NEWSLINE: ANNUAL'99: December 1998 Issue

From Sairah Irshad Khan in London

"I do not advocate violence, but violence breeds violence"

Q: Who do you think killed Hakim Said?

A: Nawaz Sharif figured in the plot to assassinate Hakim Said. This is the general consensus of the party. He may not have done it directly, but he hatched the conspiracy.

Q: With what end in mind?

A: To find an excuse to impose Article 245, to launch an operation against the MQM, and to divert the attention of the people of Pakistan and abroad from his corruption. His desire to impose Shariah stems from the same purpose.

Q: What is your response to the imposition of Article 245 in Karachi?

A: They have imposed Article 245 and also established summary military courts which will decide every matter. The establishment of these courts is a blatant denial of the present judicial system in Pakistan. The members of the [MQM] Legal Aid Committee have told me that Article 245 does not give the authorities the right to establish such courts or take extra-constitutional measures. They are currently examining the issue and, along with the members of the central coordination committee, are leaving for Islamabad to file a petition against this undemocratic imposition. We will use all the democratic means available to register our protest.

If the government is unable to function through the civil administration, they should resign. If they need to resort to such undemocratic measures in Karachi, they should call in the armed forces altogether, because the law and order situation is no better in the Punjab or elsewhere.

The government is resorting to quick fixes, administering emergency medical aid and pain killers where, in fact, a diagnosis and long-term cure is called for.

Q: what about the allegations that your party has itself contributed to the problem, and the charges levelled against the MQM of involvement in extortion, terrorism and murder?

A: I strongly deny all the allegations levelled against the MQM. However, I want to stress that if a nation, a community, a linguistic group or a religious or ethnic minority is pushed against the wall, the persistent process of persecuting that particular group through the use of brute state force ultimately creates resentment and leads to psycho-reactionary responses from those who are subjected to this brutalisation. In such cases, sometimes, some party followers or sympathisers leave the party fold, distance themselves from its policies, and take the law in their own hands.

Q: Do you mean to say that all the illegal activities your party has been charged with are the handiwork of only party renegades and breakaway factions?

A: The MQM is the only ray of hope for the middle-class, downtrodden masses of Pakistan. It does not have any feudal in its rank and file. Its massive support base may, however, comprise a few individuals who take the law in their own hands. But you cannot term an individual act as a party act or as party policy.

Q: Yet, whenever you have called for a strike it has been accompanied by violence. This is particularly ironic considering that during the observation of such strikes, the very people you supposedly represent are the biggest sufferers.

A: I do not know of any political party that has, while calling for a strike, asked its workers to go on to the streets and burn buses etc.

Whenever a strike call is given, whether by the MQM, the PPP, the Jamaat-e-Islami or however, there are some people who use the opportunity to commit acts of violence. We have seen that often these people are not even from the party. The question is, why does the government force the frustrated youth to come on to the streets in the first place? There is a reason behind the violence.

Q: When the MQM was first launched, you had a very specific charter. You spoke of the need to abolish the quota system, local government, the redistribution of revenue etc. But in the last seven or eight years, these demands seem to have fallen by the wayside. Instead, increasingly your attention seems to be focused on releasing party workers and running down successive governments with whom you have developed differences.

A: The demands are still there. But it is part of government policy to divert the party's attentions, to keep it engaged in other areas so that it has no time to concentrate on its main objectives. They arrest, they torture, they kill extra-judicially, so we have to run around to get those innocent men, elderly people, children, who are the victims, released. That has to take priority. This is also part of the establishment strategy to divert the international community's attention from the actual facts. They want to show the human rights organisations that only one party is involved in acts of terrorism and in committing violence.

Q: The MQM has twice forged alliances with the PML(N) and the PPP. All have ended bitterly. Now you seem to be flirting with the PPP once again. Do you plan to enter any formal alliance with the PPP?

A: Not right now, that will be decided by the MQM coordination committee. If there is any kind of coming together, it will be on the basis of the MQM's one-point agenda: the restoration of the Sindh Assembly. On this agenda we are willing to join hands with any party-even the Jamaat-e-Islami.

Q: Would you concede that your party continues to sacrifice principles at the altar of political expediency?

A: It is true that we made alliances with the PPP and the PML on different occasions, but we have been betrayed by them. We have not betrayed anyone. Also, we have not flirted with anyone, they may want to flirt with us. In any case, in the existing situation we have to be realistic enough to talk to the different political parties for the benefit of our ideology and philosophy.

