Yousuf in the Confessional

If you haven't already, you must read this report about an extremely frank interview with Mohammad Yousuf (that apparently aired yesterday on some television channel) and in which he lays directly into Umar Akmal, Shoaib Malik and an unnamed player. I don't know which channel this was, if anyone knows please let us know, particularly if there's a weblink to the interview.

Some choice excerpts of what Yousuf said:

On PCB Chairman Ejaz Butt announcing midway through tour that he would be replaced as skipper:

“I don't know when the statement was made, but when it was, suddenly everyone in the team changed. Six or seven players started to see themselves as captains all of a sudden. At the start of the tour in New Zealand, the players were cooperating with me, but as the tour went on I felt they weren't because they knew I wouldn't be captain in the next series.”

On Umar Akmal's mysterious "stiff back":

“Umar was fine as far as I knew. What happened in his room and how he got a stiff back all of a sudden was a surprise to me. He miraculously recovered as soon as we told him that he would be going home.”

On Shoaib Malik as a possible captain:

“We all know what he’s good at, certainly not captaincy.”

On the most problematic player in the team:

“There is one player in the team who is disturbing team unity and other players. I spoke to coach Intikhab Alam and other management about it and they agreed with me," Yousuf said. “I will only disclose his name to the chairman of the board, Ijaz Butt.”

“Intikhab Alam (coach), Abdur Raqeeb (manager) and [Shahid] Afridi know who the player is and we discussed it as well several times,” Yousuf added.

“During the New Zealand tour and onwards Intikhab was telling me to be wary of him, but I wanted to see for myself. I saw in Australia how his body language was and we dropped him from the Tests. We decided in Australia during a meeting that we had to do something about him.”

Hmmmm. An intriguer who Yousuf does not like and who did not play in the Tests. One guess who this one is.

First Aman Event Remains An Asha

Apparently the first big do for and by 'Am(a)n Ki Asha' - the Times of India / Jang Group collaboration - has bit the dust in the wake of the dual bomb blasts in Karachi.

The Jang Group was going to play host February 16-17 in Karachi to a massive gathering of business and industry leaders from Pakistan and India. The event was to have seen the likes of the Tatas, Birlas and Ambanis or their representatives from the Indian side and the Manshas, Saigols, Hashwanis et al from the Pakistani side. Almost all the top companies from both sides were represented and people like former Pakistan State Bank Governor Ishrat Hussain and Indian filmmaker Mahesh Bhatt were to have addressed the august gathering. Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani was scheduled to be the chief guest, the idea being that sitting down and sharing biryani and pulao would help break some ice and promote greater collaboration between the business sectors of the two countries. But it was not meant to be.

Fears about security and, possibly, nervousness from the Indian side after the carnage in Karachi on the 5th of February, have, sources claim, put paid to the plan for now. The meet has been postponed till further notice. No word on what the next step will be. Shireen Mazari must be ecstatic.

Can Pakistan and India ever move forward on anything without something or the other screwing it up?

Aamir Liaquat: Further Adventures in Irritating TwitDom

Can no one rid us of this idiotic twerp?

The pseudo-doctor Aamir Liaquat Hussain (sorry, Hardilazeez [Beloved] Aamir Liaquat Hussain, since that now seems to be part of his name) is back. Not that he ever really left. But back as in back after making a hefty packet out of a Haj packaged tour sold with his name, where he sort of accompanied the faithful (who shelled out a premium to get a guided tour of the pilgrimage with him... Why, God only knows) by staying at a 5-star hotel and turning up to read a dua-e-maghfirat (prayer for forgiveness) for the camped out pilgrims.

And what a return it has been. So far, he has given his two-cents that the real cause for the losses suffered by the Pakistan cricket team in recent weeks has been the green soles of the team's shoes (apparently a direct rebuff to Islam since green is the colour associated with it) and opined that the assassination of an Iranian nuclear scientist a few weeks ago had to do with Iran kowtowing to Zionists by constructing synagogues for its Jewish citizens.

