Our Announcements

Not Found

Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.

Archive for category Bhutto-Zardari Feudal Family Corruption

The Apathy in Pakistan to Support Reform

NOTES FROM A SOCIAL SCIENTIST

imgres

The Apathy in Pakistan to Support Reform

I am appalled.

 I am appalled at the apathy of Pakistani society in not supporting for once what is clearly ( in my lifetime at least ) the most serious and deep rooted attempt at reform.

 I am appalled at the pretentiousness of many otherwise perfectly logical and sane people, for not supporting this serious attempt to get rid of this terrible putrid sewerage system of so called democracy, so cunningly labeled by these sick self-serving so called politicians to safeguard their golden geese.

 These politicians who have destroyed all semblance of good order and governance, simply because of this label of so called democracy. Look at these names who have been in political power in one form or shape or the other, be it a civilian or military administration.

 Look at this horrible horrible roll call of political deviants. Nawaz Sharif, Shahbaz Sharif, Ishaq Dar, Saad Rafique, Asif Zardari, Khurshid Shah, Fazlur Rehman, Asfandyar Wali. An endless list of self serving, corrupt to the core, people.

 While some may criticize IK and TUQ for resorting to “undemocratic” methods. Here’s something to ponder. What choice do IK and TUQ and and people like us have.  

 We can’t boot the Nawaz Sharifs and Asif Zardaris out through the electoral process because they have “bought” the entire process.

 We can’t take them to court, because they have “bought” the entire judicial system.

 We can’t hold them for any form of major administrative impropriety, terrible misgovernance, gross and blatant use of authority in public sector leadership appointments, misuse of public funds, open corruption, brazen conflict of interest, just because they have “bought” the entire administrative structure.

 So IK and TUQ and people who want reform had and have no option but to resort to what they have done. Because, while theoretically we have a parliament and an elected government and there is due process for acquiring power, the system has been hijacked and held hostage by these “professional crooks” masquerading as political leaders.

 Look at Khurshid Shah thundering in parliament, earlier today and look at the sickening amount of ill gotten wealth he has acquired through corruption since 1991 when he was first elected as am MNA. Can anyone justify this terrible and blatant hypocrisy and criminality.

 While some may not like IK’s arrogance ( I do) or TUQ’s Canadian citizen ship ( irrelevant) or their perceived lack of political acumen. BUT If these two can set in motion the wheels of change for a better, prosperous Pakistan with strong institutions, especially the Police and the Judiciary, an electoral process which does not hand over power to a bunch of professional crooks with just 10 to 15 % of the registered vote, a system of political accountability which does not allow people in power to blatantly and brazenly misuse authority and public trust and public funds, and a country where no one Faith is imposed on another, I am all for it.

 And for those professional politicians with IK ( not many with TUQ) who think that they will benefit once again from the ‘IK” bandwagon, as they have done on other bandwagons in the past…I think they are in for a surprise

Author’s Contact: hl_mehdi@hotmail.com>

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

The Middle East we must confront in the future will be a Mafiastan ruled by money by Robert Fisk

Cover Photo

ROBERT FISK

 

 

Sunday 20 April 2014

The Middle East we must confront in the future will be a Mafiastan ruled by money

In Iraq, mafiosi already run almost the entire oil output of the south of the country

Saudi Arabia is giving $3bn – yes, £2bn, and now let’s have done with exchange rates – to the Pakistani government of Nawaz Sharif. But what is it for? Pakistani journalists have been told not to ask this question. Then, when they persisted, they were told that Saudi generosity towards their fellow Sunni Muslim brothers emerged from the “personal links” between the Prime Minister and the monarchy in Riyadh. Saudi notables have been arriving in Islamabad. Sharif and his army chief of staff have travelled to the Kingdom. Then Islamabad started talking about a “transitional government” for Syria – even though Pakistan had hitherto supported President Bashar al-Assad – because, as journalist Najam Sethi wrote from Lahore, “we know only too well that in matters of diplomatic relations there is no such thing as a gift, still less one of this size”.

 Now the word in Pakistan is that its government has agreed to supply Saudi Arabia with an arsenal of anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles, which will be passed on – despite the usual end-user certificates claiming these weapons will be used only on Saudi soil – to the Salafist rebels in Syria fighting to overthrow the secular, Ba’athist (and yes, ruthless) regime of Bashar al-Assad. The American in other

words, will no longer use their rat-run of weapons from Libya to the Syrian insurgents because they no longer see it as in their interest to change the Assad government. Iraq, with its Shia majority, and Qatar – which now loathes and fears Saudi Arabia more than it detests Assad – can no longer be counted on to hold the Shias at bay. So even Bahrain must be enlisted in the Saudi-Salafist cause; his Royal Highness the King of Bahrain needs more Pakistani mercenaries in his army; so Bahrain, too – according to Najam Sethi – is preparing to invest in Pakistan.

But this is merely a reflection of a far larger movie, a Cinemascope picture with a cast of billions – I’m talking about dollars – which is now consuming the Middle East. It’s a story that doesn’t find favour with the mountebank “experts” on the cable channels nor with their White House/Pentagon scriptwriters, nor indeed with our own beloved Home Secretary who still believes that British Muslims will be “radicalised” if they fight in Syria. Sorry, m’deario, but they were already radicalised. THAT’S WHY THEY WENT TO SYRIA.

But the Taliban is no more going to take over Afghanistan than al-Qa’ida is going to rule Syria or Iraq, nor the Muslim Brotherhood Egypt. “Islamism” is not about to turn our beloved Arab and Muslim Middle Eastern world into a caliphate. That’s for The New York Times to believe.

Let’s just take a look across the region. Corruption in Afghanistan is not just legendary. This is a place where governance, law, electoral rules, tribal ritual and military affairs function only with massive bribes. It rivals North Korea in financial dishonesty (according to Transparency International). Remember the Kabul banking scandal that milked $980m (£584m) from the people (from which only $180m – £107m – was ever recovered)?

The Americans funded the Afghan warlords and then the NGOs spread their cash around the country and now, with the US withdrawal imminent – along with that of America’s NATO mercenaries – the Afghan gang bosses are not especially worried about the Taliban. Nor are they particularly concerned about women’s rights. But they are fearful that the dollars will stop flowing. A militia leader with three villas, 10 4x4s and 200 bodyguards has to find money to pay them when the Americans go home. So they will have to turn to drugs, money laundering and weapons smuggling on a massive scale. Pakistan, of course, is there to help.

