Building a Progressive Pakistan through Objectives Resolution 1949 and Resistive Economics

Dr. Muhammad Akram Zaheer

Dr. Muhammad Akram Zaheer’s insightful addressed at the special session organized by the Pak-Iran Intellectual Forum in Islamabad was nothing short of extraordinary.  The special session organized for the Book “A Paradigm Shift.  Building a Progressive Pakistan through Objectives Resolution 1949 and Resistive Economics that demonstrated not only Dr. Muhammad Asim’s deep understanding about the historical and economic contexts but also his visionary perspective on Pakistan’s future Dr. Muhammad Asim’s eloquence and intellectual rigor captivated the audience, offering fresh and thought-provoking interpretations that underscored the significance of the Objectives Resolution of 1949 as a cornerstone for progressive development. His contributions are invaluable in fostering a deeper understanding of resistive economics and their potential to transform Pakistan into a more resilient and prosperous nation. His passion and commitment to these ideals truly inspire and resonate with the aspirations of many.

Dr. Asim should be recognized as “an academic equivalent to Ibrahim Raisi” for Pakistan, being the first to pioneer work on the concept of a resistive economy within the country. In his previous book “Romanticizing Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan: A Region through the Lens of Resistive Economy”, he not only presented a detailed feasibility report for establishing a joint administrative market at the tri-borderland between Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan but also meticulously assesses.  Such an initiative could challenge the dominance of US unipolarity and West-inclined international financial institutions, ultimately undermining Western socio-cultural and economic hegemony. Additionally, Dr. Asim astutely highlights Afghanistan’s rational approach to seeking sustainable development since August 15, 2021, and Iran’s similar path since 1979, attributing this progress to the implementation of resistive economic mechanisms. He draws attention to the pivotal role of current Iranian President Ibrahim Raisi, who designed such mechanisms during the Iranian Cultural Revolution, leading Iran to its current sustainable stage.

Conversely, Dr. Asim underscores the detrimental impact of irrationality within Pakistan’s power nexus, particularly within the military and bureaucratic spheres, which poses a significant hurdle to the country’s socio-political and economic development. By adhering to colonial legacies and prioritizing personal interests over national and regional concerns, these sectors have perpetuated policies that align with Western interests, neglecting the broader welfare of Pakistan or US. Despite the exposure of these flawed policies, particularly evident after the ousting of Imran Khan from government, Dr. Asim asserts that entrenched practices persist. Drawing on the insights of Craig Murray, former British ambassador to Pakistan, Dr. Asim illustrates how the CIA launched a regime change operation in Pakistan with the assistance of COAS Qamar Javed Bajwa. This operation was prompted by Pakistan’s refusal to provide stations or bases to US troops post-Afghanistan withdrawal, adoption of de-dollarized barter trade through cabinet ratification on February 24, 2022, neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, adherence to Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s policy on Palestine, and rejection of COAS-backed US-sponsored initiatives regarding Israel and Indian-held Jammu and Kashmir.

Dr. Asim’s book precisely examines how Pakistan’s current administrative, constitutional and political system acts as a significant impediment to its political development. He highlights that while the Objectives Resolution of 1949 remains a preamble to the constitution, its principles often disregarded in the drafting process. Through a detailed analysis of this resolution, Dr. Asim reveals its alignment with the themes of the Charter of Madina and the prerequisites for implication of resistive economic mechanism(s) in any third world country like Pakistan. He advocates for the adoption of a new social contract or constitution based on these principles, presenting 12 articles derived from the 12 clauses of the Objectives Resolution. These articles, further elaborated through specific clauses, founded on the Charter of Madina, resistive economic mechanisms and 20 essential points essential for national building and socio-economic growth. In my personal judgement, Dr. Asim’s proposed constitutional draft extends beyond Pakistan’s borders, offering a transformative framework applicable to other third-world countries grappling with corruption and authoritarianism.

By: Qamar Bashir

In a stunning and perhaps desperate move, China has issued judicial guidelines on imposing criminal punishment on diehard “Taiwan independence” separatists for organizing, plotting, or carrying out schemes of “de jure independence,” or seeking independence from China in collusion with any foreign government, overseas institution, organization, or individual, and has set severe punishments. The issuance of judicial guidelines signifies a hardening stance on Taiwan’s independence movement which included allowing for trials in absentia underscoring China’s determination to deter any steps towards Taiwanese independence by defining legal repercussions more clearly and harshly.

For Taiwan and its separatists, these guidelines represent an escalation in the legal and political pressure from Beijing. They signal that China is prepared to take more aggressive legal action against those advocating for Taiwan’s independence, potentially increasing risks for Taiwanese leaders and activists. The threat of harsher penalties and trials in absentia could also create a chilling effect on pro-independence activities and rhetoric within Taiwan.

