Resolving the Hijack Crisis

bahmad #125

Dear Bilal Ahmad,

I appreciate the spirit of your posting. I agree with you that each government`s `inability to keep its house in order` plays into the hostility of the other.

Sadhana

PS: Best wishes for the New Year, to all on Chowk. Also, thanks SameerJB, and `kabhi unko kabhi apne chowk-id ko dekhte hain`

(:-))

I have some comments to the article about the `Crisis in India-Pakistan relations`.

As long as lip service was paid to `peaceful negotiations`, Indian government had sufficient reasons to promote them. There has indeed been a hardening of the Indian stance, and the Pakistani refusal to accept Kargil as a cause is unrealistic. How did Kargil contribute to peace and stability in the region which India`s rhetoric is jeopardizing so much now?

The distinction between Pakistani government and militants was badly blurred during the Kargil crisis. It would be criminally negligent for a government to give the Pakistani government a clean chit without enough cause after such an incident.

If Pakistan so openly makes guns the currency of dialogue, why expect India to return to `talks`. Arguing that Pakistan has a right to openly use arms in Indian Kashmir only opens the door for India to stir trouble in PoK. Also, if militant organisations regularly issue statements

from Pakistani soil, its difficult for the Indian public not to ascribe delibrate intent to the Pakistani government, as is ascribed to India by common Pakistanis during the Bangladesh crisis.

To angry young Chowkwallahs from across the border here is a challenge:

Can you reach agreement among yourselves about what your government wants and what you want:

About Kashmir

a1. Piece of Indian Kashmir for yourselves

a2. Piece of Indian Kashmir for Kashmiris sympathetic to Pakistan

a3. Piece of Indian Kashmir as new holy land of Wahabi Islam

a4. All of Indian Kashmir as new holy land for Wahabi Islam

a5. All of Indian Kashmir for all Kashmiris including non-Muslims

a6. All of Kashmir * for all Kashmiris including non-Muslims

a7. All of Kashmir * for yourselves.

a8. Any part of Kashmir(or any part of India) demanded at any time, till perpetuity

*(excluding Chinese Kashmir)

About Pakistan

b1. Secular democracy/oligarchy?

b2. Islamic to some extent democracy/oligarchy

b3. Totally Islamic theocracy

`a` choices may depend on `b` choices.

I suspect in some cases, the answer to both is `death to India`

How are Indians to know which choices will triumph in Pakistan? Can any long-lasting settlement with Pakistan be reached without these issues being made clear?

Sadhana

RE: Reply#: 119 fh

``tvarad - ``There are more than 130 million Muslims in India, the richest Indian is a Muslim ....``

I find this an incredibly naive comment - basic statistics - we should be talking about averages (and standard deviations) rather than individual cases. e.g. Michael Jordan is a millionaire but that doesn`t reflect the fact that in the US Afro-Americans have incomes about 60% of whites, etc.``

I never did make the statement that everything was hunky-dory for Muslims in India, did I? It is what you get when you take a statement out of context. The point I was trying to make is that Muslims in India have a shot at the big-leagues if they so choose unlike minorities in Pakistan and I gave the above example to validate my statement. Now social imbalances between Muslims and Non-Muslims do exist in India. But there are also social imbalances between Dalits and Higher-Castes, between sub-castes; between North and South and the like. India has made a genuine attempt at reducing these imbalances with which no one can argue, by reducing feudalism, establishing quotas and the like. And, of course, there is no doubt that much more needs to be done.

Pakistan is a failure as a state because it has very clearly failed to address similar social imbalances which have only grown more acute as the problems are ignored further. It will probably be impossible for such change to happen peacefully because there are too many vested interests who won`t let go of their pound of flesh.

``And the politicians/ elites induct members of an oppressed minority to show how well represented their administrations are - e.g. the right wing BJP had a muslim minister.``

That may be but remember that the BJP government is kept in power by it`s coalition partners many of whom rely heavily on the Muslim vote for their power and have been instrumental in getting it to tone down it`s Hindutva rhetoric (e.g. Telugu Desam) and provide good governance. Pakistan should try democracy for a longer time. It will find strange ways to accomodate the pushes and pulls of it`s body politic too.

