Media: The more things change...

Let me first phrase the Pakistan resolution from wikipedia.

"No constitutional plan would be workable or acceptable to the Muslims unless geographical contiguous units are demarcated into regions which should be so constituted with such territorial readjustments as may be necessary. That the areas in which the Muslims are numerically in majority as in the North-Western and Eastern zones of India should be grouped to constitute independent states in which the constituent units shall be autonomous and sovereign.[13]

Additionally, it stated:

That adequate, effective and mandatory safeguards shall be specifically provided in the constitution for minorities in the units and in the regions for the protection of their religious, cultural, economic, political, administrative and other rights of the minorities, with their consultation. Arrangements thus should be made for the security of Muslims where they were in a minority."

That was basically a loose confederation of states where rights of individual states will be protected. That was the basis of movement of "Sindhudesh", "Bangladesh", Pakhtunistan and Baluchistan.

In 1946 Cabinet mission plan proposed alternative to Two states in its plan. It was either take it or leave it for other party to take it. That was tried and was unsuccessful. And untimately two nation states were born. Pakistan and India.
In the beginning it was basically the survival of Pakistan and later American interest in the region which shaped the history.
Now. Is confederation an alternative. If we dissect closely all the current states (provinces) are dependent upon each other since a lot of development has happened with federation in mind. For energy resources Pakistan on its own is dependent on Sind and Baluchistan. For Port also on sind and Baluchistan. Fot water on NWFP, tribal areas and Kashmir.
The main issue is not to breakup Pakistan, but come up with equitable solution. If not it will continue to sow the seeds of breakup of Pakistan.
The independent parts will have some difficulty in survival. The main problem will be with Punjab, because of its land locked position. But Sind and Baluchistan will also not fare good nor will NWFP and Kashmiris will be in bad shape with no help avaiable. I don't think any option like that will be acceptable to even neighbours and foreign powers either.
But the proposal that provincial and regional leaders should take care of their constituency and Central Government take care of defense, foreign policy.
With more relax situation education and local economics can be left to provinces.
I don't think people in Sind and Punjab will be of the opinion of something like Bulleya is presenting.
I keep my opinion on NWFP and Baluchistan to myself, as I don't have enough information on politics in those regions.

" 1946 Cabinet Mission to India
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
History of South Asia and History of India


Stone Age 70,000–3300 BCE
• Mehrgarh Culture • 7000–3300 BCE
Indus Valley Civilization 3300–1700 BCE
Late Harappan Culture 1700–1300 BCE
Vedic period 1500–500 BCE
Iron Age 1200–300 BCE
• Maha Janapadas • 700–300 BCE
• Magadha Empire • 545–320 BCE
• Maurya Empire • 321–184 BCE
Middle Kingdoms 230 BCE–1279 CE
• Satavahana Empire • 230 BCE–199 CE
• Kushan Empire • 60–240
• Gupta Empire •280–550
• Pala Empire • 750–1174
• Chola Empire • 250 BCE–1070
Islamic Sultanates 1206–1596
• Delhi Sultanate • 1206–1526
• Deccan Sultanates • 1490–1596
Hoysala Empire 1040–1346
Kakatiya Empire 1083–1323
Vijayanagara Empire 1336–1565
Mughal Empire 1526–1857
Maratha Empire 1674–1818
Sikh Confederacy 1716–1849
British India 1858–1947
Modern States 1947 onwards
Nation histories
Bangladesh • Bhutan • Republic of India
Maldives • Nepal • Pakistan • Sri Lanka
Regional histories
Bengal • Himachal Pradesh • Orissa
Pakistani Regions • North India • South India • Tibet
Specialised histories
Coinage• Dynasties • Economy • Indology • Language • Literature
Maritime • Military • Science and Technology • Timeline
This box: view • talk • edit
The British Cabinet Mission of 1946 to India aimed to discuss and finalize plans for the transfer of power from the British Raj to Indian leadership, providing India with independence under Dominion status in the Commonwealth of Nations. Formulated at the initiative of Clement Attlee, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, the mission consisted of Lord Pethick-Lawrence, the Secretary of State for India, Sir Stafford Cripps, President of the Board of Trade, and A. V. Alexander, the First Lord of the Admiralty. It was also supplemented by Lord Wavell, the Viceroy of India at the time.

Contents [hide]
1 Purpose and proposals
1.1 Plan of May 16
1.2 Plan of June 16
2 Reactions and acceptance
3 Formation of a government
4 Coalition and breakdown
5 See also
6 Notes



[edit] Purpose and proposals
The Mission purpose was:

Hold preparatory discussions with elected representatives of British India and the Indian states in order to secure agreement as to the method of framing the constitution.
Setting up of a constitution body.
Setting up an Executive Council with the support of the main Indian parties. The mission arrived on March 24, 1946.
The Mission held talks with the representatives of the Indian National Congress and the All India Muslim League, the two largest political parties in the Constituent Assembly of India. After initial dialogue, the Mission proposed two plans over the composition of the new government:


[edit] Plan of May 16
Promulgated on May 16, 1946, the plan to create a united dominion of India as a loose confederation of provinces came to be known by its date of announcement:

A united Dominion of India would be given independence.
Muslim-majority provinces would be grouped - Baluchistan, Sind, Punjab and NWFP would form one group, and Bengal and Assam would form another (Assam was a Hindu-majority province, while both Punjab and Bengal consisted of large populations of Hindus and Sikhs).
Hindu-majority provinces in central and southern India would form another group.
The Central government would be empowered to run foreign affairs, defence and communications, while the rest of powers and responsibility would belong to the provinces, coordinated by groups.

[edit] Plan of June 16
An alternative plan proposed on June 16, 1946 was to arrange for India to be divided into Hindu-majority India and a Muslim-majority Pakistan. The princely states of India would be permitted to accede to either dominion or attain independence.


