Pakistan’s Territorial Integrity: Lessons from American Democracy

I am totally amazed at these desis that love America more than America loves itself~ and while doing so they follow the official mythology of the American elite rather than look at the masses who are given little or no benefits of a ``democracy``.

The article is off on atleast three counts

1. First the history of the US and India/Pakistan cannot be compared. The US started off as a mostly white `settler state`, an overseas extension or replica of the colonial power while we were a non-white ``colonial state`` . In a settler society the dominant culture, institutions and economic order is much different than a colonized society and the resulting history as a result is much different as well. Look at all the settler states and look at the colonized states and you can see how differently they have progressed. Neo colonization has maintained a more or less similar though much more centralized apartheid arrangement.

2. The author states <<< The American democratic experiment, despite all its short-comings--including a civil war after 70-odd years of declaring nationhood--represents one of the most happy if not the perfect union of several states in modern history, if not all human history. It is by far the one and only union of a continental scale that has strengthened with the passage of time while all others ( e.g. the Roman or Islamic empires) have dwindled and evaporated in thin air.>>>

This is exactly what I mean by a ``house slave`` mentality. His conclusion, worshiping the US is premature to say the least. The union has been very unueasy to say the least and the empire even more tenuous. It will not even last a fraction of the time that the Roman or Islamic empires lasted.

3. There is no substantive democracy in the US, there can never be in a society based upon purchasing power where 1% of the wealthiest controls more wealth than the rest of the 99% combined.

To the author, ``NO thank you``. Pakistan is already messed up because of being the ``most aligned`` of all states to the US, we do not need further emulation or alignment or our misery will only increase. We need to tell the American elite and the American facade of ``democracy`` to go to hell.

Athar Sahib {``What then is the solution for Pakistan`s interprovincial rivalries? ``}

You raise a very important and timely question for Pakistan. Unfortunately, the process of disintegration of the country started with the secession of BD and continues to this day with the arrogance of Pakistani Punjabis. Personally, I have come to the conclusion that anything founded on division is bound to terminate by division. Over and over again, history teaches us that Islam, despite what religious leaders and aspiring caliphs tell us, is not a sufficient basis of unity to form a nation-state. So, this country is bound to fail, because it is not based on natural reasons for statehood - ethnicity, language, economic reasons, democratic ideals, or a homogeneous population.

For the short term, I recommend splitting Punjab into at least three, if not four, provinces. India did something like that to East Punjab and the cutting down to size has been a positive experience for the residents and the nation. Good luck.

One more comment, Athar Sahib - The comparison to the American experience is rather irrelevant. There is no commitment to democracy, no zest for freedoms of speech, religion, assembly, and conscience - OK just the freedom to bear arms. :)

#2, you state <<< So, this country is bound to fail, because it is not based on natural reasons for statehood - ethnicity, language, economic reasons, democratic ideals, or a homogeneous population. >>>

The modern nation state system is artificial because it divides up territories based upon geographic boundaries and political/economic relationships- it is not only Pakistan but the entire modern nation state system. Islam has been used only as a rallying slogan in Pakistan and for sectarianism while its essence has been ignored. Its essence is a unifying force based upon common origin of humankind and one creator, something much wider than language and ethnicity and I would argue, much more natural because it bases its commonality on humanity- so I disagree with your characterization of Islam as unnatural. Take the uniformity of the human genetic code, something natural, much more natural than language and ethnicity which have social origins as well, but much more universal.

Why we see greater uniformity/lack of conflict in modern societies compared to developing nations is because with centralized means of communication and bureaucratization, cheerful robots are produced that totally lack freedom, hense the term ``mass society`` for people living in developed nations (to a greater or lesser degree). Homogeniety out of diversity due to bureaucratic adaptation. Not something very desirable.

Greater freedom of thought, and lesser implicit control results in greater conflict, which is also intensified by levels of deprivation- as we see in developing nations. So, yes my claim is that people in developing nations are much more freer than people in developed nations inspite of any explicit coersive control. If those developing nations get modernized following the American example as the author recommends, they will produce lesser conflict, greater inequality but much lesser substantive freedom: a society of cheerful morons- something that is not very desirable or humane. I pity the mass society in the ``developed`` world. While they celebrate their ``freedoms``, I see them and see totally controlled robots, moved in a push button fashion through mass mediated information~ regular short-time swings in polls whenever any ``news`` comes out reveals just such control.

This article is completely absurd. I wonder if the author is on drugs. The US was able to form a union because there was a collective commitment towards creating a constitution, implementing democratic institutions and basically giving a equal chance to everyone for participating in the administration.

How on earth can that be compared to Pakistan? In Pakistan, there is a commitment alright. It is a commitment to have permanent military rule by a army that is dominated by Punjabis. In the brief periods where democracy has been tried, as soon as the results are slightly uncomfortable for the army or the Punjabis, it has resulted in coups, prime ministers getting jailed and the constitution getting tossed into the garbage. In 1971, Pak army could not accept the democratic result and literally pushed Bangladesh out of the union.

The resources and administration of Pakistan is tightly controlled by one province and by a small coterie of people in that province. How can other provinces feel that they are also stakeholders in such a situation? They feel more like they are colonies who are getting exploited. No wonder they want to secede. Making emotional appeals is of no use. What you need is to establish a proper constitution and implement democratic institutions so that everyone can participate in the nation. Thats the only way to keep people together.

Other Osama..... you have done great job in presenting unity and necessity of that withoutn which we will have many more problems.
One of way to avoid problems is to appoint some investigation commission with due report in 15 years with possibility of 10 years extension for completing report, so things can cool little and problem can be left to future. At this time building dam will play in hands of Indians who are masterminding blow up of railtracks, power poles and pipelines. It is specially bad when China engrs are working in B.Stan. Sindh separting is not going to solve any problem as then indians and sindhis can make problems more can divert water to Sindh through india and enter in near southern punjab through Sindhi territory. Also after Indus biggest source of water is Kabul river. With our friends like indians and afghans we do not needs enemies. With indian encouragement Afghans are thinking of building dam with india providing loans. That can be daggar at heart of pakistans water problem.
Your points are correct of exploitation of some by others and it is going all world over does not mean divorce is needed, what is needed is therapy of what Jinnah gave Unity , Faith and discipline and belief in two distinct nations and Islamic unity in pakistan is overriding little tribal nationalism of Jiye sindh of BLA etc. We should respect whining and moaning of Sindhi nd balochi but they need to be told sindhi port or balochi gas and minerals are not property of only local people but is property of all pakistanis. And these are national assets and no body should be allowed to damage gas line, rail, and towers. Those who do shold be tried by military courts so justice swift and fast and final.
You have given good example of usa. We should follow that if they start to cede from pakistan they should be treated as law and order problem and traeted as criminal. Just like when in usa soouth wanted to go away they were invaded by dark skin lover from north same way all pakistani army should not allow sindi and baluchi ti indulge in antipakistani activities and they should be crushed with iron hand any thing less means same problems. Like cancer some times need cutting hard operation. And all should support army in liquidation of spittist tendancies once for all and teach lesson to them also send message to India not to indulge in internal problems in Pakistan or they should expect same in india only multiplied by factor of ten.
You have put good points. I support your thinking. It is good you did not take side of miserable wrekers and not support them like emerging leftist fools of pakistan.
good luck 2006

Masadi you appear to be anti america type and appear leftist to me, sorry but stronly feel you are lefist with radical attitude type kind of revolution type. We hate lefist and revolution wanting people as we do not want problems.
Good afternoon and good week ahead.

#7 you write <<< We hate lefist and revolution wanting people as we do not want problems. >>>

Maybe in your fairy-tale world Pakistan has no problems but the reality is that Pakistan faces tremendous problems as we speak, which are only going to increase in the coming years, and all these are not related to ``revolutionary leftists``.

