Form d © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2015

Driving through Naypyidaw, the purpose-built capital of Myanmar, it could be easy to forget that you’re in the middle of one of south-east Asia’s poorest countries. On either side of the street, a seemingly endless series of giant(large) detached buildings, villa-style hotels and shopping malls look like they have fallen from the sky, all painted in soft pastel colours. The roads are newly paved(made) and lined with flowers and shrubbery(bush).

This surreal(unreal) city extends an estimated 4,800 sq. km, six times the size of New York City. Everything looks supersized. The streets have up to 20 lanes, there is a safari park, a zoo, and at least four golf courses. There is reliable electricity and many of the restaurants have free, fast wi-fi.

The only thing Naypyidaw doesn’t have, it seems, is people. The vast highways are completely empty. Nothing moves. Officially, the city’s population is 1 million, but many doubt this figure. On a bright Sunday afternoon, the streets are silent and hotel lobbies empty. It looks like an eerie(supernatural) picture of post-apocalypse suburban America.

Unveiled(revealed) as Burma’s new capital in November 2005, by the then military regime(ruled government), the city is rumoured to have cost up to $4bn to construct. In recent years, the city’s bizarre(unusual) urban plan and strange emptiness has become something of an international curiosity.

Local residents are wary of speaking to us. “It’s not safe,” says one 26-year-old man who moved to Naypyidaw two years ago. “This city is mainly for government staff, government buildings,” says the man. “Most people are not that happy; they are living here because they can earn money.”

Sitting under cafe umbrellas, outside one of Naypyidaw’s giant shopping malls, a pair of UN consultants are chatting with their laptops out on the table. “It’s super-deserted, like a ghost town. I just feel so awkward here,” says one of them.

Naypyidaw is laid out in large unwieldy ‘zones’ — hotels; government buildings; official residences; — making it very hard to work out where the centre of the city actually lies. One Indian journalist described it as “dictatorship by cartography.”

Down one street stands a mammoth(large) gems and jewellery showroom, where an expansive hall is packed with 40 gleaming high-end jewellery stalls. Dozens of people work here, but no customers. It’s completely silent.

In recent years, Naypyidaw has joined the global summit circuit. Barack Obama was in town last year; David Cameron came in 2012. That same year, Aung San Suu Kyi also made her home in Naypyidaw. Officials of her NLD party say she rented a house in the suburbs.

With its sparkling new international airport, Naypyidaw feels like an extreme test of the “if you build it, they will come” theory. But so far, with the government already having moved at least one of its investment agencies back to Yangon, it’s looking like a spectacular failure.

Read more »

Managers vs. Ideologues in aap

What looks like personality clashes and bickering(quarrel) is really a difference in vision between two key factions in a nascent(beginning) party that is still finding its shape in the crucible
The open war of attrition in the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) merely days after its spectacular triumph(victory) in the Delhi Assembly elections was an unusual occurrence(event) in Indian politics. Political parties in India normally enjoy what is called a “honeymoon period,” involving internal bonhomie(friendly) and consolidation(solid mass) of success through party building following facile(effortlessly) victories — even if they are won by simple majorities in polls. In the case of the AAP, the party managed the second largest Assembly election victory in Indian history, grabbing more than 54 per cent of the vote share and 95 per cent of the seats on offer. The victory was made possible due to an overwhelming desire among the population of Delhi — especially the urban poor — for a welfare and delivery-oriented government that was not beholden to special interests and directly reached out to their needs.

The open squabble between a coterie(circle of people with a common purpose) of leaders close to AAP convener Arvind Kejriwal and the party’s ideologue-duo, social scientist Yogendra Yadav and advocate Prashant Bhushan, was, therefore, surprising. Reports suggest that a truce seems to be in the offing. But the question remains as to why this difference — which apparently emerged much before the elections — came up between these leaders in the first place. The reasons for the alienation(disaffecte) of the two dissidents(difference of opinions) seem to originate from two different viewpoints. This is seen from the joint letter sent by the two recently as a riposte(quick reply) to a statement by the coterie that suggested that the duo was working against the interests of the AAP in the Delhi elections.

