Can’t we too break the wall?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

I am sure there are a lot of very complicated, deep rooted issues that need to be thought of while even considering such a possibility, but somehow, very instinctively, I get the feeling that given the choice to vote on issue like this, there will be more `Yes` than `No` to this suggestion from both sides of the border.

akumar@fcbulka.com

Pakistan wasn`t split a part like Germany. The reason behind Pakistan was to make a country following the rules and laws of Islam. Aside from the fact that whether or not Pakistan is following these rules it is a country made for muslims on the name of Religion. Where nobody can destroy Masjids by calling them a ``janam Bhomi`` (birth place) of their Raam. Where Kashmiris can look up to and find a safe place. Where muslims are allow to eat cow and to be safe. Where they know that they have a right to pray and they don`t need to live in an area of muslim majority. Most important of all where they can learn and read Urdu in public schools. Where nobody claims to be secular and then destroy the holy places. Where we don`t have any Wajpai or Rawan. Where nobody can tell us to go back to Arabia because Mohammad Bin Qasim came from there. Where we won`t be treated like achhots (untouchables).

Mohammad Ali Jinnah was among the geniuses and he tried to kept the whole thing together. Before him the mogul emperors tried it but it didn`t work and brother yousuf if you need further explaination please read the 14 points by Quaid-e-Azam. But Pakistan is not a bunch of provinces but it is a lot of muslims trying to make a better muslim community and country. As Shah Faisal once said ``Pakistan is the fort of Islam`` and Alhamdullilah we have proved it not only by Ghauri but also by our atomic power.

``PAKISTAN ZINDABAD``

For more on this, check out my up-coming novel at

http://www.mauritius.com/mumtaz/theoffer.html

Off course we can unite! if we understand that in

reality our nation-states are not Hinduism, Islam or Sikhism but Punjab, gujrat, Sindh, Pakhtunistan, Kashmir, Tamil Nadu, Maratha, etc.

We need to recognize that Punjabi, Gujrati, Sindhi, Pashto, Kashmiri, Tamil, Telugu, Marathi, etc are mother tongues of each of the nation of subcontinent and not URDU OR HINDI!!

We need to understand that if India and Pakistan is to come together then it must be solely the basis of Punjabi people of India and Pakistan, Kashmiri people of India and Pakistan as they will be united.

I say let`s make a subcontinent a real nation-state by dividing it into true nations of Punjab, Sindh, Gujrat, Maratha, Tamil, Telugu, Pakhtunistan, Baluch, and a loose central government which only takes care of foreign affairs, communications, currency and other itty bitty stuff.!!

A religion is a personal thing and not public!! It is irony that most of subcontinent people only display their emotion about their religion either while rioting, or on Internet in verbal wars. The most important part of all religions is freeddom to respect other person`s views.

But.. then most of you people are brown Sahibs whose parents were responsible for partition and it is definite that you will vehemently oppose any idea that go against your demented forefathers!!

Thanks and Best Regards,

Sandeep Singh Bajwa

sbajwa@fyi.net

Krishnakumar,

Don`t you feel embarassed, repeating this hate spreading rhetoric? Blaming an entire countries ills on a minority group of people? That was the tactic of Adolf Hitler!

I can only hope that your comments were some kind of warped ironic statement on the propaganda delivered by the governments of Pakistan and India to their people.

Lets have intelligent debate.

I too once had the dream that India and Pakistan

should unite. This was really dreamt by Khan

Abdul Ghafoor khan. He shared his dream with

our late priemer Shri Rajiv Gandhi when the Frontier Gandhi had come down to India to receive the Bharath Ratna that was conferred by our Indian Govt. But now i dont like the concept at all.

Yes, it is true that both India and pak are spending lots of money on arms and fission and fusion bombs. But had not they separated is there no need for India to produce bombs and spend such huge amount in weapons ? Certainly a big NO, to protect ourself from China india would have no other recourse . So i dismiss the question that by uniting we could have cut down much on defenser expenditure.

If all the Muslims in india had gone either to Pak or Bangladesh India would have been an

economic superpower long before. They are the

stumbling block in our progress. They dont heed to any advice on family planning saying family planning is against their religious sentiments producing pakistan each year through their.......