All - ALL analysis that fail to take into account the 1973 constitution fail to have any substance.

Pakistan HAS - IT HAS - formed a consensus - a framework from which to proceed. Attempts to give `fresh starts` or redefine what this country should be are USELESS and prevent any process-oriented system from taking route.

I too have a vision of Pakistan. Where english is the primary language of education for all, where degrees have value, where religion has nothing to do with the state etc. etc.

Since this isn`t a nation of me, but of 150 million folks, we compromise. That compromise was done and settled in 1973! And it`s a beautiful thing!

What do ALL the supposedly `anti-Pakistani` elements want? Be it the Baluchis, the Pathans, the Sindhi nationalists - they ALL want the true implementation of the 1973 resolution. The 1973 constitution IS Pakistan. And we all know who exactly is preventing the country from becoming a nation!

As for Kalabagh, I think you should offer legitimate alternatives for not building Kalabagh dam. Bhasha Dam is not `substitute` alternative because it will HAVE to be built - Kalabagh or no Kalabagh. Almost all water analysts will tell you Pakistan doesn`t need one dam - it needs TWENTY large dams!

#6 by ahmedmadani on January 7, 2006 11:36pm PT


Other Osama


ROTFLMAO....

just like Other white meat

re Athar Osama

The first basic flaw in the article is it that completely overlooks the role and influence of economics in formenting the American revolution. The American revolution was not about breaking away politically from Great Britain per se, as it was being free of British economic control on the American colonies. The event of 1776, was when it became clear that only a political independence from Britain could ensure the freedom of trade and commerce for the colonies. Likewise, Lincoln declaring war on the south, was not to free the slaves, but to protect the economic cohesion of the union, as it existed in 1861.

Pakistan`s basic law is the 1973 constitution. The questions of federal power and in comparsion to the federal power, the rights of the provinces are clearly defined. The sharing of the power, was consensually argeed upon and it was, as far as Pakistan was concerned, a truly national document. Sadly, the constitution of 1973 was amended by Z. A. Bhutto even before the ink was dry on it and what Bhutto could not finish, Zia-ul-Haq mangled by a systematic abuse of power. Both these gentlemen, who should rot in hell, amended the constitution for the sake of personalizing power and concentrating it autocratically. The very nature of 1973 constitution was, thus, corrupted and with that political corruption of its original intent, an artifical imbalance was created between the federal power and provincial powers and the concurrent list, was ignored.

There is no sense of the smaller provinces ``appreciating`` the sacrifices of the larger province as you have said, because the present debate is not about appreciating Punjab. The present debate is about the restoration of the original intent and ideal of the 1973 constitution. It is about asking the center to live to its promise made in 1973 and to re-amend the consitution, as it was before the bloody hands of Bhutto and Zia jointly stabbed it to death via their amendments.

Kalabagh dam will be created and so will be others and in the process, there will be a revitalization of this debate. Pakistan has reached a political fail-safe point in the evolution of its political power and there is a growing realization that a compromise, will have to reached. There is no physically possible way for the center to push the Kalabagh dam, without the consent of the provinces and likewise; the provinces know that resistence to the center might be possible, but it will be fatal and futile to their own interests. The four provinces of Pakistan are intergrated as an economic unit and it is just not feasible for any one of them to remain economically viable without the others.

In the end, the saving grace will that though the politicans of Pakistan have yet to develop a national identity as a Pakistani, and are still enamoured of their provincial nostalgias, the peopel of Pakistan have one common identity; of a disenfranchised majority. Pakistan is slowly coming to terms with its territorial realities and though they may still be talks about the effacy of a ummah, the vast majority of people are starting to see each other as simply Pakistanis. With the advent of cable TV and easy access to communications, the barrier of provincialism has been breached and though the passage is not all smooth sailing yet, atleast the rudder is amidship.

Out of this crucible of bitterness, a new compromise will be reached based on the premise of more aware and politically asserative provinces and a center, which has shot its last bolt of power.

Ciao

Athar Ossama sahab....

The constitution of this Republic : 1973.

While its good to look at other countries and their constitutional development... and believe you me nothing is more attractive than looking at the rich constitutional history of the Americans especially that which led to ``Dred Scott case`` and its later reversal as examples of how nation states develop legally, morally, constitutionally- I must agree with Rozaiba.. I too believe in complete separation of church and state- but I recognise that this is not a nation of me - it has decided on a popular constitution which should be allowed to work without interference from dictators, armies etc....

The great thing of the 1973 constitution is that it leaves enough room for movement in any direction... it can very easily become a French-style Republican parliamentary democracy or even go towards Westminster style democracy... it can very easily move towards a pluralist modern relatively secular state with some sprinkling of Islam... or it can become a more conservatively Islamic theocratic state.... thus it is almost a level playing field for people to work with ... and it is a field I am willing to take a chance with...

-YLH

Contrary to what people assume..the `73 constitution besides the mutilated part by ZAB, ZIA, NS and Mush..also had some key provisions which were not implemented that were meant to resolve the issue of provincial rights..one was the pledged abolition of the concurrent list after 5 years..as well as the implementation of the order to separate judicial and executive powers. Now in this day and age of devolution of power one has to look at how even those provisions are insufficient.

The Government of India Act 1935 that Pakistan adopted as its first working
constitution gave the federation 96 items of powers. The 1956 constitution reduced
it to 49. This number was retained in the 1962 constitution but in 1973 it was
enlarged to a massive 114.

Kalabagh represents a systemic problem of a lack of understanding of the concept of a federation..constituent Units are equal to other units regardless of there size or opulation..that is why the federal system in the US or Canada works effectively the senate has actual powers ..there is no question of bbig brother sacrficing..these are accepted norms in a federal system. The double standards that were applied to the Bengalis are interesting..in arguments about the NFC between West and East Pakistan it was the ruling establishment which insisted population should not be a criteria..similarly despite not having any representation in the power matrix Bengalis gave up their population representation in exchange for parity..for the sake of Pakistan. The broader concepts of water distribution betray a lack of understanding of the concept of lower riparian water rights. Pakistans provinces..are a bit of a joke..what real power do they exercise..except for Sind..3 out of 4 are dependant on federal transfers..in baluchistans case because the federation has almost all tax collection power the province depends on Islamabad for 90% ..because Islamabad defaults on payments like gas royalty..the provincial government is forced to borrow again from the federal government to keep running..the situation is so bad that according to one estimate..In the case of Balochistan, the total debt (even without accounting for the massive liabilities for employees
provident fund payments, accrued gratuity entitlement and the pension liability built up over the years)
is 2.5 times total revenues (including transfers under the NFC Award)!

Contrary to what is assumed..it has been politicians who have signed some of pakistans more significant agreements..the 56 & 73 constitutions, the simla agreement,..the 1991 water accord..it is the failure of a respect for the rule of law that creates the issue...any guarantees offered by Musharraf are not worth the paper they are written on..

No constitutional system is perfect..the US system created the grounds for the US civil war..the Indian system which has developed positive democratic conventions ..has not been effective enough to channelise ethnic/religious resentment always...the British system failed in dealing with Scottish and Irish resentment..the Japanese system has an inability to reform itself and so on..what is the key is the development of some form of institutional credibility..a court system which may get it wrong but gets it right more often..

Zakkk,

Excellent points- especially about the concurrent list and politicians signing the most important documents... the 1991 water accord and the constitution of the republic in 1973.... Even Musharrafs harps on about the 1991 accord..

Pakistan has the institutions in place... but our people are impatient. I discussed at length the issue with some very bright and very educated IT professionals and all of them were a brickwall when it came to the issue of letting democracy work for a period of time. They claimed that they had already given a chance to NS and BB.... and before that to ZAB and nothing good came out of it... this is what is wrong - this thinking... democracies don`t become perfect government overnight.... Another even brighter professional, a gentleman who is on the list of the top 1000 SAP consultants in the world, informed me that that constitutions etc were all a grand jewish conspiracy to keep public opinion divided... and that I should read protocols of the elders of zion.

