Continuing from my previous post...
ABP: You have called the current Pakistani political system a "Khaki Democracy". Will Gen. Musharraf be able to carry on with it?
TA: There is no reason whatsoever why he can't carry on with it. General Musharraf is one of the closest allies of Washington. Just a few days back, the American Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice, announced in Pakistan, that all Islamic countries should learn from Pakistan. Why on earth would Musharraf have a problem when he gets such a generous certificate?
ABP: But the religious leaders (mullahs) are infuriated.
TA: Certainly. They are not able to digest Musharraf's volte-face. And the economy of the country is literally sold out...
ABP: Then Musharraf must be under immense pressure?
TA: He is under pressure. And he is trying to perform a tight rope trick - a balancing act. But there is no imminent danger. Because, today the army is influential over the entire economy and society. Business, industry and even the agricultural sector is taken over by the ex-army officials. Because of this, the control of army over the country is deep-rooted. And this is where the crisis for democracy lies. And again, it doesn't necessarily mean that all the problems will be solved if Musharraf goes. The comparatively secular political parties are in no better state for reviving democracy. Even the Muslim League is a "Khaki Muslim League" now. The militarization is too wide-spread.
ABP: What is the reason behind this militarization?
TA: America had a big role to play even there. The "mujahids" were the creation of the CIA and ISI. A large section of the youth were trained and sent to Afghanistan to fight against the Soviet Union. When many of them started returning to Pakistan after the Soviet troops were withdrawn in 1989, they were utilized in the Kashmir Valley, to fight India. The elected government turned a blind eye, indirectly encouraging the military officials, and the ISI. At that time, the military didn't have direct control over the administration, and the elected leaders could have put a stop over this craziness. No one did. Leaders like Nawaj Sharif or Benazir Bhutto embraced corruption quite shamelessly. And the result was inevitable. No one except few blind followers of Nawaj Sharif came out in protest against the military coup in 1999. Musharraf gladly used these circumstances, and the society turned more and more "khaki".
ABP: The civilian society was growing stronger after the return of democracy following Zia's death...
TA: It was, but it never fulfilled the goal. The civilian society in Pakistan is still too weak. The media rather enjoys much more freedom in Musharraf's reign. Even the Nawaj Sharif administration didn't give so much freedom to press. And this didn't even exist during Zia or Ayub's reign. The civilian society had very little impact on the Pakistani system. Yes, a lot of NGO's have cropped up - but I would prefer calling them "WGO - Western Governmental Organization". Because they do not receive any funds from the national government, they do not have to act on orders of the Pakistani administration, but being funded by the western governments, about ninety percent of them are eager to implement the policies of the western countries.
ABP: Do you think there is an alternative in this global socio-political situation?
TA: There is. The political changes in some Latin American countries raise high hopes. The Venezuelan President, Hugo Chávez, is being able to assemble his countrymen against the American dominance. Thousands have joined protests answering his call, and I have seen it myself. Despite American sanctions, and a post-Soviet world, Fidel Castro's Cuba has been able to maintain its revolutionary image, has attempted to walk on an alternative development path. Such large scale improvements in education and health sector as in Cuba is quite uncommon even in the industrially-developed capitalist countries. I have seen in Pakistan, after the earthquake, about eleven hundred Cuban doctors in areas like Mujaffarabad, even though Cuba does not have a direct diplomatic relationship. And about half of them are women. They have been extremely helpful in the rough terrains. No other country has sent so many doctors.
ABP: You are visiting Kolkata after a long time. A Left Front Government is in power here for almost three decades. A section of observers maintain that despite criticising the economic policy of the Indian Government, the Left Front under Buddhadev Bhattacharya is practically following the same path, this Left Front is more like Tony Blair's "New Labour". What is your view on this?