India would have been a haven of

great peace and prosperity had india got rid of its nemesis once for all. it is because of these people there are lots of communal problems in india and the Indian Govt has to spend its time ,energy and money quelling those things.

Its better that half of the thorn is gone as pakistan and bangladesh . Its better if the other half also leaves India leaving us to grow and prosper.

Dear Yousof;

It is a well written article and may be given serious thoughts. In my view, your dream coming true is not possible due to the following reasons:

(I am not a historian, so forgive me about details etc....these are just my analysis);

(1) east/west german anology is not suitable in case of Pak/India because Germany was divided as a result of war and before the war it was a one nation with same culture, religion etc. However, a totally different situation led to crreation of Pak/India; people themselves chose Pak/India, though, there were people against the divide.

(2) Islamic culture is altogether different than Hindu culture and at this time, i strongly think, that neither Muslims nor Hindus in subcontinent are tolerant towards each other. this was not the case for east/west germany.

(3) You may also find the answer to your dream not coming true by answering the following question; Why can`t all arab countries in arabian/gulf region merge into a big Islamic country or form one country given that all of them share same religion, same culture, same traditions etc?

Much that I would have seconded Mr,Yousaf but for harsh realities that bound me not to.These facts are hard to fathom or circumvent.The reality that muslims of the sub-continent had purposedly kept in the backyard of the integrated Hindustan and thus back-wards.What is the state of minorities in todays India...?Why Harrigions are protesting on the stepmotherly treatment meted out to them. The BJP`s actions speak loud ans clear about their intensions towards minorities.Why are Sikhs being discriminated upon..?Can muslims forget the Babri Masjid saga ?Muslims are not confind to a particular geographical region and therefore it would lead to anarchy and another muslim movement for separate homeland to exercise their personal law.Unless religion is bannished from the earth the integration of Indopak would remain a dream.There are,however, other political options which if adopted could bring about a qualitative change in the prevelant perspective. Confidence building measures would have to taken before initiating a meaningful dialogue between all concernd.Kashmir is ofcourse is the core issue which needs immidiate resolution to pacify the burning muslim emotion.Hindu nationalist adventurism would have to be checked effectively before the smaller entities are made to belive the sincerity of the idea.There could be possible a lose confederaton in the sub-continent,if and only if all major issues are resolved and the tivial ones taken care of effectively.Once that happens,defence rather common defence would be a fancied idea.This would not only allow a bigger of natonal budgets allocated to social sectors and poverty alleviatin etc.But there are alot of Ifs involoved in the entire process.

No Yousuf, we MUST never unite - not with the

Pakistanis at least. How can you think of joining

a bunch of barbarians in a commonwealth of semi-

independent states when these people cannot toler-

ate another strain of Islam - for the protection

of whose followers their country was set up? How

do you think these barbarians would respect the

cultures and languages of the other states when

they could not tolerate Bengalies who were

Muslims? How can you think of living with neurotics who cannot think of any of their numer-

ous problems related to daily life but only the

so-called core issue? Never! Never shall we

think of uniting with these people who have

revelled in the bleeding of our country and have

set it upon themselves to shred it human being

by human being

Re: chicago-se

I agree with you. I found poeple suffering from delusions that riots in India are `imagined`. trying to distrot fact does not make things go away. Let us not behave like bunnies-close our eyes and the big bad wolf is not there any more!

Re: Born to Be

You can see problems among Hindus,

Muslims and Sikhs (due to their politicians

and religious leaders), it does not give us

a reason to overlook Shia-Sunni riots and riots which keep happening in Karachi, Lahore, Punjab

to with Muhajdins (refugees from 1947 partition)

No one is pure. We also have same kinds of leaders

Few people are born to condemn others.

No one can help them.

But others can let the better thoughts prevail.

Re: Majhid

Muslims have co-existed with Hindus since the first Arab conquest in A.D. 712. In many places on either side of the border these two faiths still co-exist alongside each other.

Dear Yousof,

Your ideas are neither utopian nor infeasible. The

most intresting part is that we do not even have

a physical wall.

The only walls we have to cross are the ones in our minds. Walls which are stifling imagination

and creativity in both countries.

