Third Umpire: Cricket, 30% Talent 70% Attitude.

 In fairness the by line of Talent and Attitude is borrowed from the lovely game of basketball, with a small change in the play of words, it applies to the Pakistan cricket team aptly. Losing and wining is part and parcel of any sport, the crucial question is the manner in which you lose and most importantly what do you learn from your short comings. Ever since following the Pakistan team one has had to accept this team can surprise one when least expected and disappoint us in equal measure. 

Six months before the current World Cup campaign there was a feeling that the team possessed a penentrating pace attack, (two or three wickets in the first ten overs) and a decent but not spectacular spin and an enviable top order batting line up. In the Asia Cup, prior to the current competition, the defeat to India seemed to have not only dented these perceptions but severely damaged them. Fast bowlers hunt in pairs, and Naseem Shah being sidelined can partly explain the wheels falling off the sting of the pace attack. But then we always boasted of depth in our battery of pace bowlers, and while Hassan Ali, surprisingly has stepped up, the previously dependable pacers have lost their mojo. Haris Rauf is hell bent of breaking the world speed record and forgetting what price he has to pay in runs for that.

It has been some time since Pakistan possessed world class spinners, and while Shahdab can have a few great outings, the consistency is sorely absent. In the batting department the team rested on the twin shoulders of Babar Azam and Mohammed Rizwan, with the odd man standing up and being counted. If either one failed the task of batting to the objectives become twice as hard, if both failed the team failed. While Abdullah Shafique may have plugged some of the gaps at the opener level, the problem remains at the middle order where no one is dependable enough to hold the fort and then take the battle to the opposing bowlers. Why batsmen like Babar, Kohli, Warner and few others excel is because fundamentally speaking they have a good technique. The ability to adjust their approach is an element of their technique allowing them to play each ball on its merit. The middle order on the other hand even when they may have technique have a misplaced approach. The mentality is to slog their way out of trouble, rather than keep the scoreboard ticking along. 

Over lay these bowling and batting disasters with perhaps the shoddiest fielding by any side in the modern day game of cricket and you have a biryani that will be tasteless and destined for the rubbish bin. Dolly catches dropped, straight forward fielding mistakes giving boundaries and a general lack of application in the field are visible through 50 agonizing overs of spills and mishaps. In fairness over the recent years fitness of the players has improved, but with it the improvement of fielding skills has been lacking. 

Failures happen to the best bowlers and batsmen and this is part and parcel of the game. The fundamental problem with the team remains ATTITUDE. When pace bowlers are being hit all over the park they don't adjust their line and length till atleast two overs of misery have passed. The bowlers don't seem to read the conditions and forget the cardinal rule that when things are not going well go to wicket to wicket bowling, nothing sexy nothing fancy. Leadership remains a major worry; Babar Azam is a great player but his captaincy skills leave a lot to be desired. Rarely does he walk up to a bowler being battered to guide him or encourage him. His bowling changes are strange at times, and when there is the need to attack his field settings are defensive. Perhaps the burden of captaincy added to the need to perform is too much for his shoulders. 

With three defeats Pakistan needs to win all the remaining matches and hope a result here or there in other matches goes their way. However getting into the final four will need more than divine intervention, prayers and hope. The mental approach of all the players will need to be totally focused and positive. The plan for each match will have to be carefully put into place with a Plan B and even Plan C in place should things not go the way they want. Playing to the conditions is very important, and this essentially means that Indian wickets are unforgiving for wayward bowling and this is where the difference has been for teams like India and South Africa. Both teams have bowled not as they love to bowl elsewhere in the world but simply kept it simple and uncomplicated letting the batsmen make the mistakes. 

Prior to the tournament I felt that England was the best balanced side and perhaps my favorites for the Cup. Their bowling, much like Pakistan's tried to search for the seam and swing which was only available on Indian wickets is sparing sessions. The failure to then adjust the attack has meant that both teams have lost their way in this campaign. I am not sure we have a world class mental coach for the team but at this stage what the Pakistan team, (and the England team) need most is a change in the mental approach to the games that are left. 

Hamas, Israel and the Tragedy Gaza will become.

 

Fifty years after the Yom Kippur war of October 1973, almost to the date (October 6th) Hamas launched a surprise attack from Gaza across the border into Israel. The military excursion by Hamas occurred at a time when optimism for a normalisation of relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel was building up. While one may wonder as to the timing of this attack there is a broader perspective which has been stirring the pot towards heightened tensions for sometime now. The present military conflict that has exploded in Gaza is not a Palestine-Israeli conflict but essentially a Hamas- Israeli conflict. 

The Hamas attack galvanises Israeli opinion behind a beleaguered Prime Minister Netanahyu as Israel has always viewed its security a matter of paramount importance. The result has been a growing call for retribution for the killing of Israelis by the Hamas fighters. While a ground invasion of Gaza is very much on the cards the wanton aerial attacks have pretty much flattened large swaths of residential areas in an over populated Gaza. Clearly the meaning of 'measured response' has been sidelined in the ferocity of Israeli reprisals which suggest that two wrongs don't make a right. 

