Pakistan's constitution makes the country a parliamentary democracy where a prime minister chosen by the National Assembly heads a federal cabinet that formulates policies that are accountable to the parliament. One reason why the indirect presidential election in Pakistan is accorded an unusually passionate involvement that can be matched only by a multi-party direct parliamentary election is that the heads of state have usually been keen on deciding the fate of governments and parliaments.

Under the original 1973 constitution, the position of president in Pakistan has been titular with actual powers vested with the prime minister. However, at various times in history, often related with military coups and the subsequent return of civilian governments, changes in the constitution have altered the powers and privileges associated with the office of the president. The current constitution -- thanks to the 17th Amendment -- empowers the president to dissolve the National Assembly. Additionally, the president also chairs the National Security Council that serves as a supra-parliament body and appoints the heads of the armed forces. The president can serve a maximum of two terms and the only way he can be removed is through impeachment by a two-thirds vote by the parliament.

This president-friendly political template has been engineered by the powerful military and thereby serves as an omnipotent incentive for its perennial involvement in politics, even during periods it is not in direct control. That Pakistan has been ruled for more than half its 60-year life by the military says it all.

A quid pro quo that isn't

General Pervez Musharraf's offer to the Supreme Court to quit the army as a quid pro quo for becoming president for another five-year term may be ascribed by some as a signal of a weakening military-institutional resolve after another long stint in power or even altruistic at a personal level but at close scrutiny proves that it is anything but. By retaining the all powerful Article 58(2)(b), he will still be able -- without his much maligned khaki uniform on -- to dissolve the National Assembly (and the provincial assemblies through governors that he appoints) thus ensuring that a tradition that goes back nearly 25 years stays. A tradition that's the means for the military to sack popularly elected governments in case they get the wrong idea about cutting the army down to size.

Witness the sacked governments of Muhammad Khan Junejo (once), Benazir Bhutto (twice) and Nawaz Sharif (twice). These were by both uniformed (General Ziaul Haq) and civilian (Ghulam Ishaq Khan and Farooq Leghari) presidents. In the case of the civilian presidents, the dissolution of parliament and sacking of government came with army-president collusion. In the only instance that a president wielded the axe without military connivance (Ishaq's dismissal of the first Nawaz government) the military sent the president packing as well.

A comparative analysis of how Pakistani heads of state have been elected reveals the 'beauty' of 'beastly' system -- authority without accountability: presidents are not directly elected yet they can get away with blue murder, taking credit for good things and blaming the prime minister for all that is bad. The institutionalisation of authoritarianism in Pakistan has been how constitutions have been authored or soiled (in the case of the 1973 constitution -- the only one that put people at the centre). It all started with the 1956 constitution framed by Prime Minister Muhammad Ali in which Pakistan's status as a dominion ended and the country was declared an Islamic republic. Thereupon the Constituent Assembly became the interim National Assembly.

Governor General Ghulam Muhammad was ousted by a group of collaborators led by Iskander Mirza, who proclaimed himself the first president of Pakistan as the constitution vested the executive authority of the president in the Federation. He had the discretionary powers to appoint and dismiss a prime minister from within a unicameral legislature. He abused his powers by appointing and dismissing Muhammad Ali Bogra, Hussain Shaheed Suharwardy, I.I Chundrigar and Malik Feroz Khan Noon as prime ministers. Mirza's joys were, however, short lived; in October 1958, martial law was promulgated by General Ayub Khan who later arrested and exiled Mirza to UK where he died.

Democrats and Dictators

Ayub Khan suspended martial law and proclaimed the constitution of 1962. Presidential elections were held in January 1965, and he defeated Fatima Jinnah in a heavily manipulated election to once again become the 'elected' president (this was a two-race referendum, a model later modified by General Ziaul Haq and General Pervez Musharraf to a one-horse race where they 'automatically' became 'popularly elected' heads of state). Ayub changed electoral rules in his favour and himself presided over his elections, denying media coverage to Ms Jinnah and himself basking in it. Had the elections been held via direct ballot, Ms Jinnah would have won. The Electoral College consisted of only 80,000 'Basic Democrats,' who were easily manipulated by Ayub. However, under mounting public protest, Ayub resigned in March 1969 and handed power to General Yayha Khan.