Walls under whose protection, leaders on both sides are easily able to mislead the poor and

the hungry.

I believe only economic progress on both sides

can help chip away these walls of ignorance.

Sanjay

RE: Amit

Finally, A voice of reason, albeit from the other side of the border!

Why cant we all accept our differences and go about our ways in our own SEPARATE countries. Why do we have to constantly get constipated over the idea of a united subcontinent?

Pakistanis and indians have over the past FIFTY years developed radically differing lifestyles and the mere fact that Pakis and Indians both still do `bahngra` at their weddings is not sufficent grounds for the suggestion. It is no longer a question of just religion in itself. (there is very little Islam being practised in Pakistan). It is now a matter of TWO SEPARATE nations with DIFFERENCES. DO you really believe that the luxury loving average pakistani could ever find the lifestyle of an average Indian appealing? (Pakistan is a poor country-govt wise only)

I do hope the Kashmir issue is resolved soon. Its about time!

I am an Indian, and a muslim, and share a meal with my hindu friends and coleagues everyday. I think this interaction/replies column has been dominated too much by Indians/Pakistanis who live abroad (in US, Canada and Europe) and have no touch whatsoever with the reality in the subcontinent. I think Yousuf`s article - though its only a dream - is very well written, and should be thought over in realistic terms.

I am an Indian and a hindu and I believe that the partition of the subcontinent was absolutely necessary. A united India would have led to large scale chaos and civil war conditions. It would be completely ungovernable. A balkanized India would have been an equally bad idea. History shows that the presence of a number of princely kingdoms always led to more conflicts and resulted in foreign occupation.

It is necessary to realize that while there is overwhelming diversity in the subcontinent, there are some divisions that are too severe for nationhood but others are manageable. We Indians need to be honest and accept the reality that the hindu-muslim division is simply too much to overcome. Religion is not just a way to refer to God, as suggested by someone. Instead it is an entire way of life. Hindus and Muslims have totally different ways of life, different social structure, food habits etc. We have coexisted for a thousand years, yet we hesitate to share a meal together.

Partition has been quite beneficial for hindus while satisfying the muslim demand. The present day India is one of the largest sized nations that hindus have ever ruled as a nation if you consider the deep south and the north-east. With a 80% plus population, hindus have unchallenged control over India. This has restored their self-confidence as a people. The presence of Pakistan has resulted in something that 800 years of muslim rule did not - unity among hindus. Hindus have been forced to overlook their caste, regional and linguistic differences in the fear of losing their nation to Pakistan. None of this would have happenned in a united India. Therefore, the status quo is just fine because neither side can dominate the other.

While it is unlikely that hindus and muslims can be friends, at least they can develop a reasonable working relationship to solve Kashmir and other problems.

Re: All those who believe that muslim problems in india are imagined in the Muslim mind
Honey!
What about the Sikhs who dont get along with the Hindu majority. Are they also (in your hyperactive imagination) under a spell of a beautiful city, perchance in Greece somewhere?
What about kashmir? HELLOOOO!!!! It under indian occupation, not pakistani! Get it!
You appear to be really impressed by Alice in wonder land. Its a good book, only to read--not to live in!

People want to read what they already believe.

In my earlier post I had NOT stated that a union is something to work towards. I had commented mainly on the interesting switching of positions that Pakistanis undergo when talking of the seperation of Bangladesh and the partition of `47.

I believe that there is no need for effacing national boundaries. Indeed I dont think that that should even be an issue.

But skewering Low IQ hate-mongers is a priority.

Continuing my mail below...
the groups mentioned below ARE LIVING in India. Lets solve their issues/massacres first.

Zain, the poeple you are addressing are lost in Alice`s Wonderland. Have no clue what they are talking about. thus are using nonsensical rhetoric, long winding arguments that in the nend make very little sense given the PRESENT STATE OF AFFAIRS and ``halaaT`/happenings both in India & Pakistan & Kashmir & Bangladesh.. not to forget this planet. Earth to Mars!!!! Helloooo!
Any suggestions for Kashmiri muslims/sikhs first.. talk about Pakistan later.

