Pak-German Media Dialogue

Transcription

1 1

2 Pak-German Media Dialogue Heinrich Böll Stifung (HBS) 2

3 Heinrich Böll Stiftung (HBS) is a political foundation affiliated with the Green Party of Germany. It was founded in 1989 and named after the German Literature Nobel Laureate and social activist Heinrich Böll. Böll's belief in and promotion of citizen participation in politics is the model for the foundation s work. HBS established its Pakistan office in Ever since, HBS has worked as catalyst, enabler and actor in the country. Together with its Pakistani partners, the HBS strives to create the ground for a future characterized by human dignity. HBS Pakistan is concentrating its current work on three thematic areas. (i) Climate Change, Governance and Energy; (ii) Democratization: Women, Youth and Media; and (iii) Dialogue on Gender, Peace and Security. Pak-German Media Dialogue Heinrich Böll Stiftung 2014 All rights reserved Compiled & Edited by: Title: Printing: Imtiaz Gul & Tahira Abdullah Sufi Bilal Khalid Art Impact Printers, Lahore This publication can be ordered from Heinrich Böll Stiftung Pakistan Country Office: H. No. 5, St. 90, Embassy Road, G-6/3, Islamabad, Pakistan T: F: W: Liaison Office: 20-F, Gulberg-II, Lahore, Pakistan T: ,

4 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 5 Preface 6 Why interaction between Pakistani and German Media? Part 1: Pakistani-German Media Dialogue 2011 Ten Years after 9/11: In Search for Common Ground Introduction: Dialogue Executive Summary 13 The Discourse: Panel Discussions 16 Part-II: 20 Pakistani-German Media Dialogue 2013 NATO Withdrawal from Afghanistan 2014: A Chance for Peace or Chaos? Introduction: Dialogue Executive Summary 26 Panel Discussion I: Is a political solution with the Taliban possible? 29 Panel Discussion II: Perspectives on Media in Pakistan-Afghanistan-Germany 35 Panel Discussion III: Changing perception of Pakistan Army? 38 Conclusion 41 Annexure I 46 Overview of Pakistani Media a Historical Perspective Annexure II 64 Overview of German Media Annexure II List of Participants 72 4

5 Acknowledgement The Heinrich Boell Stiftung would like to thank Mr.Imtiaz Gul for furnishing this document with the support of Ms. Tahira Abdullah. 5

6 Preface A major source of potential conflict in the contemporary world is the presumption that people can be uniquely categorized based on religion or culture, writes a Nobel laureate Amartya Sen in his philosophical landmark book Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny. The implicit belief in the overarching power of a singular classification can make the world thoroughly inflammable. 1 Sen s argument draws on peoples and groups perceptions about one another and how they classify others based on one or two unique identities. This happens because of advertent bias or out of ignorance, and thus can potentially lead to misunderstanding, sow seeds of intellectual discord among nations and even instigate violence by certain groups. It was perhaps against this background that Britta Petersen, then Country Head for the Heinrich Böll Stiftung, Pakistan conceived a series of meetings between influential journalists and opinion makers from Germany and Pakistan; to help them understand one another s perspectives, clarify clichés attached to the images of Pakistan, Afghanistan, explain German views of the two countries, and perhaps facilitate a correction in this view because misperceptions often breed ill-will, distort facts and also can affect even personal relations among professionals. This publication therefore represents the story of two dialogues held at two different times among media representatives and intellectuals from Germany and Pakistan. The first dialogue, held in October 2011 at Lahore, brought together about a dozen German and some 15 Pakistani journalists, anchors and intellectuals from the print and electronic media in Germany and Pakistan, with the objective of enhancing mutual understanding on 1 6 Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny: published by W.W.Norton, New York, 2007

7 various bilateral and multi-lateral issues such as Afghanistan, Indo- Pakistan or US-Pakistan relations. Some of the major questions to ponder during this two-day interaction were: is there still any common ground? How can the media contribute to a better understanding between religions, cultures and societies? What are the possibilities of peace in the post- 9/11 world? Is there any difference between the German, European and USG s perspectives on the War on Terror and its future? Where are the relations between the Islamic World and the West heading? Is it possible to find any common ground at all? Similarly, nearly two years later, the second dialogue took place at the HBS Islamabad office. Here, too, over two dozen Pakistani and German editors, journalists, intellectuals and anchors gathered to ponder issues confronting both countries as well as the broader region, particularly to the context of continued insurgency in Afghanistan, and the simmering debate about the withdrawal of the US-led NATO troops from that country in Some of the questions the participants were supposed to explore were: what did the US-led NATO peace mission achieve since the military involvement in that country in the aftermath of the 9/11 twin-tower tragedy in New York in September 2001? Will this nearly a trillion dollar security and reconstruction endeavour result in a more peaceful, democratic and economically stable Afghan society, or will the entire façade built in over a decade crumble in the face of the raging Taliban-led insurgency? How will the pullout impact Pakistan and in what way will affect its relations with Afghanistan. Another frequently asked question related to the outside view of the region that the Bush administration had relegated to the acronym Af-Pak, whereby it meant to underscore a region of turmoil and instability associated with religious terrorism and militancy. How will outsiders measure this evolving situation, often accompanied by mutual acrimony and suspicion? Common to both dialogues was the presence of leading politicians not only from Pakistan but also some from Afghanistan for greater insights into how politics works in the two countries and how it impacts lives of common people there. The presence of political stakeholders also ensured that Pakistani and German journalists 7

8 themselves get to know the politicians and the way they look at the situation around them. German visitors also heard firsthand from their Pakistani counterparts about the operational difficulties and security hazards they face while performing their professional duty. For greater understanding of challenges to Pakistani media and the context in which it has evolved, a detailed overview of the media in Pakistan is also being presented as an annexure. This also includes an historical overview of the Pakistani media since Pakistan emerged as an independent Muslim country in For the benefit of Pakistani readers, this annexure also contains a brief discussions on the media landscape in Germany and challenges to it. It briefly explains the journalistic norms and principles underlying media s operations and its conduct. The participants feedback on the two Dialogues, supported by the Federal German Foreign Ministry, only reaffirmed the belief that dialogue among nations, professionals and political stake-holders remains an absolutely unavoidable tool for bridging gaps, correcting perceptions, facilitating greater inter-cultural understanding, and promoting international cooperation. Imtiaz Gul 8

9 9

10 Part-I Pakistani-German Media Dialogue 2011 Ten Years after 9/11: In Search for Common Ground 9-11 October 2011, Lahore, Pakistan 10

11 Introduction: Dialogue 2011 Pakistan, as I could read every morning in the newspapers, has a free media with brilliant journalists, who are not only very critical but also courageous. I talked to Pakistani colleagues who investigate, criticise, and their work has an impact but too many have paid with their life for this. I had many astonishing encounters, enlightening insights and yet only got a glimpse of the larger picture. I came back home and told my friends and family: No, it s not too dangerous to go to Pakistan. The lines above essentially sum up what a journalist experiences during a few days of stay in Pakistan, and particularly following interaction with local counterparts. These observations by Heike Vowinkel, a Berlin-based deputy editor for the German newspapers Die Welt and Die Berliner Morgenpost, also illustrate the value that a dialogue between opinion-makers from two socio-culturally different countries can bring with it. The ideas expressed in a blog that Vowinkel wrote for Pakistan s daily The Express Tribune after attending the first Pakistani-German Media Dialogue (2011) at Lahore reflected the stated intent of a close interaction among key opinion-makers from the two countries. This dialogue coincided with the 10 th anniversary of the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, DC a decade ago, followed by the US-led invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. The detection and killing of Osama bin Laden in northern Pakistan in May 2011 as well as the emergence of the Arab Spring in February earlier in the year provided the immediate context for such a meeting of intellectuals. The turmoil in Pakistan s relations with the US and its allies following Osama bin Laden s elimination and the alarmingly unravelling, though controversial Arab Spring brought up questions that put Pakistan under the international spotlight too. This upheaval necessitated the need for nations to reflect on what has happened in the last decade between the so-called Islamic World and the West. And this became the foundation question for the first ever Pakistani-German Media Dialogue. 11

12 Organized by the Heinrich Böll Stiftung (HBS) Pakistan, in collaboration with the German Foreign Office (through the German Embassy) at Lahore, the dialogue aimed at enhancing mutual understanding and encouraging professional cooperation among journalists and intellectuals from the two countries. As many as 12 German and 15 Pakistani journalists senior editors and decision makers from the print and electronic media converged at Lahore (between October 9 and 11, 2011) for interactive mediaonly discussions, supplemented also by meetings, and discussions with senior politicians from various political parties. Some of the key questions put before this galaxy of media stars for an in-depth discussion were: Is there still any common ground? How can the media contribute to a better understanding between religions, cultures and societies? What are the possibilities of peace in the post- 9/11 world? Is there any difference between the German, European and US perspectives on the War on Terror and its future? Where are the relations between the Islamic World and the West heading? Is it possible to find any common ground at all? Two days of debate entailed multiple answers, some controversial, others helping in clarifying German perceptions about Pakistan, and comments by visiting German journalists as well as by their Pakistani counterparts did reflect the usefulness of these meetings spread over two days. (For more comments see Conclusion) Jan Marberg, deputy Editor-in-chief, Magazine of the German Army Y, for instance, admitted in a post-dialogue interview with the Pakistani newspaper Daily Times that he found the ground situation quite different from what he had heard about Pakistan and interaction with different people had helped resolve a number of misconceptions in his mind. We not only got first-hand knowledge of so many things by visiting Pakistan but also developed a number of valuable contacts that would help us publish the issues with in-depth details. That will help in inspiring the German public opinion about Pakistan, Jan said. 12

13 He also spoke of how the visit and the interaction with senior Pakistani journalists had helped them understand the problems that the Pakistani media and the people have been facing. Getting a better understanding about the history and the background of the conflict that had emerged in this region, especially after 9/11 was also extremely valuable, Jan stated. 13

14 Executive Summary Much of the debate during the two-day proceedings centered on the media and its dynamics, yet it was difficult to discuss media issues in isolation of so many other crises and challenges that Pakistan faces. These also define the contours of the coverage and determine the conduct of the media itself. That is why curious German participants in particular kept coming back to some of the fundamental but most recurring questions such as: What is the status of minority rights in Pakistan? What is the current situation in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and FATA areas? How do Pakistanis in general and the Pakhtuns in particular, view the Taliban, against the background of the Pakhtun majority living in Afghanistan and their ethnic and linguistic connections with the communities in Pakistan? How much influence does Pakistan wield over the Taliban? What are its interests in Afghanistan? Can Pakistan help in establishing democracy in Afghanistan? Did Pakistan s army and intelligence agencies really not know where Osama bin Laden was hiding? Should Europe help to support the liberal forces in Pakistan and Afghanistan vs. the Taliban? Besides, a number of other issues also resonated during the proceedings. German guests, for instance, addressed issues such as corruption by successive governments in Pakistan and the unofficial help by the Pakistani military and civilian establishment for the Taliban. Since German troops, as part of the US-led ISAF troops, are fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan and dying there too, Pakistan s foreign and military policy s concept of using the Taliban for strategic depth and as military assets in Afghanistan is disliked in Germany. They also pointed out that increasingly negative perceptions of Pakistan in Germany, resulted in a drop in philanthropic and charitable donations for humanitarian causes, e.g. the Earthquake and Flood affectees (2005 and ). 14