President General Yahya held Pakistan's first parliamentary elections -- believed to be the country's freest and fairest -- that returned majorities for Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's Awami League in East Pakistan and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's Pakistan Peoples Party in West Pakistan. Pakistan's greatest tragedy ensued when transfer of power could not take place and East Pakistan seceded to become Bangladesh after a brute war with India presided by General Yahya who transferred power to Bhutto who in turn became first president and then prime minister.

For the first time, a full fledged parliamentary system came into place with Bhutto as prime minister and titular Fazal Elahi Chaudhry as president. The system was institutionalised in the shape of the 1973 constitution, a seminal document that has never been bettered, only abused ever since.

General elections were held in March 1977. The PPP won but was accused by their opponents of rigging the elections. A week later the opposition alliance started a series of nationwide protests. Talks between the alliance and the Bhutto government were held in June and an agreement was reached but could not be implemented and fresh elections were announced for October 15. But on July 5 the army struck again and General Ziaul Haq imposed martial law and suspended the constitution. Infamously, elections were promised in 90 days but never held. In 1979, General Zia banned political parties. In March 1981 a provisional constitution was enforced.

Pseudo-democracy

General Zia established a pseudo-democratic order that made him president under a civilian setup. Under his scheme, he first established the Majlis-e-Shoora, which was without any legislative powers. In 1984 he then went about becoming an 'elected' president through a referendum with a trick question that was so worded that a "Yes" meant that Zia himself would be further endorsed, even though the referendum did not refer to this directly!

In 1985 he held party-less elections with drastic changes to rules in the Political Parties Act of 1962 that disqualified many and fathered a post-election Muslim League from within parliament. After nominating Muhammad Khan Junejo as prime minister in March 1985, he lifted martial law but not before having the National Assembly (with powers to legislate) validate his rule under the Revival of Constitutional Order and inserting the 8th Amendment. It altered the 1973 constitution, changing 19 of its clauses and affecting a virtually presidential system. The president was given the right to nominate the prime minister, governors, judges of the high courts and Supreme Court, including their chief justices and appoint the armed forces chiefs. In the constitution that empowered him to dissolve parliament, thus continuing military domination from behind the scenes.

In 1988, President General Zia sacked the Junejo government and dissolved parliament and ordered fresh elections in November 1988. He was killed in a mysterious plane crash in August. Chairman Senate Ishaq Khan took over as acting president. He held elections on schedule and appointed Benazir as prime minister after her party emerged as the biggest party but not without forcing her to support him as her official candidate in the forthcoming presidential elections. He won the election and became president.

However, the contortion Zia laws giving the president more powers than the prime minister led to severe conflicts between Benazir and Ishaq. Ishaq invoked Article 58(2) (b) to sack Bhutto's government. Ensuing elections in October 1990 brought Nawaz Sharif to power. However, the hybrid presidential-parliamentary system led to a repeat of conflicts between president and prime minister over exercise of executive powers and Ishaq dismissed Nawaz and dissolved parliament in April 1993. Elections were scheduled for July but were cancelled after Supreme Court quashed the Presidential Order as mala fide and reinstated Nawaz as prime minister. The resulting tensions became so high that the army had to step in and order both Ishaq and Nawaz out in July.

When 'our' man is always 'their' man

Ishaq was appointed caretaker president and Moeen Qureshi the caretaker prime minister. They held elections that returned Benazir to power with a coalition mandate in November. The same month Benazir nominated close confidante Farooq Leghari for president. He won but in less than two years Benazir found the rules of the game stacked against her and the unthinkable happened: a diehard Pipliya sacked his own parent party's government. The lesson was clear: you can put your man in the Aiwan-e-Sadr but the rules governing it are imposed by the army.

The ensuing elections brought Nawaz back to power -- this time with an unprecedented two-thirds 'heavy' mandate. To consolidate his gains, Nawaz successfully wooed Benazir to restore the constitutional balance in favour of the prime minister by undoing Article 58(2) (b). The 13th Amendment was put before the National Assembly in April 1997 and approved with two-thirds majority, empowering the prime minister to repeal 58(2) (b) and advise the president on the appointments of armed forces chiefs and provincial governors. The power of the governor to dissolve the provincial assemblies was also done away with. Such was the tense history of president-prime minister relations; however, Leghari and Nawaz also had a falling out over the former's support for Chief Justice Sajjad Ali Shah. Leghari resigned, his resignation playing out the tragic drama of conflict and conspiracy between the executive, legislature and the judiciary.

