A Brief History of Diplomatic Immunity (Updated)

Since we Pakistanis often suffer simultaneously from the twin demons of megalomania and paranoia - verily we are better than everyone else and that is why everyone is out to get us - we often also look at history through a rather selective and distorted lens. Unfortunately, none typify this mindset more than the doyens and doyennes of the Pakistani electronic media, in whom a curious mix of hyper-patriotism, half-baked information, sincere ignorance and arrogant bluster seems generally to hold sway.

Take the issue of the day on Pakistani media: whether the American known by his apparent pseudonym "Raymond Davis" - who shot dead two men in Lahore - can be tried by Pakistani courts or whether the US government has any right to claim diplomatic immunity for him. I am not going to offer my own opinion on this because, for better or worse, this is an issue for the US and Pakistani states to sort out. (I should, however, point out that, personally speaking, I do not think armed Americans or armed anyone should be roaming around the streets of Pakistan.)

But having seen numerous commentaries on television where emotive claims have been made about how Americans have not respected diplomatic immunity in their own cases, how immunity does not extend to serious crimes or how Pakistani diplomats have never been extended this kind of privilege, I just want to direct readers to a few examples.

Here's The Independent reporting in 1997 about a case in which a drunk Georgian diplomat killed a 16-year-old girl in New York with his reckless driving and the US requested a waiver from immunity for him. (The paper reports that Georgia was unlikely to approve the request though it actually was approved at the discretion of the Georgian government and the diplomat was sentenced for 7-21 years. He was transferred back to Georgia after serving three years [link courtesy @qabacha].) The piece also cites other incidences of less egregious crimes by diplomats that go unpunished. Appropriately for us, the story is titled "Can A Diplomat Get Away With Murder?"

You may also recall the shooting dead of British constable Yvonne Fletcher apparently by Libyan embassy staff in London in 1984 as well as the wounding of 11 others. Diplomatic immunity allowed the staff not to be prosecuted at all, though Britain subsequently broke off diplomatic relations with Libya. Fifteen years later, Libya accepted "general responsibility" and paid compensation, though some experts continued to question whether the police officer's death was actually caused by someone shooting from within the embassy.

Coming to Pakistani diplomats invoking diplomatic immunity, let us recall the case of our Ambassador to Spain, Mr. Haroon-ur-Rashid Abbasi, who Pakistan withdrew from his post in 1975 without allowing prosecution when heroin was discovered in his suitcase.

Let us also recall the case of our longtime permanent rep at the UN, Ambassador Munir Akram in 2003 who was accused of assault by his then girlfriend. The US also asked Pakistan to waive immunity in that case, which Pakistan did not oblige. (The case was eventually settled when Mr Akram persuaded his girlfriend to withdraw the charges against him).

So, as they say, au contraire, my friends.

Some final points, and please remember that we are only taking issue with the 'facts' of the case as presented in the media. Television analysts have almost unanimously claimed that "Davis" did not have a 'diplomatic visa'. It might behoove someone to ask our media pundits if they have ever actually seen a Pakistani diplomatic visa. From our own investigations, it seems Pakistani visas have no such specified category of 'Diplomatic Visa' (unlike some other countries). In fact, according our sources, all foreign diplomats receive Pakistani visas with the marking "Purpose of Visit:" "Official" or "Official Business" (not Official / Business, another category that does not exist) on their diplomatic passports. If they carry such a visa on their diplomatic passport and the Foreign Office has been so notified, they receive diplomatic immunity during their stay in Pakistan.

Here are some scans of Davis' passport as presented on DawnNews' Reporter programme...

This is the marking on his passport, which clearly states that he is on "diplomatic assignment" (click picture to enlarge):

This is his current visa, issued incidentally not in Washington (as claimed by Shireen Mazari on Geo and Syed Talat Hussain on DawnNews) but in Islamabad:

In fact, "Davis" only once received a three-month visa in 2009 from Washington. His subsequent 4-month visa in 2010 and his current 2-year visa were both issued within Pakistan.

Kamran Khan on Geo also went to great lengths to 'break the news' that "Davis" is a spy who works for the CIA. He almost certainly is. But not only is that not amazing insight, we have to ask, so? Is his actual work the issue of contention here? As former ambassador Zafar Hilaly pointed out on Dunya, spooks get posted on "cover postings" abroad all the time, including by the Pakistan Foreign Office, and they all receive diplomatic immunity under the Vienna Convention. Let's at least be clear what we are arguing about.


: : : UPDATES : : :

There have been some comments questioning some of my assertions in this post, which have been answered in the comments section. You may want to have a look.

A couple of other cases have been brought to our notice which we are also sharing. The first is the case in January 2001 of a Russian diplomat who killed a woman in Canada while driving drunk. A couple of quotes from this piece are worth pointing out.

