|  |  |  |  | 
|  |  | 
|                                                                                                         | violence A one-point
   agenda 
 
    Diplomats and
   Editors As tense as Tank A profile of Tank as a centre of militancy especially in the last couple of months By Javed Aziz Khan Tank has
   become arguably the worst amongst the 24 districts of the NWFP to live in --
   where shooting a person is like having a cup of tea. Tension
   prevails in the region right from Pezu in Lakki Marwat up to the two
   Waziristan Agencies where the Pakistan army fought for almost three years
   against foreign and local militants in connection with the global 'War on
   Terror.'  Till
   recently it was a part of the southern Dera Ismail Khan district but was
   given the status of a The
   deteriorating law and order situation in the district has forced the
   organisers of a local festival, held every year in connection with the death
   anniversary of Pir Sabir Shah Qadri, to observe the event silently. Neither
   the traditional sports were played nor the drums were beaten this year as the
   people of the district were terrified and tense. A number of pamphlets are
   circulating in town, with written decrees about shoot to kill all the
   hypocrites i.e. journalists, politicians, army men, government officials and
   several others. Tension generally prevails across the town. Trade centres of
   the city give a deserted look. People
   are facing numerous problems while moving across the town after sunset in
   connection with any emergency because night curfew is still clamped on the
   district. "I had to move the dead body of my relative from Peshawar to a
   village on Jhandola Road but it took several hours to get permission for
   entering the district. The policemen and security personnel were looking
   terrified by seeing several vehicles coming towards them as they thought it
   might be a convoy of militants," Khizer, a local of Tank settled in
   Peshawar tells TNS Tank was
   peaceful even when people were being killed in the fighting between the
   Pakistan army and militants, both foreigners and locals, in the two
   Waziristan Agencies. Being a settled district, it was never expected that the
   problem would come down to the town and militants would start picking up
   youth from schools for the purpose of 'jihadi training.' Though the practice
   continued for several months, the locals did not dare to resist or even voice
   their concern. The people settled in Peshawar and other parts of the country,
   however, contacted certain quarters to bring the matter into public notice.
   The police even then kept silence as the law enforcers themselves had come
   under attack by the militants on quite a number of occasions. A district
   police officer (DPO) who could never dare to resist the militants movement
   was attacked last year where he lost a gunman but himself remained unhurt.  After
   consulting Maulana Fazlur Rehman, the opposition Leader in the National
   Assembly, who is considered the most respected man in Dera Ismail Khan, Tank,
   North and South Waziristan, the provincial government brought changes into
   the administrative structure of police in the area. The new aggressive
   administration preferred to halt the progress of militants instead of keeping
   silent that led to an ugly incident in the last week of March. A police
   party intercepted some miscreants outside a privately run Oxford Public
   School when the administration of the school complained that militants were
   taking away over a dozen of their students for training without any
   permission from their parents. Two of the militants were gunned down and a
   police inspector was killed in the incident that sparked widespread clashes
   across the Tank district. The clashes continued for several days, resulting
   in around 33 killings from both sides. Thirty people were killed from the
   militants' side as claimed by the government authorities, while three of
   those killed were law enforcers. Militants attacked the private and public
   properties with rockets, hand grenades and other sophisticated ammunition.
   The government ultimately had to clamp curfew on the town to avoid further
   bloodshed. Apart
   from imposing curfew, the authorities engaged the locals in ensuring peace in
   the district. A 35-member jirga, comprising local Senators, MNAs, MPAs,
   nazims and other elders, was constituted and was assigned to negotiate with
   the militant leaders and seek their help in restoring peace. Senator Maulana
   Saleh Shah and MNA Merajuddin after a meeting with Baitullah Mahsud, one of
   the top commanders in the two Waziristan Agencies, told the jirga that he has
   denied involvement of his men in the Tank episode. The jirga and the
   administration continue to make their efforts to improve the law and order in
   the town.  The situation
   gradually started returning to normalcy and people took a sigh of relief for
   couple of weeks. The curfew was lifted and the business started in routine.