To students of history this recent outbreak of hostilities is no surprise. Since 2006 when Hamas had taken control of the administration of the Gaza strip the blockade of Gaza commenced from both Israel and Egypt. While humanitarian supplies and fuel to run the only power plant were allowed, Gaza's ability to export goods and agricultural produce were severely curtailed. In addition excise and custom collections from the Israeli side of the crossing were done by the Israelis and since 2010 have never been paid to either the Hamas in Gaza or the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah. The result has been no money for the administration of Gaza and given the conflict between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas there has been no incentive for this matter to be resolved. 

It is no surprise that the effect of 13 years of blockade would be a sense of denial and frustration. Thus when the incident at Al Aqsa Mosque happened towards in April 2023 the reaction was an explosion of this frustration and the resultant attack on Israel by Hamas started with small scale rocket attacks. While this was not the first attack by Hamas neither was the Al Aqsa mosque incident the first provocation by the Israeli side. Indeed during 2023 and before the recent violence Israel forces have killed over 247 Palestinians. There is frustration that since 2000 there has been a lack of progress on a comprehensive peace settlement between all sides to this conflict. Since the 2003 Palestinian elections the schism within the Palestinians has become all the more obvious as Hamas as emerged as the most popular party in Gaza. 

The current situation has to be seen a gross failure on the part of all parties to seek a lasting solution to the problems of Palestine. The fact that statehood for Palestine has been in limbo for decades and Israel's departure from the two state concept, which was a condition of normalisation of relations between Palestinians and Israeli's, adds to state of flux within the politics of Palestine. The expansionist policy of the Israeli state with new settlements and the occupation of new areas within what was Palestinian land, even after the various accords which were designed to demarcate the boundaries has not helped matters. 

As bombs rain down on Gaza and Hamas retaliates with rockets into Israel the question remains 'Where do we go to from here?' 

There is no doubt that the civilians mostly in Gaza will carry the brunt of the suffering from this war. Indeed, for Israeli's the shock of the Hamas attack and the killing of 1,400 of its citizens is a massive security set back for the government of Israel. The unfolding of events will be complicated and difficult but the following could be the outcomes.

1. Israel will continue to chock Gaza with a total blockade and cut off food, water, medical supplies and fuel. This they hope will cause an exodus of civilians (who they feel the Hamas is using as a human shield) leaving Gaza to then house only the Hamas fighters.

2. After a complete starvation of Gaza and the exodus of civilians the ground invasion of Gaza will start. 

3. From here on things will get complicated. Even with overwhelming forces the eradication of Hamas fighters will be a long, protracted and bloody war. If the operation is not swift the dynamics of war will change perceptions within the Israeli public. Long protracted invasions always result in this as we have seen in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

4. There are voices within Israel who are calling for a total annexation of the Gaza strip and while not an elegant or viable solution it is a possiblity one should not ignore. 

5. If annexation is discarded as non feasible. which is truly the case, then the question remains what happens to the Gaza strip after an Israeli pull out? Is the area handed over to the Palestinian Authority who may have an uphill task to rebuild their image and trust with the people of Gaza who rejected them in 2003! On the other hand it is likely that even though Hamas may be defeated as a fighting force it may well remain as a political player within Palestinian politics. 

6. On a broader regional basis Israel alone cannot appeal to its new found Arab friends to intervene for peace. On the other hand without a doubt the United States has lost its position as an honest broker in the peace process. Indeed Saudi Arabia, Qatar and UAE would play a front role in the rebuilding of a destroyed Gaza, but their ability to influence political outcomes will largely depend upon how Israel shapes it policy towards a lasting peace. 

As a closing note there cannot be any joy amongst any humanist seeing images of women and children being killed on either side of this fighting. There will be many who will comment on who has suffered more, the Palestinians or the Israeli, the truth is that one woman, one child killed in this conflict is one too many. 

Constitutionalism in Pakistan at a time of change.

 The changing of the guard at the Supreme Court of Pakistan comes at a time of uncertain political times underlying which is a struggle for parliamentary sovereignty with extra parliamentary forces embroils the apex court at the centre of the struggle. Pakistan's constitutional journey has often pitched the judiciary in the unenviable role of adjudicating on political challenges to the constitutional process. During these seven decades of Pakistan's existence the power and writ of the Supreme Court has witnessed ups and downs that has seen the Constitution either being abrogated or suspended four times. Each of these times a military led constitutional engineering happened under the 'doctrine of necessity' where the notion that the 'state' interests are superior to the legal necessities of the the Constitution. The result was the 1962 Constitution, the 1985 Amendment, and the 2003 Amendment. Each of these moments were followed by the Parliament reasserting its position through the 1973 Constitution, the 1997 Thirteenth Amendment and the 2010 Eighteenth Amendment, all with the aim to role back the 'centralisation' of the military governments. 

