KARACHI: The unexplained visits of two senior leaders of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) to the United Arab Emirates in a short span of time have fuelled speculation that Dubai-based retired Gen Pervez Musharraf has intensified efforts for the unification of different factions of the party.
The city on Saturday was abuzz with reports that senior MQM leader Dr Khalid Maqbool Siddiqui flew to Dubai on Friday where he met the former military dictator who is more than willing to unite the Dr Farooq Sattar-led MQM and the Pak Sarzameen Party led by former Karachi mayor Mustafa Kamal.
Dr Siddiqui returned home on Saturday morning.
While those representing Mr Musharraf on the social media remained tight-lipped about his political engagements in the UAE, the MQM promptly denied the meeting.
A spokesperson for the MQM, Aminul Haq, rejected reports of the meeting and said Dr Siddiqui was in Pakistan. “He did not meet any politician, including Gen Pervez Musharraf.”
He, however, confirmed that Dr Siddiqui, MQM’s deputy parliamentary party leader in the National Assembly, visited Dubai for “less than 24 hours”, but said his trip was strictly personal in nature.
Before Dr Siddiqui, MQM-Pakistan head Dr Sattar also visited Dubai and returned on Friday. He told reporters at Karachi airport that he met neither Mr Musharraf nor former governor of Sindh Dr Ishratul Ibad during his stay in the UAE.
A couple of days ago, the MQM, however, confirmed that its leader Khwaja Izharul Hasan met the former military dictator in Dubai after emergence of a picture of Mr Musharraf with the leader of the opposition in the Sindh Assembly.
The meeting took place after Ahmed Raza Kasuri, a trusted aide to Mr Musharraf, gave a formula that different factions of the MQM, other than the one being led by Altaf Hussain, accept the former president as their leader.
The MQM-Pakistan had rejected the proposal.
Money laundering probe against Altaf
On Saturday, the Altaf Hussain-led MQM released the copy of a letter of the UK Metropolitan Police sent to the lawyers of Mr Hussain and his two aides — Tariq Mir and Mohammad Anwar — in which the police formally informed them about the dropping of their money laundering investigation.
The letter reads: “I am writing to you to confirm in writing that as a result of receiving advice from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), no further action will be taken against your clients in relations to the money laundering investigation they have been subject of.”
A month ago, Scotland Yard announced wrapping up its money laundering investigation against Mr Hussain, Mr Mir, Mr Anwar and businessman Sarfraz Merchant (who is not associated to the MQM) after the CPS advised that “there is not a realistic prospect of a successful prosecution under UK law”. It had also decided to return over £500,000 in cash — seized from Mr Hussain’s residence, MQM’s international secretariat and the home of Mr Merchant — to the parties concerned.
However, the Met Police letter, dated Nov 7, did not say anything about the return of the seized money, as the last line of the letter was redacted ostensibly by the MQM. Other things redacted from the letter are the names of the solicitor, the officer who wrote the letter, his signature, email address, etc.
Nadeem Nusrat, the MQM-London convener, said in a statement that the decision was taken following years-long investigation during which hundreds of witnesses were interviewed and all the evidences were taken into consideration. “The decision of the Crown Prosecution Service and the Metropolitan Police has vindicated the principled stand Mr Hussain and the MQM had taken from day one that they have not done any wrong,” he added.
'Plus one' formula: MQM denies inclusion of Pervez Musharraf as party leader
Pervez Musharraf met Khawaja Izharul Hassan in Dubai.
Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) Pakistan on Tuesday rejected speculations over the 'plus one' formula proposed by the counsel for former president Pervez Musharraf, where he had hinted the inclusion of Musharraf in MQM as a party leader.
A video statement of Ahmad Raza Kasuri had surfaced on Monday suggesting inclusion of Pervez Musharraf in MQM as a leader. But MQM issued a statement today to clear doubts regarding the speculation and rejected any such development.
MQM in its press release also rejected speculations carried out by the local media regarding a meeting between the former president and MQM leader Khawaja Izharul Hassan.
"MQM rejects media speculations over meeting of Khawaja Izharul Hassan with Pervez Musharraf and Ahmad Raza Kasuri's statement must be considered as his personal desire," read the statement.
"Musharraf and Izhar talked about political situation of country during the informal meeting but no such formula was discussed in the meeting," it added.
The party statement, however, incorrectly mentioned that Khurshid Kasuri, the former foreign minister, had issued the video statement while in reality it was Ahmad Raza Kasuri — the counsel for Musharraf — who had issued the statement.
Last month, MQM Pakistan amended its constitution to remove Altaf Hussain as party chief after his August 22 speech which created tense situation between the law enforcement agencies and MQM.
The agencies started crackdown against MQM after Altaf’s “Anti-National” speech
MQM without Altaf Hussain?
Altaf Bhai may have become Altaf Saheb overnight and lost the veto powers he had under the MQM’s unamended constitution, but he still casts a long shadow over the organisation he founded. Can the party survive dissociated from his cult of personality or will it tear itself apart?