   But it was not the end. The
   militants retaliated with more power after a few days of silence. This time
   they targeted law enforcing agencies and top government officials. An army
   vehicle was blown up on Jhandola Road, resulting in the death of two
   soldiers. Seven army men were also injured in the incident. This was followed
   by an attack on the vehicle of the assistant district officer of the Frontier
   Constabulary. But the worst of these incidents was the attack on the family
   house of political agent (PA) Khyber Agency, Amiruddin, on May 29. Those
   killed included six members of the family of Amiruddin, including women and
   children, and seven guests of the family. A Mahsud
   jirga from Waziristan has also met the PA Khyber Amiruddin to condole the
   death of his family members and clarify the position of their tribesmen in
   this regard. The miscreants have been once again suppressed by using force as
   well as involving the elders for negotiations. This time the brother of
   Maulana Fazlur Rahman, Maulana Attaur Rahman, who is also a Member of the
   National Assembly from Tank, has been asked to play an active role. The
   Deputy Inspector General of Police Dera Ismail Khan, Zulfiqar Cheema,
   affirmed that the writ of the law would be extended to each inch of the
   settled part of the country and those who would come down to Tank from tribal
   areas would have to submit their weapons at Jandola check post before
   entering the settled area. "The situation in Tank needed committed
   efforts that we have made recently. The situation has improved and the law of
   the land has been completely implemented in Tank," he claimed. Not only
   Tank, but a number of other districts in the South are going through the
   worst time of history. District Hangu and Dera Ismail Khan have recently
   experienced curfew in the recent past while situation is getting worst in
   Lakki Marwat and Bannu. Criminals are killing and kidnapping people at the
   pretext of militants. There is a dire need to take a stern action against all
   the criminals in these districts as well as tribal agencies so the sense of
   fear among the populace in these areas could end. Mian Ijazul Hasan in Boston on current political developments... By Beena Sarwar Pakistanis based in
   America, from taxi drivers and gas station attendants struggling to make ends
   meet to wealthy doctors and bankers, have traditionally been an apolitical,
   even conservative lot. Many were moved to activism by the nuclear blasts of
   1998 catalysed. In New York, Pakistani taxi Recently, several
   Pakistanis in the Boston area had a chance to hear Mian Ijazul Hasan on
   current political developments. Mian Ijaz wears several hats -- a Masters in
   English from Government College Lahore, and St. Johns College Cambridge,
   painter, professor of art, author of Painting in Pakistan (1990)... and a
   long time political activist who has been arrested several times, since his
   first arrest in 1977 after Gen. Zia took over power. He is member of the
   Pakistan People's Party's federal council and former secretary general of the
   PPP Punjab (and chairman policy planning Punjab and Manifesto Committee
   member). Currently in America as Benazir Bhutto's special envoy, he addressed
   a small private gathering last week, hosted by Anwar Hakam and Khalid Mahmood
   (Friends of South Asia).  Giving a brief background
   to the current situation, Mian Ijaz noted that Pakistan "went wrong from
   the very beginning. It was envisioned as a federation, and the federating
   units joined the federation on this promise, which was never implemented.
   Pakistan was meant to be a parliamentary democracy, but the people's right to
   establish and dismiss governments has been violated."  Commenting on the army's
   role in Pakistan's politics, he pointed out that it had become central as
   early as 1948. "The India threat was exaggerated in order to develop
   Pakistan as a national security state rather than a state concerned primarily
   with the welfare and development of its people. They used billions to build a
   nuclear weapon to protect against India, and argued that we would not need to
   spend as much on a conventional army any more. We got the nuclear weapon but
   the conventional army still gobbles up a huge chunk of our budget." He briefly touched on the
   current state of lawlessness and insurgencies on the north-western fringes
   and Balochistan, and the Taliban are re-grouping, before coming to the
   current judicial crisis which he termed as 'the tip of the iceberg'.  "It is a unique
   movement in which all sects and political parties are coming together. There
   has been spontaneous and massive support for the Chief Justice as evident in
   the 15 mile long rally from Islamabad to Lahore; between 60,000-100,000
   people thronged the recent rally in Abbottabad -- where normally the maximum
   crowd that can be gathered is normally 25,000." The Chief Justice, said
   Mian Ijaz, is "the spark that lit the prairie fire. The image of police
   grabbing him by the hair to push him into the police car was flashed in all
   the media and caused great outrage. The whole nation felt brutalised and
   people united on this issue. The lawyers stood their ground and wore their
   black coats in 114 degree heat. As PPP Gen. Secretary for four years, I know
   how much it costs to organise rallies -- to hire buses etc for a rally of
   60,000 people costs around Rs 70 lakh. But these rallies have been
   spontaneous, and people have flocked on their own in the thousands to see and
   hear the CJ. And most remarkably, there has been no violence at all, no
   public property damaged. For the first time the higher judiciary is working
   with the people rather than with the army or the bureaucracy. And right now
   there is only one issue in Pakistan -- the restoration of the Chief Justice.