 Now the word in Pakistan is that its government has agreed to supply Saudi Arabia with an arsenal of anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles, which will be passed on – despite the usual end-user certificates claiming these weapons will be used only on Saudi soil – to the Salafist rebels in Syria fighting to overthrow the secular, Ba’athist (and yes, ruthless) regime of Bashar al-Assad. The Americans, in other words, will no longer use their rat-run of weapons from Libya to the Syrian insurgents because they no longer see it as in their interest to change the Assad government. Iraq, with its Shia majority, and Qatar – which now loathes and fears Saudi Arabia more than it detests Assad – can no longer be counted on to hold the Shias at bay. So even Bahrain must be enlisted in the Saudi-Salafist cause; his Royal Highness the King of Bahrain needs more Pakistani mercenaries in his army; so Bahrain, too – according to Najam Sethi – is preparing to invest in Pakistan.

But this is merely a reflection of a far larger movie, a Cinemascope picture with a cast of billions – I’m talking about dollars – which is now consuming the Middle East. It’s a story that doesn’t find favour with the mountebank “experts” on the cable channels nor with their White House/Pentagon scriptwriters, nor indeed with our own beloved Home Secretary who still believes that British Muslims will be “radicalised” if they fight in Syria. Sorry, m’deario, but they were already radicalised. THAT’S WHY THEY WENT TO SYRIA.

But the Taliban is no more going to take over Afghanistan than al-Qa’ida is going to rule Syria or Iraq, nor the Muslim Brotherhood Egypt. “Islamism” is not about to turn our beloved Arab and Muslim Middle Eastern world into a caliphate. That’s for The New York Times to believe.

Let’s just take a look across the region. Corruption in Afghanistan is not just legendary. This is a place where governance, law, electoral rules, tribal ritual and military affairs function only with massive bribes. It rivals North Korea in financial dishonesty (according to Transparency International). Remember the Kabul banking scandal that milked $980m (£584m) from the people (from which only $180m – £107m – was ever recovered)?

The Americans funded the Afghan warlords and then the NGOs spread their cash around the country and now, with the US withdrawal imminent – along with that of America’s NATO mercenaries – the Afghan gang bosses are not especially worried about the Taliban. Nor are they particularly concerned about women’s rights. But they are fearful that the dollars will stop flowing. A militia leader with three villas, 10 4x4s and 200 bodyguards has to find money to pay them when the Americans go home. So they will have to turn to drugs, money laundering and weapons smuggling on a massive scale. 

In Iraq, mafiosi already run the Shia port of Basra and almost the entire oil output of the south of the country. “Institutionalised kleptocracy” was a minister’s definition of al-Maliki’s government. In Syria, the rebels’ fiefdom is run by money mobs. That’s why every hostage has a price, every “Free Syrian Army” retreat – and the word “retreat” must also be placed in quotation marks – must be paid for, by the Syrian government or by the Russians or, most frequently, by the Iranians. The Syrian “civil war” is funded by Qatar and Saudi Arabia, by Libya and by Moscow and Tehran and, when it suits them, by the Americans. We’re so caught up in battlefield losses and war crimes and sarin and barrel bombs that we lose sight of the fact that the Syrian bloodbath – much like the Lebanese bloodbath of 1976-1990 – is underwritten by vast amounts of cash from foreign donors.

Just look at Egypt. The story we are supposed to swallow is that a benevolent if slightly despotic army has saved the country from an Islamist takeover. Just how President Mohamed Morsi – whose grasp of practical governance was about as hopeless as that of your average Egyptian general – was going to turn Egypt into a caliphate was anyone’s guess. Of course, our worthless political leaders – Tony Blair in the lead, naturally – are playing the “Islamist” line for the networks. Egypt was on the path to a medieval Muslim dictatorship, only rescued at the last minute by the defence minister-turned presidential candidate General al-Sisi’s belief in a “transitional government to democracy”.

Yes, the “transitional” road to democracy is all the rage these days. But the real counter-revolution in Egypt was not the overthrow of the pathetic Morsi, but what followed: the army’s re-establishment of its massive financial benefits, its shopping malls and real estates and banking, which bring in billions of dollars for the country’s military elite – and whose business dealings are now constitutionally safe from the prying eyes of any democratically-elected Egyptian government, “transitional” or otherwise. And if al-Sisi is elected the next President of Egypt – O Blessed Thought – woe betide anyone who suggests that the army, which is still the recipient of billions from the US, should clean up its multi-million dollar conglomerates.

All this is to say that the Middle East we must confront in the future – and it will be of our making as surely as the mass slaughter of its people have been primarily our responsibility – will not be a set of vicious caliphates, of Iraqistan or Syriastan or Egyptstan. No, there is one international, all-purpose name which we will be able to bestow upon almost all the states of the region, united as they have never been since the demise of the Ottoman Empire.

We will understand its masters all too well. We shall support them. We shall love them. Our Tony will understand them – Catholicism, after all, has its own history of corruption and the Vatican, as we have learned, has its own gangsters. Our enemy is not – Cameron and Hague, please take note – terror, terror, terror. It is money, money, money. Dirty money.

For the name of this brave new world will be Mafiastan. 