For the United States and Western countries, this development is likely to be seen as a challenge to their support for Taiwan’s autonomy. It could complicate diplomatic relations and necessitate stronger statements or actions in defense of Taiwan. The guidelines might also impact U.S. and Western citizens or organizations interacting with Taiwan, as they could be perceived as colluding with separatists under China’s broadened definitions.

Countries supporting the “One China” policy, like Pakistan, might find themselves in a more delicate position. While they recognize Beijing’s sovereignty over Taiwan, these nations must balance their diplomatic relations with both China and other countries supporting Taiwan. The guidelines could pressure these countries to publicly reiterate their commitment to the “One China” policy and distance themselves from any perceived support for Taiwanese independence to avoid political or economic repercussions from China.

This move is an obvious reaction to the unjust consistent and outright support of the United State of America and the West to the Taiwan separatists diplomatically and equipping them for violent struggle. The United States and its Western allies support Taiwan separatists through diplomatic, economic, defense, and advocacy measures. Diplomatically, the U.S. and Western countries maintain unofficial relations with Taiwan through trade offices and cultural exchanges, with high-level visits such as U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit in 2022. They advocate for Taiwan’s participation in international organizations like the World Health Assembly. Economically, the U.S. and Taiwan have agreements like the Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) and collaborate in critical industries such as semiconductors, where Taiwan’s TSMC plays a key role. Financial support includes investments in tech startups and infrastructure projects.

Defense and security measures include significant arms sales, such as the $2.2 billion sale in 2019, which included Abrams tanks and Stinger missiles, and military training and advisory support. The Taiwan Relations Act commits the U.S. to provide Taiwan with the means to defend itself, exemplified by regular naval patrols in the Taiwan Strait. Advocacy efforts focus on promoting Taiwan’s democracy and human rights, with public statements and support for Taiwanese civil society organizations. Educational and cultural exchanges, such as the Fulbright Scholarship, enhance ties and mutual understanding. These comprehensive measures help Taiwan resist Chinese pressure and maintain its de facto independence.

They are helping Taiwan separatists to employ diverse strategies domestically and internationally. Domestically, they influence public opinion and policy through democratic elections and legislative actions, while also promoting a distinct Taiwanese culture and identity.

Internationally, they engage in informal diplomacy, seek participation in global organizations, and strengthen security ties, particularly with the United States, to bolster their defense capabilities. Additionally, Taiwan focuses on economic measures like trade diversification and technological advancements to reduce reliance on China and increase its global standing.

Despite their efforts, Taiwan separatists face significant challenges from China’s diplomatic, economic, and military pressure aimed at isolating Taiwan and discouraging its independence.

Internal divisions within Taiwan also complicate the independence movement, as opinions vary on the issue. Moreover, the international community’s adherence to the “One China” policy limits Taiwan’s formal recognition as a sovereign state. Nonetheless, the movement persists in its pursuit of greater international support and recognition, striving to maintain Taiwan’s democratic values and autonomy.

 China’s new judicial guidelines targeting Taiwan separatists will likely provoke strong defiance from Taiwanese independence advocates, who may increase their activism despite the risk of harsher penalties and trials in absentia. The United States and Western allies are expected to condemn the move, reaffirm support for Taiwan, and potentially enhance diplomatic, economic, and military ties with the island. This escalation could strain U.S.-China and China-West relations, leading to reduced trade, economic sanctions, and heightened military presence in the Asia-Pacific region. Consequently, regional tensions may rise, polarizing alliances and destabilizing global economic and security dynamics.

China’s new judicial guidelines against Taiwan separatists will directly pressure countries supporting the One China policy to reaffirm their commitment, potentially leading to diplomatic rewards or repercussions from China. These countries may have to align their international positions more closely with Beijing, limiting their engagement with Taiwan. Indirectly, heightened regional tensions could destabilize the Asia-Pacific, impacting global supply chains and creating economic uncertainty. These nations might also face challenges balancing their ties with China and Western countries supporting Taiwan, while domestic public opinion could shift, pressuring governments to address human rights concerns more transparently.

China aims to reinforce its sovereignty claims over Taiwan and deter moves toward independence by imposing harsh penalties on separatists, thereby intimidating pro-independence activities and discouraging foreign support.

To control the fallout, China will engage in diplomatic efforts to reassure and strengthen bilateral ties with countries supporting the One China policy through trade deals, investment agreements, and strategic partnerships. Additionally, China will offer economic incentives, such as increased trade and participation in the Belt and Road Initiative, conduct military exercises to demonstrate its readiness, and use public diplomacy to justify its policies. Internally, China will enhance security measures to monitor dissent and implement laws to further criminalize support for Taiwanese independence, aiming to maintain regional stability and international support while solidifying its territorial claims.

By: Qamar Bashir

Former Press Secretary to the President

Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France

Former MD, SRBC

By: Qamar Bashir

Yesterday (22.06.2024), the Prime Minister read a statement during a high-level apex meeting held to seek his approval for the new and updated National Action Plan. He read the written statement placed before him verbatim, whereas he usually prefers to speak extempore using lofty words that often recycle. Part of his statement, loaded with expressions that have future consequences on freedom of expression, speech, and press, conveyed the message of upcoming laws, rules, and regulations intended to further curb the already limited freedom of expression, speech, and press in the country, despite being unrelated to curbing terrorism.