   If we empower the Supreme Court now, it will never again legitimise the
   army." Mian Ijaz added that
   "the CJ had taken suo motu notice of some 6000 cases involving the
   auction and sale of companies, rape and disappearances. Musharraf feared that
   the CJ would not allow him to go for a re-election of the office of
   President. Some people have criticised the lawyers for coming out on the
   streets. One photo was constantly flashed in which a lawyer is flinging a
   stone at police. There is something fundamentally wrong with the state when
   those who protect the law are in conflict with the law-enforcers. People say
   that this is not the role of lawyers. But that is precisely what their role
   is, to resist efforts to tamper with the Constitution." Coming to the process of 'Talibanisation'
   in Pakistan, Mian Ijaz commented that "The army enabled the MMA to form
   government by accepting seminary graduates to be accepted as BA equivalents
   (and by not allowing the mainstream political parties to participate in the
   elections). In the NWFP, the issue of Pakhtun nationalism can only dealt with
   politically. As for the issue of Talibanisation, it is there because of the
   army. The army's principle aim was to marginalise the two major political
   parties that Musharraf saw as the principle threat. The religious parties
   know they can never form a government in Pakistan, their strategy is to
   penetrate the state." The only way to counter
   Talibanisation, he said, is to "ensure that there are free and fair
   elections that bring in legitimate representatives of the people. Otherwise
   the extremists will gain -- as Senator Joe Biden correctly wrote in his
   recent letter to Condoleeza Rice. Only civil society and politicians can
   handle these issues." Some of those present did
   not accept Mian Ijaz's contention that the army must return to the barracks.
   They criticised politicians as 'corrupt' and the two main political parties
   as having 'not delivered' during their terms in power. Someone brought up the
   issue of the local feudal lord telling 'his' people where to vote.  Mian Ijaz acknowledged that
   there are many problems but insisted that the answer was not military rule,
   but more democracy. "I am not here to defend the political
   parties," he added. "But I do know this, that when I was imprisoned
   under civilian rule, I would be out on bail in no time. When I was arrested
   during Zia's military regime, it took Aitzaz Ahsan four weeks to find where I
   was being held and interrogated by civil and military personnel (in the
   Lahore Fort, which at least the PPP dismantled).  "The bottom line is
   that we need to strengthen civil society, rule of law and the political
   process, the judiciary and accountability. It's only when moderates are in
   power that talibanisation can be countered. Regardless of the politicians'
   corruptions or incompetence, we need to uphold the constitution and remember
   that Pakistan is a federation." He agreed that corruption
   was a problem but pointed out that "only a small percentage of the
   budget goes through the politicians' hands in the first place. Aslam Beg has
   confessed that the army used money to form the IJI but the case has not even
   come up for a preliminary hearing." More important is the issue
   of accountability. "The Indian army gets its salary from parliament and
   has to report to parliament. In Pakistan, the army's salaries are paid from
   US aid. There is never any debate on the military budget in the Pakistani
   parliament (that's why there has been such an uproar over Ayesha Siddiqa's
   book on military economy). People ask why the generals support Musharraf --
   the reason is that they are benefiting as an institution."  "The one point agenda
   right now," he concluded, "is to restore the Chief Justice and
   ensure that the army stays out of the country's politics." Beena Sarwar is a
   journalist currently on a research fellowship at the Kennedy School of
   Governmentat Harvard University. Email: beena.sarwar@gmail.com Talking of the 'Amaltaas'
   set me off on the nostalgia track, and from things we have forgotten to
   things we never had was a short step -- like nursery rhymes and other poetry
   for kids for instance. The other day I came upon a book of poems for
   children, and ploughed through and could see that they are not of the stuff
   that will become classics. In fact, now that I think on it, we must be
   eternally grateful to Sufi Tabassum Saab for writing those wonderful rhymes
   that have already stood the test of time. Most peculiar in a people
   who have long prided themselves on their poetry, and in fact held that it is And so too for stories for
   children, the fairy tales and the adventures; when we have children that age,
   we have to look for the Hans Christian Andersens and the Mother Gooses and
   the Grimms. There are really no stories for children, except some silly