"Andrey Knyazev was charged with criminal negligence causing death, impaired driving, failing to provide a breath sample, and criminal negligence causing bodily harm. Knyazev immediately claimed diplomatic immunity and on Monday, Russia denied Canada's request to lift it. [Russian Ambassador Vitaly] Churkin urged Canadians not to judge all Russians on the actions of one man. But he defended his government's right to recall Knyazev, saying it's tradition and common practice in the diplomatic community. “Many people are not happy that we didn't lift the diplomatic immunity," Churkin said. "The Canadian government has expressed its displeasure but recognized that this is our right.""

And this bit of wisdom from Canada's Foreign Minister that Pakistanis may also want to understand:

"[The] tragedy has raised questions about the use of diplomatic immunity to escape prosecution. But Foreign Affairs Minister John Manley says he will not use this case to press for changes. "There's an old saying among lawyers that hard cases make bad law," Manley said following a cabinet meeting Tuesday. "I think that (revising diplomatic rules) is something that we'd want to look at in a broader circumstance, not in the situation which we're in now," he said."

Incidentally, Shahid Saeed has also pointed out two further cases where Pakistani diplomats have invoked diplomatic immunity. The first involved Col Mohammad Hamid, a military attache in Pakistan's High Commission in London, who was caught in 2000 having sex with a prostitute in his car in a public place. When caught, Hamid immediately invoked diplomatic immunity and therefore could not be arrested. Here's an Indian Express report of the incident, which was also reported in the English papers.

The second involved the arrest in April 2001 in Kathmandu of Pakistan's first secretary Mohammad Arshad Cheema. 16kg of high-intensity explosive RDX were recovered from his residence. The Indian government believed him to be also linked to the hijacking of the Indian Airlines flight IC-814 which resulted in the freeing from Indian prisions of (subsequently Daniel Pearl murder accused) Omar Saeed Sheikh and Jaish-e-Mohammad leader 'Maulana' Masood Azhar. This report from the respected Indian magazine Frontline presents a wider and less one-sided perspective on the arrest. It also provides evidence of two things we already asserted in our post: that spies (and even military operatives) are often posted by foreign governments under diplomatic cover and that diplomatic immunity extends even to grave crimes. Cheema was expelled from Nepal rather than be prosecuted even though, by any definition, possessing high intensity explosives for ulterior motives is a very serious charge in any country.

Cutting Through the Emotionalism

Can we just express how refreshing it was to watch Najam Sethi's first appearance on Geo tonight? In the middle of the hyperventilating cacophony surrounding the shooting to death of two men in Lahore by a contractor of the US embassy (and the death of a third in a hit and run accident apparently at the hands of an American consulate vehicle), Sethi began his new programme Aapas Ki Baat with the warning that he wanted to put emotionalism aside and analyse the incident only in terms of the facts. That in itself is an all too rare approach on our television screens these days. But what followed was close to a masterclass for other television anchors on how to impart clear, precise information with a logical, rather than emotional, analysis.

Not only did Sethi cite the actual clauses of the Vienna Convention on diplomatic immunity (which Pakistan has ratified) that have been furiously talked about but never actually specifically referenced, but also put into context the whole issue in light of contemporary history and geopolitical realities. Now, others may question his interpretations of the Vienna Convention or the heretofore unknown 'facts' he presented as definite realities (we have no way of determining their veracity but he did stake his reputation on their authenticity), but I hope such challenges, if they do come, will be based on proof rather than vague emotionalism. His main contentions were:

1) Irrespective of a non-diplomatic visa (which seems to have become the main issue for some channels), a diplomatic passport - as the US claims the killer has - may still grant the man known as Raymond Allen Davis* diplomatic immunity under the Vienna Convention. [*This is assumed to be a fake name.]

2) The Vienna Convention actually grants immunity to diplomats (and their technical staff) from ALL criminal prosecution. No diplomat or foreign mission operative may be arrested by a host country, no matter what their crime (except in cases of property). (You may verify this from Clause 29-31 of the Convention.)

3) Since the American government has claimed diplomatic immunity for Davis, the Pakistan government must either accept their claim or the Pakistan Foreign Office - as the constitutional authority to decide such matters - must dispute this status. The courts are not the arbiters of the Vienna Convention under Pakistan's own constitution.

4) By claiming to leave the matter in the hands of the courts or the Punjab government, the Pakistan Foreign Office - and by extension the Federal government - is in violation of Pakistan's own constitution which details how issues of diplomatic immunity are to be handled. The Punjab police and Punjab government were wrong only to the extent that they should have referred the matter immediately to the US Consulate or the Pakistan Foreign Office before arresting Davis.