Q: A decade of such make and break alliances later, urban Sindh's situation has registered an alarming deterioration…

A: It is the duty of those in power to rectify the situation. We have never had the power to provide the people their legitimate rights.

Take the example of Karachi. We are worried about the situation there. We all want to see harmony, peace, and tranquillity. However, look at what happened. Meetings were held in Sindh under the leadership of the former Chief Minister, Liaquat Jatoi, to discuss the law and order situation in Karachi, where several policies were made to control the situation, but not a single elected member of the MQM from Karachi - the city's majority party - was invited to attend. It is clear that the authorities are just not willing to accept the mandate given to the MQM by the millions of people of Karachi. So, if the MQM is not even asked to participate in meetings of this nature, how can it be asked to accept the responsibility for what happens? We are not responsible.

We asked the Prime Minister a number of times to give us authority and a share in the administration. We were not asking for any extra-constitutional authority. We said, 'give us one month. We are the majority party of Karachi, and it will be controlled by its elected representatives. Give us that power, and then if we fail, you can lay the responsibility on our shoulders.' But when as coalition partners - in 1988, 1990 and 1997 - we were not even given our due share, what purpose did the coalitions serve? What was the point of giving us three or five ministries and cars with flags when we had no authority, no share in the affairs of the administration? No commissioner, deputy commissioner or police official took orders from us, we had no say in the formulation of law and order policies. How could we be held accountable for the problem in Karachi?

Q: So what would be acceptable to the MQM in the present circumstances - to be asked to form the government in Sindh?

A: You can gauge the height of discrimination against our party when you consider that although there were 28 of our party members in the assembly as opposed to 14 PML members, our party was denied the chief ministership.

In our agreement with the government, they pledged they would rehabilitate all those who had been forced to leave their homes in the no-go areas. They broke their word. Think about the hundreds of families, men, women and children, who came here after 1947, painstakingly built their homes, only to see them destroyed during the army operation. Young girls were raped, children were butchered and after so many had died, those who remained felt there was no choice but to leave. But they had nowhere to go. They moved in with relatives, uncles, and aunts. But their problems did not end there. Even the place where they found refuge were raided. When you have a whole segment of youth who are unemployed and incapable of supporting themselves, and when you even take away the roof over their beads, how will they react?

Q: So where do you go from here?

A: I do not advocate violence. But violence breeds violence. When the state itself commits terrorism, when it persistently terrorises its own people, the people will ultimately be forced to retaliate in a similar manner. The only solution is for the government to accept the existence of all the ethno-linguistic groups and provide the people equal opportunities in all walks of life irrespective of caste, creed, colour, sect, sex or religion.

It is ironic how all the issues the MQM had earlier raised - the Shariah, anti-terrorist courts, the Kalabagh dam - are now coming home to roost. As far as religion in concerned, it is generally assumed that the poor and middle classes of our country are fanatics who are naturally inclined to demand Shariah. The fact is, being Muslims, we too believe in Shariah but not in Nawaz Sharif's Shariah, not in any individual's Shariah. So we opposed the Bill in the Parliament and after that, like a chameleon, we saw their attitude change towards us.

When Nawaz Sharif came to call on me in October, he acknowledged before everyone present that the government had failed to implement its commitment to us vis a vis the 'no go' areas. Then he asked me why we would not support the Shariah Bill considering that it had now been modified. I told him that it was not my arbitrary decision, but the party's unanimous decision to oppose it, come what may. So now they are pressuring the Senators.

It is ironic, they call us terrorists but here you have a democratically elected Prime Minister who goes to the public and exhorts the people to pressure Senators into passing the Bill. Isn't this inciting violence? We received a call from Aftab Sheikh and Nasreen Jalil a few days ago, informing us that as they were attempting to get into the Senate, they were surrounded by several busloads of long-bearded men, wielding Kalashnikovs, chanting slogans in favour of Nawaz Sharif and threatening that if the Senators did not endorse the Bill they would be taught a lesson.

I also received a letter from Shahbaz Bhatti, the President of the Christian Association, telling me how IB officials arrived at his house and attempted to intimidate him. The MQM is against fanaticism and terrorism. We believe in religious tolerance. And we will not support the Shariah Bill.

Q: Do you believe the Quaid-e-Azam envisaged Pakistan as a secular state?