, ,

No Comments

Is Media Split or…? (Moeed Pirzada on Face Book)

In the pure interest of ‘common sense’ every man & woman with average IQ should be able to see through the façade of ‘Split Media’; let’s pull the mask off this funny allegation and see the man cleverly hiding behind the poster of ‘Azadi Sihafat’ and this phony debate of ‘Split Media’ and you will see media tycoon: Mir Shakeel ur Rehman, Owner of Jang/Geo. im

It is important to understand that the current battle in Pakistan is taking place not between the journalists but between Mir Shakeel ur Rehman and Pakistani Military. Both are sinners, both suffer from power grab impulses and have bones in the closets and it is military’s repeated interventions in politics that have lead to a situation where many intellectuals have understandably developed knee jerk phobias whenever a situation involves military. But despite this troubled history now compelled to choose between a self-serving businessman, “a Media Tycoon” and “a National Institution” that inspires countless millions, most journalists like most patriotic well meaning Pakistanis are choosing military over the antics of Mir Shakeel ur Rehman. [though generals are strongly advised not to over-read this support for this is purely nationalistic in nature] 

Unfortunately journalists employed by Mir Shakeel ur Rehman are going everywhere in defense of their ‘Seth’ under the phony term of ‘Azadi Sihafat’ and creating bad blood with other media people by calling them ‘army stooges’. Even Editorials & columns are being written, thanks to unfettered Cross-Media ownerships & its Force Multiplier Effect. But we need to be kind to all of them; for poor souls, at this stage, have no real option but to defend the ‘Seth’ and they can’t say that we are defending actions of Mir Sahib so the only option they have is ‘Azadi Sihafat’ – but this ‘phony debate’ is not the real issue in a country with countless TV and radio channels, thousands of independent bloggers and millions and millions glued to internet and other social media platforms (almost 200k are following this one page alone) – And should we forget those 130 million carrying handheld devices? – Real issues are: Media Concentration; unfettered Cross-Media Ownership, lack of meaningful Editorial Boards inside the Media Organizations, absence of Ombudsmen and Compliance Officers inside the Media Organizations, absence of international standard HR-development policies and absence of meaningful editorial independence for journalists working inside various groups so that owners can’nt force them on streets to orchestrate political interests of their owner. The two issues (Absence of international standard Human Resource Development & Meaningful Editorial independence) are often not discussed but have huge significance. Since promotion and rise of journalists is not linked with performance indices but sycophancy and there is a huge power politics inside the industry built around this, so it is possible for owners of media groups to force journalists out on streets to defend political interests of their bosses. No one has used this more intelligently and skillfully than Mir Shakeel ur Rehman but problem is generalized. Cross-Media Ownership has become an international norm; it helps media groups to generate economies of scale and it would have been irrational for Pakistani govt’s to keep denying this. However like every other public debate in this unfortunate country, issues were not properly defined. While permitting Cross-Media Ownerships upper limits of size, total viewership’s & market share etc were not defined. Result has been a huge ‘media concentration & monopoly’ in the form of Jang, GEO & News ie the largest circulating Urdu paper, largest English paper and the most entrenched and most private channel all in the hands of one businessman: Mir Shakeel ur Rehman. This media monopoly is without exaggeration perhaps the biggest in the last one hundred years achieved by one single man in any single national market. Many will think of Rubert Mudoch and Berlusconi but their media empires were checked and monitored by powerful regulators and the presence of other media groups and also by the presence of highly educated and aware civil society groups that become watch dogs over media monopolies. Pakistani regulator PEMRA was a still born child; without an autonomous structure and without ownership of industry it has unfortunately become an “illegitimate orphan” This is a pure political challenge. Mir Shakeel ur Rehman has become so big that there is a clear cut “Fear” & “Need” Relationship with other media bosses, journalists, judges, politicians and political parties and governments who all are either afraid or in need of the support of Mir Shakeel ur Rehman and Mir Sahib consequently sees himself as a “King Maker” and is not afraid of directly launching attacks on state. Neither PM Nawaz Sharif who has decided to align himself with Mir Shakeel nor Pakistan Military that has decided to challenge Mir Shakeel fully understand the implications of the current crisis. And Imran Khan who was supposed to be the main opposition leader is missing from the political scene. Closing Geo is not the solution. A temporary snap closure would have created the moral effect, but the moment has perhaps passed. We have reached a situation in our Media history (Murdoch & Berlusconi moment) where issues of monopoly and personal power of media tycoons need to be comprehensively addressed by politicians and intellectuals and civil society otherwise Media Tycoons won’t let govts and state function or achieve its national and regional goals in the best interest of electorates. Media Tycoons have not been elected by the people but due to their “mind controlling powers” over large segments of media and public they can play havoc. Media Tycoons can align themselves with political parties, army, foreign powers, intelligence agencies as per the need of the moment; challenge for the state is to curtail monopolies – otherwise governance is not possible. PM Nawaz needs to understand the risks of his brinksmanship; his decision to align himself with a media tycoon, Mir Shakeel ur Rehman, against his own military, in this crisis has backfired and PM Nawaz quite unnecessarily ended up reducing his moral authority and broadened the political space available to the military. One unintended consequence of this crisis & govt’s blunder has been that all those in media, civil society, public and political opposition unhappy with govt policies or Mir Shakeel ur Rehman’s power have by default empathized with the military and the bizarre situation is that military by default has started to look like a “political opposition” – this situation in a democracy is unacceptable and both Nawaz Sharif and Imran Khan need to carefully analyze and take leadership above the fray. PM Nawaz needs to understand that his every next move is opening up more fissures and soon he will land himself in a chaos difficult for him to manage; and he is fast reaching there. If this chaos continued, he at best, will end up having a dysfunctional government which will be a tragedy because elections 2013 had given him a huge opportunity to create a legacy.

 

, ,

No Comments

ZARDARI FAMILY FROM HELL-: THE BISEXUALITY OF BILAWAL ZARDARI & SEDUCTION OF A MARRIED WOMAN

 

Pakistan’s fate was sealed, the day Z.A.Bhutto, a scion of a feudal family came into power as the “man of the masses.” This is the biggest joke ever played on so many people (180 million), by so few, the Bhutto-Zardari clique. First, Pakistan was broken-up, due to Z.A.Bhutto’s lust for power. Then came the incompetent rule of Benazir, who left behind Zardari for Pakistan in Virsa or Inheritance. But, still there is no end in sight, Bilawal Bhutto’s lechery has taken the cake. Pakistan Think Tank had warned its readers, that Islamabad, had become a liquor laden whore house. We suggests a name change for Islamabad.   Stop defiling Islam, by attaching its name to this perfidious city. It should be called, “RandiKhana or Sharaabkhana.” Aunties, nayakaas or dalees are doing roaring business, through beauty saloon call girls. A car stops in front of a beauty salon. The man dials the salon’s number. A call girl is sent by the Aunty, who runs the salon-cum- whorehouse.  Pakistan’s economy is steaming hot with this lucrative business.  All the Who’s,Who of Pakistans putrid, fecal feudal elites are customers of the salon comfort women. Yes, this city defiles the name of the Deen of Peace. Devil has proved that he can establish his kingdom in the heart of the most powerful, nuclear Islamic nation. Pakistani nation lost, evil won. But, is it isolated. No, not at all, look around and see what is happening at your neighbours house. The strange cars. The strange people. The elite of Peoples Party, PML(N,O,P,Q and whatever), ANP, and how could the mobsters of MQM be left behind, they partake of the fruit too.  There is a dark corner for Bisexuals and Homosexuals trysts.  Dark shaded limosines drive these leeches on Pakistan’s body drive around Aabpara at break neck speeds. On weekends, they fly over to another brothel or bordello of Middle East, after Bahrain.  This is Dubai, where all the Khadims of Islam, from S.Arabia to Pakistan come cavort. They enjoy every sexual depravity, from bestiality, sado-masochism, to urinating or defecating on one another during sex. 
 

