See The Writing on The Wall
In a democratic dispensation, four or five years are sufficient time to review the performance of a government or a leadership, to scrutinize soundness or lack of soundness, and to know popularity or unpopularity of policies. It is now more than five and a half years since General Pervez Musharraf assumed absolute power. While he and his American patrons have fixed their eyes on 2007 and 2012, the fact is that carpet is being pulled from under his feet. His high-sounding assertions that he had made at the time of his usurping power, using the might of the military, have all proved walls of sand. The direction of the wind can be gauged from the recently held four massive rallies of millions of people and the country-wide strike on 2nd April. Despite all efforts by the government to counter it, media blitzkrieg, arrests of thousands of workers in the length and breadth of the country, and mere verbal sympathy while extending no concrete support at all by Peoples’ Party, the strike was a total and most effective expression of public resentment against the government and public confidence in Majlis-e-Amal (MMA).
Under the leadership of Majlis-e-Amal, within the law, and conforming to the democratic traditions, this struggle of the masses is a prelude to change in the politics of the country. Increasing participation of the masses, along with the workers, provides a picture of realities on the ground. Majlis-e-Amal had extended invitation for participation in this protest to all the political forces, including Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz), and Pakistan Peoples’ Party, but except Imran Khan’s Tehrik-e-Insaf, none participated fully. But this provided a historic opportunity to Majlis-e-Amal to assess its roots among the masses as well as to galvanize them successfully. This fact has been admitted by all those political analysts and columnists who may not be supporters of Majlis-e-Amal but who do not mince words in acknowledging the truth and who have not given themselves up to spreading, in the words of the PML-Q Secretary General, ‘official truth’. As for Majlis-e-Amal’s peaceful protest, democratic credentials and good organization, these are the facts that compelled even General Pervez Musharraf to admit in an interview to the Reuters that these gatherings were well-organized and maintained discipline.
The struggle of the masses that has now been started for the revival of real democracy, defense of Pakistan’s freedom and sovereignty and preservation of its Islamic civilizational character, and for the solution of problems of the countrymen, is a historic milestone to determine Pakistan’s direction in the future, on the one hand, and, on the other, it has thrown into the open all those issues that have been a source of controversy between the government and the public power (Majlis-e-Amal) that is challenging it. As this movement has now entered the phase of large-scale public protest, and not only political workers but intellectuals, Ulema, scholars, students and common people all are participating in it, it is imperative to elucidate its positive national agenda and objectives in clear terms, and, thus, expose the misinformation and confusion that the spokesmen of the government and its ‘embedded’ journalists and columnists are bent on spreading with a shameless resort to distortion of facts and ground realities. It is being said that ‘uniform’ in not an issue, that the real issue is about economic development and completion of mega projects—as if the Opposition is against them, while General Pervez Musharraf and his cohorts are trying their best to achieve economic development, friendly relations with neighbors and the international community! Let us see what the real situation is.
Iqbal’s and Jinnah’s Idea of Pakistan
The most basic question is about our struggle for Pakistan that we had waged against both the English and Hindu domination. What this movement of ours was about? What were its objectives and goals? If the issue was just about economic progress, mega projects, and good relations with world powers, then what was the purpose of our fight with the super power of the time, the British Empire, whose colonial rule aimed at achieving economic development and reconstruction of the country along the Western model? The network of rail tracks and roads had been established during the British rule, the industrial revolution had also started during this time, and the new system of education had also come from them. They projected themselves as the champions of progress and new civilization in the world. Then, what was the fight for?
From whatever perspective is the situation examined, what emerges clearly is the fact that the real issue was about independence, sovereignty, protection of our religion, our values and our history, and protection of our identity as a nation, and its development. Only that economic development can stand the test of time which is consistent with the demands of the sovereignty of the country and the nation, and their values of life, and which strengthens them. Be they the world powers or neighbor countries, we desire friendship and cooperation only in that framework that could safeguard independence of the country and the nation, and make our ideological and civilizational identity strong. Mere economic goals could be achieved even under the British rule, or, in the case of independence, could be sought as ‘common objectives’ without the partition of the country! In fact, the raison d’etre of Pakistan’s coming into being was not only to get an independent country but also to achieve real independence for the Muslims of the subcontinent, so that they could progress according to their own faith and religion, their principles and values, and their civilizational identity.