[edit] Reactions and acceptance
The approval of the plans would determine the composition of the new government. The Congress Working Committee had initially approved the plan. However, on 10 July, Jawaharlal held a press conference in Bombay declaring that the Congress had agreed only to participate in the Constituent Assembly and regards itself free to change or modify the Cabinet Mission Plan as it thought best."[1] While the Congress ruled out the June 16 plan - seeing it as the blatant division of India into small states - it also hesitated to accept the May 16 plan, which it saw as caving in to communal division by accepting the grouping of provinces on a communal basis - setting the stage for regional and religious separatism. It objected strongly to the inclusion of Assam, a Hindu-majority province with the Muslim-majority Bengal province which was to form the third group. It also objected to the inclusion of the Northwest Frontier Province, which was a Congress-administered province and supportive of Indian unity, into a group dominated by League-ruled provinces. The Congress was certain that the League would use the groupings as a solid platform for to achieve a Muslim state - attributed by Jinnah's demand that the groups have the option of secession in five years. The plan's strongest opponent was Mohandas Gandhi, the principal Indian leader.

The Muslim League gave its approval to the plan only under duress, as it was assured that the Congress also had accepted the scheme and the Plan would be the basis of the future constitution of India. Jinnah, in his speech to the League Council, clearly stated that he recommended acceptance only because nothing better could be obtained. However, on declaration from the Congress President that the Congress could change the scheme through its majority in the Constituent Assembly, this meant that the minorities would be placed at the mercy of the majority. The Muslim League Council met at Bombay on 27 July. "Mr. Jinnah in his opening speech reiterated the demand for Pakistan as the only course left open to the Muslim League. After three days' discussion, the Council passed a resolution rejecting the Cabinet Mission Plan. It also decided to resort to direct action for the achievement of Pakistan."[1]

However, the plan had its advocates. Maulana Azad, a nationalist Muslim leader said that while groupings was a major concession to the theme of religious separatism, it would also force the League to accept a framework for a united India. While assuring minority rights and participation, an independent India would be free to do away eventually with the groupings arrangement. While Gandhi criticized the Maulana's views for ignoring practical considerations and League ambitions, other senior Indian leaders like Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and Jawaharlal Nehru were aware that if the Congress did not approve either plan, the entire government would be transferred to the League, which had approved both. Expressing strong reservations, the Congress approved the May 16 plan for a loose union of India.


[edit] Formation of a government
The Viceroy began organizing the transfer of power to a Congress-League coalition. But League president Muhammad Ali Jinnah denounced the hesitant and conditional approval of the Congress and rescinded League approval of both plans. Thus Congress leaders entered the newly styled Viceroy's Executive Council: Jawaharlal Nehru became the head - vice president in title, but possessing the executive authority. Vallabhbhai Patel became the Home member - responsible for internal security and government agencies. Congress-led governments were formed in most provinces - including in the NWFP, in Punjab (a coalition with the Shiromani Akali Dal and the Unionist Muslim League). The League led governments in Bengal and Sind. The Constituent Assembly was instructed to begin work to write a new constitution for India.


[edit] Coalition and breakdown
Jinnah and the League condemned the new government, and vowed to agitate for Pakistan by any means possible. Disorder arose in Punjab and Bengal, including the cities of Delhi, Bombay and Calcutta. On the League-organized Direct Action Day, over 5,000 people were killed across India, and Hindu, Sikh and Muslim mobs began clashing routinely. Viceroy Wavell stalled the Central government's efforts to stop the disorder, and the provinces were instructed to leave this to the governors, who did not undertake any major action. To end the disorder and rising bloodshed, Wavell encouraged Nehru to ask the League to enter the government. While Patel and most Congress leaders were opposed to conceding to a party that was organizing disorder, Nehru conceded in hope of preserving communal peace.

League leaders entered the council under the leadership of Liaquat Ali Khan, the future first Prime Minister of Pakistan who became the finance minister. But the council did not function in harmony - separate meetings were held by League ministers, and both parties vetoed the major initiatives proposed by the other, highlighting their ideological differences and political antagonism. At the arrival of the new (and proclaimed the last) viceroy, Lord Mountbatten in early 1947, Congress leaders expressed the view that the coalition was unworkable. This led to the eventual proposal, and acceptance of the partition of India."
This in shorrt is the cabinet mission plan and I will discuss on next board what it means.

beenaSarwar:
I read your article with interest. Because of objectivity.
The case was based on assertion that, the GEO transmission are stopped from Dubai. Since transmission have already been started from Dubai therefore case was dismissed.

Re: Geo's case before the Sindh High Court to restore at least the non-news channels, first the Deputy Attorney General on Nov 27 claimed that the government had not stopped the channels. Then, after inordinately delaying the case, the learned bench dismissed the petition as non-maintainable under the PCO. Was anyone surprised?

But then since MAJ(PUBH) was in fact in favor of balkanization - pakis should practice what their man preached... pakis should go for balkanization for their land...

Any case - unity is not really working for them... so why not go separate ways?

Re: # 69
[...that in the 5000 year (?) history of south asia...]

For most of the 5000 years - there was no cell phone or internet - people across lands didn't talk to each other that much...

History is past - the future is now... things worked very differently in past, but they would work differently from now... Choice is yours... don't blame history for the wrong choice you have made...

Re: # 69

And how low would you go? Can I have my own village
or mohalla as my country?

Re: # 67 dada

According to pakis - Mukti bahini had already done the hard work - indian army just finished the job... :)

majumdar #67: "And what happens to MAJ (pbuh) dream of Muslim nationalism???"

...good question......actually if one studies jinnah, factually, one realizes that his dream was actually balkanization of india, based on the cabinet mission plan....he wanted a relatively autonomous muslim majority area, within a united india......the best solution for south asia in my opinion.....

do keep in mind that in the 5000 year (?) history of south asia, it has only been one united country/empire for roughly 200 to 300 years (under ashoka and brits)......

viqarm# "The 64 million dollar question is whether it can be done in a peaceful way...."

yes, this is very true....will it be like yugoslavia (violent) or czechoslavakia (peaceful)........if it is under military rule, it will be violent......if it is under civilian rule, perhaps not so violent......

in any case, i think pakistan should be a union of autonomous provinces.....much like uae.....in fact, all of south asia should be like that.......

why people in lahore want quetta to be a part of one country and vice-versa is beyond me......let those who want sharia have it in their own land, and those who want secularism have it in their land......one cannot drink in sharjah, can in dubai, kind of can in abu dhabi, and can openly in fujeira (?), and everyone gets along..