Will the cult of Altaf allow MQM to survive?
Just five months ago, on March 18, the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) celebrated its 32nd Foundation Day amid rumours that party chief Altaf Hussain had passed away. The MQM was already on the back foot, reeling from the Karachi Operation at home and investigations into the activities of their party chief abroad. Many established faces in the senior leadership seemed to have left the country; most middle-tier leaders had been thrust into the first-tier.
There was a by-election on the way too, for a national and provincial seat from Karachi. The previous incumbents on both seats from MQM had tendered resignations to take up important positions in the newly-elected local government.
On the ground, the party organisation and administration at the time was being handled by the women’s wing since most men who’d step to the fore had either been arrested by the Rangers or implicated in alleged acts of sedition. There were few organisers and fewer workers to canvass as extensively as the MQM usually does. Finances for election activities were a major concern too, as the party scrambled to provide some form of social security to the families of MQM workers killed and incarcerated.
But the rumour of Altaf’s demise had caused panic among the rank and file of the party, snowballing into other tangential rumours. One concern at the unit level, for example, was whether a lookalike had been installed in his place and if pre-recorded speeches were being broadcast from London.
Although party officials scrambled to deny such rumours at the time, the 32nd Foundation Day event had gained significance among the MQM voter-base. With a broadcast ban on his appearance and speech, the event was the only way for the MQM constituent to establish, either way, whether Altaf Hussain were alive and well.
On the night, the public gathering drew in far greater numbers than the MQM had canvassed or prepared for; party officials later described attendance at the event as the largest-ever.
While MQM’s Deputy Convener Farooq Sattar addressed the audience, the lights suddenly were switched off. Attention turned towards the large screen erected behind him, which was carrying a live relay from the MQM Secretariat in London. Altaf Hussain had entered the building.
“As you can see, Altaf Hussain is on a ventilator,” joked Farooq Sattar from the dais as Altaf waved to the crowd on video link.
The image of Altaf Hussain — albeit a visibly frail one— transformed the event as the decibel levels inside Jinnah Ground went up a few notches. In his address too, Hussain was forthright with his supporters about the state of his health: “There were rumours about my death … I may not be in complete health but I am alive, breathing and can speak.”
The visuals broadcast by the MQM — from his arrival to the International Secretariat, him walking to the conference room, embracing leaders and workers, and taking his seat — were aimed at answering any and all propaganda. Altaf also cracked a few jokes and even broke into a dance. The audience might have arrived with questions about their leader; they were leaving with emphatic answers.
The Foundation Day public gathering carried the MQM past the by-elections with great ease. The victory provided much respite to the MQM. The party’s narrative of the Karachi Operation being targeted at them had prevailed. The MQM had won again without the need for much canvassing or mobilisation, and without any allegations of rigging through the use of force. Its voter had observed that the party was in trouble and had responded accordingly.
Five months later, this near total deference and adulation of the MQM’s founder seems to have disappeared, at least among the ranks of the party’s leadership in Pakistan. The cause is, of course, the near-unanimous condemnation of his Aug 22 speech.
Tehreeki workers say that their support is contingent on Sattar receiving Altaf’s blessings. “We trust that Farooq Bhai will not betray the movement or Altaf Bhai,” says another tehreeki organiser. “But ultimately, Altaf Bhai has to make the final call and that’s the one we shall follow.”
In response to hundreds of party workers still allegedly ‘missing’, Altaf accused the state of being anti-people and terrorist. To the shock of many present and, later, the wider public, he raised anti-Pakistan slogans and exhorted his charges to attack media offices if they wanted their voices to be heard. The state’s reaction to both actions was swift: the party’s headquarters Nine-Zero was sealed, party leaders were arrested, and a door-to-door search was initiated by law enforcement to nab key activists. In the face of a strong nationwide reaction to the speech and scores of its sector-offices being demolished and sealed, party leaders were forced to denounce their Quaid’s speech not only in the media but also in parliament and to amend the MQM constitution to remove Altaf Hussain’s veto power over all decisions. Even the MQM’s flags were cut up to remove the name of the expatriate leader from them.
Today, the parliamentary arm of the MQM stands divorced from its founder and leader. In the calculations of the Farooq Sattar-led newly christened MQM-Pakistan (MQM-P), Altaf is a political liability. He is no longer the revered Bhai, he is Altaf Saheb.
In the imagination of the MQM voter, the legend of Altaf has been constructed over four decades and many times, not entirely through the vehicles of fear and harassment. Efficient delivery of services and patronage and upward social mobility have equally been critical to the MQM’s mandate and indeed to the legend of Altaf Hussain delivering on his promises to the ordinary MQM voter.
