Surrender at Faizabad

As distressing as it is the humiliating capitulation of the State before a small religio-political party, Tehreek Labbaik Ya Rasool Allah (TLYRA), should not be so surprising. It is symptomatic of a chronic malaise afflicting this state and society: use of the fair name of the religion by power elites to play politics or settle scores with one another.
It all started with the change in the voters oath, which the government acknowledged as an inadvertent mistake, and immediately restored the original wording of oath. Yet overlooked by all the political parties but discovered by a JUI-F Senator, the change served as ammunition for people like Sheikh Rashid and JI chief Siraj-ul-Haq with which to assail the government. A more mystifying role was played by Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif who is said to have a working relationship with various extremist groups. He was the first to ask his party leader and older brother, Mian Nawaz Sharif, in an open party meeting to sack the Law Minister, without success though. TLYRA, of course, would not be true to its cause if it did take up the issue. It was founded in the name of Punjab governor Salmaan Taseer's assassin, Mumtaz Qadri - executed after due process - and yet the Election Commission had no qualms about registering it as a political party, putting its seal of approval on religious vigilantism.
Interestingly, according to Punjab government spokesman, Malik Muhammad Ahmad Khan, TLYRA agitators were allowed to embark on their mission to seek the Law Minister's resignation after several days of negotiations. Only the Punjab government knows why could they not be persuaded to give up that plan. What they did at Faizabad and later in other cities, attacking the police and homes of different ruling party leaders needs no repetition here. It is worth noting though that before these people called off their show in an Army-brokered agreement, Shahabaz Sharif met with the minister in question, and announced he would be tendering in his resignation. Soon afterwards, the Minister of State for Information Maryam Aurangzeb took to the Twitter to refute the resignation reports. The contradiction can be attributed to confusion and incompetence with which the federal government dealt with the problem; it is reflective too of the power struggle within the Sharif family. The younger Sharif brother has consistently been taking a line on the issue different than that of the Centre. His aim was, is, to achieve two things in one go: appeasement of the religious lobby and to deflect from him the not so hidden anger of certain quarters.
To put things in perspective, a little recall of a recent event is in order. Captain Safdar, husband of Nawaz Sharif's politically ambitious daughter Maryam Nawaz - generally clueless but in this case believed to be properly prepared - delivered a hate-filled speech in the National Assembly against a minority community demanding its members' expulsions from judicial and military positions, indirectly targeting the higher judiciary and the Army leadership. That offence could not be forgiven or forgotten. Payback time did not take long in coming.
The Federal government misread and mishandled the sit-in right from the beginning. No effort was made to break the gathering when its size was quite small. Nor to stop the arrival of more and more protesters and the supply of food and water to them. The Interior Minister relied instead on gentle persuasion through some other religious personalities' mediation, which didn't work. It was only after the Supreme Court and the Islamabad High Court (IHC) intervened to order the government to remove the protesters causing immense hardships to the public that it was decided to do something practical. That something turned out to be an ill-planned police action that ended in an embarrassing reversal. The Army was called out for help but it excused itself, citing IHC order that no firearms be used against the protesters. In its directive the court had chosen to ignore the vital detail that in a crisis situation whosoever in charge, the civil administration or security officials, has to decide on the basis of prevailing conditions the level of force to be employed. Hence the soldiers could shrug off their shoulders. But they wouldn't want to let the opportunity go by to get back at those who not only constantly blamed them for their troubles in the Panama Paper case but also tried to cast aspersions on the religious beliefs of the Army leadership. In other words, some people had to be given a taste of their own medicine.
So it has been. In a civil-military huddle on Sunday, the Army chief was reported as telling the Prime Minister "as the people of Pakistan love and have trust in the Army, it cannot be compromised for little gains." He also asked the government to "identify and punish" those (the Law Minister?) responsible for creating a chaotic situation. It was at the same meeting that the government willy-nilly gave its assent to an Army-brokered deal with the protesters. The six-point deal turned out to be surrender of the State before a mob led by TLYRA exploiting religious sensitivities for political purposes. As per the deal, the minister was made to resign and the government to release all protesters arrested for involvement in violence that claimed seven lives, including that of a policeman. It was also agreed to establish an inquiry board to investigate and decide what action to take against police officials-doing their lawful duty- who conducted the Nov. 25 operation, and further that the federal and provincial governments would compensate for the loss -caused by TLYRA activists-to public and private properties all through the sit-in. Last but not least, Army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa and his team of negotiators were thanked for their "efforts" that led to the agreement "saving the nation" from a "colossal tragedy." Who made 'little gains' in this disgraceful compromise is obvious enough.
What is also obvious enough is that this one-sided agreement will further embolden the religious-right to blackmail anyone getting on their wrong side. Rational discussion of issues and concerns will become more difficult than it already is. In fact, the party has come up with a long list of new demands, such as that registration of blasphemy cases be further simplified; its two representatives included in a panel assigned to decide changes in textbooks; annual observance of Nov 25; revival of the Nov 9 Iqbal Day holiday; and that the foreign and interior ministries take steps for the release of Dr Aafia Siddiqui. In short, a handful of self-appointed religious leaders have been given to believe they can arrogate to themselves the right to dictate government policies. Some of the power elites may have made gains, others losses. But the weapon all have been using at one time or another to achieve their worldly objectives can be turned against anyone, landing this society in more chaos than the one that is claimed to have been averted.
[email protected]