15 They pointed out that Osama bin Laden s detection and killing in northern Pakistan very close to the Pakistan Military Academy (PMA) further dented the already negative image of Pakistan in Germany. Many Pakistani media persons and intellectuals, on the other hand, blamed the US Government (USG) for its bad reaction to the 9/11 attacks. They held Washington s unwillingness and inability to resolve any situation without using military might, e.g. the post-9/11 invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq, as the primary reason for conflict, militancy, terrorism and political upheaval in countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran. The use of unpiloted drone airplanes against al-qaeda in the tribal areas of Pakistan bordering Afghanistan, they pointed out, was also fuelling the militant conflict and had rendered Pakistan insecure. The US failure to close down the infamous Guantanamo Bay prison and to enable the incarcerated suspects to access justice through the US judiciary, amongst other issues, was another factor. Both Pakistani and German media persons agreed that the world in 2011 was a MORE insecure place than it was at the end of Anti- USA emotions run high in both Pakistan and Afghanistan. The global and increasing phenomena of Islamophobia and Xenophobia also came up for thoughtful, sober discussion followed by apprehensions that in Germany, other European countries and USA, there is an unprecedented rise in, fear of, and hostility towards Muslims and Islam. This is also leading to a frightening rise in rightwing, even extremist political parties and groups across Europe. Questions related to the existing implementation of the Blasphemy Laws in Pakistan were also raised by several German journalists. In the presence of politicians representing various Pakistani political parties (both in the coalition Government and the Opposition), Pakistan s internal politics and party positions were discussed thread bare. Pakistan s role in the war on terror and the frequent terrorist attacks on its soil, especially in FATA and KP; as well as the separatist nationalist insurgency in south-western Balochistan province also generated a lively debate. German participants wondered as to why Pakistan had failed in coming up with a solid counter-terrorism and counter-extremism 15

16 policy. They asked as to whether Germans and Europeans could help Pakistan in tackling the growing wave of extremism and intolerance. The importance of safeguarding Pakistan s sovereignty and writ, as well as acknowledging the huge sacrifices that Pakistan has made, with over 50,000 Pakistani being martyred since 9/11 and rising each day, was emphasized. The fate of peace talks with the Taliban in both Afghanistan and Pakistan also came under discussion, whereby Pakistani journalists and intellectuals noted that both USA and Europe were looking for a political dialogue to end the Afghan conflict through peaceful means, while they were pushing Pakistan for military action against the Taliban on its territory. The fact that the killing of scores of journalists has now put Pakistan amongst the 3 most dangerous countries in the world for journalists, was an important theme for the debate, especially during the participants visit to the South Asian Free Media Association (SAFMA), where its director made a presentation on Pakistan s media laws and policies, repression against journalists and the working environment of journalists who report on security, defence and related political issues. 16

17 The Discourse: Panel Discussions The first panel discussion started off with a short presentation about the German perceptions of Pakistan and vice versa. Marcus Pindur, Editor Deutschland Radio Berlin, stated that the German public views about Pakistan have changed over the years, adversely affected by incidents such as the elimination of Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan on May 2, The German public view is that their tax money supports a corrupt Pakistani government which is offering unofficial help to the extremists. And these extremists are killing German soldiers who are posted in the north of Afghanistan. A declining willingness among Germans to donate money for humanitarian causes also underlines how Pakistan s image has suffered over the years; this gradual aversion can be measured by the fact that the donations for the deadly earthquake in 2005 generated more funds within Germany, compared to the flash floods in 2010, they pointed out. Ejaz Haider, security analyst and columnist of The Friday Times and daily Express Tribune offered his perspective on the post-9/11 events. He was of the view that that the US reacted badly to the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon. Unfortunately, he said, the Bush administration also never seriously considered opportunities and signals for a political way out of the anti-terror war and kept pushing the military options in Afghanistan, accompanied by relentless drone attacks in Pakistan s border regions. This also placed limitations on the capability of Pakistani and Afghan governments and bound their hands in the face of mounting public anger against the US-led coalition forces actions in Afghanistan, Iraq and their belligerent policies vies-a-vis Pakistan, he argued. Haider concluded that the failure of the US policies was evident from the fact that the security situation had gone from bad to worse, making Pakistan insecure like never before. And this invariably means that people at large and the governments in particular are now more preoccupied with security issues than taking care of the problems arising out of insecurity. 17

18 This session also addressed Islamophobia and Xenophobia in western countries. Cem Sey, a German-Turkish national and German correspondent for the Turkish newspaper Taraf, asked whether the 9/11 events provided the trigger for what Samuel Huntington had predicted in his book Clash of Civilizations between the so-called Muslims and the West? Several journalists agreed with Daniel Bax, from the German newspaper Tages zeitung, that in fact both sides have the same topics and issues which they are discussing and facing, i.e. threats from extremists and the ensuing security challenges. The 9/11 events, they concurred, had changed the entire global security dynamics, and thereby prompted controversial changes in laws such as the Patriot Act, USA. Other countries followed suit too and this entailed serious implications for the fundamental human rights. The session involving Begum Abida Hussain, a former ambassador and a member of the ruling Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), and Hashim Babar of the Pakhtoon nationalist Awami National Party (ANP) explored dynamics of Pakistan s internal politics, i.e. party politics, situation in KP and FATA, sectarian issues and how Europe can support the liberal forces in Pakistan. Both comprehensively explained the roots of sectarian violence and the militancy that has been sweeping the Pakhtoon lands, namely Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and FATA; Hussain is a Shia Muslim and belongs to the central Punjab district of Jhang which is the hub of radical anti-shia sectarian forces. Babar, himself a Pakhtoon (currently advisor to the KP provincial government) invoked historical references to elaborate the troubles that the Pakhtoon regions are currently embroiled in. The Soviet invasion and the US response to it essentially pushed the region into religious militancy and is suffering its consequences to date. German journalists Jan Ross, Jan Marberg, and Pakistani analysts Khaled Ahmed and Rahimullah Yusufzai spoke on the possibilities of talking peace with the Taliban. In Khaled Ahmed s view the Taliban have flouted all the past agreements and were not trustworthy. Also, he underlined, the Taliban don t seem inclined to compromise their stated objectives, i.e. the enforcement of their own version of Islamic Sharia in Pakistan. 18

19 Rahimullah Yusufzai, a renowned analyst and writer on Taliban matters, agreed that the Taliban forces were inimical to talks on the government terms. They live in their own world and will enter into dialogue on their conditions, something neither the military nor the civilian government might be able to concede. This panel also dealt with some fundamental questions such as how much influence does Pakistan yield over the Taliban? And what are its interests in Kabul? Did Pakistan s army really not know where Osama bin Laden was hiding? Most Pakistani participants conceded that the discovery of bin Laden, the world s most wanted terrorist, indeed came as a rude shock and sheer embarrassment to almost every Pakistani. They however offered no cogent answer to the question as to whether the military establishment knew about bin Laden s whereabouts or not. On the sidelines of the Dialogue, the then German Ambassador to Pakistan, Dr. Michael Koch, met with the German journalists and gave them a background briefing on Pakistan besides sharing his view on the future of Pakistan as well as its relations with Afghanistan. German journalists also visited the independent South Asian Free Media Association (SAFMA), a media watchdog operating across South Asia. Imtiaz Alam, the SAFMA secretary-general, briefed the visitors on Pakistani media policies, repression against journalists and the working environment of journalists who continue reporting on security and political issues despite security hazards to their lives. During a working dinner interaction with Ahsan Iqbal, then Deputy Secretary-General of the PML-N (now a Federal Minister) and Shah Mahmood Qureshi, former Foreign Affairs Minister, the German journalists got another glimpse into complex Pakistani politics and their impact on life in general. Ahsan Iqbal appreciated the media dialogue and hoped it would result in better understanding for senior journalists of both the countries Pakistan and Germany. He also expressed the optimism that despite the current gloomy situation Pakistan would emerge as a more powerful state. Iqbal also cautioned against an abrupt departure of the US-led foreign forces from Afghan and feared that if left alone to deal with the post-2014 situation in Afghanistan, 19

20 Pakistan could face serious security and economic challenges. It would be extremely difficult for the country to handle the situation on its own, Iqbal said, underlining that Pakistan would need international support and recognition for its due role in Afghanistan. Shah Mahmood Qureshi, too, emphasised the importance of Pakistan s sovereignty and its contribution to the US-led anti-terror war in Afghanistan. He listed Pakistan s sacrifices and urged the West to be more empathetic to Pakistan s concerns next door (i.e. Afghanistan). Qureshi also appreciated the event and hoped that the Pak-German Media Dialogue will become a regular annual feature and would create a better understanding between Pakistan and a strong European actor, Germany. As expected, questions related to the existing Blasphemy Law in Pakistan also surfaced in the course of the debate. Several German journalists wondered as to whether the law had any utility, particularly in view of the fact that in most cases it was the Muslims who were being charged under the law. The debate on this issue also highlighted the sensitivities of the German media on issues such as Blasphemy or Women s Rights. It turned out to be quite eye-opening for many Pakistani journalists and intellectuals to know that, being the product of a democratic society, the German media looked at the issue purely on the grounds of equal citizenry and not along sectarian lines. Protection against unlawful persecution on religious grounds is something unthinkable in the Federal Republic of Germany, they were told by their German counterparts. 20

21 21

22 Part-II: Pakistani-German Media Dialogue 2013 NATO Withdrawal from Afghanistan 2014: A Chance for Peace or Chaos? 4-6 December 2013, Islamabad, Pakistan 22

23 Why interaction between Pakistani and German Media? Interaction between Pakistani and German media is an exciting idea for a variety of reasons. The two countries are vastly different, if not the opposite to each other. One is a strong European player with a commanding role among the comity of nations, while the other is grappling with the monster of extremism, terrorism, a subsequent deterioration in law and order and socio-economic indicators. A tabloid in Germany can be threatened through a text message by a high government official regarding a personal loan taken by him and the entire episode ends with a whimper. Whereas in Pakistan, a dissenting journalist or an anchorperson may well end up in a morgue or may witness the killing of his/her security guard or driver just to teach him/her a lesson. The media in the two societies has different sets of issues. A great manifestation of the stark differences between Pakistan and Germany can be gauged by the annual report of Reporters Without Borders (RSF) for According to the RSF index, Germany is ranked 17 th amongst 179 countries, whereas Pakistan has achieved a low ranking of 159 th amongst 179. The index may or may not be objective in one way or the other, yet the huge divide between the two countries is reflective of the respective levels of tolerance/intolerance, and of maturity/immaturity regarding the utilization of the freedom of expression in the two countries. In such a contrasting social milieu, journalists from the two countries can benefit from a mutual exchange of ideas and experiences, which can start bridging the huge gap between the two countries. For instance, a German journalist who does not have an idea about the Madrassa (religious seminary) system of education in Pakistan may find it hard to comprehend the complications of religious extremism in Pakistan. Similarly, a Pakistani journalist may not be able to understand the nature of existing taboos in German society 23

