The Political Situation in
Pakistan and the Labour Party
Pakistan Perspective after
September 11th
Changes In All Sides, Where do we stand and some thoughts on
perspectives
By Farooq Tariq
General Secretary Labour Party Pakistan
2-10-2001
The 11th September incident has had a devastating effect on
the politics of different trends in Pakistan. It has polarized
the politics of each group to an extent never seen before. The
Pakistan Peoples Party, the party of the Bhuttos, is now openly
supporting the stand of the military regime to go for an all
out help for the Americans. So is the case of the Mutihida Qaumi
Movement (MQM) the party of the immigrants with a mass base
in Sind cities. In the North West Frontier province, the National
Awami Party, the largest party of the Pushtoons has also changed
sides from opposing the military regime to openly supporting
the regime.
The PPP and ANP til 11th September were openly opposing the
military regime and are part of the Alliance For Restoration
of Democracy (ARD). The PPP has also tried its best to please
the military regime by participating in demonstrations on the
so-called Solidarity Day on 27th September. General Musharaf
gave the call for this day.
The Muslim league of ex Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is trailing
behind the religious fundamentalist and is half-heartedly supporting
the Taliban and opposing the military regime for its support
for Bush.
Some of the smaller alliances of the radical and Stalinist parties
are
also openly supporting the standpoint of the military regime.
The US must be supported to root out terrorism is
the cry from these ex-left parties justifying their support
for the regime. These left parties include the National
Workers Party and Communist Mazdoor Kissan Party (Communist
Workers Peasant Party). They have now abandoned their anti-US
sloganeering.
The religious fundamentalist forces are propagandising for all
out
support for Osama Bin Laden and an all out war. Over 50,000
demonstrated in Quetta on 2nd October in favor of the Taliban
led by Jamiat Ulama Islam, a religious party that has openly
supported the Taliban from the beginning. It was ally party
of the PPP of Benazir Bhutto in the power period from 1994 to
1996. It was this period when the Taliban took over Afghanistan.
Benazir Bhutto coming on side with the military regime is now
claiming that she was about to go against the Taliban
regime in 1996, when she was overthrown. In fact it was her
power period which paved the way for the Taliban taking over
in Kabul. The first act of the Taliban at the time was to hang
the body of Dr. Najib Ullah in the main center of Kabul for
a few days, after he was taken out of the United Nations office
and killed by the Taliban. The UNO or the Americans or Benazir
Bhutto had nothing special to say about this barbarian act of
the Taliban. Dr. Najib Ullah was the head of Afghanistan government
from 1988 to 1992. When he was overthrown by the Mujahadeen
in 1992, he took refuge for
four years at UN headquarters in Kabul until he was killed by
the
Taliban.
What a hypocrisy of the military regime that it has for the
first time
condemned in words the terrorist attack on the Indian held Kashmir
assembly on 1st of October where in a suicidal attack, 32 were
killed. The Jaish Mohammed, the religious fanatic group, which
has claimed responsibility for this brutal attack, has a base
in Pakistan. They had to do it now. They could not say now that
the attack in New York was a terrorist attack and the attack
in Srinagar was part of the national struggle as was their policy
until now.
Jaish Mohammeds leader Masood Azhar was released only
two years before from an Indian jail on the demand of the hijackers
after the successful hijacking of an Indian plane. After his
entry to Pakistan from Afghanistan, he was allowed to form the
Jaish Mohammed group, collect funds from all over and to train
the terrorists in Pakistan. Most of the small shops all over
Pakistan have a box inside with an appeal to help the Kashmir
Mujahadeen with funds.
The Kashmir Mujahadeen has nothing to do with the national struggle
of Kashmir, but plans to make Kashmir another Afghanistan controlled
by a new Taliban. They had the full support of the Pakistani
State under the military and under the previous civil governments
of Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto. From a position of full
support of the Taliban and Mujahadeen, the military regime has
taken a U turn to support the even bigger terror, US imperialism,
to carry an all out attack on the Afghanistan people.
The 11th September attack has also polarized the civil society
organizations. Some are taking a position of No to War but yes
to a measured response. This position was taken
by a group led by former chairperson of the Human Rights Commission
of Pakistan and renowned human rights activist Asma Jahangir.
Her article in the Daily Dawn on 30th September revealed her
position quite clearly. On the contrary, many other are advocating
a position of No to War; No to Terrorism condemning
both and declaring their solidarity openly with the international
peace movement. Fareeda Shaheed of Shirkat Ghah and Nighar Ahmed
of Aurat Foundation lead this trend within the civil society
organizations.
The Labour Party Pakistan position is very close to the position
of No to War; No to terrorism. The LPP will not
have any confidence in the UN to solve this issue by legalizing
the war on Afghanistan. It will not support the creation of
International Criminal Courts (ICC), as this will be another
institution for the cover of the crimes of the US government.
From the very first day, the LPP condemned the terrorist attack
and the policies of US imperialism carried out in the past against
the colonial countries. TheLPP would never justify the terrorist
attack for any reason. But it was consistent in its opposition
to the methods and program of US Imperialism. It was already
organizing the anti IMF and Word Bank movement in Pakistan.
It also started to build a peace movement as like others, it
is anticipating a fully-fledged war on Afghanistan. The LPP
has to oppose the religious fundamentalism and the powers that
were harboring it, mainly the military regime of Pakistan in
general and the ISI (Inter Services Intelligence) in particular.
Unlike the others it did not support the lesser evil philosophy.