But Altaf Hussain has also been beset by serious problems over the last few years. There has been relentless pressure exerted by the army establishment, which has played up in the media its perceptions that the London Secretariat has been hand-in-glove with enemies of the state, particularly Indian intelligence agencies. There have been times before when the establishment turned on Hussain — in particular the 1992-96 crackdown which also saw the formation of the Haqiqi faction — only to re-seek his support when circumstances changed. But this time the establishment seems adamant that the London-based leader is completely unacceptable. In addition, cases in London related to money-laundering and the murder of former MQM ideologue Imran Farooq, in which the MQM founder is a suspect, have also tarnished perceptions, especially among younger supporters who grew up after he left Pakistan in the early 1990s. Hussain’s mounting health issues and his own distancing from his cadre over two and half decades of self-exile have also exacerbated the disconnect.
But such is the weight of the personality of Altaf Hussain on the politics of the MQM that it still took two press conferences for Sattar to dissociate the party from its iconic founder and sole ideologue. The first press conference was aimed at the MQM worker base to allay any concerns of an internal coup; the second was for common consumption and to lay the groundwork for the MQM’s readjustment into the national mainstream.
Sattar was flanked in the press conferences by all the top leadership of the party within Pakistan, sending out a message that, at least for the time being, everyone was on the same page.
The question remains, however: can the MQM exist without the cult of Altaf Hussain?
In order to understand this, one needs to understand MQM’s structure. All jobs related to the everyday running of the party — voter feedback and complaints, public dealings, resolution of petty disputes etc— were carried out through the party’s tanzeemi division. But this is not the only level at which the MQM operates.
The other is called the tehreeki division, which assumes the responsibility of furthering the cause of the social movement for Mohajir empowerment. The crucial difference between the two wings is that while the tanzeemi division operates within the framework of Pakistani nationalism, there are no such limitations on the tehreeki division, which prioritises the Mohajir people (qaum or nation) and the objectives of Mohajir empowerment over and above loyalty with any state or party.
The supremacy of tehreek (movement) over tanzeem (organisation) in MQM culture can be gauged by the title accorded to Altaf Hussain: Quaid-i-Tehreek (Leader of the Movement). Altaf is also said to originally belong to the tehreeki division. Unless deputed to become public faces, leaders of the tehreeki wing still operate in secrecy; its members too remain away from the public eye since anonymity and confidentiality are essential facets of tehreeki politics.
Much like the structure of communist party politburos, the composition of the Rabita (Liaison) Committee — the overarching guidance body — ensured that the tehreeki arm would dominate debates and discussions, and gently convince the others to follow their lead. Some also allege that the party’s militant wing was operated by the tehreeki arm of the MQM and is controlled directly from London.
Even as the MQM tried to broaden its appeal beyond native Urdu-speakers, it retained its ideological undercurrents. The ideology of Mohajir nationalism rests with the tehreeki division of the party — a cause that continues even today, with various study circles, discussion and talks organised on door-to-door basis in the party’s core constituencies. It is also for this reason that despite not being involved in the day-to-day affairs of the party, those associated with tehreeki politics have historically remained adamant that the ‘real’ party lies with them since they are the keepers of the ideology.
The implication of this message is simple: were the MQM to be disbanded, for example, the tehreekis will be able to rebuild the party afresh since they have been preparing for this eventuality for four decades. That they’ll be able to do so from the shadows adds to the potency of this wing.
In the past, such a party structure allowed the MQM to prepare and respond to various situations based on whether it needed to exert hard power or soft in that particular instance. But today, the same structure holds the potential to tear apart the united front that the party is putting on in Karachi — if Altaf decides to react.
In both the tehreeki and tanzeemi wings of the party, lower-ranked workers are still unsure if Sattar is a permanent fixture or if the party is playing out a long, drawn-out game for its survival. Sacrificing the sole ideologue could well be the last throw of the dice for the party’s survival and the core MQM constituent understands this better than others. But a complete divorce?
“The fact that on the first day Farooq Bhai had sent Altaf Bhai on medical leave said everything that needed to be said for the MQM worker,” says one senior worker associated with the party’s tehreeki operations. “That communicated the message to us, Farooq Bhai did not disown Altaf Bhai but that there are others in the London Secretariat that the Pakistan party has issues with.”
Indeed, it was with great pains that Farooq Sattar emphasised the word “disconnect” at his second press conference in relation to the MQM’s relationship with the London Secretariat. Disowning the legacy of Altaf Hussain altogether is a different matter— something that no MQM leader is willing to do.
“Altaf Bhai was the founder of the All-Pakistan Mojahir Students Organisations (APMSO), he was the founder of the MQM, he gave the city a 28-year-old mayor in Farooq Sattar … these were all things that nobody could have imagined were possible. Not a single soul can take this legacy away from him,” says MQM-P spokesperson Aminul Haq.
Over in the tanzeemi section of the party, there is anxiety and trepidation over any reaction from London. This dread exists despite the seemingly unquestioned authority that Sattar is currently enjoying as the chief of the MQM-P. “The party is now under Farooq Bhai’s control, and it was proved on August 24, when nobody from the MQM defected during the mayoral elections,” says Haq. “We had a meeting of all our elected members — from Senators to UC [urban council] chairpersons — and together, they have made changes to the party’s constitution. This is a collective decision, not one person’s call.”
The party’s public relations machinery, meanwhile, maintains that all is united and the party is preparing to reorganise with renewed and greater vigour. Among the changes made is the return of Khalid Maqbool Siddiqui in the Rabita Committee; he was last removed after another organisational disagreement with London.
Despite these changes, tehreeki workers say that their support is contingent on Sattar receiving Altaf’s blessings. “We trust that Farooq Bhai will not betray the movement or Altaf Bhai,” says another tehreeki organiser. “But ultimately, Altaf Bhai has to make the final call and that’s the one we shall follow.”
While Pakistani media is banned from carrying Altaf’s statements, Wasay Jalil, former spokesperson of the party and now based in the London Secretariat, tweeted that no ‘minus-one formula’ would be acceptable and that the MQM ‘united under Altaf Hussain’ condemned the resolution presented in the National Assembly. Although the London Secretariat has attempted to keep Altaf Hussain away from public appearances, there were also media reports that Altaf Hussain had himself termed the moves in Pakistan as ‘treasonous’.
Were such an argument to be extended, the notion of “betrayal” — of the movement, the party, and Altaf Hussain — carries a significant price. “Jo Quaid ka ghaddar hai … woh maut ka haqdaar hai,” goes the slogan.
The men who would be Quaid
At the heart of the questions regarding the future of the MQM is who can possibly replace Altaf Hussain as the supreme leader of the party. This is a question that has predated the current crisis, mostly predicated on the leader’s failing health and fallout from the ongoing cases in London. Simply put, most believe that no one within the MQM commands the same kind of authority as Altaf Hussain. Some argue this is entirely by design.
But there are three names currently in the mix to take over the leadership of MQM-P: Farooq Sattar, Khalid Maqbool Siddiqui and Amir Khan.
As one of the few surviving and active members of the first generation leaders of the MQM, and having steered the MQM through troubled waters time and again, Farooq Sattar is the soft face of the MQM and manages to evoke trust in the MQM voter base more than other leaders.
On the positive side, Sattar is the poster child of all that the MQM has achieved over four decades: middle-class political empowerment, upward social mobility, greater political respectability and clout, and of course, a voice against the “oppressor” — whichever form that it may take. Over the years, and particularly in moments of crisis, Sattar is sought to manage public perceptions about the party.
Even in dissociating the party from Altaf, Sattar managed to maintain civility and respect for the MQM founder — something that PSP chief Mustafa Kamal failed to adhere to. In the current climate, respectability seems to be the currency of politics in Karachi and Sattar has reserves of those.
But what makes him a significant heir to Altaf Hussain is the link that he forms between the tehreeki and tanzeemi arms of the party. Among first-generation MQM leaders and cadres, he is a mentor and teacher to both tehreeki and tanzeemi activists. Despite not being an ideologue, he is respected for his control over ideological matters and those of the organisation — not many are as adept at handling both spheres as well as Sattar.
Sattar’s weakness as a candidate arises precisely from being the party’s soft face. It is not at all clear that he would be able to rein in the hardline elements within his party, were they to rebel. And his acceptability to the security establishment may also be used against him.
Sattar’s direct rival for new party chief, Khalid Maqbool Siddiqui, is considered to be the MQM’s Mr Clean since he boasts an unblemished record. He is known in inner MQM circles as the “perfect ideological worker.” He is the longest serving chairman of the All Pakistan Mohajir Student Organisation (APMSO) and was heading the student organisation during the tumultuous early ‘90s.
A medical doctor by training, Siddiqui was made a federal minister for industries for his services as APMSO chief and held other important positions in the party. Sources say that he was settled in USA and was assigned to mobilise the expat community as the patron-in-chief of MQM North America, when Altaf Hussian picked him to play a crucial role in Karachi. He arrived few months before the 2013 elections and was elected from Hyderabad on an MQM’s ticket.
What goes against him are continued disagreements with members of the London Secretariat. Despite his stature in the party, he has been in and out of Rabita Committees because of his strong opinions. Unlike Sattar, he also is not identified as the soft face of the MQM.
The third man in the running is Aamir Khan, whose job is to enforce discipline in the ranks of the party. He was among those who had formed the Haqiqi splinter group with Afaq Ahmed in the early 1990s but returned to the party fold once he was released from prison and begged Altaf Hussain’s forgiveness.
Aamir’s return owed much to the efforts of Khalid Maqbool Siddiqui, who at the time had been left exasperated by the machinations of then Deputy Convenor Anis Qaimkhani and his coterie. Khan’s return was to offset the influence that Qaimkhani had begun to enjoy in the MQM.
Aamir’s presence is also crucial in the matrix of street power in Karachi. On separate occasions, he has been able to woo workers from the Afaq Ahmed-led Mohajir Qaumi Movement into Muttahida. While there is talk of a merger between the two factions, Aamir Khan is the obvious link between the two parties.
