Skip to main content

Karachi calling


Urban violence has become a permanent affliction in Karachi. Anyone explaining the roots of this violence to you would say ‘it’s complicated’ – and that is indeed an accurate summary of the bloodshed that erupts across the city in random spurts. The plague of violence in Pakistan’s biggest city and commercial hub is multifaceted. From ethnic strife to gang wars to politically motivated crimes to just petty theft – Karachi has it all. Where does it start? And more importantly, where would it end?
This is strange because less merely 25 years, Karachi was the land of opportunity in Pakistan. Once the capital of the country, this economic hub bustled with life and activity with little thought spared to the horrors awaiting citizens a few years down the road. Fast forward to 2012, Karachi faces (in the words of Bilal Baloch) feeble security, over-population, poor public transportation and housing, weak law and order, abuse of public services by the wealthy and powerful, illegal land-grabbing and squatter settlements, pollution so pervasive that it contaminates food and water for all, ethnic divisions, sectarian divisions, meager education; in short, institutional inadequacies on a grand scale. At the same time, it is this city that allows unbridled port access to NATO, fishermen and businessmen. The city has seen the likes of Alexander the Great, Sir Charles Napier, Muhammad Bin Qasim, poets, authors, bloggers and artists. The City of Lights continues to function under such paradoxical circumstances, with violent bloodshed in one corner of the city and celebrations in another.
The trouble with Karachi started when its politics began to get based around ethnic grounds. This was a direct result of the Russian occupation of Afghanistan and resulting influx of refugees and militants encouraged by the then president. That occupation and resistance left its residual impact – scores of weapons and refugees made their way to Karachi. Overpopulation fed tensions. When scores of populations of various ethnicities, economic and social classes, and different religious and political affiliations begin to struggle for more room in an enclosed space, it is but natural that it would create spillover effects. That’s how MQM came to be – a neo-fascist political party borne out of an astounding 13 million population fighting, with relative success, for political hegemony in the metropolitan. The influx of weapons and refugees pushed this political agenda further and the birth of gangs facilitated the process even more. It is the simple rule of mutual back-scratching. Mafias and gangs get validation from political parties who bank on their support for legitimacy for themselves. Karachi currently stands divided in different turfs run by gangs, lorded over by political parties. There is also a severe vacuum in the city because of a lack of a solid civil society – either because of indifference to violence that has become a routine for inhabitants or because lack of understanding of what civil society is and what role it can play in generating life back in the city.
Added to the city’s woes is presence of Taliban and Al-Qaeda. This presence has raised questions in Washington and the rest of the world about Pakistani government’s co-existence with terrorist organizations. Two dozen top al Qaeda, Afghan Taliban, and Pakistani Taliban leaders, mostly in Pashtun areas on the outskirts of Karachi were arrested in Pakistan's largest city. The list included Afghan Taliban leader Mullah Omar's top deputy, Mullah Baradar, whose capture raised hopes that the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan was finally gaining momentum.
Where is this leading? The central question is that why don’t people start to migrate out the city? Why Karachi? Why not other metropolitan areas? The answer is simple: opportunities. There is a growing middle class in Karachi, an affirmation of the old saying that city’s streets are littered with gold; one just has to pick it up. There is also the hope that the violence would be cleaned up by a crackdown from the government. That is just nostalgia of the previous failed operations in the 1990s and 1980s to curb growing violence – and one that cannot be acted on in any case, since the army has bigger issues on its plate. The aforementioned operations failed because of they were targeted at low-level gangs and political factions that did not matter. Operations that did target the top echelons of stronger political parties and their mafias failed to produce decisive conclusion, leading to top leaders fleeing the country and running their movements from abroad.
One can no longer rely on expansion of the industries because of the sad cycle of black marketing, kidnapping, murders and blackmail, again, watched over by some criminal elements within the political parties in power. Illegal neighborhoods continue to expand, pollution is in access. Strangely, according to various sources, Pakistanis still lead better lives in Karachi than anywhere else in the country. According to UN’s human development index, Karachi did better than any other place in the developing nation. Not only do medical centers and universities exceed what's available outside the city: the potential employers range from tanneries to towel manufacturers and real estate developers, and from hypermarkets to the dozens of newspapers and TV channels that chronicle the city’s distress.
As a general analysis of what Karachi is today, there is only one word to describe the dynamic metropolitan: paradox. With the city remaining closed for days on end due to one strike or one violent eruption after the other, it also remains alive and functioning at the same time. Karachi is easy to dislike for all its problems and at the same its significance in the country’s context cannot be denied.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Pakistan can never be Madina E Saani

By Nadeem Sajjad. Pakistan is a land loved by many and lived in by millions. It has been witnessed in the past --and somewhat in the present age – that the origin of the name (word) “Pakistan” has had many different accounts of its creators/inventors. Known to be the most accurate of all accounts, is the one of the much respected Chaudhry Rehmat Ali. Others have the concept that the word “Pakistan” was given to the Muslims of India, after the success of Lahore resolution in 1940, by the Hindus of the subcontinent and was then used by Quaid e Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah in his presidential address to the All India Muslim League annual session at Delhi on 24 April 1943. Whatever may be the origin, the Muslims got their own land to practice their religion Islam, and to maintain their traditions. The thing that should be emphasized upon is that the country was created in the name of Islam.  Knowing the origin is one thing, but naming the country or the name itself to something else an

Waging war on ourselves

BY  ETHAN CASEY A couple of years ago, giving a talk at a church in Seattle, I was conveying as best I could the anger Pakistanis feel toward the US about drone attacks, when a woman raised her hand and asked, “What’s a drone attack?” I give her credit for asking, but I was astounded nonetheless. Ever since then I’ve kept that woman in my mind, and often cited her to audiences, as an example of the ignorance of ordinary Americans about things that are happening – I should say things we’re doing to other people – beyond our shores. My mentor  Clyde Edwin Pettit  used to say that we’re all ignorant, only about different things. That can be a helpful working assumption when trying to achieve common understanding, but it’s also true that some of us are closer than others to the coal face of hard experience. For example, the novelist  John Grisham recently pointed out  that support for the death penalty is “still very much the consensus among white people in the South. Black people kno

Muslim Pages on Facebook | What Happened To You ???

I was prompted to highlight this issue because people were going crazy on the social media specially facebook over the blasphemous anti-Islamic film.  Yes, the film is blasphemous and the makers of the film should be punished because there is a clear difference between freedom of speech and hate speech. But the thing that I am going to highlight is the pictures that are being spread all over the facebook, for example have a look at this one: Translates : Hitler writes in his book My Struggle that "If I had wanted I could have killed all the jews of the world but I left a few for the world to know why I killed them" Now, the book My Struggle was published in 1924 and the Holocaust happened in 1930, how could Adolf Hitler wrote about Holocaust six years prior to its happening ? Take a look at this picture:  Does the maker of this photo even know that it was Hitler's holocaust that led the zionists accelerate their activities in getting a homeland ? N