VIEW : In Pakistan: accusations and protests — Shafiq Solangi
.BMP)
Daily Times – Monday, October 08, 2012
Iron rods, sticks and weapons were defiantly not the stuff to celebrate the Ishq-e-Rasool day with
In September, we experienced two very caustic events that raised some questions on the credibility of Pakistan at the national and international level. First, there was the statement of Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan on nuclear proliferation and second, the countrywide violent protests against the sacrilegious film.
In September, we experienced two very caustic events that raised some questions on the credibility of Pakistan at the national and international level. First, there was the statement of Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan on nuclear proliferation and second, the countrywide violent protests against the sacrilegious film.
The nuclear scientist revealed that the former prime minister of Pakistan, Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto, asked him to transfer nuclear technology to two countries. He said, “At least 800 people are used to supervise the process. The then prime minister Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto summoned me and named the two countries that were to be assisted, and issued clear directions in this regard.” However, in 2004, Dr Khan confessed that he helped in the proliferation of nuclear technology to three countries including Iran, Libya and North Korea. If this story is true, the question arises why he remained silent for the last eight long years. Why did he not reveal this information when Ms Bhutto was alive; she would have answered him more appropriately. Would it not be appropriate to say that while Ms Bhutto is not alive, Dr Khan wants to cleanse his guilt by blaming a person who cannot answer his fabricated claim?
.BMP)
In the same interview, while talking about the former prime minister, Mian Nawaz Sharif and the nuclear test, Dr Khan said, “...But I made it clear that if he did so, I shall put the facts before the media. After this, Mian Nawaz Sharif was compelled to conduct the nuclear tests.” Now, Dr Khan, in his own words, proves that he compelled Mr Sharif to go for nuclear testing. If he disobeyed the then prime minister Mr Sharif, why did he not refuse Benazir Bhutto? Why did he not threaten her that he would put the facts before the media?
Interestingly, there are some contradictions within Dr Khan’s statements. If 800 people supervise the process, how did he manage to do the business of proliferation alone? Or did he take all 800 concerned people on board before obeying the command of the then prime minister, Ms Bhutto? While Dr Khan now claims that he proliferated nuclear technology to two countries on the command of the late Ms Bhutto, while in his confession in 2004, he admitted he proliferated to three countries (Iran, Libya and North Korea). Can Dr Khan tell the nation if he assisted the third country as a personal goodwill gesture?
Now since Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan wants to prove that he merely followed orders and he is innocent, he should also realise that such a statement is highly irresponsible from a nuclear scientist. It will not help him to clear the mess created in the past but it will also further damage the image of Pakistan at the national and international level. Therefore, he should act responsibly and not blame a twice-elected prime minister, and the pride of the nation, Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto.
Then came a Friday, of September 21, 2012. Not a good Friday, it was indeed. The way we behaved was unfortunately undisciplined, unorganised and violent. This was not the way to show the love for Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). In fact, what we as a nation conveyed to the world community was something very bad and unexpected. Iron rods, sticks and weapons were defiantly not the stuff to celebrate the Ishq-e-Rasool day with.
Interestingly, there are some contradictions within Dr Khan’s statements. If 800 people supervise the process, how did he manage to do the business of proliferation alone? Or did he take all 800 concerned people on board before obeying the command of the then prime minister, Ms Bhutto? While Dr Khan now claims that he proliferated nuclear technology to two countries on the command of the late Ms Bhutto, while in his confession in 2004, he admitted he proliferated to three countries (Iran, Libya and North Korea). Can Dr Khan tell the nation if he assisted the third country as a personal goodwill gesture?
Now since Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan wants to prove that he merely followed orders and he is innocent, he should also realise that such a statement is highly irresponsible from a nuclear scientist. It will not help him to clear the mess created in the past but it will also further damage the image of Pakistan at the national and international level. Therefore, he should act responsibly and not blame a twice-elected prime minister, and the pride of the nation, Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto.
Then came a Friday, of September 21, 2012. Not a good Friday, it was indeed. The way we behaved was unfortunately undisciplined, unorganised and violent. This was not the way to show the love for Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). In fact, what we as a nation conveyed to the world community was something very bad and unexpected. Iron rods, sticks and weapons were defiantly not the stuff to celebrate the Ishq-e-Rasool day with.
If noted, a majority of these violent protesters were young (under 18) and it would not be a wild guess that many of these were students of madrassas. These young madrassa students seemed too well prepared to damage public property; it was as if they were asked to do that. Burning and destroying government and private property and killing innocent people is un-Islamic and it is strongly condemnable.
Later on, some political parties and media sections accused the government for all that happened on that unfortunate day and termed it as ‘state-sponsored’ violent strikes. However, keeping political point scoring statements aside, we should give the credit where it is due. It was a wise decision to ensure there was no loss of lives and property. That day people were considered to be more secure in their homes than on the roads or at the workplace.
I keep thinking, which one from the above two was more dangerous; when I reach a conclusion, I find both of them equally terrible, irresponsible and vicious in their own way.
The writer is a research analyst in Islamabad and tweets at @shafiqsolangi He can be reached at Shafiqsolangi_ir@hotmail.com
Later on, some political parties and media sections accused the government for all that happened on that unfortunate day and termed it as ‘state-sponsored’ violent strikes. However, keeping political point scoring statements aside, we should give the credit where it is due. It was a wise decision to ensure there was no loss of lives and property. That day people were considered to be more secure in their homes than on the roads or at the workplace.
I keep thinking, which one from the above two was more dangerous; when I reach a conclusion, I find both of them equally terrible, irresponsible and vicious in their own way.
The writer is a research analyst in Islamabad and tweets at @shafiqsolangi He can be reached at Shafiqsolangi_ir@hotmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment