Bombs, Missiles and Pakistani Science

Professor sahab,

You`re a real complainer. You are a liberal and a pacifist, but there is this hostility fueled by complaining in all your writings and statements that make your liberalism and your pacifism seem positively militant.

You have said that Pakistan`s acquisition of nuclear capability is not a sign of scientific progress. Fair enough. But you use too many words to say this and, in the process, give the impression of a thoughtful analysis. In fact, your article completely ignores (i) the geopolitical dynamic of nuclear power and (ii) the value of pure science to a developing country - the two core issues that make this subject infinitely more complex.

Developing societies can ill-afford spending money on pure research. For example, it is fashionable to complain about how the late Abdus Salam could make only a meager salary as a lecturer in Lahore and was forced to leave Pakistan, only to go on and win the Nobel Prize. But I ask you, what does a developing country do with a theoretical physicist who is seeking to unite the weak nulcear force with electromagnetism ? Not that this question isn`t a good one. Rather, it is too grand. In a country with crushing poverty and all the real pain that comes with it, thought experiments on the nature of matter do not deserve priority. Moreover, thank Allah that Salam sahab left - he needed the Western intellectual environment to realize his true destiny.

You are complaining about the lack of science and mathematics PhDs in Pakistan. Tell me, if you have them what will they do ? There is little money to fund research or to create jobs in science, so you will only end up defrauding many smart young people who could have done something more useful with their lives than work towards a degree that will not get them employment and which their country is too poor to use.

Some people - perhaps you included - would say to this that there is in fact a lot of money to support the pure scientific enterprise in Pakistan, if only we`d stop speding so much on a weapons race with India. To people who genuinely believe this, I have two things to say:

1. Our weapons race with India is a highly complex problem, given the historical, political and geographic realities. This is clearly the greatest need of the subcontinent today, but easier said than done.

2. Even if military expenditure is somehow eliminated from our budget, the funds should be channelized towards sanitation, clean water supplies, vaccine and other public health initiatives including comprehensive state-sponsored health care, roads, bridges and other public infrastructure, primary and secondary education, crime-fighting, and social welfare programs aimed at poverty. Funding pure science should come much, much later. We should feed, clothe and give dignity to all our people before we indulge in the luxury of pure science.

Dr. Hoodbhoy, you are a theoretical physicist but you openly embrace an activist social and political agenda. The former has given you academic success, the latter influence and notoriety. I think you are obliged to do something more substantial for Pakistan than just complain. I do agree that your complaints are more articulate and visible than most peoples`. But everybody can complain - it`s the easy way out.

Saad Shafqat

Re. Shafqat

Saad,

While I agree with some of your points, I`m afraid I must take issue with most of your response to Parvez Hoodbhoy`s article.

First on the issue of defense spending. I do think that geopolitical realities require Pakistan to develop a strong defense. It is a pity that this should be so, and I think we should all work towards a time when Pakistan and India no longer fear and distrust each other. I do not buy the crap --- pardon my language --- that India and Pakistan must be enemies for some overarching moral, religious, or cultural reason. I do not think that the so-called two-nation theory has any intrinsic validity, but it has, unfortunately, turned out to be a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts. Given this contingent reality, and the attitudes of governments in both countries, I do think it is appropriate to seek a position of some military strength while working for the day when it is no longer needed. I have no doubt that our children will either see the Sub-Continent become an economic union along the lines of the EU or disintegrate into anarchy. I hope it is the former.

Conceding that Pakistan must develop a strong defense, however, does not mean that the perpetuation of this situation should be the goal. Perhaps we do need to spend 30% of our GDP on defense today, but we must urgently seek ways to decrease this in the future. The way things are, I see little or no effort to develop an atmosphere where both India and Pakistan can de-escalate and divert some of their defense expenditures towards development. That --- not today`s defense expenditure --- is the real scandal.