   'moral' stories which the kids hate and will never follow. We have a long
   tradition of 'Jinns' and 'Peris' but they live in the 'Talism-e-Hoshruba' and
   the land of Raja Inder and have not been used for their proper function which
   is to entertain kids. But then that may be our own fault. Trouble is that my
   own childhood was rather a long way in the past, but I do remember one or two
   tales. There was for instance the
   tale of the too healthy wife. A man married this lady, who seemed nice
   enough, but he was amazed when she told him what her diet was: In fact it
   needs explaining. When the best cooks set out to cook a 'Chappatee' the test
   of their expertise is that the 'Chappatee' be small and delicate, and in fact
   to swell up into a round ball which is composed of a thick side taking up
   most of the flour, and a paper thin other side which is so thin it is
   see-through.  Even when a 'roti' is
   cooked in a 'tandoor' parts of it bubble up to form thin balloons, and these
   are called 'Roti Ka Phapholas'. The point is that the lady insisted her total
   diet at any meal was one 'roti ka phaphola' and a 'chirriya ki zabaan', the
   tongue of a house sparrow!  Or there was the story of
   this gent who woke up one day to find that a pair of 'Bhootnas' was growing
   out of one of his teeth! Now a 'Bhootna' is really the diminutive of a 'Bhoot'
   which is small and basically mischievous rather than evil. Nevertheless they
   had to be got rid of, and when the man drove them off, they just hung on to
   his neck -- and then swung round and round and round until all of his neck
   was worn away except the aorta!  There was nothing to do
   except take a piece of 'Nivaar' which is a long strip of woven cotton, three
   inches wide and a mile long, used to thread the bedstead called a 'Pallang'
   -- he took this strip and wound it round his thin neck, and then went around
   wearing a high-necked 'Shirvanee'! I have no memory of how either story
   ended, or if there was a moral which it wasn't. The whole point was the
   premise which caught the imagination and is a fond memory sixty years on.  Pressed gallery A blow by blow account of the scuffle in the press gallery on June 6 By Naveed Ahmad The journalist fraternity
   was all set, last week, to record its protest against draconian amendments in
   the existing oppressive PEMRA act -- in line with its tradition of token
   walkout from the press gallery. The Pemra Ordinance
   virtually gave an absolutely free hand to its chairman over the content and
   equipment of the private television network, something the information
   ministry through its Principal Just a day earlier, the
   government had eaten up its own words by withdrawing an FIR against the
   journalist representatives for allegedly trying to occupy the prime
   minister's office after their torch-bearing protest against the promulgation
   of amended Pemra Ordinance. Filled with anxiety and
   anger, the journalists entered the National Assembly gate one by one on June
   6 expecting the session to echo hot-blooded exchanges on the Karachi massacre
   and other offshoots of an unresolved judicial crisis. Convened after a break of
   22 days ahead of the government's last budget on June 9, the National
   Assembly session was undoubtedly set for a bumpy start.  Ever since the judicial
   crisis unfolded on March 9, the government media managers had little to smile
   about and the worst was only unfolding now. Genuinely conscious of the fact,
   the information ministry had swung in action to frustrate the embarrassing
   protest and walk out inside the parliament premises.  Information Secretary
   Ashfaq Mahmood, Principal Information Officer (PIO) Chaudhry Rasheed and a
   few well-informed officials from the government worked a textbook style plan
   to deflate journalists' protest. They had issued over three dozen special
   identity cards to low level government employees. The official media wizards
   did not invent this tactic but only inflated the size.  "I personally called
   up the PIO by 4 pm and advised against sending planted government officials
   in the press gallery to thwart our protest," says Afzal Butt, president
   of Rawalpindi-Islamabad Union of Journalists. According to him, the PIO
   admitted sending the PID staff in large numbers to the National Assembly.
   "On my reminder that the journalists would be holding protest against
   amended Pemra Ordinance, he said he would instruct them to walk out of the
   press gallery with the journalists."  
 On the insistence of
   journalists, the defiant individual told them that they belonged to
   information ministry and would not join them in the protest. Only a few could
   produce the identity cards while others lost temper and turned violent.  The angry journalists
   followed the suit and retaliated effectively to abusive language and punches.