Manto and other........Most people who have never steped in court do not understand finer points. But that constitution is not good and gardians of book are not good. What that constitution has said about revolutionary changes ( like take over) or army powers etc? All times take over is conceded by supreme court judges. Also there should be discussion about what constitution says about military take overs. I am no knowledge of law but feel if constution is interpreated by judges from usa,britain etc nice lawful countries will be good. They can act as obstruction of coward judges of pakistan. We have problem of native judges they have no backbone to stand to army. Mo Zia said is right litle law book he can tear and nothing happens and pakistan is first and nobody can challenge. We can follow english constitution still there is no spirit of justice in Judges, its like pouring nice pure water in broken pot it will not hold.
Need of hour is justices at highest level from usa or uk who have nothing to loose by following book of law.
Dam is essential as karachi has water famine all time, what is point in allowing water flow to sea and waste.
Mr.Masadi I am opposed to revolution and left encouragement for poor people to riot and make problems like, jamming traffic, protests and stone throwing, carrying guns and creating terror use of bombs etc. Lots of people who are snatching purses from old ladies, pick pockets, always claim of poverty and have leftist attitude of robbing middleclass, rich and poor so they can have easy life. Left is trying to support insurgencies and giving lame excuses to ethinic terrorists. Left are not kind human people for them makng troubles is way of life and we do not want to have that type od people. China is leftist but they know how to deal with criminals last year they hanged 35,000 people and sure that country is exporting lots of goods to usa. We need to follow china.

Manto and other........Most people who have never steped in court do not understand finer points. But that constitution is not good and gardians of book are not good. What that constitution has said about revolutionary changes ( like take over) or army powers etc? All times take over is conceded by supreme court judges. Also there should be discussion about what constitution says about military take overs. I am no knowledge of law but feel if constution is interpreated by judges from usa,britain etc nice lawful countries will be good. They can act as obstruction of coward judges of pakistan. We have problem of native judges they have no backbone to stand to army. Mo Zia said is right litle law book he can tear and nothing happens and pakistan is first and nobody can challenge. We can follow english constitution still there is no spirit of justice in Judges, its like pouring nice pure water in broken pot it will not hold.
Need of hour is justices at highest level from usa or uk who have nothing to loose by following book of law.
Dam is essential as karachi has water famine all time, what is point in allowing water flow to sea and waste.
Mr.Masadi I am opposed to revolution and left encouragement for poor people to riot and make problems like, jamming traffic, protests and stone throwing, carrying guns and creating terror use of bombs etc. Lots of people who are snatching purses from old ladies, pick pockets, always claim of poverty and have leftist attitude of robbing middleclass, rich and poor so they can have easy life. Left is trying to support insurgencies and giving lame excuses to ethinic terrorists. Left are not kind human people for them makng troubles is way of life and we do not want to have that type od people. China is leftist but they know how to deal with criminals last year they hanged 35,000 people and sure that country is exporting lots of goods to usa. We need to follow china.

as with most chowk articles, this article contains high school level analysis of both u.s. as well as pak history and politics. the issue of state rights was one of the key themes in early american politics and in fact the issue was not fully resolved until nearly two hundred years after american independence when in early 1960’s, uncle sam sent federal law enforcement officers to mississippi and alabama to enforce desegregation against the wishes of the majority local white population. also the main champions of state rights were southern states who were and probably still are the most backward and corrupt states in the american union. southern politicians raised the issue of state rights enforce regressive social structure i.e. slavery/segregation and to protect corrupt local political structures.

advocates of provincial autonomy in pak have the same motives as those calling for state rights in the u.s. rural sind, baluchistan and fata are the most backward regions of pakistan both in terms of the economy as well as social structure. it is in these places that you find tribalism, feudalism, pir-fakiri, slave labor and the worst oppression against women any where in the world. and surprise surprise, its in these places that you find the strongest advocates of provincial autonomy. and obviously these people will resist kalabagh dam and gwader port because economic development is the fail safe way to bring about social change.

its also important to remember that even in their own territory, these people do not enjoy any sort of support as evidenced by election results. their agenda however is amplified by elements that bear a grudge against the pak government. these elements include external enemies of pak, politicians who don’t have a share of power ex bb and ns, secularists who blame govt for being islamic ex the ft/dt crowd, anarchists and commies, out and out nut jobs such as altaf hussain and english newspaper columnists who are bitter about the fact that rest of the society is moving ahead while they themselves are stuck in their dead end jobs that pays them rs.10,000 pm. normal pakistanis otoh have nothing but gratitude for pak fauj officers for putting their lives on the line so that the rest of us can live in peace. and i know what i am talking about because i have seen karachi before and after army operation against mqm.

response to Cut paste artist#10 by arjun_m on January 8, 2006 5:20am PT
#6 by ahmedmadani on January 7, 2006 11:36pm PT


Other Osama


ROTFLMAO....

just like Other white meat

Mr. Arjun you have lots of problems due to watching too much silly hindi movies and too much ct and paste. What you are writing does ot make sense to any body. In pakistan we are taught to write when we go to school. We do not allow students to copy answer from neighbour student.
I will like to know what is ``ROTFLMAO.....`` also all others. My cat is better than you expressing his thoughts. He shouts and asks for food and still I am sleeping then he climbs my bed and bites my hand and I give him food. See what you say does not make any sense. I have lost all respects to your IIT colleges.
I will suggest you to think before type. Its getting late, good night crude cut paste artist.
I always wish good luck that is called decent behaviour.

Yes... faisal... ordinary Pakistanis don`t have anything but gratitude for Pak Fauj....


In an unrelated event...

Earlier this morning- the wife of one of Pakistan`s many Corps Commanders visited our humble little showroom on a Sunday to look at the Mercedes Kompressor and the new Mark 1 ... the perfect cars for the salary of an honest armyman in Pakistan.

Good night....

I am in favor of Kalabagh dam and I think in the end it will be good for Sindh. The issue now boils down to trust.

What I like about this debate is that now secular and real issues are being discussed in Pakistan not the stupid Islamic issues and fundamentalist framing the debate on Huddood or any other brain fart Islamic schemes.

The debate allows Sindh and some elements in NWFP to come back to the national scene. Sindh especially the interior Sindh has no interest in religion or making Pakistan an Islamic country. Islam in Pakistan has been used to sideline the real issues. The current debate would bring secular forces back in the nation debate and as long as this debate continues, the secular elements would continue to gain the upper hand in national as well as in regional politics.

Kalabagh may be announced but it is not happening until the new elections and I think this is a good time for secular parties to cash in on issues that are important to the country.

The MQM is opposing the kalabagh because it has been asked to that to drown the Sindh nationalist voices on this issue. This ploy is not going to work and would actually intensify the provincial rights issues too.
More on this later but Athar really has no handle on the provincial autonomy or the nationalities issues in Pakistan.

very well said, before Kalabagh we in Azad Kashmir has
problems regarding royalties and settlement issues with
the federal government, although most of our people got
the promised land in elsewhere in Pakistan (especially in
Vehari, Bhurawala and Gujarkhan in Pakistan) but still
some people did not got the promised land which was promised
to people of Azad Kashmir by Islamabad and then Azad Kashmir
had problems regarding getting royalties from Islamabad which
is a standard issue now since Islamabad (wapda) has a unique?
system of setting royalties to land owners and provinces which
should be re-set as soon as possible. Then there`s another issue of
of extending Magla Dam which has been handled by politicians in
AZK (especially infamous PPP Barrister Sultan) as yet another ploy of
blackmailing central government and making it a issue although threes
some element of justification in Barrister Sultans stance against
extending Magla Dam but 70% of what he says is `bull-sh*t` and nothing
more.
The whole issue of building dam is a non-issue, even the nationalists and opposition has agreed on building more damns (which
proves that if damns are not made we in Pakistan could possibly face
a situation which is very hard to handle); to me it’s even the location of proposed Kalabagh Dam is a non-issue the real issue is
the trust in central government for obvious reasons and the roots of problems starts with the shifting of capital from Karachi to Islamabad * in Punjab *, to a very controversial way of distribution of resources (NFC Awards).
There`s even a proposal of declaring the proposed area of Kalabagh
a `Federal Area` but the central government has somehow didn`t get the
the whole point about ` trust ‘, there is an impression that Islamabad = to Punjab which should be changed.
Anyone who had been to or visited Hyderabad, Sindh would know how essential Kalabagh Dam is for Pakistan; Basha Dam is supported universally in Pakistan.If we want to learn anything from Americans we should learn how to make Supreme Court and our judiciary free from any influence .