24 and media. Such media dialogues can play a significant role in bridging these gaps. Exchanges of views between journalists of the two countries are of significance for a number of reasons: o A significant number of Pakistanis live in Germany and to an extent their degree of social acceptability depends on how the German media portrays Pakistan locally. Views merely based on media reports can be misleading and hence can cause more prejudice. o Both Pakistan and Germany can benefit more economically and politically when media in both the countries are free of misconceptions and are providing objective information to the relevant quarters. o There is a large Afghan diaspora living in Germany since the past three decades. The planned withdrawal of the NATO forces from Afghanistan is likely to have multiple impacts, both on Afghanistan and Pakistan. Both the countries are in close geographical proximity and that fact warrants close and suspicion-free ties between the two nations. Journalists from Germany and Pakistan can play a significant role in becoming harbingers of peace and cooperation between the two neighbours. o For Pakistan, a lot of problems arise out of the misconceptions about Pakistan and its people in the West. Germany, being a strong European Union member, and a world economic powerhouse, can help to portray an effective perception of Pakistan through the German public and private sector media. This will be possible when journalists from both countries meet and dialogue frequently. According to the German journalist, Heike Vowinkel, I met a [Pakistani] law student who told me how open-minded her parents had brought her up. That she had always been able do what her brothers had done and to choose on her own what she wanted. Her father, a military man, was dead and her two brothers had joined the 24

25 army. She longed for change, for less influence of the military and more democracy. Such encounters on a greater and more frequent level will hopefully bring about a change of opinion in the German media and public opinion regarding Pakistan. The Taliban issue also plays a huge role in creating a negative image of Pakistan. The USA and its allies (including Germany) have a certain point of view, which vastly differs from the Pakistani narrative. It is easier for outsiders to apply their own contextual yardstick in condemning or criticising or even appreciating something playing out in as complex a situation as it currently obtains in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Yet, it is equally necessary to explain to them the local context which often enforces unholy compromises among stakeholders. For example, Ejaz Haider, a security analyst, columnist and TV anchorperson, expressing his views during the 2011 Pakistan-German media dialogue, stated that the US reaction on the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon was not fitting. Opportunities and signals to resolve the post-9/11 situation without the huge military intervention in Afghanistan and the USA s drone attacks in Pakistan have not been taken seriously by the USA. He said the failure of the USG policies is reflected by the worsening security situation in Afghanistan. On the other hand, the presence of German soldiers in Afghanistan as well as the stream of news surrounding the killings of ISAF soldiers there also influences the coverage of these events and by implication shapes the views of the German public. Marcus Pindur, editor at Deutschland Radio in Berlin, also resonated this point during the discussions. He said that the German public s views about Pakistan had changed over the years and had become more negative since 2005, and especially so, after the finding and killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan in May In the German public opinion, their tax money supports a corrupt Pakistani government, which offers unofficial assistance to 25

26 terrorists and extremists, who are killing German soldiers fighting in Afghanistan. The Heinrich Böll Stiftung, is therefore, thankful to the Federal Foreign Office for supporting such an endeavour in the spirit of promoting inter-institutional professional dialogue among nations which invariably facilitates better understanding of respective sociopolitical contexts. 26

27 Introduction: Dialogue 2013 Throughout much of the year 2013, policy-makers, strategic forecasters, intellectuals, academia and politicians inter alia, particularly in the leading NATO countries such as the United States, Canada, Germany, the United Kingdom, Netherlands, France, as well as Australia and Japan, remained busy in grappling with several questions surrounding the post-pullout future of Afghanistan. Against this backdrop, the Heinrich Böll Stiftung, Pakistan, too, decided to dedicate the 2013 Pakistan-German Media Dialogue to the same key issues. One of the considerations was to help Pakistani and German media representatives better understand their respective views on Pakistan and Afghanistan. Pakistan s image in the German media is often defined by news flashes of violence, continuous instability, alleged abetment of and support for Afghan and Kashmiri militants, the predominance of military in the uneasy civil-military relations and Islamabad s alleged historical pursuit for a client state Afghanistan in its strategic backyard. The idea behind the media dialogue was also to help senior journalists and opinion-makers scrutinize or articulate certain issues flowing from state policies in a more detailed intellectual way, and try removing misperceptions and there are plenty. These discussions were meant to be different from the cursory treatment that news and views related to Pakistan and Afghanistan get in the German media. As it turned out, the dialogue did help in removing misperceptions and facilitated a candid exchange of views, enriched with the participation of some leading Pakistani and Afghan civil and military officials both retired and serving as well academia and intellectuals. 27

28 Executive Summary The impending withdrawal of the NATO and ISAF troops from Afghanistan in December 2014 poses an enormous challenge for the region and especially for Pakistan. The relationship between the two neighbors is characterized by deep-rooted mistrust and missteps. Pakistani participants expressed the fear of an increased spill-over of the Afghan conflict into their own territory with further impetus to religious radicalization once the bulk of the foreign forces leave Afghanistan. Afghan guest speakers reiterated the popular notion that Pakistan continues to view their country as a possible client state with a pliant regime installed in Kabul with the help of the Taliban. Afghans also sounded convinced that Pakistan is still using the Taliban as its military assets as part of its efforts to secure strategic depth on its western border. A number of Pakistanis agreed with this notion but others disputed this cliché because of its relevance in the post-9/11 scenario. They believed that the policy of so-called Strategic Depth to the western borders is long dead in view of the new circumstances. 2 Such misgivings are deeply entrenched and often hard to rub off from public minds, particularly because they often resonate in the respective national media. This reiteration not only fuels bilateral tensions but also plays out in the foreign media coverage of the two countries. German media is no exception either. Much of its reporting on Pakistan and Afghanistan draws on clichés and often superficial analysis drawn on local media resources. In Germany, the public image of both the neighbouring countries is dominated by stereotypes and an almost exclusive focus of reporting on the violent conflict and human rights violations, ignoring other developments and issues. Since both Pakistan and Afghanistan will most likely remain the focus of public and media attention in Germany because of the diminishing 2 28 The theory of so-called Strategic Depth, coined in the mid-1970s by then Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, was a concept that grew out of Pakistan s acrimonious relationship with its eastern neighbour India. The primary idea behind this was to have a friendly government in Kabul so Islamabad should not have to worry about its western border in case of an armed conflict with India.

29 role of the Federal German Army in Afghanistan 2014, the HBS thought it fit to put leading opinion makers from all three countries across the table in a trilateral media dialogue. It essentially aimed at bringing journalists from Pakistan and Germany together, in order to sensitize them on broader issues of the region and try purging their discourse from stereotypical biases and superficial analysis on the future of the region beyond A few journalists and experts from Afghanistan were also invited to give their inputs, in order to balance and present a holistic perspective. 29

30 30 Panel Discussion I

31 Is a political solution with the Taliban possible? This panel discussion brought together speakers such as Humayun Shah Asefi, Vice-Presidential candidate in 2009 (Afghanistan), Senator Afrasiab Khattak (Awami National Party), Daniyal Aziz, Member National Assembly (PML-N), Faisal Sabzwari, Member National Assembly (Muttahida Qaumi Movement), and Allama Hafiz Tahir Mahmood Ashrafi, Chairman Pakistan Ulema Council. One of the most recurring thoughts that echoed during this heated panel discussion was that some warring groups in Afghanistan could perhaps be isolated from the hardcore Taliban (i.e. those linked to al- Qaeda), by redressing their practical grievances through good governance and creation of economic opportunities. Some participants argued that the Taliban were a stakeholder in Afghan peace and should be included in any future dialogue process. Yet others dismissed the idea of talking to those who have been killing even their own people. During the discussion, most of the speakers cautioned against foreign-imposed solutions and underscored the need for the Afghans to themselves decide their future. The media also got a snub during this session, when the Afghan participants in particular urged it to help remove misunderstandings between Pakistan and Afghanistan, rather than stoking fears, uncertainty and pushing respective establishments agendas. Humayun Shah Asefi, who was a vice-presidential candidate in the 2009 Afghan election recounted the sufferings of Afghans since the Soviet invasion of his country in December 1979 and said all Afghans were fed up with the perennial state of uncertainty. They want peace and economic opportunities Asefi also ruled out the possibility of Taliban returning to power after withdrawal of the US troops, saying that things have changed tremendously and majority of Afghans, the younger generation in particular, are against religious extremist forces such as the Taliban. He reiterated that for Afghans, Pakistan is an important country and 31

32 similarly Afghanistan is that important for Pakistan. Both however need to remove misunderstandings and the trust deficit by increasing people-to-people contacts and exchange of delegations of politicians and media from both the countries. Asefi also dismissed as wishful thinking the oft-repeated notion of a friendly government in Kabul. Pakistan should stop dreaming of a puppet government in Kabul. "I think it must be very clear to everyone...a friendly government in Afghanistan is possible but an obedient government [as a result of reconciliation process] is just wishful thinking," Asefi said, adding that it is high time that everybody should realise their past mistakes and recognise Afghanistan as an independent and sovereign state. Asefi, however, sounded optimistic with regard to the government of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. The establishment of a new government in Pakistan in June this year does signal signs of hope for peace in Afghanistan and we hope Pakistani government will do whatever it can for peace in Afghanistan. In his address to the participants, Senator Afrasiab Khan Khattak of the Awami National Party (ANP) drew comparisons between the situation of the late 1980s, when most of the world had practically disengaged and left Afghanistan on its own, and the circumstances in 2013, when most of the leading nations such as the United States, UN, China, India and Turkey were actively engaged in Afghanistan s peace, security and reconstruction efforts. And this has helped Afghanistan undergo several transitions such as general and presidential elections, institution-building and greater enrolment of boys and girls in educational institutions, and advances in telecom. The emergence of national security forces, i.e. Afghan National Army and the Afghan Police, too, marked a big step forward that has happened with the support of the friendly countries. This will work as a bulwark against the Taliban, Khattak underlined. He also brushed aside the argument by some Pakistani officials and intellectuals that the Taliban could not be defeated in Afghanistan. 32

