Much as I am tempted to begin with the themes of Kalabagh Dam and the Kashmir issue I am inclined to begin with the story that hit the print media on 13th December with an unusual headline which read thus on the front page: 'Turmoil as Indian TV shows MPs taking bribe'.
The first question that came to mind, or perhaps thought would be a better word, was: "This kind of thing could not happen in Pakistan? Another thought that comes to mind is that we have stopped hearing or reading newspaper stories wherein it would be stated that a person, lowly or well-placed in life, was caught red handed taking bribe. Where have these media stories gone? Have we stopped catching people red handed, as they take their bribes?
Let me first focus on the India story. Said the AFP report that "an Indian TV station caused a political uproar on Monday (12th December) when it broadcast images of 11 members of parliament taking cash allegedly in return for raising an issue in the federal legislature.
"The main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) immediately suspended six of its legislators after the video clips were shown on Aaj Tak Television. The other MPs came from the ruling Congress Party and its ally, the Rashtriya Janata Dal, as well as the regional Bahujan Samaj Party.
The video comes in the wake of the resignation from the federal cabinet last week of the former foreign minister, Natwar Singh, over allegations that he benefited from the cut rate oil vouchers under the UN oil for food programme in Iraq.
The Speaker of the 545 elected lower house, Somnath Chatterjee said that he was shocked by the sting since last May, it trapped wardens of India's most guarded prison, in Tihar, taking bribes. "He was quoted as saying that "I am making a personal request to all of those allegedly involved to please do not attend the session until the matter is looked into and a decision is taken". There was an uproar in the parliament".
It is said that that some of the legislators shown grabbing cash also belonged to parliament's prestigious Upper House, the Rajya Sabha, which is nominated instead of directly elected. L.K Advani was quoted as saying that "it is a matter of concern for us because, while the whole country is debating probity in public life, our own MPs have been charged with showing greed for raising questions in Parliament."
Laloo Prasad Yadev, Railways Minister and leader of Rashtriya Janata Dal, said that he would punish a member of his party shown stuffing wads of cash into his pockets. It may be mentioned here that Yadav has been embroiled in a court case for years over charges that he siphoned off millions of dollars in funds meant to buy fodder while he was chief minister in the eastern state of Bihar.
There are more details in the story than what we can reproduce here. It is said that the TV channel Aaj Tak, which one is not received here in Pakistan, said that it floated a fictitious business forum before launching the 11-month long sting operations in April.
Now hear this: Anirudh Bahal, Aaj Tak reporter who posed as a businessman revealed that "the MPs were paid between 110,000 rupees and 10,000 rupees each to ask questions on the floor of the house. And some of the questions, said AFP, handed out allegedly were actually raised in Parliament earlier this year, records show. One of the MPs, Narendra Kumar Kushwaha, shown on the video clips said that he was trapped.
Now back to the thoughts that came to mind, that I have referred to earlier above. One thought that comes to mind is about the "power and influence" of the television channels also in India.
Another relates to the question whether it will be possible to have access to Indian news and current affairs in this country. Right now we have Indian content on our cable which relates primarily, if not entirely, to the entertainment ambience. It gives the impression that India is a society which is all fun and games? And that is not so.
The other thoughts relate to Pakistan, and its TV channels, private channels and the state owned and managed channels. Can a Pakistani TV channel go as far as the Indian channel Aaj Tak, and show corruption in this country in high places? We keep hearing of the extent of the corruption that goes on in this society. And the frequent anger and anxiety about corruption destroying the institutional network is well known. Therefore, can one imagine one day whether our TV channels will expose the corruption that has become so integral to our life style, at all levels.
One wonders whether the clips of Aaj Tak TV were shown on the channels that are available here. I haven't seen them. Anyway the next day, 14th December there was another AFP story from New Delhi which said that "another Indian MP suspended".
The Indian Upper House of Parliament suspended Chhatattrapal Singh Lodhia. The Hindustan Times, said AFP, ran photographs of the legislators taking money under the headline "Men who sold our house". Lodhia was the only one of the eleven MPs who belonged to the Upper House of the Indian Parliament.
****************The Kalabagh Dam has been one of the major themes on television channels. It surfaced in the Sindh assembly, it was presented with determination by President Pervez Musharraf when he was in Karachi during the week, and earlier the Prime Minister also stressed vehemently the urgent need for dams in the country.