5) There are some 50-60 such contractors working for the US Embassy in Pakistan, who are all Blackwater-type operatives and whose job involves spying and ferreting out leads to trace Al Qaeda and Taliban leadership. Under a secret treaty signed by the military government of General Pervez Musharraf, a Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) allows such operatives to work in Pakistan as well as Afghanistan. The important thing to remember here is that the military and the intelligence agencies are fully on board about this and know full well the mandate of these operatives. (This claim by Sethi, if true, of course flies in the face of those who have recently been painting Pakistan ambassador to the US Husain Haqqani as the principal villain in granting visas to these operatives, as if such visas are not overseen and approved by the ISI. It also means that those who point out that the Vienna Convention applies only to the discharge of official duties by diplomats and that Davis could obviously not be on any official mission at Mozang Chowk in Lahore, could be countered by the simple assertion by the US Embassy that he was.)

6) In case the Pakistan Foreign Office does decide to dispute diplomatic immunity to Davis, it will probably have to bear the brunt of reciprocal action from the US for reneging on a bilateral / international treaty.

7) Even if diplomatic immunity is denied to Davis, he will most probably be acquitted by the courts since his plea of self-defence will be very strong. As evidence for this contention, Sethi cited his own information that the two men killed by Davis were indeed brandishing weapons, that they were actually shot in the chest or on the side (contrary to news reports of their being shot in the back) and the context of previous attacks on foreigners in Pakistan and the atmosphere of fear that they have created.

Incidentally, Sethi does not address the death of the third man who was run over but it bears recalling that Davis is not charged in that case and the US Consulate has refused to acknowledge that its vehicle was involved. Sethi was also at pains to clarify that he neither condoned Davis' actions nor that he supported such infiltration of secret American agents into Pakistan. In fact, he also condemned such commandos roaming freely around Pakistan under the guise of diplomatic cover. But the solidity of his programme rested on the fact that he was able to separate out a dispassionate analysis of a given situation from the patriotic impulse that seems to overtake our other television analysts.

This does not mean, in any sense, that this issue will not become a hot political issue, particularly serving as a lightning-rod for popular disaffection with American policy but also helping political actors from making opportunistic capital off it. Or that the Peoples Party government is not now stuck between a rock and a hard place. Sethi himself acknowledges this. But it is good to have more than just one side of the debate, particularly when that one side is often also misinformed.

For those who missed the programme, I am attaching the clips below. But first it might also be useful to see how another programme on the same channel, Aaj Kamran Khan Ke Saath, dealt with the issue, just in the previous hour, and which trotted out that doyenne of hyperventilation and hyper-patriotic confused thinking, Ms. Shireen Mazari, to make its point (the segment begins around 1:10 and ends around 11:30).

Don't miss how Ms. Mazari fudges the issue of diplomatic immunity by referring to a waiver in other cases (which obviously implies immunity). Remarkably this was not even the worst fudge of an analysis on our screens.

In stark contrast, here's the full Najam Sethi programme:

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 4:

I suppose kudos to Geo are also in order for finally bringing some rationality to their programming. See? It's not all that bad.

New Editor, Old Perspective

This past week seems to have been a Nizami-obsessed week. Might as well share a final bit of news about the goings on at The Nation.

So, Salim Bokhari has been tipped to take over as editor at The Nation in place of the recently departed Shireen Mazari. Bokhari has been a journalist for almost four decades though most people will recognize him most from appearances as an analyst on various television channels and his recent co-hosting with Orya Maqbool Jan of Aaj TV's reconfigured Bolta Pakistan programme (the team was cobbled together after the departure of Nusrat Javed and Mushtaq Minhas for Dunya TV). Previously, Mr Bokhari's most high profile stint was as the Resident Editor of The News in Lahore. He had left The News to start up the Abu Dhabi-owned The National's Pakistan operations but the Pakistani version was quietly shelved.

Salim Bokhari (right) with Orya Maqbool Jan

Now you might be wondering what would draw The Nation owner Majid Nizami to Mr Bokhari (after all, you must satisfy certain ideological requirements for Majid Nizami to feel comfortable with you). Well, could it be that Mr Bokhari's most recent job - which he took on once The National stint didn't work out - has been as Resident Editor in Lahore of The Daily Mail? You know, the suspect paper that launched this whole brouhaha?

