Famous Last Words or a Messiah in Khakis?

krashid #109

I have a lot of problems in my country, you have a lot of problems in your country. You have thusg in your country, we have thugs in our country.

But I have a Constitution on the basis of which I or any Indian can demand justice or satisfaction even from a governments run by thugs.

What do you have? Who defines a thug? The triples As you so picturesquely say. I`m saying let the fourth A, the Pakistanis take this opportunity to lay groundwork for the future. Who else will do it? Not the triple As, surely? Surely reviewing the Constitution doesnot need Gen PM out of the way?

Sadhana

If you think rule of thugs should be accepted as democracy. The Pakistani nation as a whole says NO.

There is progress towards, democracy at grass root level. Fight against corruption. Improvement in economy inspite of some isolation at international level. Hold of fundamentalist is being reduced in process and there is more peace.

That is the demand of people, whether it is carried out by Musharraf or XYZ what difference does it make. Particularly when our leaders are completely immune to public opinion and look at US for their survival.

Have you heard that our leaders are sustained by:

Triple A. Army, America and Allah.

The basis premise of democracy Awam (people) is missing from equation.

Let us fight our own battle.

You have lot of problems in your country if you keep your eyes open and refuse gto budge with propaganda.

If you believe in Ism. It is past.

Only reality is people.

krashid #106

The vast majority of people who are interested in their own welfare ought to express their wish for their(the peoples`) welfare clearly so that the political/military leadership are forced to think of their(the peoples`) welfare instead of their own. :-)

A cat whether black or white ought not drink all the milk in the house, instead of catching mice.

Sadhana

Sadhna#106

The vast majority of people in any system have opinions. And not all of them carry arms or work for politics. They are interested in their welfare.

Political parties are for leadership. Because it is organized.Big Political parties in our country is an organised groups of thugs.

Small political parties have their own followings, without mass appeal.

The people vote, because there is election and political mafia.

The people want their problems solved and a better future.

As one of the most pragmatic person of last 2-3 decades Deng Xio Ping said ``It does not matter whether the cat is black or white as long as it catches the mice.``

krashid #104

When I said `all interested parties`, I didnot mean only political parties. All Pakistanis are `interested parties`, from each province, from each religious/ethnic dispensation, from the Army, from political parties, tribal leaders, pirs, respected intellectuals representing as wide a cross-section of Pakistan as possible. You tell me since I don`t know what constitutes a comprehensive representation of Pakistan? All need to sit down and talk about the Constitution. Is each citizen out to loot the country? Hard to believe, sounds very self-serving :``You guys are no good, we are the only sincere clean ones, let us rule you for your own benefit``

I will believe that the Army is sincere about Pakistan`s eventual good only if Gen. Musharraf, now having consolidated his position begins to talk of national unity, and that too, totally outside the context of relations with India. Else its only more of the same.

Sadhana

If that was as you are saying, Sadhna.

Why we have to bother.

These parties will sit together on only one point.

``How to make their pocket full``.

What these parties have to do with 13th, or any amendment or even democracy. Their access to National exchequer should be unhindered.

It is probably difficult for you to understand. Try to read between lines, thoughts from Pakistanis.

krashid #102

I meant reviewing the entire Constitution, another look at my posts will show. Isn`t a Constitutional review and sitting down together of all interested parties something that has to happen eventually?

How else will Pakistan get `true` democracy? Surely not through a lightening bolt from the sky.

Sadhana

What happens after the debate.

The 13th amendment is repealed. Elections are held. The same people who because of their excessive power and money are again elected. 13th amendment is again implemented.

We reach there again.

We need constitutional reforms in a way that the power of feudal-industrialist lobby is mitigated.

We need democracy but not the one we had.

krashid #100

``Give me the methods of repealing 13th amendment. Whatever method you want to give. Then we can see it is possible or not.``

Let me request you to reread my mail #78.

To examine/repeal/alter/rationalize laws which have done more harm than good, Gen. PM could appoint a multi-party, multi-ethnic, multi-religious committee representing all sections of society for Constitutional review to make recommendations with a trusted nonpartisan Chairman and proceedings to be made public. The fundamental principle that all citizens are equal could be a worthwhile and noncontroversial(surely) reference point. Unanimity of views could be a good criteria.

Once the recommendations are finalized, whatever method of getting public consent is appropriate can be used, after enough public debate.

Sadhana

Give me the methods of repealing 13th amendment.

Whatever method you want to give. Then we can see it is possible or not.

krashid #98

I still don`t understand why laws like the 13th Amendment cannot be repealed or altered?

Sadhana

Sadhana!

The policies of Pervez Musharraf are pragmatic, possibly in right direction and are appeasing to people.

You have to judge from the fact, that inspite of all international pressures, this Government is able to sustain and to have its recognition.

That may be bad in long run, particularly if army consolidates its grip on power and is accepted internationally. In that case prssure on Pervez Musharraf Government will be much reduced.

The best Pervez Musharraf can do is give constitutional rights to people, which cannot be taken back in future Feudal-Industrialist alliance which is a necessity of Parliamentary system of democracy as practiced in Pakistan.

I think, the plan of democracy at local level will effectively shatter the power of Industrialist-feudal lobby and will be a great administrative step in solving the local problems, which the people want and need most.

krashid #93

It depends on how you look at it.

If Pakistan`s history began with advent of NS and ended with removal of NS, you are on the mark. If not, perhaps you might see many years of military rule and many years of setting national priorities by the military as part of the problem. Leaders in the military setting the national priorities for the future also maynot seem like the absolute best solution.

You say ``Nawaz Sharif tried to put his own man on Army``. Again: cart and horse in proper sequence, please. Wasn`t someone saying NS was the Army`s man? Will the next man they choose to impose on the Pakistani people(after splitting the PML, maybe )be another NS? How will Pakistanis keep control over the next leader?

Anyway, you say under NS, ``people will continue to be subdued and suppressed``

Are people able to influence Gen PM`s policies now? Do he or his functionaries have hearings or audiences or frequent exchange of ideas with the public? Will future leaders feel the need to be different?

You say `` Islamists would be free to have their day and Pakistan would be a second Afghanistan``

Is the fear any less now?

I can understand the need for trusted leaders. However, is the issue so black and white? Anyway, the point is that the current `fluid` situation may allow many things to happen. Laying the right groundwork for future is part of it, surely? Examining how the various provisions in the Constitution have played out could well be one of them.

macgupta referred to an article on the PH board, what do you think of it?

Sadhana

Dragon Slayer #92

I didnot quite get your point. India doesnot have a much better ranking than Pakistan as far as corruption goes. I personally don`t have enough specific information.

Recently there have been a number of articles on how the Central Vigilance Commissioner in N.Delhi is finding it impossible to obtain any legal action against proven corrupt officials. In the political arena, the CBI is currently going after Laloo Yadav(with the timing being a little questionable), but many other seemingly open-and-shut cases against even former Central govt ministers have been tough to carry through the courts.