I had actually caught some other twerp on his programme on January 31 (right after the 5th ODI between Pakistan and Australia and devoted to cricket, including an appearance by Maulana Inzamamul Haq) holding forth on the green soles issues and had been looking around for a clip of the programme to make its way to the net. But apparently, Mr. Jahil Online (JO) actually said the same thing himself in his first programme back, on January 29, which has been blogged about by a number of other people including Teeth Maestro and Nadeem Farooq Paracha in Dawn.

Here's the clip from that programme (the bit about the green soles is between 3:30 and 4:15):



As JO points out: "Yeh belief ki baatein hain, yaqeen ki baatein hain, aql ki hujaton ko poojnay waalon ko kabhi yeh baatein samajh nahin aayein gi." ('These are matters of belief, of faith, those who worship at the altar of reason will never understand them.') Damn right about that, you silly superstitious little twit.

But if propounding silly superstitions were the only thing this moron did, it would be easy to ignore him (though not of course Geo and Jang which provide him with the platform to take his twitdom to the public at large). No, he uses his platform to far greater effect. Remember, this is the same man who had called on air for Salman Rushdie to be killed (which led to his expulsion from the MQM) and for Ahmadis to also be targeted. He has now spent two full programmes about the Dr. Aafia Siddiqui episode, interviewing her mother and sister in a manner that can only be termed calculated to provoke religious zealots.

I don't want to get into the content of the programmes at this time but even the ad for the programmes, splashed on the front page of The News and Jang, can provide a fair inkling of it.

The ad reads: "Amreeki adalat mein Pakistani beti mujrim qaraar... Mutaasib jajon ke janibdaraana faislay par aik pur-istaqaamat maan aur pur-azeemat behen ki istaqlal aur azm se bharpoor guftagoo." ('Pakistani daughter convicted in an American court... A discussion full of commitment and resolve with a steadfast mother and determined sister about the biased decision by prejudiced judges.')

Now, that's what you call objectivity, innit. To be frank, I don't know the real truth about Aafia Siddiqui's case, there are issues that need to be resolved (was she actually arrested in 2008 as claimed by the Americans or had she been detained illegally - as the notorious "Grey Lady of Bagram" - since 2003? Did she actually try to kill her American interrogators or is this a purely fabricated case? What was her actual link with Al Qaeda? What's become of her two children not yet recovered? etc etc etc) and she may indeed be a victim of human rights violations perpetrated in the name of the "war on terrorism." But does that give JO and the largest media group in Pakistan the right to pass judgement all by themselves? Forget that, ostensibly, what does a 'religious' programme have to do with a legal case... On what basis is this judgement being made? The opinions of an obviously traumatised mother and an irritatingly self-righteous sister who seems to be hiding a lot more than she is divulging?

And what about this news, published in the Jang Group's own English paper? According to it, the Taliban have threatened to execute an American soldier if Dr. Aafia Siddiqui is not set free, their demand coming after  Dr. Siddiqui's family approached them to put pressure on the US. The Taliban commander had this to say to explain the call for her release:

"“We tried our best to make the family understand that our role may create more troubles for the hapless woman, who was already in trouble. On their persistent requests, we have now decided to include Dr Aafia Siddiqui’s name in the list of our prisoners in US custody that we delivered to Americans in Afghanistan for swap of their soldier in our custody,” explained the militant commander.

He claimed family members of Dr Aafia told the Taliban leadership that they had lost all hopes in the Pakistan government and now Allah Almighty and the Taliban were their only hope. Later, Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid also called The News from somewhere in Afghanistan and owned a statement given by the Taliban commander."

There is far more to this case than meets the eye. But will Dr Aafia's sister continue to hold that the family has no connections with militants in Afghanistan? You can bet that JO will never be asking her this question.

Afghanistan: Back To The Future?

One of the most thoughtful pieces about the recently held London Conference on Afghanistan has come from BBC Urdu's Wusatullah Khan, published on January 31.

Here is a translation of the piece, done by yours truly. Worth reading.

Create A New Problem!

Wusatullah Khan

BBCUrdu.com Islamabad

 

For the last few days, I have been remembering slain Afghan President Najeebullah intensely.

 

In 1989, when the last Soviet troops had crossed the River Amo, to save Afghanistan from further destruction, Najeebullah’s national reconciliation plan was on the table. Under it, the Mujahideen groups had been appealed to think only as Afghans, now that the Red Army that they had been fighting against was gone. Najeebullah’s government said ‘We will not take up arms, you too should lay down your guns. Let us call a Loya Jirga [Grand Meeting], sit across from each other and instead of indulging in a destructive blame game, let us make a government that represents all segments of Afghans. This government can then make a constitution and conduct elections as well.’