To give you further insight into the content of the rag that Mr Bokhari allowed his name to be associated with, here is how it reported on the launch of the Indo-Pak singing competition for children, Chhote Ustaad, which was broadcast on Geo as well as the Indian Star Plus and eventually went on to become a major hit on both sides of the border:

RAW handpicks Rahat Fateh Ali for fresh anti-Pakistan project

— Rahat sells off Pak kids to RAW like camel jockeys under the grab of music show Chhote Ustaad

— Project initiated to evaporate Pakistani culture, identity

— RAW plans to keep the project for next ten years to eliminate 2-nation theory completely from the minds of Pak Kidz

By Uzma Zafar

"ISLAMABAD—After years of speculation, finally Indian Intelligence Agency Research & Analysis Wing (RAW) appears to has found a smooth operator in the form of Rahat Fateh Ali Khan from Pakistan, on whose shoulder’s they can land their gun and put forward the agenda of making the concept of two-nation theory completely evaporate from the minds of the Pakistani children, make them dance at the tunes of one nation, one world, through it’s recently initiated project Chhote Ustaad, a so called kids’ musical competition show on India’s Star Plus TV while it is being reproduced back in Pakistan by a local TV Channel that is already doing some joint ventures with the known anti-Pakistan Indian Newspaper The Times of India reveal the investigations of The Daily Mail.

The Daily Mail’s investigations further reveal that the desire to rob the Pakistanis of their very identity was on the minds of the RAW for decades but it is only now that the agenda has found a vent through where the very idea can be materialized, infecting the young minds with the idea that their culture is but the same as the Indian one. And what better way than to initiate a supposed talent hunt, putting a music legend of Pakistan; Rahat Fateh Ali on it’s pay roll, to make him dance on the tunes of unity, preaching the idea that two-nation theory is all but a lie, The Daily Mail sources reveal.

The Pakistani kids taken in for the programme are in fact, being used by Rahat Fateh Ali, like camel jockeys, sold on the hands of the RAW, all belonging to poor families and Karachi for that matter, only one being that from Faisalabad.

The Daily Mail’s findings indicate that Star Plus latest season of song based reality show Chhote Ustaad has taken in 10 kids from Pakistan, rather Rahat Fateh Ali has taken them to India for RAW’s fresh covert project against Pakistan for which he has been Paid in millions. Some unconfirmed reports suggest that he has been paid equalling fifty million Pak rupees for one season while the RAW plans to continue it for at least ten seasons. The entire season 2010 is going to be a combo of Pakistani and Indian young talent on the surface but the reality is quite the opposite. Not only this, but the judging panel has Sonu Nigham from India and Rahat Fateh Ali Khan from Pakistan, the latter having no affiliation for the Pakistani kids in the show for he has already sold them for the worse.

The Daily Mail’s findings further reveal that Zee TV took up the initiative earlier, in inviting Pakistani handful of kids and humiliating them onscreen and now it’s Star Plus’ turn to do some more. Also the name has been modified from ‘Star Voice of India Chhote Ustaad’ to ‘Chhote Ustaad – Do Desho ki Awaaz’. One tends to smell rotten fish right from the very idea of picking up kids from Karachi only, just one being taken in from Faisalabad. Karachi is not the whole of Pakistan anyway! Pairing up kids of Pakistan and India itself is a game to malign the very image of two-nation theory in the minds of the Pakistani kids so that, through the years, they even forget their very identity. This could be evident from the phrases that our kids were given to learn, for speaking at the show, being that once they got off the flight, they felt right at home in India. Then again, the question arises, why has the background of the Pakistani kids shown, all belonging to bleak and rather poor families? Was it the criteria of the programme to project the poverty-ridden image of Pakistan? Well, with RAW involved, one can always expect the unexpected. That all was at the back of the minds of the RAW bigwigs and a lot more. The agenda is not that simple that meets the eyes reveal The Daily Mail sources.

The Daily Mail’s investigations reveal that for years and years, Pakistani songs have been illegally twisted and turned to be used in Bollywood flicks. The Bollywood industry has been funded by the RAW and thus, through promotion and making the films available in Pakistan through the black market, our Lollywood industry has never been let to surface. And now the RAW is landing it’s claws over our music industry, being our singers for Bollywood songs and this time, going an extra mile and using a music maestro to hum the tunes of one nation, one goal bullshit, raising the very question in the minds of our kids that what was the need of partition anyway? And to top it all, instead of condemning or banning such an activity at large, Geo has decided to get a little taste of the RAW’s salt and increase it’s earnings to a notch!

When contacted, a former spy agency official stated “The need is for ISI to take the matter in its hands. Black marketing of Bollywood flicks should be curtailed till the RAW agrees to put on Lollywood flicks as well in India and the same should be done to their channels at once. They should not only be banned in Pakistan where their most of the sale is done till they air our programmes on their channels. The joint productions between the two countries should also be given a close check at immediate basis but at the foremost, people like Rahat Fateh Ali should be taught a lesson for cranking his neck at Indian tunes, destroying our music scene at large and making our kids too, sing just the Indian tunes, as if we have no music here. Besides, in all our reality shows, Indian songs should be banned and contestants should be let to perform on our tunes only.

The ISI and other related agencies like the Intelligence Bureau and PEMRA should take strong note of this project and should not let anyone make mockery of the two-nation theory, our identity and culture at large."

