G
Guest
Guest
Short selling is a term widely used in financial world and equity markets. In simple words it is promise of selling something which you dont own actually. Every year many traders gather fortune through short selling. Infect last year half of top 1000 richest of the world were traders and most of that half were short seller, as markets slides.
No business activity or production is involved in short selling. The person acquiring such wealth is sole actor and a beneficiary. Gain without Pain. Is not it interesting? But more interesting is politics in Pakistan where many have gathered political fortune through political short selling. What it takes is tricks of a smart man and how good he is in manipulation. Principals, ethics, a program or political organization to implement such program are meaningless.
Movement for restoration of judiciary started by lawyers was a movement of middle class educated people. Participation of doctors, journalists, teachers and civil society organization made it a popular movement of masses. Ideally, the liberal and middle class political parties are natural allies of such movements. Surprisingly, liberal to left parties with roots in masses like PPP, MQM and ANP decided to stand on other side of a popular movement.
This created a vacuum which was filled by right to middle right groups like PML, PTI and JI. All of these gathered huge political dividend. Nawaz Sharif, whose political career was facing an end, rose to a popular national leader. Imran Khan successfully got huge number of young educated members. JI which always acted as a tool for dictators, become a champion of struggle against dictatorship. Is it anything more then political short selling?
A person or a group asking for independence of judiciary and rule of law must believe on dispensation of justice by state institutions and laws passed by duly elected parliament.
PML which stands as a middle right party dominated by traders and businessmen can digest an independent judiciary to certain extent. Not too happily. What about JI and PTI? JIs constitution states to form a group of righteous men which will grab power and impose righteous rules. They do not believe on democracy and think it as a conspiracy of kufar (infidels). Inqalab not Intakhab (revolution not elections) is their ideology.
We have witnessed danda bardar Shahab Milli (a group of self righteous law enforcers of JI with sticks) dispensing justice on streets on New Year eves and teaching morals to youth by public beatings. Dispensation of justice through flogging by self styled Taliban Qazis is completely Shari (according to sharia law) for JI, if, it is not carried in public. So where the slogan of dispensation of justice by institutions does stands?
The most interesting of all is PTI. Imran Khan, gathered huge political dividend during lawyers movement. I have a lot of respect for the former cricketer. He is doing a tremendous charity work. He speaks boldly and bluntly. But he is no different from other political short sellers? According to Imrans TV interview his party manifesto is under review for more then 5 years. His party organization and elections will only complete when he has sizable support. Till then enjoy one man show!
The entire political dividend gathered by Mr. Khan is result of his public statements during his participation in lawyers movement. Does he actually believe in rule of law, independence of judiciary and freedom of press? What his program about equal opportunities, distribution of resources and system of governance. The only source, through which we can judge, is from his public statements. Do political parties work like that?
He believes on Jirga system and in its support, quotes similar system in some North American tribes. He conveniently ignores the composition of our feudal society and rotten traditions which were imposed by authoritarian tribal chiefs and corrupt mullah for oppressing the weak. His ideological direction is more confusing then anything.
He launched his party with help of extreme left/communist activists like Miraj Muhammad Khan, Hassan Nisar and liberals like Hamid Khan. Then he jumped on bandwagon of a dictator Pervez Musharaf. He supported a dictator Pervez Musharaf who promised to appoint him as a Prime Minister, thus loosing the left wing comrades. As Musharaf picked Chaudhries for top slot, Imran joined the JI which was opposing Musharaf because of his liberal views. Left-Right!
From extreme left once, today his critics view him as a Beardless Talib. He is a close ally and supporter of JI and Hameed Gul ideology of strategic depth. His critics claim that he is doing so to get support of ethnic Pashtuns. His personal life is not less confusing. An ultra liberal, fun guy as most of the Pakistani youth from upper middle class in actions. Surprisingly he is a hardliner religious extremist in his public statements.
Mr. Khan publicly declares Dr. Mahatir of Malaysia as his role model. He wants to adopt Mahatir model for development of Pakistan. Mahatir, a popular speaker overseas is an extremely controversial figure at home. During his rule he sacked entire higher judiciary and appointed corrupt, incompetent and puppet judges. To silence his political opponents he introduces National Security Act (NSA). Why to oppose Musharafs emergency?
According to Mahatirs NSA state got the authority to put any person in prison for indefinite period with out trial. Thousands of political prisoners are still behind bars for decades, without any trial. Quite recently a bloger was sent to prison under ISA. Courts are still under control of administration. State lands were distributed on political bargains. Contracts were allotted without tenders to trade sympathies and jobs were given without any formal merit. Why NRO cant fit in that?