Following protocol

“The AAP has to decide whether it will follow the “pragmatist” line that its supremo espouses(follow) or give more space to those in the party who seek to carry forward some of the legacy of their civil society days... ”

Mr. Bhushan, a vocal lawyer who has taken up many cases against corruption, had serious reservations with a set of candidates chosen by the party for the Delhi elections, among other issues. The set of candidates included rent-earning speculators and local bigwigs, defectors from the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Congress. Mr. Yadav, on the other hand, was not so critical of this “electoral pragmatism”, justifying in an interview the AAP’s decision to tap traditional patronage networks in Delhi’s rural areas. His key reason for dissent stems from his view that the AAP has to have a pan-India strategy beyond Delhi State, which is clearly at cross-purposes with party supremo Mr. Kejriwal. The latter had vowed(promise) to consolidate his party’s victory in Delhi, more so to mitigate(lessening) the widespread and well-deserved criticism that his resignation from government last year was a sign of political immaturity. What binds Mr. Yadav and Mr. Bhushan’s dissidence is their insistence on the AAP leadership following protocol — consultation, collective decision-making and internal democracy — diligently(patience).
Political positioning
Proximate reasons apart, the recurring rifts, resignations and defections from the AAP are an outcome of the fact that the party is still finding its feet, as it graduates from a socio-political movement to a political party, currently saddled with the responsibility to rule in Delhi. Its current positioning in the political space traditionally occupied by the Congress — a centre-left party that accrued(increase) support from the poorer sections of society — has been the result of shrewd(smart) electoral tactics rather than any ideological vision. The AAP’s volunteer and activist base is primarily drawn from the middle classes and, especially, among this section’s youth cohorts(group). While they espouse an idealistic zeal to change politics by joining the political mainstream, they have no ideological inclination(tendency) except to support a solution-based approach towards governance and public policy. On the other hand, a small section of activists derive(gain) their legacy from civil society movements and agenda-driven, non-governmental organisations. These activists believe in a centre-left core and it is this set of voices that is represented in the leadership by Mr. Yadav, Mr. Bhushan and others. Mr. Kejriwal himself belonged to this section of civil society activists but has, since his entry into politics, gravitated closer to the “pragmatists” in his party.

A recent addition to the AAP’s core is a set of media-savvy “leaders” — many of whom served in the news media before — for whom the line between public-mindedness and publicity-seeking is a blur(make unclear). They serve an important role for the party by keeping it in public consciousness(awareness) through — largely noisy and personalised — discussions in the public sphere. This section has also been useful for Mr. Kejriwal in managing the Delhi elections and has established a firm presence in the coterie that surrounds him.

In the initial phase of the party, the various sections seem to have brokered an understanding that the party would stand for solutions and not for broad positions on various issues. This has allowed the party leadership leeway to maintain a non-committal position on ideology while offering ad hoc solutions on a case-to-case basis. The ideologues of the party, including Mr. Yadav, defended this approach in the past, while putting the onus(burden) on a number of theme-based committees in the party to decide its overall positioning in the long run beyond the limited agenda of instituting a Lokpal. Many of these committees’ reports — the economics and ecology committees’ for example — have been ignored or their work is yet to be discussed by the coterie-centred leadership. It is no wonder that several voices from civil society who supported the AAP in its initial phase have moved away from the party crying foul over the lack of inner party democracy.

The coterie’s not-so-subtle(elusive) claim that it is only Mr. Kejriwal’s charisma and their pragmatic ability to field “winnable”candidates that helped the AAP register its strong win is only partially correct. After all, the AAP’s credibility lay in the fact that the party took on the establishment and had committed activists from civil society taking part in its agitations(charge up). These activists also played an important role in firming up the party’s electoral strategy in the run-up to the two State elections in Delhi recently, apart from the general election in 2014. It is these leaders who offered a dissenting position in the party.

A vision

In a nutshell, the differences in the AAP basically boil down to the visions for the party’s role in Indian democracy. Mr. Kejriwal and others who support him seem to believe that the AAP has to merely play a non-corrupt and efficient role in power and use this to delineate(define) itself from other political parties. In other words, their emphasis remains on simply bettering other parties in being conduits for public interest in a welfare-oriented political system that is “transaction-driven”. Political parties in this view are only vehicles for providing services to various interests in return for attaining power through their support. Politics and public policy in this view are reduced to promises made during elections, welfare delivered to voters and politicians acting as managers of “public interest.”