THE BACKDRAFT

 
 
The backdraft of total callousness or rather concious apathy has given birth to dark and neanderthal forces of extremism and mulliayat. 
While, the poor masses of Naudero and Nawabshah had a glimmer of hope from Bilawal, he has let them down. Not only that, he has let the nation down. But, what could Pakistan expect from Zardari’s, “bad seed”?
The London Daily Mail commented in 2008 on Bilawal, while he was still a student at Oxford,”Orthodox Muslims will be surprised to see the new leader of the Pakistani People’s Party with his arms slung casually around two girls, one of whom declares herself as “bisexual” on a social networking website.” But, Bilawal has gone so overboard in his shenanighans that even the most liberal Pakistani will do a double take on his totally lecherous life style.

 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-506355/Free-alcohol-hangovers-bisexual-friends-girl-called-Boozie-Suzie—inside-student-life-Bilawal-Bhutto-Zardari.html#ixzz287iScurZ  

These Neros are fiddling while the Capital city is shaking with their damnable deeds. The have once suffered a huge earthquake, but that warning has gone unheeded. How long can Sipah Salar hold back the seething anger of Officers and Jawans. Lets hope they exercise patience, because, the worst democracy is better than the finest dictatorship.
Although, Z.A.Bhutto was a drunk and a womanizer, Benazir was a typical Muslim woman. But, when, Zardari, joined this family and produced Bilawal, all hell has broken loose. Bilawal is a bi-sexual sex fiend on steroids. Every Daily Mail in UK and every “trash sheet” in India and Bangladesh is rife with stories of Bilawal’s depravity. So, much for the love affair of India with Zardari and the Bhutto family. Bilawal is claimed have seduced Hina Rabbani Khar, while she is still married to millionaire businessman Firoze Gulzar, from whom she has two daughters named Annaya and Dina.
The Baaniyas, who consider Bhuttos as their own have shown their true colours. They have plastered the news of Bilawal’s sexuality all over their wicked nation. Kafirs revel, when Muslims rebel against Islam.
But never mind, what goes around comes around. India will has the Gandhi family, which has its own lurid past. So, Baaniyas, dont ask for whom the bell tolls, it talls for thee. The backlash of Bilawal’s gunah kabira, will come from the people of Pakistan.The deeds of Z.A.Bhutto, Murtuza Bhutto, and Benazir Bhutto did not bring the Bhutto family solace. So Bilawal beware, his action will be his own undoing. He has only one enemy and that is himself!
Enough said!

 

Click Image to Enlarge

Bilawal Bhutto with horns of devil

 

, , ,

No Comments

THE TWO CASTES OF PAKISTAN: JINS & JUNKIES

Pakistan has a Caste System Based on History and Economics. There are only two Castes in Pakistan, the Jagirdars/Industrialists (the JINS-e.g.Nawaz Sharif & Sharif Family) and the 99 percent who are fed the opiate(JUNK) of democracy and pain of loadshedding make up rest of the people (Junkies).

 

Junkies are named so, because 99 percent Pakistanis are addicted to poverty. They are fed an opiate of poverty as being “ordained” by Allah Almighty. It is a part of their Kismet. A concept light years removed from the social dynamics; and the emphasis on effort to enhance ones economic condition, as described by Islam. Pakistan’s wealth, economy, political power, and opportunities are controlled by the Jagirdars/Industrialist Axis (the JIN Axis).The JINS preach the gospel of Status Quo.  Don’t rock the boat, the big bad wolf from India will come and get you, if you did.  So in 65 years, the JIN are the rulers and the Junkies are the ruled.  The JINS use their wealth to gain an unfair advantage over the Junkies.  Any one person or entity, including a religious scholar turned activist like Tahirul Qadri or a political party like Tehreek-i-Insaf or MQM, tries to act as proponent of parity or equal distribution of wealth are labeled as foreign agents or corrupt. Pakistani media is owned by the JINS, because without it, they could not maintain their hold on wealth and power. But,  who laid the foundation of this institution of  JINS and Junkies.

Here is the history of how it all began:

herald96bThis is an in-depth article on the genesis of the curse of Jagirdari in Punjab and Waderas in Sindh. How the likes of  the Jatois of Sindh, the Noons, the Tareens, the Mazaris, the Legharis, the Qureshis, the Syeds of Sindh, the Hayats, the Tiwanas, the Daultanas, of Punjab became powerful in Pakistani politics.  Their roots date back to a more than a hundred years. These families were collaborators with the British and fought the Freedom Fighters during the 1857 Struggle for Independence.

Rewards for Ghadaars-Noons, Syeds, Sheikhs, Qureshis, Hayats, and Tiwanas: Collaborators of British during 1857 Struggle for Independence 

 Landowners accounted for over 60 per cent of the Punjab’s restricted electorate. This stood at just over of two and a quarter million voters, just 1 in ten Punjabis. Moreover, non-agriculturalists were still disallowed from contesting rural constituencies. This resulted in men committed to the imperial connection dominating every government which was elected in the new era of provincial autonomy...

Ian Talbot quoted from Khizr Tiwana, The Punjab Unionist Party and the Partition of India, Routledge, 1996. 

David Page quoted from Prelude to Partition,  The Indian Muslims and the Imperial System of Control 1920-1932, OUP, 1982.

