus have no solution or even substantive argument for the challenges of modern republics in 21st century; this creates fears amongst all those who don’t agree with them; the Liberals who were afraid of Islamists have thus joined forces for various external elements like the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia who all wanted Muslim Brotherhood to fail for their own different reasons (Israel afraid of political empowerment of Hamas and Hellebore & Saudi Arabia afraid of change itself) …result is a total disaster for Egypt; I leave with this, since this is too much for many of you to hate me…but you need to question how has definition of democracy changed for ever with the failure of all sides in Egypt; this is what matters to us in Pakistan….best…

Women Role in Development, Lead Pakistan, Serena Hotel, Islamabad, 25th July 2013

0

Dr. Pirzada moderated the panel discussion, “Women Role in Development” organized by Lead Pakistan at Serena Hotel Islamabad on 25th July, 2013. Panelist included: Dr. Akmal Hussain of BNU, Khawar Mumtaz, CEO Shirkatgah, Dr. Adil Najam, VC, Lums & Ali Tauqeer Sheikh CEO, Lead Pakistan.

Tonight with Moeed Pirzada (Exclusive Interview of Chairman PTI Imran Khan)

In an exclusive talk with Chairman Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf Imran, Dr. Pirzada raised important questions on KPK government’s reservations on Pakistan China Corridor. Dr. Pirzada raised questions in front of Imran Khan failed to understand actual CPEC routes & why KPK government is not starting new Projects?

Imran Khan briefed his position that they were unable to understand tricks of PMLN government as they kept them in complete dark on the Pakistan China Corridor details and said that if Election system reforms then everything will be fine in favour of Pakistan Democracy.

Erdogan’s Turkey: Hope for the politics of Muslim World?

Moeed Pirzada | Pique Magazine |

Few people in Pakistan have been able to fathom why the public protests in Turkey, that erupted in June, spreading from the epicenters of Taksim Square and Gezi Park in Istanbul to more than seventy Turkish cities especially Ankara and Izmir – with men and women, young and old battling with police – commanded such furious global attention. What after all is the importance of few hundred environmentalists resisting a development plan at a park? What is happening in Turkey today is fundamental to the future of countries like Pakistan, Iran, Egypt, Bangladesh and perhaps even Saudi Arabia. Many Pakistanis like most supporters of AKP, the Turkish ruling political party, in Istanbul’s Grand Bazaar or Mevlana Rum’s Konya were quick with their usual conspiratorial conjectures that these protests represented an American or western or still worse an Israeli plan to derail the Turkish economic miracle. This only demonstrates that despite endlessly repeating the mantras of “Muslim Ummah” we are woefully ignorant when it comes to the real dynamics of other Muslim societies – even if it as important as Turkey.

I am an over-active blogger on Face book; an obsession that is fast turning me into an undeclared professor, quite distinct from the role of a television anchor which defines my bread and butter. As I posted article after article from the New York Times and Economist and from Turkish papers like Hurriyet and Zaman, many were startled and jittery and accused me of being paid by the US embassy or State department for casting aspersions on great Turkish leadership or for working against Islam. But many also asked: what’s wrong with you? Why on earth are you so obsessed with Turkey? So let’s start by asking the questions: Why is Erdogan’s Turkey so important? What is different about Turkey that distinguishes it from all other Muslim countries and nations? What is the future of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk’s Turkey? Why US and Europe cannot afford to destabilize Turkey?

In the summer of 1993, Professor Samuel Huntington penned down what turned out to the be the most controversial, most read, debated, cherished, and reviled policy paper of the second half of 20th century. “Clash of Civilization”,first published by Foreign Affairs, was later turned into a book that was endlessly condemned by Muslim scholars. True to our ingrained habits, few bothered to read it carefully for they would have found a section dedicated to the Muslim world’s dilemma of not having a model state that could lead or inspire the rest of the Muslim world with its experience, its history and its institutions.