Sadly the constitutional engineering was directed through political motives and not really with the aim to improve the constitutional framework within the country. Recourse to the superior judicial system is always taken to resolve political conflicts, as we have recently seen, placing a heavy burden on the judges. The 18th Amendment was far reaching in the devolution of power to the provinces, a long standing demand of the smaller provinces, but fell short of addressing the need for devolution of power to local government at the district level. However, that Amendment also reduced the powers of the President with out creating a mechanism for the former powers to be vested in an alternate form. The result has been that since then the Supreme Courts decisions can only be implemented by the government of the day on a selective basis. The erosion of the judicial writ has been accompanied with a rise in the incidents of contempt of the court, in many cases by politicians and worse still from officials of the bureaucracy. The devolution of power to the provinces also been accompanied by a call for creating new provinces with the aim to adjust the power concentration in the larger provinces. This alone creates challenges for adjustments within the existing framework of the Constitution and new provisions and amendments that is a gigantic undertaking.

A major aspect of the centralisation of powers during the military governments, particularly during General Zia's regime, created a source of constitutional reengineering which went beyond the scope and intent of the 1949 Objectives Resolution. This resulted in a gradual and incremental growth in the religious content of both legal and even constitutional provisions. The fiat accompli of these enactments by nature of society and political expediency have since made debate impossible on this content and reform of those laws difficult. A case in question is the Blasphemy Law the discussion of which even to improve it evokes a violent response, leaving the onus of dealing with cases under this law to rest on the shoulders of the Supreme Court. 

There is little denying that after 75 years Pakistan constitutional edifice is still being worked upon which inextricably creates conflicts between the necessity of law to clash with the expediency of politics. Thus Constitutionalism, in the context of Pakistan, does at times represent absorb and be influenced by its ideological framework and the power dynamics that have emerged, from time to time, within the country. In Western countries the influence of ideology, beyond a recognition of democratic tradition of law, is low to negligible allowing a rule of law and the working of the judiciary to seen as not only the final arbitrators of the law but also the custodian of justice beyond the mere act of interpreting the laws. In the case of Pakistan the colonial and post colonial legacy meant that they drew much of its legal shape from Western, and democratic, legal traditions, which then were attempted to be juxtaposed into local and national norms and practices. 

Insofar as the problem of designing Pakistan's Constitutionalism was limited incorporating local norms and practices the task would not have been burdensome. However the power dynamics on the ground which resulted in military governments taking over four times created legal challenges which were monumental to say the least. Each of these governments sought to obtain legal cover from the judiciary even though, especially after the 1973 Constitution, express provisions (like Article 6) were violated. In each case the courts either openly obliged the military rulers (Ayub and Zia) with a new constitutional framework (1962 Ayub) or through large scale suspension of provisions of the Constitution (Zia). In the case of Musharraf the judiciary tried to maintain a semblance on continuity but on essential aspects of Constitutionalism went along with the military government and what its bureaucrats wanted. It is interesting that only after the military rulers vacated their seats of power the judiciary was quick to rule their governments acts as unconstitutional. 

There is no denying that the principle of segregation of power between the judiciary, parliament and the executive branches of the state has never been an issue. The conflict has been as to the scope of this segregation and where the dividing lines emerge. In 1996 and then in 2011-2013 some significant progress was made when the power to appoint judges, especially to the higher courts, moved to a Judicial Commission from the previous set up of executive appointment. Though only recently the Parliament of the coalition parties in 2023 have tried to assert their role in the matter of judicial appointments the matter is far from settled. 

There has emerged, after the 18th Amendment, a constitutional vacuum as to the absence of an executive authority to enforce the decisions of the Supreme Court when the executive branch of government refuses to implement its decisions. This has been recently seen in terms of the references made to the Supreme Court on the questions of calling fresh elections. Traditionally in a situation like this the President was empowered to call the elections based on the superior court decision. Political tussles have resulted in the Parliament passing laws that erode some of the edifice of the Constitution and some may even suggest a politicalisation of the judiciary is being attempted. 

One is often asked how India and Pakistan differed in their Constitutional law and more importantly, in the governance of the state. The simple answer is how the two countries differed in their initial design of the state apparatus and the functionality that went with it. India while accepting, initially, the vice regal system of the British rule, installed Lord Mountbattern, the former Viceroy of India, in a ceremonial role of Governor General. The founder of the nation Ghandi was excluded from the government role and did not hold any position, not even of a ceremonial one. Nehru this could assert the will of the Parliament in the shaping of the pattern of governance and  its Constitution was framed without any 'lopsided' power. 