But behind the scenes, the coming together of the two parties was dependent on the London Secretariat, which was not too keen on this amalgamation. Their suspicion was that Afaq’s men wanted to only enter the party to capture the leadership positions. In fact, after one recent skirmish between rival activists in Jaffer Tayyar Society, the London Secretariat issued a press release to categorically term Afaq’s men as “terrorists.”
This doused any talk of a merger at the time, but with Altaf seemingly out of the picture, the option to merge with Haqiqi is back on the table. Were the MQM to go down this route, there will certainly be greater weightage accorded to Aamir Khan’s candidature.
Aamir Khan’s strength is in his ability to control the hard core militants of the party but his past as a former defector and his very association with the hardliners may not be what the average constituent wants from a future leader.
The Wildcards
There other wildcards in the picture, including Karachi’s new mayor-from-jail Waseem Akhtar, whose association with Altaf Hussain and his tehreeki connections strengthen his case as a loyalist. But what goes against him are allegations of terrorism — made throughout his political career though yet still unproven. In the current climate, such disrespectability is not tolerable to the powers that be and Akhtar is likely to stay in prison at least till the MQM’s leadership issues are somewhat settled.
The longtime Sindh Governor, Ishrat-ul-Ibad, who resigned from the MQM to take up his official post also has an aura of elder statesman, and enjoys the respect of the older MQM supporters. He is obviously acceptable to the establishment as well. But Altaf Hussain’s pronouncements in recent years against him might make his job much harder were he to be thrust into the job of leading the MQM.
Could any of these potential replacements for Altaf Hussain ever unite the MQM behind him and recast the party as a mainstream political force acceptable to the establishment? Or will the party inevitably splinter after its cult-leader leaves the scene? The answer to this depends entirely on what London’s next move will be. If, as is widely expected, Altaf Hussain refuses to relinquish immediate control and reasserts his leadership, MQM’s future is likely to be one of more suffering.
MQM is under pressure from rivals such as PSP and ASWJ
MQM’s current crisis is not just an internal one of leadership. It is being buffeted not only by pressure from the security establishment but also from rivals attempting to snatch its control over its primary turf in Karachi as well.
In particular, the most potent rivals currently are the Pak Sarzameen Party (PSP) and the Ahle Sunnat Wal Jamaat (ASWJ), whose politics on the street has flourished ever since the start of the Karachi Operation.
PSP was counting on support from low-ranked MQM activists, who had enjoyed benefits during Mustafa Kamal’s tenure as mayor. One scheme in particular was crucial to his support: the resettlement of poor Mohajir families. Through a special undeclared unit called the ‘Abadkari Cell’, Kamal sought to provide a low-cost housing scheme for poor Mohajir families. He managed to settle Urdu-speaking households in areas with mixed populations; this allowed the MQM to reinforce and sometimes re-engineer their vote bank in various constituencies. This was besides the hundreds of jobs he created for Mohajir youth in various city government-run departments.
The PSP also enjoyed the benefits of pressure being exerted by the Rangers on the MQM. Within the MQM, the PSP is referred to as a “laundry party” — those with criminal histories can emerge as respectable citizens if they join Mustafa Kamal’s party.
PSP was actually dealt a blow by the creation of the MQM-P and its dissociation with Altaf Hussain, despite PSP leader Mustafa Kamal’s earlier glee at the latter’s Aug 22 speech which seemed to confirm all of his accusations against the self-exiled leader. With PSP’s raison d’être being attacks on the person of Altaf Hussain, Farooq Sattar ascension as the new chief of MQM removes the need for any PSP-like entity.
Although the PSP managed to make some inroads at the grassroots level, many of those who defected to the PSP had already begun returning to the MQM after last Eid — much before Altaf’s diatribe at the Karachi Press Club. One of the key reasons for these returns was said to be PSP leader Anis Qaimkhani’s arrest in a case pertaining to providing treatment and shelter to alleged terrorists, although conspiracy theorists also claimed that he was sent to jail to liaison with other activists.
The ASWJ, meanwhile, has been an older and more potent thorn for the MQM and the two have been battling for turf much as MQM earlier battled the Sunni Tehrik and Pushtuns backed by the Awami National Party.
When Altaf suspended Anis Qaimkhani and his coterie, lower-ranked followers of Qaimkhani joined the ASWJ, formerly known as the Sipah Sahaba Pakistan. “They had various offers from different quarters,” says one source from the tanzeemi arm of the MQM, “but they went where they found some ideological attraction. That was Sipah. These men would openly discuss takfir [labelling others apostates] within the party and whether it was justified to kill the Shia in Karachi.”
The common perception within the MQM till then was that the Shia dominated influential positions in the party structure. The theory was backed by the MQM’s partiality towards the now-obscure Sipah Mohammad Pakistan (SMP); young members would often also moonlight for the SMP while working for the MQM.