RE: Reply#: 119 fh

``tvarad - ``There are more than 130 million Muslims in India, the richest Indian is a Muslim ....``

I find this an incredibly naive comment - basic statistics - we should be talking about averages (and standard deviations) rather than individual cases. e.g. Michael Jordan is a millionaire but that doesn`t reflect the fact that in the US Afro-Americans have incomes about 60% of whites, etc.``

I never did make the statement that everything was hunky-dory for Muslims in India, did I? It is what you get when you take a statement out of context. The point I was trying to make is that Muslims in India have a shot at the big-leagues if they so choose unlike minorities in Pakistan and I gave the above example to validate my statement. Now social imbalances between Muslims and Non-Muslims do exist in India. But there are also social imbalances between Dalits and Higher-Castes, between sub-castes; between North and South and the like. India has made a genuine attempt at reducing these imbalances with which no one can argue, by reducing feudalism, establishing quotas and the like. And, of course, there is no doubt that much more needs to be done.

Pakistan is a failure as a state because it has very clearly failed to address similar social imbalances which have only grown more acute as the problems are ignored further. It will probably be impossible for such change to happen peacefully because there are too many vested interests who won`t let go of their pound of flesh.

``And the politicians/ elites induct members of an oppressed minority to show how well represented their administrations are - e.g. the right wing BJP had a muslim minister.``

That may be but remember that the BJP government is kept in power by it`s coalition partners many of whom rely heavily on the Muslim vote for their power and have been instrumental in getting it to tone down it`s Hindutva rhetoric (e.g. Telugu Desam) and provide good governance. Pakistan should try democracy for a longer time. It will find strange ways to accomodate the pushes and pulls of it`s body politic too.

Whither Indo-Pak Relations?

Dr. Hasan-Askari Rizvi`s article (reproduced below) raises several issues. The answers of some of the issues are not only difficult but are virtually impossible. Rizvi contends that the Indian government has launched a propaganda implicating Pakistan (especially ISI) for masterminding the recent hijacking (with the support of Taliban and Osama bin Laden).

A lot of citizens of Pakistan and India often blindly support the positions taken by their respective countries. From such a standpoint, they often doubt the intentions and integrity of the other party and view its aspirations, policies, and actions as somewhat evil. Although there may be some element of truth in the propaganda against the other party, the policy of looking at the other party`s faults is often a result of each government`s inability to keep its own house in order. Citizens of both India and Pakistan need to realize this simple fact before engaging in endless and unnecessary bickering that rarely helps anyone. We need to adopt a policy of cooperation and competition rather than an unwise policy of mutual-destruction.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

The Nation, Lahore

Sunday, January 02, 2000

Crisis in India-Pakistan relations

Dr Hasan-Askari Rizvi

The dawn of the new millennium is witnessing a steep deterioration of relations between India and Pakistan. There have been ups and downs in India-Pakistan relations in the past, but what happened in the last week of December is the most unfortunate and serious crisis in their relations in the decade of the nineties. This crisis developed when the Indian media and the government used the hijacking of its aircraft on December 24, 1999, to launch a massive propaganda campaign against Pakistan, accusing its ISI of masterminding and executing the hijacking by using Kathmandu as the base of the operation. They claimed that India was a victim of an international terrorist conspiracy carried out by Pakistan, the Taliban and Osama bin Laden. The Indian leaders proposed that the international community should adopt a joint strategy to deal with such initiators of terrorism and apply strict sanctions against Pakistan.

Indian charges against Pakistan were either self-contradictory and the India media continued to change these from time to time, or were contradicted by the Napalese government, the station manager of Indian Airlines at Kathmandu Airport, and inadvertent release of some information by the Indian government. With the passage of time, the attitude of Indian media and the government softened towards the Taliban but Pakistan was not allowed off the hook. At times, it appeared that India was more interested in maligning Pakistan rather than bringing the hijacking to an end. Pakistan`s media and the government responded to Indian propaganda with no less vigour, pointing out inconsistencies in the Indian case against Pakistan and India`s flawed management of the hijacking. The Pakistani analysts hinted at the possibility of Indian intelligence staging the hijacking in order to have Pakistan declared a terrorist state by the international community. All this resulted in a full-blown propaganda war between the media (official, semi-official and non-official) of the two countries.