Pakistan is three centuries behind USA.

Lessons from American democracy.{{{{{Many of the questions that were being raised of the American states in the 1780s are valid for Pakistani provinces today. }}}}

Re:-Pakistan is three centuries behind USA.

Zeena and your point is?
yes we may be backwards in terms of wealth and scientific know-how but we are
one thousand times ahead of Americans in terms of respect for elders,culture and
family values.
Zeena , either you are of slave mentality or either a Indian like arjun who whatvere reason hates Pakistan .

Good article; though it paints a very rosy picture of the formative years of the American democracy. A lot has gone on in America in the past 229 years from slavery to emancipation, from the westward expansion to the trail of tears, to the 14th, 15th and 16th amendments to the Civil Rights Movement......Americans have been through hell and back.......Things have not been that peachy for them as Mr. Osama`s article may presume, neither as democracy as seen today in America been what it had been.

America has come a long way, and Pakistan will too...

Hats off to Athar Osama Sahib for atleast thinking about it, developing a coherent thesis and presenting it... Please write more....

Asim

`` The ongoing political drama leaves a terrible taste in ones mouth and makes one wonder, why is it that we, in Pakistan, are engaged in a zero-sum game where the federation can only gain at the expense of the provinces and the provinces at the expense of the federation? Why can`t a citizen of Pakistan wear his/her dual indentities, Pakistani and a Sindhi-Baluchi-Pathan-Punjabi, with pride on his/her chest at the same time? ``

Welcome to nation building !!!

`` What would happen if Pakistan`s territorial integrity is indeed compromised? Would Sindh or NWFP or Baluchistan survive on its own? Should Sindh take the unthinkable step in protest of Punjab`s high-handedness over KBD, would it be able to guarantee any water for itself coming out of Punjab? Lets assume, hypothetically, that Punjab is indeed on the wrong of side of the KBD issue, would independent Punjab and Sindh be in any better position to sort out the water distribution among themselves and how? Would Punjab have access to the sea port that is as much a lifeline of its economy as it is Sindh`s? If Pakistan is to disintegrate, what would refrain these provinces to engage in ``water wars`` with each other? What would stop other neighboring countries, India, Iran, or even Afghanistan, from taking advantage of that situation? ``

NWFP could merge with Afghanistan. Not that it would solve any of their problems.

Baluchistan could survive on its own. It has natural gas supplies which could generate $$$ given current natural gas prices. They could collect the rent from Uncle Sam that the generals in Islamabad are currently collecting.

Sind and Punjab have to work out a mutual agreement on use of Karachi port and sharing the Indus waters. Both have a strangehold on the lifeline of the other. Punjab controls the waters. Sind controls access to the ocean.

`` When nationalists leaders raise the issue of Pakistan`s territorial integrity, they talk as if nothing would be lost to them if Pakistan disintegrates into separate countries comprising different ``nations``. Nothing can be far from the truth. Pakistan, despite its shortcomings and defects, is greater than the sum of its parts. Every province gains from the union considerably while at the same time contributing to it. Baluchistan provides natural resources to other three provinces. Sindh provides a port to the rest of the country. Punjab and NWFP contribute with its agriculture. Dividing Pakistan into separate countries would only eliminate these synergies and jeopradize the survival of each of the four provinces. At the very least, independent provinces would find themselves in considerably more hardships than what they currently face. It would expose them to the kinds of dangers that American republican leaders were aware of and worked so hard to avoid in the 1780s. ``

Pakistani Punjab and their entity called Pakistani Army would be the losers. They would lose access to the ocean. They would lose cheap Baluchi natural gas. They would lose the rent they get from Uncle Sam.

Why do you think Pakistani Army is ranting Islam, Islam, Islam ...

`` What then is the solution for Pakistan`s interprovincial rivalries? An extra-constitutional option leading to a territorial split is clearly not an solution. Pakistan`s four provinces and the federation must find answers to its problems within the country`s broader constitutional framework. This would require genuine reconciliation, compromise, and sacrifice between provinces. The bigger province, Punjab, must take the lead in sacrifice like the elder brother does for his/her younger siblings. In turn, the smaller provinces must appreciate the sacrifice of the bigger province and make compromises in national interest. Politics is the art of making compromises. We should not let the best be the enemy of the good. If the country cannot reach a compromise (yet) on KBD, lets move forward with the Basha Dam on which all provinces agree upon and, in due course of time, and with greater trust and understanding between provinces, KBD would become a reality as well. ``

Mutually benefical confederation with a lean federal government is the only long term solution.

ahmedmadani #6

`` One of way to avoid problems is to appoint some investigation commission with due report in 15 years with possibility of 10 years extension for completing report, so things can cool little and problem can be left to future. At this time building dam will play in hands of Indians who are masterminding blow up of railtracks, power poles and pipelines. It is specially bad when China engrs are working in B.Stan. Sindh separting is not going to solve any problem as then indians and sindhis can make problems more can divert water to Sindh through india and enter in near southern punjab through Sindhi territory. Also after Indus biggest source of water is Kabul river. With our friends like indians and afghans we do not needs enemies. With indian encouragement Afghans are thinking of building dam with india providing loans. That can be daggar at heart of pakistans water problem.
Your points are correct of exploitation of some by others and it is going all world over does not mean divorce is needed, what is needed is therapy of what Jinnah gave Unity , Faith and discipline and belief in two distinct nations and Islamic unity in pakistan is overriding little tribal nationalism of Jiye sindh of BLA etc. We should respect whining and moaning of Sindhi nd balochi but they need to be told sindhi port or balochi gas and minerals are not property of only local people but is property of all pakistanis. And these are national assets and no body should be allowed to damage gas line, rail, and towers. Those who do shold be tried by military courts so justice swift and fast and final. ``

I see why the Bengalis got feed up with Pakistan.

Why would not Afghans build a dam ? Don`t they have any rights to their shares of Kabul river ? After all Afghans are also Muslims ??

`` IAliBirmingham ``

`` Zeena and your point is?
yes we may be backwards in terms of wealth and scientific know-how but we are
one thousand times ahead of Americans in terms of respect for elders,culture and
family values. ``

What are you doing in Birmingham, United Kingdom ?

What is so scared about respect for elders ? America does look after its old people better than a lot of other societies.

re: this article
I am not sure if the author has read the American History. There is not much resemblance between the former 13 American Colonies of the early American Republic and the 4 Pakistani Provinces (Sindh, Punjab, NWFP, Balochistan) today.
Much of the early experience of the American colonists was shaped by common enmity with Britain much as the early history of Pak has been shaped by its enmity with India. But then Pak broke free of India as it saw itself as a muslim nation that cannot live with the hindus. Pak shaped its destiny pretty much on the lines of religion, making Islam the supreme religion of the land, denying much religious freedom to other minorities. It infact went to the other extreme of not only forcefulling converting a large section of hindus to Islam after its independence but denied freedom to Ahmediyyas who face religious presecution.