Others in the AAP who belonged to civil society movements, on the other hand, see a more transformative role for the AAP. They seek to not just adjust to welfarism in the way it is extant today, but to bring about effective changes in the system. They stop short of claiming that they espouse a radical social democratic vision — which is what their views effectively amount to — but they see clear differences between the “managers” in the AAP and themselves.

In their view, their role is not that of conduits or managers but catalysts for substantive public participation in policy setting and expansion of democracy. It is this difference in vision that has come to the fore in the squabbles in the party today, even if it has taken the shape of personality clashes and inner-party issues.

The AAP cannot live with these differences forever and seek to expand as a political party beyond its current stronghold in the capital region of Delhi. It has to decide whether it will follow the “pragmatist” line that its supremo espouses or give more space to those in the party who seek to carry forward some of the legacy of their civil society days as they consider their party to be a vehicle for a political movement. The recent moves to effect reconciliation within the party suggest that Mr. Kejriwal is willing to reconsider his current positions.

Read more »

Jammu and Kashmir

The Central government headed by the BJP does not possess the kind of levers needed to deal with the ground realities in Kashmir. It needs to do more than merely making strong statements from time to time in the belief that this would check the profligacy(high life) of the Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister and his cabinet on matters of security
Events in Jammu and Kashmir seemingly appear more surreal than real, making it difficult to separate the truth from perceptions. The 2014 elections in Jammu and Kashmir had raised expectations of a significant shift in a progressive direction as far as the State was concerned. The national parties, the Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), had between them secured over 45 per cent of the vote, an increase of more than 14 per cent when compared to the 2008 elections. Thus, the perception was that this would herald(announce) closer cooperation between Srinagar and New Delhi. Unfortunately, this does not seem to be happening — at least not yet.

Skewed mandate

A contributory factor, possibly, has been the skewed nature of voting patterns which convey the impression of a sharp divide — between a predominantly Muslim populated Kashmir Valley and the Hindu majority Jammu region. Votes in the Valley largely went in favour of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), virtually shutting out the BJP as Jammu voted overwhelmingly for the BJP. The seat arithmetic did not provide much scope for the emergence of a stable government, unless the PDP and the BJP — representing two opposite poles of the political spectrum — combined forces. This did eventually happen, but only after an extended and corrosive(capable of destroying) delay. Moreover, the contents of the common minimum programme of the two parties, which was forged after several rounds of discussion, hardly inspire confidence about the longevity of their understanding.

Managing an “unlikely coalition(alliance)” of this nature, requires both sides to adhere(stand by) strictly to the rules of “coalition dharma”. At the very least, it requires that neither party undermines key postulates(put firmly) of the common minimum programme, and that they take care not to upset carefully contrived(planned) arrangements in place. At best, there could be some room for employing a scalpel(a thin surgical knife) — but used with a surgeon’s dexterity(using the hands) — rather than a sledgehammer used by a construction worker. Consultation and accommodation have to be the watchwords. All this is presently in short supply.

Breaking the concord(agreement)

The choice of Mufti Mohammad Sayeed as Chief Minister for a full six-year term, did foreclose some of these options. Mr. Sayeed promptly proceeded to violate some of the basic principles of the understanding. Almost his very first pronouncement was to credit Pakistan, the Hurriyat Conference and the militants for the smooth conduct of the Assembly elections in the State. This stoked(fire up) a controversy that is unlikely to die down. A little after this, an even more serious controversy erupted(break out) following the release of Masarat Alam, a Kashmiri separatist hardliner and a close affiliate of the Tehreek-e-Hurriyat leader, Syed Ali Shah Geelani. Hence, not all of New Delhi’s efforts to pour oil on troubled waters can disguise the vast differences in approach and attitude that exist between the two coalition partners.

“Militancy in Jammu and Kashmir is at its lowest since the 1980s. Nothing should be allowed to happen that would lead to a reversal of this situation ”

Mr. Sayeed is not known to be a conciliator(peace maker). The Congress realised this during the PDP-Congress coalition of 2002-2008. On that occasion, he had only a truncated(shortened) three- year term. His strong views on how to chart Kashmir’s destiny are in sharp contrast with views held by a majority of the national mainstream. Further, given his animus(bad blood) towards the Abdullah family, which leads the National Conference, it is only to be expected that every decision taken by the Omar Abdullah ministry is likely to be overturned. All this and more could certainly have been anticipated.