Huntington discussed one by one: nuclear but impoverished, unstable Pakistan; oil rich but Shia Iran; fabulously wealthy but politically primitive Saudi Arabia; moderate Indonesia disjointed from Muslim narrative and historically rich but troubled Egypt. After an academic catwalk of Muslim societies, he zeroed in on Turkey. He argued that Atatruk’s modern Sunni secular state, with glorious history of the Ottomon Emprie and Caliphate behind it, a bridge between East and the West, with its linguistic and cultural influence across Central Asia, is definitely that potential leader of the Muslim world.

But he observed: unfortunately modern Turkey is holding a begging bowl at the doorsteps of Europe, being humiliated and rebuffed for almost 40 years. Huntington argued that may be one day Turkey will realize that a far more majestic future lies ahead if it decides to claim its leadership of the past. We don’t know if Recep Tayyib Erdogan, Turkey’s charismatic Prime Minister, ever read or believed in what Huntington wrote; but with his eleven years of leadership of the ruling AKP and his life long struggle behind it, he has gradually brought Turkey to the pedestal from where it can begin to claim the leadership of the past. Turkish economy has continuously grown for the past decade at an average rate of 5-6%, which has baffled the economic wizards of Europe.

Erdogan has won plaudits at home and across the world for his handling of the Kurdish militancy, taming of the assertive military, reform of the judiciary, improvement of human rights and a more robust approach towards Europe. In his best seller ‘The Next Hundred Years’, George Friedman, founder of intelligence forecasting company, Stratfor, predicts Turkey to be a bigger and more important political power than India with its potential to collaborate with China and challenge the west. Futuristic speculations may have started to show; such is the growing importance of Turkey that in his latest book, ‘Dispensable Nation: American Foreign Policy in Retreat’, Professor Vali Nasr mentions that in his years as President, Barrack Obama has spent more time talking with Erdogan of Turkey than any other leader. But Vali Nasr also describes the alarm bells that rung from Washington to Brussels to Moscow when in 2010 Erdogan joined hands along with Lula Da Silva of Brazil in persuading Iran to a meaningful dialogue; panicked American and Russians both shot down the possibility mostly for the fear of losing leadership the new emerging powers.

This is the background, the context, which makes the recent jolts that emanated from Taksim Square so important. Erdogan is the most important Turkish leader after Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who fashioned the republic after the end of Caliphate. But there is also the opposite face of the enigmatic Turkish coin: Ataturk founded a fiercely secular state that often went berserk in suppressing Islam’s role in politics and society. Erodgan, a victim of that secular state, captured power with promises of providing individual freedoms similar to the British model but has raised fears of creeping Islamization in which seculars and minorities can become second class fringe elements.

Nothing like that has happened; not so far. But the gradual actions of AKP in outmaneuvering the secular military, changing the complexion of judiciary, alleged control of media ownerships and the recent actions of regulating the sale and advertisements of alcohol have all provided the milieu in which diverse interests ranging from environmentalists, secular elite, pro-European media, feminists and other shades of minority opinion have started to rally around fears engendered by what they describe as growing “authoritarianism” of Erdogan. Economist of London in one its June editions echoed the feelings of Gezi Park when it wrote that, “Turks won’t let a middle class democrat become an Ottoman Sultan”. Is Erdogan really on his way to become the “Ottoman Sultan” his opponents fear? His statements, his choice of words to describe the protestors as “looters”, his snubbing of his party leaders like President Abdullah Gul and senior politician Bulent Arinc and his final decision to clear the Gezi Park by police action have all given oxygen to the fire of growing allegations.

Today Ankara and Izmir are far more European cities than Orhan Pamuk’s enigmatic Istanbul and here you find the most vocal critics of Erdogan who loathe him as a dictator. But this should not misguide any casual observer to the width and depth of popularity Erdogan and AKP enjoy amongst the more conservative sections of Turkish society. Like Nawaz Sharif and PMLN in Pakistan, Erdogan derives his support from the business communities of all kinds, sizes and forms across Turkey. For shopkeepers and traders in Grand Bazaar of Istanbul and markets of Konya and NevSehir and for service providers in Gorem, Erodgan is undoubtedly the great savior who has given them abundant bread, lots of butter and amazing doses of self-respect and confidence. A successful hotelier made me sit till early hours in the morning to describe in detail how his business life and career changed under the low interest rates Erdogan has managed. Others start crying with emotions while expressing their love for Erdogan. No one in our living imagination since the days of ZA Bhutto – the original Bhutto – has inspired such belief and passions.

