Differences with Jamil Malik
Posted by Taimur Rahman on August 3, 2006
First let me try to answer the questions raised by comrade Vegard.
1) “What will happen if these forces [MMA] gain access to Pakistans nuclear-program if they take power??”
After the Dr. A.Q. Khan incident the gov. of Pakistan gave “guarantees” to the USA that these nuclear sites could not be used in a manner that would be deterimental to US interests. I suspect that the level of control the US excercises over these nuclear sites is greater than the average Pakistani suspects. The possibility of these devices falling into the hands of the MMA, at
this stage, are very slight. In all probability they will be destroyed or scuttled if ever there is a chance that the MMA was close to taking power.
2) “Another question, is Musharraf considered by Pakistanis as a Islamist, a religous leader with “good” ties to the Mullahs, or is he a opportunistic army general serving the interest of imperialism?”
Definitely the latter.
3) An about the CMKP and CPP relations, I have understood so far that the CPP grew out of CP India in 1948. Then after the sino-soviet conflict, it split into MKP and CPP. And about in 1990`s the MKP and CPP joined forces in CMKP. But did all members of the CPP join the CMKP? Are the members and leaders of todays CPP, with mailadress: firstname.lastname@example.org, members who didn`t want to join the CMKP?
No. All the members of CPP joined the CMKP. There may have been individuals who disagreed with this decision (on both sides) but they never presented their opinions in the form of an organized platform. For all intents and purposes the merger was next to unanimous and a historic advance at the time.
Jamil Malik’s email@example.com is a recent breakaway from the CPP (which in turn broke away from the CMKP in 1999). All the parties arguing on this forum were members of the CMKP after the 1994 merger.
4) “Does it serve the workin-class and the peoples interest if Balochistan is to get autonomy? Maybe the communist in Pakistan could discuss and answer that.?”
Frankly, that would hardly constitute a discussion because everyone agrees on the question of autonomy. They do not however, agree on the right of self-determination or on basis of the conflict (i.e. the extent of the “foreign hand”).
Now to turn to Comrade Jamil Malik’s message
1) “Imdad Qazi also joined CMKP but none said that CMKP is a “Maoist Party” then. However, in year 1999 Imdad Qazi and Maula Buxsh was expelled from CMKP on the reasons known both to CMKP and Maula Buxsh and Imdad Qazi.”
In fact, not only was this objection not raised at that time, it was also not raised during the time when comrade Imdad Qazi split from the CMKP. In one word, the basis of the split was hardly over the question of the alleged Maoism of the CMKP. Comrade Imdad Qazi and Maulah Bux Khaskheli were not expelled from the CMKP comrade Jamil Malik. They chose to leave. Please recall that they campaigned to reconvene the 5th party congress (1998) by gathering signatures of the delegates to the 5th congress. When the demand to reconvene the congress was rejected by the central committee Imdad Qazi and Maulah Bux Khaskheli walked out and called for a new congress of the CMKP despite the decision of the CC (please note that even then the congress convened was of the CMKP). It was at this alternative congress that the 36 odd present delegates (if I am not mistaken) took the decision to revive the CPP. (The number of delegates is actually irrelevant because I would support even one person if they were really standing for Marxism-Leninism). The first time I have heard about the “Maoism” of the CMKP as the basis for the split was in Mansoor Saeed’s recent statement. However, if that is the position of the CPP then they should state it openly and without hesitation. Let us have an open debate on this issue and we will defend our position with logic and facts.
2) Comrade Jamil Malik wrote “Is he [Mansoor Saeed] spokesman of CPP led by Imdad Qazi or is an employee of the Central Secretariat of CPP led by Imdad Qazi?”
Comrade, this comment is below the belt. I think you owe Mansoor Saeed an apology for this personal insult. Whatever mistakes Mansoor Saeed may be making, you cannot take away from him the work he has done in the context of progressive television in Pakistan. Especially the work he has done for the translation and dubbing of the documentary series “The Ascent of Man” and “Cosmos”.
3) Jamil Malik wrote “It is a closed chapter from our side and every on this forum knew that a rift was created last year (2005) on Hisbah Bill and on the matters of Provincial Autonomy and Baluchistan within CPP and the result was that the communists within CPP, who believed in two lines struggle expelled Imdad Qazi due to his pro-establishment and pro-Musharraf role and elected Engineer Jameel Ahmad Malik as the Chairman of CPP.”
First, the conflict over Balochistan was an after-thought on your part comrade. As an impartial observer I felt that you only opened this debate after you had been told repeatidly to obey party discipline and not support the Hasba Bill. On that issue I still support the position of Imdad Qazi. He was right and you were wrong.
Second, your interpretation of the “two-line struggle” misrepresents the teachings of Lenin and Mao.
Third, the alleged expulsion of Imdad Qazi is as much news to me as the “Maoism” of the CMKP is. Name the members of the CC and PC, of the CPP supported you?
Fourth, have you realized your mistake on the Hasba? Are you ready to make a self-criticism on this position? If so, would you be prepared to submit this in writing?
Jamil Malik wrote: “Is it possible in Pakistan that all the left and progressive political parties can be united on one platform so as to form one left political party in Pakistan as the scattered left and progressive parties have yield no positive results in the Pakistani politics yet?”
No this is not possible comrade because those who have left communism are not ready to accept anything less than complete capitulation from Marxism as a prerequisite for unity. Given the current ideological alignment of parties, such a unity (i.e. the formation of one political party of the left) would essentially constitute the complete liquidation of the small communist parties left in Pakistan.
Small and ineffective as we may be comrade, the real hard work in front of us is continue to ideologically struggle for the dominance of Marxism-Leninism against variants of social-democracy. Failure to understand this essential task is what led you to pursue steps that
scuttled the consolidation of the Joint Left Front. But you have not understood your error in this regard because you still continue to harbour illusions about these “left” parties.
Jamil Malik asked “Or if not in one political party, can left and progressive parties are competent enough to form an effective united alliance against the current military regime?”
We did form such an alliance comrade (the Joint Left Front) but it was primarily your impatience that led to serious raptures in the relationship we built after enormous efforts.
PONM, ARD, AJT I think we should join PONM and the ARD. If the AJT is ready to talk to us on the basis of equality, we should be ready to join that as well. Membership of one front does not preclude the opportunity to join other fronts. Why should we leave any anti-establishment forum
or alliance without communist influence?
Jamil Malik asked : “Presently in Pakistan, there is no effective role of left and progressive parties and groups against the military regime of General Pervaz Musharraf and American Imperialism and can we play an effective role now, if so, how and why?”
Little Red Riding Hood got into a lot of trouble by taking short-cuts. Similary, we communists should not expect any other results from similar shortcuts. We have to first and foremost build Marxist-Leninist unity on the basis of ideological clarity. It is the low ideological level of the movement as a whole that condemns us to factionalism.
Which is why this forum and this debate in particular is proving to be a great asset for ML unity. I hope that we communists continue to participate on this forum with a scientific spirit.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.