Not to speak of the hawala racket, illegal commissions in Bofors and other defence deals, and other local scams involving crores of rupees. If you look at bank defaults, I suspect the figure might be pretty shocking. Again, can anyone comment on this?

I think a trader named Harshad Mehta allegedly owes/owed the Govt of India a few thousand crore rupees(and was mentioned in the Union budget)and still trades? Does anyone know any more about this?

Sadhana

Corruption in India,

Kerala being the most `literate` state in India has the most sophisticated and `above board` system of corruption. This was perfected by the marxist govt., legendary for the non-corrupt and gandhian leaders like EMS Namboodirirad and Nayanar.

The entire corruption is handled as party donations, in small denominations, Rs 10 these days. To have a meeting with the minister, you have to meet the local party man. He will give a book of donations and you pay for it. Later you meet the minister who in turn will direct you to his close party man. He will give another set of donation books and if you are lucky, you get the favours.

The marxists created the system of collecting bribes from all competing parties, say for a contract. but finally gave it to the party sympethiser, that is one with a long history of donations.

By this elaborate process of network, every one gets a share of the pie, not the minister alone. Even a local party man has access to `corrupt` money.

Because the governments change so much in kerala, even the opposition parties have influence over award of contracts.

Corruption in pakistan is of another `order`. Govt is proposing legitemisation of smugling by asking the traders to pay a sales tax at Bura markets, traders are telling no...no.. we want to be illegal. Great, the country is joke, what does islam say about Bura market.

Observer #91

((The way you have stated the situation, it would seem that given your premises, India just has the credibility whereas the Pakistanis and Pakistan lack it, or else, you know the answer but wish to see how miserably the rest of us, plebians and pedestrians, fail. Well, I have failed. Now out with the explanation, you tease!))

I regret if the tone of my post seemed sarcastic. It was`nt meant to be. Actually, I dont blame you for feeling that way. Unfortunately, I`m seeing some of us Indians have been particularly nasty with their anti-Pak tirades. Its resulting in very unproductive shouting matches. We are acting just like our politicians:)

Pakistan has traditionally gone out of her way to support & help the Arabs (particularly S Arabia).Even though there was quite a lot of sympathy for Saddam Hussein, Pakistan sent troops to S Arabia`s aid during the gulf war. They have supported the Arabs vociferously in every diplomatic venture against Israel, even sent their pilots during the Arab Israeli war. The Palestinians stabbed S Arabia & Kuwait in the back & supported Saddam. I mean, what more can Pakistan do to demonstrate solidarity!?

Despite all that, its pretty pathetic that the wealthy Arab states can only give polite murmurs of empathy to Pakistan on Kashmir. Isnt Kashmir one of the prime foreign policy issues of Pakistan--ever since independance?

India is heavily dependant on Arab oil, trade & jobs in the gulf. Potentially, the rich Arabs states have much more clout & arm twisting power than the US--in that respect.

If the Arabs threaten an embargo, what can India do? The Arabs can easily trade & import workers from other countries. India just doesnt have the muscle to threaten them militarily.

I am genuinely puzzled at the lack of Arab reciprocity to Pakistan. I dont believe India has more credibility. Personally, I think Pakistan is getting a raw deal from them. I would have expected more from friends.

Any comments? --anybody?

Sadhana.

You are right in pointing the corruption in Indian Politics like Bofors scandal. I thnk RamaRao Government was involved in too much corruption (and may be one reason For Vajpayee to be elected).

But situation in Pakistan was much different. Corruption was not the reason for Government ouster. Although people were very much in favor of accountability, and before NAB the accountability bureau at the time of Nawaz Sharif was manipulated to crush People`s party of BB.

But still that was not the reason.

Then 13th amendment giving Nawaz Sharif absolute power over MP`s.

But still that was not the reason.

Then supreme court was stormed and chief justice of Supreme court sacked.

But still that was not the reason.

Then Governor rule was imposed in Sind to prevent two large parties from forming the Government.

But still that was not the reason.

Then press was subjugated when Nawaz Sharif stopped the Newsreel of largest Newspaper in Pakistan.

But still that was not the reason.

Then Nawaz Sharif tried to put his own man on Army, which is the most organized institution and Army revolted.

People saw all these, and gladly accepted the sacking of Nawaz Sharif Government.

What would happen if Army did not intervene? Nothing. People will continue to be subdued and suppressed and in a couple of months when the Nawaz Sharif Government would pass 15th amendment of Shariah law, all the interest of loans would have been pardoned and possibly Loan itself pardoned in the name of ``Qarze-Hasna`` (Good loan).

The Islamist would be free to have their day and Pakistan would be a second Afghanistan.

You can see why Pakistanis are politically conscious and silent majority at least sees a ray of hope.

I remember a film made at the time of ZA Bhutto made by Americans on Islamic Bomb. When a farmer from Punjab was asked about anti-Islam tilt of Bhutto and pro Islamic PNA movement, he retorted ``Islam Naal Ki Lena Hai`` meaning what I have to do with Islam, if Bhutto is giving us benefit.

The same most Pakistani can say ``Jumhuraiat Nal Ki Lena Hai``

It does not mean we are not aware of dangers of autocratic rule, but we are struggling for a new form of democracy where we can redress our problems, rather than some slogan which has only

given us more poverty, taken away the rights from us and put our money at the mercy of looters.

Shanker #87

No, I tried but cannot seem to come up with an explanation. The way you have stated the situation, it would seem that given your premises, India just has the credibility whereas the Pakistanis and Pakistan lack it, or else, you know the answer but wish to see how miserably the rest of us, plebians and pedestrians, fail. Well, I have failed. Now out with the explanation, you tease!

May an Arab`s camel give you milk, and other good wishes to you.

Sincerely.

krashid #86

I don`t know enough about corruption in India to draw parallels(can someone else oblige?). I have heard that very often when the Congress PM needed money, he/she would threaten to dismiss a state government. Then the Chief Minister would travel to NDelhi with a suitcase(of money). I remember there was a big media uproar on one occasion when a Chief Minister in a similar position travelled to N.Delhi with a suitcase and the press even carried out public experiments to see if the alleged bribe amount would actually fit in a suitcase of that size. There was a lot of speculation about denomination of notes, weight of the suitcase etc etc.

Such an activity is likely to be continuing in some form or other and always will. The thing is how to keep it within limits and what limits? Most importantly, whose limits?

Would it not be better if public opinion and cover of law enabled institutions and a few honest people in them to go after the stolen wealth? Has the Army intervening and defining its own priorities in `accountability` been more of the same thing as those `dishonest` politicians? Is the NAB doing its job right or is it partisan? Who will police the Army or hold it accountable?

Sadhana

shankar #83

If the point of Dilip D`Souza`s article was to underline the futility of showing attitude when the fate of ``1/5th of humanity`` is on the line, the point of my posting was that it is equally futile to trivialise the current Indo-Pak impasse as a question merely of personalities and childish behaviour of the current leaders.

There is no percentage in continuing to provide cover for what may be others` true agendas. We must definately talk, but with eyes open, not eyes shut.