The British dependence on Punjab for  military manpower after the 1857 mutiny heavily influenced  British policies towards land, administration, franchise and demands for self-rule in that province. These quotes provide glimpses  of the particularity exercised towards Punjab by the British.  

Punjab and the 1857 mutiny
Ian Talbot writes:
John Lawrence, the first Chief Commissioner of the British Punjab favoured the interests of the cultivators rather than the landowners. He fell out with his brother Henry, a fellow member of the Punjab Board of Administration, over the treatment of the jagirdars left by Sikh rule. The debate raged fiercely over the fate of the Sikh jagirdars of the central Punjab. But the British were keen to confirm the landed authority of the Tiwanas and other ‘tribal’ leaders who had supported them against the Sikhs in the conflicts of 1845-6 and 1848-9 in the West Punjab. Such families as the Noons, Tiwanas, and Hayats of Wah were to subsequently play central roles in the future colonial administration to the localities.

The British recognition of such ‘tribal’ leaders paid a rich dividend in 1857. Historians remain divided over the causes and nature of the uprising of that year but agree that this was the supreme moment of truth for the British in India. The crucial support of the Punjab’s chiefs safeguarded the Raj. It ended any doubts concerning the desirability of maintaining the influence of the rural intermediaries.

On 10 May 1857, soldiers of the Bengal Army mutinied at Meerut. News of this event reached the Punjab at midnight two days later. The concentration of European troops in this key frontier region left towns in the Gangetic Plan open to attack. The fabric of Government collapsed in Oudh which had been recently annexed by the British and also in the North Western Provinces. Henry Lawrence was killed in the fighting in Oudh to which he had been recently transferred. John Lawrence organised irregular forces of Punjabi cavalry to snuff out disturbances in the region before mounting an attack to recapture Delhi.

Groups of sepoys mutinied in their Punjabi cantonments of Ferozepore, Jullunder, Ambala and Jhelum. When a body of sepoys massed for an attack on the British district headquarters at Shahpur, Malik Sahib Khan rode over from Mitha Tiwana to parley with the anxious British deputy commissioner. Their meeting entered the Raj’s folklore.

Malik Sahib stood before Mr. Ousley, salaamed and offered him the handle of his sword with the point directed to his own body and said ‘I have fifty horsemen and I can raise three hundred. I can clothe them and feed them, and if no questions are asked, I can find them arms too. They and my life are yours.’ Malik Sahib Khan’s dramatic gesture was the first offer of assistance to the beleaguered authorities in the West Punjab. Moreover, it was proffered at a time when the triumph of British arms was uncertain. The deputy commissioner was well aware that he could have mounted only token resistance, if the Tiwana chief had jointed the ‘rebels’. The British thereafter remembered that the Tiwanas’ loyalty had stood firm when it had been put to the test.

Malik Sahib Khan’s forces defeated the sepoys of the Bengal Army in battles at Jhelum and Ajnala during the course of July. In one episode they captured 200 ‘rebels’ without firing a shot. In August, the Tiwana troops joined the forces which John Nicholson was massing in Amritsar to recapture Delhi. By this stage the Tiwana contingent had been swollen to a thousand sowars with the addition of the forces of his brothers,.. and great nephew.. They joined the British forces on the Ridge outside Delhi. The besieged city finally fell on 14 September. The aged Mughal Bahadur Shah escaped with his life, but the British exacted a heavy retribution on its other Muslim citizens.

Following the siege of Delhi, Malik Sahib Khan with his brothers took part in several other actions including the battle of Kalpu which sealed the fate of the Rhani of Jhansi. Malik Sahib Khan then accompanied General Napier on his campaign in central India. The British were so impressed by the fighting capacity of the Tiwana irregulars that a detachment was incorporated in the regiment of the 2nd Mahratta Horse at Gwalior which was raised for duty in central India. In the military reorganization at the end of the revolt, the unit became the 18th Bengal cavalry.

When the Prince of Wales(the future George V) visited India in 1906 he became Colonel in chief of the regiment which changed its title to the 18th(Prince of Wales’ Own) Tiwana Lancers. Finally in 1921, the 19th Bengal Lancers amalgamated to form the 19th King George V’s Own Lancers. Both Umar and Khizr[Tiwana, Malik Sahib Khan’s descendants] displayed great pride in wearing the regiment’s scarlet uniform and blue pagari in their capacity as Honorary-Colonel. Tiwanas held most of the regular Indian commissions in the regiment, as the British saw their ‘natural leadership’ as vital to discipline in a fighting force recruited entirely from the Salt range.

The creation of the Tiwana regiment climaxed the ‘tribe”s emergence as military sub-contractors of the state. Henceforth military service and their local power as landholders were closely enmeshed. Army pay and pensions enabled Tiwana chiefs to both increase agricultural productivity in their home villages, and invest in land elsewhere. No other Muslim Rajput ‘tribes’ formed their own regiments, but they were heavily recruited in the Indian Army from the late 1870s onwards… The economic multiplier effects of military service enabled the transition from ‘tribal’ chief to West Punjab landlord to be completed. A military-agriculturalist lobby also emerged. Provincial autonomy which was introduced by the 1935 Government of India Act gave it full expression. The Unionist Party became its mouthpiece and fittingly a Tiwana served as the last Unionist Premier.

British policy in Punjab 1857-1920
Ian Talbot writes:
The loyalty of the Muslim and Sikh landowners of the newly annexed Punjab region in 1857 confirmed the school of thought associated with Henry Lawrence. This sought to govern with the assistance of rural intermediaries. The British richly rewarded those who had stood by them in their darkest hour. The Tiwanas were the most successful but by no means the only rural family which embarked at this time on what were to prove lengthy and lucrative ‘loyalist’ careers. The Noons and Hayats shared a similar history.

Officials recognised the need for securing the support of the rural elites, however, not only because they were local peacekeepers, but because they were military contractors. The Tiwanas, as we have noted, exemplified this role, although it was played by many other Rajput ‘tribes’ following the Punjabisation of the Indian Army. This resulted from the thorough overhaul of military organisation after 1857.

