The Color Blindness!

Eventually, the biggest by-elections of in the history of Pakistan gave the most surprising results for the country`s politics. The worst victim of the by-elections results turned out to be PTI which lost its strong seats that had been not only won by its top leadership Imran Khan, but also there was a relatively a big margin in comparison to the rivals. Yet PTI lost its seats so easily that the 22^nd August results very badly dented its already deteriorating image. On the other hand, MQM came up as the biggest beneficiary of the same elections which not only easily gained its traditional seats, but also secured one additional seat of PS-64 MirPurkhas despite the presence of the Army.

However, another surprising aspect of the by-elections results is that none of the anchorpersons, political analysts or columnists could predict anything in advance about such shocking results. Although all the news channels have more than one talk shows in which their anchorpersons and political analysts keep closely analyzing the prevailing politics and predicting the emerging scenario in advance. So, why could any of them not foresee these results especially of Karachi? In the general elections of 11^th May, 2013, the Pakistani news channels and their anchorpersons as well as the analysts were doing commentary as if the elections were being held only in Karachi especially NA-250. But, on the 22^nd August, it looked if was polling was going on in the rest of the country except Karachi. Why was it so? Why did we not witness the “live commentary” from the constituencies among the political works enjoying their victories? Why do the media-men only focus the aspects or events targeting MQM?    

A couple of weeks ago, a well-known analyst and anchorperson Mr. Najam Sethi ,in his program “Apas Ki Baat” predicted that MQM would get weaken in a couple of years and its would not politically remain so strong as it is at present (especially due to the PTI factor/phenomenon.) The question is how did he make such a claim about future? Was that his professional skill, in-field experience, or any insider`s “leak” that provided him a base for that? Whatever it was, the question is why did all of his basis altogether fail to sense the MQM`s political standing getting stronger in the by-elections that were about to be held just after one week? Does it not appear to be very strange that he was not able to foresee the MQM`s outstanding performance coming up just after some days, but he could very clearly see its “weak future position” after the next two years? Does there seem to be any rationale between two entirely different aspects? When logically no, then what was the reason for such a big contradiction?

To tell truth, it is not the first time at all. Rather, hundreds of similar “predictions” based on the one-sided analysis, journalists` investigation reports and the leaks from “most reliable sources” exclusively targeting MQM and its leadership have previously been made.  One thing was very common in all those claims, i.e., they were breaking a bad news about MQM. None of them could ever foresee any of the MQM`s victories that it made in the last three decades. Why is it so? Are the Pakistani media-men color blind that they can see only the still un-happened MQM`s failure or disaster, but not the achievements that it has been making since its inception despite all the conspiracies against it?

Yes, they are color blind! Their personal dislikes, political rivalry, ethnic hatred, monetary benefits and/or the on-going anti-MQM policy of the establishment have made them color blind. That is the reason why they focus and “predict” only those scenarios in which MQM seems to be in an unfavorable position. That is different that, hardly, any of such claims ever came true, yet they kept on telling lies. The purpose of all this is not only to malign MQM, but also to break the nerves of its workers and supporters.

It is on record that in 2007, the movement for independence of judiciary emerged. During the movement, not only the political parties, media-men, civil society, intellectuals, lawyers, but also even the retired and present High court and Supreme Court judges confessed that the Pakistani judiciary had been enslaved by the rulers of the time for last 60 years. (How interesting that our anchorpersons and analysts keep making “predictions” about future, but before 2007, they could not have made any single claim about the enslaved judiciary on the basis of the last 30, 40 or 50 years?).

Anyway, during the 90`s when MQM was raising its voice on the victimization of the Urdu speaking community in from of illegal arrests, torture and extra-judicial killings in the name the Military-led operation clean up, not only anti-MQM political parties, but also the anchorperson, columnists and the political analysts criticized MQM by terming its protest as an act of defaming Pakistan army. They also advised its leadership to go the courts with its grievances claiming that the courts were the independent and the right forum to seek justice from.

The question is why did they pressurize MQM to go to the same courts that had had enslaved by the rulers? Did the era of 90`s not fall into the period of slavery of the Pakistani judiciary? Why did all the political and religious parties, columnists, political analysts and the anchorpersons require MQM to look to the rubber-stamp courts despite being fully aware of their reality? Didn’t they know what sort of “justice” the victims___MQM could have faced from the judiciary that was being controlled by the political as well as the military establishments? What else should this act of the so-called “impartial” and “honest” people including the media men be called if not the “deliberate collaboration” in the genocide of the Urdu speaking community?
This clearly indicates that whether it is the personal differences, political rivalry, ethnic hatred or the monetary benefits or, perhaps a mix of these, the MQM rivals can go to any extent against MQM and its supporting people. Therefore, the MQM worker and voters must keep in mind that these people are very much biased towards them. No matter, they use the attractive terms like “democracy”, “national interest”, “Islam” or “humanity”, they cannot be trusted at all.