According to me, there seems to be no limit to which military planners in Pakistan will not go to, even denuding their own nation, to achieve their true purpose: total accession. It may not be so, but what is gained in the interests of eventual peace by wilfully discounting the possibility?

Here is an excerpt from yesterday`s The Nation. I may be wrong, but I think the author sits in the National Security Council.

Apr 19 The Nation (www.nation.com.pk)

Tight-rope walking

Inayatullah

``...The international community has more or less, defacto, accepted the Indian occupied Kashmir as Indian territory as if the Line of Control is the international border between the two countries. We were dubbed as ``intruders`` during the Kargil conflict.

There are voices already within Pakistan for putting a halt on our supporting the Kashmiris` struggle and letting them carry on their efforts for freedom on their own. These so-called peaceniks advance the argument that Pakistan cannot afford to remain engaged with Kashmir. It must, they advise, cut down its defence expenditure, divert resources to development, and normalise relations with India. However plausible their points appear to be, the question is: Can Pakistan afford to delink itself with what India is doing in the occupied state and abdicate its historic obligations?

Are all the heart-rending sacrifices of the hapless Kashmiris to go waste? Will the people of Pakistan (and there are hundreds of thousands amongst them who have come from Kashmir) accept such abdication of responsibilities? Apart from the fact that the cause of the Kashmiris is just and that Pakistan has a strong case will any such decision not result in the weakening of Pakistan psychologically and materially? Can Pakistan survive if India gains total control of the very life line of Pakistan - the rivers that provide water to our arid areas? (Most of Pakistan is an arid zone dependent upon the water of the rivers). Will this not mean, in due course, Pakistan`s economic strangulation? And who will stop an emboldened India to crush the helpless Kashmiris with impunity as also to nibble away parts of Northern Areas and Azad Kashmir, after some time?...``

``...We cannot disown our friendship with our western neighbour. We have to stand with it and help it address its problems which include taking steps to improve its image and standing.

We have to avoid rash initiatives which may land us into trouble with powerful organised groups within Pakistan. Utmost care is needed in dealing with well-meaning Kashmir supporters. Handling of these matters - Kashmir, the jehadi elements, and relations with Afghanistan - is more important than even the accountability operations and grass-roots devolution....``

(end excerpts)

As far as third party mediation goes, realistically, I don`t think Pakistan has ever been happy with any third party who interceded in any Indo-Pak issue. I see so many articles and letters even today about the duplicity and self-serving nature of third parties. After Clinton`s visit, I thought I saw a report that the Pakistani govt is letting up slightly on its insistence on third party mediation.

Finally: When we want to talk, they want to fight. When they claim to want to talk, we claim to want to fight. May the day come when we are truly `in phase`.

Sadhana

DIALECTICAL CASTE

War of words over caste

By Our Special Correspondent

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, APRIL 19. The inclusion of a new column on caste in the membership form by the Ernakulam district unit of the Communist Party of India CPI(M) has led to a war of words between the party and the BJP in Kerala.

While the State secretariat of the CPI(M) dismissed it as a faux pas, announced a probe into it and vowed to take action against those responsible for it, the BJP characterised it as the nadir of ideological bankruptcy of the CPI(M).

The State secretariat dismissed reports that the party had decided to seek the caste of its members as baseless and for propaganda purposes. It pointed out that according to the reports, the scrutiny form which the members had to fill while renewing membership sought the community in which they were born. It asserted that the CPI(M) had not taken any decision to find out the caste of its members. It was the State committee which prepared the membership scrutiny form and distributed it to the district committees for printing. There was no column on caste anywhere in it. No change was made in the scrutiny form which was in force since the birth of the party.

It said the workers viewed the membership records very seriously. The questions in the form related to name, address, age, educational qualifications, class of birth, year of joining the party, mass organisation, sex, profession and monthly income. It should also say whether the person was a full-time worker. No decision had been taken to include any other question in the form. It deplored the bid to misinterpret the issue and tarnish the party over it.

The State secretary of the BJP, Mr. M. S. Kumar, however, viewed the development as the nadir of ideological bankruptcy to which the CPI(M) had plummeted. He said that Marxism which was hailed as the vision of fraternity devoid of caste and religion had progressed to the level of Mr. Pinarayi Vijayan (State secretary of the CPI-M) asking the caste of its members. He wondered what the DYFI workers who sang the refrain ``there is no Hindu blood in us, there is no Muslim blood in us, there is no Christian blood in us, there is only human blood in us`` had to say about the development. ( Chowk is full of this type of people, striving for indo-pak peace, the accidental theory adherants: are welcome to join the marxists of kerala. )

The following is an excert from BBC News, S.Asia:

{{Pakistan`s military ruler, General Pervez Musharraf, has concluded talks in Tripoli with the Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi.

The Pakistani leader arrived in Libya earlier this week on the last leg of an exhaustive foreign travel itinerary.

Last week he attended a meeting in Havana of the Group of 77 developing nations and then went on to Egypt.

Libya`s official news agency said that General Musharraf and Colonel Gaddafi discussed regional and international issues in addition to bilateral relations.

General Musharraf stressed during the meeting ``the feelings of friendship felt by the people of Pakistan for the Libyans and their leader,`` the news agency said.

Seeking support

In Cairo, General Musharraf had meetings with the Secretary general of the Arab League, Esmat Abdel Maguid, and President Hosni Mubarak.

General Musharraf at Cairo`s Al Azhar mosque



He also met leading Egyptian businessmen.

In recent weeks, the Pakistani leader has been touring a number of countries - many of them Muslim nations - in South East Asia and the Middle East.

In most of these meetings he is believed to have briefed his hosts on political developments in his country and tried to win recognition of his regime.

He is also believed to have tried to strengthen trade links and win support for Pakistan`s position on nuclear proliferation and the Kashmir question.

Arab line

So far, there is little indication that he has achieved any of these goals.

None of the countries he has visited has publicly backed the military takeover or his country`s stance over Kashmir.

However, Pakistani diplomats are no doubt pleased that in Cairo Mr Meguid said that Islamabad had a legitimate right to possess nuclear weapons, and that it could not be accused of having aggressive intentions.

As for Kashmir, Mr Meguid said that General Musharraf had explained his country`s position on the subject and that the Arab League understood this position.

Gone are the days when Pakistan enjoyed the automatic support of these countries, whether individually or within forums such as the Arab League or the Organisation of Islamic Conference.}}

A couple of questions/observations:

1)The good general is spending an awful amount of time & foreign exchange running all over the world. No matter how optimistic a spin his staff put on the results of the tours, he doesnt seem to be getting a bang for his buck.

2) I`m sure he`s telling his fellow muslim brothers how the evil Indians ( read hindus) are killing ,raping & pillaging innocent Kashmiri muslims. All he`s getting is polite murmurs of empathy.

I`ve asked this question repeatedly. This genuinely puzzles me. Logic dictates that the Arabs should respond with the same outrage that Pakistanis have about Kashmir. Nothing would scare the BJP more than an Arab oil embargo. Just what hold does India have over the Arabs? Indian diplomacy just cannot be that effective. On the other hand, Pakistani diplomacy cant be that ineffective.