In order to establish the case for Pakistan in clear terms, Iqbal had said that we wanted to get rid of the yoke of slavery of the British not just for gaining independence, we, rather, wanted an Islamic state (dar-us-salam) to emerge as a result of this independence. There is no use of an independence that could not produce this result. Quaid-e-Azam too was categorical when he said, even before the Pakistan Resolution adopted in Lahore on March 23, 1940, that: “People should gather under the banner of the Muslim League and should not let any fear or hesitation come in the way of presenting their demands. They should continue the struggle for the protection of their religious, social and traditional rights. I am ready for dignified rapprochement with the Congress or the Hindus on the basis of the principle of equality, but I cannot make the Muslim nation mere lackeys of the Congress or the Hindus.”
At the Aligarh University, Quaid-e-Azam exposed the fallacy of economic development and told that the Hindu leadership in fact wanted to subjugate the Muslims with respect to their religion, ethics, and civilization. He said: They are forcing us to chant idolatrous hymns of ‘Band-e Matram’. As a Muslim, I fully respect other nations’ culture, social norms and civilization, but I love my own Islamic culture and civilization very much. I do not want at all that our coming generations become unaware of Islamic way of life and philosophy. It is unacceptable for Muslims, and they cannot tolerate that they place their life and death, language, culture and civilization at the mercy of a majority whose religion, civilization and social values are totally different, whose present-day treatment of Muslims is very bad, reprehensible, and unjust.
At a reception of the Memon Chambers of Commerce and Memon Merchants Association, Quaid-e-Azam presented his view in detail: Muslims do not need to search for a program. They have a complete program for the past 1300 years in the shape of the Holy Qur’an. Along with our economic, cultural and social progress and reform, Qur’an gives us a political program too. I believe in this law of God, and the independence that I want is for obeying this law of God. Qur’an commands us for three things: freedom, equality and brotherhood. As a Muslim, I have a right to enjoy these things. Our salvation lies in Qur’an and we can achieve all grades of progress with this guidance.
After the Lahore Resolution, Quaid-e-Azam said in his speech in Ahmadabad on December 21, 1940: Pakistan provides the best means for independence to both the nations. Muslim should have no fear of being crushed in Hindu-majority provinces. Muslims of the provinces where they are in minority should come to terms with their fate there, but should also help in getting independence for Muslim-majority provinces so that they could shape their lives according to the Islamic Shariah.
During the question-answer session at a gathering of the youth at the guest house in Rockland, Hyderabad Deccan, Quaid-e-Azam explained the basic points in the debate on Islamic system for Pakistan:
Q: What are the ingredients of religion and theocratic government?
A: When I hear the word ‘religion’ in the English language, my mind shifts, according to the idiom of the language and the nation, to mutual relationship between God and His servant. I know very well that Islam, or Muslims, do not have this limited and confined concept or interpretation of religion. I am neither a moulvi nor a mullah, nor do I claim expertise in religious studies, but I have studied Qur’an and Islamic laws. This glorious Book provides guidance in all spheres of life: spiritual, social, political, economic – in short there is no sphere of human life that has remained outside the scope of Qur’anic teachings. Qur’anic teachings and the political program it gives is best not just for Muslims, it is impossible to conceive a better program for the treatment and constitutional status of non-Muslims in the Islamic state.
Q: Turkey is a secular state. Islamic state is a different thing. What are your views in this regard?
A: To me, the political term ‘secular state’ does not fully apply in the case of Turkey. The main distinction of the concept of Islamic state is that obedience and loyalty is due to Allah alone. This is why Qur’anic commands and principles are binding. In Islam, obedience is due neither to the King, nor to the Parliament, nor to any other person or institution. It is the commands and principles laid down in the Qur’an that determine the scope of our freedom as well as restrictions. Islamic state, in other words, is the rule of Qur’anic commands and principles. Whatever kind of government you want to establish, you need to have a state and a piece of land.
Q: How can we get such a state in India?
A: The Muslim League, its organization, its struggle, its approach and direction—are all an answer to this.
We have provided these excerpts in a bit detail just to shed light on the Quaid’s idea of Pakistan, to make it clear that while we do need to achieve economic stability and progress through mega projects, but our real objective is independence for the Muslim Ummah, and protection and promotion of its sovereignty and religious and civilizational identity. Economic development is part of this whole. This is why Pakistan’s survival, development, progress and stability depend not just on economic factors but on the uniformity and conformity of all factors political, civilizational, and economic with one another.