Pak is not formed by the will of its power, unlike the USA after the Revolution whose abiding motto was the sovereignity of its people. Religious freedom was respected even in the 17th century America. American Revolution was the handiwork of ordinary Americans rebelling against the economic, political sovereignty of Britain (unlike Pak being the handiwork of one single person obsessed with his hatred of Gandhi and idea of a land for muslims). Colonists even in the early 1770s (before the Revolution) were prosperous, without the aristocracy, tilteship of the British and many owned and tilled their own lands. They saw themselves very different from the British, with very different value system. Freedom was upmost in their mind. When Americans won the Revolution, George Washington, the Chief military commander, voluntarily gave up the post and desisted the temptation of becoming a monarch. In this, he had no precedence. This unique act in the annals of history put America on path to greatness.
Pak`s latest military dictator (in the line of so many before him) in a coup threw away an elected leader and the people of pak applauded then. Could this have ever happened in America or elsewhere? Pak does not have a free judiciary, a free Press (it is seemingly free in as far as the dictator allows it to be free) and the elections are never free and the present PM is elected per the will of the dictator.
Any comparison of Pak`s provinces to the 13 former American colonies is therefore laughable. Pakis can however draw important lessons as to where and how they failed in creating the kind of society that the former Colonists managed to create. In this, they may draw some useful lessons from the Indian experience in the neighboruhood where feudalism failed and democracy survives. Army in India does not call shots and is subservient to the elected leaders. Pakis do not have to go as far as the American colonies for lessons in history. They only have to look to their giant neighbour.
Sridhar

#24 by IAliBirmingham on January 8, 2006 1:50pm PT


but we are
one thousand times ahead of Americans in terms of respect for elders,culture and
family values.


Yes..the world found out...on 9/11, 7/7 etc etc...

re:#6 by ahmedmadani
Ha, ha, ha.
Ahmed ``mad``ani says:
(We should follow that if they start to cede from pakistan they should be treated as law and order problem and traeted as criminal.)
But when it comes to Kashmiris, Pakis like ``mad``ani will say that they need self-determination. why not apply self-determination uniformly across the board and say that even Sindh, Balochistan, NWFP need to have self-determination and allowed to secede if they want to.
Sridhar

No offense, but what was the point of this long article? To demonstrate that we must take a look at the Civil War scene to get a no-brainer lesson on the Pakistani situation?!!

re: Manto`s post
(The great thing of the 1973 constitution is that it leaves enough room for movement in any direction... it can very easily become a French-style Republican parliamentary democracy or even go towards Westminster style democracy... it can very easily move towards a pluralist modern relatively secular state with some sprinkling of Islam... or it can become a more conservatively Islamic theocratic state....)
The great thing about 1973 constitution is that it does not exist in 2006!
The great dictator of Pakistan, General Musharraf rules over the land and is ably guided by USA with China looking over his shoulders.
Talking of a constitution when the nation is ruled by a dictator is like a whore talking about chastitiy. It does not ring true.
Sridhar

re: Musharraf and the present consitution of Pak
In a controversial referendum in April 2002, Musharraf became the
the self- appointed democratic leader of Pak.
In i think Aug 2002, Gen. Pervez Musharraf unilaterally changed Pakistan`s Constitution with amendments that expanded his control of the country he took over by coup in 1999. These
Legal framework order 2002 as they are called, put a stamp of Musharraf`s authority.

As per the new amendmends, he gave himself powers to make further amendments at will and allow him to dissolve the elected Parliament and appoint the country`s military chiefs and Supreme Court justices. The changes also institutionalized the political role of the military in politics by allotting it some seats in the National Security Council.
The constitution of Pak does not reflect the will of the people. How can it be so when the ruler of the land is a dictator and military rule is paramount and overrides the powers of the elected rulers.
Sridhar

Rsidar: `` why not apply self-determination uniformly across the board and say that even Sindh, Balochistan, NWFP need to have self-determination and allowed to secede``

Because only a minority in Balochistan wants to have their demands met. They certainly don`t even want to break away. Their forefathers themselves opted for Pakistan. None of these things are true in the case of Kashmiris. Pakistan did not invade Balochistan or Sind.

Taking a class in logic and history might help you.

And even if they exercised self-determination, they would still stick with Pakistan. India cannot dare to do the same.

Not dare to hold a plebscite in Kashmir, that is.

re: #35-37 by xosmanx
(Because only a minority in Balochistan wants to have their demands met. They certainly don`t even want to break away. Their forefathers themselves opted for Pakistan. None of these things are true in the case of Kashmiris. Pakistan did not invade Balochistan or Sind.)
How do u know what the Balochis want? You can know that only if u have a referendum.
The problem seems very deep rooted. Balochistan may prove to be Pak`s Vietnam.
Sridhar

#24 alibirmingham
Sir, I don`t hate any country. Yes, I do criticise , if, I see their is corruption going on in any country or community.
Pakistan is #1 corrupt country in the world. And, don`t tell me that I am wrong. It is the very fact. You`re saying Pakistan has morality, family values, respect for elders, culture.

Lets talk about each one of them and their prevalence in Paki society.
1:-Morality, yes, that is the main reason Pakistani society is # 1 in corruption. Which is the reflection of great morality.

2:-family values, yes, family values where majority of people hate eachother living in combined family system, which raise more chaos, than living independently.

3:-respect for elders, No more, elders are being mentally and physically abused at the hands of their own kids. They are victims of insecurities, if, they are poor. They don`t have any Govt. system to support them. There is NO family or social support system for them. They are being tortured daily by their kids and grand kids and they die in their own miseries.

4:- culture, yes, cross culture from India or some mexican culture with lil mixed up of Arabs. Where is your culture? Yes, a culture of bribery, lies, greed, thefts, and bombing innocent poor citizens.

Pakistan is a failed state with NO values left . Pakistan has failed to give respect to it`s citizens. When a state fails to give protection an dbasic rights to it`s own citizens equally , that is failed state, for sure.

and, America gives every support to it`s elders. American elders are in much better condition than their Paki counterparts. They live in their own freedom, freedom of independence. Now, don`t tell me, they are not being respected. No, they are the ones who are being respected and love the most. They are the ones, who have every facility possible with out hurting their ego. They are well respected by their kids, grand kids and by their own state. Hats off to american great system for elders.

and, on side note:-
When I say Pakistan is three centuries behind America, I mean not only progress, but, also Paki society is much too, backwards , when it comes to be civil and to be moral.

Like India -- Pakistan`s territorial integrity lies in Democracy and only in Democracy -- NOT army dictatorship -- Army rule lost East Pakistan -- army rule is hell bent on fracturing Balochistan now.

regarding KBD -- building KBD with real democracy -- with consent from three opposing provinces -- whatever the decision may be to build or not to build -- NOT by a ONE-MAN army ruler -- with a rump `parliament` in his pocket -- who instead of managing the Kashmir catastrophe -- is busy establishing the `government writ`` over Balochistan now -- the kind of writ General Tikka Khan established in East Pakistan.

how many times the army wants to reconquer Pakistan and its provinces -- losing Bengal is apparently not enough...

Author says in his summation that . . . ````only by working together and with a spirit of reconciliation and sacrifice can we build a ``more perfect union``.````

More than half-a-century ago, Pakistan threw out large segments of its productive population to try and build something better. That in itself was the first wrong step. In other words, the basic foundations of Pakistan were flawed.

But that is now in the past. Pakistan has had enough time to fix its pillars and foundations. But it does not seem to have.

On the other hand, to a large extent, those it threw out are doing better than they would have if they had hung around. Therefore, the first reconciliation Pakistan must do is with the descendants of those thrown out so brutally. It leads from there then that their success will devolve back to Pakistan, too, in the spirit of mutul forgiveness and reconciliation.