Re: # 63
"....having said that, i am starting to realize that, perhaps, balkanization may actually be something good for pakistan (and for countries, which have diverse cultures and populations)......take uae as an example....."

Romair Sahib,

The 64 million dollar question is whether it can be done in a peaceful way. I agree that if it is not possible to get along - and there are plenty of indications of that - then it is better to peacefully separate.

Who knows, with maturity in some distant future, we might be able to come together again.

Mohar bhai,

(nobody believed rice-eating, dark, short bongs would ever beat back martial race west-pakis - )

And they were proved right in their beliefs. The martial race Pakis were beaten not by "rice-eating, dark, short bongs" but by paratha chomping turban wearing (fellow) Punjoos!!!

Agree with you 200% on #64.

Romair sahib,

(balkanization may actually be something good for pakistan)

And what happens to MAJ (pbuh) dream of Muslim nationalism???

Regards

Hamidumdum Sahib,
Do you think that Bezamir could defeat Aitzaz if there were elections for PPP Chairperson?

Re: # 64

Mohar,

I do not think Pakistanis are capable of understanding this concepet of inclusion and
integration. They are too drunk on religion.

Another lot like them is Kashmir Muslims. Although
after numerous thappads by Indians, may be they
are seeing the light, nasha is going down bit by
bit, it appears, though you never know how long
the treatment is needed.

Re: # 63 romair
[..i have never figured out why people want to be a part of giant unnaturally united countries...]

Well, for one, there is safety and benefit of numbers... but only if all the groups are willing to work together...

the problem in pakiland is not the size of the country, the problem is the ideology... you pakis adopted ideology of exclusion and isolation, instead of inclusion and integration... the result is obvious...

It may be too late already to repair the damage... too much blood and water has gone down the drain...

majumdar #: "Pakistan is facing serious turmoil no doubt but it is nowhere near breaking up as it was in 1971..."

...perhaps not as near......but one never knows......i have always felt that balkanization and not talibanization is ther real issue for pakistan......

....having said that, i am starting to realize that, perhaps, balkanization may actually be something good for pakistan (and for countries, which have diverse cultures and populations)......take uae as an example.....

pakistan should be a federation of autonomous states, within a state, like uae.....in fact, all of south asia should be like that, if you ask me......

i have never figured out why people want to be a part of giant unnaturally united countries....

Re: # 61

Dada - you are using the benefit of the hindsight on 1971 episode... Before it happened, nobody believed it would happen - nobody believed rice-eating, dark, short bongs would ever beat back martial race west-pakis - the "geographical peculiarity" notwithstanding...

The theory of "geographical peculiarity" is an after-thought, commonly used by pakis to explain away their humiliating defeat and paper over the fact that they are basically surrender monkeys with no guts and no glory...

That said - of course, the current situation in pakiland is very different from 1971, but you never know what the consequence could be...

Rashid mian,

Re: #60

Pakistan is facing serious turmoil no doubt but it is nowhere near breaking up as it was in 1971, which I must remind you had significant geographical peculiarities which dont exist now. I find the article alarmist in nature.

Regards

Balkanization, not Talibanization, is the real threat facing Pakistan
Politics of irrelevance in the banana republic. From frying pan to fire.

Participation in the elections under a dictator will be an act of treason in the current conditions and would tantamount to collaboration with a regime that is presiding over the balkanization of Pakistan.

By Yousuf Nazar, Former Global Head of Emerging Markets Investments, Citibank

Pakistan’s establishment and sections of its media have perfected the art of projecting the most irrelevant topics as national issues of paramount importance. They have now been joined by the Bush administration. Musharraf’s ‘doffing’ of his uniform is one such example. Some newspapers even published comments to the effect whether it was the beginning of a drastic transformation. Really; transformation to a completely failed state from a ‘failed state’? Another general? So what? Hitler was not from the Army. He never really wore a general’s uniform. So he never had to take it off. But that did not alter the fact that he was a dictator whose third Reich led to Germany’s worst defeat and complete destruction.

Ayub Khan took off his uniform in 1962 but ruled for another seven years as a military dictator without many problems. He was the most ‘moderately enlightened’ of all generals. He introduced private enterprise to the Army as well as to his family and institutionalized corruption at the highest level of government for the first time in Pakistan’s history. He wore fine dinner jackets to the state dinners in Western capitals and swam with beautiful British call girls [see photo of Christine Keeler left] in his leisure time. But the extreme inequalities and regional and ethnic polarization caused by his misrule led to the dismemberment of Pakistan (presided over by another general) after two years, eight months, and twenty two days of his exit as the President of Pakistan. So much for the stability that his ‘economic achievements’ had supposedly brought to Pakistan.

One would think that Pakistan’s elites (although intellectually depleted to a debilitating degree due to massive brain drain over the past three decades) having lived most of their lives under military dictatorships, would have learned that only two generals in the modern history brought about any positive political change, Napoleon and Atatürk. And they would therefore focus on more substantive issues. Is this too much or too rational to expect?

Let us now look at some real issues: The history teaches us that all generals behave in exactly the same manner when they have power. Their policies revolve around self-preservation and protection of the military’s institutional interests, and absolute concentration of power inevitably leads to greater problems than the ones, they supposedly seized power to solve. It is therefore of little consequence if they rule with or without uniform, as one-man dictatorship or as a group. Or with ‘rubber-stamp’ parliaments or without even the pretense of having an election or a parliament.

Musharraf’s both coups were desperate acts of a man who saw his career coming to an end. Both the coups showed complete and contemptuous disregard for the constitution and the interests of the country. He acted with impunity in a brazen display of naked power that showed no regard for any consideration other than his own self. What really led to his ‘dismissal’ by Nawaz Sharif was his misadventure into Cargill; a historic blunder whose sole purpose was to sabotage the peace process initiated with Indian prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee. A peace process that could have led to a period of greater stability and development in the sub-continent and a reduced role of the military. After eight years of his misrule, what has Pakistan really achieved?