Humans try very hard to make everlasting changes. They do not realise that most creations exist for a very short time, all things considered. Be it nations or walls. This much is understood by everyone once attention has been brought to it. Simulataneously the other side of it is somehow ignored in similar human attempts at eternity. What I mean to say is that just as today certain groups of humanity stand apart, similarly at a later time they will stand together and at a still later time they will stand apart. These are just cycles that need to happen. All of our devices could prolong a certain period or delay a change for a while but thats all. In the end such things dont matter.

In other words, equilibrium is a lower dimensional space than nonequilibrium. This is an essential fact of existence. This is just because there are more ways to be not in equilibrium. Hence such cycles will go on for ever with probability 1.

On the other hand, your life is somthing that you can change. As long as you dont marginalise anybody intentionally and as long as you do not become overly sensitive to actions/thoughts/comments of other people there is really no need for unity/national spirits etc. Such concepts are merely devices of false leaders. What is important is that you treat someone as you would like to be treated yourself. This is deeper than it sounds. You should interact with people as if you are interacting with another copy of yourself. The day you can do that,
terms like hindu/muslim/indian/pakistani hold no value any more. Also as long as you dont follow that one commandment, no amount of good wishes is going to solve any of our perceived troubles. As you might have noticed, all our problems stem with existence of one and its other.

What will uniting a region of land do?
If each person thinks of himself as one,
What will creating a 100 nations from that land do?
If people do not forgive.

In summary, just as partition did not achieve any goals, so also this proposed union will not achieve any goals. Goals are not achieved by external movements of borders but by internal reorientation of your minds.

Finally the discussion seems to make sense. Pleez continue to concentrate on Current EVENTS, NOW.
PRACTICAL! (to all those rhetoric, khyaali lovers out there)
The plight of kashmiris, muslims and Sikhs in India! Good work Farrukh Azfar and Zia!

It is sad to see a potentially good dialogue go to pieces because of a few low IQ hate-mongers.

Those who love Chowk and live it (at it?) MUST interact here. That morons are a vocal minority is what has ruined my country. The rest of you had better stop giving your lungs a rest (and praying for a good leader and a better tomorrow) and start shouting sense NOW.

Back to the article. There are interesting threads developing. A fairly typical point of view from across the border is that the national boundaries set up in `47 were a mistake and that mistake should be redressed. Interestingly several of my Pakistani friends feel somewhat the same about 1971 and openly claim that Bangladesh would have been better off had it not sought independence. The answer that my Bangladeshi friends give is fairly similar to the ones we give when confronted by a similar argument from Indians.

There are major issues to be discussed here. Minority rights protection. Religious intolerance.
Economic prosperity. The fact that the culture and identity of both Pakistan and Bangladesh are strongly-defined and independent enough by now to make the question of erasing national boundaries moot (or are they).

There are no easy answers; although each side is probably convinced that there are and they have it.

This article could be a starting point to understand why each side thinks as it does. Ridiculing the way the other side prays and to whom it prays is pathetic.

I hope that the chowkwalas return to salvage this discussion ,picking up on the many threads that are so enticing.

Why are peopel so ``bliND`` to whatever is going on in India right now AGAINST muslims. Why is the majority on this page so wrapped in some unreal Utopiac world. The people of the subcontinent living together in peace with some `baansree` sounding in the background. Reality CHECK, please!
I wrote this in my earler reply so i am not going to repeat myself but...

Babri Masjid

Muslim Genocide

Pakistan melding with india and not the other way round

Muslims pretending to appear less muslim on REsumes and higher eduction applications

Why do the Sikhs want khalistan? I guess its their first hand experience in India that drove them to it? or is that also some kind of madness leveld against the poor mother India?

Why are the Kashmimirs so bent on thoer independence form india? Why arent UN age old resolutions bieng carried out? Maybe because india `s word has no value in its own as well as others eyes.

Why are bangladesh-india relations so sour?

It seems to me every NATION that is not Hindu is considered less DIFFERENTLY-the ancienbt caste system expalinms this indian mentality after all thay lived under it For 5000 years!

DO all of these, probably many more, ring a bell?