Hence, Mr. Sayeed’s current statements must not be perceived or treated, as an aberration(disorder). The truth is that the Chief Minister is ambivalent(not sure) on the issue of India-Pakistan relations. He is viewed as someone who has a soft spot for the Hurriyat. His approach to militancy and the role of militants in the Valley has often been at odds with New Delhi’s perceptions. Even earlier, as the Chief Minister, he often demonstrated that he was not on the same page as New Delhi on these matters. His elder daughter, Mehbooba Mufti, had also previously demonstrated a “softness” towards militancy and the militants.

More serious than this, are the implications of the Chief Minister’s so-called “healing touch”. The road to hell, it is said, is often paved(made up) with good intentions. The release of Masarat Alam may be viewed as a minor incident, but can fuel a new wave of unrest, and give fresh grist to residual anti-national forces within the Valley. In turn, it could encourage Pakistan to embark(set out) on more aggressive moves.

Masarat Alam has been actively involved in violent activities for long. Kashmir’s dangerous decade of the 1990s began with a single instance of the abduction of Rubaiya Sayeed, Mr. Sayeed’s other daughter, in December 1989, and the letting off of some militants in exchange for her release. As a result, Kashmir and India suffered a great deal and it has taken more than two decades to retrieve the situation.

Replay of the past?

To many, the events of the past few days are beginning to look like an eerie replay of what occurred then, and which was to push Kashmir almost to the brink. In December 1989, Mr. Sayeed was the Union Home Minister when his daughter’s abduction(take away) and the release of militants took place. The circumstances of the release and the exchange remain controversial to this day.

Likewise, Masarat Alam’s release remains a matter of controversy. His release coincided(go with) with Mr. Sayeed’s assumption of office, leading immediately to a hue and cry. This was followed by strong statements by the Union Home Minister that terrorism and violence would be dealt with a strong hand — implicitly(silently) blaming the PDP-led government for the release. All this seemed to end in a whimper(cry softly), following a belated explanation that the release had been ordered by the State government during Governor’s rule. The belated explanation has, however, not convinced anybody. Rather, it has all the makings of a Sherlock Holmes novel.

The short-, medium- and long-term implications of all this need to be carefully considered. Kashmir remains a highly sensitive region to this day. The government in New Delhi headed by the BJP also does not possess the kind of levers needed to deal with the ground realities in Kashmir, unlike the Congress when it was in alliance with the PDP. The Central government needs to do more than merely making strong statements from time to time in the belief that this would check the profligacy of the Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister and his cabinet on matters of security.

Mr. Sayeed is unlikely to be deterred(try to prevent) by the vehement(intense) opposition voiced by the Lok Sabha to his actions, or the Prime Minister’s categoric disapproval of his controversial remarks. The Chief Minister is a shrewd(smart) leader who realises that he can possibly tap into a lingering(leave slowly), though currently receding, anti-India sentiment among sections of Kashmiris, who continue to remain unhappy with the Centre.

Currently, militancy in Jammu and Kashmir is at its lowest since the 1980s. Nothing should be allowed to happen that would lead to a reversal of this situation. No price should be seen as too heavy for this. Measures need to be put in place before the situation slips out of control. We do not need a repeat of what took place during the tenure(period) of the Janata Dal government led by Prime Minister V.P. Singh of which Mr. Sayeed was a part of as the Union Home Minister.

Once the situation stabilises, the healing measures initiated during the years 2005-2010, under Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, should be revived and energised. The reports prepared by the four working groups should be retrieved for early implementation. The round tables should be revived. All this had made considerable progress during that period, but withered(thin) on the vine due to neglect post-2010.

It may be too early, just yet, to consider a India-Pakistan entente(understanding) that could result in the setting up of a cooperative and consultative mechanism to deal with the problems of people on both sides of the Line of Control (LoC). The Pakistan Army seems to have once again gained ascendancy(control) and can be expected to be a spoiler in terms of better India-Pakistan relations. India will need to wait for better times. Nevertheless, India must continue to affirm that it favours a resolution of the Kashmir dispute that does not seek to redraw borders, but will enable easier commerce, communication and contact between the Kashmiri people on both sides of the LoC.