Could somebody help me out with this?!

Sadhna #85

BB was more democratic than NS.

The 13th and 14th amendment was passed by Nawaz Sharif to consolidate his grip on power in his second stint in power.

To give you more insight into politics of Pakistan, the same faces in different parties are there to not only protect their interest, but to loot the exchequer and this loot does not trickle down to common man but is rotten in Foreign banks.

After the Atomic Bomb blast, when there was a risk of flight of foreign exchange to foreign countries, the Government freezed the foreign currency account. But it made sure that foreign exchange of decision makers are already out of country at the time of freezing of foreign currency account.

That is why it is surprising for most people that even diehard democratic people want a new form of democracy in which the interest of common man is safe guarded.

krashid #82

Thanks for the clarification. However, staying with the 13th Amendment example, again I must ask, is there unanimity in Pakistan that it is better for Pakistan if the utility of its provisions are re-examined?

BB,NS misused it. Will not someone in future misuse it too? Its realistic to expect rulers, civilian or military to be self-serving, why would anyone venture into such a miserable business of bearing responsibility for millions of people otherwise?

There is an Anti-Defection law in India, too, which was introduced in the 1980s` to solve various identified problems, and now is being reviewed for fine-tuning/scrapping for solving of various other problems. Now if the Indian public or media are not vigilant, measures may be passed that only promote the interests of legislators.

Again, what I want to point out is :

1. A provision or law must be examined in light of the longterm national interest. Is it so difficult to identify longterm national interest in this case at least? Suspending all laws will not work beyond a point in time after which new problems will arise.

2. The best way to avoid self-serving collusion between vested interests whether civilian or military against overall national interest is have open debate to bring out all aspects of any matter.

Sadhana

INDIAN PROPAGANDA PRIVATIZED

The ZEE TV commercial with a Pakistani general with the green and white sash is pretty nasty and funny as well. The humour of it is undeniable. More Pakistanis are probably amused than Indians.

sadna

post#80

So,what`s youre point?

The ISI has been regularly been blamed by India as the main culprit for causing trouble for India. Similarly, Pakistanis blame RAW for any trouble within their country. I guess we substitute RAW & ISI depending on what side of the border we belong.

Is that the reason we should stop talking to each other? The only way out of the deadlock is to keep talking to each other.

The Pak govt has repeatedly proclaimed their intention to resume talks. India uses the excuse of terrorism to refuse talks. I think thats fundamentally stupid. Refusing to talk only makes terrorism stronger. Its time to put that ``betrayal`` syndrome of Kargil to rest. India has milked it to the max.

Why is India refusing 3rd party mediation? The real answer (IMHO) is because they will then have to concede to give up Kashmir eventually.

Someone rightly said that now is the time to ``buy stock``, when Pakistan`s stock is low. Refusing to talk is stupid.

Sadhna #78

To give you a more clear picture.

13th amendment takes away the right of a member to vote against any decision by his party leader.

That was good for Benazir Bhutto, who put away all shame and supported this so that his few members in parliament could not desert her. It was good for Nawaz Sharif which gives him absolute control over his elected partymen and since he was elected with 2/3rd majority (although real estimate is around 18-20 percent voting in election) he could do anything.

The people had redress in the form of Supreme Court,and a hearing was underway when supreme court was stormed by Nawaz and his cronies. And an alternative Supreme court with Nawas Sharif`s cronies was created which sacked the Chief Justice of sitting Supreme Court.

The president had power to sack the Government, so it had introduced another amendment which approved by two third majority to take away all the powers of president.

When the Government stopped the Newsreel of Jang Newspaper and making fake cases against ``Jang Newspaper`` Jang fought it.

What alternative the people had.

Muslim League cannot rebel against its leader.

Alternative was peoples Party which itself was trying to save its leader and so were reluctant to take any stand.

There was a problem in Sind. So Governor rule was imposed and Anti terrorist Courts were put in for summary punishment.

TEMPORAL #&$

I wanted to write ``demanding`` in a post on another board but ended up writing, exacting, stringent, persnickety, meticulous and (fastidious, exact, scrupulous, finicky, fussy, particular, punctilious, perfectionist,... ad infinitum).

I guess we all have `sacred cows`.

Good bye friend.

N.B. If you ever feel like writing please contact ``Khayyam@Graphic-Designer.com``

shankar #77

This article from the Deccan Chronicle, Wednesday Apr 19 merits some attention.

(www.samachar.com, listed major newspapers, latest articles)

Sadhana

ISI plans `no-fly` zone in Kashmir for IAF aircraft

New Delhi: Pakistan`s Inter-Services Intelligence has chalked out a new 11-point strategy, including establishing a ``no-fly zone`` within the Kashmir region, to step up militancy in Jammu and Kashmir. Intelligence sources said this decision was taken during a meeting held in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir in the last week of March. It was attended by Pakistan Army regulars, ISI officials and Kashmiri militant outfits, including the Lashkar-e-Toiba, Hizb-ul-Mujahideen and Al-Badr.

The new strategy has been conveyed to all the militant groups operating in Kashmir.The ISI has directed the terrorists to create ``no-fly zones`` in the Kashmir region to keep Indian Air Force fighters and helicopters out of that airspace, intelligence sources said.

Any Indian aircraft violating the ``no-fly zone`` would be shot down by anti-aircraft guns, the new strategy reveals. According to the new plan, the ISI will provide arms and ammunition and long-range guns and mortar as per geographical area requirements.

The ISI is now paying a lot of attention to the collection of information about the Indian security forces - on deployment, operation, modus operandi and movements, intelligence agencies sources said.

The militants have been asked to send intelligence inputs to their high command immediately. The ISI has decided to update the mode of training provided to terrorists in various parts of Pakistan on the basis of intelligence inputs on the modus operandi of the Indian security forces so that there is always a surprise element in their attacks, sources said.

The 11-point strategy advises the militants to be flexible and change their operational strategy to suit the situation.i Now that security around Army installations has been beefed up, the militants have been directed that ``all actions should be far from built-up areas.``

Apart from dwelling upon new ways for the militant outfits to add more teeth to their firepower, the ISI has also prescribed fresh guidelines to the militants to restrict themselves to Islamic religious decorum in their day-to-day functioning.

During talks and lectures, they have to adopt Islamic philosophy and also keep a watch on the activities of other Islamic institutions, reads one of the 11 instructions forwarded to Kashmiri terrorists.

The militants have been also asked to renew their bid to win the sympathy of the Kashmiri Muslims. The militants had lost acceptance among Kashmiris to a great extent ever since normalcy was restored in the Valley.

All the militants have to establish good and lasting relations with the ``Islamic people of Jammu and Kashmir,`` says the new strategy. It adds that during action against Indian forces, all principles mentioned in Islamic jehad should be remembered and applied.

shankar # 77:

Yaar is siyasi hamaam maiN sab naNgay haiN.