 

But Najeebullah’s plan was scornfully rejected by the United States, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the Mujahideen groups. Najeebullah was taunted, saying ‘you yourself are a remainder of the Soviet occupation, how can there be any reconciliation with you?’ The result was that the destruction that had occurred in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation, much worse was visited upon the country after it, and has continued since.

 

The reconciliation strategy that 60 countries have endorsed as practical at the London Conference is almost a photocopy of Najeebullah’s national reconciliation plan. If there is any difference between the two, it is that 20 years ago the same plan was considered impractical because it was put forward by a Soviet puppet Afghan president. Now the same plan is considered kosher because the US and NATO are behind it. And because Hamid Karzai is touted as an elected leader rather than a Western puppet.

 

Najeebullah was accused of many things. But he was never accused of financial corruption, of encouraging warlordism or of overseeing drug trafficking. Hamid Karzai’s reputation is entirely different and these allegations against him have come – and continue to come – not from his enemies but, in fact, from circles within the US, NATO and the United Nations. According to Transparency International, Afghanistan is the second-most corrupt country in the world. And the level of misgiving is such that even the Afghan parliament itself has twice rejected most of the nominees put forward for the cabinet.

 

In such a scenario, to expect the Hamid Karzai administration to honestly oversee disbursement of the promised US$500 million fund set up to bring the Taliban into the mainstream of Afghan social life, is like putting a cat in charge of protecting milk.

 

Whatever else the London plan may have accomplished, it is certainly reinforcing the perception that within a year or year-and-a-half, Afghanistan will once again be left at its own mercy. But when the US and NATO take their leave, their place will once again be taken by militants backed by Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia and India.

 

They say one way of addressing a complicated and complex problem is to create a bigger problem. It looks like this is exactly what is in store for Afghanistan.

Some Thoughts On Karachi's Bomb Attacks

Some people have asked us why he have not "covered" the bomb attacks in Karachi yesterday.

This is meant simply to be a brief explanation of why we did not blog about the carnage that engulfed Karachi yesterday or have not blogged about earlier such incidents. It's not that terrorist strikes do not affect us or that we live in some sort of cocoon far removed from the reality of present-day Pakistan. They certainly affect us very personally - emotionally if not physically - and, in fact, we know many people who have lost friends and relatives in the bloodshed or seen them injured. Many of our colleagues in the media have also suffered.

No. The reason for not blogging about it has more to do with seeing no need to replicate the wall to wall coverage that is already present in the media, and with a reluctance to speculate on something about which the facts are often still murky, at least to us. Yes, we know that there have been terrorist strikes in Karachi on Ashura and Chehlum, for example, but can we really say with 100% surety who was behind them? Can we add anything to the discussion that has not already been said? All too often people are willing to jump in with prescriptive opinions on the basis of silly assumptions, hearsay and wrong data.

Let's take the Ashura bombing and subsequent "rioting" that followed. The original claim of a suicide attack on the procession was eventually officially struck down (after a week!) and it was pretty apparent right at the beginning that the burning of Boulton Market et al was hardly an act of 'spontaneous rioting by enraged people in the targeted procession.' (Processionists at such religious congregations do not generally carry with them chain-cutters, gloves and inflammatory chemical material, all of which were used to break into shops and burn them, as we saw on the closed circuit camera footage.) Now, had there actually been a suicide bomber, the probability of jihadists being behind the bombing would have been quite high - if there's one thing paid mercenaries are unlikely to do, it is to sacrifice themselves for a 'cause'. But since there was apparently none, the possibilities of who could be behind the bombing multiply. This does not mean that jihadists (and I will come back to them later) could not be behind the attack (in fact, at least one spokesman for them claimed it). Just that the pool of possible perpetrators increase.