33 "If some Taliban are living in Islamabad how they can be defeated in Kabul, Khattak quipped in a reference to allegations by the Afghan government that most Taliban leaders were sheltering in Islamabad and other Pakistani cities. The real issue between Pakistan and Afghanistan is not the border management but the outsourcing of the border [Pak-Afghan border] to the (Taliban) militants. 3 Khattak, too, advocated an inclusive solution after an intra-afghan consultation but warned against an externally imposed solution. This will not work, he emphasized. Khattak, himself a nationalist Pakhtoon, pointed out how the social media was helping the much-more aware and sensitized educated youth in acquiring and disseminating knowledge. Another major difference in today s Afghanistan, Khattak explained, was that unlike the ideological polarization that had emerged in the 1980s (following the Soviet Union s invasion and occupation of Afghanistan) such as Islam versus Communism, the country today has more space for a liberal debate and national reconciliation. He called for comprehensive confidence-building measures (CBMs) between Kabul and Islamabad to deal with a number of serious security and political issues that continue to threaten stability in Afghanistan. Pakistani state institutions must try to erase the common perception that Pakistan was supporting the Taliban insurgents. This requires firm action and demonstrable commitment and that can do wonders if Pakistanis managed to convince their Afghan counterparts that they have no favourites in Afghanistan. Daniyal Aziz, member of the national legislature, representing the ruling Pakistan Muslim League (PML-N), spoke on the wider geostrategic factors that he said would determine peace in Afghanistan, not the Taliban, religious bigotry or the so-called strategic depth mantra. He said the western powers were still holding their vision for the future Afghanistan close to their chest. Unless they come out 3 Most of the 2,560 km border between Pakistan and Afghanistan is porous and largely unmanned. Pakistan claims to maintain some 970 border security posts, compared to less than 200 on the Afghan side. Afghan officials claim that Taliban militants move across the border unhindered and unchecked by the Pakistani security forces. 33

34 openly with their vision, Pakistan should not be expected to do more and adopt a hands-off policy, he added. Hafiz Mohammad Tahir Mahmood Ashrafi, Chairman of the Pakistan Ulema Council, a liberal cleric and very vocal on minorities rights, said any dialogue for a political solution to the Afghan issue would be futile without the participation of the Taliban who had a strong support in the country. That is why they have survived for so long and been able to inflict losses on Afghan and international forces. They have a cause to which many Afghans subscribe, he said. He claimed that it was because of the grass-roots support enjoyed by the Taliban led by Mullah Omar that the western powers wanted to engage them in the dialogues. If the US occupied Pakistan we will do the same as what the Afghan Taliban Chief Mullah Omar is doing in Afghanistan," Ashrafi said in defence of the Mullah Omar-led insurgency. He however rejected the presence of Mullah Omar in Pakistan, or the existence of the Quetta Shura. He also had a word of advice for both Kabul and Islamabad: Things could become better if Pakistan stops considering Afghanistan as its fifth province and Afghanistan refrains from treating Pakistan the way India treats Pakistan, Ashrafi said. Faisal Sabzwari, the MQM legislator, said Pakistan must prioritize solutions to its own problems. The government must invest in its own people rather than remaining obsessed with a policy that has led Pakistan down a disastrous path. Backing groups such as the Taliban will take Pakistan nowhere. They do not hold any promise for this country. On the contrary, Sabzwari underlined, they represent obscurantism which will only hurt Pakistan. Most of participants, however, sounded skeptical of a peaceful political resolution in Afghanistan in view of the surging Taliban insurgency and the stalled peace process since the Afghan government s rejection of the Taliban office in Doha, Qatar in June, Nor did they see any hope for de-escalation in the TTP-led 4 4 TTP stands for Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, an anti-state group formed by Baitullah Mehsud in December 2007 in South Waziristan (Mehsud regions). The 34

35 violence in Pakistan. Some elements within the Afghan and Pakistani Taliban, opined Pakistani participants, might become part of the mainstream through sustained and coordinated efforts, but they also cautioned against equating the Afghan Taliban with their Pakistani counterparts. They drew a distinction between the Afghan and Pakistani Taliban. The former, they said, justify their insurgency by calling it a jihad against the US-led occupation forces. The Pakistani Taliban, the TTP in particular, are on the other hand challenging the state of Pakistan, asking it to sever its ties with the United States and its allies. In doing so, the TTP has ratcheted up unprecedented violence across Pakistan. Yet, on the face of it, both the Afghan and the Pakistani Taliban appear to be focused on the singular agenda of imposing their brand of Islam on the rest. Some of the speakers, while sharing their concerns regarding the government s peace overtures towards the Pakistani Taliban, argued that offering talks to the TTP would only embolden the TTP 5 and lend it socio-political legitimacy. They argued that the TTP never displayed seriousness in a peaceful solution, and, in fact, have made it clear time and again, that they are not interested in any dialogue with any democratically elected government of the country. 5 group demands enforcement of Sharia all over Pakistan. It owes allegiance to Afghan Taliban chief Mullah Omar but is largely focused on targeting Pakistan s security establishment. It also rejects the present political dispensation as well as the Constitution of Pakistan as un-islamic. Soon after becoming the third time prime minister, Nawaz Sharif had hinted at talks with the banned TTP in an effort to end violence 35

36 36 Panel Discussion II

37 Perspectives on Media in Pakistan-Afghanistan- Germany Senior Pakistani journalists M. Ziauddin (Editor-in-Chief, daily The Express Tribune), Imtiaz Gul (Political Analyst, Columnist weekly The Friday Times) and Hasnain Kazim, (former Pakistan correspondent for the most influential German weekly magazine Der Spiegel) gave their perspectives on the evolution of media in Pakistan, with particular emphasis on the phenomenal growth of the electronic media since 2002, when private radio and tv channels increased phenomenally. Speakers also shared their views on the role of media regarding the conflict in Afghanistan, and the overall security situation in the region. The speakers said that despite some gaps and weaknesses, the media overall continued to play an important role in generating and shaping crucial debates on issues such as security, religious militancy, conflict-induced humanitarian crisis, and the democratic transition. M. Ziauddin recounted the journalists struggle for preserving their professional freedoms in the country s history, particularly under military regimes since October 1958, when General Ayub Khan imposed Martial Law and suspended all liberties. His successors, General Yahya Khan ( ) and General Zia-ul-Haq ( ), too, treated the media with authoritarian disdain, exposing media houses and working journalists to harsh conditions of censorship and reprisals. The veteran journalist likened the three military dictatorships to dark ages for the press also chronicled in a landmark book The Press in Chains by the late journalist Zamir Niazi. Mr. Ziauddin underlined that the press had won its freedom at high cost and did not get it on a platter. However, while pressures continue and the uneasy civil-military relations also reflect on the media and keep casting their shadows on the print and electronic media, yet the Pakistani press as a whole has come a long way in the last decade or so. In his presentation on the Pakistani media landscape, Hasnain Kazim gave his impressions as a German correspondent based in Pakistan 37

38 until early Kazim sounded very dismissive of the media in general for poor standards of journalism. He listed several shortcomings in the print and electronic media, such lack of professionalism, little investigative journalism, and casual or scant follow-up of important stories and dearth of human resource development within the industry itself. By doing so, Mr. Kazim threw light on the Pakistani media in general. In response to Mr. Kazim, Imtiaz Gul took up from where M. Ziauddin left off. Gul, also a former correspondent for Germany s overseas broadcaster Deutsche Welle, disputed Kazim s generalizations about the Pakistani media. He agreed that the media at large suffered from shortcomings but reminded the participants that journalists in Pakistan owed their freedoms greatly to committed veterans like renowned poet Faiz Ahmad Faiz (a former editor of The Pakistan Times), M. Ziauddin, Husain Naqi, I. A. Rehman, Zamir Niazi, Minhaj Barna, Aziz Siddiqui, Nasir Zaidi, and so many others who gave their blood and sweat to protect journalistic freedoms from ruthless dictatorial assaults. Pakistanis are proud of these journalists for having stood up to autocratic military and civilian rulers, Gul underlined, and agreed that, like other fields of life, media, too, does suffer from weaknesses and there was still a huge room for improvement. (For more details on Pakistani media s evolution and its current situation please see the Annexure on Pakistani Media) 38

39 Panel Discussion III 39

40 Changing perception of Pakistan Army? Participants experienced a very lively debate on this controversially complex issue. Retired army officers, Maj. Gen. Ithar Hussain Shah, Gen. (retd.) Asad Durrani, Gen. (retd.) Talat Masood and Gen. (retd.) Agha Farooq gave their views on whether perceptions of the army have changed over time. Veteran journalist Hussain Naqi and the head of the Institute of Strategic Studies (ISSI) Dr. Rasul Baksh Rais spoke from their civilian perspective on the issue, particularly to the context of former president Gen. Pervez Musharraf s resignation in August Most agreed that the civil-military equation was gradually correcting itself under the democratic transition since Musharraf s departure. Relatively peaceful elections in May 2013, followed by the retirement of former army chief General Pervez Kayani in November, and of Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry in December 2013 marked huge steps forward in the country s volatile political history. They concluded that it is a good sign that the military is backing the initiatives taken by the civilian government with regard to peace and security in the region. Regardless of whether by compulsion or by choice, the General Headquarters (GHQ) meanwhile is a less aggressive institution in view of a more assertive judiciary, vibrant independent media and a grand political consensus against army take-overs. Guest speakers, however, were unanimous in admitting that because of its long history of involvement in politics direct interventions or otherwise the military in Pakistan remained a pre-dominant player which is more organized, unified and clear in its objectives, unlike political parties which suffer from dynastic, elitist style of leadership. While political parties endlessly talk of democracy, the conduct of their leaders defies fundamental democratic norms, with the result that these parties have little room for a genuine and inclusive democratic debate. That is why, speakers maintained, while being on the defensive, the military remained very much in control of strategic foreign policy 40

41 issues such as relations with India, USA and Afghanistan. Some were of the view that the military needed to stay within its institution and not step into something for which they had no training. During the proceedings, different perceptions emerged about the future of Afghanistan in the wake of the withdrawal of the NATO/ISAF troops from Afghanistan in Some speakers were quite optimistic about the promising future of, and stability in Afghanistan, while others feared Afghanistan may once again descend into chaos once the foreign troops depart. The withdrawal of foreign troops may also pose an enormous challenge for the entire region, not just for Pakistan and Afghanistan. Unfortunately, the relationship between these two neighbouring countries has been characterized by deep-rooted mistrust that needs to be addressed bilaterally. Some also pointed out that the acrimonious Indo-Pakistan relations also reflect in their respective policies on Afghanistan, where both countries seem to be fighting for political clout. Besides the public panel discussions, the Dialogue also included inter active lectures by key officials serving and retired on subjects such as: a) Afghanistan then and now: How the country has changed after the end of the Taliban regime b) Beyond Strategic Depth: The Pakistani government and its critics c) Talking with the Taliban - Does Imran Khan s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) have a concept? d) What does the Pakistan Army want? These particular sessions on December 5 and 6 were preceded by a stage-setting background session of the German visitors with Ambassador Dr. Cyril Nunn, and followed by lectures by Aizaz Chaudhry, the Foreign Secretary, Sherry Rehman (Former Ambassador to Washington, and ex-legislator of Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), Maj. General Athar Abbas, former spokesperson for the Pakistan armed forces (ISPR), and Mian Khurshid Kasuri, Former Foreign Minister. 41