I also agree with you that Pakistan (and other developing countries) cannot afford to support too much fundamental research. However, they must --- absolutely must --- support the intellectual development of the educated population. Perhaps Pakistan cannot build supercolliders and sponsor human genome projects. However, there is no excuse for not supporting world-class research in mathematics, theoretical physics, engineering, economics, the social sciences, literature, philosophy, and other such disciplines. Experimental research --- which eats up most research money --- is really only a small part of the world`s intellectual output. Fine, let us leave that to the U.S. and Japan. That still leaves a vast field of basic research that requires little more than creative minds, pencil, paper, some computer support, and a receptive environment. Of these, Pakistan has everything but the last. I would submit that it is not economic constraints which are responsible, but a societal --- and especially governmental --- disregard for intellectual achievement.

Let us take some examples: India, Israel, Turkey, and Hungary. India has more or less the same cultural conditions, climate, per-capita income, and political problems as Pakistan. Now look at publications by Indian scientists in the top physics, chemistry, and engineering journals.

Look at their international visibility. Above all, look at the quality of the work. True, most Indian universities are no better than most Pakistani universities, but their best universities and institutes --- and I mean the top dozen or so --- are world-class. Even the second-tier universities in India compare reasonably with second or third tier institutions in the US. Pakistani institutions are not even on the map. If India --- the quintessential third-world country --- can achieve scientific respectability without building Mars landers, so can Pakistan. It is not a lack of resources, but a lack of vision that holds us back.

Now turn to Israel. True, they receive $4 billion a year from the US in aid, and more from supporters in Europe and North America. But they need most of that just to keep their economy afloat and their defense strong. It is only a few years since inflation was running at 300% in Israel. Their entire Jewish population serves in the military. They have virtually no natural resources. Somehow, that has not kept them from producing some of the world`s pre-eminent mathematicians, physicists, biologists, engineers, linguists, archaeologists, and others. Their universities are among the world`s best, and their contribution to the world`s intellectual output is immense.

Next, consider Turkey --- a largely agrarian country, mostly Muslim, with a major separatist movement, very unstable politics, and difficult neighbors. Again, look at the contribution of Turkish scientists and engineers to top research publications, and look at the quality of their best universities (where, BTW, many Pakistanis on RCD scholarships received an excellent education).

Finally, let us take Hungary, circa 1989, which I chose for variety. True, it is --- and has been for many decades --- a fairly industrialized country. However, it is definitely not a rich country, has limited resources, suffered through Soviet occupation, is land-locked, and, in general, cannot aspire to great scientific projects. Yet, you know as well as I do, that some of the best neuroscience of the 60`s and 70`s --- and to this day --- comes from this small Eastern European nation. Indeed, all Eastern European countries have an incredibly strong record of producing outstanding mathematicians and scientists. Again, the key is in the attitude towards intellectual achievement.

I think what all these examples show is that economic limitations are only a very small part of Pakistan`s problems. The attitude towards education, development, social welfare, human rights, and intellectual endeavour is much more important.

I think that all the criteria that Dr. Hoodbhoy uses are legitimate and significant. It is true that Pakistan does not add enough value to its exports. It is true that Pakistan has no respectable universities (well, I suppose some like AKU are semi-respectable:-). It is true that the quality of intellectual discourse in Pakistan --- even in non-technical areas such as politics --- is fourth rate. It is true that Pakistani society is beset by the worst kind of obscurantist, reactionary forces imaginable --- the Taliban only being the most recent addition to this list. I don`t think any of us need reminding that Pakistan`s rulers --- past, present, and, alas, future --- would be in jail in most countries with a real justice system. The danger to Pakistan is not from spending money on missiles or bombs per se, but from the attitude which celebrates this situation instead of seeing it as a necessary evil. It is one thing to soberly pursue the country`s legitimate defense needs, but quite another to turn it into a national circus.

Finally, I will say this: All the things that you list among your priorities --- universal health care, primary education, vaccination, etc. --- are truly pressing national needs for Pakistan. but so are some of the things that Dr. Hoodbhoy talks about. No country can afford to fix its primary schools while letting its universities go to pot --- or vice-versa.

Ali Minai

This is sharp and sobering political commentary. One of the things that is striking is how in the age of neo-colonialism, Pakistan`s status as a peripheral state serves the interests of the West, yet the country continues in its state of economic subjugation and scientific under development. We`re busy producing foot balls, and cotton, products that do not require scientific refinement or research; yet we play with weapons of mass destruction, and have available to us, elite products of consumption, like latest model cars.