Depending on your point of view, it could be Al-Qaeda aligned jihadists (Pakistani Taliban or Lashkar-e-Jhangvi types), foreign agents (out to sow chaos in Pakistan and depending on your point of view, this could mean Indian, Afghani, American), local shadow government agents (out to derail the government), or even ruthless political players (out to score petty local gains). The only thing we know for certain, at this time, is that whoever it was, falls squarely into the definition of "terrorist", i.e. they want to achieve some political aim through an act of violence that is designed to create a scare among ordinary folk.

Let's look also at the allegations hurled about after the arson that followed the Ashura blast. The MQM immediately blamed the 'Taliban' (in their mind often a shorthand for Pashtuns from the north who have active support from the Pashtuns in Karachi), while others immediately blamed the MQM, ostensibly because the City Government (CDGK) it controls wanted to shift / demolish some shops in the area earlier and, sotto voce, because it allegedly wants to drive the Pashtuns out of the city by initiating a backlash. Neither side has been able to provide conclusive proof so far.

The problem with the MQM allegations is not that the jihadists could not be responsible, it is that its knee-jerk pinning the blame for every such act of violence on the Taliban / tribal Pashtuns reeks not a little bit of political opportunism and racism. Is it too much to ask to wait for an investigation to uncover some facts?

On the other hand, the Jamaat-e-Islami led allegations against the MQM, in this case at least, have not yet been backed up by real proof. Not only has the supposed CDGK plan to evict shopkeepers whose shops were actually burnt not been backed up by any concrete proof, it boggles the mind that, with such a dastardly plan in place, the MQM would go out of its way to capture footage of the arsonists and provide it to the police and the media.

What we do know is this: since the calculated act of arson could not have been carried out without the cover of the blast, it would be reasonable to connect the two. So, those who planned the arson would, in all probability, have had to know at least that there would be a situation created wherein their activity was possible. There is no point in speculating beyond that.

However, a final word about jihadists, a term I am using simply as a shorthand for a certain mindset. There is a section of opinion that has got so carried away with its anti-American and anti-establishment rhetoric that it paints the Taliban and its allies as some sort of romantic resistance movement against neocolonialism. And I don't mean just Imran Khan or our shadow warriors like Colonel Imam and Hameed Gul. I have heard even some otherwise reasonable leftists spout similar rhetoric. Let's get one thing straight: they may be anti-American (right now) but the Taliban are no resistance movement against neocolonialism. They and their allies are among the most ideologically regressive bunch of people to walk this earth who would be all too willing to be in bed with Unocal once again if they were in power.

But one of the other most irritating things to hear in the media is the claim that such acts of murder could never be committed by Muslims. That of course not only blithely ignores the whole history of internecine Muslim violence over 1400 years, but also deliberately ignores the commonality between the Taliban and their jihadist allies: their Wahhabist aversion to Shia Islam. Al Qaeda, The Taliban, the Mehsud-led Tehrik-e-Taliban, the Sipahe Sahaba, the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, the Jaish-e-Mohammad, the Lashkar-e-Taiba et al, they are all part of a continuum that sees Shias as innovators in religion (and thus worthy of condemnation) or outright heretics (and thus worthy of being killed). And this mindset has been tolerated at one point or another (or continues to be tolerated in the case of some) by not only their military handlers but also by the majority of Pakistanis sold on the idea of romantic resistance.

So let's not kid ourselves. The jihadists may not have been behind the bomb attacks in Karachi on Ashura and Chehlum. But not because they could not intrinsically do this sort of thing.

Samaa Without the PR

We don't usually put comments from an earlier post into an entirely new post but there are a couple of reasons for doing it this time. For one, the comments are new additions to a post more than three months old and have probably been missed by most readers.

Secondly, they provide at least some current information that interests us and which we have partly been able to confirm. Specifically, that Director Current Affairs Amir Zia has either left Samaa TV or is about to leave. Here is how an anonymous poster alerted us to the news on January 29:

"ok... i'm usually the silent observer (reader) but this time its an exception.

1st of all let me tell u that the reason of sacking people was never "financial". Oh, wait a minute the latest news first .i.e. Mr. Amir Zia is told to leave by 11th of March, 2010. (explain this Mr. Jehangir)."

As we had written last October, Zia had been 'demoted' in a sense from Director News and Current Affairs and transferred to Islamabad during the last round of retrenchments at the channel. Obviously, he could not have been too happy about this, a fact that is borne out by recent sightings of him in Karachi, apparently job hunting.