Read more »

Hasty conclusion over a tragic death

A hyper-active media and a narrow-minded polity act as inadvertent(accident,happen by chance) roadblocks to a proper investigation into IAS officer D.K. Ravi’s death
When was the last time we saw spontaneous(unscripted) protests and crowds in their thousands pouring out into the streets to mourn(sorrow) the death of an Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer, or for that matter any government official? In a country where government offices and officers are treated with fear and suspicion, this happens very rarely.

The circumstances in which 2009 batch IAS officer, 36-year-old D.K. Ravi, died are mysterious and tragic. The outpouring of emotion for the young officer, last posted as Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Enforcement), is testimony to the love he earned from the people.

It was in Kolar district in Karnataka, known for its fierce(violent) caste conflicts and land mafia, that he earned his reputation as being an outstandingly honest and endearing(lovable) official when he was deputy commissioner between August 2013 and October 2014. Anecdotes of how he served the people and how he cracked down on the land mafia have filled newspaper pages and television airtime. People’s groups in Kolar even launched a strong protest when he was transferred.

So, when an officer of such high reputation, who took on several large lobbies in his career as well as real estate giants(large) during his last posting in the commercial taxes department, is suddenly found dead in his apartment, there is bound to be shock, confusion and suspicion of foul play. What the situation demanded and continues to demand is a thorough investigation.

The circumstances in which Ravi was found dead on March 16 are reminiscent(aware) of how the young and upright civil servant Satyendra Dubey, an engineer in the National Highway Authority of India, and the Indian Oil Corporation sales executive, S. Manjunath were killed in 2003 and 2005, respectively, for exposing organised crime and corruption.

Irresponsible polity

Unfortunately, the death of Ravi has turned into a slanging match between the main political parties in Karnataka and the harbinger(announce) of a 24X7 speculation show in the media. The former Director of the Central Bureau of Investigation, R.K. Raghavan, told this correspondent that the prime mistake in the investigation was how the government and the police declared his death as a case of suicide even before a proper post mortem was conducted.

Bangalore city police commissioner M.N. Reddi told television crew, just a few hours after the body was found, that “prima facie it appears to be a case of suicide”.

This was followed by the State Home Minister, K.J. George, reiterating to a furious Opposition in the Legislature that it was a case of suicide and that it was because of “personal reasons”. These statements were made even before the officer’s body was buried. Chief Minister Siddaramiah, who claimed that it was “personal reasons that led to Ravi’s death”, also claimed in the House that “Ravi was transferred out of Kolar because of a request from his father-in-law”. These statements were uncalled for, especially as they were made even before the body was buried and an official report on investigations was released.

It begs the question why the State government was in such a hurry to declare the cause of death. Was it not the responsibility of the government to wait for a basic investigation to be completed before making such categorical statements on a platform no less than the floor of the house? Least of all, was there not a need to be a little more sensitive to the emotions that the officer’s family and his admirers were going through?

“Ravi’s immediate family members have been vociferous(noisy,loud) in their demand for a CBI probe, but the Home Minister has ruled one out”

For the Opposition, this was a powerful issue to raise the political pitch. None of Ravi’s admirers would trust Opposition politicians more than they would trust the government, but the latter queued up to make a point by stalling,  legislative business.
Former Chief Minister H.D. Kumaraswamy of the Janata Dal (Secular) even went to the extent of saying that “the ceiling fan from which Ravi’s body was allegedly found hanging was intact” and asking how it could be a “suicide”. When politicians turn into investigators, the facts of a case are often major casualties.

Another former Chief Minister, Jagadish Shettar of the Bharatiya Janata Party, seemed convinced that it was “not a case of suicide” and his party decided that it would take the matter to New Delhi and “carry on the fight on behalf of the family”.

The media’s constant attention on the case, highlighting every allegation that was made by anyone, has only added to the prevailing confusion. Some television channels even showed graphic video footage of the officer’s body being lowered from the fan in his house.

These videos and the beeline that top politicians and officials made to his house within hours of the incident revealed how much evidence could have been lost or disturbed from the spot. The first priority for the police was to secure the area and collect evidence. Unfortunately, they seem to have been in a hurry to “conclude and not investigate”, according to a senior IAS officer.