   Within 15 minutes, bruised faces, broken chairs and torn papers marked the
   prestigious press gallery. The house set aside the
   question-hour and other agenda for the day to debate the unprecedented
   incident in Pakistan's parliamentary history for hours before Speaker
   Chaudhry Amir Hussain adjourned the proceedings until next morning.  But the speaker gave no
   indication about when he would give a ruling over the matter that, he said,
   had 'worried him too much'. Though he did acknowledge suggestions for an
   amicable solution, while some ruling coalition members called for action
   against not only the protesting journalists but also opposition members who
   joined the slogan-chanting for allegedly violating the sanctity of the house.
    Interestingly, federal
   ministers Wasi Zafar and Ijaz-ul-Haq exploited the opportunity to slate the
   media persons. Speaking on the floor of the house, Wasi had the stubbornness
   to say that "those protesting at the (building) gate are not journalists
   but ghundas (hooligans)".  The law minister sought
   strict legal and punitive action against the journalists who raised slogans
   in the press gallery and thrashed the officials. He also rejected Aitzaz's
   call for a parliamentary committee to probe the matter.  Wasi 'corrected' the house
   that press was not the fourth pillar of the state. As usual, he
   re-interpreted his comments as a result of afterthoughts and advice. Ijaz-ul-Haq also exchanged
   heated arguments with some protesting journalists who recalled the
   ruthlessness of his father General Ziaul Haq's who went to the extent of
   flogging some defiant media persons. He reportedly said that journalists
   could not digest the newly found freedom  Like Ijaz and Wasi, certain
   other ministers too termed the incident as contempt of parliament.
   Information Minister Muhammad Ali Durrani, who was out of the country on the
   fateful evening, terms the incident as 'unfortunate'. Speaking to TNS, he
   said: "We will ensure that nothing of the sorts ever happens
   again."  While the protest,
   sloganeering and brawl became the centre of attention of the assembly, PML
   Chief Whip Sardar Nasrullah Dareshak, Deputy Speaker Sardar Yaqoob, Minister
   of State for Interior Zafar Iqbal Warraich, PPP MNAs Raja Pervez Ashraf and
   Khurseed Shah moved swiftly to defuse the situation.  Information Minister for
   State Tariq Azeem rejected that non-journalists were present in the press
   gallery. He rather hinted at internal dispute amongst the journalists
   covering the proceedings.  Immediately after the
   incident, National Assembly Speaker Chaudhry Amir cancelled all press cards
   issued to journalists for their entry into the parliament house for the
   coverage of the current session of the assembly.  After extensive talks with
   the Speaker and parliamentary delegation, a seven member committee comprising
   journalists was formed to probe and resolve the matter. This saved the
   government from press boycott of its much celebrated fifth and the last
   budget.  With the withdrawal of
   amendments in Pemra Ordinance and fruitful negotiations with the NA speaker,
   the media fraternity has apparently gained some advantages. Now the
   information ministry is no more the issuing authority for press cards of
   parliamentary coverage. At the same time, an understanding has been reached
   between the journalists and the speaker about walkouts from the press
   gallery.  "We will inform the
   speaker first and he would try to resolve the matter by summoning the
   officials concerned in his chamber. If he fails to bring resolve the matter,
   then we would stage a walkout," said Afzal Butt. Though new identity cards
   have been issued to journalists by the NA secretariat, their number remains
   far less than required. Currently, two journalists of smaller publications
   and four from the bigger media organisations are allowed to cover the
   proceedings. However, the PID officials (fake journalists) are still sharing
   the press gallery with the journalists.  The journalists fear press
   gallery row may crop up again owing to lack of infrastructure to handle media
   at the NA and Senate secretariat. The intelligence officials and PID
   personnel may again be used to exploit an embarrassing situation for the
   government. Even today, the basis on which the protest was lodged -- presence
   of non-journalists -- remains to be addressed.  The presence of journalists
   in the press gallery could be reduced and their work load curtailed if the
   Senate and National Assembly websites are used effectively. The Speaker
   should direct the staff to upload vital information such as agenda, draft
   bills, question hour and other documents in real time on the website.    Email:
   navid.rana@gmail.com 
 
    Sometimes
   it is impossible to gauge the outcome of events in the country. Several
   months ago, in mid-March, as the lawyers began their agitation against the
   ouster of the Chief Justice, it was widely believed the movement would fizzle