The movement that is gaining momentum in the lengths and breadths of the country against General Pervez Musharraf is not concerned with his ‘person’, but for the system of governance, the antics of rule, and the national and international policies under him. The past five and half years have exposed his intentions. If his system of governance is explained in clear terms, in black-and-white, its seven characteristics come to fore prominently. These characteristics stem from not only his statements but his government policies and the measures it has taken. The public protest movement is against these policies.
One Man’s Rule
The first main characteristic of his system of governance is that it is one man’s rule. He respects neither the Constitution, nor the procedures and traditions. He forsakes even the rules and regulations he devises himself. He has embarked on such a journey of one man’s rule where the Constitution has become an irrelevant book and the Parliament an ineffective institution. His own handpicked government is just a hapless spectator in this game. While the Prime Minister is apparently the chief executive, his real worth is not more than the ‘chief observer’ and ‘most obedient servant’. In policy matters, in meetings with world leaders, in international agreements, in administrative measures to run the government, even in petty matters pertaining to officials’ appointments and transfers, it is one man’s show. Institutions have been rendered weak and ineffective, and rules and regulations are mere words on paper, dull and dead, meaningless and worthless. This is an antithesis to democracy and Islamic principles of governance. The present protest movement’s first objective is to challenge this one man’s rule and, in its place, establish the rule of the Constitution and the supremacy of law and institutions.
Military’s Interference
The second point is about the supremacy of political and civil forces in the system of governance, according to the terms and spirit of the Constitution. ‘Uniform’ is, in fact, a symbol of military leadership’s illegal usurpation of the country’s political system. The opposition is not to the uniform, but to its wrong use misuse and abuse. Military’s uniform fits on its soldiers; for the president of the state, and other officials, it is necessary to use democratic means as envisaged in the Constitution and possess the qualities that it enunciates.
The Constitution makes it binding on all military officers and soldiers to not to involve in politics. When it gets involved in politics, it becomes controversial. It should enjoy the trust of the whole nation, and be dedicated to the defence of the homeland alone. Military training is meant to perform its special and specific duties. It is neither capable nor mentally conditioned to politics or run the government. When it jumps into political foray, it becomes a controversial power broker and contender. This badly affects its defence and fighting capabilities.
General Pervez Musharraf’s policy has resulted in military’s interference, rather a pervasive role, in politics and governance to such an extent that it is now recognized as a contender in all fields. It is for the first time in the history of the country that people have become critical not only of some generals, rather, it is the military as an institution that is losing its respect and dignity in the eyes of the people. This is a dangerous development. Masses are expressing their distrust and disgust against it. They are not looking at it as the defender of the country and the nation. Increasingly, it is being viewed as one of the institutions involved in the loot and plunder, corruption and decay in society. This situation poses a serious threat to the defence of the country, and to the respect and standing of the military itself. With his insistence on retaining the uniform, General Pervez Musharraf has not only ruined his own reputation, he has put at stake the standing and position of the whole military.
The pomp and show, and the stiff security under which he addresses political rallies in ‘uniform’, and the way he campaigns for a assorted breed of politicians, have dragged the military as an institution in the marshy area of politics. Military’s lionized uniform has been tainted and stained so badly that it is now a joke to recognize it just as such as military uniform. Therefore, the second aim of the democratic protest movement is to make the military once again a strong and effective institution for the defence of the country, remove political burden from it, and make the whole system of defence work under a civilian order to help it, not to rule it.
Sullied National Pride
General Pervez Musharraf had come saying that he would revive national dignity and respect. But the situation is that in the past five and half years, especially after 9/11, his measures and policies have made Pakistan a camp follower of America. While sentiments against America are rising around the world against America’s unjust and nasty policies, 70 to 80 percent of the population in Western countries and 90 to 95 percent in the Muslim world consider it a colonial power, an aggressor hell-bent on crusading against Islam and Muslims, a despotic regime that has disturbed peace in the world and committed gross violations of human rights, it is the government of Pakistan that takes pride in its role in America’s so-called war against terror, so much so that it, and the General in particular, is viewed as the most obedient, trusted ally doing America’s dirty work! We have become the focus of hatred and loathing in the whole Muslim world. On the other hand, it has resulted in anarchy and chaos in the country. With small breaks, embassies and diplomatic mission of America and its allies are shown as if in great danger, and warnings are issued to those who intend to travel to Pakistan!