The Empire strikes back

After the passage of 13th Amendment just when it appeared that a complicated constitutional issue was solved in an amicable way through consensus, and hopes grew of a new era of political stability, the military struck again when Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif sacked army chief General Pervez Musharraf and appointed a replacement. General Musharraf and his army rebelled, staged a coup, overthrew the prime minister, dissolved parliament and began another long spell of military rule. The elaborate but tired Zia era callisthenics were employed again -- a farcical referendum was held and the army chief became an 'elected' president. The Legal Framework Order, through the 17th Amendment, validated the extra-constitutional military rule, re-empowered the president to sack governments, dissolve parliament, and appoint armed forces chiefs, governors and judges.

The parliament may have completed its tenure but three prime ministers were changed. Former and deposed prime ministers were exiled, chief ministers jailed or bombed to death. The president may yet take off his uniform (after nine years people have gone to sleep waiting for it) but as president for another term he will still be a former general (another first negative in national history) with deep ties with the military and he will unsurprisingly be still armed with the powers to sack governments and dissolve parliament.

President Musharraf and his regime are believed to be squandering billions of rupees from the state exchequer on self projection for the upcoming presidential elections. According to some news reports, the present administration has planned to spend seven billion rupees from the state resources on promotion and publicity of President Pervez Musharraf in particular and the government in general.

"General Musharraf and Chief Minister Punjab Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi have spent more than two billion rupees during the last 30 days on their self-projection in print and electronic media," PML-N secretary information Ahsan Iqbal tells TNS. He alleges this amount is being taken from the World Bank loans for education and health sector reform programmes. "It is being spent on the image-building campaigns of individuals. Though later it will have to be paid by the people of Pakistan," he says.

Ahsan says the Musharraf government cannot distort facts by jugglery of numbers and colourful advertisements. "There has been three times increase in the prices of food items in the last eight years of Musharraf's rule. According to a study, during the last eight years, only seven per cent of population has experienced increase in income whereas for the remaining 93 per cent the income levels have declined," he says. "74 per cent of the population has fallen under US$ two per day poverty line," according to World Bank figures, he says.

Justice (r) Wajihuddin Ahmed, contesting the presidential election against General Musharraf, thinks the present state-sponsored election campaign of Musharraf is completely illegal. "It is not fair by any means to allow one candidate to use state machinery and billions of rupees from taxpayers' money while other have not been provided an opportunity even to address their electoral college -- the parliamentarians. Election Commission should give us this opportunity but the Chief Election Commissioner has become a party in the presidential elections. It seems a person who is also the head of Pakistan army is allowed to do whatsoever he wants. He is wasting money of the people of Pakistan and should be stopped from doing so," he says.

PPP candidate Makhdoom Amin Fahim says the government is trying to rig the presidential elections. "Being the president Musharraf does enjoy certain privileges; but he should remember that now he is also a candidate and a candidate is not allowed to use state resources." He says Election Commission should come forward to stop Musharraf.

According to PPP Central Deputy Information Secretary Sajjad Bokhari the government is spending more than Rs10 million per day on its commercial campaign in newspapers and TV channels. "We have come to know that this money is being taken from education, health and even from earthquake relief fund," he tells TNS.

Election commission officials are not ready to talk on the presidential elections. Secretary Election Commission of Pakistan, Kanwar Muhammad Dilshad, tells TNS that according to election rules and regulations no specified limit of amount is mentioned which a candidate cannot cross while campaigning. He refused to answer further queries from TNS saying "please keep me out of this issue."

Experts think elections must provide a level playing field to all candidates. "If there is no limit of expenditure mentioned for presidential election candidate, even then Gen. Musharraf cannot be allowed to spend billions from state resources. He should spend as much money as he wants but from his own pocket," says Mukhtar Ahmad Ali, Executive Director, Centre for Peace and Development Initiatives, Pakistan. According to him present massive advertisement campaign of President Musharraf is deliberately timed around the presidential elections "which is against the rules and ethics." He says that Punjab government has recently announced an allowance of Rs 500 to 65,000 people in the province which is also a deliberate effort to buy the votes of poor as political people will nominate those who are eligible for this allowance.