Most mid-tier leaders were aware of this practice, but since it did not threaten the MQM at any level, they were allowed to do so. At the higher echelons, the SMP was seen as a Shia counter to the Majlis Wahdatul Muslimeen (MWM) — the Shia clerics party which had begun to assert itself in Karachi —as well as against the ASWJ. Together, these factors combined to create the perception that MQM is a “pro-Shia” party among some hardline constituents with a sectarian bent.
With such potent opponents, willing to fight the MQM through the ballot box and on the street, there are many delicate calculations that are being made by the MQM today. Without their founder and unquestioned uniter, the MQM is without a doubt handicapped in many ways. But this complex web of what is at stake is also an indication that politics in Pakistan is never black and white.
FROM being a political force claiming to represent urban Sindh’s Urdu speakers, the MQM has tried to transform itself into a national player.
However, while it has made its mark in Pakistan’s politics and has sent many members of the urban middle class to the legislatures, it has been unable to shed its reputation for using strong-arm tactics, especially where control of Karachi is concerned.
Many of the demons in the Muttahida’s closet were dragged out into public view by party dissident and former Karachi mayor Mustafa Kamal when he returned to the city earlier this month.
Mr Kamal launched a number of devastating salvos primarily targeted at MQM supremo Altaf Hussain, accusing him of working with RAW and misleading the party cadre.
The Muttahida leadership has blamed elements within the establishment for engineering the split. This may be possible as the establishment was also believed to have been instrumental in carving out the Afaq Ahmed-led Haqiqi faction from the MQM in the early ’90s. However, then, as well as now, many of the dissidents could hardly be considered ‘clean’, as Afaq Ahmed and many of his cohorts were believed to have been involved in violence while still attached to the mother party.
In Mustafa Kamal’s case, a number of individuals linked to his unnamed party have had less than immaculate records, associated as they were with the Karachi Tanzeemi Committee, considered the Muttahida’s enforcement arm. This brings us to the key issue: that of the MQM’s association with and acceptance of violence.
The Muttahida for long has played the victim card, claiming its cadres have faced the oppressive might of the state, during the infamous operations of the ’90s, and more recently, for example when the paramilitary Rangers went marching into Nine-Zero, the MQM’s headquarters, last year. Some of these complaints may be valid.
Yet what the MQM leadership is not talking about is the fact that until the state took action, the party controlled Karachi with an iron grip, through its shadowy militant wing. The city’s residents have not forgotten when Karachi used to shut down almost completely on the MQM’s calls for days of ‘mourning’ or protest.
It would not be incorrect to say that the party led the way in introducing gun culture to urban Sindh’s politics, as well as the politics of ethnic division. And accusations that the party thrived on extortion are equally hard to dismiss, while the MQM tolerated little dissent — internal or external.
The political wing of the MQM needs to acknowledge these sordid facts and admit that condoning violence was ill-advised. This should be followed by a permanent break with those who wield the gun within its ranks.
Local polls in Sindh have shown that even without the coercive force of party militants, the MQM can perform well at the ballot box.
LONDON: Faced by a combination of legal, political and security challenges, the MQM leadership in London insists that it is “business as usual” as it waits to see what the crucial weeks ahead will bring. Altaf Hussain has been making regular speeches to dispel rumours about his health but otherwise the party is keeping a low profile.
A source close to the MQM in London insists the party will overcome the challenge laid down by Mustafa Kamal. “It all depends on the peoples’ support – and I don’t think they are getting that kind of response they hoped for,” he said.
But while the MQM assesses its political situation, it is also waiting for the UK authorities to take a final decision on whether or not to charge Altaf Hussain and other senior members of the party with money laundering. The UK police have told the MQM that a final decision will be taken by the end of April – although Met police officials have said that deadline might slip.
Much will depend on attempts by the UK and Pakistani authorities to reach agreement on how to proceed. Many in the Pakistani establishment are hoping that money laundering charges could lead to allegations about RAW funding of the MQM being heard in a British court. The MQM and the Indian authorities have both denied the claims of RAW funding.
For the British, meanwhile, the top priority is to secure a conviction for the 2010 murder of Imran Farooq. The MQM says the murder case has nothing to do with the party which is still cooperating with the police investigation.
It now seems likely that either both cases will proceed or both will be dropped. But even if both cases are dropped the British authorities are likely to use anti-money laundering laws to keep the more than half a million pounds that has been seized from various MQM properties. The murder case is now the subject of a UK extradition request for suspect Mohsin Ali Syed. But the current status of that request is not clear. UK Home Office officials are refusing to confirm or deny whether the extradition request has actually been delivered to the Pakistan authorities.
A Home Office spokesperson told Dawn that: “As a matter of longstanding policy and practice, the UK will neither confirm nor deny that an extradition request has been made or received until such time as an arrest has been made in relation to that request.”
The statement overlooks the fact that Mohsin Ali Syed has been arrested. It also fails to take into account that the Home Office has previously confirmed extradition requests in strikingly similar circumstances. In 2006, for example, the UK confirmed it had requested the extradition of Birmingham-born jihadi Rashid Rauf who at the time was in Pakistani custody.