The latest Indian attempt to label Pakistan as a terrorist and irresponsible state is a return to the strategy India first adopted in 1992-93 when it engaged in a sustained campaign for persuading the US to declare Pakistan a terrorist state on the grounds that the militant Islamic groups based in Afghanistan and Pakistan challenged the established order in several countries. What perturbed India most was Pakistani support to the nationalist struggle in Indian-administered Kashmir and the involvement of some Pakistan-based groups with the separatist movement in Kashmir. This strategy waned as the US indicated that it would not designate Pakistan as a terrorist state. This gave a boost to the efforts to improve India-Pakistan relations. India revived the campaign against Pakistan, describing it as a major base and sponsor of international terrorism, in the course of the Kargil war in May-July 1999. Unknown pro-India circles placed a full-page advertisement in The Times, London, New York Times and the Washington Post, which described the Pakistan Army as a rogue army that had supported and resorted to terrorism outside of Pakistan. Since then this campaign has remained India`s active agenda, which reached its climax in the immediate aftermath of the hijacking of the Indian aircraft on December 24, 1999.

The same attitude shaped India`s policy of non-acceptance of the establishment of the military government in Pakistan in October 1999. India`s official and non-official circles sharply condemned the displacement of the elected government in Pakistan and described the assumption of power by the military as a threat to peace and stability in the region. Indian radio has been putting out negative commentaries since then, specifically targeting General Pervez Musharraf for his alleged links with Islamic ``terrorists`` and that the Pakistan Army would now have greater opportunities to promote ``terrorist activities`` in the region. India adopted an extremely negative attitude towards the new Pakistani government in the Commonwealth Conference in November and had the SAARC summit conference postponed because of the coup in Pakistan, although other members wanted it to take place as scheduled. When Pakistan`s Commerce Minister sought a meeting with his Indian counterpart on the eve of the WTO meeting, the Indian government declined as it did not want to talk to a senior member of Pakistan`s military government. However, the Indian Foreign Minister made a telephone call to Pakistan`s Foreign Minister after the hijacking incident.

The post-1999 election Indian government of Vajpayee has significantly altered its approach towards Pakistan. Instead of mutual engagement, confidence-building measures and dialogue on the contentious issues, the present Indian government is pursuing a strident approach for substantiating that Pakistan is a pariah state. India would prefer international economic and political sanctions against Pakistan similar to those imposed on Iraq, Libya and Iran.

It seems the present Indian government has come to the conclusion that Pakistan, an obstacle to achieving India`s foreign policy objectives, needs to be put in its place. It was no longer acceptable to the policy makers that a smaller state should try to undermine its security concerns. Furthermore, it is believed that given Pakistan`s economic predicament, it would not be able to withstand India`s diplomatic and military pressures. A strident approach towards Pakistan also helped to externalize all the blame for the problems in Kashmir. It appears that the Indian government has accepted the argument of a section of the right wing/hard-liners that Pakistan needs to be pushed to the wall, if not physically punished, in order to bring the situation in Kashmir under control.

India got the opportunity to embark on a tough policy towards Pakistan due to Western/US paranoia regarding Islamic militant groups that vowed to undermine American interests. The US alarm at the Afghan war veterans, Islamic militant groups, especially Osama bin Laden, and the Taliban provided a suitable backdrop to India for linking the Pakistani state with these groups. As the US had declared Harkatul Ansar/Mujahideen as a terrorist group, India concocted the Pakistani state`s partnership with this outfit. Anybody watching India-based TV channels or listening to Indian Radio during this week knows about the velocity of the Indian campaign for proving that Pakistan is an integral part of the Harkatul Ansar-Osama-Taliban ``terrorist network`` and that the Pakistani state machinery (especially the Army) is responsible for the activities of these and several other Islamic groups. By implication, the hijacking of the Indian aircraft is yet another evidence of Pakistan`s sponsorship of international terrorism.