Musharraf loyalists are not ready to call these activities 'illegal'. Chaudhry Shahbaz Hussain, Federal Minister for Population Welfare and a close aide of president Musharraf tells TNS that blame game is being played as a tool in elections in our country. "President Musharraf announced his candidacy last year and his recent visits to different provinces are not part of election campaign. In fact the programmes such as inaugurations of different development plans had been scheduled earlier and he is going there as president of the country," he says, adding one should ask Justice (r) Wajihudin Ahmed and his team where are they getting money for their campaign.

According to the federal minister this is election year and the advertisements in the newspapers are not meant for personal publicity of General Pervez Musharraf or Chauhdry Pervaiz Elahi or anybody else. "In fact we are trying to convey to the people of Pakistan what we as government have done for them during the last five years," he says adding that it is propaganda that seven billion rupees are being spent on the publicity of President Musharraf or Chauhdry Pervaiz Elahi.

Justice (r) Tariq Mahmood, ex-member Election Commission of Pakistan and a close aide of Justice (r) Wajihuddin Ahmed, tells TNS that election commission 'if wants' can ask candidates to play within the rules and regulations. He thinks that the original loss is of the people who will have to pay many times more than seven billion rupees "since last three months, the presidential election and its related activities have overlapped with most of the business activities in country. If some government department dares counting this damage it may end in billions."

According to him the lawyer community itself is making arrangements for the expenditures on election campaign of Justice (r) Wajihuddin Ahmed. "During his campaign, he always travels in economy class and stays in cheap hotels in different cities. His expenditures on visiting a city are not more than Rs 20, 000 to 30,000," he says.

Tariq says Musharraf's position in present circumstances is apparent, then why is he wasting people's money. "In fact he knows that his image in public has been badly damaged and he is trying to improve it, but he should not do so using state resources."

Alhamra has been holding festivals of music -- first it was the festival of classical forms of music, then the ghazal festival and last week a two day qawwali event was organised in which Mehr Ali, Sher Ali, Sikander Badar Miandad, Maulvi Muhammed Hussain Azhar, Riaz Ali Ejaz Ali and Kashif Mastana took part. As it is, in deference to the holiness of the month qawwali recitals on all the television channels and the radio networks round the clock have become a permanent feature in Ramzan and Alhamra too driven by the same motive chimed in to organise the two day event.

Mehr Ali and Sher Ali have emerged as the most significant of the qawwal groups after the stage had been vacated by the three giants of qawwali -- Nusrat Fateh Ali, Sabri Bradaraan and Aziz Mian. These three rose to prominence almost at the same time and then died rather young, in the prime of their creative lives, leaving a void that has been hard to fill. Mehr Ali and Sher Ali are qawwals in the traditional mould. They do not experiment by crossing the limits imposed by the forms and yet are innovative. Their greatest advantage is that they are highly in tune, something that you cannot say about every qawwal and their selection of the kalam is not exclusively dictated by contemporary concerns has placed them ahead of the pack.

The musicians in our tradition including the qawwals have never been educated in the formal sense but due to the structure of society and the close knit institutional setup were educated informally. Somehow they understood the relationship of the note with the word not as a scholar as the poets and the critics expected them to but in its finer musical aspects of tonal nuance and shades. Now that the institutional setup is not that closely knit and society too is spinning on more than one pivot the informal input in the education of musicians has become a trickle. The bond is loosening and threatening the basis of the assumption on which the entire musical edifice has rested.

As is the wont the meteoric rise of the qawwali maestros was a great incentive for others to follow and many qawwals, most of them younger, were seen to imitate the great masters who had made a name for themselves even on the international circuit, dreaming of achieving their dizzying heights. But the quality of qawwali recitals by these groups has been quite ordinary if not poor. The younger generation of qawwals unfortunately do not measure up to the high level of musical performance that had been established by the elder generation. For example Sher Miandad, Muazzam, Fareed Ayaz, Abu Muhammed, Rahat Fateh Ali Khan and Amjad Maqbool Sabri are no patch on their elders.

Qawwali is still popular in the West and other countries but not as popular as it was in the recent past because the musical quality has shown a great fall. The musicality in qawwali was what appealed to the people all over the world because they were not aware of the language in which it was being sung. The audiences were mesmerised by the qawwali beat and the passionate rhythmic design meant indigenously to create a kind of fevered trance. The altered consciousness, haal, has always been part of our culture.