Maybe Pakistan needs to analyse this, and learn from it?

#40 you write <<< American elders are in much better condition than their Paki counterparts. They live in their own freedom, freedom of independence >>>

Really, then how come the suicide rates for white males peak at old ages in USA? When worth in a society is based on value in the work place, ageism, is a much bigger issue than a more traditional society like Pakistan. So #40 what you state is nonsense.

Yes... Veeresh... you think it was unilateral... you would given your ignorance and consumption of high quality Desai beer...

The fact of the matter is that all estimates show that some 7 million Muslims moved West (and also into East Pakistan) while 3 million Hindus and Sikhs made their way to India.... so lets be fair...

The murder and mayhem as well as uprooting that took place was primarily because India`s first govenor general Mountbatten refused to deploy the Boundary Commission Force despite repeated appeals by Pakistan`s governor-general-in-waiting ... Mountbatten responded to 10 Jinnah letters saying that he did not have ``the report`` that would allow him to deploy the troops... a report that Jinnah knew had been with Mountbatten since mid-July...

The obvious conclusion is that the whole uprooting and mayhem was deliberately created so that 7 million refugees would put additional pressure on Pakistan and literally cripple it at the onset... India`s First Governor General was in bed with Nehru... and therefore it was possible.

Mantolives #45

`` The fact of the matter is that all estimates show that some 7 million Muslims moved West (and also into East Pakistan) while 3 million Hindus and Sikhs made their way to India.... so lets be fair...

The murder and mayhem as well as uprooting that took place was primarily because India`s first govenor general Mountbatten refused to deploy the Boundary Commission Force despite repeated appeals by Pakistan`s governor-general-in-waiting ... Mountbatten responded to 10 Jinnah letters saying that he did not have ``the report`` that would allow him to deploy the troops... a report that Jinnah knew had been with Mountbatten since mid-July...

The obvious conclusion is that the whole uprooting and mayhem was deliberately created so that 7 million refugees would put additional pressure on Pakistan and literally cripple it at the onset... India`s First Governor General was in bed with Nehru... and therefore it was possible.``

If Nehru and Governor General wanted to destroy Pakistan they could declare war on Pakistan. How long could Pakistan resist a much larger Indian state ? Do you think Pakistan was ever prepared to fight a war longer than 3 weeks ?

masadi #44

`` Really, then how come the suicide rates for white males peak at old ages in USA? When worth in a society is based on value in the work place, ageism, is a much bigger issue than a more traditional society like Pakistan. So #40 what you state is nonsense. ``

Comparing India-Pakistan with America on living standards and quality of life for seniors is plain silly. If you have a gripe against American foreign policy and other aspects of American polity please do express yourself.

Suicide rates may be higher. American seniors live longer due to better medical treatment for heart disease, diabetes, blood pressure, cancer etc. They live happier inspite of divorces, living away from kids etc. People live routinely in the 80s and 90s. It is very easy to be lonely when all the people around you start dying.

as i have said before, baluch situation is a child`s play for the army compared to the insurgency in karachi. as a reminder of those events, check out the amnesty report on karachi. situation actually got worse after this report and karachi only returned to normalcy after rangers stepped in and taught mqm karkun a lesson. this is also the reason why criminal political elements in pak are screaming murder over baluchistan. they are afraid that success of army operation will mean that same danda will be to them. we can only wait

also noteworthy that army succeeded by applying tactics opposite of that recommended by a.i.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGASA330011996?open&of=ENG-PAK

PAKISTAN
Human rights crisis in Karachi

...The organization has received reports of hundreds of cases of unlawful detention, torture, deaths in custody, extrajudicial executions and ``disappearances``, mainly in Karachi, but also in other cities of the province. According to official figures, some 1,770 people were killed in Karachi in 1995; these include members of different political parties, law enforcement personnel and apolitical residents of Karachi, including women and children.

While law enforcement personnel appear to be responsible for some of these human rights violations, there is strong evidence that armed opposition groups have also perpetrated torture, hostage-taking and killings in Karachi.

bbabu...

The attempt was to force Pakistan to ``see its folly`` and return back to the fold.... it won`t ever happen.

The 55 crores of rupees issue is also related to this... or are you telling me that the constant ahsan-jatana of Gandhi`s ultimate sacrifice for Pakistan is just a drama?

#47, you write <<< Suicide rates may be higher. American seniors live longer due to better medical treatment for heart disease, diabetes, blood pressure, cancer etc. They live happier inspite of divorces, living away from kids etc. People live routinely in the 80s and 90s. It is very easy to be lonely when all the people around you start dying. >>>

You are wrong. The discussion was comparative, young vs old. Now if you control for class when comparing Pakistani/Indian vs American seniors, the Pakistanis would win hands down simply because in the US status is assigned based upon position in the economic institution while in more traditional societies it is assigned based upon other criteria. As a result, suicide rates for white males- those that benefit MOST from the US system peak at old ages, while those for Black males- those that are exculded from the system peak at YOUNG ages.

Now, mortality rates for people making less than 9K a year in the US (and there are millions of them) are three times that for those making 25K or more- similar is the prevalence of some of the diseases you mention. And what about the over 46million that have zero health insurance? You have to disaggregate and control for comparisons to be meaningful.

#41, you write <<< and, on side note:-
When I say Pakistan is three centuries behind America, I mean not only progress, but, also Paki society is much too, backwards , when it comes to be civil and to be moral. >>>


Nonsense again, how come the “land of the free” has the biggest prison population in the world and the highest rate of prisoners per capita of all countries ? Please explain how that translates into ``civil and moral`` and the over 1 million rapes of women each year and the fact that 4 to 5 million women are battered blue and black every year in the US.

I think we should run as far away from this ``progress`` as possible, three hundred years is too narrow a gap, I want further distance between myself and such ``progress``.

Two of the old subcontinental sayings worth merit attention in the context of Pakistan :-

1. Boya Beej Babool ka tau Aam kehan sey Hoye, and,
2. Ek Galti ,sau galtiyan karvati hai.

The creation of Pakistan itself was on faulty lines. It was based on the pretext that the Religion is a great unifier. Yes, it is.. but only against an another religion. You can unite Hindus against Muslims, Muslims against Jews, Jews against Christians and Christians against any other. But you cannot unite Hindus, Muslims, Jews and Chrisitians on their own. All of them,amongst themselves, will be as divided as separate religions.

The greatest natural unifier of the human beings is the Land. The second one is the ancestory or ethnicity and third is the culture. A Hindu and a Muslim of Avadh or Punjab or Bengal or Hyderabad will get united on the basis of these three factors but a Hindu & a Hindu and a Muslim & a Muslim of Avadh, Punjab, Bengal ,Hyderabad will never get united.

Pakistan suffers from yet another dilleama which India does not suffer i.e. domination of One particular Group i.e. Punjab. In India, though the Hindi-speakers are in maximum numbers,as a group, but they themselves are in minority. Hindi is the mother-tongue of about 35% of Indians, 65% Indians are Non-Hindi speakers. The total parliamentary seats shared by Hindi-speaking states in about 220 or so, well short of majority of 272. Further, non-hindi speakers are more in numbers than Hindi-speakers in Army, Government and business. This makes India a successful working alliance of different peoples having different History, culture, languages and background.

Punjabis, in Pakistan, are now more than 50% of its population(I understand). The only other worthy comptetitor to them is Sindh, which in itself is too powerless. Its share is Pakistan Army is negligible. Stripped of power from all sides, the non-punjabis in Pakistan are bound to feel uneasy.

Pakistan does not seem likely to get out of its quagmire on the basis of theories and discussions. Only a strong leader like Mao Ze Dong, Lenin or own very own Indira Gandhi can turn the tide to its favour. If such a leader does not appear in the next 5-10 years, Pakistan will not be able to get out of the cesspool its has created for itself.

