Crisis in Karachi

As if Pakistan needed more needless deaths, over the last four days, 31 people have been killed in Karachi in targeted killings. Given that the country’s had a bit of a hiatus from the now commonplace suicide attacks, this political battle resulting in further unnecessary violence is particularly hard to swallow.

The violence has come in the form of targeted killings as tensions have risen between the two political parties in power in Sindh, the ruling Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and its coalition partner, the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM)***. It is unclear who is to blame for the attacks, with the MQM denying that their party members have been involved, instead alleging that “gangs running drugs, guns and land mafias in the city were behind the killings.” The MQM is claiming that at least 20 of its workers have been killed by “elements patronised by some senior leaders of provincial government.” Meanwhile, Interior Minister Rehman Malik is blaming foreigners, including Afghans, for this “organized conspiracy against the government.” Malik’s assertions have been followed by a threat of crackdown against illegal immigrants in the city, among which there may be foreign militants.

This deflection of responsibility away from the government to unknown and unnamed foreign sources is unfortunate (to put it kindly), particularly given that it is ultimately the government’s responsibility to maintain the law and order situation. A potential crackdown against immigrants in Karachi, many of whom have been there for decades, is also hardly reassuring by way of human rights, not to mention that going after a whopping 2 million immigrants is hardly a realistic endeavor.

Throughout the 1990s and earlier, Karachi was the site of political upheaval, ethnic and communal tension and strikes, bringing chaos to the streets. As Huma Yusuf explains in her column in Dawn:

Karachi has a long history of ethnic conflict, sectarian violence, land mafias and intra- and inter-party tensions. .  . Acknowledging that the dynamics of violence are locally defined and steeped in histories and circumstances particular to certain places and events is the first step towards effectively maintaining peace and stability.

Over the last couple of years, however, Karachi has largely avoided being the center for terrorist activity. That’s why the bloody events of the last few weeks have been particularly jarring. In December, during Muharram proceedings in the bustling metropolis, a suicide attack killed 44 people and injured 60. On Friday, January 8^th, an explosion in a house thought to be used by terrorists also raised questions as weapons and suicide vests were recovered from the rubble.

This latest crisis is critical from both the security angle and the political lens. If the rift between the PPP and MQM finds the MQM moving to the opposition bench, further questions will be raised about the ability of the current government to survive.

*** For those not familiar, the MQM is the country’s third largest political party and was created in 1984 as the Mohajir Qaumi Mahaz to represent the interests of the Mohajirs (Muslim migrants from India who settled in Pakistan after partition). The success of the MQM in tapping into an increasing sense of Mohajir insecurity was evident upon its formation, as the party gained, almost overnight, the support of the majority of the Mohajir community. As the change in the organization’s name suggests (getting rid of the word Mohajir), the MQM has transformed from a political movement that represents solely the interests of a particular ethnic group to one which is attempting to solidify its position as a mainstream political party with support bases around the country.

The MQM is quite the fascinating political party. It’s adopted thuggish policies in the past, and is cult-like in its following of its leader, Altaf Hussein. However, in recent months, it’s been heralded for its successful governance of Karachi and by international observers, as a secular party that can pose a challenge to religious political parties. I recall there being talk in DC circles of the U.S. reaching out to the MQM as a partner in the fight against militancy, a terrible idea in my view (just because a party is ostensibly secular doesn’t meant its fit to lead the country).