   out. Instead it has quickly snowballed, developing into a true crisis for the
   regime, as people frustrated and angered by the current socio-economic and
   political situation join hands with the lawyers.  Sometimes,
   as has been the case since the 1950s, it is easier to judge what is happening
   within the Washington
   and President Bush have, until now, publicly taken the stance that the unrest
   in Pakistan is not of any serious nature and they remain firmly behind
   President Musharraf. Indeed, it has often seemed in recent years and months
   that Washington has failed to look beyond Musharraf and has persuaded itself
   that he will remain in place forever, at the 'forefront' of the war on
   terror, as Bush so often likes to say. The fact that even as this battle
   continues, new madrasa schools have been cropping up, extremist armies have
   taken control of huge tracts in the NWFP and have begun threatening
   Islamabad, seems not to have shaken US convictions regarding the
   trustworthiness of their ally. But, the
   latest statements hint at growing concern over the internal situation in
   Pakistan. Even as the aircraft carrying Richard Boucher hovered over Asian
   skies, prior to touching down in Islamabad, the US State Department issued a
   hard-hitting statement, hoping that if President Musharraf 'continues in
   political life' he would set aside his uniform. In the same statement, the
   State Department spokesperson also emphasised a free media was essential to
   any functional democracy and stated the US believed President Musharraf would
   seek re-election from a new parliament, formed after balloting.  There
   has at the same time also been conjecture that Richard Boucher's visit is
   aimed at attempting to forge the much talked about bridge between President
   Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto, as such setting in place a US-orchestrated
   formulation for the next polls. In his expectedly diplomatic comments
   regarding his visit, Boucher has of course denied any attempts to intervene
   in intricate politics of Pakistan, and has stated he discussed 'bilateral
   relations' in his meetings with foreign minister Khurshid Kasuri and other
   foreign office decision-makers.  But
   there can be little doubt Boucher has also been engaged in a process of
   judging mood in Pakistan, and at the same time making it clear to Musharraf
   that the US would like polls to be seen as being fair. While concern with
   democratic practice or the situation of people in any nation has never been a
   primary consideration for Washington, as its record in Latin America, East
   Asia and now Iraq proves, it would seem the State Department is at least
   interested in making a show of a principled adherence to democracy. The fact
   that the US comments regarding uniform run contrary to those made by
   President Musharraf, who apparently regards his khakis as his 'second skin',
   are also important, given some suggestions that Washington may see wisdom in
   raising its vision beyond President Musharraf should this become necessary.  Certainly,
   there is every indication Boucher's visit is intended to test waters. By all
   accounts, his talks with a broad cross section of politicians, including many
   prominent members of opposition parties, are reported to have been frank and
   quite forthright. Some observers have been insisting they can detect a
   distinct change in US mood, but this of course may be nothing more than
   wishful optimism in a country where political parties bank on support from
   Washington as the means to power, rather than on the backing of people. The
   street power that popular parties were once able to command seems to have
   diminished over the past decade.  But
   perhaps more than anything else, the visit by Richard Boucher and the intense
   focus of attention on it, is a saddening reminder of how Pakistan has
   squandered much of its sovereignty in the course of its long-standing
   relationship of servitude with Washington. More than the people in whose name
   decisions are made, more than the political parties engaged in their exchange
   of rhetoric, it seems obvious Washington holds the key to decision-making. If
   this were not the case, Boucher's visit would of course not have assumed so
   great a significance as is being attached, with political figures vying
   desperately for a chance to whisper a few words in his ear.  But even
   as the displays of sycophancy continue; even as politicians accept their
   serfdom to the US power -- they would do well to keep in mind that throughout
   history, the US has had little qualms about abandoning so-called allies, and
   perhaps still more dangerously, loyalty to Washington can in today's global
   political environment bring only distrust and hatred from ordinary people --
   who, eventually, will inevitably determine the future political direction of
   the country.  RIPPLE EFFECT By Omar R. Quraishi The title of this column
   may be slightly misleading in that one will be talking separately of
   diplomats and editors.  First about diplomats.