Every corporate under Mahatir Model, should pay a donation to ruling party in order to stay in business. Entire press and media are owned by a government owned company further controlled by strict censorship. Money politics is a common practice. Institutions and accountability is absent. Do building infrastructure with petro-dollars by demolishing state institutions qualifies a model to be adopted?
The lack of institutions has forced the Malaysian National Bar to start a struggle of independent judiciary similar to Pakistan. People have started protesting against discriminatory laws and corruption. The entire model dived nose down when last year Mr. Mahatir lost the election of a delegate (something like a local councilor) from his home town and accused government of paying voters $ 500 each to vote against him. Well, no complaints, victim of your own model.
Has Mr. Khan actually studied the Mahatir Model of governance?
Hardly after a week of restoration of judiciary, Mr. Khan has begun loosing the political dividend earned during lawyers movement. Criticizing USA is a fashion and another kind of political short selling. Not condemning Taliban ideology is unacceptable in todays Pakistan as they are posing a threat to our existence. Mr. Khan has never condemned Talbanisation and Taliban ideology in clear terms. His mute response against Taliban and mixed reaction on public flogging of Swat girl has raised many questions. More flip flops?
Does Mr. Khan support such laws? Does he have any objection on dispensation of justice by groups above the state institutions? Why to negotiate with criminal gangs which do not recognize state authority? Can Jirgas and independent judiciary get along at same time? Can justice and Talibanisation work in side by side? Can Mahatir Model guarantee independent institution and freedom of expression?
Politics of tricks and hypocrisy is dying in Pakistan. Only those will survive in future who are clear about their vision and goals and sincere in their actions. There is a clear divide in society. Either you are on side of Taliban like JI, or you are against them. Either you are for rule of law or for rule of authority. Either you are for strong political institutions with elected offices or one man show. Either you develop a democratic model of governance or you copy a glittering failure of someone else.
Unfortunately, the down side of short selling is that such profits are not sustainable. While the well organized institutions sustain their profits, the short sellers loose as quick as they earn. Let us see how long Mr. Khan sustains his dividend in absence of a program and a political organization. To sustain such dividends he will have to come up with a clear manifesto and program according to wishes of masses and a strong party organization. But it wont be a surprise if his one man show worked.
This is Pakistan. Anything is possible.
No business activity or production is involved in short selling. The person acquiring such wealth is sole actor and a beneficiary. Gain without Pain. Is not it interesting? But more interesting is politics in Pakistan where many have gathered political fortune through political short selling. What it takes is tricks of a smart man and how good he is in manipulation. Principals, ethics, a program or political organization to implement such program are meaningless.
Movement for restoration of judiciary started by lawyers was a movement of middle class educated people. Participation of doctors, journalists, teachers and civil society organization made it a popular movement of masses. Ideally, the liberal and middle class political parties are natural allies of such movements. Surprisingly, liberal to left parties with roots in masses like PPP, MQM and ANP decided to stand on other side of a popular movement.
This created a vacuum which was filled by right to middle right groups like PML, PTI and JI. All of these gathered huge political dividend. Nawaz Sharif, whose political career was facing an end, rose to a popular national leader. Imran Khan successfully got huge number of young educated members. JI which always acted as a tool for dictators, become a champion of struggle against dictatorship. Is it anything more then political short selling?
A person or a group asking for independence of judiciary and rule of law must believe on dispensation of justice by state institutions and laws passed by duly elected parliament.
PML which stands as a middle right party dominated by traders and businessmen can digest an independent judiciary to certain extent. Not too happily. What about JI and PTI? JIs constitution states to form a group of righteous men which will grab power and impose righteous rules. They do not believe on democracy and think it as a conspiracy of kufar (infidels). Inqalab not Intakhab (revolution not elections) is their ideology.
We have witnessed danda bardar Shahab Milli (a group of self righteous law enforcers of JI with sticks) dispensing justice on streets on New Year eves and teaching morals to youth by public beatings. Dispensation of justice through flogging by self styled Taliban Qazis is completely Shari (according to sharia law) for JI, if, it is not carried in public. So where the slogan of dispensation of justice by institutions does stands?
The most interesting of all is PTI. Imran Khan, gathered huge political dividend during lawyers movement. I have a lot of respect for the former cricketer. He is doing a tremendous charity work. He speaks boldly and bluntly. But he is no different from other political short sellers? According to Imrans TV interview his party manifesto is under review for more then 5 years. His party organization and elections will only complete when he has sizable support. Till then enjoy one man show!