Not only Pakistan does not have a democracy, it does not have even a chance of holding free and fair elections that would be at least as ‘fair’ as they were twenty years back in 1988.
Pakistan is as corrupt, if not more, a country as it was on October 12, 1999. The biggest loan defaulters and arguably the most corrupt family in Pakistan’s history – the Chaudris of Gujrat – are Musharraf’s principal backers and lead the ruling party.
Pakistan has been declared the most dangerous country in the World by the Americans, his best friends. It ranks 12th on the failed states index, has the highest inflation rate in Asia and the second highest rate of suicide bombings in the world. It also achieved the dubious distinction of becoming the largest buyer of arms in the developing world in 2006.
Pakistan’s judiciary had a tainted record but it still operated with some semblance of respect. Now it stands completely destroyed.
And the economy? The massive inflow of funds (over $65 billion) during the eight years has been a wasted opportunity. The greatest beneficiaries have been the generals, bankers, stock brokers and their friends without any real development, whatsoever, in the country. As far as the $11 billion aid from the United States is concerned, a little over 90% of this amount is military aid and has nothing to do with economic development. The largest source of external funding has been the remittances ($26 billion), which would have come any way regardless of which government was in power.
The general was shrewd enough to use the 9/11 to end his own international isolation but in his desperation to undo the blunders committed by the generals (himself included) that earned Pakistan the reputation of a ‘terrorist state’, his regime has made the biggest compromises on Pakistan sovereignty and independence in the country’s history; compromises that may ultimately lead to Balkanization, and not Talibanization, of Pakistan.

Why Balkanization? The term usually refers to division of a place or country into several small political units, often unfriendly to one another. The term balkanization comes from the name of the Balkan Peninsula in Europe, which was divided into several small nations in the early twentieth century.

A major fallout of the prolonged periods of military rule (1977-1988 and 1999-to date) since the break-up of Pakistan in 1971, has been that the country no longer thinks nationally. For example there is no real national party. The PPP which once played that role was squeezed out of that role by the Army generals and their minions, like Nawaz and Chaudris, with the slogan “Jag Punjabi Jag” and mindless repression and persecution of its followers, leaving aside its own blunders for a moment.


The ANP, MQM, MMA and PML(N) are either purely ethnic parties or at best Provincial entities. Similarly on issues such as Kalabagh Dam, division of assets, etc; the discussions, regardless of which Government is in power, are conducted on the basis of provincial rather than national interests. Musharraf says that the Army provides the glue to Pakistan’s integrity but implicit in this dangerous argument is the admission that nothing else holds the country together.

In any case as the situation exists, Baluchistan is in the midst of a war for secession, and the Northern territories of Pakistan are on their way to forming autonomous entities with their own justice system, tax collection regime, police force, and fairly effective militias.

From a Federation we seem to be evolving into a de facto confederation which is usually a prelude to independence. The question may no longer be whether this slow motion disintegration of Pakistan can be stopped but whether it can be managed peacefully.

That is the challenge Pakistan faced in 1969-1971 and failed. The apologists for the Field Marshals and Generals dismissed the possibility then. They are again ignoring such warnings now. But history and conditions do not seem to be on their side, never mind the ‘pragmatism’ of the Busharraf followers, moderates, realists, etc. The threat of Balkanization is not an issue of ‘idealism’ or ‘morality’. This threat has never been so real since 1971.


Participation in the elections under this dictator will be an act of treason in the current conditions and would tantamount to collaboration with a regime that is presiding over the balkanization of Pakistan. This is not a time for polemics and short-sighted tactics. The nation and its political parties must rise to the challenge or be prepared to face the consequences

p.s. all the vegetable vendors in islamabad oppose his reinstatement

How about shopkeepers in Peshawar.

Poor hindu idolators - they do not know that even with all the movement for "democracy" in Pakistan they would still have to face terror attacks from Pakistanis after the holy months.

The deadly script has already been written for them thousands of years back:

"Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the jizya (poor-due), then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
- Qu’ran, 9:5"

hamidm:

mush tried to be ataturk. and failed.

mush then tried to be hosni mubarak. and failed - after 2007, he can no longer use the terrorist bogeyman.

So, no mush is trying to be putin - by cheating in the elections. and rest assured he will fail again.

after that what? maybe he will try to become hamidm, and spend his remaining days talking about the unwashed pakis..

hamidm: look at mush's pictures after he has been separated from his precious wardi and you will notice a close resemblance with a plucked chicken.

Re: # 50

yea ! .......... release aitizaz ahsan - i like the guy !

.... oh sure, go ahead and release the cj too even though he has served his purpose and is now about as useful as tits on a bull ........

list of people who want the droopy eyed pco-1 cj chaudary whatshiname reinstated

1. Tahmed
2. Imran Khan
3. ........

p.s. all the vegetable vendors in islamabad oppose his reinstatement

list of people who have boycotted the election so far

1. Imran Khan
2. Tahmed
3. .........

..... i will update the list after watching four more hours of ary and geo ..... stay tuned

FREE AITZAZ AHSAN

Re: # 49

tahmed32,

You are being far too generous to the gentleman in question, surely some credit goes to the lawyers, human right groups and international agencies not to forget El Prezidente Moosharaf architect of this entire fiasco.

By the way, said gentleman was also taking interest on vegetable prices in Islamabad.

#49 Posted by tahmed32,

The US ambassador visited Aitezaz Ahsan's residence today. I'm waiting if and when she's going to visit Chief-Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry's.

rf: The CJP is not "what's his name". He has already won on the one of two issues that had led Musharraf to "fire" him - i.e. Mush had wanted to remain President AND in uniform at the same time. This alone has ensured that the Chief Justice's name will go down in Pakistan history.

The second issue was the Chief Justice standing up for Habeas Corpus - and in doing so stood for the rights of every individual in Pakistan to not be "disappeared" by Musharraf's agencies. In doing so, he was standing up for your rights as much as for mine and for every Pakistani. How well he succeeded there, time will tell. Why is this so dificult to understand?

Re: # 47

tahmed32,

Life is not a clustering of linear events, most of the time events are random and like someone very rightly said, change is the only permanent thing.