   According to Wikipedia, diplomacy is the "art and practice of conducting
   negotiations between representatives of groups or states". Issues of
   peace-making, trade, war, economics, culture and so on are usually discussed
   by diplomats. The word itself comes from the Greek 'diploma' which means
   'folded in two'. Over the years and by the time of the Roman Empire,
   'diploma' was used to describe official travel documents such as
   "passports for imperial roads" that were stamped on double metal
   plates. Apparently, the English philosopher and statesmen, Edmund Burke
   (otherwise famous for writing such classics,especially in conservative
   circles, as Reflections on the Revolution in France in 1790) is said to have
   introduced the word 'diplomacy' into the English language (after it first
   appeared as 'diplomatique' in French. Over the time, the phrase
   'to be diplomatic' came to signify someone who spoke in a polite and civil
   tone without being blunt and straightforward. However, to be diplomatic has
   now assumed a negative connotation in that it is used for someone who, for
   the sake of tact and civility, is unwilling or unable to speak the truth. Ambassador and high
   commissioner are positions that diplomats reach at the pinnacle of their
   careers. These positions require one to be diplomatic, but often diplomats in
   such positions are just the contrary. A good example that comes to mind is
   Zalmay Khalilzad who was America's ambassador to Iraq and Afghanistan and is
   presently its envoy to the United Nations. He often spoke his -- or perhaps
   his master's -- mind where he could have done better just keeping quiet. Then
   there was a British ambassador to a Central Asian country in recent years who
   was outspoken to the extent that he had to be removed from his post -- he has
   since become an outspoken voice against British foreign policy. Closer to home, there have
   been some ambassadors and high commissioners who have spoken in a most
   undiplomatic fashion. Of course there was Robert Oakley, America's ambassador
   to Pakistan from 1988-91, who many thought behaved more like a viceroy. In
   more recent times, Britain's former high commissioner, Mark Lyall Grant, said
   something about the expanding role of the military that did not go down too
   well with the government (although much of what he had said was spot on). His
   successor, Robert Brinkely, said something (also spot on) in mid-May in
   Lahore which ruffled quite a few feathers in the government. As a diplomat,
   Mr Brinkely surely stepped out of line but he was merely echoing the
   sentiment of most Pakistanis (and repeating something that is already known
   as the stand of the Commonwealth and the UK) when he said that Commonwealth
   countries expected President Pervez Musharraf to quit his post as army chief
   and hold free and fair elections and that an independent judiciary was
   crucial for democracy in Pakistan. Almost as if in a huff, the
   Foreign Office called these remarks unacceptable and said that they were
   "unsolicited and tantamount to interference in the internal affairs of
   Pakistan". More recently, the EU as well as the US State Department have
   publicly asked the government,indirectly as well as directly, to refrain from
   imposing any curbs on the media since a free and independent media was an
   essential feature/pre-requisite for democracy. In the EU case, the Foreign
   Office again went into a 'huff-and-puff' mode while no response was
   forthcoming on what surely was 'tantamount to interference in the internal
   affairs of Pakistan' on the part of the US Department of State. This double standard on the
   part of the Foreign Office became even more difficult to ignore when the Imam
   of the Kaaba, Sheikh Abdur Rehman Al Sudais, came visiting Pakistan. Almost
   on a daily basis, he told Pakistanis that they should shun extremism and
   violence. He spoke (admirably so) against suicide attacks and said that
   Muslims needed to alter themselves from within and so on. However, he met a
   10-member delegation representing the Lal Masjid clerics in Murree (the Saudi
   ambassador in Pakistan was also reported as being present in this meeting)
   and prior to that he said that the Lal Masjid clerics were doing no service
   to Islam because the responsibility for carrying out jihad rested with the
   state/government and not any individual group. But surely, his meeting the
   Lal Masjid delegation amounted to "interference in the internal affairs
   of Pakistan". What does the Foreign Office have to say to that? Or do
   they have a policy of only picking bones with statements by ambassadors/high
   commissioners that embarrass the government (read speak the truth)? ************ As for editor, one under
   whom I worked died recently. In fact, another one, Ahmed Ali Khan, died a few
   months ago, but the one being mentioned here just passed away a couple of
   weeks ago. Tahir Mirza was my editor for around 30 months in Dawn's Lahore
   office from 1998-2000 and again in Karachi from 2004-06. Incidentally, his
   last day was my last as well -- he chose to go into retirement and I to this
   newspaper. The best thing about him as an editor was that -- like a good
   practitioner of his craft-- he insisted on always having the other side's
   version, being a stickler for facts and on publishing a piece of writing if
   it was good, regardless of the reputation/status, or otherwise, of the person
   who wrote it. May his soul rest in peace.   The
   writer is Op-ed Pages Editor of The News. Email:
   omarq@cyber.net.pk 
 | 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 |