In the case of Pakistan the vice regal system was not only adopted at Independence but the powers of the Viceroy were vested with the Governor General who was also the founder of the nation. While the initial intent was to create a cohesiveness in administration of the new country and it was desired by Mr Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the founder and first Governor General, that the Constituent Assembly formed by him to frame the constitution would deal with these issues. However, soon after his demise his successors continued with the vice regal system and indeed with the same powers. Considerable conflict arose between the Governor General and the Constituent Assembly with one Governor General dissolving the Assembly. In fact it was the then Supreme Court that in May 1955 decided that the dissolution was irregular and a new Assembly was appointed. The percieved 'interest of the state' has always been put to test against constitutionalism when the attitude of this vice regal mentality has come to the fore front in Pakistan.

Whether it was the military governments of Ayub, Yayha, Zia or Musharraf. or the civilian government of Ghulam Mohammed (1955) the 'interest of the state' have been used as a reason to dismiss civilian governments and in effect, like during Zia's regime, completely subvert the constitution and even the parliament. Let is not forget during Zia's regime the Constitution amendment actually carried his name (a first in Constitutional history) and the National Assembly relegated to an 'advisory' role. The 8th Amendment of 1985 perhaps single handedly eroded parliamentary sovereignty and at the same time introduced safety clauses (Article 58(2) and Article 90 to name a few) that provided a safety net for the military coup leaders from the effects of Article 6. We must forget the architects of this engineering were not all wearing a uniform, they included bureaucrats and members of the judiciary who framed and in some cases sanctioned the process to be ratified by a truncated or 'selected' National Assembly. 

Through these times the judiciary through various decisions on case law accepted, at times, that military rule was merely a constitutional deviation based on the necessity of 'state interests'. Powers granted well beyond the remit and intent of the 1973 Constitution were taken my both Zia and Musharraf and not questioned by the judiciary. The dictum was that the take over of power for national interest was itself the justification in law. While Zia's 8 Amendment gave him powers to make the National Assembly a lame duck and merely an advisory role it also gave him powers to dismiss the Prime Minister and even send the Assembly packing home. Further it create an trump card provision that created immunity from future persecution for the action of the coup or any other actions he may take. Musharraf's regime in addition created the unique provision that through various ordinances he could change any provision of the constitution as he thought fit. 

In this tussle between the de jure realties and the de facto realities within Pakistan invariably the the de facto considerations prevailed. Whether it was a full blown abrogation of the constitution (1958 coup) or the suspension, (1977, 1990, 1999) the judiciary was on hand to provide help to the usurpers. In the case of Zia and Musharraf the Supreme Court's award of the power of amendment of the constitution to them was equivalent to acknowledging that the Parliament was not the supreme law making body in the country. Ironically, we recently saw a debate where the Parliament was seeking to assert that it had supremacy over the judiciary by virtue of it being a body elected by the people. This new dimension to Constitutionalism in Pakistan is still to be tested and I am afraid this is just the first episode of the series. 

As a new Chief Justice takes his oath the perception of schisms within the superior courts judges need to be resolved. While the substantive part of the differences seem to have been over procedural issues political circles on either side of the divide did not waste time to politicise the situation. Indeed the recent PDM and the earlier PTI government took varying measures to plan a political complexion to the judicial process. The perception that the direct engineering by the military of the Constitutionalism process may well have receded in the face of a more buoyant judicial presence has to be balanced with a common held view that influence through proxy continues on major legal issues. There is no evidence to suggest either of the perceptions is true thus leaving a large measure of speculation which is used by all and sundry to discredit the highest courts. 

As a nation there is an urgent need to not expect political squabbling to be resolved always by a bench of five or more judges. Sadly after the 1973 Constitution was formed the process of continuous refinements to its legal framework was subverted in a manner explained earlier. Thus constitution making either was halted in the years that followed or completely derailed by the military governments. The new Chief Justice one can be sure is aware of the bumpy constitutional journey that has happened in the leading courts of the country. There is hope that the attempted politicalisation of the judiciary is stopped in its track. The creation of a more transparent view of the judicial process alongside by a tolerant and honest public discussion on constitutionalism in Pakistan should occur within the sociaty and on the media. The dispensation of justice should take precedence over only the interpretation  of the law. On a more enduring level a dialogue to bring about legal reforms and more education on the constitution should be encouraged. 

Lessons of Life. 1 (part of 65)

 

Lesson 1

Know Yourself.

Humans have, over the centuries, explored the universe and at the micro level delved into understanding atoms and genomes. While much effort has been made to understand the human mind and our actions, introspection of our self nature has been marginal. Since the dawn of man we have had emotions and feelings, from love and empathy to anger and violence, all of which remain embedded in our mind and actions to this day. These emotions have, over the centuries, been tempered with our shared experience of human progress and history, and in some ways conditioned by it. To many this has directed our moral compass to shape what we consider right and wrong about say genocide, racism and gender.