The Chief Minister has even been quoted by a local language daily as having said in an interview that the “officer had made several calls to a woman IAS officer before his death” and “police sources” were sharing details with the media about call records and conversations.

Given such fodder, the media seems to have forgotten that the least that the officer and his family deserve in such circumstances is that the officer’s dignity is preserved and his and his family’s privacy respected.

The irony is that the government is in haste to declare it a suicide and the Opposition is convinced that it is not. This is exactly why an impartial investigation is the least that can be done. The counter question posed by many in the State government is how the CBI can be trusted and how one can be sure that they will not be under political pressure from the ruling BJP in the Centre.

It may be a valid question, but it is also questionable if there is any investigating agency in the country that is “politically independent”.

Mr. Raghavan pointed out, when interviewed, that “...if they have nothing to hide, there is no reason for the State government to resist a CBI probe.” He added that it would be important for the investigations to rely on forensic analysis and call records.

While the State police force may have the resources for a detailed probe, any investigation by the Crime Investigation Department (CID) would still be viewed with suspicion because of the pre-emptive statements made by the city police chief, the Chief Minister and the Home Minister declaring the death as a case of suicide.

Ravi’s immediate family members have been vociferous in their demand for a CBI probe, even as the Home Minister has ruled one out. Several IAS officers in Karnataka have also signed an online petition addressed to the Prime Minister, seeking a CBI probe.

Given the overall context, while a CBI probe may not be a guarantee to the truth, it seems to be the only way to send out a perception of seriousness and fairness in investigations; if not to the public, at least to the family 

Read more »

Journey to Pakistan

Pakistan is a complex nation but ten days are enough to find that while politics, religion and life itself have changed, its people haven’t
It’s been a little over seven years since I was here last. As the car moves from Wagah to Lahore, I see few vehicles on the road.

“It’s the fuel crisis,” Kamran, a strapping Lahori, explains. “The Pakistan State Oil only had reserves for three days. They say it was because of [a] lack of planning.” Whatever the reason, Lahore had little fuel left. People had stopped going to offices, public transport was off the roads, and queues at a few petrol pumps stretched for miles. The CNG rickshaws were still plying(run), but with LPG cylinders.

Worse still is the electricity situation. In Gulberg, one of Lahore’s most affluent(crowded) areas, load shedding is over 11-12 hours every day. In Karachi, it is 5-8 hours and in Larkana, 14 hours. The incessant(continues) hum of fuel-guzzling(drinking rapidly) generators is one’s faithful companion in Pakistan.

Lahore looks much as it did seven years ago. The wide, tree-lined streets, the hustle and bustle of Ichra (a local bazaar), the haggling(bargaining) … I could have been in Sarojini Nagar, Delhi, but for the difference in the dresses and the tehjeeb. Everywhere I went, people spoke with utmost graciousness. The poorest shopkeeper, the seemingly illiterate bus driver, the fearsome security guard — I saw no one cursing, shouting or being even remotely rude. If there is eye contact, a ready smile and an asalaam waalekum come your way. And if they figure out that you are a foreigner, you become their guest.

All-pervasive(spreading) fear

After the Peshawar attack, fear is palpable(can feel). Children shudder(shiver) to go to school. Parents make them touch the holy Quran, utter(express) a dua (blessing) over their heads, and send them out each morning. The added security outside schools does not reassure them. Many point out and say, “What choice do we have? We can’t stop sending children to schools.” Fear is all-pervasive and yet has not dampened the Pakistani hospitality. It has not yet translated into a ubiquitous(present anywhere) suspicion of strangers and foreigners.

For an outsider, Lahore is still a historic city that you can wander around with relative ease. Unlike in Karachi, you see people walking about. More importantly, you see women. Most of them are burqa clad or have their heads covered — unlike in the Lahore of 2007 — but they are visible. In Karachi, the few women I encountered were on local buses or behind the tinted glasses of cars. In Clifton, Karachi’s poshest address and in Zamzama, you saw a handful driving cars. Yet the markets were full of women.