Please concentrate on what is HAPPENING rather than carrying on a philosophic rhetoric.
Indians have PROVEN by their ACTIONS, not mere replies to articles the height of their bigotry, barbarianism cloaked under nationalism, not to mention proved itself mentally and emotionally immature nation on an international level too.
Pakistanis have yet to do/or not do so.

Re Imam Din.Very pathetic the way you start abusing other religions. I dont agree at all with what Suresh said but the answer to give is against his points that religion spreads hate and that partition was a mistake. Your remarks are sick and crude as hell.

Re: BG (``...I still havent heard anything on the potential for more abuse by giant corporations?...``)MULTINATIONAL CORPORATE IMPERIALISMWe’ve discussed this theme elsewhere so I didn’t think I had much more to add to it, thus my reticence. Also, I’m away from home these days and shall return in mid-August, so my interactively is at a minimum because Internet connectivity is not as universal as we like to believe.We are living through a global revolution of unprecedented proportion. This is, what Alvin Toffler called, The Third Wave. One of the universal changes underway is the increasing irrelevance of National State entities, both big and small, in the face of the new pyramids of power typified by, what I like to call, “Gobble & Engulf International, Inc.” (All this bickering over nationalism is much like the bow-and-arrow weilding, tent-dwelling, half-clad Native America tribes fighting over herds of bison as the approaching tidal wave from Europe makes that punny dispute moot.)(Borrowing an analogy from Star Trek, this is the invasion of The Borg. The mindless, amorphous, impersonal and impervious entity called the Multinational Mega Corporation which absorbs and assimilates all that stands in its path - ‘Resistance is futile.’ In the coming decades, as budgetary constraints diminish the ability of national governments, even things like the armed forces will eventually be privatized and come directly under corporate control. Already there are three major private military corporations in the worlds and many more are coming up. Executive Outcomes, a Johannesburg based corporation, has ex-military officers from the US, USSR, UK and France and they provide “defense consultations and training” worldwide to whoever wishes to pay the price.)The mega corporation is, I believe, a ‘higher’ life-form on the evolutionary ladder than the individual. It is true that corporate entities are ultimately made up of individuals also, but only in the sense that as an animal is made up of individual cells. I am an ardent individualist so I see the growth of this life-form with the same horror as an ameba must have seen the development of the early multicellular creatures, because its development spells the end of my kind. Its your old ‘cat-people’ vs ‘dog-people’ argument again.Oversimplistically speaking, there are two interactive (and competing) components in an economic system: Capital and Labor. Their interaction, in the presence of a catalyst called “enterprise”, is what creates ‘goods and services’.In the old days both labor and capital (along with goods and services) moved at the speed of a camel caravan or an ox cart. Later this changed to the speed of sail ships and still later steam engines and then airplanes.However, since the SWIFT system ( the worldwide electronic money transfer grid between International banks) came to be established, Capital has acquired the ability of move at the speed of light. While you lay asleep at night in New York, your money is changing hands in Tokyo. This gives ‘capital’ an extreme competitive edge over ‘labor’ in any adversarial conflict. Labor does not only move at the speed of aircraft (at most), it must also cross passport-control and work-permit barriers across various market pools. Capital has no such constraints. There is no doubt as to the outcome of any conflict between Labor and Capital. As any student of Carl von Clausewitz would know, speed and the ability to concentrate in force are the two absolute essentials for victory in battle. This battle is over. Karl Marx is dead....SR

Re: M AlianiOne last question: ``It is strange you have the term `his`.......`` Are you just trying to demonstrate your wit or do you have something useful to say?

Re: M. Aliani I have the following questions: 1.Are you calling me a liar? 2. Aren`t you generalizing about the Sayyeds? 2a. Do you hate Sayyeds or any other classification of Muslims thereof? 3. Can you give any examples to support your arguments or this merely self righteous fluff? 4. Do you know my Pakistani friends? 5. Are you Afghani? 6. Do you know the 13 Afghanis that I know all of whom hate India but not Pakistan? 7. Is Punjab in the former USSR?

Hey, what`s all this Indian and India bashing? Puhleeez, gentlemen, calm down and argue on the issue.I am as offended by this kind of `we are better than you` rhetoric as by Indians assuming that South Asia=India. And, feel proud of having more in common with secular, open-minded, progressive Indians than I do with narrow-minded, intolerant Pakistanis!