This is a eye-opening article of how our alleged technological advancement through missles is just a case of ``The Emperor`s new Clothes``; the fact that this technology has no substantive, meaningful advancement for us, is a sorry state of affairs. The timing couldn`t be perfect for such a piece.

As for replies complaining of Hoodbhoy`s complaining, I skimmed thorugh your response, and actually thought of responding, but how do you respond to an argumentative equivalent of the proverbial dog chasing its own tail?

shafqat wrote:

``Professor sahab,You`re a real complainer.``

I think Shafqat totally missed the point professor is trying to make. No where I get an impression that he is complaining about insufficient funding for scientific institutes in Pakistan. He has simply tried to point to the deception politicians are playing by equating bombs and missiles with ``scientific achievement``.

Re: Pervez Hoodbhoy

An interesting article that followed a very specific point of view, as all your articles have in the past, on the issue of scientific and technological advances in Pakistan.

In this, I agree with Shafqat`s assessment of your article. You have brillianly pointed out the problems, but as is your habit, you have not showed one iota of reasoning or advocated a recourse on how to resolve the problem! All your articles bemoan the state of Pakistan, rightly at times, but have no where offered a constructive critism of the problem. It does not require specific insights or a doctoral degree to quote all the ill of the Pakistani society. In a rather significant way, you have astutely demostrated your own analysis and have validated your own critism of Pakistani educational advances! You have offered no new insights, but have merely re-stated the obvivious; a critera which you use to blame Pakistani technical achivements.

This article reminded me of your other article on the use of a command and control régimé for Pakistani nuclear weapons and your rationale for employing PALs (Permissive Action Links). You merely point the problem and when I asked you specific questions on the issue, you were silent (as evidenced in the posts to that article).

Sir, you have some interesting observations, in your articles, but it is also incumbent upon you that when you offer a critism you should also suggest a solution to the problem. However, you prefer to cry ``wolf`` and if you persit in crying wolf in your articles, like the boy in that fable, your articles and your message will be ignored and that would be tragic, because you have some geniune concerns to share with all!

Re: Ali Minai (reply #4)

Dear Ali,

I find very little in your response to argue with.

I completely agree with you about the subcontinental arms race and the hyperacute need to curb it - I was just trying to say that it`s a complex issue that won`t go away tomorrow.

On the need for elevating the level of intellectual discourse in Pakistan - of course. The need for developing science in Pakistan - of course. But if intellectual mediocrity is the problem, Dr. Hoodbhoy`s article is as guilty of it as our fourth-rate universities.

On the examples of non-G7 countries doing well in science - very interesting. Of the four countries you cite - India, Turkey, Hungary and Israel - only Israel produces the kind of world-class science that is routinely cited in US journals. This is not surprising when you realize that Jews were winning Nobel Prizes even during the Holocaust. Over 33% of the world`s Nobel laureates are Jews, while Jews are less than 0.33% of the world`s population. Thus Jews are 100-fold overrepresented in the population of Nobel Prize winners. I don`t know if they`re truly special, but the numbers sure make it look that way.

The other examples are clearly also noteworthy. Hungary has a strong tradition in science and mathematics going back centuries. And Turkey, Hungary and Israel are also all much richer than Pakistan.

India, the country in your list that most resembles Pakistan, has indeed benefited from the visions of its leaders in educational planning and in quality of professional institutes. But teaching and training professionals is one thing (which Pakistani schools like AKU, IBA, LUMS and GIK can do with world-class quality as well), advancing human knowledge through the creation of new information is quite another. Indian science has volume, but it is little noticed outside of India and even less often cited. Still, I do agree that the quality of the output is superior to Pakistan`s.

I am not defending Pakistan`s pitiful record in scientific research, but it is interesting to note that none of the countries you cite is crippled by a feudal ruling class. Outside of Pakistan, Pakistanis have done and are doing world-class science. Within Pakistan, a range of constraints keeps us scientifically backward. And the constraints are more complex than simply Nawaz Sharif mistaking an atomic bomb for true scientific achievement.