The entire political dividend gathered by Mr. Khan is result of his public statements during his participation in lawyers movement. Does he actually believe in rule of law, independence of judiciary and freedom of press? What his program about equal opportunities, distribution of resources and system of governance. The only source, through which we can judge, is from his public statements. Do political parties work like that?
He believes on Jirga system and in its support, quotes similar system in some North American tribes. He conveniently ignores the composition of our feudal society and rotten traditions which were imposed by authoritarian tribal chiefs and corrupt mullah for oppressing the weak. His ideological direction is more confusing then anything.
He launched his party with help of extreme left/communist activists like Miraj Muhammad Khan, Hassan Nisar and liberals like Hamid Khan. Then he jumped on bandwagon of a dictator Pervez Musharaf. He supported a dictator Pervez Musharaf who promised to appoint him as a Prime Minister, thus loosing the left wing comrades. As Musharaf picked Chaudhries for top slot, Imran joined the JI which was opposing Musharaf because of his liberal views. Left-Right!
From extreme left once, today his critics view him as a Beardless Talib. He is a close ally and supporter of JI and Hameed Gul ideology of strategic depth. His critics claim that he is doing so to get support of ethnic Pashtuns. His personal life is not less confusing. An ultra liberal, fun guy as most of the Pakistani youth from upper middle class in actions. Surprisingly he is a hardliner religious extremist in his public statements.
Mr. Khan publicly declares Dr. Mahatir of Malaysia as his role model. He wants to adopt Mahatir model for development of Pakistan. Mahatir, a popular speaker overseas is an extremely controversial figure at home. During his rule he sacked entire higher judiciary and appointed corrupt, incompetent and puppet judges. To silence his political opponents he introduces National Security Act (NSA). Why to oppose Musharafs emergency?
According to Mahatirs NSA state got the authority to put any person in prison for indefinite period with out trial. Thousands of political prisoners are still behind bars for decades, without any trial. Quite recently a bloger was sent to prison under ISA. Courts are still under control of administration. State lands were distributed on political bargains. Contracts were allotted without tenders to trade sympathies and jobs were given without any formal merit. Why NRO cant fit in that?
Every corporate under Mahatir Model, should pay a donation to ruling party in order to stay in business. Entire press and media are owned by a government owned company further controlled by strict censorship. Money politics is a common practice. Institutions and accountability is absent. Do building infrastructure with petro-dollars by demolishing state institutions qualifies a model to be adopted?
The lack of institutions has forced the Malaysian National Bar to start a struggle of independent judiciary similar to Pakistan. People have started protesting against discriminatory laws and corruption. The entire model dived nose down when last year Mr. Mahatir lost the election of a delegate (something like a local councilor) from his home town and accused government of paying voters $ 500 each to vote against him. Well, no complaints, victim of your own model.
Has Mr. Khan actually studied the Mahatir Model of governance?
Hardly after a week of restoration of judiciary, Mr. Khan has begun loosing the political dividend earned during lawyers movement. Criticizing USA is a fashion and another kind of political short selling. Not condemning Taliban ideology is unacceptable in todays Pakistan as they are posing a threat to our existence. Mr. Khan has never condemned Talbanisation and Taliban ideology in clear terms. His mute response against Taliban and mixed reaction on public flogging of Swat girl has raised many questions. More flip flops?
Does Mr. Khan support such laws? Does he have any objection on dispensation of justice by groups above the state institutions? Why to negotiate with criminal gangs which do not recognize state authority? Can Jirgas and independent judiciary get along at same time? Can justice and Talibanisation work in side by side? Can Mahatir Model guarantee independent institution and freedom of expression?
Politics of tricks and hypocrisy is dying in Pakistan. Only those will survive in future who are clear about their vision and goals and sincere in their actions. There is a clear divide in society. Either you are on side of Taliban like JI, or you are against them. Either you are for rule of law or for rule of authority. Either you are for strong political institutions with elected offices or one man show. Either you develop a democratic model of governance or you copy a glittering failure of someone else.
Unfortunately, the down side of short selling is that such profits are not sustainable. While the well organized institutions sustain their profits, the short sellers loose as quick as they earn. Let us see how long Mr. Khan sustains his dividend in absence of a program and a political organization. To sustain such dividends he will have to come up with a clear manifesto and program according to wishes of masses and a strong party organization. But it wont be a surprise if his one man show worked.
This is Pakistan. Anything is possible.