42 Much of the discussion that flowed from these sessions contained a lot of information and ideas that resonated during the public panel discussions too. But the idea behind these sessions was to enable the German journalists get incisive background and critical analysis in the small group of participants. Pakistani military establishment s decades-old theory of strategic depth drew quite a lot of adverse comments from participants such as Hussain Naqi etc. They likened the idea of strategic depth to an illusion which had created more problems for Pakistan than helping it. Foreign Secretary Chaudhry as well as retired Generals Athar Abbas, Ithar Hussein, Talat Masood and Asad Durrani, however, disagreed with their civilian counterparts, saying that the theory of strategic depth had long lost its relevance because of the drastically changed circumstances. The Pakistani army is not oblivious to the changed geo-strategic environment and would be stupid to continue pursuing goals set in the 1970s in a radically changed world in 2014, Gen. Abbas observed. Others, too, insisted that Afghans had always been their own masters and gullible to external pressure or persuasion only when it suits them. And this reality essentially precludes the possibility of an obedient or client government in Kabul, they insisted. Civilian critics in Pakistan, and key stakeholders in Afghanistan, though refused to accept that the strategic pulse of the Pakistani military has changed. They accused it of being duplicitous when it comes to drawing a distinction between good Taliban (those who cooperate and do not damage Pakistani interests), and the bad Taliban (those who refuse to talk and continue to attack Pakistani political and economic interests). 42

43 Conclusion The two dialogues between the journalists of Germany and Pakistan (2011 and 2013) provided excellent opportunities for both to gain new insights and awareness about each other, and the challenges they face. Both were appreciative of the importance of such a meeting of minds where they were able to discuss threadbare issues of common interest and also dissected the problems that often arise out of ignorance or little knowledge about each other. The German media is one of the most robust and diverse in the world. In Germany, the media has gone full circle since the end of the Second World War and the society is fully cognizant of the importance of a fully independent and responsible media. Their counterparts in Pakistan are very recent entrants and are still on the learning curve as regards media independence and freedom. The Pakistani print media (and now including the privately-owned electronic media since the past decade), on the other hand, has weathered a large number of crises since Independence in And, since the opening up of the privately-owned electronic media in 2002, the media landscape has undergone dramatic changes, albeit not necessarily always for the better. Its unprecedented freedom has allowed a huge space for debate, but there are also some glaring errors of editorial judgment being made. This hard-won freedom has been abused as well. Some journalists, anchorpersons and owners of media houses unfortunately have abused their position as a licence to act as lobbyists and activists, posing as public representatives. Their owners, driven mainly by commercial pursuits, or orthodox ideological leanings, have also tended to exploit their own platforms, more as a private enterprise than as professionals. Yet, on the whole, the private media has emerged as a strong voice. It does serve as a watchdog over the government, as well as a valuable platform for debate on all kinds of issues. It requires moderation, and more focus on social issues vs. politics or sensationalist news 43

44 presentation. It is still evolving, and has yet to mature as a responsible medium. Continued interaction with foreign journalists can serve as a moderating effect on leading media managers, journalists and writers, and thereby help raise professional standards. Similarly, if the German-Pakistan Media Dialogue succeeds in driving the above issues home, it would have carried out an important service. Positive feedback from the returning German media persons will help to spread awareness of Pakistan s improving record regarding the media s freedom of expression and rights, as well as of the issues it faces. Such bilateral dialogues need to continue and to be expanded both within the EU and within the SAARC and other regions too. The dialogues also highlight the need for training Pakistani journalists abroad, or through exposure trips which can be extremely beneficial in broadening their horizons, and improving their professional skills such as data collection, research, analysis, objective presentation and balanced moderating, as well as gaining new perspectives on globally important and emerging international issues. The following comments by some of the participants also underscore the utility of media dialogues: The Pak-German Media Dialogue shall hopefully become a regular annual feature and would further create better understanding between Pakistan and a strong European actor Germany: Shah Mahmood Qureshi former Foreign Minister 44

45 The media dialogue would result in better understanding for senior journalists of both the countries Pakistan and Germany: Ahsan Iqbal Deputy Secretary-General PML-N Federal Minister since June 2013 I returned to Germany well inspired and with a broadband of impressions and information. The openness of our discussions was impressive and rewarding. I didn't regret any of the many missed hours of sleep: Theo Koll, Head of Political Section and Current Affairs, ZDF TV, Mainz The discussions were frank and honest and that is how media people should discuss issues. Marcus Pindur set the tone of the proceedings by candidly and provocatively telling us how Pakistan is perceived in Germany. The dialogue was interesting and engaging: Rahimullah Yousufzai, Resident Editor The News, Peshawar Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the Pakistani-German media dialogue. I enjoyed the time with our dear Pakistani friends and colleagues very much. It provided me with a new and unique insight about your wonderful country that will surely have a positive impact on my work here in Germany: Jan Marberg, Deputy Editor of Federal German Army s news magazine "Y" 45

46 The two-day interaction offered me insights into many issues and I am grateful to Heinrich Böll Stiftung for that: Ejaz Haider, Security Analyst, Columnist and tv anchor It was a perfectly organised event: Ines Zöttl, In charge Foreign Affairs Financial Times, Berlin Thanks for the opportunity. It was an enlightening session: Farah Zia, Editor, The News-on-Sunday, Islamabad It was a truly inspiring time. I am looking forward to continuing those discussions soon: Daniel Dylan Böhmer, Pakistan Editor daily Die Welt, Berlin I agree with what Shah Mahmood Qureshi has said that hopefully this dialogue will become a regular feature. I found the dialogue most helpful: Omar Quraishi, Editor Editorial Pages The Express Tribune, Karachi Impressive days and discussions in Lahore: Peter Riesbeck, Ressortleiter Politik, daily Berliner Zeitung 46

47 Hats off to HBS both for excellent visualizing of such a conference and realizing it. Britta and her team did a commendable job while we are especially grateful to the German journalists for making it so special: Naveed Ahmad Investigative Journalist, Islamabad 47

48 Annexure I Pakistani Media in Historical Perspective At the time of independence in 1947, only four major newspapers existed in the area now called Pakistan: Pakistan Times, Zamindar, Nawa-i-Waqt, and the Civil and Military Gazette. A number of other newspapers owned by Muslims re-located to Pakistan from India, including the English language daily, Dawn, which began publishing in Karachi in 1947, along with the Morning News, and the Urdu-language dailies: Jang and Anjaam. By the year 2000, 1,500 newspapers and journals were being published in Pakistan, which dropped to 945 in After the low point in 2003, however, the number of publications grew again to 1,997 in 2005 but went down to 1,467 in This number stood at around 1,820 in 2007, and declined to 1,199 in 2008 underscoring the precipitation that the print industry faces the world over. Pakistani newspapers and magazines are published in 11 languages; mostly in Urdu and Sindhi, but English-language publications are also numerous, albeit with low circulation figures. Most of the print media are privately owned, but the government still runs and controls the Associated Press of Pakistan (APP), one of the major news agencies. From 1964 into the early 1990s, the National Press Trust (NPT) acted as the governmental mechanism for controlling the press. As of 2014, the state, however, no longer publishes daily newspapers. Understanding the Context The evolution of the Pakistani print and electronic media, one must bear in mind, is the fruit of decades of bold, sincere and committed journalism of several selfless professional journalists. That is why a look back into the political history of the country is unavoidable to understand the political strains, organizational limitations and 48

49 professional shortcomings of the Pakistani media. For roughly 34 years out of the 67 years since its creation, the military has directly or otherwise ruled Pakistan. This has had a direct bearing on the evolution of democratic institutions and social behaviour as well as on the media. The usual lack of, or less tolerance for difference of opinion and aversion even to constructive criticism has been one of the consequences of the military-led authoritarian rule, marked by censorship and muzzling draconian laws. Consequently, the societal tendencies have not been fully inclined towards accommodating freedom of expression, pluralism and diversity. Right from the start of Field Marshal General Ayub Khan s capture of political power in 1958, the media s journey in Pakistan has been uphill. The Ayub decade was replete with instances where private sector print media editors and journalists were imprisoned for criticising the regime. Properties were confiscated, printing presses were forcibly closed down, and trade unions were threatened, and even banned. One way of gauging the deviant voices used to be the cancellation of publication permission, i.e. the licences. Following President Ayub Khan s fall in 1968, his successor President General Yahya Khan, too, imposed severe restrictions on the print media. The worst was yet to come. General Zia-ul-Haq, then Chief of Army Staff, staged a military coup d état in July 1977, ousted the elected Prime Minister, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, and imposed martial law in the country. Zia s oppressive rule continued until August 1988, when his airplane crashed in mysterious circumstances inside Pakistan. During his tyrannical rule, Pakistan experienced the worst years of brutal state oppression and obscurantism in the guise of Islamization. Journalists were jailed, some publicly flogged for dissent, and brutally tortured. Zia and his cronies took official censorship of the media to new levels, forcing opposition newspapers to leave blank spaces when army officials would not clear certain news items. The state-controlled print and electronic media was not different from the communist era European countries where they would always heap praise on the shrewd General and cover only 49

50 government activities, with no space for political dialogue, debate or dissent. Political parties, trade unions and students unions were banned. History, Islamic Studies and Urdu language textbooks were re-written to distort Muslim history, and to tailor it according to the narrow vision that General Zia personified. He also enforced Islamic Sharia laws through presidential decrees, in 1979 on issues such as (Hudood) evidence (Shahadat), and compensation/settlement (for murder), inter alia. These decrees entailed devastating consequences for women and non-muslim minority communities of Pakistan. At the same time they also underscored the shrinking space for a free media in the oppressive environment. Equally disastrous for the civil liberties and press freedom was the USA- and Saudi-funded Afghan jihad against the former Soviet Union in the 1980s, a partnership that opened floodgates to forces of sectarianism, jihadism, extremism and terrorism from all over the world. During almost a decade of civilian rule after General Zia-ul-Haq s sudden demise in a plane crash in 1988, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif took turns as Prime Minister. This also marked a relative freedom for the media in general, more obvious in the Bhutto tenures. In October 1999, Pakistan witnessed another military coup, this time by General Pervez Musharraf (then Chief of Army Staff), who deposed Mian Nawaz Sharif, accusing him of corruption and gross misconduct as the chief executive. Unlike his predecessors, General Musharraf found himself constrained on the one hand by an ever growing cyber age, and by an unavoidable global proliferation of satellite tv on the other. Driven by the desire for acceptance and international recognition as a liberal General, Musharraf gave in to the growing chorus of demands for free private electronic media in 2002, heralding thereby the era of private satellite tv in Pakistan, which, as of 2014, has 50

51 become a vibrant and vocal voice, which no government can afford to ignore or gag. The state and extent of Pakistani electronic media s freedom drew admiring remarks even from the renowned US intellectual, Noam Chomsky: I spent three weeks in India and a week in Pakistan. A friend of mine, (Professor) Eqbal Ahmed, told me that I would be surprised to find that the media in Pakistan is more open, free and vibrant than that in India. In Pakistan, I listened to and read the media which go out to an increasingly large part of the population. Apparently, the government, no matter how repressive it is, is willing to say to them that you have your fun; we are not going to bother you. So they don t interfere with it reported on Oct 25,