Saad

Extremely persuasive article about the futility of the effort expended by nations trying to parade the ability to kill and maim as proof of technological progress.

Re: Feroz

You are absolutely right, Feroz. We all now know Pakistan`s problems. They have been discussed umpteenth times. We`re beating a dead horse at this point. It is now time to discuss solutions, the ways to take the country out of the muck it has been stuck in for some time. Given the current political, social and economic situation in Pakistan, the country has no future. It`s a shame that, at the dawn of third millennium, Pakistan stands bankrupt both morally and financially and without a future.

As always, the problem lies with the machinery that runs a country, ie, its political setup. It is not working in Pakistan. How about this for the starters: do away with the borders of Punjab, Sindh, Baluchistan and the Frontier, integrate the country into one piece and redraw the lines into small districts, something along the lines of Congressional Districts in the US (a jigsaw puzzle?). The more districts the better. Hopefully, this could help alleviate the ethnic problem of Punjabis, Sindhis, etc, and also make many more leaders to come forward and take responsibilities for their districts. A national leader with vision is bound to arise from this pool. This would also put a major dent in so-called horse-trading because there will be just too many politicians to buy. Further, hold the general election every three year, not five. Five years is too long a time. Three years will keep the pressure on the politicians to perform.

The only problem, as I see it, is Who will put the bell around cat`s neck?

What do you think? You are a very bright political scientist. I would like to hear from you.

RE: Jitnay muNh utnee bataiN

Firstly, I believe (and Chowk kay mahafiz can refute if not true) that Pervez does not read these replies, and therefore, will not defend himself from the teekhay waar of the Chowkwalas.

Good for him!

To whom this is beating a dead horse and stating the obvious etc., I disagree vehemently. This is supposed to be an article for a mainstream Pakistani newspaper, whose audience is not the ``enlightened`` chowkwalas, at least not entirely. In the missile/nuclear bomb-induced paranoiac bliss that the Pakistani people at large find themselves in, who exactly has been beating the horse to death? Pervez has been a local voice of reason, an internal doubting conscience, for the last 25 years (more or less). He has survived so far and he continues to survive, and each day that he continues to point out the problems and misconceptions of the society he lives in is a tribute to his immense courage and determination, which to him is only doing the right thing. The real complainers, finger-pointers, ``problem-solvers``, etc. will always be there, and as usual they will make no difference, except provide for a self-gratifying exchange in the drawing room.

Pervez does make Pakistani masses think and self-reflect and that in itself is solving part of the problem. His ad should say:

Can your problem-solver do that?

Wa lam yakullahu kufuwun ahad, but Pakistan does need more like him.

Wallah aalam bissawab,

maTha

Thanks for telling us the truth. I wonder if the Pakistani newspaper will publish this as it is.

One small quibble I have is that I always thought that it was reason which beget science and not science that beget humanism, rationalism etc. Humanism is also I think a separate concept from science.

Science without humanism is a far more dangerous game than ignorance and fanaticism ala the Taliban
and our so-called scientific expertise.

Perhaps I digress, but I feel that merely criticising our priorities as a nation is not enough--Many wonderful writers do the same. Why we have those priorities should be looked into as well. Unfortunately most writers shy away from tackling questions of why we as a society give power to those who incite emotion rather than call to reason. Dont you think our morbid fascination with fear/dominance--starting with God onwards has a lot to do with our priorities?. Why is our concept of Allah so bloodthirsty? Why do we hate those weaker than us? Why do the educated shy away from speaking the truth? Why is it that we berate all our leaders yet each who comes to power is a mirror image of the last? Why is it that our writers hint at the truth but dont speak it?

Centuries of submission to superstition has made us almost sub-human. Isnt it time that intellectuals/writers said it like it is? Why are people so afraid to speak?

Re Lord Matha:

Spot on my good Matha. But to add on to your thoughts, this article is of immense value even if not published in Pak papers before a ``non-chowkwala`` audience: (a) This is not beating a dead horse, and (b) beating a dead horse, while not as good as trying to resurrect it, is better than picnicking on its rotting carcass.