Fauji-lover Faisal’s gems:

“and obviously these people will resist kalabagh dam and gwader port because economic development is the fail safe way to bring about social change.”

No. They resist Kalabagh Dam SOLELY due to the mistrust created by the Army which has monopolized power. That is the SOLE reason. The 1991 Water Accord under Nawaz Sharif’s regime is proof that democratic governments can unify the nation over the most critical economic issue. And water is the most critical. Sure there are alternatives for what type of economic basis Pakistan should have – agricultural, industrial, services oriented etc – but for all intents and purposes, Pakistan is entirely reliant on the agri-sector and by the looks of it will remains so for a couple of decades. One of the points Nawaz Sharif’s regime made was to forgo Punjab’s share of royalty from the Kalabagh dam if that dam was constructed – of course this point would only be made part of the agreement once the negotiations began. The Gwader port, another one of Nawaz Sharif’s visions would not have faced so much resistance as it does now. Simply because democracies work better. I say this despite not being a supporter of PML(N).

As Najam Sethi says, the Baluch were not ‘ungovernable’ in the past as the various elements were OK with the power-sharing arrangements of previous governments. The current dictatorial govt. refuses to share power. However, there is no option but to share power with the tribals. If the current government was revolutionary in its ideals and had a plan to upstage the feudals and tribals and what not, then you could complain about how the primitive lords are a hindrance to progress. But the current government is completely status-quo oriented. So your nonsense has no basis.

“normal pakistanis otoh have nothing but gratitude for pak fauj officers for putting their lives on the line so that the rest of us can live in peace.”


Good one. Baluchistan burns, northern areas burn, the tribal areas have in their reaction embraced the Taliban and the best the government can do is throw out the building of Kalabagh dam to divert attention from the failures of its attempts to build national consensus.

But there’s the 8% growth rate so everything’s cool right? :D

I agree with Rozaiba...

Most of the development we see today was chalked out by democratic governments of the 1990s... and no one can deny that a popularly elected Punjabi leader that Nawaz Sharif was, he was able to sacrifice a lot of Punjab`s interests for the greater good of the federation... this is what constitutional governance does.

I must repost my post from Farzana`s board given its relevance here...


#3 by Mantolives on January 8, 2006 9:20pm PT
`Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official.` (Theodore Roosevelt)

I believe Musharraf is sincere in all that he wants - modern pluralist relatively secular Pakistan, women`s rights, stable democracy and peace with India... The problem is that his fashion is arbitrary and therefore I am not going to put my money on him...


Sorry to disagree with you but if India really wants to make peace with Pakistan, here is what it needs to do:

1- While demonising Pakistani Military, don`t demonise Pakistan and its people.

2- Instead of clamouring for the rights of ``oppressed groups``, imagined or real, call for and forcefully call for the revival of Pakistan`s constitution and its status as a democracy...


Because these two will win India a lot more friends... it will win India a friend like me... and there are many like me.

Sridhar: `` How do u know what the Balochis want? You can know that only if u have a referendum. The problem seems very deep rooted. Balochistan may prove to be Pak`s Vietnam.``


No, Sir, I diasgree. We did not have a referendum in India before partition but a majority of people wanted Independence. So having a referendum is not the only way. It`s a political solution. We kniow that Kashmiris for instance will benefit from a referendum because they would like a a state of their own or join either countries on their own accord. Now, how does one know this? By first holding a plebscite? No, by first opening your eyes and your mind. Then, you hold a plebscite to confirm the hypothesis. This is part of the political progress - you can`t tackle it through `how do you know for sure` style empty arguments. Ask ordinary Baluchs (not people on the payroll of those warlords) and they will tell you what the situation is.

I also think talking about who is better in terms of ethical or moral values is a useless line of controversy. We all know the kind of spiritual and moral values everyone else has.

It reminds one of what Bernard Shaw said in Man and Superman:

``Your friends are all the dullest dogs I know. They are not beautiful: they are only decorated. They are not clean: they are only shaved and starched. They are not dignified: they are only fashionably dressed. They are not educated: they are only college passmen. They are not religious: they are only pewrenters. They are not moral: they are only conventional. They are not virtuous: they are only cowardly. They are not even vicious: they are only ``frail.`` They are not artistic: they are only lascivious. They are not prosperous: they are only rich. They are not loyal, they are only servile; not dutiful, only sheepish; not public spirited, only patriotic; not courageous, only quarrelsome; not determined, only obstinate; not masterful, only domineering; not self-controlled, only obtuse; not self-respecting, only vain; not kind, only sentimental; not social, only gregarious; not considerate, only polite; not intelligent, only opinionated; not progressive, only factious; not imaginative, only superstitious; not just, only vindictive; not generous, only propitiatory; not disciplined, only cowed; and not truthful at all: liars every one of them, to the very backbone of their souls.``

here is pkr under mush:



and here is pkr under bb/ns.



as the graphs indicate, financial market participants clearly did not think too much of development under ns. and i am not even going to post the graph of the stock market.
lets also see what imf has to say about growth over the last 4-5 years

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2005/wp05139.pdf

``Pakistan achieved a remarkable turnaround during 2000–04, marked by a sharp adjustment in macroeconomic balances toward external sustainability and a resumption, followed by acceleration, in economic growth. The adjustment was mainly driven by a rise in private savings, though fiscal consolidation helped as well. Both favorable external factors, post-September 11, and greater domestic confidence, resulted in a significant increase in private remittances from abroad and in foreign currency deposits of residents. Structural reforms in the banking and corporate sectors contributed to rebuilding domestic confidence as well as to enhancing productivity and profitability. These factors combined to increase the private savings rate and strengthen the incentives to invest.``

as for political stability under bb/ns, i will let amnesty international have a say on that.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGASA330011996?open&of=ENG-PAK

as for how much each region contributes to the national khazana, that information can be found on the following link:

http://www.cbr.gov.pk/

so clearly then we have a couple of people here who dont have a clue about the topic at hand.

Most of the interacts on this article are not focusing on the key argument made in this article. As I see it, the gist of the comments made thus far can be summarized in two arguments.

1. The writers has been ``smoking`` something, is too americanized, or must be day-dreaming to endorse American democracy. The American democracy has serious defects and hence is not a model to be followed.

To this argument, I would like to humbly state that no-where in the article do I make a claim that America`s is a perfect democracy only that it has led to gradually improving inter-state relationships. I acknowledge its failings in the past (the civil war) and today (election of GW!). The only claim that the article makes is that the ratification debates at America`s founding are similar to the situation that Pakistani provinces faces today and hence it is useful to learn from some of the arguments made then (thirteen country solution vs. one United States AND four separate states vs. one Pakistan with four provinces). The entire thesis of the article is that Pakistani provincial nationalists who argue that their problems would be solved if Pakistan were to be broken up in four separate states can probably learn something from history. The history of America`s founding suggests that it might not be the case. Of course, history is devoid of counter-factuals so we don`t know what would have happend had Americans chosen 13 countries instead of one but we do know what did happen when they chose to create one United States. Most of the commentors are assuming that the article says much more (e.g. endorsement of American democracy) than it actually does.

2. The writer is making a fallacious comparison between Pakistan and America because America is a democracy and Pakistan is not.

To this argument, my humble suggestion would be, that there is always a first step. True, Pakistan is not a democracy but that doesn`t mean that interprovincial relations cannot be managed without give-and-take between provinces, and provinces and the center. While struggle for establishing a well-functioning (not ``managed``) democracy is every citizen`s obligation, it doesn`t mean that all functions of national governance would remain suspended until democracy returns to Pakistan. The provinces and center, the governor(s) and the governed do exist at all times and must function to the best of their ability even under the current regime. We can`t wait for the resumption of democracy to try to solve the problems between the provinces or between provinces and the center and let the country disintegrate. Like in the past, the current military government would run out of its steam and then democracy would once again come to Pakistan. Would the Pakistani state, in its current shape and form, last to see that day? I think it must and it will.