While this may have shaped, to some extent, as to who we are, we, as individuals, still have to embark on our path towards discovering our self nature. The exploration of the Self has been marginal and in essence in most cases a personal effort. Over the past five decades or so there has been an exhaustive effort towards self-help, self-improvement and counselling of the soul to attain a modicum of peace and tranquility within us. Meditation, yoga, spiritual well-being courses etc. have become the buzz words for many as they quench their thirst for knowledge and peace within.

Integral to the human condition is a search for happiness and achieving happiness is measured differently for different people. Happiness for some is the attainment of riches and a lifestyle, for others attainment of love and companionship, and for some a state of peace within. The true accomplishment of happiness is integral to knowing our self nature in order for the happiness to be sustainable and long lasting.

Have you asked yourself “Who am I?”

Is it our name? Is it the self image we have of ourselves? Is it reflective of the image others have of us? Generally we use words to describe ourselves, words like ‘kind’, ‘honest’, ‘caring’ and many other words. We have to look beyond the words or the images these words carry in our brain. Let’s say we believe kindness is a part of one’s self nature. We have to examine this trait of kindness within us by understanding what does this concept of kindness mean. In what context do we use the word ‘kind’? Are we kind to some people who are close to us and not so kind towards strangers? Are we kind to someone so long as they praise us but if they are critical of us do we become less kind, more passive aggressive?

While we recognise the emotions within us through shared experiences, relate them to a broad assembly of similar feelings represented by one word which is a bundle of similar emotions, understanding our representation of the emotions that envelope that word reveals glimpses of our self nature. Take an example of the emotion we call ‘Kindness’. The question is whether such an emotion, which we then ascribe to our self nature, is transactional and conditional or innate within us? Is our kindness in response to an act of kindness to you? Is your kindness selective or universal? Is your kindness impulsive to emotions or reactive to a stimulus? Are you kind in the face of hostility? When you are kind in your actions and emotions what do you feel afterwards? Is this ‘after feeling’ conditioned by the reaction you get from the recipient of your kind act? What makes your kindness unconditional? Can you remain ‘kind’ in the face of hatred?

The more we explore the anatomy of these emotions within us we will discover that words become the anchors by which we identify a particular emotion. There is nothing wrong in such identifiers in our emotional vocabulary but it should not prevent us from exploring whether such an emotion is unconditionally embedded in our self nature. To know our self nature is a momentous step towards knowing, acknowledging and embracing our self nature.

One may ask why is it important to know our self nature?

There are some conditions of the human mind and living that we crave. Happiness, Peace and Love would rank high in our non material pursuits of living. These conditions are within us but we as sentient beings seek them on the outside of the self rather than first attain them within us. True happiness, true love and true peace reside in the self knowledge we attain. It is through this self knowledge of ourselves that we attain love, happiness and peace within us. Through our structured learning and share experiences in life we have concepts about happiness and what it means to us. More often then not one barometer of attaining happiness is codependent on the actions of people around us. In this sense happiness is transactional, while may well be real and uplifting we need to acknowledge its sustainability depends on how external elements continue that feeling of happiness.

When we know and embrace our true self nature then happiness, love and peace are no more transactional depending on the stimulus the actions and words of others provide us. Yes words and actions of the people we care for matter but they cannot be the sole reason for happiness. When we know our true self nature we attain an emotional self sufficiency which does not seek self affirmation. We then see the words and actions of the people around us with confidence rather than a desperate seeking to feel good. The knowledge of our self nature also is integral to protecting ourselves from hurtful emotions because we can assess negative emotions around us with a detachment allowing us maintain our emotional balance.

Our self nature, rather the image of it, is shaped through our shared experience of life and the belief systems that are embedded into our psyche. This shared experience can be positive and reinforcing and it can be shaped by negativity and depleting to the self. Knowing our self nature involves facing those emotions within us which may also, on closer examination, beak down our own preconceived images of our Self. Because our image our our Self is also images of how people see us and our belief of those images, challenges this notions really creates clarity of who we truly are.

The question then is how do we achieve this better understanding of our true self? This is a process of introspection which has to done in stages and in quiet reflection. Those of us who can mediate may wish to first calm the mind before such an introspection, others can choose a quiet place and an undisturbed half hour or one hour. Say I believe in the self image that I am a compassionate person. Do I believe this because people say it to me? Do I recall the moments where I have shown compassion to others? Was the compassion prompted by an event or came from noticing someone’s anguish or grief? Is my compassion universal or selective? Is my compassion consistent or transitory? Can I recall moments where in contrast to compassion I have actually hurt someone’s feelings? Can I recall these moments where I hurt someone? Was this hurt inevitable or unavoidable due to circumstances, and if so, was I compassionate towards the people I hurt? Can I recall what I felt after I hurt someone?