So yes, I guess Mr Bokhari would find it incredibly easy to accommodate Majid Nizami's world view.

More Sackings at The Nation

As if almost on cue to khabardrama's long-delayed review of Arif Nizami's Pakistan Today (see previous post), comes news from chacha Majid Nizami's The Nation of large-scale layoffs at the paper there (no, we don't think there's any connection).

More than 30 staffers have been summarily dismissed today without any advance warning from the Lahore office alone and several from Islamabad as well. The Peshawar and Karachi bureaus fear that the axe will next fall on them. Economic difficulties are being cited as the only reason. It's not entirely clear yet whether the personnel sacked were the same ones who had recently received long-delayed raises or whether these layoffs had anything to do with the very recent departure of editor Shireen Mazari.

It should be kept in mind that Majid Nizami can be a vengeful proprietor. We heard about a peon who was recently summarily sacked after more than 20 years of service, simply because the management suspected that his loyalties may still lie with the embittered former editor (and nephew) Arif Nizami.

The Nation does seem to be in freefall. And it's difficult to see how such measures are going to help it meet the challenge posed by the brash new competitors such as Express Tribune and Pakistan Today, both of which have oodles of cash backing them up.

Solid Staid

First of all an apology and an excuse. I have been meaning to write about Arif Nizami's long-awaited Pakistan Today ever since it hit the newstands but have found myself contracting a severe case of writer's block every time I sat down to do just that.

Front page, Berliner-style

The reason is simple. Maybe it's just me, but I need to either love something passionately to feel motivated enough to gush about it in print or to feel it's so bad that I can't wait to tear it to pieces. In the present case, I felt no such overpowering emotion. No adulation or loathing or anything so strong. Just a vague grey reaction. Competent, I thought. Pretty decent. Promising. Not too bad really. A solid, worthy venture. But nothing exciting. Or too awful.

The paper certainly looks different though. Mainly because it doesn't look like your average broadsheet Pakistani daily due to its 'Berliner' (not tabloid, they insist) format. Now I do realise that most upmarket British dailies like the Independent, Times and Guardian also opted for this format some years ago (while giving readers a choice of both formats). But while I could understand their logic for doing so in a country where everyone reads during their long bus, train or underground commutes, why a Pakistani paper should go the same route is puzzling. Try reading anything on your coach or train commute from Lahore to Gujranwala or on a Karachi mini-bus and you will see what I mean.

Page 2 and 3: Clean spread

Once you get over the shock of holding a daily that looks like a weekly, things get pleasant enough. For example, the 32 pages are all colour and the paper quality seems to be on the expensive side. The pictures are pretty decent too and it looks like someone has put some thought into the layout rather than thrown endless, unbroken text at the reader like The News does or thrown a paintbox all over its pages, as is The Nation's preferred design choice. Still, I couldn't help but thinking the overall look was reminiscent of the Express Tribune, albeit in a once-poor relative-with-some-new-money type of way. But still, it is neat, clean and tidy. And it has none of the editorial bloopers and immaturity that initially characterised ET.

Meanwhile, like everything else, the quality of material is, well okay. Not exciting, exactly, but decent enough. Just like the editing. There are scoops but not earth-shattering ones, and a fairly intelligent selection of stories. 'Good effort' is the biggest compliment I could muster.

 Business looks appealing, entertainment ho-hum

City pages will give the competition a run for their money

The sports pages are all right, the business section looks pretty decent and the entertainment pages break absolutely no new ground. The city pages, at least in Lahore, seem pretty good and will give the competition a run for the money. Similarly, the editorial pages are all right but not spectacular. There's nothing there I would kill to read but nothing much to rant or rave against either, unless you are allergic to Humayun Gauhar. The biggest draw is the induction of The Friday Times' superb Sabir Nazir as cartoonist. The editorials are solid and take a pretty even-handed, fairly liberal line without making your pulse race. I mean, there is little, if any, of the crazy, conspiratorial hysteria that characterised The Nation after the younger Nizami stormed out to give way to (the now-departed) Shireen Mazari.

Interestingly, the editorial policy seems not to treat the Sharif brothers like the sacred cows they have become for large sections of the media. Does that in any way reflect Arif Nizami's sense of betrayal over being ditched by the Raiwind brothers during his falling out with Majid Nizami? We will never really know.

Op-ed: So far so solid and Sabir

The refreshing thing is that this is not, thankfully, another Nawa-i-Waqt-type super patriotic, flag-waving, rag. Nor is it The Nation in its recent utterly hysterical and conspiratorial Mazari mode. If anything, it's like The Nation when it was a fairly decent paper many years ago. In fact, what is the most courageous feature of Pakistan Today is that it is resolutely serious and eschews sensationalism. That in itself is a relief in a media environment that is becoming increasingly hysterical.