In the past days Pakistan commanded great respect and prestige in the Muslim world, now the Muslims throughout the world consider its leadership mere lackeys and followers of America. Our foreign policy had never been so worthless. It is now being said that we have no foreign policy at all; we are gleefully ready to secure America’s interests at the cost of our own. We as a nation have no hesitation in playing the role of its stooge. Friendship with India is being sought under American instructions, and feelers are employed to assess the public mood for according recognition to Israel at America’s behest. We are contributing to American pressure on Iran, and the situation has come to such a pass that we have the guts to say that in the case of aggression on our Muslim neighbour country, we would not stand by it, we would be just by-standers and onlookers and silent spectators. It means that there would be none to stand by our side when we might be facing aggression in future! To what lows we have fallen!
‘Enlightened’ interpretation of Islam
The retreat in not restricted to compromise in matters of political independence and sovereignty, this government is fanning other dangerous trends: ideological anarchy, confusion and perverted thinking about the two-nation theory, promotion and spread of shameful Western culture and civilization, receptivity to India’s idolatrous Hindu cultural onslaught. These engender great threat to Pakistan’s existence and its civilizational identity. It is tragic that the leadership of the Muslim League (Q), which in normal situations used to talk about Islam and Muslim values, too has given itself to the mantra of common traditions and culture with India. One talks about common Punjabi civilization, the other shows ‘talk’ on the forehead and invites Hindu fanatics’ leader Sheri L.K. Advani to lay foundation stone of temple in Lahore Fort!
In this hullabaloo, the mantra of ‘enlightened moderation’ is also raised, and, in its name, sometimes it is beard or veil (hijab) that becomes the target of ridicule, sometimes the punishment of cutting thief’s hand is called barbarous, at times Hudood laws become the target of criticism, and at others the blasphemy law receives antagonistic remarks, sometimes there is wining and dining and vulgarity under ‘basant’, sometimes marathon races of young men and women are staged, at times religious education and institutions are made targets of smear campaign, at others all principles and rules and regulations are condemned as ‘extremism’ while ‘progressive march’ is sought in obscenity, lewdness, and immorality!
This all is being done in the name of Iqbal’s and Jinnah’s concept of modernity, though the Pakistan for which Jinnah strived and the Muslims offered great sacrifices was about the protection, preservation, and promotion of Islamic civilization and Islamic conduct of life, not for the promotion of Western civilization or Hindu culture. As for Iqbal, one of the tasks of the lofty work he had dedicated his whole life to was about exposing the mischievous notion of progress and enlightenment. In ‘Javed Nama’ his far and foresight, thought and vision, and the lucidity and clarity with which he expresses his views, are remarkable:
The East has forgotten itself in the blind imitation of the West, though it should have carried out a criticism of the West. The power of the West is neither because of its instruments of music nor because of the dance of barely-dressed girls; its beauty neither because of the magic spell of the lover, nor because of bare legs or short cut hair of ladies. Its strength is not because of its abandoning religion, or because of its Latin script. This is because wisdom and knowledge do not come from how you cut and shape your dress, and turban is no obstacle to gaining knowledge and acquiring skills. O playful youth! It is not one’s clothes but brains that matter in acquiring knowledge and wisdom, skill and expertise. In this way, all that is required is ‘sight’, not this or that headdress. If you are equipped with ‘vision’ and ‘far-sight’, it is sufficient for your pursuit of knowledge and understanding. If one spends nights awake, one gets the secrets of wisdom and fathoms the depths of knowledge. Understanding does not come save with untiring constant effort. So, the fourth aim of the present day democratic movement is: protection of Pakistan’s civilizational identity, resistance against the cultural onslaught that has sprung under the patronage of this government, and collective struggle for the reconstruction of Pakistan according to its real concept, and strive to bring forth a new capable leadership.
Friendship with India, ok, but at what cost?