Any self exploration has to be honest and bit by bit in these silent moments of reflection we not only understand the emotions and experiences that twine around the ball at the center of which is the Self, we relate their understand into who we truly are. The Self is never static, it is endemic to change through experience, emotional interaction and reflective internal thought.

Imran Khan and the Political Scene in Pakistan

 When Imran Khan's government was ousted in a vote of non confidence in April 2022 one thing was clear that a multitude of political and vested interests aligned to thwart any political comeback. While the non confidence vote in itself was by the book there was little doubt that there was a good deal of 'nudging' by various interest sections to ensure the outcome was his ouster. To say what followed was to be a test of Imran Khan's political acumen is an understatement. Now a year an half later the highly popular Khan is incarcerated in prison under a 3 year jail term, his party has been ploughed through leaving a shell which he cannot really rebuild while inside. Yet Imran's political journey is a repeat of Pakistan's sad political journey where every elected Prime Minister since 1970 has been jailed at least once. 

In a country where opposition to the government is immediately equated with being a traitor to the country it is not surprising that patriots in the true sense are hard to recognise and much less appreciate. There is also little denying that every leading political figure has, at some time or the other, had the benevolent hand of the establishment guiding their destiny. This was true to Nawaz Sharif, Benazir Bhutto, and even Imran Khan, while one may argue as to the extent of the support and guidance that each may have received. 

There was a significant difference in the emergence of Imran Khan as a political leader because it was achieved on the back of massive political following amongst the youth of the country. While his three plus years in office were not spectacular they were not a failure either. It would seem that while his PTI government was planning for a long stay at the wicket and planning accordingly the reality was that with a coalition government the innings could not be guaranteed to be a long one. Imran's style of leadership, largely focused around his own office and persona, did not create the infrastructure of a true political party. This is much like his rival PMLN and PPP which remain movements collected around a couple of individuals. Both rival parties have never had qualms about making special deals to either remain in power or to regain power. Khan and his PTI not only lack the wheeling and dealing experience of the other two but also didn't use its time in office to galvanise the small political pressure groups into their mantra. 

Imran and his PTI forged a message of a 'Naya (New) Pakistan' where by definition they were going to change the way things happen in Pakistan. Even proclaiming such a noble objective is likely to rile up vested interests in the country who have created, nourished and benefited from the set up that has been shaped over 75 years since Independence. In hindsight Imran chose a platform where he created more enemies that he could handle and prudence may have suggested a step by step approach to remedy the system. But given his age and the lack of political depth in his party Imran Khan was in a hurry to change things, and being in a hurry one is likely to make mistakes. 

Having been removed from office Imran Khan seemed to feel he can, single handedly, rewrite the political narrative in the country and 'force' a perfect storm where the government of the PDM (an alliance of 13 parties) would be forced to call elections. While in Jan 2022 the PTI government's popularity was waning on the back of inflation and weakening currency, his ouster surged his popularity to an unprecedented level. Ironically this surge in public following was perhaps the single most deciding factor for Imran's opponents to attempt to derail his political journey.

The events of the past 18 months are not a good reflection on Imran Khan's political acumen. In similar measure it has also be a unique insight into how the 'state' can treat its political opponents. Human rights violations, disappearance of journalists, and a crack down on political dissent is the order of the day. Nearly 200 criminal cases have been filed against Imran Khan, all of which cannot be substantive, with the aim of bogging him and his supporter down into a legal quick sand long enough to dismember his political party. 

One is often asked if Imran Khan could have handled things differently. Without the benefit of being in the driving seat one can only make suppositions, and they may well be off the mark in such an analysis. After losing the majority in the parliament Imran chose to boycott the National Assembly, perhaps a move that back fired as his opponents mustered a sham opposition group and continued about their business. In cricketing terms Imran Khan forgot that you cannot win a match by sitting in the stadium. Even when the umpires are not neutral, and the pitch is doctored against you, your team still has to play the game. (After all he did that against India in the series there). 

Thereafter the strategy seemed to be to appeal to the public and political rallies, and long marches became the order of the day. The show of force was at times impressive but it created two issues. The lack of immediate gains from these rallies, and the possibility of steam running out of the political fervour all suggested this was not going to be a quick resolution on the back of street power. The government of the 13 did what they do best, locked down on the media blanking out coverage of Khan and his political message. Imran felt that the peoples support was his biggest weapon, and to a large extent he is not wrong. However he did not use this support to capitalise in any negotiations he could have had with his opponents and the establishment. On the contrary there were no substantive negotiations and till this day each side blames the other for the absence of a dialogue. 