Pakistan`s attitude has also hardened towards India as a defensive mechanism. Pakistan has generally reacted to the propaganda rather than taking the initiative. Pakistan`s TV channels and radio offered rejoinders to the Indian media`s effort to blame Pakistan for the hijacking. The Government of Pakistan changed its policy on Kashmir, declaring on December 27 that Kashmir would be on the top of the agenda in any dialogue with India. General Pervez Musharraf said: ``Earlier we used to say that we will negotiate all issues including Kashmir. But now we will discuss the Kashmir issue first,`` and that their relations cannot improve without resolving the Kashmir problem.

Indian attempts to obtain international support for its case of Pakistan`s alleged involvement in terrorism is not expected to succeed. The US/West is wary of the activities of certain extreme Islamic groups. But the US administration does not lump together all Islamic movements and countries, although Western media often ignores this distinction. Furthermore, unlike India, the US interests are not served by isolating and condemning Pakistan as a terrorist state. No doubt, India is a powerful state and the US recognises its centrality to South Asia, but the US is not likely to follow on ``either-or`` approach while dealing with India or Pakistan. Both are important in their own right and sacrificing one for the other is not an advisable strategy. Therefore, no matter if India and the US have some sharing of agenda regarding Islamic ``terrorism``, India`s agenda against Pakistan and its desire to become the gatekeeper for the transactions between the states of South Asia and the rest of the world are not going to materialise. The US pursues on engagement policy while dealing with the states of South Asia and it wants to modify the policies of these states through constant engagement and positive and negative interaction. This approach is not expected to change in the near future.

India needs to adopt a more realistic approach towards Kashmir. It cannot put all the blame for what is happening there at the doorstep of Pakistan. There are strong domestic sources of the on-going insurgency in Kashmir and the ordinary Kashmiri Muslim is totally alienated from the Indian state. No doubt, strong societal linkages exist between Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir on the one hand, and Indian-administered Kashmir on the other; these are not the primary cause of the trouble in Kashmir. When the same type of people live across a political divide that have a strong sense of historical injustice, mutual support is understandable. India must not forget its own experience during the Bangladesh crisis period, 1971. The linkages between West and East Bengal and between the Indian polity and the Bangladesh movement produced military, political and material support from India to the Bangladesh movement. In the case of Kashmir, how can one ignore the strong historical, cultural, ethnic, linguistic ties between Pakistanis and Kashmiris and their overlapping political goals? Therefore, a realistic approach that explores different options for the solution of the Kashmir problem rather than Indian insistence on no talks on Kashmir`s future can improve the regional security environment in South Asia.

India and Pakistan need to follow a policy of mutual engagement and result-oriented dialogue on all the contentious issues. The new Pakistani policy on Kashmir is a tactical move. If there is a shift in India`s current policy on Pakistan, the Government of Pakistan is expected to revert to the earlier policy of simultaneous dialogue on Kashmir and other issues.

The salvation of South Asia depends on peace and stability and socio-economic development. These goals cannot be achieved if the on-going crisis in Indo-Pakistan relations persists. The present high tension between India and Pakistan should not be allowed to become a permanent feature of their relations.

-- The Nation Group of Publications Pvt Limited

Propoganda indeed cuts both ways.

Leafing through a MiddleEastern newspaper, I came across three articles on a single page. One talked about how Pakistan was dissapointed by India`s ludicrous claim that the hijacking was an ISI-planned operation and nothing else. A second article had a Nepalese minister replying in blunt terms that the Nepalese people were offended by Indian diplomatic claims that one of the hijackers was Nepalese and that the Nepalese government was to be blamed as well. The third article was a note by Taliban militia calling India`s statement about Osama Bin Laden being the brains behind the hijacking a ``useless and untimely propoganda scheme``.