This level of trust and love for Erdogan in itself is seen as a threat by the likes of those who had assembled at Taksim Square. But this is not all; most of these AKP supporters unabashedly use four letter words to give vehemence to their feelings about Mustafa Kemal Ataturk – the founder of the republic. But then there are countless others who worship Ataturk, adorning his beautiful portraits, often multiple, in the same office or study. Turkey is certainly a very polarized society. But a top official, who has the eyes and often ears of Erdogan, confided to me that deep inside Erdogan himself realizes that today’s achievements would not have been possible without the path to modernization which Ataturk set into motion. Several months ago, Erdogan offended many die hard Islamists of Muslim Brotherhood and Salafis in Egypt by openly telling them that Eygpt needs to adopt a secular path.

Will Huntington’s prophecy of Turkey providing leadership to the Muslim world come true? This all depends upon how this most promising and the most charismatic of the leaders of the Muslim world manages to take along the diverse and opposing emotions he has unleashed. Muslim world’s tragedy lies in not finding a political model that can combine modernity with popular democracy.

Elitist models of modernity were tried in countries as diverse as Algeria, Morocco, Iran, Iraq, Egypt and Pakistan. In the end, they all failed, replaced by either military or party dictatorships or unstable majoritarian democracies like in Pakistan or Bangladesh that are unable to connect with the modern world for they often fail to realize that brute populism is only one aspect of democracy; liberal constitutionalism is another.

Kemalist Turkey laid the foundations of a modern state but it suppressed the religious and ethnic freedoms. Erdogan’s new Turkey – despite its bumps on the road – still holds the placard of hope for all of us.

The writer is a known columnist, media critic and Tv anchor. Director@media-policy.com & facebook.com/MoeedPirzada

India and Other Tests

Moeed Pirzada | PIQUE |

Nawaz Sharif and his foreign policy team should thank their stars that Afghanistan, and the U.S. withdrawal from there won’t drain their cerebral energies. This has been a front where C.I.A., Pentagon, Obama’s National Security team and Pakistani establishment have been fighting pitched battles for every centimeter and for every knot of an agreement.

And now when there is some semblance of stability after the reopening of NATO supplies, none of these powerful players will permit any sudden brain waves from a new government in Islamabad to disturb the carefully balanced apple cart.

But that does not mean that Sharif will have an easy time on the diplomatic front. He faces formidable challenges in dealing with the demands and expectations of a growing Indo-U.S. regional nexus that will push him to grant more and more space to India within Pakistan without offering any parallel concessions in return. Also, he will find it difficult to leverage the support of his Saudi mentors without alienating a suspicious Iran.

He desperately needs his Saudi allies to bail him out on the energy and economic front. There have been carefully planted news in print and e-media that hints at Saudis offering deferred payments for 100,000 barrels a day of crude petroleum and 15000 tons of furnace oil amounting to a fiscal space of around $15 billion, and that those details would be settled during Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s first visit to Saudi Arabia in June.

Denials to this effect have also made it to print. But all of this, even if it materializes, may come at a price. Many have already predicted a shelving of the Iran-Pakistan gas pipe line project, though some also argue that this may provide Pakistan an opportunity to negotiate a better price from Iran and that such a provision exists in the contract.

However, one should not forget the U.S. reservations on the Iranian gas, unambiguously expressed by the State Department in March this year when President Zardari inaugurated the project at Chabahar. PML-N team has therefore, already taken this cautious position that they first needed to analyze the feasibility of the Iran-Pakistan gas pipe line project before deciding anything.

PML-N foreign policy team’s abilities will also be tested in terms of relations with Putin’s Russia where the PPP government had taken some careful initiatives and the principled position which Pakistan’s foreign office had taken on the insurgency inside Syria where Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries, with open support from the U.S. and its allies, have been supporting a bloody civil war to overthrow the “Alawite regime” (a Shia sect); a strategy that is being effectively resisted by both Russia and China.