Re: Usman Qazi I can only speak from my own experience, and what I have seen is this. All pakistani punjabis do not touch hindu punjabis with a yard pole! The only sikhs they come near are the ones who are rooting for khalistan. This excludes american born people. The mutual dislike is so very famous here, that even CNN remarked that it was ``visceral``. That is the nature of all the Pakistanis. A test of this is try calling a Pakistani ``Indian`` and see his response.... Fortunately, I have four or five sindhi friends on whose behalf I can speak. They feel comfortable only with the Jains of Kacch because they are unhappy with the Indian federation. Rajastanis they say, make them feel uncomfortable always trying to tell them about the freedom of Sindh etc. while when the conversation turns to freedom of Rajhastan, the subject is quickly changed. I really do not see any signs of ``unity`` in that (Alhamdolillah). The Sindhis and Punjabis like the rest of the Pakistanis, have the same general dislike for the Indians. Same is the case with Urdu speaking Pakistanis. The same for the Baluchis and the Pathans. Infact, the Afghans in the US who came through Pakistan also dislike the Indians!!! That I think is the most telling example of how many poles apart we and the Indians are. Re: Born to Be and KHWhat can I say? Bravo chaps! You make this Pakistani prouder still!!!

No thnanks! WE have NO intention/aspiration to be called `bharati` citizens, to alter our names to sound less islamic in order to get good jobs/higher education in `Mother India`, see a temple built at the babri masjid sight like a slap in the face of the muslim `citizens` of India, try for the rest of our lives trying to justify the fact that despite all the discrimination and third class status accorded to us we still `love my India`( case of `sour grapes`, i presume!). No thanks I would take pakistani `mushkils`/frustrations anytime over losing my self respect and having my religious identity used as a measure of my `incompetence`.And as for all those who do want `bharat maata`s asheervaad`, do all of us a favor, Go to India!Experience it first hand and then write all of us poor pakistani souls whether your dream really came true or did the expereince leave an ashy aftertaste! Ciao!

Re: BG I see your point my friend. As you said that that when someone says that we are the same donot necassarily mean it in the vice versa. Whenever this has happened to me, I always tell the Indians ``Then you won`t mind if I call you Pakistani``, and everytime there smile has dissappeared and they have quickly changed the subject. This is, quite irritating, but in a way quite funny too. The only reason I get along better with middle easterners is that when I say, oh you`re virtually Pakistani, they genuinely feel happy about that, and that gives me a feeling of much greater closeness to them. But then again, who your friends are is a personal matter based on your preferences, but this was just to show a point.Best RegardsHassan

Re: Hamid Shah * *Why is it that this forum tends to support Anti Pakistani feelings more than True nationalistic feelings. * *What are Nationalistic Feelings? Can you give an example? It appears that you consider yourself a Pakistani. Can you please elaborate what you consider a forum that would suit your taste?The writer, Yousuf Saeed has a point of view that he expressed - should he be prevented from wanting to explore this issue? * *either the founders of this site are ``AHMEDIS` or some awfully anti Pakistan motivated group. * *Now, about Ahmedis. Would you feel better if Ahmedis were exterminated like Jews? Is that what Pakistan needs to progress? Is that your idea of an ideology? I am sure you dont believe that so why spread hate. Havent we had enough of that. Please dont give religion a bad name by fomenting hatred and contempt. Leveling accusations and criticising others is really not a pleasant habit - it is bad for you and distasteful for the readers. I am sure you know that it is unIslamic too. Co-existence and co-operation are virtues that we have ignored in our march to progress. It is not a bad thing to occasionally consider extending hands of friendship.