By the end of the First World War, the Punjab so dominated the Indian Army that three-fifths of its recruits were drawn from the region. Moreover, they hailed from a narrow range of Hindu Dogra, Sikh Jat and Muslim Rajput  ‘martial castes’ which represented less than 1 per cent of the subcontinent’s total population. Punjabis saw action  in the mud of Flanders, in the deserts of Arabia and in the bush of East Africa, winning over 2,000 decorations, including three Victoria Crosses. The Punjabi ‘martial castes’ continued to dominate the Indian Army throughout the inter-war years.

At no time did the Punjabi contingent drop below three-fifths of the total strength. The imperative to secure the loyalty of the ‘martial castes’ understandably exerted a profound impact on the Punjab’s political economy.

The British adopted a number of policies to secure rural stability in the sword arm of India. Overriding all other considerations, until it was fatally dislocated by the Second World War, was the imperative to defend the rural power structure. This was achieved by the following methods: first by associating the ‘natural leaders’ of the ‘agriculturist tribes’ with their executive authority; second, by ensuring that the rural leaders politically controlled the economic forces set in train by the colonial encouragement of a market-oriented agriculture; third by using the resources which this produced to reward the agriculturalist population rather than stimulate industrial development; fourth by establishing a framework of political representation which institutionalised the division between the ‘agriculturalist’ and ‘non-agriculturalist’ population.

The British identification of the ‘tribe’ as the focus of rural identity underpinned all of these policy initiatives. Indeed, the maintenance of the tribal structure of rural society became the legitimising principle of British rule, thereby obscuring realpolitik imperatives. However, as David Gilmartin has revealed, the definition of the ‘tribe’ was vague and ‘workable principles of tribal grouping were extremely elusive’. The British therefore created their own around the artificial construct of the ‘agriculturalist tribe’. Although this built on pre-existing social structures, it was a political definition enshrined in the 1900 Alienation of Land Act. This measure not only ‘crystallized the assumptions underlying the British Imperial administration’ but ‘translated’ them into popular politics. Henceforth, both the justification of British rule and the programme of the leading men of the ‘tribes’ and clans who banded together eventually in the Unionist Party was the ‘uplift’ and ‘protection’ of the ‘backward’ agriculturalist tribes.

The British co-opted the ‘natural leaders’ of rural society into their administrative system by means of the semi-official post of the zaildar.This was unique to the Punjab’s local administration…Subordinate to it but serving a similar purpose was the post of sufedposh. ‘Tribal’ chiefs and landowners were also tied to the administrative system by being made honorary magistrates and members of the darbar… Posts were also reserved for agriculturalists in the official ranks of the local administration.  Sir Michael O’Dwyer’s governorship witnessed an especially sharp increase in the agriculturalists tribes’ representation in the public services. In the Irrigation Branch of the Public Works Department this rocketed from 29 to 66 per cent of the officials. Such reservation strengthened ‘tribal’ as against ‘communal’ identity.

The Pax Britannica encouraged the commericalisation of agriculture. The British also vastly extended irrigation facilities and slashed transport costs. The West Punjab underwent an agricultural revolution as arid subsistence production was replaced by commercialised production of huge amounts of wheat, cotton and sugar.

The Shahpur district stood at the forefront of this transformation. The Lower Jhelum Canal converted the waste of the Kirana bar into first class irrigated land. This was parceled into 337 colony villages or ‘chaks’. New market towns came into existence where the agriculturalists brought their commercial crops. These were lined by rail to Sargodha from where 500,000 tonnes of wheat were being annually dispatched to Karachi by the 1920s. At this date the Punjab produced a tenth of British India’s total cotton crop and a third of its wheat. The region thus emerged as the pace-setter of the subcontinent’s agricultural development well before independence. At the most conservative estimate, per capita output of all crops had increased by nearly 45 per cent between 1891 and 1921.

The Lower Jhelum was just one of the Punjab’s nine Canal Colony areas. These transformed the endless waste and scrub of the Jhang, Lyallpur and Shahpur districts into flourishing agricultural regions. The Lyallpur district which had been only sparsely populated by nomadic herdsmen possessed a million inhabitants within thirty years of the opening of the Chenab Canal in the 1880s. Three and a half million rupees worth of crops were annually produced from its Lower Chenab Canal Colony. The whole area was neatly laid out into plots of land known as squares, with market places, towns and villages spaced along the roads and railways which criss-crossed the Colony. By thus ‘creating villages of a type superior in civilisation to anything which the region had previously experienced’ the British hoped to establish a model for the Punjab’s development.

The Canal Colonies were also intended to mop up surplus population from the crowded districts of the central Punjab. Large number of Sikh Jats migrated to the Lower Chenab Canal Colony where they eventually owned a third of the land. In all, a million Punjabis moved to the nine Canal Colonies. They not only relieved congestion but formed a market for the produce of other regions, as the colonists specialised in cultivating a narrow range of cash crops. Furthermore, they remitted much of their income to their home villages.

The Canal Colonies’ creation coincided with the Punjab’s emergence as the sword arm of India. Indeed enlistment was encouraged by the British policy of rewarding ex-servicemen with lucrative grants of land in the Canal Colonies. Much land in the Lower Bari Doab Canal Colony was set aside for this purpose. The vast increase in productive land also enabled the British to earmark large areas for breeding horses and cattle for the Indian Army. During the First World War, the Lyallpur Canal Colony provided huge amounts of wheat and flour for the troops and gifts of horses and mules were made to the Army. The Shahpur District was, however, the main areas for Army horse breeding. In all 200,000 acres within it were leased for this purpose….

Although the bulk of the land in the Canal Colonies was sold to peasant proprietors, the Punjab Government reserved areas to reward both the ‘martial castes’ and the ‘landed gentry’. At the end of the First World War over 420,000 acres of Colony land were distributed to just 6,000 Commissioned and Non-Commissioned Army Officers. Under the terms of the ‘landed gentry status’ seven and a half per cent of the Lower Bari Doab Canal Colony alone was earmarked for the landowning elite. It is important to note that such land was among the best in the whole of the subcontinent and was highly valued….

The Tiwanas

 

 

A file picture of 1945 in which viceroy Lord Wavell (left), convener of the conference greeting Malik Khizar Hayat Khan Tiwana (centre), premier of Punjab while premier of North West Frontier Province (NWFP) (2nd from left) and Bhulabhai Desai look on, at Simla conference, in Simla.

The Collaborator


 

 

VICEROY WAVELL

A file picture of 1945 in which viceroy Lord Wavell (left), convener of the conference greeting Malik Khizar Hayat Khan Tiwana (centre), premier of Punjab while premier of North West Frontier Province (NWFP) (2nd from left) and Bhulabhai Desai look on, at Simla conference, in Simla.

   
Credit : (Source: The Times Of India Group)
© BCCL
Photograph Date: : 01/06/1945 (tentative)
     
     
     
 
 

 

The Tiwanas like other Punjab chiefs shared in this bonanza. When Umar was a minor, about 90 squares of land in the Chenab Colony was purchased on his behalf at an auction. The main village was called Umarpur. The Government also gave him 43 squares on nazrana terms during his minority.

British rule, however, also swept away the barriers which had previously prevented moneylenders from acquiring land in the countryside. As land prices rose- the result of the Pax Britannica, as well as improved communications and irrigation- it became increasingly tempting for landowners to pledge land in return for easy credit. Moneylenders supported by a westernised legal system foreclosed mortgages on the lands of agriculturalists debtors. In other parts of India, most notably Bengal, following the Permanent Settlement of 1793, land had changed hands dramatically in this way. A similar process in the Punjab, however, would threaten political stability in a region of immense importance to wider Imperial interests. Furthermore, it would strike at the heart of its administration’s strongly held assumptions and beliefs.

S.S. Thorburn in his book ‘Mussulmans and Moneylenders in the Punjab’ sounded the tocsin. Thorburn, a Deputy Commissioner in the Dera Ghazi Khan district highlighted the alarming rate at which land was being alienated to money lenders. The large Muslim landlords of the trans-Indus districts were not, however the moneylenders’ only victims. The Hindu Rajputs of the submontane districts of Ambala Division also suffered at the hands of powerful moneylenders who ‘exact free services and free fuel fodder and ghi and (take their) dues as much in grain as in cash. The Hindu Jat cultivators of the agriculturally poor Rohtak district also suffered from the moneylenders’ exploitation…’

The British first attempted to solve this problem with piecemeal measures. They took a large number of encumbered estates under the wing of the Court of Wards Administration. It soon became apparent, however, that more sweeping action was required. After a sharp internal debate concerning the virtues of intervention against sticking to laissez-faire principles, the Punjab Government implemented the 1900 Alienation of Land Act. It barred the transfer of land from  agriculturalist to non-agriculturalist tribes. The former were designated by name in each district. They included not only the Rajput martial caste landowners and Jat, Arain and Gujar cultivators, but the Muslim religious elites-the Syeds, Sheikhs, Qureshis. The measure not only halted their expropriation by the non-agriculturalist commercial castes of Khatris and Banias, but also provided the framework for the structuring of politics around the idiom of the ‘tribe’, rather than that of religious community. The Unionists Party’s agriculturalist ideology was directed rooted in this legislation. ..

The British had in fact earlier prepared the ground for a rural domination of Punjab politics… ..Only members of the agriculturalist tribes, as defined by the 1900 Alienation of Land Act were allowed to stand as candidates for the rural constituencies of the New Legislative Council created by the Montague-Chelmsford Reforms.[1919].

1900-1920s British military recruitment in Punjab and allied concerns
David Page writes:
  ‘..out of a total of 683,149 combatant troops recruited in India between August 1914 and November 1918, 349,688 came from the Punjab….Out of the 250,000 soldiers recruited up till April 1918, the lion’s share had been provided by three main communities, the Muslims of West Punjab, the Jat Sikhs of Central Punjab and the Hindu Jats of the Ambala Division.

The first community provided 98,000 combatant troops, the second 65,000 and the third 22,000. The finest record, however, belonged to the Muslim majority districts of the Rawalpindi division. From Rawalpindi and Jhelum over thirty per cent of the manhood of the district went to the War; in Attock the figure was sixteen per cent, in Gujrat thirteen per cent and in Shahpur ten per cent. These five districts were amongst the eight most heavily recruited districts in the entire Punjab, the other three being Ludhiana and Amritsar, the two main Sikh recruitment areas, which sent fourteen and eleven per cent respectively, and Rohtak, the main Hindu Jat recruitment area which sent fifteen per cent.’

..In the 1920s, the total rural electorate excluding soldiers amounted to 216,324 while 163,085 had the right to vote on account of their military services to Government.

Ian Talbot writes:
By 1928 over Rs. 140 lakhs were being paid annually paid out in pensions. There were 16,000 military pensioners in the Rawalpindi district alone.

David Page writes:
The Governor of Punjab Michael O’Dwyer said this in the Imperial Council in in 1917 : “The great improvement in the pay, pensions and allowances of the Indian army has already given a powerful stimulus to the fighting classes, the earmarking of 180,000 acres of colony land for allotment to men who have rendered distinguished services in the field is a further encouragement, which the recent announcement in regard to the grant of Commission will specially appeal to the landed gentry.”

Next, after casting aspersions on the courage of the urban classes and hinting at further legislation to regulate usury, he laid stress on the importance of the Land Alienation Act. “It is to it[he continued] that we owe the fact that we are appealing today not to be a sullen, discontented and half-expropriated eager perhaps for a change which might restore them to their own, but to a loyal and contented body of men who realise that Government has stood and still stands between them and ruin and who consequently rally in their tens of thousands to its support.”

“But [he continued] we have not only done what legislative and administrative measures could do to maintain the zemindars in possession of their paternal acres, we have also relieved congestion and increased their prosperity by opening up to them several million acres in the great canal colonies. In allotting those lands we have invariably given them priority seeking not so much the profit of the Government as the advantage of the rural population…
..
Again, take the question of land revenue settlement. The Punjab government has long accepted it as a principle of revenue administration that the peasant proprietors, especially in those districts from which the Indian army is  largely drawn, shall receive special favour in assessment. The re-assessment of all the rich districts of the Central Punjab has been completed within the last 5 or 6 years and I am in a position to say that Government has rarely imposed a demand above half of the half net rental which is supposed to be the standard of assessment in the Province. At the same time, where agricultural conditions are fairly stable and fully developed it has raised the terms of settlement from 20 to 30 years. The result of this leniency is to appreciate enormously the value of proprietary rights which 50 years ago sold at from 5 to 10 times by now sell at an average of 170 times the land revenue demand, a figure which excites the envy and admiration of other provinces, even those under permanent settlement.