The Kalabagh Dam has been discussed, supported and opposed for almost two decades now, and its urgency is now being advocated with a heightened sense of almost emergency.
And TV channels, PTV and the private ones, are having fairly candid discussions on why Kalabagh Dam is needed. But the bitter opposition by the antagonists to the Kalabagh Dam is also evident. It makes the average viewer realise the extent to which we are diametrically opposed on a variety of national issues.
I saw Aaj Kamran Khan Key Saath, and Aryone's Views on News (hosted by Dr Shahid Masood) handling this Kalabagh Dam and both seemed to give an impression that perhaps more and more opposition to the Kalabagh Dam is being generated, despite the sustained and concerted efforts of the governments, over the years, to make people in Sindh, for example realise why they must support the building of the dam. Three provinces are opposing the dam, and Punjab is supporting its construction.
The news channels on Tuesday were focusing on the threat that came from the opposition parties which said that they would lay down their lives if President Pervez Musharraf went ahead with the construction of the Kalabagh Dam without consensus amongst the federating units.
Farooq Amjad Mir of the ruling Pakistan Muslim League alleged that the opposition was trying to play politics by raising the issue. He was quoted as saying: "How can they oppose the dam? All stakeholders agree on its construction".
However what Pakistan People's Party Parliamentarians(PPPP) members told newsmen in Islamabad rejected the contention that the opposition was playing politics on the proposed dam, and "warned that the bid to build it could jeopardise the Federation" if all the provinces were not taken on board.
Earlier, we saw on Television (PTV also)President speaking, at the Governor House, to MPAs, MNAs, senators, federal and provincial ministers and advisors, belonging to Sindh. He told them that he would go to each and every district of the Province to convince the people of the merits of the construction of the Kalabagh Dam and other water reservoirs in the country. "If you cannot do this job then I will go district to district and make people aware about the need for the construction of the Kalabagh Dam", He urged his audience.
It is relevant to mention here while there were news reports quoting "sources privy to the President's meeting" that "none of the legislators present in the meeting supported the Kalabagh Dam, and many of them expressed serious reservations about the project and observed that the people of Sindh would reject it. "Aaj Kamran Khan Key Saath, quoted from what some of the dissenting members had to say, including the MQM. Television also reported that the leader of the MQM, Altaf Hussain "has refused to side with the government on the Kalabagh Dam or any other issue that goes against the interests, hopes and aspirations of the people of Sindh". He was addressing the Haq Parast parliamentarians via telephone in Karachi.
****************It was very absorbing to hear the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams on the Aryone when he was being interview by journalist Farhan Bukhari. I am sure that Pakistani TV viewers were hearing him for the first time. It was a very realistic interview, though rather short, given the seriousness of the subject.
Then on Tuesday night in the Capital Talk on Geo there was almost an hour long panel discussion with Dr Rowan Williams, sitting with Dr Khalid Masood, Chairman of the Islamic Ideology Council, and Dr Khalid Alvi, head of the Dawa Academy, of the International Islamic University, Islamabad the subject of the discussion was a dialogue between Islam and Christianity.
The context was the prevailing situation in the world, especially after the 9/11 turning point, where the world appears politically divided. The emphasis throughout the conversation was on examples from the recent history. That heightened the interests of viewers.
Some of the issues that anchorman Hamid Mir focused on were "Why did Imperial College London ban the Hijab? Can the abolishment of blasphemy law build bridges between Islam and Christianity? Is the situation in Iraq becoming a threat for dialogue between Islam and Christianity"?
It was a very serious, powerful discussion, and it was good to hear from the Archbishop of Canterbury that he was given a warm welcome when he visited one of the Madrassahs. A question that was raised more than once was whether the Madrassahs were teaching students to "hate Christianity" and the answer was in the negative. It was a very candid discussion, in many ways.
Dr Rowan Williams did not support the ban on the Hijab in the Imperial College, London.
He also said that it must be kept in mind that the Church and State are two separate entities, and implied that the influence and role of the former was smaller than the latter's.
In a newspaper article the Archbishop of Canterbury was quoted as saying that "yet it will take time for Pakistan's Christians and other minorities to trust the Islamic State's social order. After all, Britain's Muslim minority, which suffers no obvious legal disadvantage, does not instinctively trust the state".
****************I had wanted to talk of the Kashmir theme on our channels, the UN appeal for quake aid, as the paucity of funds could affect relief work, and some other pressing themes. Evidently I have run out of space.