For the sake of friendship with India, and at the cost of national pride and Pakistan’s real interests, drastic changes and U-turns in policy matters have not only staked the country’s existence and stability, it has the portents to upset the map of the whole region. Kashmir’s is not a border issue. It is an issue of freedom and realizing the right of self-determination of 15 million people. Besides being crucial to Pakistan’s strategic interests, it is part of the unfinished agenda of the partition of India. No one has the right to subject it to his or her game and adventures. Nobody has the right to alter the nation’s historical position by his or her own will, as he or she may please. The United Nations resolutions are a moral and legal agreement; they are also an international accord that recognizes three main parties: Pakistan, India, and the people of Jammu & Kashmir. The United Nations and the international community are guarantors to this accord. It is surprising that a military-man who has no expertise in matters of diplomacy and international law has the courage to say, without any advice or decision of the concerned institutions, in front of the international media that they can be set aside. It is sad that he is not held accountable for such utterances, rather the worshippers of the rising sun, the hangers-on and sycophants start interpreting it, putting gloss over it, and changing the direction of the whole Kashmir policy.
What can be said about the political acumen of the leadership that considers this retreat, volte face, lack of grit, and sell-out of national interests as its ‘courage and bravery’, and sings own praise. The courage and foresight are evident from the fact that when America asks to side with it or be ready for its enmity, it surrenders to it unconditionally! What small and weak countries such as Lebanon and North Korea accomplish in diplomacy, we cannot even reach anywhere near it. Even in the face of defeat in 1971, on the occasion of the Simla agreement, the political leadership had not only got the mention of the UN Charter and its principles included but also remains within the framework of ‘with no prejudice to the position of the two governments’, and includes the final solution of the Kashmir issue in the agenda, but our military rulers have no understanding of such legal and diplomatic intricacies or sophistication. To them, ‘courage’ means swift surrender to others’ demands and sudden change of own policies. So, the fifth aim of the democratic struggle is a reassertion of the well-established and truth-based position on Kashmir, in keeping with the national sentiment and Pakistan’s real interests, which reflects the aspirations and feelings of the people of Jammu & Kashmir, which recognizes their historic struggle and sacrifices, which best serves the interests of the people of Pakistan and Jammu & Kashmir. Pakistani nation certainly desires friendship with India, but without compromising its sense of pride and honor, and national interests.
Poverty and Skyrocketing prices of essential commodities
People are also protesting against economic hardships that have made common man’s life really miserable. These hardships are a result of this government’s ill-conceived policies. No doubt that foreign exchange reserves are bulging, but what is the use of foreign exchange reserves that do not translate into common man’s relief, especially the most indigent and downtrodden? The rate of poverty is increasing, and more than 50 million people do not get two meals in a day today. In 1990, 20-22 percent of the total population was living below the poverty line; it has surged to 32-34 percent in 2004. In 1999, the ratio of unemployment was 5 percent; it is over 8 percent in 2004. The prices of oil and gas have registered 80 percent rise in the last five years. Petrol was Rs 26/liter in 1999, it is Rs 46/liter today; flour was Rs 9/kg, it is Rs 19/kg today; sugar was Rs 13/kg, it is now Rs 20/kg. While the masses are crying under the burden of economic hardships, General Pervez Musharraf and his billionaire economic managers are blowing trumpets for rise in foreign exchange reserves; and the Stock Exchange about whose exceptional growth they were so happy has nose-dived and they are now taken aback! General Pervez Musharraf and his regime may pose to be the messiahs, the question remains as to who will really heal the wounds of the masses? An important objective of the peoples’ struggle is putting an end to economic exploitation and injustice and adoption of that framework for economic progress by which the results of progress could filter down to masses, poverty could be alleviated, the genie of rising prices of essential commodities could be controlled, the unjust distribution of wealth cold be disciplined, basic amenities could be within the reach of common man, and opportunities of economic development could be open to all.
