Who is a traitor, who a patriot?
By Mazhar Abbas
STATE OF THE NATION
OPINION, March 19, 2025
WHO have we not labelled a ‘traitor’? Make a list of all those who, at some point, have been branded with this accusation. Then, ask yourself — were these individuals truly misguided, or were the real culprits the ones who eagerly handed out ‘certificates of treason’? Time and again, we condemned those who held differing views, silencing and restricting them, until the country itself was torn in two.
Remember, when parties and leaders that favour a nation are banned, the foundation for nationalist politics is laid. And when you push nationalist parties and leaders to the wall, extremism first comes into existence and then terrorism. The saga of our country’s political instability follows a familiar pattern.
Mazhar Abbas
Whether the discussion is about former East Pakistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Sindh, or Balochistan, why is it that the political and non-political elites of Punjab always come under criticism? Although the country has supposedly been going through a “critical phase” since more than 75 years, the situation obtaining in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan nowadays is getting particularly serious. To be sure, the aims and objectives of the terrorists active in the two provinces differ greatly — on one side there is a separatist movement, while on the other there is a desire to impose a certain system on Pakistan.
Abdul Rahim Zafar — in his book ‘Sang-e-Larzaan: From the formation of BSO to its split’ — has come up with a remarkable statement, one that should open our eyes, “Those who do not learn from history are taught a lesson by history itself.” These days, a 40-year-old speech by Khan Abdul Wali Khan is going viral. It was likely made in the context of the first Afghan war, and I have mentioned it before. In his speech the veteran leader had said, “These weapons being brought here for Afghanistan will not be used there; they will be used here.”
I still remember meeting Khan Sahib in 1978 when some of us from the Karachi University visited him in Charsadda during our trip to Swat. Later, our Journalism Department’s chairman, the late Saeed Sahib, grew quite upset with us. After all, we had gone to Swat on a recreational trip, but journalism and politics are inseparable.
As early as the 1980s, politicians like Wali Khan and esteemed leaders like Mir Ghaus Bakhsh Bizenjo had warned us about the circumstances we face today. But at that time, the ‘state’ considered them to be “unpatriotic and traitors”. This was a continuation of policies crafted under the illusion of an “ideological mirage” after Pakistan’s creation — policies that began with the split between the Bengal Muslim League and West Pakistan Muslim League. It was seemingly decided back then that the “majority” could not be accepted, even if they won all the elections. That was the beginning of our ‘pastime’ of rejecting the mandate. So, whether it was the left-wing alliance called ‘Jukto Front’, Awami League, PPP, MQM, PML-N, or PTI — every political movement was crushed.
After 1954 a decision was taken to hold the elections in 1958, but then the political process was halted and a martial law imposed on the nation. Over 2,000 politicians were disqualified, leftist parties banned, the judiciary was made compliant, and the media was controlled. Those actions culminated in the creation of Bangladesh in 1971, but to this day our school textbooks highlight the so-called “benefits of authoritarian rule”.
Our “political elite” is the product of an undemocratic system — one that began with the so-called regime of Basic Democracy under Gen Ayub Khan and was further developed under Gen Ziaul Haq’s party-less system of governance. The parties and leaders so developed were never meant to boast democratic tendencies.
Pakistan’s first consensus-based constitution was formulated in 1973, but a year earlier (in 1972) a rebellion was attempted against the government. It failed, and many officers from the army and air force were punished. Around the same time, the death in custody of communist leader Hassan Nasir and the disappearance (and later murder) of Baloch leader Attaullah Mengal’s son, Asad Mengal, gave rise to the “missing persons” issue as a national narrative.
The military operation in Balochistan, the dissolution of its provincial assembly, the ban on National Awami Party (NAP), the establishment of Hyderabad Tribunal, and the sentencing of popular leaders were grave political mistakes committed by then Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, regardless of whether or not he took those decisions under pressure from certain quarters.
The staged drama of recovery of arms from the Iraqi Embassy, the Pakistan National Alliance (PNA) movement of 1977, and Gen Zia’s emerging role after negotiations between the two sides hit a deadlock all hinted at a looming military intervention. Mr Bhutto was warned not to lift the ban on NAP or wrap up the Hyderabad Tribunal. Meanwhile, some PNA leaders were advised not to drop their demands regarding the trial.
Even when in the Hina Jilani case the Supreme Court declared the martial law as unconstitutional, the military takeover of 1977 was legitimised under the “doctrine of necessity”. The execution of Z.A. Bhutto under a military regime remains one of the darkest episodes in Pakistan’s political history. If elections had been held in October of 1977, and the military had returned to the barracks, the situation could have been very different today.
The Iranian Revolution and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan triggered a war that Pakistan actively took part in. Under the banner of “Afghan Jihad”, Gen Zia and later Gen Hameed Gul planted certain saplings that have by now turned into strong trees, which we have been unable to uproot despite repeated efforts. These forces have by now developed into deep-rooted entities that threaten the ‘state’ itself. What’s more, these elements enjoy tacit support from some political as well as religious groups.
Meanwhile, as the political parties played a game of ping-pong, the real match was taking place elsewhere. Then on 12th October (1999), another elected government was sent packing and once again a sitting prime minister was labelled a traitor and sentenced to life in prison. However, Gen Pervez Musharraf’s gravest mistake was not just violating the Constitution but his handling of Balochistan was terrible as well. Put differently, the manner in which he handled the province inflicted irreparable harm on the nation.
His most disastrous action was the killing of Nawab Akbar Bugti, but Gen Musharraf’s subsequent justification of the operation was no less atrocious. Those decisions have taken us to the point of no return. That, more than anything else, is making it very difficult for us to reverse the harmful trends.
Musharraf’s government did fall eventually, but not before another elected prime minister, Benazir Bhutto, had been assassinated. She became a victim to the same ideology that neither believes in democratic values nor accepts the leadership of a woman politician.
In 2013, former prime minister Nawaz Sharif made a sincere and serious attempt to address the Balochistan question. Although his party enjoyed a majority in the province, he supported the formation of a government under his ally, Dr Abdul Malik of the National Party. I was a witness to the crucial meeting where that decision was taken, largely because of my association with the late Mir Hasil Bizenjo, who I knew from my university days. But even that solution was deemed unacceptable.
By 2016, Nawaz Sharif had been disqualified; in 2017, he was convicted, and in 2018 his party was prevented from forming a government. The beginning of the end of his government came with the birth of Balochistan Awami Party, which was put together using elements from within the PML-N. The manipulation continued until Hasil Bizenjo was defeated in the election to the post of Senate chairman through a carefully orchestrated strategy that can be termed “the Faiz-yaab scheme”. The Baloch leader’s last speech in the Senate is quite instructive in this regard; so listen to it carefully.
(To be continued)
Translated from the article published in ‘Jang’