TA: To tell you the truth, I am severely shocked and frustrated this time. There are so many shopping malls, was it really necessary? Is this really development? It seems like a copy of the American style. Rather, have a look at the European countries, like France - have you seen anything like this there? They have shopping centres, cafeterias - but in their own way, their own style - not as replica of other countries. Yes, I am pleased that a Left Front has been able to govern West Bengal for such a long period. Because of this, communal forces have not been able to poison the society here, as they have done in Gujarat. It is also true that the Left Front Government has to work within the constraints of a federal system. Even then, I don't think that it should be impossible to search for alternative paths. The leftists in this state should learn from the Latin American countries, who have stood up in retaliation despite tremendous pressure from America. Kolkata has always been the place for alternative thoughts, Kolkata has shown the way to the rest of the nation. I wonder why the situation has changed so much...This is the place where Ritwik Ghatak, Mrinal Sen, Satyajit Ray created their masterpieces, but, today, even in films, all I can see is an attempt to copy from the Hollywood...
ABP: Do you still believe in the Marxist philosophy, even at this stage of capitalistic globalisation?
TA: Certainly. It is possible to find an answer in the Marxist philosophy. But you have to be cautious - if Marxism becomes a religious belief, or a blind faith, if it turns into a secular religion, there will be no differences between that and a non-secular religion. Secular or non-secular religion - both can be dangerous. And Marxist politics should not rest upon blind faith. The Marxist politics should constantly search for new directions, do experimentations, should encourage new thoughts. Why did the Soviet Union fall apart, or why did China opt for a capitalist economy - these are important questions, and the Marxist politics of today should seek answers to these.
ABP: During the sixties, the protests over Vietnam War, the Prague Spring, the revolutionary ideology were able to create a different backdrop. The voices of the likes of Edward Said, Noam Chomsky or yourself were inspiration for thousands. Who would inspire the new generation in this changed world after you?
TA: Revolutionary intellectuals have always been rare. It's easy to be a conformist. And that is why many people choose the traditional way of life. But, the human race has started facing the new problems with a new outlook. We are seeing different forms of protests, new ways of movement in different parts of the world. I am still enthusiastic about interacting with our young generation - these are the ones who will find the answer. It's the revolutionary voice which helps the world progress. Modernism is not synonymous with the American way of life, rather it is a way of justifying the reality with logical reasoning.
The interview ends here. I hope to post some of my thoughts on these issues very soon.
ABP: You have called the current Pakistani political system a "Khaki Democracy". Will Gen. Musharraf be able to carry on with it?
TA: There is no reason whatsoever why he can't carry on with it. General Musharraf is one of the closest allies of Washington. Just a few days back, the American Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice, announced in Pakistan, that all Islamic countries should learn from Pakistan. Why on earth would Musharraf have a problem when he gets such a generous certificate?
ABP: But the religious leaders (mullahs) are infuriated.
TA: Certainly. They are not able to digest Musharraf's volte-face. And the economy of the country is literally sold out...
ABP: Then Musharraf must be under immense pressure?
TA: He is under pressure. And he is trying to perform a tight rope trick - a balancing act. But there is no imminent danger. Because, today the army is influential over the entire economy and society. Business, industry and even the agricultural sector is taken over by the ex-army officials. Because of this, the control of army over the country is deep-rooted. And this is where the crisis for democracy lies. And again, it doesn't necessarily mean that all the problems will be solved if Musharraf goes. The comparatively secular political parties are in no better state for reviving democracy. Even the Muslim League is a "Khaki Muslim League" now. The militarization is too wide-spread.
ABP: What is the reason behind this militarization?
TA: America had a big role to play even there. The "mujahids" were the creation of the CIA and ISI. A large section of the youth were trained and sent to Afghanistan to fight against the Soviet Union. When many of them started returning to Pakistan after the Soviet troops were withdrawn in 1989, they were utilized in the Kashmir Valley, to fight India. The elected government turned a blind eye, indirectly encouraging the military officials, and the ISI. At that time, the military didn't have direct control over the administration, and the elected leaders could have put a stop over this craziness. No one did. Leaders like Nawaj Sharif or Benazir Bhutto embraced corruption quite shamelessly. And the result was inevitable. No one except few blind followers of Nawaj Sharif came out in protest against the military coup in 1999. Musharraf gladly used these circumstances, and the society turned more and more "khaki".
ABP: The civilian society was growing stronger after the return of democracy following Zia's death...