Generally these politicians are full of it. I believe if we replace these four with any other four establishment figures currently in power, the results would be similar. They are in a invisible strait jacket. Their careers could be ruined. Oh such hypocricy!

Can anything be done about it? Yes.
Who will do it? The moderates on either side.
What are the chances of success? Slim by a long shot. But worth a try. Or we will end up glowing in the dark: if we survive!

rgds

t

krashid #77

You say `How?`. Very good question.

Let us first restore the sequence of cart and horse. If the Pakistani common man has identified at least one of his fundamental problems, shouldnot his government find a way to remove the source of the problem(13th Amendment in this example). After all, Gen. PM claims to be acting according to the wishes of Pakistanis, not the other way around.

Now, if the public talks enough about genuine longterm solutions, then Pervez Musharraf and his regime may find it necessary to respond to the `dynamics` by rearranging his priorities, or even constituting say, a Constitutional review committee, in exactly the same way he responded to the public apprehensions about Indian designs by tailoring his foreign policy.

Secondly, again with longterm good of the country and the inevitable need for national consensus brought into focus by the public, Pervez Musharraf and the Army may feel the need to talk of national reconciliation and mutual cooperation in governance, which has to happen some day anyway, you will admit?

We have to accept this basic fact: even messiahs limit their scope of action to what circumstances and their own impulses force them to do. Hence even the brightest visionaries are only as good as the demands made on them. And the reality is that Gandhis and Jinnahs are scarce on the ground these days.

Finally, your question, what is to prevent Constitutional changes in future? Who can say? What prevents any leader from doing anything anywhere in the world(the US 2nd Amendment is all about this). However, donot discount the power of precedents to guide the direction of future events(I`m sure you donot).

Also, a rehashed example: if murders have always happened and will always happen as long as humanity exists, does it mean we can do away with law and punishment for murder?

Sadhana

Temporal #69

Many thanks for posting that article.

I blame the BJP`s foreign policy for this. This is the time to start talking to their Pakistani counterparts, not ignoring them. I think the whole subcontinent is a laughing stock in the eyes of the world.

Sadhna#70

You said get rid of 13th amendment.

How?

2nd if 13th amendment is got rid of unconstitutionally by us. Who can prevent it from happening after next election.

Arugupta you mentioned the election in Azad Kashmir and its manifestation. Does that not happen in India. How many people have been killed in Bihar, what happened to Lallu and his cronies.

What rights are given to Kashmiris, to be killed and raped by security forces.

Get out of euphoria and superiority complex, and start seeing the reality.

gymnosophist #70

Well said.

yj #72:

Thanks. You are entitled to disagree with my comments preceding the reproduction of the article. Though let me hasten to add there was no ‘self-satisfied smugness’ intended or implied.


By no stretch of thinking their behaviour was correct. If anything it was uncalled for, despicable, unproductive, and utterly contemptuous. And childish.

Cumulatively they hold sway over the short and long term fate of one fifth of humanity. They HAVE to talk. The alternative is dastardly, regressive and intolerable.


Have you realised the implications of not talking to each other? Many of our surviving friends and family members there would glow in the dark!

I have a personal preference to read the full reference to the comments here, rather than go all over the net. But I suppose citing a reference to the site can do as well.

regards.

t

PS: Sameer # 73:
Thanks for your interacts on MM’s Lacking Inside board. Enjoying you and Zahra and PM there.

temporal: Thanks for posting, ``Silence of the Hawks`` by Dilip D`Souza. I, for a while confused him with Dinesh D`Souza who is a very conservative writer in US politics. Anyway, let me suggest a different title for this article. How about, ``Two DESIgnated DESIS DESISted the DESIres of the DESIS``.

I believe, not in too distant past, NS and I. K. Gujral were on very good personal terms. It is funny that both Abdus Sattar and Jaswant Singh being Hindi/ Urdu speaking also could have talked about Naushad Ali`s music or Kathak dance or a number of other areas which their parents might have equally enjoyed. Talking about non-controversial topics might have lowered their blood pressures. They could have talked about the social scene in New Delhi where Abdus Sattar has previously served as Pakistani Ambassador.

temporal #69

No, temporal, with all the respect I have for you I can`t stomach the self-satisfied smugness in your comments preceding the article and the reproduction of the article itself. The behaviour of all four individuals was ``correct`` in both senses of this word.

They could have exchanged greetings. No more was advisable. If greetings is what you had in mind then I share your feelings and withdraw my observation above. Otherwise not.

If one feels hurt and doesn`t feel like exchanging greentings then I would call it honesty, a trait lacking in ``rulers`` at all levels, and something I myself have learned only recently. Witness my comment above!

And how could a reader quote or cite a paraphrase of the news item/report? Perhaps all of us should resurrect the habit of giving references. Ras Siddiqui`s review doesn`t give a reference (I got it from a similar review from a New York publication; I just saw a reference (by F_K)to a book by Mukhtar Masood (Marhoom) but no reference to publisher etc. This is more important in case of volumes in Urdu which one can`t find in ``Books in Print``. Salaam

GymMac #67, 68

From the ``Verdict ... .`` board

Ref krashid #: 65

krashid

You say {It is in response to a post where corruption and maladministration was equally rampant in Indian and Pakistan Politics and is no reason to do away with democracy in some form.

Who can know it better than Pakistanis. Where every generation has fought for the struggle for democracy. And has lost one part of Pakistan for the same reason. It is so strong that even parties like Jamat-e-Islami and all other Islamic parties like JUI talk about democracy and restitution of 1973 constitution.}

You lost Bangladesh not because you supported democracy but because vested interests opposed the results of the 1970 elections which would have made Mujibur Rahman Prime Minister of Pakistan. Do you think, given the choice between being Prime Minister of Bangladesh and Prime Minister of all of Pakistan, Mujib would have chosen the former? No way! It was the unbridled ambition of Bhutto, who saw his opportunity to become the Prime Minister slip away for ever, who decided that he would rather rule West Pakistan than deal with democracy. If at that time power had been yielded to East Pakistan, the rule of law would have been strengthened; smaller provinces such as Sindh, NWFP and Balochistan would have gained a sense of fairness in the political process, and Pakistan would have been more cohesive today. It was all sacrificed at the altar of one man`s ambition and the Army went along because they had no other civilian leader to turn to.

You say (It was the subjugation of democratic institutions which people disliked. Like fight of Benazir with Supreme court, Attack on Supreme court by Nawaz Sharif.)

I already mentioned that it is not unknown in India to transfer non-compliant high court justices to remote locations on short notice, thus serving notice to them that they could be ``punished``. When Indira Gandhi was arraigned before a judge after the Janata Dal came to power, there was a screaming mob that made proceedings impossible. Indira Gandhi was never tried for her excesses during the Emergency and came back to power in the next elections two years later.

You say (Subjugation of Parliament and president.)