How a sober and solid (bordering on dull) paper fares in an over-crowded market is anybody's guess. Initial reports from Lahore suggest a fairly positive response. My hunch is that for a new paper trying to make its presence felt in this cut-throat, crisis-ridden market, Pakistan Today will need to do more than just be competent to take its place at the top.

I would be very curious to know if anyone violently agrees or disagrees with me on this. Or whether everyone is too lulled by indifference to offer a view on Pakistan Today, one way or the other...

Irreconcilable Conspiracies? (Updated)

So, the honeymoon of the conspiracy maniacs has finally come to an end.

It has been confirmed that Shireen Mazari, that doyenne of hyper-nationalistic pseudo-patriotic nonsense nutters (a.k.a. 'everyone's out to get us because we are so brilliant' conspiracy theorists), who took charge of The Nation after the bitter falling out between patriarch Majid Nizami and nephew Arif Nizami, has been forced to resign her editorship. Staffers were formally informed of the change today.

 Shireen Mazari: a particular kind of alaap

She lasted in her position about 14 months to the day. Though in one sense it seemed like a marriage made in heaven, it lasted slightly longer than I expected, given the humongous egos of both Ms Mazari and Mr Majid Nizami.

There has been a lot of speculation the whole day among journalistic circles about what exactly led to the falling out between obsessive India-bashing Majid Nizami (the main thrust of his 'doctrine' at the Nazaria-i-Pakistan Trust [Pakistan Ideology Trust], which he heads, is that 'Hindus' will always be 'our' enemies) and obsessive Blackwater-behind-everything Ms Mazari. But as of yet, we do not have any confirmed details about the reasons. If anyone has solid information, please do share with us.

Meanwhile, no indication yet of the fate of Ms Mazari's 'political' cooking show (yes, she hosted a cooking show!) on Waqt TV. No doubt the handis would probably be a bit burned.


: : : UPDATE : : :

Ms Mazari has sent the following email in response to the speculation on the Pakistan-MEDIA discussion group to explain the circumstances of her departure (thanks to Marvi Sirmed for sharing it with us). We are reproducing the email as is (not much of an 'editor' is she?):

"I  was nevee Chairman and Editor in Chief of TheNAtion but was the Editor. I have resigned today as I was asked to shift to Lahore where the owners want the editor to now sit full time. This was not possible nor was it part of my TOR so I resigned but have agreed to continue for a few days so a new editor can be appointed. There is really nothing conspiratorial at all - more an issu eof logisitics! Shireen Mazari"

Aw. Ms Mazari getting upset about conspiracy theories.

The Media Earthquake of the Decade - Update 2

It just had to come, didn't it? Of course it did. The backlash against the Jang Group - Times of India Group collaboration, that is.

First there were the comments on our blog post, which started off as a fair enough critique of the language and sins of omission of the joint editorial, until they descended into the usual "Hindi title, Indian poet" crapola. (Surprisingly, no one's actually yet commented on how the Urdu word 'Amn' has been transliterated into it's Punjabi equivalent 'Aman'.)

But how could Madame Mazari be far behind. Here's The Nation's editorial in today's paper, directly attacking the project (getting back at The News running Arif Nizami's columns perhaps?). I thought I might as well reproduce it in full below, for your reading convenience of course..

A farcical peace

Published: January 2, 2010

ONCE more a new propaganda offensive has been launched by segments of Indian civil society, including its media, in the shape of a "hope for peace". That it is propaganda is evident from the fact that it has come at a time when the Indian military is sending threatening messages to Pakistan with its new war strategies. Bolstering this renewed hostility, the Indian Home Minister Chidambaram has launched a vitriolic tirade against Pakistan and its so-called "terror structure". Ironically, this vitriol has come when the whole Kasab case is unravelling. Even worse, this "peace" offensive is designed once again to sidestep the real conflicts of Kashmir, water and arms build-ups by the Indians along the Pakistan border. By recalling the Sufi and other poets of the subcontinent, the effort is to divert people from these very real political issues without which there can actually be no real peace and stability in this region. It is interesting to note also that while all the major poets of the subcontinent have been recalled in the "peace" context, Iqbal, who is linked closely with the idea of a Muslim homeland that came to be Pakistan, has been ignored. Surely such an omission could hardly be accidental?

That some in Pakistan have joined this new propaganda offensive is not surprising given the genuine desire for peace within Pakistan. Unfortunately, these Pakistanis need to take their blinkers off and see the reality of the Indian position. There is no myth about India's continuing hostility towards Pakistan - at least amongst its leadership. Unless the mindset of the ruling elite in India alters there can be no lasting peace because the present leadership is carrying on in the tradition of earlier Indian rulers who have sought to evade conflict resolution and focus on conflict management. Perhaps it would serve a more useful purpose if the Indian civil society and media that seek peace were to first seek to alter their ruling elite's mindset so that occupation of Kashmir can end and India can learn to abide by the Indus Waters Treaty. There is also India's backtracking on the Siachin draft agreement of 1989. Perhaps the Indian "peace" activists can influence their state to stopping its aid and arms flows to militants in Pakistan.