In the midst of it all, while Mr. Vajpayee does his best to save his seat, no Indian minister - or Indian intelligence for that matter - could ever answer the following simple three questions:

1. Why was the plane not prevented from leaving Amritsar? (The time factor excuse - according to the BBC - does not apply, since authorities knew the plane was hijacked as soon as it had ENTERED Indian air space from the border which is all the way across the country).

2. The plane had landed in Dubai as well. Why weren`t the authorities in Dubai asked to prevent the plane from leaving as they were in Lahore, and even after the plane left, why weren`t they condemned for it as Pakistan was?

3. The inital passenger list released by the Indian media did not include any Pakistanis at all. Where on earth did four Pakistanis turn up from and when they did enter the plane, what nationality did they enter under(this can be easily figured out through the passenger list by process of elimination)? All this is, of course, after the hijackers were mentioned to be Nepalese, Kashmiris, Afghanis, Chechnyians and even Indians.

Does anybody in India know that the two Indian passengers released earlier were treated in Pakistani hospitals?

And the food for the aircraft while it stayed in Afghanistan came from Pakistan?

In a region where India does its best to cover its own impotence in handling a crisis situation by scapegoating Pakistan for everything (quite obviously in the hopes of having it declared a terrorist state), it would not surprise me if I found an article in the Indian media with the headline:

``Pakistan`s ISI behind massive floods and other natural disasters.``

Using the terminology of Islamic militants who divide the world into Dar-ul-Islam and Dar-ul-harb and believe violence is justifiable in Dar-ul-harb, I divide the world into Dar-ul-Secular and Dar-ul-Harb. Kashmir is Dar-ul-harb and violence is justified till it becomes Dar-ul-Secular.

Ummairr:

There is far more justification of the Indian charge of a Pakistani hand than the Pakistani charge of the hijacking being a RAW plot. The Lakshar-e-Toiba openly takes credit for assaults on Indian forces and has mass meetings in Muridke. The hijackers breathe free and are much less tense in Kandahar than Amritsar - it is clear they feel a lot more comfortable in Taliban (a Pakistani creation) territory than say the UAE. At some point ``moral`` and ``political`` support for violent groups fighting for Kashmiri independence becomes complicity. When and where that point is a matter of judgement - in the eyes of many Indians, myself included, the Pakistani establishment is complicit in violent acts of terrorism. You may feel the same way regarding the complicity of the Indian establishment in Army excesses against Kashmir civilians. I feel that way too - the whole Indian population is not doing enough to stop it. At the same time, I find Pakistan politics at their core ridiculous and illiberal and I dont believe that the liberal beliefs of Indian secularism should thrown in the towel to Islamic manifest destiny in Kashmir. Kargil should have demonstrated to the world and to the Kashmiris that the Indian belief in their cause does not consist merely of shooting at people from a position of strength but also includes many officers and jawans going willingly to meet their deaths in defense of this cause.

Kafir K Khan (aka KKK)

Re post#114

Its precisely that kind of racist thinking that has flushed our two nations down the same toilet.When you comment about the justice system & corruption in India, the resounding reply is ---LOOK WHO`S TALKING!! THE POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK!!

I could take cheap shots at Islam, but that would be coming down to your level. Besides, I happen to have respect for every religion.

Logically, the only place that these hijackers have gone to is Pakistan. If the Pak Govt really want to look good in the eyes of the world (for a change), they should arrest both the hijackers & the 3 released terrorists & send them back to India.

Think of the diplomatic fallout--the whole world will hail them as the ``defenders of justice``, not to mention the adulation of a billion Indians. Lastly, wouldnt Pakistan be really THRILLED to watch the BJP & Jaswant publically eat their words?!