52 The Current Situation of the Media in Pakistan As a whole, the independent Pakistani electronic media has grown in strength and size since liberalization in from just three stateowned and state-run tv channels in 2000 to almost 100 privatelyowned channels in 2014, according to the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA), a content watchdog. Nearly 100 private FM radio channels, beside a dozen or so state-owned AM and FM channels also demonstrate the rapid growth of the electronic media in Pakistan. According to market surveys during 2013, the Geo News channel is the market leader (among the private TV channels), with a 24% market share, followed by Samaa (11.9%). In case of entertainment, ARY Digital is leading the market with a share of 23.6% followed by Urdu1 (20.4%). In the music category, 8XM is leading, with 63.3%, followed by Play channel at 11.3%. 52

53 SoS Data/Graphics Source: December

54 With channels broadcasting in Urdu, Sindhi, Seraiki, Balochi, and Pashto as well as English (PTV), the Pakistani electronic media is clearly, aimed at the multi-linguistic, multi-ethnic, multi-sectarian, and class-divided society. There, however, is a clear divide between the Urdu and English language media. The Urdu language media, particularly the newspapers, are widely read by the masses - mostly in the rural areas, and are mostly right-leaning. The English language media is mostly urban and elite-centric, and is more progressive, liberal, secular and professional. The English print, television and radio channels have far smaller audiences than their Urdu counterparts, but yet they have disproportionately greater leverage among the opinion makers, politicians, professionals, the business community, and the upper income strata of society. Pakistan's media sector is highly influenced by the ownership structure. There are a few dominating media moguls, or large media groups, which, to some extent, also have political affiliations. Due to their dominance in both the print and electronic media these media groups are very influential in politics and society. While the concept and spirit of the media s freedom of expression is enshrined and protected in the Pakistan Constitution, Articles 19 and 19-A, a huge debate is raging both within and beyond the media in Pakistan on the nature and quantum of freedom, in terms of the media wanting unfettered licence vs. the necessity of certain restrictions based on globally accepted Codes of Ethics and Conduct. Never before until 2002 did the viewers get a chance to witness the grilling of politicians, retired generals and bureaucrats live at the hands of TV talk show hosts and anchors. Pakistani audiences were not previously exposed to daring drama themes, music and fashion shows. In a conservative milieu, whose foundations were laid during the repressive Zia era, the electronic media, especially entertainment, was expected to be compliant with traditional orthodox societal norms. Ever since the inception of privately-owned radio and television channels in the new millennium, things have changed dramatically; from news to politics to drama to fashion, the content has undergone immense change. Views and opinions are expressed boldly in live 54

55 political talk shows and even once taboo topics are discussed during prime time TV plays. TV anchors have created their own niches and are able to often dictate their agendas the channel owners. Many have a huge following, and thereby the possibility to influence them too. One of the manifestations of the shift via electronic media was seen in the popular movement of lawyers and civil society for the restoration of the independent judiciary ( ), when the government was forced to restore the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and his senior colleagues. The private media, in tandem with lawyers, human rights activists and civil society, mobilized public opinion to such an extent that the sustained pressure forced the government to give in and back down. Most of this went live on almost all private tv channels. Code of Conduct? However, unlike USA, Canada, or the European countries, Pakistani electronic media lacks institutional structures, a well-defined and self-imposed Code of Conduct and Ethics, along with a universally accepted ratings system. Thus, tv channels at times behave recklessly just to muster up ratings and boost commercials, and often this happens at the cost of fundamental journalistic norms. Such care-free, commercially-driven conduct at times also invites reaction by institutions; the targeted attack, in April 2014, on the Jang/Geo media group s prominent journalist and anchorperson, Hamid Mir, is a case in point. Within minutes of the incident, Mir s family held the head of the intelligence, i.e. Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) responsible for the attack. Geo TV quickly jumped in to broadcast the claims, and for well over seven hours kept repeating those claims, and prominently displayed the photograph of the ISI chief with every related news. The episode triggered a huge controversy and brought fresh strains on the already tense civil-military-media relations. Within 48 hours, several government officials and ministers, followed by the Prime Minister, Mian Nawaz Sharif, visited injured Hamid Mir in his Karachi hospital. This again generated more criticism, and 55

56 resentment, since over 100 journalists and media personnel have lost their lives or have been injured seriously in similar targeted attacks in a decade, yet no Prime Ministers, Chief Ministers or Ministers showed this kind of concern. More importantly, this also angered the military establishment as one of its key leaders (the ISI chief) had been projected by Geo/Jang group as the possible culprit. The military then unleashed its own counter-offensive, using other tv channels for condemning Geo/Jang group. It also petitioned Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA), asking it for punitive action against the private media group for what the Ministry of Defense called objectionable, treasonous matter. It also used indirect means to illegally get the Geo TV off air in most of Pakistan. Following several controversies and deep policy divisions between the civil-military institutions, the Jang/Geo group eventually backtracked and apologized when it was subjected to immense pressure by PEMRA. Officially it was suspended for 15 days with a Rs.10 million penalty, and resumed broadcasting on June 22, As a whole, the entire episode also highlighted the need for selfregulation and responsible journalism. Often, even small events are blown out of proportion, or tv channels start acting as social vigilantes. Reckless and thoughtless campaigns essentially rooted in commercialism adorn tv screens, often disregarding the impact they potentially can have on viewers. The incident also exposed the tensions that accompany the civilmilitary-media relationship. Besides, it also polarized the big media houses, the primary driver being the commercial dividends that other tv channels reaped off the Jang Geo-Military stand-off. Journalists operating in dangerous environment Journalists in Pakistan face multiple pressures, including those from state institutions. Historically, it was the state power, which curbed freedom of speech and attacked journalists. Now journalists are under attack by non-state actors also. Dubbed the second most dangerous country in the world for journalists after Mexico, Pakistan 56

57 has seen the killing of over 100 journalists since Of these 32 were shot dead, eight were kidnapped, three were beheaded and the others died in suicide attacks. Most of the deaths occurred while covering conflicts in the insecure tribal areas of Pakistan, (FATA), Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Balochistan and Karachi. As many as ten journalists were killed in Pakistan in the year 2013, earning the country the tag of being one of the world's deadliest five countries for media personnel. Journalists in the troubled province of Balochistan and the Tribal Areas were mainly the targets of intimidation and violence with impunity sustaining the climate of terror (data source: SAFMA). Media freedom in Pakistan during 2013 also remained constrained by the high levels of violence against tv media outlets like Express, Independent News Pakistan (INP), ARY, Aaj, Geo and Dawn tv channels. A fatwa or religious edict naming certain Pakistani media houses and journalists as enemies of the Mujahedeen was re-issued on 19 October, 2013 in the form of a post on Twitter, greatly increasing the dangers to which they are already exposed. 7 Reporters Without Borders (RSF) listed Pakistan as 151st out of the 178 countries ranked in its 2010 Press Freedom Index. It named Pakistan as one of the "ten countries where it is not good to be a journalist", stating:... in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Mexico, countries either openly at war or in a civil war or some other kind of internal conflict, we see a situation of permanent chaos and a culture of violence and impunity taking root, in which the press has become a favourite target. These are among the most dangerous countries in the world, and the belligerents there pick directly on reporters

58 Operational Hazards: Regulation, Censorship and Commercialism The Pakistani Constitution limits censorship in Pakistan, but allows "reasonable restrictions in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of Pakistan or public order or morality". The armed forces, intelligence agencies, laws and judiciary, and religion are topics that frequently attract unwelcome attention from state institutions. Ironically, both the state institutions as well as big media houses and leading journalists interpret the constitutional limits on censorship, and at times end up abusing it too. State institutions do so because of what they perceive as national or security interests. Sections of the media both print and electronic at times abuse the liberties available to them because they think they would get away with it in the name of media freedom. Both act in disregard of the bitter reality that absolute control of, or absolute freedom of the media practically exists nowhere in the world. Critique of Media Trends in Pakistan The media in Pakistan can take pride in the fact that it is relatively free and carries out its public watchdog functions with great energy, but some negative trends must, however, be highlighted, simply in the interest of a better future. In displays of courage and chivalry, at times journalists get carried away and do not put events in perspective. The hallmark of today s electronic media is the prime time live talk shows on various tv news channels. In a bid to gain higher viewership levels, a large number of TV anchorpersons resort to all sorts of sensationalist tactics to stir up controversies without accountability or responsibility. As a result of this unbridled pursuit of popularity, most audiences are left baffled, since they are not provided with research, data, or any incisive analysis or conclusive thoughts. 1) A lot of analysis by TV anchors is offered on various functions of the State but there is apparently very little research backing this 58

59 activity. The practice of getting political figures with opposing views to clash, and calling it analysis, is simply inadequate if not downright wrong and unethical. The electronic media needs to hire technical experts, instead of using non-expert political figures simply to save money, or to increase viewership. As an owner of a TV channel honestly admitted privately, most TV anchors are provided only with the daily news on which to base their discussions. A lot of analysis by TV anchors is offered on various functions of the State but there is apparently very little research backing this activity. 2) The TV channels and the Urdu press need to discuss the problem of terrorism, extremism and sectarianism in a balanced manner. Opinions purveyed in the Urdu language press still demonstrate an ideological bias and an apologist tendency towards the elements promoting and carrying out militancy and violence. Because of the TV anchors' own vulnerability to punitive action by the terrorists/extremists, many or most of them develop an excessive reactionary tendency to attack the progressive, liberal elements who dare to speak out against terrorism, extremism and sectarianism. A large number of anchors hold the same militant, isolationist and narrow religious narrative as the one more vociferously pleaded by the extremists. Despite ample empirical evidence and the daily killing of innocent people, and attacks on worship places, schools, markets and most sensitive national security installations, many media-persons tend to obfuscate the reality with their speculative presentations, portrayal and conspiracy theories. 3) Isolationism while discussing foreign policy and internal events having international impact, like the attack on Malala Yousafzai, results in confusion, conspiracy theories and farfetched linkages to the war on terror. The moral, social and political consensus needed on such occasions, was thus undermined and the Taliban, who audaciously publicly claimed the responsibility for the ghastly act, were allowed to get away with their incorrigible standpoint with impunity, despite a huge moral loss of the 59

60 militant outfit. Even the positive role of the UN regarding promotion of girls education, was cast in a bad light by some of the more orthodox discussants and presenters. 4) The democratically elected government was exposed to a regular assault in the name of accountability by certain TV anchors, who chose to take sides in the discussions on their own talk shows. The adage of adversarial relationship was taken too far, which exposed the media to accusations of being anti-elected governments, which still remained under the obligation to provide the media an even playing field, and to continue to respect media freedoms and rights. 5) The media inexpertly handled the activism of the superior judiciary and failed in its duty to be non-partisan in hosting informed debate and discourse; particularly on some of the judgements that were more populist and political in nature and created sharp divisions even among the legal community. It accepted without demur the judicial intervention in setting standards of morality and piety in the media, by curtailing entertainment after renaming it obscenity. No objective analysis was made of the inadequacy of the subjective definition of obscenity in a state where people needed entertainment while endangered by terrorism and suffocated by obscurantism. Reporters were allowed undue licence while expounding their own political views, in violation of the ethics of political neutrality and nonpartisanship of the media. 60