A: How can anyone deny that? He said as much very clearly in his speech to the Constituent Assembly. Perhaps a better word may be 'liberal.' Quaid-e-Azam was a liberal and he never wanted Pakistan to be a theocratic state. We want to fashion Pakistan into the country envisaged by its founding father. Today, we do not have democracy in Pakistan. It is a system of the feudals, by the feudals, for the feudals, and until there is democracy, there will be religious fanaticism, illiteracy, backwardness. It doesn't matter which party comes to power, the feudals are equally divided in Benazir and Nawaz's camp.

I supported Nawaz because I genuinely like him. Unlike Benazir, he was not a feudal. But the feudal stranglehold is so powerful, that today even this industrialist has become a

feudal, and establishment the Raiwind Estate. Feudalism is not only about owning property - it's a mindset, a mentality. How can this class, with their huge homes in Clifton and Defence, who keep their serfs in the villages poor and illiterate, bring democracy to the country?

When the MQM was given the education ministry in 1990, we opened 200 schools in interior Sindh. But as soon as we left, all these schools were converted into autaqs of the landlords. We say give us one year, give us the power to implement the changes we believe in, and I give you my word there will never be a need for an operation again.

Q: Apart from the Haqiqi, is there any other splinter group of the MQM that poses a challenge to your party?

A: The answer is in the results of the general elections of 1988, 1990, 1993 and 1997, where people voted again and again in favour of the MQM. As far as the Haqiqi is concerned it is known internationally and nationally, that they are a bunch of criminals patronised by the army. The establishment has continued to attempt the creation of splinter groups to show the international community that the Mohajirs are divided and the MQM's strength has been whittled down.

Q: Do you think the federation will survive?

A: If the federal government persists in interfering in provincial matters, if they infringe upon the provincial autonomy, it will weaken. Ultimately, Pakistan will see history repeat itself: it will meet the same fate as the country did in 1971. The Bengalis did not want to separate, but a persistent policy of victimisation and oppression forced their hand. If they continue to do what they did in Balochistan, using guns on the people, depriving them of their fair share, oppressing them, a day will come when they will say keep your Pakistan and your Punjab, we are going to separate.

But if the government pulls back, if there is no hegemony of any one group, the situation can still be salvaged. In the culture that exists, however, if you are a Punjabi then you are a loyal, patrotic, first-grade citizen of Pakistan. If you are not a Punjabi your patriotism is questioned. This is not an issue about the Mohajirs alone. The problem is universal. Many Sindhis, Balochis and Pathans have, in fact, joined the MQM. I'm not claiming these nationalities are large in number, but we were never allowed to go to Balochistan or the Punjab freely. And besides, those people who have joined us are victimised; their parents are rounded up, even women and children are beaten up.

Q: So are you going to persist in the drive to go national, as was the obvious intention when you changed the party's name to Muttahida?

A: All the provinces have a similar feeling - that apart from the Punjab, they are considered second-class citizens. So I've appealed to the youth, the intellectuals of the Punjab, to come and talk to us, to work towards changing the existing political culture and system. But alone I cannot change anything. I even say, if you don't like the MQM that's fine. But all educated, thinking people should come out, form their own organisations and struggle for change-change through the ballot, not the bullet.

Q: Under what circumstances would you consider returning to Pakistan?

A: I'd love to return but you are aware of the brutal assassination of my elder brother and my nephew. They were arrested and brutally tortured. When the establishment does not even spare my relatives who have no affiliation either with the MQM or any political party, then my life is at grave risk. Nonetheless, the MQM's central coordination committee will not allow me to return.

Q: How much longer can you realistically expect to run the party from here?

A: Seven years have already passed. It has never before been witnessed in political history, this long-distance running of a party, but it goes to show that while it may be unprecedented, it is not impossible. Never before has the world witnessed the phenomenon of using the telephone as a revolutionary tool. We have shown that if you have the will, you will find a way.

Q: How do you support yourself in the UK?

A: I don't support myself, my party supports me. The funding comes from donations collected by our overseas units all over the world-from South Africa, Australia, Canada, Europe, the US, UAE etc.

Q: What is your legal status in Britain? Have you been granted political asylum?

A: Not yet. My case is under consideration, but I'm a legal resident.

Q: Do you miss Karachi?

A: Terribly. You can find the best quality of life here, but apni miti ka maza aur hai. However, one has to cope and sacrifice, if one has commitment and dedication.