Unrest among the Provinces
In his address in October 1999, General Pervez Musharraf had identified federation-provinces harmony and balance as one of his goals. But, the ever-widening gulf between the federation and the provinces, and the unrest and anxiety in smaller provinces resemble the situation that existed just before the loss of East Pakistan. It is a source of deep worry for all sincere citizens of the country. Council of Common Interests is a Constitutional institutional, but it has not met even once during the five years. On the National Finance Award rest provinces’ economy and development, but no Award could be announced in these five years. The Frontier Province is crying for its rights, Baluchistan is feeling deprived and discriminated against; the waves of unrest are sweeping Sindh. The issue of waters’ share and construction of dams has been made complicated; it has now become a complex political issue more than a technical issue. While the Parliamentary Committee is trying to put out the fire of hostility in the sensitive Northern Areas and Baluchistan, the General is not prepared to change his torturous and insulting tone and rude style, thus contributing only to making the situation worse. He still thinks that Pakistan is strong when the Center is strong, though Pakistan’s strength cannot be achieved without strong and satisfied provinces. An important objective of the peoples’ democratic struggle is the establishment of a real federal system, distribution of powers among the Center and the provinces and implementing it in a way that results in strength and progress for the provinces, which, in turn, make Pakistan strong and stable. The political movement that has started in March 2005 under the leadership of Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), which got a boost by the strike of April 2, 2005, is for these objectives and will continue till it achieves all its goals, Insha’Allah.
Public Opinion on the Website
These aims reflect peoples’ real feelings and aspirations. MMA has given expression to them, and has launched a democratic grass-root level movement to realize them. An eye-opener is the fact that while MMA’s four Million Marches and the Strike, their aims and objectives, have been the talk of the day, a recent survey shows that the General’s own website itself been bombarded with questions about these very issues. His crazy answers betray his loss of grit. According to a survey published in The News International, London, on April 8, 2005, the website received largest number of questions and objections on skyrocketing prices, the second largest number of questions and feelings and views of the people was on the General’s so-called ‘enlightened moderation’. The reviewer writes that people are not happy with the liberal approach, which is reflected from some of the electronic media channels.
The General has said that he himself is not in favour of ‘over-Westernisation’, but he forgets that the issue is not just about the electronic media, it is his country-wide policy. Then, the real problem is not about over-Westernisation, but of Westernisation in the name of modernization, which is runs against the Muslims’ faith, civilization, history, and traditions, and which is being promoted by an opportunist class through media, NGOs, and MNCs (multinational companies) under the patronage of the General.
The questions that came third were about Pakistan’s independence and sovereignty, where people criticized increasing American influence and our doing its bid. Fourth came the questions about Pakistan’s nuclear assets and resentment on the treatment meted out to Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan. The review notes that a segment of the population feels that ‘Pakistan is selling its sovereignty cheaply’.
The General is enraged by this and his answers reflect anger rather than logic, and self-centeredness and self-assertion rather than furnishing facts. Whether the General, and others entrusted with policy-making, make use of this website or not, it has proved that MMA’s Million Marches and its Strike call give expression to peoples’ real feelings, sentiments, and problems. A reflection of this fact can be seen on the General’s own website. As The News puts: ‘Let this be a wakeup call for all’, and that there is a need to put an end to the VVIP culture.
The Student Convention: The Writing on the Wall
Another show of public opinion came during the national student convention held on April 9, 2005, at the Jinnah Convention Center in the presence of General Pervez Musharraf. The participants and students in this convention had all passed through various filters, yet some gutsy student speakers did express their true feelings when they talked about the pledge of doffing military uniform and backing away from it, employing military in the name of development works in Wana, warning to the Baloch for being ‘hit’ while not knowing what has hit them and from where, military’s interference in politics, and ludicrous activities on basant, etc. The hall resonated with clapping in their applause when they talked on these issues. General Pervez Musharraf repeated his old hackneyed views, but he knew well that he convinced nobody except himself. If he still refuses to see the writing on the wall, it exposes his understanding and far-sight!
Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal has rendered a great national service in drawing attention of all to the real problems facing the nation and the peoples’ true aspirations and feelings by launching a grand movement of the masses. It is sad that the many groupings of opposition are viewing the tide from afar, held back by their respective priorities. The need of the hour is that all the democratic forces in the country try to pull it out from the quagmire and expose American game plan that General Pervez Musharraf champions ‘enlightened moderation’ and that all the so-called liberal forces should be his allies. Today, the issue is not of ‘enlightened moderation’, which are just a ploy and eyewash to perpetuate the General’s one man’s rule. Pakistan’s foundation and its Constitution’s main pillars are Islam, Parliamentary democracy, and the principles of federation. These three pillars are the basis of the democratic struggle of the masses; and none of these can be ignored or overlooked. Their end result is: real independence for Pakistan and protection of its sovereignty, preservation and promotion of its Islamic civilizational identity, and the establishment of a just and equitable system for all. This is the cry of the hour and the real prescription for a developed, stable and strong Pakistan.