It makes a non-trivial point by putting the spotlight on the recent pride in ``scientific advancements`` evincd by both India and Pak. Even here in the US we routinely hear comments in the media such as ``Well Terri, these are smart people [talking of how India made the bomb]; after all these are the people who designed the pentium processor [referring to Vinod Dham in particular who was the Lead on the Intel pentium project]``. Such asinine comments show the wholesale ignorance of what constitutes being ``scientifically advanced``.

Also, as you point out, while it would be great to have Pervez interact here, its unlikely that he will do so given his time constraints - it was a minor miracle that he agreed to be a regular contributor. So it is rather lame to insinuate that when asked to give solutions,the prof does not come forward and interact. Personally putting the spotlight where it is needed and doing it in full public disclosure and doing it well, is, well, pretty good stuff. For other things that he is upto, try to get to know Mashal a bit more.

Re: Godot # 8

I think you`ve put your finger on the pulse of the patient! Also: sorry for the lenght of this post since I know how much you hate long posts!

As to the gerry-meandering of Pakistani political districts and the dilulation of ethnic geographical identies, I agree with you again!

The problem with Pakistani politics is that there is no national identity, but rather we Pakistanis identify ourselves not as Pakistanis, but rather as Punjabis, Sindhis etc. The basic question we have to ask ourselves is, ``what is Pakistani?`` Think of Pakistan in the context of the situation in former Yugoslavia and you will see the problems. We are Punjabis etc. first before we are Pakistanis; we think of our ethnic interests before we think of our national interests. The break-up of the provincial political districts will certainly help in the process.

Also, the the Pakistani political habit of reserving seats for minorities needs to be dis-continued. This policy, in a realistic sense, is designed not to favor ethnic harmony, but rather to highlight ethnic differences. We should open up political representation in Pakistan to all concerned and the the elections of our political representatives should be based on the rule of meritocracy, an oxy-moronic idea in Pakistan, not on the basis of some devine fedual right!

As to the time-frame of elections, three years is rather a short time in political terms. I still favor a five year term, but with the proviso of holding a constitutionally mandated vote of no confidence every three years during a government`s tenure in office! Another thing which will help the situation in Pakistan is that we must decide if Pakistan is secular or a Islamic country; the co-existence of two philosophies is impossible and a source of potential disaster in the future! I think that we as Pakistanis have still not rationalized what is Pakistan and who we are?

These are internal reforms. Furthermore, we ex-pat Pakistanis must get in the act also. I have been thinking of this since reading about Dr. Amjad Ali`s heartbreaking case of his brother`s murder. We, es-pats, should link our financial contributions/reimbursements to the Pakistani coffers with the imrovement of human rights in Pakistan. We will keep sending monies critical foreign exchange to Pakistan as long as the Government concentrates on improving the lot of its citizens. I have been discussing this idea with Temporal and I think that we ex-pats should lobby our (American/whatever country we may reside in) representives to link the loans, development of international aid, IMF debt retirement loans and in short, any form of monetary aid to Pakistan, from western nations, and should hold them to be conditional on the Pakistani government`s record on human rights!

There is every indication if this happens, the Pakistani government will merely use this as a rhetoric of western/imperialistic conspiracy. Hence, there needs to an identification of a local pressure point, in Pakistan, which can bring pressure on the government to pay attention to this problem. The best way to do this is by linking arms sales to Pakistan to its human rights record. If we can convince the Pakistani military that it will get no new toys and then link their lack of weapons procurement to the governments` dismal record on human rights, we will be creating a potential pressure point which the government could ignore only at its own peril!

If we have to, to solve the Pakistani problems, resort to the Chigago Way we should! Like Sean Connery in the movie Untouchables said; Everyone knows where the booze is. The question is who wants to cross Al Capone! Likewise, we all know what the problems in Pakistan are and the real question is what are we prepared to do about it?

Re: maTha, #11

I agree with you vehemently. Beating the dead horse was not my reference to this article of the esteemed professor. I was merely venting my frustration with the `pahaya-jam` (stuck wheel?) political situation in Pakistan. I am going to eat my bagel now (I love bagels; I`ll tell you, this is all Zionist conspiracy!)

