www.chitraltimes.com

CHITRAL TROUBLED ELECTION

This letter refers to the recently published two letters of Mr. Islamauddin of Garum Chashma in Chitraltimes and Chitralnews (online edition). The writer is one of the intellectuals of Chitral who possess good knowledge of changing paradigms of politics, social and economic development in the area. In these letters he has presented critical analyses of factors which influenced the results of election 2008 in Chitral. The key arguments of these analytical letters are put forwarded by the writer to create a conclusion with the following main points:
Pakistan Peoples Party Parliamentarian lost a confirm seat of NA 32 Chitral due to its bad choice of candidate in the recent election. The writer termed PPP contender for NA as weak, unknown and unacceptable for PPP workers. This is why that PPP could not benefit from the sympathy waves created after assassination of Muhtarama Benazir Bhutoo. As a severe reaction, PPP workers in Chitral with huge assistance from District Government and Jamat-e-Islami, supported Mr. Sardar Ahmed an independent candidate (PPP Loyalist during his civil service) for National Assembly Seat.
Massive support for Mr. Sardar Ahmed was a good initiative and it could lead to emancipation of Chitralis who are still controlled by feudal structure. The campaigners of Mr. Sardar Ahmed mismanaged massive mobilization and could not translate this movement in to vote power. One of the factors was aggressive attitude of frontline spacepersons of Chitral Dost Mutahida Movement which resulted in diversion of voters to Sahazada Muhaiuddin. However, this campaign was a great demonstration of Suni-Ismaili unity which was spoiled by main players due to misled steps during election process.
Instead of focusing on real issues, the election process witnessed a personality based campaign and Chitralis demonstrated an immature attitude and voters were guided by unfair beliefs such as religious and ethnic affiliation, geographic location of settlements, blackmailing through both formal and informal institutions and monetary incentives. If problem persists, Chitral Dost Movement would get more strength (which is bad or good--not clear in the letter).
The Ismaili community overwhelmingly supported Shahzada Muhaiuddin and Ismaili leaders misquoted His Highness the Aga Khan�s guidance and institutionally made efforts for Muslim League Q. As evidence the writer mentioned that one of presidents of Ismaili local council was seen in car with flag of a political party (perhaps PMLQ). Ismaili should have not supported Sahazada Muhaiuddin as his ancestors forcefully converted Ismailis in to Sunis in past, therefore, Shazada Muhaiuddin�s personality does not suit to follow the enlightened moderation slogan of Pervez Musharaf.
My analyses of the current election process have established different facts. I partially agree with the first point of the writer that PPP ticket holder was not bona fide worker of PPP. Selection of Mr. Fardad Ali Shah would have been stronger point for PPP due to his own vote bank and his personal strength; however, there was also opposition from party workers on his nomination during preliminary process of candidate selection. The campaign of Mr. Sardar Ahmed remained focused on a single point that three of the party ticket holders in Chitral belonged to prince family. This stance rejected the notion that Begum Shahzad Suleman has life long association with PPP and Ghulam Muhaiuddin was a genuine worker of PPP and his candidature was approved by Shaheed Benazir Bhutoo in a party meeting. Chitral Dost Movement leaders motivated the people on this issue and it was general consensus among them that Mr. Sardar Ahmed was real representative of PPP supporter as he belonged to a family which is acceptable for common people or workers of PPP. Perhaps, the writer�s term of weak in the letter indicates this point otherwise Ghulam Muhaiuddin was qualified with regard to education and party membership.
With due respect, I totally disagree with the argument of the writer that Chiltralis are trying to emancipate from feudalism and Mr. Sardar Ahmed was the only option to end the miseries of Chitralis. As defined by Chitral Dost Movement, economically Mr. Sardar Ahmed qualifies to be categorized as privileged one; however, the manifestation of this definition emerged horribly in a different way during the election campaign. This action of campaigners not only created a social division in the already fragile social system due to persistent gap between Suni and Ismaili communities, but also caused rupture in the social foundation of the society. Many people remained confused about their social identity because the campaigners provided them with only two options to choose. The People of Chitral always conscious about their ethnic affiliation, and even in social and economic transition period in a knowledge economy era, a majority of people proud to be associated with certain clans. Revealing their ethnic association recently by many groups and prevalence of both push and pull factors in terms of rejection and acceptance of these claims by host clans exemplifies this situation. I am surprised, based on these dividers, how does the writer expect to have positive results from a struggle which over looks the real issues and exploits the weak point of poor people in relation to their ethnic affiliation. The Writer�s argument on non-issue politics also substantiates this point. In my view such situation will not only widen the gaps between communities but reverse the process of social and economic development. The social division created by this election campaign is visible and the gap seems to be widening in days ahead.
Considering the interests of population in certain geographic location is not an unfair deal. In a power struggle, interests of individuals and social groups play important role in shaping politics and setting strategic direction for development. In developing countries like Pakistan, one should not expect that people fully avoid these factors while choosing their representatives.
The writer has concluded without thoroughly looking at the distribution of votes among candidates. This was the only election where there was a very close contest among contenders and the wining candidates clinched with marginal lead. Champions of spatial and community oriented packed votes could not maintain their relevancy. Voting pattern in Lotkoh, Chitral town and Drosh demonstrates this new trend. In upper Chitral majority of people in Ismaili dominated villages supported PML Q. However, this credit goes to Mr. Ghulam Muhammad (PML Q) who ran his campaign in an organized way and motivated the inhabitants of Beyar area to have the MPA in their side. This effort not only resulted in huge support for him but also for Shahzada Muhaiuddin. In addition, MMA candidate also secured considerable amount of votes in Ismaili dominated area. This diversity of support from Ismaili community negates the argument of the learned writer. Perhaps, while analyzing the election process, the writer has limited himself to the local political dynamics which dominated his views and misguided him throughout his assessment process.
The people of Chitral expect that leaders (not only political) should think over the new developments and their consequences. Strengthening the efforts of those who work on dividers would further deteriorate the situation. It is high time that leaders should avoid to disturb the social fabric and reduce the gap created by some individuals with vested interested during election campaign. Failure to this end would bring about a negative change in the society and it will provide the external forces with opportunity to accelerate their exploitation of local people particularly in near future when this area is going to be exposed to outside world after completion of Lawari tunnel.

Sajjad Ali
Booni Gole Chitral