For the last 33 years, there has been some questions about what are the limits on the powers of the President of India. If a Governor of a state can dissolve the state assembly and declare President`s rule, can the President of India dissolve the central cabinet and declare President`s rule? This is not specifically discussed in the constitution and in 1967 Indira Gandhi was afraid that the Congress Party bosses might put in their candidate Sanjiva Reddy as the President and have him fire her as Prime Minister. She broke up the party by firing her deputy prime minister Morarji Desai, nationalized the banks, and ran Jagjivan Ram (a Dalit) as her candidate for president and won. Since the powers of the President are unclear, even today people are not sure what KR Narayanan, the current President, might do. Hence the unhappiness when last year he refused to sign the declaration of President`s rule in Bihar and over his controversial speech at the dinner in honor of Clinton. Sometimes, politics dictates that you don`t test certain vague powers too much. Thus, the President of India has never fired the prime minister and the parliament has not voted to clarify the President`s powers. Your problem is that the Army pushed President Leghari to fire NS last time and NS did the only thing he could: pass the constitutional amendment to make sure the President doesn`t have the powers to fire the prime minister ever again. If one agrees that the Pakistani (and Indian) constitutions are modelled after the British parliamentary democracy, then the President has no right to fire the Prime Minister just as Queen Elizabeth has no right to fire Tony Blair.

You say (last but not least, keeping two biggest parties out of Sind province to form its Government and when failed imposition of Governors rule.)

Lasy year and just last month in Bihar. And probably once if not twice in the history of every state in India. Nothing new here.

You say (Also due to size of India and number of states, a problem in one or two states is still a very small part of country. While in Pakistan a provincial problem means that a significant part of country is in trouble.}

Not really. You guys just anticipate trouble and impose martial law. You need to give people the reason to want to work out the problem. So long as the army keeps popping out of the barracks, there is no need for compromise among politicians.

You say {The situation can be compared to imposition of emergency by Indira Gandhi (although it was nothing compared to actions of Nawaz Sharif)}

Try telling those to people who were jailed, tortured (such as George Fernandes whose family was tortured to find out where he was hiding)and/or killed. Or those forcibly sterilized.

You say {in India there was a system of redress like vote of no confidence}

Couldn`t vote out Nehru, could we?

You say {or voting out of power by President or electorate etc.}

So who prevents the Pakistani people from voting out NS or BB? The Army! (You don`t get a prize for guessing this answer!)

You can always rationalize what is happening in Pakistan. But the fact is it has all happened in every country with a democracy and you have to look no further than India to see it happening even now. But you have to keep the faith that things will turn out okay. You can`t keep opening the oven door to see how the souffle is coming: that only guarantees that the souffle will collapse.

When responsible adults behave like haughty children their lack of effort reflects upon the miseries of millions. Here at the Chowk some of us can sift through shouting matches and name calling and can at least hear, and possibly talk with the other.

______________________________________________

Dilip D`Souza


Silence of the Hawks


The sheer childishness of it all is a wonder to me. Two grown men -- they know each other and have undoubtedly spoken numerous times -- find themselves on the same long flight, sitting a few feet apart. Both know the other is there. But they don`t exchange a word, even pretend not to have noticed each other. This happens not once, but twice in the space of a few days, the second time with another pair of grown men on another long flight.

Now these are more than just your everyday men; they are senior leaders in their respective countries. Yet their behaviour must cause onlookers to ask: Are these adults or overgrown children? Ministers or playground runabouts? Statesmen or half-men?

The first pair was Jaswant Singh and Abdul Sattar, foreign ministers of India and Pakistan respectively. Heading for the recent meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement, they took the same flight last Saturday from Miami to Cartagena, Colombia. Sattar was already seated in the plane as it waited at the gate in Miami. Singh arrived late and hurried on board. Reports tell us that he ``studiously`` avoided eye contact with his Pakistani counterpart as he made his way down the aisle to his seat three rows behind. For the several hours to Cartagena, they sat just like that. ``The deep freeze in Indo-Pak ties,`` PTI reported, ``was evident`` on that flight.

The second pair was General Perveiz Musharraf and India`s Human Resources Development Minister, Murli Manohar Joshi. They took the same flight to Havana for a meeting of 77 developing countries. Joshi followed the example Singh had set. Edged his way past the general. Sat in silence the rest of the trip. Was whisked away on arrival in Havana, separately from the general.

Here`s the fruit of hostility between India and Pakistan: Childish pettiness from our most senior leaders.

Now I met several Pakistanis last week. Some of them, I had met before. Curiously, we didn`t turn up our noses at each other. We didn`t look ``studiously`` past each other. We didn`t maintain haughty silences. No, we sat down, chugged a beer or two together, talked. I say this with no particular desire to show off. Nor do I feel ashamed of our familiarity. It just happened that way, is all. We behaved just as anyone -- you and I, for example -- might at a gathering. Some small talk, some gossip, some arguments, even heated ones. Normal stuff from normal people.

But apparently when you get to be a minister in our part of the world, you can`t be normal any more. You have to play-act a kiddie way through life.

I can see it already. Here in an India Today article by Swapan Dasgupta I`m looking at, for example. Those Pakistanis I mentioned, and those of us who met them, are all soft, goody-goody ``leftists`` and ``peaceniks``, thus to be dismissed. We ``bleeding-hearts`` are entirely out of touch with reality. Meanwhile, it`s the ``hawks`` who have a monopoly on a true understanding of the realpolitik of Indo-Pak relations. Peace between our countries will come not from the naivete of the ``peaceniks``, but via the hard-nosed realism of the ``hawks.``

All very well. Except when hawks play their games on international flights, you have to wonder who`s truly out of touch with reality. Us, doing what comes naturally? Or the hawks, with their silly playschool play-acting? When 60-year-old men behave like five-year-olds, are they being hard-nosed?

Of course, Jaswant Singh went on to win India a ``major diplomatic triumph`` in Cartagena. He persuaded NAM that military-ruled states should be debarred from membership. Though a final decision will be taken only next year, Singh made the case that NAM should take a ``principled stand`` against ``countries which subverted democratic principles.`` (Apart from anything else, let`s remember that this is the same NAM that once had Castro`s Cuba as its chair. That watched Cuba try to introduce a resolution saying the Soviet Union was the ``natural ally`` of the NAM. In NAM-space, principles mean little).

He spoke easily of a ``principled stand``, but Master Singh really only wanted to make digs at Pakistan. That phrase he used, ``countries which subverted democratic principles,`` is mere code for ``Pakistan``. As Seema Guha points out in the Times of India, ``The purpose of the entire exercise was not so much respect for democracy as to nail ... Musharraf. If democracy was the hallmark, India could have been just as cool towards its eastern neighbour, Myanmar. Yet New Delhi, in its eagerness to woo the military junta in Myanmar, has steadily ignored the cause of the democratic movement [there].``

Or, the only reason Master J Singh went to this NAM meeting was to find ways to embarrass Pakistan. These days, it seems that`s the only reason any of our Ministers go to any international meeting. But oddly enough, Master Singh was in excellent company as he went about his embarrassing endeavours. Master A Sattar was busy finding ways to embarrass India, chiefly by what, in Indian circles, is always described as ``raking up the Kashmir issue.``

They did not care to speak to each other, these two overgrown kids, but they worked overtime trying to score brownie points off each other. More delicious fruit of the hostility between India and Pakistan.