Somehow I have very serious doubts that they have the guts to do that..

kafir K khan #109

{Pakistan produces less than 40 Ph.Ds a year as compare to 1200 per year by Indian Universities. India is doing favorably well in biotechnology, space and software engineering. All this is happening because India`s core industries and institutions were allowed to flourish between 50`s and 70`s}

Some more data supporting your above statement. Indians’ expertise in software is well known. What surprised me was an article in Wall Street Journal last week on India’s medical industry and how reverse engineering is leading now to expertise in developing new drugs. New Delhi firm Ranbaxy (market cap 3 billion dollars) was dicussed in detail. 14 out of every 100 researchers working in US pharmaceutical labs are of Indian origin. Very impressive indeed.

Re: sadna Reply #: 112

Masood spent 6 years in Indian jails while Zargar spent 8. I feel that these many years are sure to have brought about a change in their psyche. So I don`t think we will see either of them in Kashmir again. The thought of being caught again - with almost certainity of collecting a one-way ticket this time - will be too scary. As a report said, they will probably spend time in some other Islamic country (Sudan, SA) while allowing the hijacking to `cool off`, before returning to pakistan.

The hijackers present great danger to pakistan at the moment, in terms of revealing their identities. It is in pakistans interest to liquidate them at the earliest and this is what will happen I think.

Meanwhile let us Indians sit on our 400 nuclear bombs. Maybe some of them will hatch.

InterAct! 112
``Here is a repost. BTW has anyone noticed the dates on chowk.com show year 100? ``

Dear Sadna:

The visible naming naming scheme is [author name][month]_[2 digit day][2digit year]. 100 is actually ``Jan_0100`` Internally we track the 4 digit year.

Sincerely
Chowk Staff

Here is a repost. BTW has anyone noticed the dates on chowk.com show year 100?

The recent hijacking episode has not only revealed India`s unpreparedness for a crisis of this kind but it has also been an embarrassing example(not the first or the last) for the Pakistan and Afghanistan governments of

`Hamaari hi billi, hami se meaow`.

It may be very difficult for India to bring the hijackers to justice, but it will be impossible for the Pakistani or Afghani governments to do if they ever feel compelled to do so. These governments are the greater hostages and they have not been released yet. It must be really scary for the Pakistani and Afghani governments to realise that their countries` foreign policies have dynamics or hands and feet not wholly under their control.

About where the hijackers will end up, thats easy. For 10 years, foreign fighters and loads of arms and ammunition have been falling out of the sky into Indian Kashmir. The hijackers will ascend into that very spot in the sky. While desis have sufficient mythological evidence to accept this, how to convince the unimaginative West. I predict a payoff in the near future.

Sadhana

Not far from New York Transit on 34th Street in New York is Kashmiri restaurant proudly presenting cuisine of Kashmiri chicken. A tourist entered the restaurant and ordered a chicken. After it was served, he would not eat. He enquired from the manager how was it made. The manager told him that it is cooked with spices and is utterly delicious. Tourist was still doubtful. Finally the chef was called to explain.

``I mean how is it made,`` he asked.

``Sir, we terrorise the chicken first, then we kill him Kashmiri style before we add spices``, chef explained.

No amount of Saudi money or ``Powder`` exprot (drug) is going to help Pakistani economy. Pakistan has to decide between trade and terrorism.

Pakistan`s education system needs revamping. It is at disadvantage when we look at our enemy India. India has achieved a landmark this year when it exported $ 1.2 bn of software this year. It is little less than Pakistan`s total currency reserve of $ 1.4 bn. So where is Pakistan spending its money ? We know it is not health ? Is it education ? Answer is - NO.

Pakistan produces less than 40 Ph.Ds a year as compare to 1200 per year by Indian Universities. India is doing favorably well in biotechnology, space and software engineering. All this is happening because India`s core industries and institutions were allowed to flourish between 50`s and 70`s. Pakistan did not do so. So where is Pakistani money disappearing. It is going to ISI and pockets of Generals and politicians. Pakistan has a choice to make. Spend money on education or remain fixated with ``India Syndrome``. No amount of Saudi money or ``Powder`` exprot (drug) is going to help Pakistani economy. Pakistan has to decide between trade and terrorism.

Re: all

this excerpt from the venerable (!) dawn talks about the average and the not so average pakistani mindset where he is always on a penis-contest with an India... What a shame for a nation to be obsessed with another ..........