Pakistan’s relations with the U.S. have always been difficult and complex. However, as mentioned at the outset many challenges of the immediate nature for the next 18 months have been resolved in the kind of understandings and bargains built in the reset of U.S.-Pakistan relations during the reopening of NATO supplies.

President Obama’s new position on “Drone Strikes” during his address at the National Defense University in the third week of May, tantamount to a phased withdrawal of the use of drones. Though this is mostly a result of hard positioning by Pakistani establishment after Salala tragedy, as discussed in the Prof. Vali Nasr’s new book Dispensable Nation and Imran Khan’s relentless campaigns that turned “Drones” into a major political issue but its benefit will accrue to PML-N government that can claim credits of a break through due to strong and wise positioning by Nawaz Sharif.

Pakistan’s lay media keeps on harping themes of conservative Sharif’s widely exaggerated links with sectarian organizations, sympathy for Taliban and fears in western minds about PML-N’s Islamist support base. Most of this is utter nonsense.

The reality is that since 2008, Sharif has worked carefully and diligently to build bridges of trust with the U.S. and its western allies; its skilled public relations exercise, its strategic relations with a powerful section of print and electronic media, its ability to stay on the right side of judiciary and track record of relatively better governance in Punjab with stories of a workaholic chief minster have all contributed to international community seeing PML-N as the desired regime for an economically challenged Pakistan that needs stability and strong governance. Much of that goodwill towards Sharif is also a result of the deep frustration which the U.S. and its western partners increasingly felt for the Zardari government’s non-serious attitude towards issues of governance and its overall dismal performance. This should explain the warm and effusive welcome PML-N victory received from the U.S. and U.K. despite widespread allegations of rigging that started to appear in the media about an election that has been perhaps, the most robustly contested vote since 1977.

This warm welcome has some difficult expectations woven into it. The most challenging one relates to speedy “normalization of relations” with India. This euphemistic term mostly means Pakistan uncritically yielding on many issues without the careful process of negotiations that is needed. The first such test lies on “MFN status for India” which was almost done by PPP government but then got stalled due to internal rethink within a Zardari government that really wanted to deliver on it.

The unusually friendly gestures towards India which Sharif made during the last few days of his election campaign and immediately after the elections were all geared towards reassuring the international community about his intentions to embrace India. This also helps understand the kind of pressure he is under from the U.S.

Sharif and the powerful business community of Lahore that supports him, including some top financial figures of the country, also conclude and correctly that increased trade with India, and possible Indian investments, will give breathing space to Pakistani economy and they hope that it may help to reduce Indian intransigence towards the Pakistani state which is beset with multiple insurgencies and other crises.

However, Sharif’s embrace of India may not be all that easy for reasons beyond his control. His predecessors were no less eager to move towards India but were often rebuffed by an Indian attitude that welcomes whatever it could extract but does not want to make unnecessary concessions to what they perceive as a failing Pakistan. And soon this will be an election year in India making it difficult for politicians to show any flexibility.

Sharif’s initial over-excitement of inviting Manmohan Singh to his inauguration met with a discouraging response, and his own support base across Punjab — unlike PPP — is strongly conservative and nationalistic which will make it difficult for him and PML-N to make the U.S.’s desired unilateral progress towards India without getting parallel responses from across the border.

Tonight With Moeed Pirzada & Syed Munawar Hassan (JI)

Dr Moeed pirzada raised question that why jamat Islami losing its popularity which was once a popular political Islamic party and even other Islamic movements in the world took inspirations from Jamat Islami . Dr Pirzada asked that why party didn’t perform well in elections 2013. Answering this questions Syed Munawar Hassan pointed out role of agencies in Elections 2013.

In an exclusive talk interview with Jamat islami former Ameer Munawar Hassan discussed role of agencies during elections in PAKISTAN. He said not only Jamat islami but all parties even winning parties also pointed out rigging in elections 2013 all over the country. He said that media also has proofs and it will be unveiled after few years. Jamat Islami’s role, importance, future and relevance in Pakistan’s politics were discussed in the interview.