Meanwhile, we leftist bleeding-heart Indian and Pakistani peaceniks spent most of a day together in Mumbai. Three memories from that day, if I may.

One: We had a small squad of policemen with us, to ward off any hawk-inspired hostility. One cop stood with our one-woman reception committee near the immigration counter at the airport, watching the Pakistanis emerge. ``Arre,`` he whispered to her wonderingly, ``these fellows look just like us!``

It should be no surprise, but the tragedy is that it is -- that people from across the border do look just like us. What the cop said is certainly a cliche, but it bears being repeated. Over and over, if it helps break down stupidity.

Two: When we rounded up everybody after lunch to head for Juhu Beach, two of the Pakistanis were missing. Consternation for a while. Then we remembered the five Mumbai constables sitting outside. A couple of hours earlier, the missing pair had been seen talking to them. Now, we rushed out to check.

The two were still there, chatting with the havaldars like old chums. Smiles and handshakes as they reluctantly parted company.

Three: At Juhu Beach, the Pakistanis traipsed off in all directions. Some took rides, some munched coconuts and corn, some ran down to the water`s edge to wade in the waves. Within seconds, not one was visible among the crowd on the beach. Until I saw three, some distance away. They were surrounded by several unknown locals and the whole group was caught up in an animated discussion. My heart skipped a beat. After all, in the climate our hard-nosed hawks and sawdust supremos have built up, especially in Mumbai, who knows what might happen to a few Pakistanis left to themselves on a crowded beach?

I needn`t have worried. Suddenly, they were all exchanging hugs. Try that on for size, you silly little hawks.

Ref macgupta #67:

Azad Kashmir only part of what in India is called PoK (Pakistan occupied Kashmir). The other area, called Northern Areas, actually went up to the Pak Supreme Court last year to demand political rights and the Pak Supreme Court affirmed that they should be given political rights. Northern Areas has been treated all along like enemy territory as far as political freedom for people were concerned.

A fact conveniently ignored by the plainsmen from Punjab.

In reply to ( Reply #: 62) krashid, who writes,

Azad Kashmir itself has its own Government, ruled by their own president and prime minister. The problem is Indian held Kashmir, where every election is manipulated by Indians.

End quote.

Yes, the Congress(Indira) and a Kashmiri party (the National Conference) have manipulated elections in Kashmir.

You might find the following also interesting. In 1991, before the World Wide Web, a Usenet newgroup, misc.news.southasia (or something close) used to be a source of news, that relied on contributors. There was a moderator, an Indian lady, and in one of those typical Indian-Pakistani net fights over the nature of moderation, Pakistani contributors boycotted the site. So, for a month or so, because I had access to a print version of Dawn, I used to collate news as reported there, presumably reflecting a Pakistani point-of-view. I still have some files, I`m posting excerpts below.

The context is recently held elections in ``Azad`` Kashmir, where Qayyum displaced PM Rathore. The rest should become clear fast enough.

Newsitems from July 1991 :

KASHMIRI WOMEN WANT RATHORE`S RELEASE

(Dawn Correspondent) Rawalpindi, July 12

A procession of Kashmiri women led by Rathore`s wife made this demand.

QAYYUM DENIES RIGGING, OFFERS RECONTEST

Islamabad, July 12

He said that he would renew his offer of re-election at any seat the Opposition might deem fit. He also said that ` the Indians were pre-occupied with their internal affairs` or else they would try not to allow the Muslim Conference Ministry to take office.

LHC ORDERS RATHORE`S APPEARANCE

(Staff Correspondent) Rawalpindi, July 14

The Rawalpindi bench of the Lahore High Court directed the Federal Govt. to produce arrested AJK PM Rathore before it on July 21.

RALLY URGES RELEASE OF RATHORE

(Dawn Correspondent) Mirpur (AJK), July 14

Processions protesting the arrest of Rathore were held by supporters of the AK PPP, and by members of the People`s Student Federation and the National Student Federation.

AJK PP TO PROTEST AGAINST `RIGGING`

Islamabad, July 14

AJK PP workers will hold a peaceful protest demonstration outside the AJK Assembly building in Muzaffarabad when the new assembly meets, to mark their resentment over the alleged rigging of the recent elections.

PULLOUT OF PUNJAB, NWFP POLICE FROM AJK URGED

(PPI) Islamabad, July 14

The acting President of the AJK PP, Mohammad Hussain, made this demand. According to him, it was a drain of Rs. 2 million per day on the state

exchequer. He accused the Frontier Constabulary of selling illicit weapons and narcotics in AJK.

PP AJK FORMS BODY TO SEEK SUPPORT OF OTHER PARTIES

(PPI) Islamabad, July 15

The purpose of the body is to build pressure for holding of fresh polls in AJK.

IJAZ GREETS SIKANDAR HAYAT, SARDAR QAYYUM

(APP) Islamabad, July 15

Fed. Minister for Labor,Manpower and overseas Pakistanis, Ijaz-ul-Haq congratulated Hayat and Qayyum on their nomination as Pres. and PM of AJK.

AJK TO HAVE EXEMPLARY ISLAMIC SYSTEM: QAYYUM

(APP) Muzaffarabad, July 16

Qayyum recounted his historic actions of declaring Qadianis as non-Muslims, introducing Islamic justice system, and enforcement of Hadood and Qisas Act during his stint as chief executive of AJK from 1970-74, as he outlined his plans for AJK in an interview with APP.

LAW OF TORT FOR AJK SOON, SAYS QAYYUM

(APP) Muzaffarabad, July 16

This will help those seeking damages and compensation from the govt. officials

or other influential people. ` This system ensures compensation to the aggrieved party in one sitting.`

OFFICIALS OF AJK WARNED

(APP) Muzaffarabad, July 16

Qayyum warned them not to indulge in red-tapism or financial bungling.

ARRANGEMENTS FINALISED

(APP) Muzaffarabad, July 16

These arrangements are for holding a public meeting on Accession to Pakistan Day, which falls on Friday, July 19.

NEW AJK ASSEMBLY OPPOSED

(Dawn Correspondent) Mirpur (AJK) July 16

A protest rally was held at S.S. Stadium here, the first held by the JK Jamhoori Ittehad against the alleged rigging in the recent AJK elections.

RATHORE SAYS HE IS STILL PM

(Bureau Report) Islamabad, July 17

Talking to Dawn after his release at 10:00 PM, Rathore said that he considered himself to be AJK PM as the Pak. Govt. action was illegal.

* * * * * * *

This is all that I have; somehow these files escaped deletion, and remain in a tar archive. I remember that quite a lot of action ensued with Rathore.

The point of it all is that the independence of ``Azad`` Kashmir is not real. Its own prime minister and president is dictated from Islamabad. Then there is what happened to Shias in other parts of Pakistan-held Kashmir (remember, Azad Kashmir is only a fraction of what Pakistan holds of the pre-1947 state of J&K).