The base of the qawwali is the text. It means in straight terms the singing of the text, the sacred text, either the verses from the holy quran or sayings of the prophet (pbuh) and the text of the poets, Sufi poets who about all subscribed to the broad based theories of "wahdatul wajood"

What could be the main reasons for the declining standards of the qawwali. The qawwals who made qawwali acceptable all over the world were all trained in the traditional style, and some if not all, started to experiment only after they had established themselves as traditional qawwals. Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan was a qawwal accepted by all and sundry much before he started to experiment with western orchestration and various forms of rhythmic patterns. He was also helped along the way by changing standards in world music and the rising tide of International Music where the musical peculiarities of individual cultures were pooled into a more standardised and globalised response.

The text is of importance in the qawwali and as the form evolved, the beginning of qawwali recital was the Arabic verses either from the holy text or the hadith followed by poetry in Persian, while the major and the bigger chunk consisted of the last section based on the text in vernacular languages. The present day qawwals are not very familiar with the text in the classical languages and neither are the audiences.

Once classical languages were part of the daily discourse and the curriculum of the educated but in the course of the last century the relationship has been disrupted. Now the educated classes are not schooled in the classics and what the qawwals render is probably understood and appreciated as part of some glorious tradition or in deference to an international response. And when the qawwali moves into the languages which are understood by the local population the emphasis shifts to text that borders on the polemical. The running battle in our culture between the rind and zahid is almost sensationalised.

The greatest challenge for the contemporary qawwals is how to balance the demands of contemporary sensibility with its traditional trappings. As long as qawwali was sung in the traditional mould mostly on the shrines of sufi saints the restrictions imposed on the form were as if inviolable. It was not even considered that the form and the style of rendering it could be tampered with but the popularity of qawwali in avenues other than the shrine exposed it to the vagaries of change.

Popular forms of singing have gone through a tremendous change. Film music and the ghazal in the last ten years have been greatly influenced by music played and sung by groups and bands not only in the rhythmic stresses but also in the intonation and the application of the note. Actually qawwali was one of the first traditional forms to be exposed to the tide of popular world music and it survived, rather thrived, due to the delicate balance that was maintained by the likes of Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan. Now in the absence of a master it is to be seen what course the form takes in the near future.

Alhamra should be facilitated for holding these festivals and it is expected that following its mandate the support for the musical forms with little commercial value will stay a priority.

Spanish writer, Enrique Vila-Matas, in his novel, Bartley &Co, discusses the lives of creative people who did not make works of art or produce literature after a certain age. Calling it 'Bartleby's syndrome', he quotes examples of Rimbaud, Duchamp and several other writers and artists. All of them after securing huge names for themselves did not create anything in their later years.

There may be different reasons for these artists or writers to have discontinued their creative activities, but a simple question concerns everyone. Can a creative individual, who abandons his art practice or leaves his writing career, consciously or otherwise, still be considered a literary person or an artist? The question leads to some other thoughts relating to quantity, quality and continuity of creative output. Some artists or authors believe in producing new pieces, regardless of the content, originality, value or impact of those works. Just the fact that they chose a career early in the life compels them to keep adding to it in their later years.

On the other hand, there are a handful of individuals who, at some stage of their life, decide to not prolong their creative lives. That may have roots in the drying up of creative urge/ability and the realisation that they have run out of ideas; or a feeling that whatever they have done was enough to represent them and maintain their position/status as a significant creative personality. The example of Marcel Duchamp is appropriate as he abandoned painting after making a number of important works of art. In an interview the French artist explained that he liked breathing more than painting. Yet he is still regarded as one of the most significant artists of the twentieth century.

Like him, a number of other artists have abandoned work after contributing substantially through their earlier works. But many ponder -- as referred earlier -- if they can still be called writers and artists?

As a matter of fact, arguments like these do not matter to those who have either left their artistic pursuits or changed the form of their creative expressions. They could not care less about whether they are still considered authors or artists. The question is important for those still engaged in producing art or literature. Looking at some of their works, one wonders about their worth and justification because, in most cases, they are repetitive, recycled and rehashed, embellished with a few new elements.

Leaving literature aside (since this is not a book review for Enrique Vila-Matas novel) there are many examples from fine arts, the latest versions of artists' once successful series of works. In some cases they are unable to create original works, but instead of abandoning the practice of painting or habit of sculpting, these individuals continue refurbishing old ideas, tried-out techniques and familiar imagery.