You may recall that the COO of Samaa, Mr. Amir Jahangir had himself denied our claims (in the comments section) in the following words:

"Mr. Amir Zia is back in the field of journalism with SAMAA's flagship program "Qoum Kay Samnay". This is every journalist's dream."

So which one is it Mr. Jahangir? Is Mr. Zia with Samaa or not? Or is he sick of the dream?

In any case, if anyone has further information on this or other developments at Samaa, please feel free to share. We are interested in the facts. No innuendo or personal attacks please.

A Name, A Name, My Kingdom for A Name

I held off on posting this just in case this turned out to be some sort of spoof. But apparently not. My Arabic speaking sources confirm at least that the translation is correct. And as Foreign Policy's blog reports in considerable double entendre, the news has made it to Arab language newspapers.

Ambassador Miangul Akbar Zeb (Embassy Photo: Lee Berthiaume)

So, without further ado, here's how Salem-News of Oregon reported this delicate matter:

Saudi's Reject Pakistani Diplomat Whose Name Translates to 'Biggest Dick'

Tim King Salem-News.com

In Saudi Arabia, size does count.

(SALEM, Ore.) - A high level Pakistani diplomat has been rejected as Ambassador of Saudi Arabia because his name, Akbar Zib, equates to "Biggest Dick" in Arabic. Saudi officials, apparently overwhelmed by the idea of the name, put their foot down and gave the idea of his being posted there, the kibosh.

Akbar Zib is no newcomer to politics, in fact you could say he's a pretty big deal. This long-ranging high level diplomat has worked with some of the largest members of world governments, players charged with negotiating the outcome of the world's current events.

He most recently served as High Commissioner Designate of Pakistan to Canada, and prior to that he was the ambassador of Pakistan to South Africa,. He also served in that capacity in Washington from 1983-87, and New Delhi from 1994-2000.

He earlier worked at the Pakistan headquarters as section officer from 1982- 83, director from 1987-94 and director-general from 2000-2003.

Miangul Akbar Zib, also whose name news agencies sometimes refer to as Zib, was born on 15 February, 1954. He holds a Masters degree.

According to the Arab Times (as reported by FP) the poor Mr. Zeb's credentials have previously been rejected on the same basis by UAE and Bahrain (he is currently the Pakistan High Commissioner in Canada). Are foreign relations between the "brotherly Islamic countries" or any states really so dependent on misinterpretation of slang?

I wonder what would happen if Mr. Lund became the Swedish ambassador to Islamabad. Or had Laura Bush ever visited Pakistan. May be that's why Begum Abida Hussain never referred to herself as Mrs. Fakhr Zaman Imam when she was our ambassador to the US. I guess that would also rule out sending anyone named Foqia on any diplomatic assignment in the English-speaking West. Not to mention Rabia Butt.

Shahid Afridi Having A Ball, A Bit Too Literally

Unbelievable!



What can one even say? Forget the Khalid Hameed incident. In the absence of anything to say to Afridi that hasn't already been said by innumerable commentators ("What was Afridi thinking?"), bloggers ("A disgrace") and the general public ("Mind boggling madness [from] a guy who's played more than 300 games...Shame on you", "Why would you do anything with the ball with 27 cameras watching you?!"), I thought we'd take a different tack and open up the comments section for YOUR suggestions on possible explanations that can be proffered by his close friends and relatives for this truly bizarre behaviour.

Here are some of mine:

1. Afridi was just really hungry but he didn't want the team to lose motivation if he went off the ground for a bite to eat.

2. Shahid just has a thing for leather and, usually, he's able to keep his fetish in check.

3. Afridi's actually a rodent and sometimes that side of him comes to the surface.

4. Shahid is a method player and he was imagining pulling the pin off a hand-grenade to hurl at the Aussies.

5. Everyone does it, yaar, you just don't see it because the goras never show their own people doing it.

6. Actually, he was forced to because he'd trimmed his nails that morning.

7. I probably shouldn't be telling you this but you know how bowlers shine the ball and where all it's rubbed? I mean, he is a Pathan after all...

8. Yaar, everyone knows the Pakistan cricket team sucks these days.

9. Shahid loves the game so much, he could just eat it all up.

Ok, folks, come up with your own.

