The moment Muttahida Qaumi Movement’s (MQM) chief, Altaf Hussain, called Pakistan an epicenter of terrorism and requested India and the US to invade Pakistan, Pakistani flags began appearing in hoards across the country. Sentiments of every Pakistani were hurt when Hussain showed his disdain for Pakistan to the extent of seeing it disappear from the world map. The uproar against Hussain and, consequently, the MQM was natural. The matter was worsened when on Hussain’s call some media houses were ransacked. These became twin attacks: one on Pakistan, and the other on the independence of media. The ensuing crackdown on the MQM head office Nine-Zero, its sectors and the arrest of its party leaders and sector in-charge threw the city in doldrums. Many people had already predicted the end of the MQM. People waited to hear something from the government or the army chief that would prove a last nail in the MQM political coffin. Most of all, there was a demand to ban the MQM. It was also expected that the mayoral elections in Karachi would be postponed to keep the MQM out of the election loop. None of this happened. Suddenly the contours of the protest changed. Social media that had been fuming with anti-MQM slogans turned tack, and began heaping blame on the government for its complacency. Rangers too were looked at with anguish for not showing its teeth. It was as if a golden opportunity had been lost to ‘delete’ the existence of the MQM. All along one thing that occurred with consistent frequency was the hoisting of Pakistani flag on anything that bore the MQM mark. Rangers disturbed flags among the people of Karachi to put up on vehicles, bicycles, shops, homes and other places. The slogan of ‘Long live Pakistan’ was chanted everywhere. The question is why Pakistan’s sovereignty is thrown into peril at the mere reference that the country deserves to be taken off the world map. What is so vulnerable about Pakistan that its image needs reinforcement at a slight attack to its existence? We have seen this displayed in Balochistan. In fact, a particular spectacle is arranged on every August 14 where flags are put up at every nook and cranny of the province to ‘generate’ nationalism. Whatever Altaf Hussain said deserved denouement. Balochistan has been infiltrated by the foreign element, and has remained a sticking point in the political milieu of the country. The malice, however, runs deeper than what meets the eye. Hussain’s diatribe was not new. What had been new was the reaction to his hatred against Pakistan. There was no shutdown or strike by the business community or transporters. Mayhem was limited to the attack carried out on the media houses. No targeted killing followed. It remained peaceful, mostly. In time to come, Hussain’s pictures were taken off Karachi’s streets coupled with anything that was of reminiscence of him: the famous Mukka (fist) Chowk was renamed Liaquat Chowk. There was relief that Pakistan’s ‘dignity’ had been restored. Has it happened? Has the world started taking us seriously since? Are we better off renaming the MQM as MQM Pakistan? Have the efforts to bring the Pak Ser Zameen party as an alternative to the MQM started bearing results? Will Pakistan be a better place to live in? In all seriousness, these questions are still difficult to answer. Nationalism is a solemn matter left to the optics. And 2008 onward, after Barack Obama became the president of the US, and accelerated drone attacks in Pakistan, we cried hoarse over the breach of our sovereignty. However, as revealed later by Bob Woodward in his book Obama’s Wars, Pakistan and the US had an arrangement whereby Pakistan would protest against the drone attacks, while the US would keep bombing terrorists in the tribal areas of Pakistan. Whether we bolster nationalism or not, Pakistanis love this country. Many have already given their lives in terror-related incidents that include civil society and law enforcement agencies. However, nationalism or the mere promotion of it does not make any country livable or bearable for its people. In his farewell analysis on Pakistan, the outgoing director of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Marc-Andre Franche says that Pakistan has antiquated and nonfunctioning public institutions. Critical of Pakistan’s elite he points out how public funds never reach the constituencies, especially in the rural areas, perpetuating poverty. He comments on politicians who plunder public money but reach out to the United Nations for funds to improve sanitation, state of education and water-related issues back home. Franche goes on to say that Pakistan’s future is being compromised with 38.8 percent poverty rate. He does not fail to mention that due to “apartheid of opportunities” young people in Pakistan want to leave this country at first instance. About media Franche observes that the powerful use it to their advantage adding to the erosion of democracy and institutions. At the other end, in a conference organised by the ministry of planning and development on “Early Childhood Development,” it was revealed that Pakistan, globally, has one of the highest rates of child mortality. Of every 1000 children 40.7 dies before reaching age five. With these facts in hand, does putting flag on every vehicle, building or house lends hope that Pakistan is a place where its people are provided with equal opportunities, and where the rule of law does not differentiate between the rich and the poor? Balochistan can be decorated with flags on every August 14, but to carve Pakistan in the hearts of the Baloch require eliminating poverty and giving the people of Balochistan the right to use its resources. Balochistan is the most impoverished province of the country even today. We may argue with evidence that volatility in Balochistan is the result of the mischief of foreign hands. However, we cannot support with any evidence the sincerity of any government including the military to modernise the province. The dearth of education, clean drinking water and health facilities are still in need of redressal. Almost other 85 percent of the area in the country is in equal disarray. When Angelina Jolie came to Pakistan after the 2005 earthquake, she was shocked to see the insensitivity of Pakistan’s elite after attending the reception that was thrown in her honour at the Prime Minister House. When half the country was submerged in water, and when thousands of people were dying of hunger and insufficient medical facilities, the elites were busy impressing a woman who had come to donate five million dollars to rehabilitate what the actress thought was one of the worst calamities to hit the country. It hardly ashamed the elite though. And 11 years later, the report by the former UNDP Director Marc-Andre Franche has the same story to tell: the elites of Pakistan have usurped the rights of the taxpayers and the poor alike. Whether we like it or not, there is an Altaf Hussain in each of our politicians. While he intimidated, harmed and plundered the people of Karachi, the political elite did the same by keeping those who sent them to the assemblies impoverished, uneducated and physically malnourished. A poor man with no self-esteem and control over his destiny is as good as killed, extorted, intimidated, and plundered. Nationalism sans equal opportunity and sincere leadership is just an illusion and a gimmick for the political elites. The writer is a journalist. She can be reached at durdananajam1@gmail.com