Mansur Aye is an artist who became known for a particular type of work, flirted with fame, acquired a name in the history of Pakistani art. Mansur rose to fame in the 1970s with his series 'Moon Faced Girls' shown in Karachi. After the appeal of this body of work, Mansur began to reproduce the same imagery, till it turned into a trademark. Although during his long artistic life, he has tried a number of other forms and techniques, such as Chughtai-inspired surfaces, Indian miniatures, Impressionist rendering of beach scenes. after every attempt he reverted to his celebrated style -- moon-face maidens.

A recently held exhibition of Mansur Aye at Croweaters Gallery in Lahore comprises, once again, canvases with moon-faced women (the girls have matured into women!). Often these faces are drawn with sweeping brush strokes and in soft hues. These canvases while affirming his grasp on the methods of image-making also reveal the artist's creative block, which may have begun after the success of his early shows in the seventies. In the latest exhibition, it was felt that the artist has compromised on his work, and without giving much thought to any change in his aesthetics, is churning out works with identical imagery and slight difference in tone and texture.

However, Aye is not the only painter who is following this course. There are a number of artists cashing on this 'one-time stand'. One could cite many names among our well respected painters and sculptors who have not evolved after a specific period in their creative lives, thoroughly enjoying the position of being the sole possessor of that style, imagery and way of working.

In most cases, it indicates a sense of lethargy rather than comfort amongst our artists. But why blame the artists or writers only? Everyone else wishes to assume a status (be it the cultural, political or intellectual sphere) and then spend the rest of his life to retain that position.

In that respect, artists and writers, who realise the repetitiveness of their creative expression and stop working any more, represent a courageous breed. Sometimes these are not accepted as artists or writers. But a person who decides not to paint or write after the age of 35 or 40 years could still be called artists or authors. In the same way as the Renaissance painter Raphael (one of the greatest in the history of European art) is considered an artist and Franz Kafka (the most important author of our times) a writer. Because the Florentine painter only lived for 37 years and the Czech writer died at the age of 41.

A new book on Pakistan's nuclear programme attempts to shed light on what it terms, in its subheading: Pakistan, The United States and the Global Nuclear Weapons Conspiracy. The book itself is called Deception and its co-authors are journalists Adrian Levy and Catherine Scott Clarke; and it is based, apart from interviews and other research, on documents released under the US Freedom of Information Act.

The book was published last month, and I have to admit that I am still in the process of reading it, so I can't really present an opinion of its merits. However, a recent chat with one of the authors was interesting as he spoke of how he believes the Bush administration and the Pakistan army are complicit in the whole business, as the former has decided to 'turn a blind eye' to the ongoing involvement of the latter in this 'international trade.'

The book reads a bit like a thriller but is an interesting attempt to link politics of the war on terror and the collusion of countries on the issue of atomic energy to events in and around Pakistan.

Talking of explosive issues, another was a recent lecture at London's Asia House by Dawn's CEO and culture chronicler, Hameed Haroon. Provocatively titled The Holy Warrior and his Enemies: Popular Art, Music and Culture in Frontline Pakistan, it focused on the ongoing tussle between regressive jehadi forces and more tolerant and rational elements in popular art.

Hameed's main focus was in fact cinema and film music, so we got to see a treasure trove of rare film clips including the one of a (till very recently) banned song from the film Lakhon mein Aik,where Shamim Ara playing a Hindu girl brought up by a Kashmiri Muslim family, sings and dances in a temple. Apparently this depiction was considered a threat to our Muslim identity and national security!!! There were also some fascinating clips from Jamil Dehalvi's film Blood of Hussain, a film which is an enduring depiction of political repression and dictatorship in the context of Pakistan using Shia symbols and rituals as a metaphor for the fight against oppression and cruelty. Yet another choice clip was from that blatantly rabble rousing film International Goreelay, an echo of Lal masjid 'martyrdom' mindset two decades before the events of the 2007 siege (Interestingly both these films had a high martyrdom theme but from totally different perspectives!).

A chilling clip of some soldiers recently kidnapped by tribal militants included the execution of one of them. This is a frightening illustration of how the ideological war has gone far beyond the film screen and the script, into a gruesome 'Reality TV' netherworld. These 'reality videos' can be easily disseminated on the internet.

There was a huge turnout for this Asia House lecture, so obviously the subject had aroused interest. And the well illustrated talk certainly revealed how Pakistan remains a battleground in the conflict between the Khuda kay Liyesympathisers and the International Goreelaydevotees.

And so it continues.........