Daily Times

Altaf Hussain’s leadership of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) is a phenomenon the whys and wherefores of which I have never quite understood. Living in London since 1992 and directing the politics of the Urdu speaking people, known as Mohajirs, he commands their unquestioning submission. They will do virtually anything he orders them to do. This intense dedication of nearly 20 million persons in the largest city of Pakistan gives him a great deal of power and influence in the nation’s politics. He claims to stand for the abolition of feudalism and the confiscation of large landed estates, which the ancestors of their present owners had received as grants during British rule. These estates are located mostly in Sindh and southern Punjab, particularly in Multan and the adjoining districts. This advocacy costs the MQM nothing, for its people form an urban community. It is likely that Hussain and his associates have never visited rural Pakistan and rubbed shoulders with peasants. It would be fair to say that his main objective is to protect and advance the Mohajir community’s political and economic predominance in Karachi, Hyderabad, and other urban centres of Sindh.

Hussain seems to be in trouble. In a telephonic address to his followers on June 30, 2013 he alleged that the Metropolitan Police and Scotland Yard were trying to implicate him in the murder of Dr Imran Farooq who had been one of the MQM’s most highly regarded leaders. He recalled to his audience the intense grief he had endured when he heard of Dr Farooq’s murder three years ago. It goes to the credit of the police that the team assigned to investigate this crime is still working on the case. They have questioned hundreds of persons and searched scores of homes, one of which belongs to Hussain. They are said to have taken numerous documents, videos, and nearly half a million pounds in cash from his residence. Hussain protests that he is a law abiding citizen of the United Kingdom. It so happens that he recently addressed his followers in Karachi and threatened that the opponents of his organisation would be terminated. It should be noted that it is a violation of British law for one of its citizens to instigate disruption of public order in another country. It is being said that his threat to his opponents could land him in trouble. He says in his rejoinder that he is the target of conspiracies being hatched against him in Britain and the international community. It is not clear why and how his sayings and doings are of any consequence to the rest of the world. But they do impact politics in Pakistan and could thus be a matter of concern for the British authorities. Recall in this connection the British prime minister’s recent declaration that the friends of Pakistan are friends of the United Kingdom and its enemies are that country’s enemies.

We would want to know what Hussain’s objectives are. His dominance of the Mohajirs in Karachi is assured, but his claim that his party maintains presence and influence all over the country is not valid. Nor is the prospect of its influence extending beyond urban Sindh credible in the foreseeable future. The events and circumstances surrounding Hussain have made his status as the leader of many millions of persons in Pakistan dubious, to say the least. He is alleged to have engaged in money laundering. Huge sums of money aggregating to millions of pounds have been deposited in his two bank accounts in recent years. He is also said to own some 30 units of urban property. Questions are bound to be asked as to how he happens to have become so immensely wealthy. The explanation that huge sums of money come to him as donations from his supporters is not viable. British law requires evidence that donors have paid income taxes and it is doubtful that any such evidence can be provided.

It is not entirely unlikely that the British authorities will prosecute Hussain for his violations of the law mentioned above. How will his followers react when his designation as a law- breaker becomes widely known? Those who idolise him will conclude that the accusations against him are bogus, resulting from the machinations of inhospitable forces. Many others will find it hard to dismiss out of hand the evidence that the metropolitan police and Scotland Yard have collected and made known. It is possible that they will look for a new leader.

The identity of this new leader will depend on the objectives he is expected to achieve. One may wonder what the Mohajir community in Karachi and other parts of urban Sindh wants. The names of territories and the languages spoken there are coterminous. Thus Punjab is the land whose people speak Punjabi, and it is called Punjabi because those who speak it live in Punjab. Urdu is the mother tongue of the Mohajirs in Karachi. They are referred to as the Urdu speaking people but there is no Urdu equivalent for that expression. Mohajir is a misnomer. It refers to persons who have migrated from one place to another, in the present case from India to Pakistan. The great majority of such people have long been dead and gone. Mohajirs who were born after the establishment of Pakistan are now in their 60s. They are sons of the soil, natives, as much as others. Most of them do not speak Sindhi with the result that their claim to a Sindhi identity remains dubious. They also want to maintain their identity as a distinct Urdu speaking people. In this respect they want to be different from other groups in the country. Most of the other Pakistanis who have completed elementary or middle school education speak Urdu and their native language. The Mohajirs do not want to do the same. It seems to me that this is a position they will eventually have to reconsider.

Let us now return to the aftermath of the troubles surrounding Altaf Hussain. Accusations of heinous crimes are being made not only against him but also his party. A BBC report on its leading men and activities contains testimony from some of its former notables as saying that its militant agents have actually killed several hundred dissidents in Karachi. It continues to regard resort to physical force as a legitimate weapon in dealing with rivals.

The MQM is the third or fourth most influential group in the country’s politics. Regretfully, one has to note also that its attitudes and orientations are unwholesome.

The writer is professor emeritus at the University of Massachusetts and can be reached at anwarsyed@cox.net