Establishment was not only behind the Ghazi brothers, they are the one's who created them. But like many of their other frankenstain's, Ghazi brothers too felt that they were above the law and demanded their pound of flesh without realizing change of winds, or may have known and resisted. Rest is history.

What was his name, CJP is now redundant. Your attempts to revive his memories with such fondness may be honorable but of little purpose. More importantly, Whats his name Ex-CJP is not the savior, had he been honorable Chief Justice of PAKISTAN he would have resigned once he was vindicated. But that was not to be, and he too will be remembered for his politcal shenanigans.

majumdar: Also see lal masjid: There, it is clear that mush found it convenient to let the mullah brothers fool themselves into thinking that they were some kind of khulafa-i-rashidoon. In fact they were merely convenient means for musharraf to intimidate people in Islamabad and direct attention away from the Chief Justice's rejection of Mush's bid to remain in uniform and remain president for another 5 years.

Tahmed sahib,

Re: #45

The ease with which the havayoons took over the Swat valley and almost the same ease with which the kanjaroon Army has retaken the valley makes your theory very plausible indeed.

Regards

majumdar: looks like musharraf has fooled not just bush (who is easily fooled it seems) but also zeemax into thinking that the maulvis are anything more than convenient fools who helped keep him in illegal power for 8 years.

#35 nasah: in other words, when mullah fazloo flips, hamidm will flop. and when mullah fazloo flops, hamidm will flip.

Thus: while mullah fazloo flip-flops, hamidm flop-flips.

Please dont encourage hamidm to continue his flop-flipping on musharraf when i am trying so hard to get him to start using his own mind.

Zee sahib,

I think I will go with HP sain here. Indeed it is true that Pakistan is having to fight for its borders but the situation is nowhere as desperate as you think it is. The havayoons are getting a beating in FATA lately. Of course they will remain a strong force in the countryside and also plague Pakistan with random acts of bombing.

Regards

#41 Posted by HP,

I'm sure you're right, but it appears you say different things to different people, HP Sain:

#43 Posted by HP on December 2,
#42 Posted by majumdar
Dada,
The one thing you forget to mention that while the Soviet intervention led to its own disintegration, the other interventionist in Afghanistan, Pakistan too is fighting to keep its geographical integrity.

#30 Posted by zeemax
"if I didn't know how crazy you can be, I would actually think you are quite ignorant."

The problem with you my friend is that you have no idea what the political concepts are. Your reliance on TV and newspapers makes you appear a simpleton rather than someone who understands what a particular phrase means and what historical contexts are all about.

Aleph -- not in terms of business by any means -- it was regulated to the hilt -- but socially.

nasah #38:

{{the phrase is Nehruvian Fabianism -- lazy stagnant Laissez-faire}}

It's stagnant state socialism, not laissez-faire! Nasah sahib, how could you?

Re: # 28

the phrase is Nehruvian Fabianism -- lazy stagnant Laissez-faire -- not zealot murderous Stalinism -- and it did work for its time.

#27 yes, zeemax, amazingly they do. I have no idea why, but they do.

Re: # 31

"on behalf of my president i would like to thank the horrible hindoos for their kind thoughts:"(himdm)

instead of 'Horrible Hindoos -- 'Surrundering Sikhs'

Re: # 32 33

change it man change it right now -- inversely or directly.

now hamidm says -- "Reinstate the Supreme Court and Restore the deposed judges"

hamidm zindabad! Maulana Fazooloo murdabad!

#33 is wrt hamidm #32

hamidm: That is an interesting thought process - make your views a function (inverse, in this case) of another man's views. hmmmm.....

mullah fazloo agrees with me on the droopy-eyed cj ? .... i might have to change my position

ISLAMABAD: Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) Secretary General Maulana Fazlur Rehman on Saturday refused to support the reinstatement of deposed judges of the Supreme Court and high courts including sacked chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry.

Speaking at a ceremony hosted by the South Asian Free Media Association (SAFMA), Fazl said that he supported the independence of judiciary, but would not favour reinstatement of the deposed CJP and other judges, who had taken oath under a PCO in 1999.

...... on behalf of my president i would like to thank the horrible hindoos for their kind thoughts:

ISLAMABAD, Dec 1: Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Saturday greeted President Pervez Musharraf on his re-election and expressed the hope that ties between two countries would get better.

Mr Singh in his message to Mr Musharraf extended greetings and felicitations on behalf of the government and people of India...APP

#29 Posted by HP,

-Only politicians change borders.

-they don’t have the strength of politicians to do that.

HP Sain, if I didn't know how crazy you can be, I would actually think you are quite ignorant.

#25 Posted by zeemax
“Constitutionalism is the only way out if Pakistan is to remain in its present shape and form –“

Hehehe Zee babu you are too much into tv.

My post 17 was in response to Hamid’s post and we discussed the issues in a way that perhaps we understand. Hamidm has promised to buy a new and bigger hdtv to work hard for democracy to beat you, tahmed and romair. That is the kind of effort you can only expect from a democracy lover. I already have two 50 inch plasma TVs in my lounge and study. So my commitment to democracy in Pakistan is bigger and deeper than any of you.

How could you possibly accuse me or Hamid of “trivializing the democratic alternative” when we are doing so much for the democracy in Pakistan? I can guarantee you we are doing better than you all. And all our efforts in watching tv for couple of hours every day would bring democracy to Pakistan.

As far as your talking of constitution and then bringing in the Havayoon separatists in to the discussion, merely means that you really don’t understand what constitution is all about. Let me add a historical fact to your knowledge. Only politicians change borders. The criminals, bands of outlaws and Havayoon such as the ones in different parts of the country will not be able to do that because there is no historical precedent of that happening ever. So your wet dreams of some Islamic empire in areas like swat or malakand are just dreams. They can try but they don’t have the strength of politicians to do that.

Zee sahib/Nb,

The poor in India are more likely to vote than the rich, now whether that does anyone (including the poor) any good is a different matter.