More
and more political trends from right to left are justifying
their
betrayals in the name of having no choice but to support the
lesser
evil. The US is supporting the lesser evil (the Pakistan military
regime) in comparison to Taliban. Pakistan is supporting the
lesser evil (US) as was declared by general Musharaf in his
televised speech.
The position of the official labor movement is also more and
more to
support the military regime. The Pakistan Workers Confederation
main leadership has openly supported the military regime with
an appeal to the US not to attack Afghanistan. The trade union
leaders within the PWC who are members of LPP are waging a war
within the labor movement for no support to war. These trade
union leaders, including Yousaf Baluch, are receiving a good
hearing from the workers.
The religious fundamentalists have different influence in different
parts of the country. After the initial edge of religious forces,
they
are now loosing ground in the cities, mainly Lahore and in Karachi
to some extent. But they are in a more favorable position in
the main cities near Afghanistan like Peshawar and Quetta. They
are also making headway in the small towns and villages across
Pakistan. The war has not yet started but the war within the
political organizations is reaching
new heights.
The most commonly asked question at the present time is what
option did the military regime have, if they would have not
gone the way they have gone now and what difference the possible
American aid to the Pakistani military regime can make in the
future and its effect on the military regimes future.
It is clear that the capitalist economy internationally is in
a period
of crisis. Through different institutions like the IMF and World
Bank
they made such agreements that it put the entire burden on the
already sinking economies of the third world countries. Against
these injustices, a strong anti capitalist movement was developing
in the advanced countries. We saw hundreds and thousands of
workers in different parts of the advanced world protesting
in anti capitalist demonstrations. After 11th September initial
reactions, it is clear that American government has got new
friends like the military regime of Pakistan to go for an all
out war against Afghanistan.
In this background, the Americans have lifted sanctions against
Pakistan and have announced a good friendship relationship with
the Pakistan military regime. The general impression is created
that the American aid would help the sick economy of Pakistan.
But this is contrary to the factual situation. Pakistan exports
have been deeply affected after the 11th September. Many export
orders have been cancelled or postponed.
The main crisis of the Pakistan economy is productivity. That
will
decrease even further. All the conditions of the IMF and World
Bank have made the life of the workers and peasants even worse
than it was before the military took over in October 1999. In
these circumstances, the revival of the Pakistan economy does
not seem possible even if US imperialism pumps in massive injections.
It will make the life of the rich and the ruling class better
but not the life of the workers. That was the case in the eighties.
Over 30 billion dollars was pumped into the Pakistan economy
after the Russians entered into Afghanistan. This massive amount
did not change the life of the masses. But it did help the military
generals and their sons and daughters to become the new rich.
We will see many more Ijazul Haqs (son of General Zia UL Haque,
the military dictator from 1977 to 1988) and Hamayoons (son
of another military general close to Zia). They both are now
very rich and are owners of factories and many big houses. The
American aid (if it comes)
will be a real treat for the military generals.
The possible aid from the US will make a difference to the possible
length of the military regime. Before 11th September, the military
regime was losing its social base quite rapidly. But the terrorist
attack and its U turn towards American imperialism has earned
him good new political friends like the PPP. The regime has
strengthened its position for the time being. But once the war
starts, the mood can change within the military where at present
it seems theres total support for Musharafs position.
But there are religious fundamentalist elements within the army
top ranks. They have been forced by the pressure of the events
to keep quiet but they have not been kicked out of the army.
Once the war starts, the anti American feelings can even more
get the social base in line with the religious fundamentalists.
On 14th August the military regime announced a road map
for democratic restoration. It was announced that elections
would take place in October 2002. The intention of the military
regime was to install a civil government very dependent on the
military. But after 11th September, there is no talk about any
plan for the restoration of democracy.
It seems very likely that the Taliban regime will loose power
soon. This will definitely give a more moral boost to the military
regime and can help them to remain in power longer than the
expected three years. Nothing can be said for sure, as the situation
is very fluid. It is a rapidly changing scenario. But the U-turn
of the military regime in favor of the US has many negative
aspects as well. It has given a new life to the fanatic forces.
It has endangered the life of the progressive and left forces
within Pakistan.
The labor movement has to oppose the American intervention in
the
region. But also it can not close its eyes to the growing influence
of
the religious fundamentalists. The religious fundamentalist
forces are in contradiction with US imperialism. But workers
can not gain by siding with any one. They can only lose their
independent identity by supporting one against the other.
|
|
SPECTREZINE
Homepage
Weblog
Spectremail
Contact
LATEST
FEATURES
The
Last War of the 20th Century - Part Ten - by Jan Marijnissen and Karel
Glastra van Loon
Gene
seeks Farmer - by Kartika Liotard MEP
EU-India
Free Trade Talks: In Whose Interest? by Christa Wichterich
Water
Thieves - by Steve McGiffen
Global
security: too vital an issue to be left to NATO and the Right - by Tiny
Kox
Flexicurity,
false promises, and the EU's renamed Constitution
LATEST
NEWS FROM
THE WEBLOG
Weblog-
Homepage
Macedonia and EU membership
Turbulent times for Eurozone
Left Euro-MPs Attack
Turkish condemnation of Human Rights Campaigner
France Breached Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty
“The hope for the reunification
of Cyprus is back”
Call of La Via Campesina
for April 17th, International Day of Peasant Struggle
CATEGORIES
Africa
Book Reviews
Corporate Crime
Current Issues
Economy and Society
East Asia
Editorial
Environment
Europe
Global Resistance
Latin America/Caribbean
Middle East
North America
Progressive Press
War
ARCHIVES
News
Review 2001-04
Features
2001
Features 2002
Features 2003-04
|