My host, a well-known, young author told me that in Karachi, women wore jeans, short-sleeved outfits, even capris. Behind the veil(hidden) were women in the most modern dresses, made-up faces and stylised hair. But when they travelled, the burqa provided anonymity and safety. Men didn’t leer(look in a bad way), no one knew their identity, no one could comment on their dress. Just like the city, its people too lead a dual life — one indoor and one out of doors. When times are uncertain, kidnappings commonplace, and when bullets and bombs become so familiar that they no longer paralyse you with shock, anonymity provides security. So men drink, women drink and smoke cigarettes but within the four walls. Youngsters have Facebook accounts but with fake identities. YouTube is banned, but everyone uses a proxy to watch videos. Large houses have swimming pools, but on the beaches in Karachi, women go into the water in burqas. There was a time when in multicultural Karachi, religious leaders had issued an appeal for women to use costumes to prevent drowning. Now, of course, no one would even dare to recall such a request.

In Karachi, as in the rest of Pakistan, life goes on, but with caution. Freedoms are curtailed till people find ways to circumvent restrictions. They lose some space and yet they regain some semblance of what was once their everyday life.

In Karachi, the spectre of the gun dogs you at every step. Police patrols, heavily armed rangers, gunmen behind pickups and in cars, homes with high walls and barbed wires define Karachi, at least to me, the first-time visitor. There are other things that strike you such as the wide roads. Even in the old city there were six-laned roads, the sheer number of shops and markets, the beautifully decorated trucks, buses and rickshaws. Yet, even as you savour(taste) every morsel(bite) of the sumptuous(tasteful) halwa poori served for breakfast or admire the beautiful truck art, you feel the presence of the gun. My host told me of an interesting incident. “The first time I visited Lahore, I was shocked. The homes had low walls, little fencing, and open gates. In Karachi, we have always lived behind barbed wire, high walls, and padlocked doors.”

“Despite guns being around everywhere in Karachi, people carried on with their lives as if everything was just fine. Perhaps, this is what life in a conflict zone is about and this is how we survive”

Every time I looked around in Karachi, and to some extent, in Pakistan, I saw guns. It’s true that these guns were for the safety of people, but they had me on edge. Yet, around me, people carried on with their lives as if everything was just fine, as if they didn’t even notice the guns. Perhaps, this is what life in a conflict zone is about and this is how we survive. Perhaps this is necessary to retain one’s sanity and life.
Ten days is too short a time to understand a place and Pakistan is a complex nation. I claim no understanding of its people, or its politics. I have no answers when people ask me why they support terrorists, why they won’t let go of Kashmir, why things are breaking down. I only know what I experienced. It was a country where even under the shadow of the gun, people treat outsiders with grace and warmth. Where the media, just like the media here, makes every effort to blame “the other” for everything — from border violations to terrorist activity in Peshawar. Where the common men and women are just as curious about us as some of us are about them. The questions I was asked were not about Indian politics or Kashmir or terrorism. They were about the language we speak, the food we eat, the clothes we wear. They were about our similarities and differences. They were about Bollywood. “Bollywood movies are the best, but Indian serials, too much artifice! Now, Turkish soaps, you should watch.”

“Have you seen PK? No!” That was almost a cardinal sin!

Did I travel alone? “Women in Pakistan don’t travel alone.”

Didn’t I feel scared travelling alone in a new country, especially one that is often regarded with so much suspicion?

Being afraid

How could I? How could I when the only thing I encountered in this country was love and acceptance? When village women rummaged(search) through their treasure chests to bring me the best honey they had collected? When bus drivers stepped out into the cold night to get a special adrak ki chai (ginger tea) made for me? When taxi drivers refused to take money as I was a guest? When the hostesses on my luxury bus conspired to ensure that the Pakistan Rangers would not discover that I was a foreigner — else I would have to step down and go to their checkpoints for a series of formalities? When the security guard at Abdullah Shah Ghazi’s mazhar in Karachi went to her seniors to get special permission for me to click pictures because I had come from afar? When the head of airport security and an entire van of policemen accompanied me to my hotel in Mohenjodaro because my escort hadn’t turned up and I was their mehmaan? How could I be afraid?

This, perhaps, is the one thing that hasn’t changed about Pakistan in the last seven years. I wasn’t afraid then and I am not afraid now because while politics has changed, religion and life itself has changed, at the most basic level, people haven’t. They are just as welcoming now as they were then. Just as warm and just as friendly.

Read more »