While national media was ordered to blank out Imran Khan the one thing they could not control was the social media. Undoubtedly the passionate support for Khan in the social media grew and continues till today. It perhaps remains the single most focused voice that emerges in favour of Imran Khan. However, as much as social media is an amazing tool it is also something that is not entirely understood and therefore very difficult, if not impossible, to control. So much so that PTI position holders also got carried away in their messaging as an aggressive and at times vile campaign emerged against anyone or any section of society that did not embrace the PTI narrative. After the first short period of arrest of Imran Khan on  May 9 2023, it was no surprise that the intended peaceful protests turned violent. It is unlikely that such violence, which the nation had seen many times before in its history, was personally directed by Imran Khan, but clearly this is one of the many cases he will have to face. 

It is evident that there is a concerted effort to not only discredit Imran Khan but also to disfranchise him from politics altogether. Notwithstanding the legal challenges that he faces, Khan's role in a political sense will not simply fade away. His political survival will not only depend upon the powers that be but also on how he plays his cards in the coming months. If elections are held between November and February next year then as things stand Imran may well not be in the race for office. However PTI, if organised fast enough, could fight the election on the back of Khan's popularity and have a suitable enough showing in a high turn out election to make them a factor in the future of Pakistan politics. On the other hand a low turn out election which are prone to riggings, may result in PTI being marginalised. 

Some may argue that Imran Khan has no need to reinvent himself in a political sense, and this may well be true. However, he will need to assess not only his tactics and strategy but also focus again on the organisation of his party. Empowered by the support of the younger generation he must focus on his next generation of party leadership and build the party from the bottom up. The test will be whether he will need 'electables' who are assured election victory due to caste, creed or local politics. If the traction he has gained in the past 18 months amongst the populous can be maintained then his direct or indirect presence on the political scene cannot be set aside. Unlike the Sharif family where inspite of Nawaz Sharif being disqualified and sentenced to jail there is a plethora of family members to continue their political presence, Imran does not have the same situation. This implies that Imran has to gravitate to the young wing of his party who had not abandoned him irrespective of the pressure on them to do so. 

Imran Khan will have, nevertheless, rethink his approach in a political comeback he is likely to make. The steps he would have to consider would broadly encompass the following:

• Rebuild the party at the grass root level.
• Bring in a new empowered leadership.
• Create a non partisan 'think tank' to plan key economic, political, legal and social reforms.
• Reset his relationship with the military establishment.
•  Recognise that in Pakistan large scale change can only be done in phases.
• Build a core of highly professional individuals who would be the essence of their governance should they win the election.
• Decentralise power from himself and empower a new cadre of leadership.

Perhaps the list can be a mile long but it is essential for Pakistan that the current polarisation is not conducive to the country. Each segment, including Imran Khan, has to play their part in bringing sanity to the system. One thing is clear that things cannot continue in the manner they have been conducted over the past seven decades. Clearly the one thing that Khan's presence has done, rightly or wrongly, given a voice to the youth who were unheard in the past. His party should not see them as a tool for electoral victory but empower them to be a positive influence in the country. 

On the flip side it would be naive to think that popular political leaders can be simply dissolved into the heap of history. One may argue that some of Khan's image may well be tarnished. While Imran's popularity is perhaps his best insurance to prevent the worst, it is also the biggest threat he poses to his opponents. Imran's maturity is what is on test as to how these assets are used to not only tone down the political conflict but to project that politics in Pakistan does not need to be a zero sum game. 

Pakistan: Difficult Times.

 To say that my homeland,  Pakistan, is going through difficult times would, indeed, be an understatement of colossal proportions. On the other hand, someone may be equally right in pointing out that when has Pakistan not been through difficult times? According to Ayub Khan he marshalled the first military coup to over come some serious difficulties. Bhutto continued with martial law after the breakaway of East Pakistan, to form Bangladesh, because the country was going through difficult times. Zia ul Haq overthrew Bhutto to settle the situation and difficulties caused by the political turmoil from rigged elections. Musharaf while not faced with difficult times in the country was encountering a difficult relationship with Nawaz Shareef hence he stepped in. 

Now we stand at the familiar cross roads under the road signs of 'difficult times' yet again. Political chaos, an erosion of the principles of the rule of law, an economic implosion and a near anarchy situation has polarised the country. The edifice of the Constitution has been trampled upon with no recourse to a remedy other than the superior courts warning that the death knell of constitutionalism is around the corner. Sadly we, as a nation, are reduced to solely relying on a bench of judges to remedy 75 years of mismanagement. As we grapple with form and substance of the government we choose, or not choose, to govern us, we can only be reminded that perhaps we have held a fake democracy close to our hearts. with political movements masquerading as political parties it is no surprise that the three major claimants to our votes lack the political organisation of student union body in any developed democracy. 

As we stand today, two of the provinces of the country have essentially illegal caretaker governments in place. Human rights have become all the non existent and the rule and writ of the law is entirely whimsical to those who rule the country. A protest, which unnecessarily became violent, (not the first time in Pakistan) suddenly is equated with terrorism and with lines drawn so hard between all the stakeholders its now a show down between 'them and us'. Is it necessary that we in Pakistan have to push our already broken down cart of democracy to the edge of the ravine each time we cannot sit across the table and talk things out? If Martin Luther King was right that 'the riot is the language of the unheard' then we must ask what is the language of imprisoned and tortured nation? This is so because in Pakistan we have gone miles beyond being 'unheard'. Disappearances, wanton arrests, and a total disregard for accepting what is right have become the order of the day.