61 6) Inadequately researched and misinformed debate was attempted on such matters as price-fixing by the judiciary after an early government failure at fixing the price of sugar. The politicians were pilloried needlessly on the question of oil pricing, while it was obvious that the oil/gasoline prices were pegged to international prices and their being lowered disproportionately to the international exchange value would be disastrous for the country - through higher consumption and unsustainable state subsidies. Even the newscasters were allowed to use such emotive terms as mehngai ka bomb gira diya ( the bomb of higher prices has been dropped ) when the prices of imported fuels went up. Nowhere was media dereliction more observed than in refusing to acknowledge that reduction of the government subsidy was important for the survival of the fragile economy. 61

62 7) The media also erred by not first inquiring into the definition of the term before accusing successive governments of bad governance. No distinction was made about the corruption inherent in the system and its auxiliary personalized variant. No comparison was made in relative terms between governance in the past and governance under conditions of civil war, duress, internal fragmentation and polarization. No doubt the private media should have exposed corruption wherever they found undeniable evidence, but the issue of corruption became an instrument in the hands of unscrupulous elements for mudslinging on the basis of speculation and rumours. 8) The topic of ratings is already bringing negative returns to the media in the shape of viewer cynicism. The biggest flaw in the media is the practice of sensationalism and it is not restricted only to the exaggeration of crime stories through re-enactments. Every act of the government, civil society and well-known personalities is brought under sensational focus, and events are depicted as an outrage against the accepted norms of decency. Almost all news items are subject to this sensationalism. This applies particularly to such events as alleged insults to religion and desecration of holy relics by vulnerable people and communities that cannot defend themselves. But there is inadequate media focus when the same outrage is committed against the religious minorities, e.g., the bombing of a Christian church in Peshawar in September 62

63 2013, or the Rimsha Masih false blasphemy case in Islamabad. 9) Unfortunately, the blackmailing aspects of some TV anchors have come to light and the viewing public has been afforded the sad opportunity to see the phenomenon live on screen. But instead of being subjected to accountability, the offenders have been rewarded with better contracts by rival media groups, in contravention of the voluntary Codes of Ethics and Conduct. 10) Quite ironically, sections of the media are now in the forefront of imposing various kinds of restrictions and censorship on the media on subjectively defined ideological and cultural grounds, negating the concepts of pluralism and diversity. Unfortunately, the blackmailing aspects of some TV anchors have come to light and the viewing public has been afforded the sad opportunity to see the phenomenon live on screen. But instead of being subjected to accountability the offenders have been rewarded with better contracts by rival media groups. 63

64 Some Media-Related Bodies Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) PEMRA was established under the PEMRA Ordinance (law) 2002 to facilitate and regulate the private electronic media. It has the mandate to improve the standards of information, education and entertainment, and to enlarge the choices available to the people of Pakistan, including news, current affairs, religious knowledge, entertainment, art and culture, sports, as well as science and technology. All Pakistan Newspapers Society (APNS) The All Pakistan Newspapers Society is a premier body of newspaper publishers, founded in 1953 with a view to facilitate the exchange of their views on matters of common interest among newspaper owners and to take common positions on those issues. The APNS successfully afforded to newspaper owners the means to watch over, protect, preserve and promote the rights and interests of the newspaper industry on matters directly or indirectly affecting their rights and interests. It became a force to be reckoned with in the publishing and advertising world and laid down rules of conduct for member publications as well as the advertising agencies. The APNS works as a bridge between the newspapers and the advertising agencies and has grown rapidly as a representative body of newspapers and magazines all over the country; in 1971 only about 41 publications were its members, whereas its membership has risen to 402 in 2014, many of them being newspapers and weekly magazines from small towns all over Pakistan. 64

65 In 1999, the APNS prepared a set of press laws including the Draft for the formation of a Press Council in Pakistan, Registration of Printing Presses, and Newspapers Ordinance and a draft Freedom of Information Act. After thorough discussions among the APNS, CPNE and the Ministry of Information, the drafts on the Press Council and the Registration of Presses and Newspapers were finalized and enacted in The APNS is recognized by the International Newspapers community and was accepted as a member by the World Association of Newspapers in Council of Pakistan Newspaper Editors (CPNE) The Council of Pakistan Newspaper Editors (CPNE) has worked since its foundation in 1957 as the representative body of Newspaper Editors in Pakistan, to campaign for the defence of press freedoms and the right of access to information in the service of democratic practice and the strengthening of democratic institutions in the country. The members of this prestigious organization of the newspaper Editors have also formulated and voluntarily adopted a Code of Ethics, which lays down the norms for maintaining the dignity and non-partisan nature of the print media, along with the professional high standards of its member publications, in respect of the publishing of news, views, comments and analysis. Pakistan Broadcasters Association (PBA) The Pakistan Broadcasters Association (PBA) has been set up to offer optimum advantage to all stakeholders of the media industry the media broadcast houses, the advertising agencies, and advertisers alike. Even though all the issues the industry is facing are not common, yet they all feel the impact in one way or another. A system-operated Clearance House makes it imperative for the advertisers to pay their dues in the stipulated time to avoid any inconvenience of disruption in telecasting of their advertisements. Besides the broadcast houses, it provides some protection to the 65

66 advertising agencies and the media buying houses against situations that could arise out of default in payments. Media Logic, a company with working affiliations with the top of the line international players in the field of media research, has been entrusted with the task of TAM - Television Audience Measurement. TV channels rating reports from three metropolitan cities Karachi, Lahore and Rawalpindi are presently available, while expansion is planned for four other cities Peshawar, Bahawalpur, Faisalabad and Sukkur. Besides this, other research tools, such as content audit, programme feedback, and measuring viewer involvement index, are also being examined by the PBA, with a view to being introduced in the near future. Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ) The Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (often referred to as the PFUJ) is the first journalistic association of South Asia, representing journalists of the entire country. The PFUJ was established in 1950 and is affiliated with the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ). The PFUJ is an independent body, having its own constitution, accountability process and a Code to check journalists and their work. 66

67 Annexure II Media in Germany The media in Germany consists of several different types of communications media including television, radio, cinema, newspapers, magazines, and the internet. Many of the media are controlled by large for-profit corporations, reaping revenue from advertising, subscriptions, and the sale of copyrighted material. The German Constitution stipulates that the sole responsibility for broadcasting rests with the Länder of the Federal Republic as part of their "cultural sovereignty". Because of this, the public service broadcasters are a creation of the Länder. They act individually or jointly (in agreements). The exception is the broadcaster Deutsche Welle, based on federal legislation, designed to provide services (radio, TV, online) to foreign countries only. The traditional public service broadcaster is set up as an independent and non-commercial organization, financed primarily by public licence fees. State Regulation and Censorship in Germany The Federal Republic of Germany guarantees freedom of speech, expression, and opinion to its citizens as per Article 5 of the Constitution. Despite this, censorship of various materials has taken place since the western Allied occupation after World War II and continues to take place in Germany in various forms, due to a limiting provision in Article 5, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution. According to the Reporters without Borders (RSF) Press Freedom Index, Germany is currently ranked 17th in the world in terms of press freedom. During the Allied occupation of Germany, the media was controlled by the occupying forces. The policy rationales differed among the occupying powers, but there was resentment in literary and journalistic circles in many parts of the country. Undesired publishing efforts were unilaterally blocked by the occupying forces. 67

68 Since the publication of the German Grundgesetz, there have been two kinds of censored media in Germany. The first is material that is considered offensive or indecent. Such media are placed on the "Index" and restricted in their publication, and distribution to minors is illegal. The second is material that is considered anti-constitutional or dangerous to the State. The underlying concept is "Streitbare Demokratie" (self-defending democracy), that legally hinders the rise of all anti-constitutional and thus undemocratic movements. The concerned media are banned outright, with criminal penalties for infringements. An example is the outright ban on material which supports National Socialism. In May 1949, the German Grundgesetz, the new Constitution, was passed and control of West Germany passed officially into German hands. The Freedom of Expression is granted by Article 5, with certain limits: 1. Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing, and pictures and to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources. Freedom of the press and freedom of reporting by means of broadcasts and films shall be guaranteed. There shall be no censorship. 2. These rights shall find their limits in the provisions of general laws, in provisions for the protection of young persons, and in the right to personal honour. 3. Art and scholarship, research, and teaching shall be free. The freedom of teaching shall not release any person from allegiance to the Constitution. 68

69 Media Landscape of Germany Germany has a very wide range of print media. During the years of the Nazi rule the mass media had become a tool of the regime. In 1945 the media experienced an "hour zero" and started nearly completely anew. The post-war media system was based on the principle of press freedom as stipulated in the Constitution of Germany adopted in There are approximately 354 newspapers in Germany. Together with local editions, there are 1,512 different newspapers. Since the early 1990s, the number and circulation of newspapers in Germany has shown signs of a decline. National Newspapers include BILD, Süddeutsche Zeitung, Frankfurter Allegemeine Zeitung, Welt, Frankfurter Rundschau and Tages Zeitung. There are over 500 radio stations in Germany. Radio stations are licenced by media authorities in individual states, a result of Germany's federal structure. With almost 40 million TV households, with 365 TV channels licenced in Germany and a total market volume of 9,615 million, Germany represents one of the biggest and most diversified TV markets in the world. The strongest revenue segment in Germany is public funding ( 4,430 approximately), followed by advertising ( 4,035 million) and subscription ( 1,150 million). This dominant market position of the public sector and ad-funded free TV channels in Germany explains why the German pay-tv segment is significantly underperforming in an international comparison. 69

70 In terms of total TV viewing market share, Germany's market leaders are ARD with 12.7% and ZDF with 12.5% and the two leading commercial channels (RTL with 12.5% and Sat.1 with 10.4%). The leading pay TV provider is Premiere, which was renamed Sky Germany in early The biggest teleshopping providers in Germany are QVC and HSE24. With 19.8 million TV households, cable is still the dominant TV infrastructure in Germany, followed by satellite (15.7 million TV households) and terrestrial (4.2 million TV households). 70

71 Freedom of Expression in Germany According to Index on Censorship/21 August 2013, the situation with regard to freedom of expression in Germany is largely positive. Freedom of expression is protected by the German Constitution and basic laws. However, there is room for improvement, with Germany s hate speech and libel laws being particularly severe. Germany s biggest limits on freedom of expression are due to its strict hate speech legislation which criminalises any incitement to violence or hatred. Germany has particularly strict laws on the promotion or glorification of Nazism, or Holocaust denial with paragraph 130(3) of the German Criminal Code stipulating that those who publicly or in an assembly approve, deny, or trivialize the Holocaust are liable to up to five years in prison or a monetary fine. Hate speech also extends to insulting segments of the population or a national, racial or religious group, or one characterised by its ethnic customs. Germany has strict provisions in the Criminal Code providing penalties for defamation of the President, insulting the Federal Republic, its states, the flag, and the national anthem. However, in 2000, the Federal Constitutional Court stated that even harsh political criticism, however unjust, does not constitute insulting the Republic. The criminal code however remains in place. Freedom of religious expression is regulated through anti-blasphemy laws criminalizing offences related to religion and ideology. Paragraph 166 of the Criminal Code prohibits defamation against a church or other religious or ideological association within Germany, or their institutions or customs. While very few people (just 10) have been convicted under the blasphemy legislation since 1969, the impact of hate speech legislation is seen more frequently, in particular in the prosecution of religious offences. 71