Ooh, looks like things are just heating up. Zaid Hamid can't be far behind.

The Nation Vs The World

How's this for moving fast? In her short stint as the Editor of The Nation, Dr. Shireen Mazari has managed to turn virtually all her colleagues in journalism against her.

Take a gander at this letter, sent today by 21 of the world's top media organizations, to the government protesting at the "irresponsible" and "unsubstantiated" attack by The Nation on a journalist from the Wall Street Journal "tarring him" as a spy and thereby, according to the letter, endangering his safety. (And no, they were NOT talking about that other Wall Street Journal reporter tarred as a spy and later beheaded.)



For those who don't want to click through, here is the text of the letter:

"TO: Qamar Zaman Kaira,

Minister for Information and Broadcasting, Government of Pakistan

4th Floor, Cabinet Block, Pakistan Secretariat, Islamabad

RE: Nation article about Wall Street Journal reporter

16 November 2009

Respected Minister Kaira,

We are writing to register our strong concern at a recent development that has caused alarm among international media organizations working in Pakistan.

On November 5, The Nation newspaper published a front page article accusing Matthew Rosenberg, a correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, of working for the C.I.A., Israeli intelligence and the U.S. military contractor Blackwater.

Mr. Rosenberg is a respected journalist of high standing. Not only was the article unsubstantiated, it critically compromised his security and raised questions about whether he can return to Pakistan to work safely in the future. 

The article also has broader implications. These are difficult times for all journalists in Pakistan. Our employees already face an array of threats, including violence and kidnapping, as they strive to provide timely and accurate coverage. Now those risks have been needlessly increased.

We strongly support press freedoms across the world. But this irresponsible article endangered the life of one journalist and could imperil others. It is particularly upsetting that this threat has come from among our own colleagues.

We recognize that courageous Pakistani journalists routinely face greater dangers than their international counterparts. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, five Pakistani journalists have been killed in the past 12 months alone. And we are heartened that several Pakistani media organizations have denounced The Nation’s story.

But we are also concerned that an incident of this kind – tarring a foreign reporter as a spy – could occur again. We ask the government of Pakistan to take note of this story and to take all necessary steps to ensure the safety of all media personnel in future."

The letter is signed by the heads, the editors, the editors-in-chiefs, and vice presidents of virtually most major news organizations in the world. Count them, they are almost all there: ABC News, AFP, AP, Reuters, McClatchy, FranceInfo, The Guardian, The Independent, The Times, Financial Times, The Economist, BBC, CNN, Radio France Internationale, Los Angeles Times, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, NPR, Time, Newsweek, and even Al-Jazeera. Rather incredible isn't it? You have to have a certain je ne sais quoi (is 'touch' the word I am looking for?) to garner such collective denunciation, don't you think?

Just in case you were wondering, here is the original article, carried on the front page of The Nation on November 5, that sparked off this whole furore. I think it bears being reproduced here for people to judge for themselves how journalistically sound it is:

Journalists as spies in FATA?

By: Kaswar Klasra | Published: November 05, 2009

"ISLAMABAD – Agents of notorious spy agencies are using journalistic cover to engage themselves in intelligence activities in NWFP and FATA, sources informed TheNation on Wednesday.

To the surprise and shock of many, top bosses of Federally Administrated Tribal Area (FATA) Secretariat are allegedly feeding these journalists with secret reports and information regarding Pak Army and militant groups operating there.

Matthew Rosenberg, South Asian correspondent of Wall Street Journal, has been spotted travelling frequently between Washington, Islamabad, Peshawar and New Delhi during the last couple of months. His frequent and secret meetings with Secretary Law and Order FATA Secretariat, Capt (Retd) Tariq Hayat Khan, and Additional Chief Secretary FATA, Habib Khan, have raised several questions.

The sources alleged that both Tariq Hayat Khan and Habib Khan were equally responsible in facilitating and feeding Matthew about secret documents regarding Pak Army and sensitive information regarding ongoing operation against militants.

Despite the fact that Foreign Office and Interior Ministry have warned foreign journalists and foreign workers of NGOs not to visit NWFP and FATA, Matthew in a clear violation of this warning recently held a detailed meeting with Habib Khan that lasted for two hours and 17 minutes.

When contacted, Matthew Rosenberg confirmed to this scribe from New Delhi on phone that he had been meeting with Tariq Hayat Khan and Habib Khan since long, as he enjoyed good terms with them.

