From: Aqil Sajjad <aqil_sajjad@...>
Subject: [Seraiki] The venomous B-teams
To: "Aqil Sajjad" <aqil_sajjad@...>
Date: Thursday, 9 July, 2009, 1:17 AM

The venomous B-teams

http://thenews. jang.com. pk/daily_ detail.asp? id=187090

Thursday, July 09, 2009
Samad Khurram

 

In The Art of War, Sun Tzu wrote that "If you know both yourself and your enemy, you can win a thousand battles without a single loss." Two thousand and
five hundred years later, the words continue to ring true. Pakistan's current predicament is a product of not being able to identify ourselves and our
enemies. And so we continue to lose many campaigns.

 

The bona fide nuisance is rarely the visible enemy. The external foe subsists across the gulf and tends to make its intention clear and in conflict with
yours. On the other hand, the chameleons within obsolete principles, obscure discussion, promote their own agenda, extract political mileage and engage
in a constant war of attrition. Lovingly, my friends and I refer to them as the "B-teams."

 

The anatomy of these B-teams is rather complex. These B-teams tend to exist more pronouncedly as politicians, analysts and journalists. Some of these individuals
receive patronage for their performance, while others seek recognition. The last are those who become B-teams by virtue of their own biases. Whichever
one of these categories they may fall in, the B-teams have always been more dangerous for Pakistan, as they form public opinion and direct discourse. They
appease the public by remaining dead right most of the time but when it comes to the contentious issue, they skirt around the issue, focus on non-issues
and misguide the people.

 

It only took one serious long march this year to restore the judges. This could have been done in 2007, saving us all time, money and effort. But Musharraf
had found his B-team in the form of the PPP. This party tried every ruse to avoid the issue. Like any B-team the PPP issued obscure statements and tried
to appear as if they were with the people, not against them, and did not oppose the popular demands openly.

 

Contrast the PPP's active role in the first part of the lawyers' movement after March 9, 2007, with their actions after the elections of Feb 18, 2008. In
2007, the leaders of the PPP were at the forefront of the movement. They would organise rallies, protests, walks, camps and lionise the chief justice as
an honest, upright judge. Farooq Naek and others would quote the Constitution on how the sacking of sitting judges by the president was unconstitutional.
Many PPP leaders are on record with statements claiming it was Iftikhar Chaudhry's honesty which landed him in trouble. However, once they had extracted
the NRO, the PPP shunned its principles, the Constitution and everything else they promised to uphold. This B-team of the establishment tried to buy judges,
offered lucrative jobs to lawyers for opposing Kurd's elections, crafted unconstitutional "fresh oaths" and tried to drain the energy of the lawyers.

 

The B-teams of the PPP followed course too. Their first major tactic of the B-team to help the PPP was to vociferously oppose any criticism of the PPP by
accusing commentators of being responsible for sowing seeds of martial law or being "right-wing. " Secondly, they remained visibly muted in their condemnation
of the PPP government. Remember how human rights activists would highlight the Mukhtaran Mai case during the Musharraf regime? Today the human rights record
is much worse. We have several ministers in the present cabinet with questionable human rights records. While human rights groups will show you their occasional
press releases condemning these appointments, one does not need to know their background working to realiSe that many of these activists really have no
interest in building pressure on the PPP. A simple comparison of their agitated response during Musharraf's regime and silence on the PPP government speaks
volumes of their insincerity. Thirdly, the B-teams started to distract the people in non-issues and created confusion. The very same people who braved
bullets on May 12, 2007, to simply greet the chief justice later started accusing him of being a PCO judge, of being corrupt and inept. On top of it, the
B-teams of the PPP supported a double PCO judge over those who had refused to take oath under the last PCO!

 

The B-teams and their tactics must be kept in mind when dealing with the Taliban for an effective solution. Just as our failure to recognise the B-teams
of Musharraf led to a delay of a year and a half in the restoration of the judiciary, our failure to identify and expose the sympathisers of Taliban will
result in irreparable loss. We need to classify the politicians, journalists and others are soft on their criticism of the Taliban, those who have different
principles for the Taliban, and those who create confusion on this issue.

 

At a seminar organised by the PTI last month, Qazi Hussain Ahmad said that even though the Taliban had slaughtered Jamaat-e-Islami members, criticising
them would only strengthen enemy (American/Israeli/ Indian) designs. (Compare this with statements by the PPP B-teams who accused critics of the PPP as
being supporters of military rule.) It beats me on how a Taliban-free Pakistan not afflicted by daily terrorist attacks would be beneficial for our enemies.
The PTI speaks in a similar tone, which has been adequately discussed by many of us. A similar approach is adopted by other former MMA parties.

 

Then, there are the media sympathisers who create confusion. The Taliban's criminal flogging of a girl was defended by certain journalists on the grounds
that it was ' Islamic'. The real issue was thus swept under the carpet. (Compare this with the PPP's flaunting of the pictures of Benazir Bhutto and renaming
everything to Bhutto as way of hiding important issues.

 

Playing with emotions is the worst form of deception that the B-teams do. In the flogging case the real issue was not one of Islam but of the state of Pakistan.
Only the state has the authority to conduct trials and award punishments. Anyone else who does it becomes a state within a state and must be prosecuted.
Even the murder of a known murderer by non-state actors is criminal. The minor issue was on the type of punishment for adultery which could be addressed
by deliberation of lawmakers.

 

In the same book Sun Tzu wrote: "To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's
resistance without fighting." In Pakistan's case the supreme excellence would be to oppose the soft corner existing in society for the Taliban and expose
these B-teams. The civil society must direct its attention to these B-teams and make them listen to the demands of a terror-free Pakistan. If a 14-year-old
in a madrasa would hear open condemnation of the Taliban daily, the possibility of him becoming a suicide bomber would fall to zero. To remain the Taliban's
sidekicks is only harming our country. I often ask: when will we muster the strength of character to stop being the B-teams of others, and become the A-team
of Pakistan?

 

The writer is a student at Harvard University, US. Email: skhurram@fas. harvard.edu