Asked to explain the contradictions, Home Office official said they had nothing to add. The lack of clarity on the issue adds to suspicions that some elements of the British state are trying to protect the MQM because they see it as a diplomatic asset that gives the UK influence in Pakistan. The key issue in the money-laundering case is whether the UK authorities decide to use terrorism legislation as opposed to the Proceeds of Crimes Act. The Proceeds of Crimes Act requires the UK authorities to prove the criminal provenance of the MQM’s funds. Since the UK authorities have no investigative powers in Karachi, it is difficult for them to establish whether there has been criminal activity there without the cooperation of the Pakistan authorities.
The MQM says its funds are legitimate and came in the form of donations from businessmen in the city.
Although the US describes the MQM as a Tier 3 terrorist organisation, neither the UK nor Pakistan has made a similar designation. Use of terror legislation in the UK would therefore require evidence that the party has been involved in violence or the use or threat of force for a political cause. Without documentation from Pakistan showing such violent conduct, delivered through official channels in a form that can be used in a UK court, even the weapons list found in Altaf Hussein’s home is not enough to trigger the use of terror legislation.
The UK authorities are also investigating whether recent speeches by Altaf Hussain amount to hate speech. A previous hate speech enquiry was dropped in 2014 because of fears that the translation of the original Urdu speeches could be contested in the courts. The police are now assessing whether more recent speeches – not least one in which the MQM leader talked about playing football with policemen’s skulls – contain less ambiguous phrases which clearly cross the legal limits.
Alternative leadership
As well as facing Mustafa Kamal’s breakaway and the UK legal issues, the party is up against internal tensions concerning the establishment in January this year of a nine-member Supreme Council led by Nadeem Nusrat. At that time, with a bail hearing in the UK’s money-laundering investigation approaching, the MQM’s lawyers had advised the party there was a real possibility that UK authorities would not only charge Altaf Hussain and other key MQM officials – but also possibly hold them in custody.
There are now signs that Altaf Hussain regrets having taken the unprecedented step of putting an alternative leadership in place. Sources close to the party in London say that the Pakistani establishment took the creation of the council as a sign that Altaf Hussain was in a weaker position than they thought – a perception that prompted them to advance their plans for a breakaway faction.
In addition, the selection of nine people to lead the party in the leader’s absence has given rise to heightened personal rivalries within the MQM leadership circles. As the MQM watches and waits, London-based Karachi businessman Sarfraz Merchant has said he is willing to give evidence to Pakistan about British police documents which refer to evidence that RAW played a role in financing the party. But he says Pakistan too needs to bring the evidence it has into the public domain.
“I am willing to do everything for the investigation if it helps the security of Pakistan,” he said, “but the investigating authorities in Pakistan need to be more serious about using their own evidence of RAW funding and about cooperating with the British.”
In a letter to the FIA in Karachi, Sarfraz Merchant suggested that the organisation should have contacted the UK authorities a year ago to ask for mutual assistance. Meanwhile, Lord Ahmed of Rotherham has written to the UK Director of Public Prosecution asking why, when so much money has been spent on a British police investigation, insufficient evidence has been gathered to send a file for charging decision to the Crown Prosecution Service.
A similar letter he sent to the Home Secretary Theresa May on February 9 has not yet been replied to.
These are indeed interesting times for the MQM. For one, the maelstrom unleashed by former Karachi nazim and party stalwart Mustafa Kamal after his return to the city last week refuses to die down.
Up till now, Mr Kamal has managed to convince a number of MQM leaders — including two Sindh Assembly members — to join his fledgling, unnamed party.
While none of the defectors can be considered big names in the party’s pecking order, the fact that lawmakers are joining Mustafa Kamal’s caravan points to an internal crisis in the Muttahida.
All those who have pledged their support to the former city nazim, such as Waseem Aftab and Sagheer Ahmed, have had similar plaints: that the party, particularly its supremo, Altaf Hussain, has used workers for nefarious purposes, including indulging in a number of serious crimes.
Of course, the Muttahida leadership has dismissed the defectors and the various accusations as part of a grand conspiracy against the party, pointing the finger at elements within the security establishment.
Allied to the string of defections have been calls for a judicial commission to investigate the allegations made by Mustafa Kamal and others, specifically related to the MQM’s purported links to Indian intelligence.
The PTI has been leading the calls for a judicial probe. However, the state has been proceeding cautiously in this regard; rather than corner the MQM, the federal interior minister has dismissed calls for a judicial probe, saying instead that a committee has been formed to look into the claims.
As far as the defections from the MQM are concerned, it is fair to ask what — or who — is fuelling this phenomenon.
If the MQM’s version regarding the involvement of the establishment’s hand is to be believed, then a few things need to be considered.