“Yes I have been in Islamabad and Peshawar many times and Tariq Hayat Khan and Habib Khan are also close friends of mine. However, let me tell you that I am not working on any hidden agenda,” Matthew said.

According to an official of law enforcement agency, who requested anonymity, Matthew was working as chief operative of CIA and Blackwater in Peshawar. The law enforcement agencies, he said, had also traced Matthew’s links with Israel’s intelligence agency Mosad as well."

So, basically (in case you missed it), it is anonymous sources (I would wager anything that it's ONE intel guy) who not only "spot" Mr. Rosenberg travelling between "Washington, Islamabad, Peshawar and New Delhi" but also intimate our intrepid reporter about his position as "chief operative of CIA and Blackwater" and his "links" with Mossad! Not only that, the reporter's meetings with the Secretary Law and Order and the Additional Chief Secretary for FATA (two government officials for God's sake!) have been scandalized as something improper and surreptitious. Er, whatever happened to proof? Or basic journalism ethics? Or libel laws? Obviously Shireen Mazari cannot be bothered with such petty things while leading the supercalifragilisticexpialidocious jihad for "national interest."

This is how The News, to its credit, rightly editorialized on the issue on November 12 :

Shoddy journalism

"Journalists lead dangerous lives in Pakistan. They are targeted by the terrorists whose actions they report and by politicians and bureaucrats whose failings and indiscretions they expose. All this is to be expected. What a working journalist may not expect, however, is to be stabbed in the back by one of his own, as has recently happened to Matthew Rosenberg, a journalist working for the Wall Street Journal. Mr Rosenberg has been accused in a local newspaper of having links to the CIA and Mossad and of acting in some undefined way as an agent of Blackwater. As if this were not enough to blight his life and career, he is further accused of having 'secret' meetings with Secretary Law and Order FATA Secretariat, Tariq Hayat Khan, and Additional Chief Secretary FATA, Habib Khan. Both are said to have 'fed' documents to Mr Rosenberg, thereby implicating them in his alleged espionage activities. The story is based upon information from a nameless source and has no supporting evidence. Mr Rosenberg has had to leave the country and is unlikely to be working here in the foreseeable future.

The editor of the Wall Street Journal has rightly and robustly sprung to the defence of his journalist and written to the editor of the newspaper that printed the story. The opening paragraph of his letter reads … "As a fellow editor I am writing to convey in the strongest possible terms our dismay and disgust over the slanderous falsehoods published on the front page of your newspaper on November 5th regarding our reporter Matthew Rosenberg." We might add 'grossly irresponsible' and 'unprofessional' to the list of printable adjectives that may be applied to this dangerous travesty of journalism. Accusations such as this, based on information from a single unnamed source are life-threatening in their gravity. At the very least there should one other corroborating source and preferably more than one where accusations as grave as this are made. The electronic media has recently reached a voluntary agreement to 'clean up its act'; and perhaps some sections of the print media need to do the same."

But to expect Shireen Mazari or her band of yahoos posing as journalists to show even the slightest contrition or introspection would be really like asking for the moon. The very next day, Ms. Mazari's editorial lapdog Ahmed Quraishi - a former PTV host who incidentally is a fellow traveler of loonyman Zaid Hamid on the PakistanKaKhudaHafiz blog - responded to The News editorial by a further front-page diatribe, which bore little or no relation to the substance of the criticism but chose the usual defence of the Zaid Hamid variety. That is, accuse your critics of a lack of patriotism and everything else. Just don't talk about the subject at hand.

Truly, as Samuel Johnson put it in 1775, "patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel."

Arif Nizami's Termination Notice - Updated

So, here is the first update to my earlier post... just in case you thought I was making up the bitter tussle between chacha-bhateeja...

Here is the text of the notice sent out by Majeed Nizami to the staff of The Nation / Nawai Waqt:

Please note that the services of Mr Arif Nizami Editor of The Nation have been terminated with immediate effect.

You are informed not to deal with or to take any instructions from Mr Arif Nizami regarding the business of the newspaper of the company. The new Editor ie Ms Shireen Mazaari has taken charge from today and shall be responsible for the working of the newspapers.

Signed
(Majid Nizami)
Editor-in-Chief

Ooh. This is masala-time.

Update: Had missed this bit of live theatre, with Arif Nizami live on Aaj TV talking about how and why he was sacked. Thanks to khabardrama for pointing me in this direction... You don't need to watch the entire piece, it's only in the first few minutes. By the way, you can ignore Nusrat Javed's platitudes about the Nizamis, it's the kind of false crock that people come up with before they plunge in the knife... And that bit where Arif Nizami says that Majeed Nizami has become more self-centred and unable to hear opposing views with age... more crock, he's always been that way!