72 In 2006, a pensioner in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia was given a one-year suspended sentence for printing The Holy Koran on toilet paper, and sending it to 22 mosques and Muslim community centres. In 2011, 9 of the 18 operators of the far right online radio programme Resistance Radio were given between 21 months and three years in prison for inciting hatred. Germany has also seen heated debates over a widespread ban on religious symbols in public workplaces, especially affecting Muslim women who wear headscarves, which limits, as a result, their freedom of religious expression. Half of Germany s 16 states have, to various extents, banned teachers and civil servants from wearing religious symbols at work. Yet this is not applied equally to all religions, as five states have made exceptions for Christian religious symbols. 72

73 Media Freedom in Germany Government and political interference in the German media continues to raise concerns for media independence, with several incidents of interventions by politicians attempting to influence editorial policy. In 2009, Nikolaus Brender, the Chief Editor of a public service broadcaster, ZDF, had his contract terminated by a board featuring several politicians from the ruling Christian Democratic Union. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) labelled it a blatant violation of the principle of independence of public broadcasters. In 2011, the editor of Bild, the country s biggest newspaper, received a voic message from President Christian Wulff, who threatened war on the tabloid, which reported an unusual personal loan he received. Media plurality is strong among regional newspapers, though due to financial pressures, media plurality declined in 2009 and Germany has one of the most concentrated TV markets in Europe, with 82% of total TV advertising spending shared among just 2 main TV stations in Germany. This gives a significant amount of influence to just 2 broadcasters and the majority of Germans still receive their daily news from the television. The legal framework for the media is generally positive, with accessible public interest defence for journalists in the law of privacy and defamation. However, Germany still has criminal provisions in its defamation law, which, although unused, remains in the penal code. Germany s civil defamation law is medium-to-low-cost, in comparison with other European jurisdictions. It places the burden of proof on the claimant (a protection to freedom of expression) and contains a responsible journalism defence, although not a broader public interest defence. Digital Media The digital sphere in Germany has remained relatively free, with judicial oversight over the content takedown, protections for online 73

74 privacy, and a high level of internet penetration (83% of Germans are online). Germany s Federal Court of Justice has ruled that access to the internet is a basic right in modern society. Section 184-b of the German Penal Code states that it is a criminal offence to disseminate, publicly display, present or otherwise make accessible any pornographic material showing sexual activities performed by, on or in the presence of a child. Germany has also ratified and put into the law the Council of Europe s Convention on Cyber Crimes since Mobile operators also signed up to a Code of Conduct in 2005, which includes a commitment to a dual system of identification and authentication to protect children from harmful content. This was reaffirmed and made binding in There are concerns over the increased use of surveillance of online communications, especially since a new anti-terrorism law took effect in In 2011, German authorities acquired the licence for a type of spyware called FinSpy, produced by the British Gamma Group. This spyware can bypass anti-virus software and can extract data from the device it is targeting. Two reports by the German Parliamentary Control Panel, from 2009 and 2010, stated that several German intelligence units had monitored s, with the amount of surveillance increasing from 7 million items in 2009 to 37 million items in However, Germany s Constitutional Court ruled that intelligence agencies are only allowed to collect data secretly from suspects computers if there is evidence that human lives or state property are in danger and the authorities must get a court order before they secretly upload spyware to a suspect s computer. Germany s tough hate-speech legislation also affects free speech online. In January 2012, Twitter adopted a new global policy allowing the company to delete tweets if countries request it, meaning that tweets become subject to Germany s hate-speech laws. The latest Twitter Transparency report states that the German government 74

75 agencies asked for just 2 items to be removed. In October 2012, Twitter also blocked the account of a far-right German group, Better Hannover, after a police investigation. 75

76 Pakistani Journalists List of Participants 2011 Annexure II SR# Name Name of the paper 1. Abbas Rashid Freelance journalist and political analyst, Lahore 2. Cyril Almeida Columnist, analyst and editorial writer,dawn, Islamabad 3. Ejaz Haider Consulting Editor of Friday Times, Lahore 4. Farah Zia Journalist / Editor Karachi, The News on Sunday 5. Imtiaz Alam Journalist and Secretary General of South Asian Free Media Association, Lahore 6. Khaled Ahmed Political analyst, journalist, author, Lahore 7. Naveed Ahmad Investigative Journalist/Academic Islamabad 8. Omar R Quraishi Editor, Editorial/Opinion The Express Tribune, Karachi 9. Saida Fazal Resident Editor Business Recorder, Lahore 10. Shehar Bano Khan Journalist, Development and Media, Lahore (based in Landon). 11. Prof.Dr. Shahjehan Prof of Journalism and Mass Communication Peshawar, 12. Saba Imtiaz Reporter/Journalist at Express Tribune,Karachi 13. Urooj Zia Freelance journalist Karachi 76

77 GERMAN JOURNALISTS SR# Name Name of the paper 1. Ines Zöttl Incharge, Foreign Affairs, Financial Times Deutschland, Berlin 2. Jan Ross Coordinator Foreign Affairs, DIE ZEIT, Hamburg 3. Heike Vowinkel Deputy Head of the Ressort Reports, WELT AM SONNTAG, Berlin 4. Peter Riesbeck Head of politics, BERLINER ZEITUNG, Berlin 5. Daniel Bax Incharge, Editorial/Opinion, Die Tageszeitung, Berlin) 6. Jan Marberg Chief Editor, Magazine of the German Army 7. Marcus Pindur Editor Background, DEUTSCHLANDRADIO, Berlin 8. Daniel Dylan Boehmer Editor incharge of Pakistan and Afghanistan DIE WELT 9. Dirk Benninghoff Editor News, weekly Stern.de, Berlin 10. Sabina Matthay Correspondent, German Public TV station ARD, New Delhi 11. Cem Sey Correspondent, Turkish Newspaper TARAF, Berlin 12.. Theo Koll ZDF, Auslandsjournal GUEST SPEAKERS: SR# Name Details 1. Shah Mehmood Qureshi Former Foreign Minister and Member of National Assembly, Pakistan People s Party 2. Senator Syeda Abida Hussain Former Minister and Ambassador to the US, Pakistan People s Party 77

78 3. Prof. Ahsan Iqbal Deputy Secretary General and Member of National Assembly, Pakistan Muslim League-N 4. Hasham Baber Additional Secretary General, Awami National Party 5. Dr. Michael Koch German Ambassador Pakistani Journalists List of Participants 2014 SR.# Name Name of the Paper 1. Imtiaz Gul Security Analyst and Executive Director of Centre for Research and Security Studies, Islamabad. 2. Sami Abrahim Senior Analyst for Dunya TV, Islamabad 3. Moeed Peerzada Political commentator, journalist, and TV, Islamabad 4. Iqbal Khattak Journalist and the Executive Director of Freedom Network, Peshawar. 5. Omar Qureshi Editor, Editorial/Opinion, The Express Tribune, Karachi 6. Nargis Baloch First Baloch woman editor of Urdulanguage Daily Intekhab, Quetta. 7. Shehzada Zulfiqar Senior Pakistani journalist from Quetta. 8. Zahid Hussain Senior editor with Newsline, DAWN and a correspondent for The Times of London, Newsweek and The Wall Street Journal, based in Islamabad. 9. Rahimullah Yousufzai Senior Pakistani journalist, Resident Editor The News, Peshawar. 10. Nadeem Malik Journalist / TV Anchor Islamabad. 78

79 11. Marianna Babar Journalist from The News, Islamabad. GERMAN JOURNALISTS SR.# Name Name of the Paper 1. Friederike Boege Political Editor, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Frankfurt 2. Sven Hansen Editor Asia, Die Tageszeitung, Berlin, Germany. 3. Silke Mertins Freelance journalist Foreign- and Security Policy, Berlin 4. Nicola Vitense-Likat Senior Producer, Second German Television ZDF, Singapore 5. Ingrid Mueller Senior Editor Der Tagesspiegel, Berlin 6. Sylke Tempel Editor-in-Chief, Internationale Politik, Berlin 7. Hasnain Kazim Correspondent for Turkey and Pakistan weekly Der Spiegel, Istanbul, Turkey. 8. Norbert Staeblein Magazine of the German Federal Army Y, Berlin. 9. Willi Germund Asia Correspondent, Berliner Zeitung, Bangkok 10. Cem Rifat Sey Correspondent T24, Istanbul; and Contributer Deutschlandradio, Deutsche Welle, Kabul 11. Carsten Luther Editor International Politics, ZEIT online, Berlin 12. Daniel-Dylan Boehmer Editor for Pakistan and Afghanistan Die Welt, Berlin 13. Gabor Halasz Senior Correspondent First German Television ARD, New Delhi, India. 79

80 AFGHAN GUESTS SR.# Name Name of the Paper 1. Wazhma Frogh Co-founder & Executive Director of Research Institute for Women Peace & Security Afghanistan 2. Huma Naseri Journalist- (Hasht-o-sobh), Afghanistan 3. HUMAYUN SHAH ASEFI Politician, Kabul GUEST SPEAKERS SR.# Name Details 1. Dr. Cyril Nunn German Ambassador 2. Sherry Rehman Member of National Assembly- Pakistan People s Party-PPP, journalist, former Ambassador to the US, former Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting 3. Maj. Gen. Asim Saleem Bajwa 4. Mr. Aizaz Ahmad Chaudhry 5. Lt. Gen (R) Talat Masood Director General Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) Additional Foreign Secretary and Spokesperson of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Pakistan Retired engineer officer of the Pakistan Army Corps of Electrical & Mechanical Engineering (EME). 6. Hussain Naqi Senior Journalist and National Coordinator of Human Rights Commission of Lahore, Pakistan 7. Bushra Gohar Vice President of Awami National Party, Peshawar, KP and Member of the National Assembly Senator Afrasiab Khattak Writer, human rights activist and Provincial President of Awami National Party-ANP, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

81 9. Danyal Aziz, MNA, PML-N Politician and Member of National Assembly from Pakistan Muslim League- Nawaz (PML-N) 10. Faisal Subzwari Politician and Member of National Assembly from Mohajir Qoumi Movement-MQM, Karachi 11. Hafiz Muhammad Chairman Pakistan Ulema Council. Tahir Mahmood Ashrafi 12. Rasul Buksh Rais Political analyst and head of Political Science Department at LUMS, Lahore 13. Prof. Dr. Shahjehan Syed Mediothek, Media House, Peshawar 81

82 82