Guinness Book mentions four Pakistanis

KARACHI, Jan 1: At least five Pakistanis have been mentioned in the millennium edition of the famous book of world records which is published every year by the Guinness World Records Ltd. The Shah Faisal Mosque and Indus Valley Civilization have also found a mention in it.

The Pakistanis whose names have made it to the edition, titled ``Guinness World Records 2000``, are: Abdul Sattar Edhi, Benazir Bhutto, Tahir Rashid, Wasim Akram and Wasim Bari. Shah Faisal Mosque has been described as the biggest mosque of the world and the Indus Valley Civilization has been mentioned under the category ``Biggest Ancient Civilization Discovery``.

Abdul Sattar Edhi`s institution has been described as the world`s biggest volunteer ambulance organization. According to the book, Sattar Edhi has not taken a day off during the past 45 years. His ambulances even pick up corpses and his soup kitchens feed 100,000 people a month.

``His radio-linked network includes 500 ambulances throughout Pakistan,`` says the publication. ``He has also set up 300 relief centres, three air ambulances, 24 hospitals, three drug rehabilitation centres, women`s centres, free dispensaries, adoption programmes and soup kitchens that feed 100,000 people a month.``

Edhi has paid for and supervised the training of 17,000 nurses, says the book. His organization, established in 1948, has now developed into a big welfare service which attracts funds of $5 million per year, without any government assistance, adds the book.

The book has included Benazir Bhutto`s name for her feat of bagging more than 98 per cent of the votes in her constituency during the 1990 general election. She obtained 94,462 - or 98.48 per cent - votes in the constituency Larkana III.

The other Pakistanis mentioned all hold records in the field of international cricket. Tahir Rashid has been mentioned because he brought about the highest number of dismissals in a first-class innings by a wicket-keeper. He completed eight catches and stumped once while playing for the Habib Bank against the PACO XI at Gujranwala in 1992. Tahir, the younger brother of former test cricketer Haroon Rashid, shares the record with Wayne James of Zimbabwe.

Wasim Bari has found his way into the edition for dismissing the most batsmen in a test innings. He caught seven of the New Zealand`s batsmen during a test innings at Auckland in 1979. Bari shares the record with Bob Taylor of England and Ian Smith of New Zealand.

The famous all-rounder Wasim Akram has been mentioned for taking most wickets in a One-Day-International career. He dismissed 371 batsmen in 265 matches from 1985 to 1999. He also holds the record of hitting the most sixes during an innings. He hit 12 sixes in his innings of 257 not out for Pakistan against Zimbabwe at Sheikhupura in 1996.

The book of records describes Shah Faisal Mosque as the biggest mosque complex in the world. A total of 100,000 people can say their prayers in its prayer hall, it says. An additional 200,000 people can be accommodated in the adjacent grounds.

The biggest ancient civilization discovery, according to the book, was made by the deserting British soldier Charles Manson. He discovered the remains of the ancient Indus Valley Civilization in the late 1880s.

Meanwhile, the book has mentioned a number of Indians. Most of the Indians mentioned are either from the Bombay film industry or the field of cricket. The edition has devoted a two-page section to ``Bollywood``, just as it has to Hollywood.

The Indian cricketers described as record holders are: Mohammed Azharuddin, Anil Kumble, Sachin Tendulkar and Yajurvendra Singh. The actors, actresses and artistes finding a mention are: Lalita Pawar, Satyajit Ray, Ramesh Sippy, Nutan, Lata Mangeshkar, Sanjeev Kumar, Dilip Kumar, Ashok Kumar, Shah Rukh Khan, Salman Khan, Asif Khan, Shabana Azmi, Amitabh Bachchan, Madhuri Dixit, Guru Dutt, Jairaj, Kajol and Karishma Kapore.

The politicians finding their way into the book are: M.K. Gandhi, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi. Besides these Indians, some others have also been mentioned for holding miscellaneous records like raising a hand for the longest length of time and having the longest moustache. - Nizamuddin Siddiqui

-- Rishi