TA: It was, but it never fulfilled the goal. The civilian society in Pakistan is still too weak. The media rather enjoys much more freedom in Musharraf's reign. Even the Nawaj Sharif administration didn't give so much freedom to press. And this didn't even exist during Zia or Ayub's reign. The civilian society had very little impact on the Pakistani system. Yes, a lot of NGO's have cropped up - but I would prefer calling them "WGO - Western Governmental Organization". Because they do not receive any funds from the national government, they do not have to act on orders of the Pakistani administration, but being funded by the western governments, about ninety percent of them are eager to implement the policies of the western countries.
ABP: Do you think there is an alternative in this global socio-political situation?
TA: There is. The political changes in some Latin American countries raise high hopes. The Venezuelan President, Hugo Chávez, is being able to assemble his countrymen against the American dominance. Thousands have joined protests answering his call, and I have seen it myself. Despite American sanctions, and a post-Soviet world, Fidel Castro's Cuba has been able to maintain its revolutionary image, has attempted to walk on an alternative development path. Such large scale improvements in education and health sector as in Cuba is quite uncommon even in the industrially-developed capitalist countries. I have seen in Pakistan, after the earthquake, about eleven hundred Cuban doctors in areas like Mujaffarabad, even though Cuba does not have a direct diplomatic relationship. And about half of them are women. They have been extremely helpful in the rough terrains. No other country has sent so many doctors.
ABP: You are visiting Kolkata after a long time. A Left Front Government is in power here for almost three decades. A section of observers maintain that despite criticising the economic policy of the Indian Government, the Left Front under Buddhadev Bhattacharya is practically following the same path, this Left Front is more like Tony Blair's "New Labour". What is your view on this?
TA: To tell you the truth, I am severely shocked and frustrated this time. There are so many shopping malls, was it really necessary? Is this really development? It seems like a copy of the American style. Rather, have a look at the European countries, like France - have you seen anything like this there? They have shopping centres, cafeterias - but in their own way, their own style - not as replica of other countries. Yes, I am pleased that a Left Front has been able to govern West Bengal for such a long period. Because of this, communal forces have not been able to poison the society here, as they have done in Gujarat. It is also true that the Left Front Government has to work within the constraints of a federal system. Even then, I don't think that it should be impossible to search for alternative paths. The leftists in this state should learn from the Latin American countries, who have stood up in retaliation despite tremendous pressure from America. Kolkata has always been the place for alternative thoughts, Kolkata has shown the way to the rest of the nation. I wonder why the situation has changed so much...This is the place where Ritwik Ghatak, Mrinal Sen, Satyajit Ray created their masterpieces, but, today, even in films, all I can see is an attempt to copy from the Hollywood...
ABP: Do you still believe in the Marxist philosophy, even at this stage of capitalistic globalisation?
TA: Certainly. It is possible to find an answer in the Marxist philosophy. But you have to be cautious - if Marxism becomes a religious belief, or a blind faith, if it turns into a secular religion, there will be no differences between that and a non-secular religion. Secular or non-secular religion - both can be dangerous. And Marxist politics should not rest upon blind faith. The Marxist politics should constantly search for new directions, do experimentations, should encourage new thoughts. Why did the Soviet Union fall apart, or why did China opt for a capitalist economy - these are important questions, and the Marxist politics of today should seek answers to these.
ABP: During the sixties, the protests over Vietnam War, the Prague Spring, the revolutionary ideology were able to create a different backdrop. The voices of the likes of Edward Said, Noam Chomsky or yourself were inspiration for thousands. Who would inspire the new generation in this changed world after you?
TA: Revolutionary intellectuals have always been rare. It's easy to be a conformist. And that is why many people choose the traditional way of life. But, the human race has started facing the new problems with a new outlook. We are seeing different forms of protests, new ways of movement in different parts of the world. I am still enthusiastic about interacting with our young generation - these are the ones who will find the answer. It's the revolutionary voice which helps the world progress. Modernism is not synonymous with the American way of life, rather it is a way of justifying the reality with logical reasoning.
The interview ends here. I hope to post some of my thoughts on these issues very soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment