The MQM paradox

Legal eye

The writer is a lawyer based in
Islamabad.

What did Altaf Hussain say in his latest rant that was truly shocking? Had he not threatened the media before, cursed judges, taunted generals? His speech in India suggesting that Pakistan might have been a mistake is available on record. And so is a letter to Tony Blair offering services to the UK government in return for, amongst other things, disbanding ISI.

And his former associates and supporters, including Mustafa Kamal and Saulat Mirza, have shared accounts of his reliance on violence and terror as well as links with Indian intelligence.

Article 5 of the constitution declares “loyalty to the state” to be the basic duty of every citizen, and that, “obedience to the constitution and law is the inviolable obligation of every citizen…” That’s the deal. The guarantee of the fundamental rights of citizens to be upheld by the state follows the citizens’ obligation to be loyal. Altaf wishing Pakistan ill, calling it names and inciting supporters to violence only confirmed the suspicions of many outside his support base regarding his infidelity to Pakistan and its laws.

What was different this time was that Karachi and Pakistan have passed the tipping point. Altaf has steadily lost physical control of Karachi manifested in his inability to shut it down at whim. The credit for this goes most of all to the Rangers who have taken back turf seized by or abdicated to the MQM over the last few decades. Altaf has also lost control over public narrative around the MQM, previously in place due to the media’s fear of Altaf together with a vocal MQM political wing skilfully projecting the familiar narrative of Mohajir persecution.

In a perfect world, Altaf’s speeches shouldn’t be banned. Let people hear his ideas and accept and reject them as they choose. And if he incites violence, let him be prosecuted for hate speech. But the ‘marketplace of ideas’ analogy broke down in Altaf’s Karachi. The media wasn’t free to choose whether or not to broadcast his speeches and had to seek his forgiveness if live telecast of his long rants was ever cut to go to other stories. Till a few years back fear was so palpable that criticism of Altaf and his ways was unthinkable and self-censorship the norm.

And then who would investigate or prosecute Altaf? Altaf Hussain had become larger than the state. And the state had allowed him to do so. And once he had crossed the Rubicon, initially with the state’s complicity and later with it being a neutral bystander, it was just not a level-playing field. After ceding absolute control of Karachi to the MQM, the state has had to throw all its weight behind Maj Gen Bilal Akbar to wrestle it back from Altaf. Last week’s suicide mission was a desperate Altaf’s reaction to power slipping through his fingers.

There are two diametrically opposed perceptions of the MQM. One, popular amongst most outside Karachi, who can’t be bothered with the Mohajir identity’s evolution in Pakistan and can’t tolerate Altaf, is that no one in their right mind can support someone who speaks, acts and behaves like Altaf. That his has been a reign of terror and the moment his ability to inflict violence dissipates so will the fear he has instilled in people and the support he begrudgingly gets in return. From this post-colonial perspective, we are duty bound to ‘save’ Mohajirs from Altaf.

The second is that Altaf is the saviour of Mohajirs. He has cultivated Mohajir ethnic consciousness, fought for their rights, and given them a voice and the possibility of upward social and political mobility in a country dominated by Punjabis and a province dominated by Sindhis. From this perspective, what is now happening to Altaf is proof that he was right all along. That the Punjabi dominated state is out to suppress the Mohajir, hold him back, deny him his due share in state power and resources, and persecute him if he resists.

The truth is somewhere in the middle.

But let’s give Altaf his due. He put together an amazing political and administrative machine in the form of the MQM: endowing well-spoken, self-made folks with political recognition and responsibility but vesting administrative power and financial control in another tier represented by sector commanders (whose authority trumped that of the political wing), with both tiers reporting directly to him, and with him maintaining direct contact with the mass support base. The MQM’s organisational structure makes for the case study to be taught in schools!

The challenge for the Pakistani state and political parties in the present situation is to create space for the political tier of the MQM to survive and continue to represent the Mohajir community, while taking administrative steps to turn off oxygen for the organizational tier directing militants, coordinating training in foreign countries and controlling the extortion mafia. This is easier said than done, as the political and administrative tiers do not sit neatly in completely isolated compartments. There will be some overlap.

The real challenge for the state is not to overplay its hand here. It must not try to patronise the Mohajir community or assume the mantle of a saviour. It must not delude itself into believing that it can reorder the politics of Karachi or Sindh. It must give up the dream of creating a King’s party that will be seen by ordinary folks as a representative of their voices and defender of their aspirations. The state has tried its hand at this project multiple times before and failed. Failed ideas don’t work even when pursued by a new set of people with renewed vigour.

The thorny situation in Karachi requires dispassionate thinking and careful restrained action. It would be a bad idea to let egos take over or make exacting revenge from ‘traitors’ a goal at this time. It would be a bad idea to see this as an opportune time to run tutorials on patriotism. Rangers’ personnel pulling Farooq Sattar away in public view was an unseemly sight. Men in uniform tearing down Altaf’s posters is unnecessary. The lesser the footprint of security agencies within the political realm, the better.

Majority communities cannot instruct minorities on how to conceive and articulate their interests. It is only through actions that majorities can resolve issues that provoke minority identities and create opportunities for parochial leaders. Is it for anyone but the Mohajirs to decide who speaks for them? The problem with Altaf was that crime and violence became so entwined with his politics that the two were inseparable. The problem was the means he chose to pursue his politics. It is those means that the state must target, not the politics.

And that isn’t something the state has done. The militant wings and extortion mafias of Karachi will not go away so long as the state continues to treat allegiance to the law as optional and prosecuting those who break it as a means to pursue political ends. Saulat Mirza’s confessional statement being streamed out of his death cell perfectly synchronised with the timing of the Karachi Operation or Waseem Athtar being arrested right before his election as mayor for involvement in a crime from 2007 doesn’t strengthen public faith in the writ of law but rather makes it look like a tool in the hands of the powerful.

Public faith in rule of law and its ability to dispense justice won’t be strengthened so long as expedient measures to enforce order continue to trump the law. The perception that Karachi is being ‘cleaned up’ with suspected criminals going missing is worse for the rule of law project than the now fading perception that anyone who crosses the Bhai will be found in a body bag. Public faith in rule of law will be strengthened when masterminds and perpetrators of tragedies such as the Baldia Factory arson are convicted in public trials in ordinary civilian courts.

Email: sattar@post.harvard.edu