I would appreciate if the discussion focusses on how to make the best of the current situation. I am convinced, as of now, that it is in nobody`s interest to let Pakistan disintegrate, not Pakistan`s and not India`s. We must engage positively with this debate in that spirit. However, if the purpose is to let Pakistan disintegrate or even ``facilitate`` that process, then its a totally different ballgame. For those wishing or seeking to do that, my article has nothing to say.

Sincerely,
Athar Osama

and here is what would have happened under the constitutional government of nawaz had he been allowed to continue. source is manto`s own newspaper:

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_3-5-2002_pg3_6

Writing in daily ‘Pakistan’ (28 April 2002) columnist Ataur Rehman referred to an interview given by General Musharraf to a Turkish publication in November 1999 in which he had criticised Nawaz Sharif’s effort to pass the 15th Amendment whereby Nawaz Sharif could have enforced laws of the Shariah ‘in the practical sense’.

...The 15th Amendment would have empowered Nawaz Sharif to issue edicts that could not be challenged in the court of law. This was an Abbaji sort of legislation that the PML parliamentary party did not like but the lackeys of Nawaz Sharif passed in the National Assembly. No government can be allowed this kind of ‘law-making on its feet’ even under Islam.

#58, the author, I am glad to note that you are NOW softening in your blind support for the American system. In the article, you are totally worshipping it when you state

Quote <<< The American democratic experiment, despite all its short-comings--including a civil war after 70-odd years of declaring nationhood--represents one of the most happy if not the perfect union of several states in modern history, if not all human history. It is by far the one and only union of a continental scale that has strengthened with the passage of time while all others ( e.g. the Roman or Islamic empires) have dwindled and evaporated in thin air. >>>

We do not need emulation of the American system of tyranny, or articles that tell us we are hundreds of years ``behind`` America. The facts are, that given the total advantage America faces in the world scene and its share of global wealth, it has millions that live in poverty and a mass soceity that has, in a large percentage absolutely no share of that wealth.

Athar Osama: Many thanks for your article, but it helps us little in resolving the issue. What you are saying is what every single Pakistani knows. What we should or should not do is apparent to everyone. What we don`t know is how to go about it resolving the situation. Looking at the Civil war confers no advantage. If the purpose was to prove that we have to resolve the issues otherwise we`d be in trouble, it`s an unnecessar waste of effort. Pakistanis remember the East Pakistan conflict, and know the implications too well even without a dose of history.

If you browse thourgh any newspaper today (and I`m sure you do), the same arguments are repeated everywhere. While the sentiment at work is certainly commendable, these suggestions might not take us anywhere. Surely, they inform the public - but I doubt whether our largely illiterate public is going to be that open to argument at this stage.

#60: M. Asadi:

I am neither softening my stance on anything hor hardening it. I am merely restating that the article says. You may read more (or less) into my article than what It actually means depending upon the color of your glasses but thats a bias that everyone of us brings to the table. My article is not about American democracy. Neither is it an exhaustive and comprehensive review of American constitutional history. At the very most, it begins in 1776 and ends in 1787. One would hardly call it a review of America`s democratic history--its successes or failues. All I am attempting to do here is to look at a particular instance in time in the US Constitution making and draw parallels with problems that we face today. I believe learning from history helps. You may disagree with my comparison. But to take one sentence out of my article (that too a qualified one) and, on the basis of that, reject the entire argument is, I believe, unfair to the argument that I think stands.

Again, I am too humble a student of history, politics, and policy to claim that I am trying to solve a mammoth problem in the space of a single article. But I hope I am making a contribution to the debate.

Another attempt at the Fauji-lovers to run away from the debate by posting their wild economic growth numbers.

The 90’s decade cannot be touted as a failure of democracy. It is the failure of ‘limited democracy’ and the only conclusion to draw is the need to enforce complete democracy. That Nawaz Sharif was forcing the Islamic amendment through reflects the institutional malaise that was prevalent in the absence of any institutional existence – a condition that was there due to an unwilling establishment playing with backdoor conspiracies and ensuring no system take root.

In any case, if Nawaz Sharif ATTEMPTING to ram through an Islamic Amendment can be used as a reason to justify the rejection of limited democracy, then what would you say of Musharaf’s raping the ENTIRE constitution? Of course logic is probably not the forte of fauji-loving freaks :D

But I would go so far to say that even if NS had managed to install that amendment, there was STILL more hope for democracy in Pakistan than there is today. A democratic government has the power to give direction – toward one religion or toward no religion. I accept that since I believe in the supremacy of the constitution.

As for the 6% Economists…well, when we have America’s blessing, we do great. That is the golden rule. Yeh sab tumhara karam hai America! Why do you commit shirk by praising someone else for the ‘great’ growth rates? :D

In the mid-late 90’s the NYSE (New York Stock Exchange for the economics challenged Fauji Lovers) was doing phenomenally well. If the average mutual fund was growing at 30% per year and say Vanguard’s comparable fund was only growing at 15% (which still beats the historical annual averages) the Fund Manager of Vanguard would be fired.

With all the influx of American $$ and American blessings and American investment in the post-911 era, Pakistan should be growing with double the current rate!

That’s the problem with Fauji-lovers. You guys have low standards. In a competitive world, you’d be fired.

Anyhow, even a double digit growth rate is no substitute for an already existing constitution.

re: #56 by xosmanx
(Ask ordinary Baluchs (not people on the payroll of those warlords) and they will tell you what the situation is.)
It depends on who u ask. If u ask the Baluchis being killed by your Army, they will tell u that they want out. If u ask Baluchis who will ultimately benefit by Army action, they would tell u it is good for the country. Who is in the majority? The surest way is by a referendum conducted by an international agency.
In Kashmir, there is a state govt elected through ballot. Now, u can go on debating whether the elections were free or not till the cows come home (many International agencies have vouched for its fairness) but the fact is there is a state govt in place with a Kashmiri CM as the head. There are many disgruntled Kashmiris in the valley who want either independence or join Pak (latter being a minority). So, even in the valley(with a clear muslim majority), the house is divided.
In the rest of J and K, muslims are in a minority. Ladakh has a buddhist majority and will never vote in favor of Pakistan. Jammu has a hindu majority population.
The reason why India refuses a referendum is the same reason why Pakistan will refuse a referendum in Balochistan viz India considers J and K to be an integral part of India. Constitution of India says so implicitly but gives that state a special place with special provisions. To change that, rest of India must agree. This will never happen.
Pak is on shakier grounds. Balochistan is also claimed by Iran. Tomorrow, Balochis may want to secede and join Iran or become independent. You cannot blame India for supporting their cause as Pak has never been good to India and has exploited sentiments of Kashmiris to the hilt for its own personal agenda.
A word about Pak occupied Kashmir. It is now a haven for terrorists, as recent earthquake clearly revealed.
AlQaida thrives in POK
The atmosphere is viciated by terrorists. If Pak sincerely believes that terrorism is not coming from its soil, it should have not problems shutting down a number of
Terrorist camps all across Pakistan as the above link will show (go to the bottom of the link for a list of terrorist camps).
Pak does not have a democracy. Its Army, that rules the nation, was once supporting AlQaida but took an about-turn in its policy after US threat. It is unable to completely dismantle terror apparatus. On top of all this, it was allowing Abdul xerox khan, the nuclear scientist, to continue with his nuclear proliferation.
How many nations in the world would have faith in your ruler do you think?
When Paki ruler says he wants justice for Kashmiris, only Pakis believe it. Nobody else does.
Sridhar

re:#59 by faisaluno
Did not Pakis vote for Nawaz Sharief with an overwhelming 2/3rds majority? was that voting rigged too, just like your dictator`s re