HP sain,

Yes, indeed 60 years of democracy has not done India too much good but that was partly the result of the Nehruvian Stalinism adopted by Injuns - a bad choice but not necessarily an automatic corollary of democracy- had JLN not been a***hole things may have turned out differently. With luck and patience things may still turn diiff

#26 Posted by nb,

I doubt the millions living on roadsides in Calcutta, or squatting on railtracks in Bombay, vote anyone in or out. Do they? If they do, I stand corrected.

Zeemax #25
The Indian non-privileged/disenfranchised are a defeated and fatalistic lot content with whatever destiny sends their way.
I have no idea why you think that. Indians generally are very politically aware and change their governments with alarming frequency.

#17 Posted by HP

Believe me democracy would not change any thing in Pakistan. Btw, in the last sixty years what has democracy changed in India?

How are Pakistan and India comparable?

The Indian non-privileged/disenfranchised are a defeated and fatalistic lot content with whatever destiny sends their way.

Pakistani non-privileged/disenfranchised are a vibrant and aware people mired in discontent who know this country belongs as much to them as anyone else, and fight for their rights to it.

All they need is a viable alternative to the status-quo, likely to succeed in the long run, for them to rise and ensure it is put in place.

What will provide that alternative? The briefly independent Judiciary and Media was a big leap forward in providing just that. If that is restored to its pre-3rd November form, you will see Pakistan leapfrog in the comity of nations in no time at all.

Constitutionalism is the only way out if Pakistan is to remain in its present shape and form - as the 1973 Constitution was not only agreed upon by those who had been opposed to Pakistan's very creation, but also upheld by those who are now engaged in militancy against the State for its continued violations. Such a miraculous document can never be produced again.

If above is not achieved, the other alternative is the one already being pursued in Waziristan and Swat i.e. a loosely aligned federation of Ameers (warlords if you like) tied together with a common politico-social ideology, stretching from Malakand to Kunar on one end, and Tank to Kandhar on the other. No one can prevent that process firmly underway. Don't know about Baluchistan but once the Pakistani federation falls, that will be up for the highest bidder.

In that event, the hamidms and the HPs can ponder over WTF happened and what should they do now with the remaining Punjab and Sindh? I say remaining Punjab because you can count out Seraiki belt as well.

So don't trivialize the democratic alternative just yet. It is now or never.

Re: # 22 Posted by hamidm2 on December 1, 2007 8:23:25 pm

[... we are not a 'mustakil mazaj' people ...] are we "dynamic mizaaj" then?

Re: # 10 Posted by HP on December 1, 2007 6:02:49 am

[... and Punjabi moderates like Nawaz and Imran..]

Huh! Since when has Nawaz become a moderate? And that idiot Imran is just a "yo-yo" without any political direction. Come on can you not give a better evaluation of these so-called Pakistani politicians?

Re: # 19

bj,

.... you don't really understand us pakis ... we are different ..... believe me, i sincerely wanted democracy a few weeks ago but now that it seems inevitable, i am bored and looking forward to our next dictator ........ we are not a 'mustakil mazaj' people .......

Re: # 17

hp,

.... thanks for explaining this strange phenomenon of our obsession with democracy - i agree with you that change is a human need ... but why can't we just swap dictators every five years ?..... now that geo is back on air i will do my best to do my part ...... i would hate to think that folks like tahmed, romair and zeemax did more for the cause of democracy in pakistan than me ......... i might even go out and buy a big screen plasma hdtv and a new couch ...... i still have ten cases of salsa and chips left over from the y2k fiasco .........

#12 Posted by hamidm2:

"........what happened ?..... "

Don't know. Had a Pakistani friend over for lunch today. The Mrs. and me were surprised for she "talked" politics throughout the afternoon. Previously she would talk only about extremely boring things like "derivatives", "options", "Sienna" etc. So something must have happened. On the other hand, her husband repeated the same story about "heera mandi" that we have heard maybe 100 times. So, then again, nothing might have happened.

#17 HP

Kambakhat HP, if you are trying to turn funny now - it is too little, too late...

And too lame!

Re: # 12

Hamidm Sahib:

Whoever thought you were for DEMOCRACY FIRST. Certainly not me. Although, I thought your first priority would be that glass of fine nectar, which cannot be used to wash unwashed masses. You are turning into patriot Pakistani. Are you slipping?

#12 Posted by hamidm2

“i am afraid i have lost interest in democracy, independence of the judiciary, freedom of the press and other trappings of a civilized society”

I don’t blame you for losing interest. The whole affair is for people that are genetically manufactured differently. Judiciary, Freedom of the press or even democracy should be such a necessary part of any society that no one should really give them any time of the day.

In some other post I had already written that The CJ or any of the stalwart for the democracy or the rule of law, are not some hard nut committed ideologues (Asadi) who would dedicate their lives for lofty goals like democracy or the rule of law. They have always been part of the system and would prefer not to change the system as long as it works for them. The CJ droopy eyes or not, never shied away from grabbing more power through whatever means. At present his means to remaining in power was not to stick with Musharaf. Give him Kiyani as President and Nawaz as PM; the same CJ will take oath under PCO 3.

Have you ever wondered why the democracy is such a success nowadays? It goes to the mercurial nature of the human being. We need change and need it frequently. Kings used to govern for decades until some other king or his son would dethrone the king.

Now with new means of production and development, the attention span has also shortened. Now no one wants to wait decades to get a new ruler. They want that change in five years and eight years. Democracy is the only system that suits the current state of human mind. So it is important that we in Pakistan should also have the ability to change the president or the PM every five years. The problem with the army generals is that they don’t have enough smarts to figure this out and they attempt to stay in power forever. Since that conflicts with the human nature, every few years or so Pakistani start clamoring for change. I don’t support democracy for some high or lofty goals I have that can only be achieved through democracy.

Believe me democracy would not change any thing in Pakistan. Btw, in the last sixty years what has democracy changed in India? 700 million still squat on railroad tracks. Compared to 1947, the percentage point movement in India for people using railroad tracks is about half a percent. So I doubt that Pashtoon would stop spitting naswar on every street or the Mohajir would stop chewing Paan and spitting on the marble fronts of Karachi buildings because Pakistan would become a democratic country due to the current struggle.

