Although my personal view is that if it makes pathans happy to have a name of their choice, there is nothing anti-pakistan about it; the rest of this post is quite eye-opening
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Friday 09April 2010
What make Nawaz Sharif U-Turn on NWFP-18th Amendment? (1)
By Dr Shahid Qureshi
riWhat spell comes on Nawaz Sharif leader of PML-N that he got into the pro-India ANP/PPP/MQM trap laid for 18th Amendment on the name changing of the NWFP? The editorial of historically pro Nawaz Shairf leading daily newspaper ‘Nawa-eWaqat’ published on 2nd April 2010 should have been enough for PML-N as a wake up call.
The editorial states: Nawaz Sahrif has always been suspicious of anti national interests policies of his political brother Asif Zardari, but he become ‘hand in glove’ on changing of the name of NWFP to Pukhtunkhawa. He (Mr Asif Zaradari) started calling NWFP, Pukhtunkhwa long before the presentation of proposal in front of Constitutional Reform Committee. Should (Pakistani) nation inference that Nawaz Sahrif and Zardari are brothers on this anti state agenda? Pro Indian agenda of PPP, ANP and other coalition parties in government is very well known to the people of Pakistan and not hidden. Pakistani Nation is wondering that how come Nawaz Sharif leader (Muslim League) of the founding party of Pakistan toed that agenda? Few days ago he rejected the name Puktunkhawa, was all that a drama? Shouldn’t he at least explain his seasonings of supporting the name change to the nation, so Pakistani nation could at least decide whether to support him or not into the national politics? Mian Nawaz Sharif can do whatever he wishes but he should remember one thing that nation will not support him in any Indian doctored anti–national interests agenda, and NWFP’s new name Khyber Puktunkhawa is not acceptable to the (Pakistani) nation”.
It is eye opening to see how weak these so called leaders of mostly family run business like political parties are? A novice can see what was coming and yet twice Prime Minister of Pakistan, Chief Minister and Finance Minister of the largest province Punjab, grown and nurtured in military earth pots with fresh horse manures, Nawaz Sharif, completely failed to visualise and foresee? What made him change his mind and forced for a U-Turn? “A phone call from British Foreign Secretary David Miliband made him took U – Turn as claimed by former Law Minister in a TV program on 5th April 2010. It was an alarming but not an unexpected claim by the former Law Minister but he may not be aware with Nawaz Shairf’s own Indian links and connections.
Therefore, I wrote following letter to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London on 7th April 2010: “I am writing to you regarding a recent phone call by the British Foreign Secretary David Miliband to a Pakistani political party leader Mr Nawaz Sharif in connection with Constitutional crisis. It is widely reported in the media that a phone call was made on 27th March 2010. Former Law Minister Mr Raza Hayat Haraj claimed in an ARY Channel debate on 5th April 2010 that: Mr Nawaz Sharif took U-Turn (on the issue of constitutional package after phone call (from the British Foreign Secretary David Miliband). Many people in Pakistan are seeing this as interference in Pakistan’s internal affairs. Mr Nawaz Sharif is not part of the current government or opposition. The opposition leader in the Parliament is Mr Nisar Ali Khan (MNA). I am wondering if you could provide more information about this phone call for clarity and British position.”
Within hours I received following response from Foreign and Commonwealth Office on 7th April 2010: “I can confirm that the Foreign Secretary spoke to Nawaz Sharif but the conversation as portrayed in the media is not wholly accurate. It is not matter of course for us to brief the details of private calls. But I can advise you that the UK position is to have regular discussions with all political parties. We support Pakistan's democratic institutions and continue to hope that all parties will continue to work together around a common agenda to consolidate the political progress made to date and agree mutual steps that will strengthen democracy and impartial justice in Pakistan.”
It was reported in media on 28th March 2010 that, “British Foreign Secretary David Miliband called PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif over the telephone on Saturday (27th March 2010) to discuss the constitutional reforms package, according to a private TV channel. Talking to another channel, Punjab government spokesman Senator Pervaiz Rashid confirmed that Nawaz and Miliband discussed the deadlock over the constitutional reforms. “They talked about the deadlock over the constitutional reforms,” said Rashid. The British secretary hoped that the PML-N would play its role in ending the deadlock over the reforms. The channel said Britain was a guarantor of the Charter of Democracy, which was signed between the Pakistan People’s Party and the PML-N in London”.
On 27th March 2010, I wrote an article titled, Constitutional Game to Undo Pakistan from the Backdoor”, in The London Post: “The plan is devious and not easy to understand. Some of those in the committee reviewing the Constitution have some idea of the true nature of the exercise they are engaged in but most of them do not know what is going on; they do not have a clue what is good for the country and are unable to see through the machinations of parties with anti-Pakistan agenda. The reports of ‘consensus’ and ‘absence of leaks’ makes one suspicious of the entire project. I fear that a ready to sign ‘draft amendment’ is a sinister plot. The public and the press must have a debate on what the committee recommends. The Constitution is too important a matter to be left entirely to politicians. It seems to me that all the ingredients are being in place to undo Pakistan from the back door without even a fight. It seems the parties in the ruling coalition are in a hurry to fulfil the agenda of international plotters. The puppet masters had been relying on the gullibility of Nawaz Sharif who has been saying he would support no action that would destabilise the country
The Constitutional Reforms Committee (CRC) which has decided to present the 18th Constitutional Amendment before the two houses of the Parliament, rejecting the reservations of Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) and some a few of its recommendations. He may have reacted a bit late but it is important that he has smelt a rat. After the priorities of the Zardari regime, which came into power on the basis of a controversial ‘will’ of late Benazir Bhutto are dubious to say the least.