For one, the Muttahida has run a well-oiled electoral machine in urban Sindh for decades, and even when its militant wing was facing the heat of the security forces, it managed to maintain its electoral relevance.
So unless the split within the ranks of the MQM is ‘natural’ and the dissidence genuine, it is difficult to see Mr Kamal dislodging the Muttahida at the ballot box, especially if the perception that a minus-Altaf formula is being engineered from elsewhere persists.
Moreover, some of those standing with Mr Kamal have had links to MQM bodies such as the Karachi Tanzeemi Committee, which has earned a dubious reputation for itself. How will he dispel the notion of the pot calling the kettle black?
As for accusations regarding the MQM’s controversial activities, such as the alleged RAW link, if the state or any party has solid evidence in this regard, they should produce it and prove it in court. Otherwise, the whole spectacle will be little more than a media trial.
For its part, the MQM must clearly address these serious allegations instead of simply brushing them aside.
While the announcement of a political party by former Karachi nazim Syed Mustafa Kamal surprised Muttahida Qaumi Movement office-bearers, parliamentarians and workers, his outburst against party chief Altaf Hussain did not come as a shock to them. The MQM leadership has been mentally preparing them for a long time that a few dissidents, including Mr Kamal and Anis Kaimkhani, are in touch with intelligence agencies and they can be used against the party at a time of their choice.
The MQM has been preparing people for this moment for the past two years. Last year the party publicly distanced itself from Sindh Governor Dr Ishratul Ibad Khan who was considered a potential successor to Mr Hussain. On Thursday, it terminated the basic membership of Mr Kamal and Mr Kaimkhani.
It is for this reason that the MQM did not even use Mr Kamal’s name, or photographs, during its campaign for the Dec 5 local government elections in Karachi. Candidates and local leaders were strictly asked not to mention his name during their speeches and, if necessary, they referred to him as the former nazim of Karachi. The MQM kept telling its constituents that all development works carried out in Karachi during the tenure of the former nazim were actually a teamwork and in the light of the vision of Mr Hussain. That finally paid off well as the party managed to get an overwhelming majority in the local government elections.
Examine: Altaf in the spotlight, again
One reason behind the MQM’s decision to nominate Waseem Akhtar as its candidate for the office of Karachi mayor is because of his estranged relations with not only the former nazim but also with the governor. Both Mr Akhtar and Mr Kamal did not see eye to eye when the latter was in Karachi until Aug 2013.
“Over a year ago, Altaf bhai had told us that an intelligence agency had asked some disgruntled party leaders in Dubai to return to Pakistan and work against him but they refused. ‘But how long they can resist the establishment when they have got their weaknesses,’ Altaf bhai said and asked us to be prepared for the eventuality,” says an MQM leader.
Many MQM leaders are of the opinion that the names of Mr Kaimkhani and his adopted son were included in the new report of a joint investigation team probing the Baldia Town factory fire at the behest of the establishment that wanted Mr Kaimkhani to lead a new faction of the MQM against Mr Hussain.
Although the duo announced their own political party from their temporary headquarters in a Defence Society bungalow, the MQM is quite convinced that the powers that be would soon force them to take control of the party infrastructure in Karachi and would coerce parliamentarians and office-bearers to defect. Interestingly, the MQM leaders don’t deny Mr Kamal’s allegations with regard to Mr Hussain’s mercurial temperament because of his “excessive drinking problem”. However, they say it ill behoved Mr Kamal to speak the language of the establishment.
“He [Kamal] could have done it in a subtle manner if his only objective was to form a new political party,” says another leader. “It must be on the demand of the scriptwriters that he used such harsh language against Altaf bhai, whom he revered before, and levelled the same allegations we have been hearing for over two decades. They will coerce people to defect. When they defect, the world will be told that people are leaving Altaf Hussain because Mustafa Kamal opened their eyes.”
Read: MQM protest over ‘propaganda’
The fear of defections was also expressed by MQM coordination committee convener Nadeem Nusrat when he told a news channel that the MQM was sure that not a single worker, or a lawmaker, would join Mustafa Kamal if they were not coerced. “It is my appeal that no one should be allowed to coerce people to change their loyalty because it only harms the country,” he said.
Mr Kamal’s friends and foes, however, were convinced that making a new political party was not a wise move as he did not have the temperament for it.
“Kamal is a hot-headed man who lacks the hypocrisy required to lead a political party in Pakistan ... they [establishment] need just his face, but for running an organisation they need Anis bhai and such people as Hammad Siddiqui,” observes another leader. “On top of everything, they need Ishrat bhai [Sindh governor] if they really want to succeed.”
A former member of the MQM coordination committee thinks that the MQM cannot be weakened by a mere announcement of a political party. “I don’t see any chance of their success. He [Kamal] would not win if he contests the upcoming by-elections on NA-245,” he says, referring to the by-polls on a National Assembly seat in North Nazimabad that fell vacant after the resignation of MQM lawmaker Rehan Hashmi, who has been elected as a vice chairman of a Karachi Central district’s union committee.