Like you, I too lose interest in a very short period of time. My attention span is not any longer than yours so I want a system in Pakistan which allows people like me and you to not worry about changing a president or seek help for the US or the hellfire, when we are tired of one Mushy or one BB or Botox, who would not give up until they are shown the door with force. That is the only reason I support democracy and I think you should agree with me too here that why do we need to watch Geo or ARY every five to eight years to make sure that our watching the TV would change the president in Pakistan. I am sure you can get a hang of what I am saying. I hope this long post has tested your attention span already.

Of-course the point below, in case you miss it, is that the Chief Election Commissioner ruled against the sitting government.

Compare that with the present times when the entire superior judiciary is thrown out when it is suspected of doing the same.

bulleya,

However I've found a particular item after a bit of googling (amongst mostly typical character assassination on the subject including a chowk article) which you might find interesting.

This is dated 7 October 1999. Remember Nawaz Sharif was still Prime Minister on that date.

The other fact it states is that Sethi was picked up by ISI i.e. the army. I maintain though that he was picked up by MI under the Army Act.

http://www.canada.ifex.org/alerts/content/view/full/9102

Election Commissioner dismisses petition against editor Najam Sethi

Country/Topic: Pakistan
Date: 07 October 1999
Source: Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
Person(s): Najam Sethi
Target(s): journalist(s)
Type(s) of violation(s):
Urgency:

(CPJ/IFEX) - After a two-hour hearing on 6 October 1999, the Chief Election Commissioner of Pakistan dismissed a petition that sought to exclude embattled editor Najam Sethi from political life by having him declared non-Muslim.

The petition was filed on 24 June by legislator Syed Zafar Ali Shah, a member of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's ruling party. It sought to disqualify Sethi, who is the founding editor of the Lahore-based English weekly "The Friday Times", from voting or running for office by requesting that his name be struck from voters' lists if he "does not fulfill the requirements of a Muslim," as defined in Article 260-3 of Pakistan's constitution.

The petition also charged that a speech that Sethi delivered before a New Delhi audience on April 30 violated Articles 62(h) and 63-1(g) of the constitution, which prohibits people whose speech or actions are deemed prejudicial to the "ideology of Pakistan" from holding any elected office.

The Chief Election Commissioner, Muhammed Qadeer, did not elaborate on his decision. Lawyers on both sides of the case presented documentary evidence only.

Sethi was arrested at his home in Lahore on 8 May, and was detained for nearly a month in the custody of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency, the army's intelligence unit. Government statements indicated that Sethi was being investigated for "anti-state" activities, including his New Delhi speech, as well as alleged collaboration with Indian intelligence operatives.

CPJ believes, however, that the Sharif government has been targeting Sethi for his consistently critical coverage of official corruption, as well as for giving an interview to a BBC documentary crew that was producing a program on corruption within the prime minister's family.

Sethi and his family have also been fighting more than two dozen cases of tax evasion, all of which appear to be politically motivated.

#13 Posted by bulleya,

bulleya, we have had this discussion at length and more will be just repetitive. Sethi was National Security Adviser (or Adviser on National Security .. as these things are named) in the Malik Meraj Khalid caretaker Government immediately preceding his second term. I may be wrong on the exact title of his post but he had the status of Federal Minister.

However, you may like to answer a question of mine as well. Why didn't Nawaz Sharif shut down Friday Times?

zeemax #: "....He had briefly occupied the position of National Security adviser in one of the caretaker administrations......argued Pakistan to be a failed state.......and was picked up by Military Intelligence (MI) on the COAS's instructions....The entire incident had nothing to do with Nawaz Sharif..."

same discussion again, for which i had provided so many facts, so the same questions:

1. in which govt. was sethi a national security advisor? .... he was an advisor in one caretaker govt, but not on national security....

2. does pakistan have a position called national security advisor?

3. i remember reading some of the text of his speech....i don't recall the details, but exactly where did he say that pakistan is a failed state

4. is it a crime to declare pakistan a failed state in india (assuming he did so)

5. according to sethi's own interview, he was picked up by the punjab police and civilian authorities, not by the military intelligence....in addition sethi, himself, stated that musharraf got him out...so what is the basis of your stating otherwise

6. sethi, himself, stated that he was picked up by nawaz sharif because he exposed ns corruption on bbc......and that sharifs apologized to him when they were out of power....how then can one say that sharifs are being scandalized, when sethi himself is saying they picked him up.......and they, themselves apologized...

....if you want to push your cause, you have every right to do so......but it will only weaken, if it is not supported by facts.....

GT, HP,

.... i was busy all last week so i didn't get a chance to keep up with the pakistani tamasaha ... do we have have democracy yet ?

....... like you guys, i too got caught up in the jungle fever of this 'revolution' led by the droopy-eyed pco-1 cj who suddenly found religion and refused to take oath under pco-2 ...... i was certain that he, along with the unemployable lawyers and the elite students of lums was going to storm the dictator's camp office and boot him off to boston ..... instead, it seems he has moved into better and rent free accomodations at the presidential palace and is looking rather dapper in mufti ........what happened ?..... he is begining to look awfully like ghulam ishaq khan .... remember him? ......

.........and maulana fazloo is looking happier than santa clause with paris hilton on his lap, while the qazi lookes peaked and imran khan is looking more and more constipated ....... the honorable brothers look like deer caught in the headlights and if they are not careful they will become gt roadkill for the chaudharies to feast on - those happy hyenas couldn't look happier!......... as for bb, she is beginning to sound like a menopausal spinster who is desperate to jump into bed with anything or anybody before it is too late .........

........ i am afraid i have lost interest in democracy, independence of the judiciary, freedom of the press and other trappings of a civilized society ........ first things first, the unwashed masses need a bar of soap and some running water ....... like fanciful schholboys, looking at a centerfold, we are getting all hot and bothered when there is no real prospect of actual sex ........

Dear Beena,

Liked reading this piece.

It does seem to be true that a sizeable section of the Pakistani society is up against the army. As a result Pakistanis have gained quite a bit. These gains, however, may trickle away EVEN under a democratically elected BB or NS and even if this leader comes to power on the base of the present movement. Please note that democracy is sweet only for the politician who is out of power, not for those who are in power. To check against such adverse flows the process of politicization has to reach the "unwashed" masses, till then this present movement has to continue.