Re: Khan, #12

My apologies to you and to all those who have taken umbrage to my `beating a dead horse.` Please see above, my response to maTha. I think I`ll have another bagel (I`ll tell you, those damn Jews!)

Another well written article by the good Doctor.
Pakistan has as it`s primary source of danger
the POPULATION Bomb to worry about above all else.
The fallout from this danger is the expanding
ignorance and declining living standard of the
Pakistani masses.
Chaghi or Chagai can deter India but who can
counter such alarming population growth and
WHO IS DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT?

Ras

Re: Feroz, #13

Thanks for the reply.

Your suggestion of tying Western aid to Pakistan with all sorts of good social behavior is probably good in theory only. You and I both know that in order for Pakistan to become anything resembling a civilized nation, it must change from the top. The Band-Aid solutions are not the long-term solutions. The entire political structure needs to be changed, assuring that those in power are held accountable for their actions affecting the country. A system of checks and balances needs to be in place.

The unfortunate thing about me discussing solutions to Pakistan`s problems is that I`m a tiger without teeth; an arm-chair analyst, as they say. My thoughts of doing away with the provincial borders and redrawing the lines along smaller districts in Pakistan is an idea that cannot be put in place without actions and concrete efforts, so is the idea of holding elections every three years (this is how it is done in Australia, I understand). To change a country like Pakistan from top down is a Herculean effort, to say the least. It cannot be done without politicians with vision and political will.

Anyway, I just wanted to put some ideas down and hope someone who can make a real difference will pick up on them, or have better ideas. The bottom line is that I`d love to see a Pakistan that is prosperous, tolerant and secure, where a good majority lives in peace and harmony and has only middle-class worries (middle-class, as we understand that term in the US). I always wonder if it can be done, and if I`d live long enough to see that.

Re. Saad Shafqat (Rep. #7)

Saad,

I always like it when people agree with me publicly:-). But seriously speaking, your response to my posting provides valid reasons why the four countries I mentioned are doing better scientifically that Pakistan. The question I have is: Why can`t we have a reason to be good too? How is it that all reasons (long tradition of scientific excellence, selfless leaders, ablishing of feudalism, Judaism, etc.) occur only in other countries? We are doing something wrong. In fact, we are doing almost everything wrong. But pointing out the problems one at a time --- as Dr. Hoodbhoy did --- is still better than saying nothing, waiting until a global synopsis of our national failings can be assembled.

Unlike some other respondents, I do think that the issue of how we view Pakistan`s scientific and intellectual ``progress`` is of great significance. The first step in aiming high is to realize one`s true current state. Recall that old Persian saying about four classes of people: 1) Those who know, and know that they know; 2) Those who know, but think they (still) do not know (enough); 3) Those who are ignorant, and realize their ignorance; and 4) Those who are ignorant, and ignorant of their own ignorance. We need to move out of class 4, and it is very important that this happen at a national level.

From my limited experience of Pakistan and Pakistanis, one factor which keeps us from acknowledging our truly miserable state is our national and institutionalized paranoia. When we can blame every problem on the West, the Jews, the Hindus, the CIA, the Foreign Hand, the British, and such, we feel no need to acknowledge our own defects. After all, how could we, the Best of Allah`s People, be intellectually backward? It must either be a foreign conspiracy, or the rest of the world`s criteria for achievement are wrong. Now, I know this is a very exaggerated view, and there are many in Pakistan who do not subscribe to such nonsense, but, unfortunately, our government, our institutions, and our media (to some degree) ahave an over-representation of paranoid reactionaries.

I agree with Ferozk that we need to decide whether Pakistan will be a secular state or a theocracy. From my perspective, there is only one sensible choice --- no prize for guessing which one:-). However, I see no sign that such a choice will be made in the foreseeable future.

One last point specific to my previous post. Indian science may not have reached the height and quality of Western science in general, but in specific areas of engineering, mathematics, and physics, they have a very respectable presence, and vie with the best.

Ali Minai