Re HassanI agree with you and disagree with you (on some of the issues). I agree that a lot of times Indians assume, dismissively, that we are the same. But when one person or group assumes that another person or group is the same as her/him/them, the assumption usually goes: you are like me and not necessarily I am like you. The difference is subtle, but important. For instance, a Black woman once told me that one of her White friends told her, in a complimentary sort of way, ``I feel we are so alike, I never remember you are not White!`` Of course, the white woman thought there was nothing wrong with what she had said; and of course, the black woman found this statement offensive. The white woman, by saying we are alike, was implying that her friend was like her (white) and therefore not black - she wasn`t implying that SHE herself was like a black person.Its happened to me tons of times: A lot of Indians ask me if (unless they have already assumed) I am Indian. I say no. They ask me where I am from. I say from Pakistan. And 3 out of 4 times, they say, ``It`s the same thing.`` And, I feel offended. I ask them if they have ever been to Pakistan and know what it is like. I tell them that culturally I have more in common with Afghans and Iranis than with Malyalis or Tamils. Of course, the assumption is justified if people are from Rajhastan or Punjab. Punjabi`s from both sides of the border have more in common with each other than they do with Balochs or Tamils.Having said that, however, I would like to say, that there so many cultural, racial and ethnic similarities between people all over central asia, the middle east and the sub-continent that its impossible to draw lines and put people in neat little boxes labeled ``these people have more in common``. I know South Indian music, language, cuisine, etc. is vastly different from my native region, but some of my closest friends are South Indians. Obviously we do share more than a few things. Culture, heritage, race, ethnicity are not linear continuums. They are all over the place across time and space and surprisingly you find similarities where you least expect.We must recognize that there are differences AND there are similarities. To deny the similarities is as problematic and dishonest as to assume that we are `all alike`. Re SR and Yousuf SaeedI still havent heard anything on the potential for more abuse by giant corporations?

Re: Mishra Speak for yourself Mr. Mishra. Where inheavens name did the Irnaians and the Arabs come in? I have lived for three years in Iran, and I have always been treated with the utmost respect. Even here in the US some of my very good friends are Iranians and Arabs besides Pakistanis of course. The only ones I find I cannot get along with are the Indians who try to strangle my national identity and try to convince everyone that we are the same. Well WE ARE NOT! I see that the dream of an akhand bharat has a new face one that is euphemistically called ``unity``. I pray a thousand times that this never comes to pass. I am Proud to be a Pakistani. Like I said before, it is a historical fact that we are two separate entities. We have been even since pre Islamic times. The concept of an akhand bharat cannot change that.Like I said before, we have much more in common with the afghans than with the Indians. That there is no afghan satellite TV or films at this juncture to prove this in unfortunate, but that is fact. Therefore, if we want unity with someone at all, we should look towards the Afghans rather than the indians.Pakistan Paindabad Forever!

Re Imam Din:I think you can make your point without abusing someone else`s faith. It would not hurt me a littl eif someone called my prophet and my God ``Ugly`` and name-tarnishers.

No we cant break the wall and dont want to. Pakistan is our country and we do not wish to wipe out our identity just because it`s the politically correct statement to make as far as the Western world is concerned. India is a religous not a secular state that upholds only the rights and aspirations of Hindus, the Sikhs are also fed up with the discrimination and regret not having claimed Khalistan in 1947. The Muslims in India are treated as second class citizens. I dont know what inspired you to write this but with due respects one should look at reality on the ground,you should also keep in mind that for many Pakistani`s even the thought of unification with India is extremely repulsive.

Interesting, Saeed.BUt I dont see the need to break the national boundaries - we DO need to break the wall - of disrespect, prejudice, paranoia. Cultural exchange etc. etc. needs just that and needs it desperately. A majr reshaping of the map of south asia isnot necessary.believe me just getting the nations in s. asia (in particular, and all over the world in general) to recognize common grounds and respect differences is all thats needed and is already as utopian and idealistic (and unlikely??) as possible.specific to Pak and India though such an integration has far more risk (of discrimination etc.) for the newly integrated minorities and very little for the religious/cultiural majority. But cultural exhange, awareness, at grass root level (dont rely on the govts.) is only beneficial.