The blame of this rests upon the shoulders of the nation as a whole. Every institution, every political party, every state organisation, from the army, to the civil service to the bureaucracy carries their share of the blame. The politicians carry the blame for letting things slip so far that their only course of action is to play the blame game. Indeed Imran Khan, once seen as the possible guide to lead the country out of the mess, seems to have floundered in his way. The strange parallel one can draw between Imran Khan's political path and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's is that both had noble principles yet both lacked the ability to understand the process they are governed by. Revolutions without bloodshed do not happen, and neither are they needed or possible in Pakistan. We need a revolution in the mind and an evolution of process that can peacefully, and perhaps in stages, shape the country to a better path. Like Bhutto, Imran Khan too perhaps feels charisma and mass support are enough to change things. Yes they are important and vital ingredients in the mix but a solid team, dialogue, and the ability to carry people with you, even those who do not agree with you, is something that has been lacking.

We stand now wondering how many more pages of our constitution will be ripped up. How utilitarian will our moth eaten parliament become in the absence of a sitting opposition (for which PTI must carry its share of the blame). Will this scotched taped government of parties that normally would be at each others throats, try and survive and prolong its stay far beyond it was welcome? Imran Khan bereft of his once passionate supporting cast of political figures, most of whom have either deserted him or forced to dump him, must now wonder if the script could indeed have been written differently. Perhaps sitting on the opposition benches would have blunted the teeth of this emerging oligarchy? 

Yet sitting distantly away from the turmoils of the country, one can only hope that sanity will prevail in these 'difficult times'. While immediate free and fair elections is the only way forward there is an urgent need to listen to the courts, to establish the rule of law and to stop making a mockery of the constitution. The consequences of further polarisation will not only be dramatic but they will also be dangerous. Imran must walk his distance to the negotiation table as indeed must the other parties and the establishment. They all must remember they are merely trustees of the nation which in the end belongs to the people.

Farida Sher: Sister, Friend, and a Guide.

 It is coming onto almost two months since my beloved sister Farida Sher passed away after a battle with cancer. It was not sudden and knowing the inevitable was around the corner did not deter Farida (who we all called Apa) from accepting the outcome with grace, poise and a huge dose of courage. In our regular phone calls, even though her voice became progressively feeble, her courage and sense of humor never diminished. A couple of weeks before her passing she was recalling the humorous banter she and I always engaged. 

Farida was more than just a lovable sister. She was a founder member of the Womens Action Forum (WAF) in Pakistan. He passion to highlight issues of women's rights was not just symbolism but an earnest desire to have more equitable laws and treatment of women. She often talked of teaching skills to woman who had been abandoned in the urban centers after they and their families had moved to the larger cities from rural Pakistan. As a founding member of Simorgh, a brilliant organization bringing awareness to the core issues of women's rights, violence against women and women's education, she worked with some amazing individuals. The landscape of both Simorgh and WAF reads as a who's who of Pakistan women rights stalwarts. Nasrene Shah, Kauser Shaikh, Samina Bano Rehman, Ajana Raza, Marium Abrar, Hina Azfar, Naheed Aziz. Neelam Hussain and many more all brought together a pool of wisdom and intellect which speaks for itself. 

One of my earliest memories was when Apa was doing her Masters in Social Work and was doing an exhaustive paper on drug addiction in Pakistan. I recall driving her to unmentionable places in Lahore and sitting through her interviews. Her emphasis was to understand the causes of the addiction rather than to condemn it. These were her early steps into social activism which grew to be a part of the street protests against General Zia's draconian laws which pushed back the rights of womens like never before.

Farida Apa was an avid reader and instilled in me the love of books from a very early age. I owe my love of reading to my mother and her, because between them I was often bombarded with questions about the books I was reading. This was a passion she passed on to her son Shakir, a dynamic businessman who carries the tell tale signs of his upbringing under the nurturing eyes of his mother. Sadly Farida, unlike our mother, did not write her story or any books, even though she was a great storyteller. I know if she had got around to it she would have spun quite a tale for us all to read. An avid self made gardner her never tired of telling you of all the various flowers and herbs she was growing. At times when I called her it seemed she was more interested in my experiment to grow avocados in Dubai than she was in me. 

But then this was what you got with Farida Apa, an undultered dose of honesty, humor and frankness. While her passing has left a void in our hearts, I do know that the fond memories of her, and the many stories we can relive of her will keep her alive in our hearts. Apa go in peace and may you blossom like your flowers in the Hereafter.