Owing to the deliberations and recommendations having remained shrouded in secrecy, people might not know why Nawaz Sharif, former Prime Minster and PML-N chief objected to these constitutional amendments in a press conference only an hour before a signing ceremony? The reality is that these amendments have many dimensions and multiple usages. Obviously the plotters are not stupid and are backed by an efficient machine. For example, those who drafted the Kerry Lugar Bill had Pakistani insiders to advise how to cloak their sinister ‘agenda’ behind nice words like support for democracy, promotion of tolerance and accelerating the pace of ‘development’. The problem is that Zaradri regime has too many ‘insiders’ promoting foreign agenda who are hurting the people and damaging the state. The MQM draft for constitutional amendments visualised “Provincial Autonomy” which gave the federation just two and half subjects – Defence, Foreign Affairs and Currency - Sine qua non for a Federation. The Draft Bill for Constitutional Amendments tabled by the MQM on 12th January 2009 MQM was not without foreign advice and support. I must admire President Asif Zardari, MQM leaders - Farooq Sattar and Altaf Hussain - and the teams of minders they have, for being so ‘creative’ for their masters.
International financiers and plotters use constitutional loopholes to disintegrate countries to take control of natural resources. These plotters, their bankers and local agents are adept at creating food and other shortages, unemployment, insecurity, lawlessness, corruption, poverty and constitutional hiatus that make it necessary to invite foreign experts and international financial institutions for advice and help. The whole idea is to pass the control over national institutions, assets and resources to these plotters. For example two ‘insiders’ who are cronies of President Zardari - Wajid Shamsulhasasn High Commissioner to United Kingdom and Hussain Haqani Ambassador to the United States - are allegedly involved in activities against the national interests of Pakistan . Wajid Shamsulhassan violated the decorum of his rank and the Service Rules of Pakistan when he went to collect documents pertaining to the trial in Switzerland and bring official documents to London and keep in his personal custody. Hussain Haqqani allegedly issued visas to the Blackwater personnel and was instrumental in adding conditions harmful and denigrating to the Armed Forces of Pakistan in the Kerry Lugar Bill. That the President as well those who serve him – whether cronies or not – are also subject to law, has been blatantly ignored. President Zardari and the team of his cronies continuously undermine the state; they get their orders obeyed because they have learnt ‘how to bypass the system’ to complete international agenda.
One cannot help admire the plotters for their selections of agents and deploying them in fulfilment of their multi layered conspiracy which is hard to detect and even harder to frustrate or neutralise. The game is not new but it is being played differently making it hard to tackle.
It seems that minders of Zardari, MQM and ANP have the Soviet Model of disintegration in mind. In modern times international plotters exploit legal and constitutional loopholes or arrange for such constitutional amendments that lead inevitably to the disintegration of the country. For example in dismantling the USSR the international plotters used constitutional provisions, which had been placed intentionally. The were provisions in the Constitution of the USSR – put in during the heady days after the Russian Revolution of 1918, that made dismantling of the Union not just possible but easy. Article 70 of the Soviet Constitution Stated: “Union of the Soviet Republics is a unitary, federal, multinational state, formed on Free Self Determination of Nations”. Article 72 was more explicit and stated: “Each Union Republic retains the right freely to secede from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics”.
Interestingly no such provision or mechanism is available in the US Constitution. According to US experts “the constitutional language is ‘sparse’. It is up to the Congress to give meaning to that language”. We all know who control and gets the majority in the Congress?
“It was 1974 constitution of former Yugoslavia which caused the break of the State”, said Antonio Moneo Lain a visiting fellow at LSE in his lecture at London School of Economics on 2nd December 2009. I asked him that although, “USA is also a union of States but no such facility like choice of becoming independent is available to the states as the issue of state autonomy is kept vague”.
Is it not strange that a party like (MQM–A) which bank on the votes of people who migrated and some emigrated later from India and have no roots with any province of Pakistan are leading the assault of the territorial and constitutional integrity of Pakistan. Clearly they are the instruments of an Indo-US plot for the disintegration of Pakistan! The irony is that it the ethnic group who are not a majority in any province are promoting constitutional provisions that would hurt them the most. What will happen to those who are not Punjabis, Sindis, Baluchis, Pathans, and Kashmiris? They might end up being like ‘Biharis - Pakistanis’ living in camps in Bangladesh!
These plotters usually start with fancy slogans to fool people like ‘ownership of natural resources and right to levy taxes should go to provinces’. In almost all countries, the direct taxes over people – on their income and what they produce or consume - is exclusively in the domain of the federal government. It is tax on land and property, which is usually levied by the provincial or local government. It is such provisions that are of interest to the people. The new name of the NWFP perhaps matters to the people of that province. The composition of the committee to select new judges is more important because President Zardari and his cronies have not given up in wresting control over the judiciary. But it is the provisions in the draft amendment that pertain to provincial autonomy that matter the most. Provinces should have the right to tax land and property. The provinces already own all the land. The markers of the success of MQM and cohorts would be that the right to tax people – on their production or purchase – is given to the provinces?
Now if we analyse USSR and Yugoslavia’s examples and read between the lines what these plotters are suggesting in the name of constitutional reforms in 1973 Constitution of Pakistan, it becomes crystal clear and evident that sinister game is being played to undo Pakistan from the back door. That is the game of many interested parties in the region including India.
Mian Nawaz Sharif is right not sign anything before it is open to public discussion and debate. He has talked about the Judicial Commission and the name of NWFP and some ‘other matters’. It is those ‘other matters’ that are of interest to the people of Pakistan. Are our politicians making such constitutional changes that court the danger of Pakistan meeting the fate of Yugoslavia? That is the question!”
To be continued