Unlike his usual self, he ensured that he read each and every word placed before him. He stated, “For a long time, Pakistan’s social space has been bloodied by enemies of the country to create conflict among our people, spread confusion, and distort and stigmatize the national narrative, bringing, God forbid, disrepute to the country. Under the constitution, everyone has freedom of speech and freedom of expression, but it’s wrongful use, flouting and tearing apart the constitution, and spewing venom against Pakistan’s progress, development, security, and stability could not be a bigger crime against the nation and the country.”

He continued, saying, “We will make new laws and rules to ensure that the government’s voice is made stronger…to ensure that the true story of the country is heard by everyone, making sure that misinformation and lies cannot hide the truth.” Referring to his visit to China, he said that enemies from outside the country and friends like enemies within the country use filth and dirty campaigns to undermine the successful outcome of the visit.

He added, “Therefore, we will bring such laws and rules that can stop this irregularity and hateful speech, putting an end to efforts aimed at creating division within the nation…..let us decide with full determination and resolve to implement those plans…and lay the foundation of prosperity and development.

The key word used here is “enemy.” The enemy could be foreign countries, our immediate neighboring countries, foreign intelligence agencies, or it could be those Pakistanis who allegedly were blamed for attacking the armed forces’ installations on May 9th. In plain terms, this includes PTI leadership considered as masterminds, the workers, supporters, and activists who abetted, facilitated, and executed the attacks, and all those political activists who are criticizing the government and armed forces of Pakistan on social media from within the country and outside the country.

If this is the scenario, then all the foreign governments and foreign agencies and Pakistani expatriates operating outside the country, who allegedly are poisoning the social space, will be outside the jurisdiction of the purported new laws, rules, and regulations. Therefore, for all practical purposes, these laws will be made only for those Pakistanis who are still residing within the country.

Common logic dictates that the people of a country, no matter how gravely and contemptuously the sitting government and its institutions perceive them, should not and cannot be termed as enemies. Therefore, the Prime Minister should have used proper and appropriate vocabulary while distinguishing foreign elements hostile to the country and domestic critics.

He could have rephrased it as follows: “While foreign adversaries seek to undermine our nation’s stability, we must also consider the impact of domestic actions that can weaken our collective resolve. Criticism is a fundamental right enshrined in our constitution, but when it crosses the line into spreading misinformation and inciting division, it becomes detrimental to our progress and security. Therefore we will introduce measures to target the malicious use of media by those seeking to harm Pakistan’s interests, both externally and internally.

Another question which arises is that given the existence of over 52 laws that directly and indirectly govern the media, and which have already granted extraordinary powers to both Federal and Provincial governments to control traditional and social media, often using brute state power to target journalists and media persons without following official procedures, and considering that Pakistan is already ranked 150th out of 180 countries on the Freedom of Press Index, what additional powers and actions does the government thinking to acquire by enacting new laws?

Hypothetically, presuming that the government might be thinking of introducing the National Media Regulation and Accountability Act aimed at enhancing licensing and registration requirements for all media organizations, including digital platforms. The licensing process could involve stringent vetting criteria to ensure compliance with national security standards, granting the government greater control over which entities are allowed to operate.

One component of the act could be to require all media outlets, including social media platforms, to implement government-approved content moderation tools to filter and remove content deemed harmful or seditious in real-time.

Additionally, media organizations could be required to submit periodic reports on their content moderation activities to a central regulatory body enabling the government to maintain oversight of media content and ensure that potentially harmful information is swiftly addressed.

The act may also include national security and public order clauses that criminalize the dissemination of any content which criticizes the armed forces and government. Violations would result in severe penalties, including heavy fines, suspension of licenses, and imprisonment for responsible individuals to serve as a deterrent against the publication of content that the government deems harmful.

The government may establish a National Media Oversight Committee comprising government officials, security agency representatives, and select civil society members aligned with the government’s interests to enforce regulations, issue fines, and recommend the suspension of licenses.

Additionally, the government would fast-track the establishment of special media courts to handle cases of non-compliance swiftly and to ensure that actions against media entities are executed efficiently, minimizing delays in enforcement.

Government in partnership with technology firms is and will invest in advanced surveillance and content analysis technologies to monitor media activities comprehensively to  further strengthen the government’s oversight mechanism and  maintain robust control over media content ensuring that national security and public order are maintained.

While these measures would enable the government to control and filter content that it perceives as contemptuous and against its vested interests, they would simultaneously gravely wound one of the most important pillars of the state: the media, an indispensable pillar of a vibrant and functional democracy.

By: Qamar Bashir

Former Press Secretary to the President

Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France

Former MD, SRBC