Re: Bhupindar Singh. Bravo Mr. Singh! You have hit the nail on the little buulseye on the head. I think that we should work towards the establishment of friendly relations and respect towards each other. I am Pakistani, born and raised. Pakistan is my country and nation and no other beyond it. So for me, it is not a plausible idea in the least. Anyway, if we are to work towards unity, shouldn`t we first re-unite with East Pakistan first? Its all well and good to talk and speculate on such matters, but speaking for Pakistanis, I donot think there would be many who would support this before or after Pokharan/Ghauri.

hats off to you for expressing such a bold and (at least as far as pakistani`s are concerned) controversial idea.my gut reaction is to say: no! no! no! (in fear, not horror or anything else) because i shudder to think what would happen to the already marginalized provinces/regions in the two countries. Of course, as you say, and SR elaborates, a strong, dominant center IS NOT AN OPTION. State/province level autonomy would, conceivably be more egalitarian and engender greater accountability.On the other hand, having no center at all, makes smaller autonomous regions much more vulnerable to exploitation and trickery by large multinationals (excuse my bias against big capital). for one thing, completely autonomous baluchistan, for eg., might end up competing with other regions by ignoring environmental or labour standards. (i know a lot of this is still happening in our part of the world, in spite of the strong centers) but the POTENTIAL for abuse is greater when small states/provinces are confronted with large multinationals that have annual revenues many times higher than the `puny` GNP of these states. I dont know...what do other people think of that?

Yousuf Saeed,You have the right instincts but please don`t use the term ``UNITE`` because it implies a huge monolithic CENTRALIZED empire. I know, this is not what you are saying. You rightly point out that REGIONAL AUTONOMY should be ABSOLUTE. The Centre MUST NOT EXIST except as a co-operative body such as exist among the African countries, the Latin American countries or the Arab League. NEW DELHI and ISLAMABAD based centralized states MUST BE ABOLISHED. Then, AND ONLY THEN, is it going to be possible to de-militrize the Subcontinent. The real enemy of peace, progress and prosperity in the Subcontinent are the Central Governmental authorities of Hindustan and Pakistan. Instead of these two, there should (AND ULTIMATELY WILL) be 20 or 30 smaller regional states that are carved around ethno-linguistic lines and are run on economic priorities and NOT IDEOLOGICAL FICTION.If all revenue is raised by locally and spent locally and the accountability is also at a local level then things will begin to improve. The President of the US has no business whatsoever in running the affairs of Colorado, for example. And the Governor of Colorado has no say in who should be the mayor of Fort Collins or Durango. This does not diminish the security of the United States. However, the prime minister in Islamabad or New Delhi interferes in the affairs of a small town in a far off province. This is an imperialist colonial setup, and it MUST BE ABOLISHED. I applaude you for having the courage to say that this emperor is running BUTT NAKED....SR

Thank God Yousef Saeed wrote on this issue. You are an idealist, like me. Realistically speaking, I doubt Pakistan, India, Bangladesh will ever unite.

I strongly believe that partitioning South Asia like that was a terrible mistake that could have been avoided. I`ve read a little bit on it. When South Asia was about to gain independence from the British, it was an opportunity for us to build a bright future, to plant seeds. Instead, in our impatience, we chose to self-destruct.

I`ve been reading and thinking a lot about what happened around 1947... The Congress thought it was representing all Indians. It wasn`t. The Muslim League thought it was representing all Muslims. It wasn`t.

The reason Pakistan was born, I believe, was because the British heard the voice of the Muslims that said they wanted a separate country. Since the British decided it was OK, it happened. The papers that officially declared India and Pakistan as separate nations, (I understand from what I`ve been reading), were signed in 15 minutes. Hundreds of thousands of lives were destroyed in a matter of days just to realize this vision of a ``pure Islamic state``. WAS IT WORTH IT???????

Also, for some illogical reason, the British decided to give Kashmir to India instead of Pakistan. Why were we still allowing the British to make such critical decisions after all the effort we put into kicking them out? They couldn`t care less about the aftermath of such decisions. The South Asians have to live with it.

What a mess!

In any case, I think all of us idealists who believe that India and Pakistan COULD some day reunite, those of us that are South Asian at heart, must unite. Let`s create an international organization. It`s especially easier for those of us who are not living in South Asia to feel South Asian. We are not subject to the poverty and voilence that perpetuates hatred for the ``Other``. Those of us in North America and Europe especially are in a powerful position. We can make a difference back home by speaking up as well as putting our money where our mouth is.

saafreen@hotmail.com