All these things are done in the interests of our zemindars and especially of those tribes and classes which enlist so freely in the Indian Army…”

Post-World War I British crackdown on Punjab
Encyclopedia Britannica writes:
Politically, as well as economically, the postwar years proved depressing to India’s high expectations. After the war British officials, who in the first flush of patriotism had abandoned their ICS posts to rush to the front, returned to oust the Indian subordinates acting in their stead and carried on their prewar jobs as though nothing had changed in British India. Indian soldiers also returned from battlefronts to find that back at home they were no longer treated as invaluable allies but reverted immediately to the status of ”natives.” Most of the soldiers recruited during the war had come from Punjab, which, with only 7 percent of India’s population, had supplied over 50 percent of the combatant troops shipped abroad.

Indian Support of the British

It is thus hardly surprising that the flash-point of postwar violence that shook India in the spring of 1919 was Punjab province. The actual issue that served to rally millions of Indians, arousing them to a new level of disaffection from British rule, was the government of India’s hasty passage of the Rowlatt Acts early in 1919. 

Muslims, Sikhs, and Hindus in a United Front

These ”black acts,” as they came to be called, were peacetime extensions of the wartime emergency measures passed in 1915 and had been rammed through the Supreme Legislative Council over the unanimous opposition of its Indian members.

Indian leaders viewed the autocratic enactment of such legislation, following the victorious conclusion of a war in which India had so loyally supported Britain, as a confession of British treachery and duplicity and the abandonment of the promised policy of reform in favour of a new wave of repression. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, the Gujarati who had returned from South Africa shortly after the war started and was by then recognized throughout India as one of the most promising leaders of Congress, called upon his country to take sacred vows to disobey the Rowlatt Acts, launching a nationwide movement for the repeal of those repressive measures. Gandhi’s appeal received the strongest popular response in the Punjab, where the nationalist leaders Kichloo and Satyapal addressed mass protest rallies from the provincial capital of Lahore to Amritsar, sacred capital of the Sikhs. Gandhi himself had taken a train to the Punjab early in April 1919 to address on of those rallies, but he was arrested at the border station and taken back to Bombay by orders of the tyrannical lieutenant governor of the Punjab, Sir Michael O’Dwyer.

On April 10, in Amritsar, Kichloo and Satyapal were arrested and deported from the district by deputy commissioner Miles Irving, and when their followers tried to march to Irving’s bungalow in the camp to demand the release of their leaders they were fired upon by British troops. With several of their number killed and wounded, the enraged mob rioted through Amritsar’s old city, burning British banks, murdering several Englishmen, and attacking two Englishwomen.

Gen. R.E.H. Dyer was sent with troops from Jullundur to restore order, and, though no further disturbances occurred in Amritsar until April 13, Dyer marched 50 armed soldiers into the Jallianwallah Bagh (Garden) that afternoon and ordered them to open fire on a protest meeting attended by some 10,000 unarmed men, women, and children without issuing a word of warning. It was a Sunday, and many neighboring peasants had come to Amritsar to celebrate a Hindu festival, gathering in the Bagh, which was a place for holding cattle fair and other festivities. Dyer kept his troops firing for about ten minutes, until they had shot 1650 rounds of ammunition into the terror-stricken crowd, which had no way of escaping the Bagh, since the soldiers spanned the only exit. About 400 civilians were killed and some 1200 wounded. They were left without medical attention by Dyer, who hastily removed his troops to the camp. 

Sir Michael O’Dwyer fully approved of and supported the Jallianwallah Bagh massacre, and on April 15, 1919, issued a martial law decree for the entire Punjab: The least amount of firing which would produce the necessary moral and widespread effect it was my duty to produce . . . from a military point of view, not only on those who were present, but more specially throughout the Punjab.”

Dyer was relieved of his command, but he returned to England as a hero to many British admirers, who presented him with a collected purse of thousands of pounds and a jeweled sword inscribed “Saviour of the Punjab.”

 The Jallianwallah Bagh massacre turned millions of patient and moderate Indians from loyal supporters of the British raj into national revolutionaries who would never again trust to British “fair play” or cooperate with a government capable of defending such action. The following year, Mahatma Gandhi launched his first Indian satyagraha (“clinging to the truth”) campaign, India’s response to the massacre in Jallianwallah Bagh.

 

(http://www.usp.nus.edu.sg/post/india/history/colonial/massacre.html)

British policy towards rural indebtedness in Punjab in the 1930s
Ian Talbot writes:
.. The 1935 Government of India Act and the Communal Award which had preceded it, reflected Fazl-i-Hussain’s powerful influence.

Landowners accounted for over 60 per cent of the Punjab’s restricted electorate. This stood at just over of two and a quarter million voters, just 1 in ten Punjabis. Moreover, non-agriculturalists were still disallowed from contesting rural constituencies. This resulted in men committed to the imperial connection dominating every government which was elected in the new era of provincial autonomy…

[..The 1930s witnessed a growing problem of rural indebtedness, brought on mainly by falling agricultural prices, but also partly by the kind of conspicuous consumption we have noted above. The Batra moneylenders of Sahiwal and Girot, like their counterparts elsewhere in the province, grew fat on the indiscretions of the landowning class. By 1937 rural indebtedness amounted to about Rs. 200 crores and the Punjab’s farmers annually paid back in interest on their loans 4 to 5 times the aggregate amount of land revenue and the water rate. ]

..The Restitution of Mortgaged Lands Act was another retrospective piece of Unionist legislation. Sunder Singh Manjithia introduced the measure in the Assembly in June 1938. It enabled farmers to recover all the land which they had mortgaged before the passage of the 1900 Alienation of Land Act. The Hindu and Sikh moneylenders claimed it was merely a cover for the expropriation of their land. They wanted it to cover transactions involving the agriculturalist money lending class which had grown up after 1900. This demand was of course rejected. The upshot was that over 200,000 Hindus and Sikhs had to return an estimated 700,000 acres to its original owners. ..

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments


Skip to toolbar