Video of the Day

Oh the irony...!

How To Report The News

Oh this is effing brilliant! A must watch for all television reporters. The Guardian's Charlie Brooker, take it away...

Sunset at DawnNews

Ok folks, so, I fear we may be over-doing the whole Dawn / DawnNews thingy with yet another post on the same. And some of the epithets hurled at the latter (YawnNews, I'm thinking of you) may begin to rub of on to Cafe Pyala. But what do you do when the (dawn)news just keeps on coming?

And this is a big one, trust me.

So, according to our insiders who kindly informed us, Dawn Media Group head honcho, Ms. Amber Saigol, addressed the workers at DawnNews yesterday on the floor of the newsroom and basically informed them that she wanted to simply shut down the channel because of the losses it had been incurring since its birth. But that she had been persuaded by the management (which would include her daughter Nazafreen Saigol) to give the channel 'one last chance.' So that is what she was going to do.

That last chance would involve restructuring the channel as a hybrid Urdu-English channel and a bunch of sackings. We hear that from February 15, DawnNews will broadcast Urdu bulletins from 9 to 12 in the morning as well at prime time, i.e. 9 to 12 in the evening. The English bulletins and programming would make up the rest of the day, primarily focused on audiences in North America.

 Naveen Naqvi and Nadia Zaffar: Dawn and out

Now, not only does this mean that some prime time programmes such as Saima Mohsin's NewsEye would eventually face the axe (since they clash with the time allotted for Urdu), but that a number of people working on the English programming would also become redundant. A big round of sackings took place almost immediately. So far some 40 people have been issued their pink slips across the country, including 27 from Karachi alone. Among the 'big names' retrenched include anchors Naveen Naqvi and Razeshta Sethna, and senior producer Nadia Zafar and anchor Mariam Zaidi (whose only claim to being a 'big name' was admittedly that she said she was in an interview in latest issue of Xpoze magazine). The entire Current Affairs / 'Infotainment' department under Mazhar Zaidi has been demolished (though he remains) with even his senior producer Nofil Naqvi choosing to walk rather than accept a pay cut.

'It' girl no more

According to our moles, the criteria for the sackings is simply the cost of the personnel. Those anchors with salaries below Rs. 60,000 - 70,000 have been retained while the rest have been let go. A number of cameramen have also been retrenched, with only those with salaries below Rs. 25,000 retained. A number of personnel, such as Creative Department head Alia Chughtai, had already resigned earlier.

As for the rumoured move to shift the newsroom to Islamabad, it seems this is still under consideration, though production would still continue to happen in Karachi. The only explanation anyone can seem to come up with such a bizarre idea is that the current head of news, Mubashir Zaidi, who shifted to Karachi from Islamabad a few months ago, would like to move back. Suffice it to say that, if these rumours are correct, this would be a bigger disaster than DawnNews currently.

Now, I'm no expert on restructuring television channels, but it would seem to me that this will not work out, for a number of reasons:

1) A language-hybrid channel is unlikely to develop a brand loyalty and is likely to simply confuse its viewership.

2) It seems DawnNews is chasing after viewers who watch other Urdu channels such as Geo, Express, Aaj and ARY. But why should they switch to DawnNews for a mere 6 hours a day?

3) Those personnel who have chosen to stay with a pay cut have probably only opted to do so as a stop-gap measure, until they are able to secure a better-paying job elsewhere. The remaining staff are likely to be feeling equally insecure and demoralized and will probably jump ship as soon as they have the chance.

4) You get what you pay for. When you get rid of your celebrity presenters / best cameramen and feature producers (by far the best thing on DawnNews was its documentaries) how would you create your niche in the glut of television channels? Are you then not ensuring that the restructuring does not stand a real chance?

5) No business enterprise (and I'm not just talking about television channels here) has ever survived with half-hearted measures that in reality become a case of 'throwing good money after bad.' DawnNews was probably a losing proposition to begin with in the manner it was conceived.

And how long would Ms. Saigol give for her 'last chance'? Apparently four to five months. No wonder many within the channel are of the opinion that DawnNews will be shut down by the end of the current fiscal year.

A shame, but there you have it.