For me, it is sad that BB believes that she can only make a difference by being in power. She may have been able to contribute much more by being outside.

#2 Posted by tahmed32
“The journalists have been right there with them, with many of them losing their lives, others getting beaten and arrested by police - again in the line of duty. Which in their case is to serve as the eyes and ears of the nation!!”

I agree with you tahmed in entirety! After having lived outside the country for more than two decades, I can only salute the Pakistani nation for standing up for democracy and the rule of law. It seems to me that all political strains in Pakistan are uniting for one goal and that is to remove the army from the political scene. Sindhi, Baloch and Pathan nationalists, separatists and leftists and Punjabi moderates like Nawaz and Imran are gathering on one point agenda and the agenda is not just getting rid of Musharaf but to create a united front against the army. It is not easy and it is not going to happen overnight.
The beast called army in Pakistan has long tentacles.

The independence struggle that MOST Pakistani missed or forced to stay away from in the 40s has finally started in Pakistan. Like the Indian struggle for independence led to a continuous civilian rule and shades of democracy in India, this Pakistani struggle for independence will lead to a genuine democracy in Pakistan. For the first time after two hundred years Pakistani are getting closer to independence.

Beena,
One must study the changes that have taken place in the Jang group after the death of Mir Khalil ur Rehman. He never wavered in his support of the army but it seems that his son is not afraid of taking up the army. why and how this transformation took place? I hope some day you will get to this subject.

Beena,
Not to undermine the struggle and determination of media, please clarify the doubts that exist about LIFAFA Culture and the names associated with it.

As for Najam, I do not consider him to be very strong in convictions and sense of history.

Dear Author,

On the issue of journalists being harrassed, it is important we highlight the reasons why the corrupt, totalitarian Najaiaz Sharif Govt went after Najam Sethi, Jang Group and other journalists trying to do their job.

Najam Sethi was attacked because of his interview to the BBC documentary that highlighted corruption in Najaiz Sharif's Govt.

Jang Group also became the victim of Najaoz Sharif's open badmashi when the Jang Grouo refused to comply with their ghoonda ghardi.

Three journalists were arrested in Karachi for their expose that irked the shallow Najaiz Sharif N Co.

Author,

The police did not stop these protests or baton charge or arrest the journalists or lawyers. At the end of the day, ... Sharif was a civilian ruler whom the people of Pakistan would have rejected at the polls had the process of democratic politics been allowed to continue.

Thanks for your clear thinking. You are a genuine patriot/activist and wish more of the Pakistani liberals had a level head on their shoulders as you. As it is, all they indulge in is cutting off their nose to spite their face.

Just a small addition/clarification re the Najam Sethi matter. He had briefly occupied the position of National Security adviser in one of the caretaker administrations with access to sensitive information associated with that post, and then had gone to India and argued Pakistan to be a failed state. That was considered seditious and more than just an ordinary journalist voicing opinions, and was picked up by Military Intelligence (MI) on the COAS's instructions and later released by the same.

The entire incident had nothing to do with Nawaz Sharif, but has been widely cited as part of his character assassination campaign.

As you would recall, his sole publication then 'The Friday Times' continued uninterrupted during his detention even though it carried a regular feature on the back page dedicated to name calling and personal insults to Sharifs written by Jugnu Mohsin, Sethi's wife.

This is just for putting record straight.

Regards

Dear Beena S,

"A nasty civilian elected government is better than a benign military government."

Lacks evidence and based upon wishful thinking. It seems u r making linear assumptions about civilian Govts ie if they are elected by the ppl they will b rejected by the ppl. There is no guarantee these corrupt, authoritarian civilian structures will not manipulate the system.

India also has no true freedom of press as all indians are brain washed for years of propaganda against Pakistan.

Atleast we were never fooled into believing that the media was "free" when we clearly saw Musharaff stage managing the media jamboories and his press conferences with carefully planted questions by 'friendly' scribes since the Agra Summit days.

"And, perhaps most heartening of all have been the Pakistani students, led by the best and brightest. They have come out in protest - and done their duty as the future of Pakistan by doing so in a dignified way without burning buses or destroying national or private property!! Some have even taped their mouths shut, and in doing so spoken louder than a dictator ever could through the microphone. Others have sung the national anthem as police has, with faces showing their shame at what they are doing, arresting them in the name of the dictator."

Hi tahmed, stop the diarrhea, the students did teh right thing, was it not at the presigeous Lahore University that teh students handed over Imran Khan to teh police.

I cannot recall any significant action by the other students that you allude to.

The pak univesities are fully islamised places where the sjunni shia battles are faught. Most of teh demand for burkha is coming from teh student unions, as testified by teh action of student organisation in handing over Imaran.

SWo take it from me tahmed, the largest and oraganised student groups are jihadis.

We should be truly proud of the courage and professionalism that our people have shown the past several months.

The Chief Justice and the lawyers have led the way by risking their lives, losing their jobs and freedom in the line of duty - protecting the Constitution and the rights of the ordinary person before the brute and lawless force of a dictator!!

The journalists have been right there with them, with many of them losing their lives, others getting beaten and arrested by police - again in the line of duty. Which in their case is to serve as the eyes and ears of the nation!!

Inspired by these, even our corrupt politicians for once seem to have understood that there is something more important than becoming the government in power - it is doing their duty to support the the judiciary and freedom of speech and free and fair elections in the country. Because if we dont have these in a nation, we are reduced to being slaves.

And, perhaps most heartening of all have been the Pakistani students, led by the best and brightest. They have come out in protest - and done their duty as the future of Pakistan by doing so in a dignified way without burning buses or destroying national or private property!! Some have even taped their mouths shut, and in doing so spoken louder than a dictator ever could through the microphone. Others have sung the national anthem as police has, with faces showing their shame at what they are doing, arresting them in the name of the dictator.

I have never been so proud of our big hearted and courgeous people as today.

I only read the teaser on the main page and have this to add:

Najam Sethi was picked up as Army wanted him picked up because he made some anti-Pakistan (I dont know how else to describe then) remarks in India. It was only that it was NS's regime.