The thinking & knowing Indian, while being unhappy and ashamed at the violence against civilians in Kashmir, the rigging of elections, etc. will nevertheless not accept that Pakistan has done any better with Azad Kashmir and the rest of the areas that comprise Pakistan-held Kashmir.

-arun gupta

krashid #65

The problem with considering politicians like NS as the sole problem is that getting rid of NS is a short term solution which will yield only short term results. For example, if there is so much unanimity about NS and the 13th Amendments` ill effects, why not keep showing unanimity and get rid of the 13th Amendment or at least water it down ?

Future generations of Pakistanis will also benefit long after NS/PM`s lifetimes.

THATS is Pakistan`s interest, not just snatching the baton from NS and giving it to the next person in line. The intellectuals and public can at the very least expend some thought about those important things which their leaders donot take the trouble to do, whether in India, Pakistan or even the US or Iran.

Sadhana

It is in response to a post where corruption and maladministration was equally rampant in Indian and Pakistan Politics and is no reason to do away with democracy in some form.

Who can know it better than Pakistanis. Where every generation has fought for the struggle for democracy. And has lost one part of Pakistan for the same reason. It is so strong that even parties like Jamat-e-Islami and all other Islamic parties like JUI talk about democracy and restitution of 1973 constitution.

Then what was the reason that Elimination of Nawaz Sharif and company was so wholeheartedly accepted the people of Pakistan.

Nawaz Sharif was corrupt from beginning, and it was commonly assumed that most of our leaders are corrupt. And there were jokes about nothing behind the skull of Nawaz Sharif. But even then when Nawaz Sharif was sacked first time, people did not react favorably. Nor was the first sacking of Benazir very favorable with people.

It was the subjugation of democratic institutions which people disliked. Like fight of Benazir with Supreme court, Attack on Supreme court by Nawaz Sharif. Subjugation of Press by Nawaz Sharif, Subjugation of Parliament and president.And last but not least, keeping two biggest parties out of Sind province to form its Government and when failed imposition of Governors rule.

Also due to size of India and number of states, a problem in one or two states is still a very small part of country. While in Pakistan a provincial problem means that a significant part of country is in trouble.

The situation can be compared to imposition of emergency by Indira Gandhi (although it was nothing compared to actions of Nawaz Sharif), which lead to her ouster at the hands of Murar Ji Desai apart from other reasons. But in India there was a system of redress like vote of no confidence, or voting out of power by President or electorate etc.

In Pakistan, there was no such choice available. With 13th amendment, voting against Nawaz Sharif would automatically lead to that members cancellation of Assembly seat even if he has 49% of members behind him. (And nobody wants to lose seat for some higher ideal, lower ideal of pocketing money is more dear). Judiciary could not do anything. President was a good neighbour. And army after Zia had a policy of continuation of democratic process. (that is why Army Generals were retired or sacked/resigned on the altar of democracy repeatedly). Nawaz Sharif invited the army itself and people welcomed the sacking of dictator.

Still although the people are tired of recent democratic exercise want some form of democracy. And that is also the reason of rhetoric of Pervez Musharraf.

The rhetoric of democracy at local level very appealing to common man is to appease the people. It is not a ploy to appease the international community. Otherwise the Turkish model can be easily applied where army set the rules.

Last year, when NS was still in power, a delegation from India headed by the Deputy Speaker of the Andhra Legislative Assembly visited Pakistan to improve ties at the level of legislators.

Perhaps it is time for Gen Musharraf to visit Hyderabad, Andhra, to meet with Chandrababu Naidu.

The reason I am suggesting this is because of what I read in an interview with the Mayor of Vijayawada.

26-year-old Panchamurthy Anuradha has been recently elected the Mayor of Vijayawada. A graduate in Electronics, she had no connection with politics. It seems Chandrababu Naidu decided that all city-wide elected positions should be filled by college graduates with no prior involvement in politics. Going against the advice of political heavyweights in his own party, he selected candidates for election on this criterion and thus P. Anuradha has become the mayor of Vijayawada.

There is hope that we can get rid of corruption if we give dedicated youngsters a chance to bring fresh thinking to politics and back them up in their efforts to clean up the process.

Aside to Umairr: This same Chandrababu Naidu was quarrelling with his father-in-law NT Rama Rao over leadership of the Telugu Desam Party hardly 10 years back. And you were complaining about how politics is within family hands in Pakistan? You never know what might happen until you give people a chance to do something for the public.

TRIALS OF A PEACE MAKER

The following is from news international,

``Just because PTV is lunatically and fatuously anti-India does not mean to say that all Pakistanis are anti-India, although it would seem that PTV`s aim is to make them so. Fortunately it is so amateurish and crass as to be a joke amongst real people, but it is a fact that the uneducated masses take some of this drivel at face value. It is also a fact that it is government-controlled and thus gives the worst possible impression of Pakistan`s policies.``

The incompetence of the PTV staffers is the only clue that the pak govt may not be completely anti-indian. There may be some takers for this insane view.

cbb#60

Azad Kashmir itself has its own Government, ruled by their own president and prime minister.

The problem is Indian held Kashmir, where every election is manipulated by Indians.

Do you think such a powerful independent movement as in Indian occupied Kashmir where a large Indian army is present to suppress came in one day.

Try to think in empathetic terms, to see the reasons of alienation of people of Indian held Kashmir

crypto #55

There was a Rand Corporation report on US Military Transport requirements. The orientation of the paper was the possible demands on US military transport capability in this century. One section examined the initiation and a possible scenario of a nuclear war between Pakistan and India. Consequently, the consequences were mainly from the humanitarian / peace keeping objective rather than from the objectives of either India or Pakistan. Its about $20 and you can order it from their website. Its quite short, the scenario, 1-2 pages, I could have posted it within this board but for copyright issues.

For what its worth, finding myself with some time at hand, I did try to apply statistical and game theory concepts to this scenario. I am afraid I had to give it up very very soon, because I did not have the resources or the knowledge to really carry the exercise to its logical conclusion. In addition, I found that the decision tree suddenly jumped major orders of magnitude in the possible branches and associated probabilities that it soon became impossible for me to complete it. The joint probability distributions although did come up with some surprising numbers, but that may be because of my assumptions being totally off the scale. Some things which I found interesting was that India would be the more likely to keep on lobbing nukes mainly because the longer / deep chain of command, depth of the country and the converse within Pakistan. Secondly, the climatic and weather patterns make a huge amount of difference. For example, a war in July/August is going to hurt India more than Pakistan due to the fallout /dispersal area and the wind direction. Conversely, its going to hurt Pakistan more if the war is done over the winter months, Dec Jan, due to the countervailing months.

Cheers

bd

Umairr #56

If Pakistan`s main concern is that the Kashmiris be allowed a free vote to decide what they want, then what is stopping Pakistan to conduct such vote in Pakistan-held Kashmir ? At least, that would be a start !

Deception seems to be the order of the day. At least , now, the whole world knows what Pakistan means by `` moral and political support only`` !. And whosoever said that ``word ``k`` in Pakistan`s name, stands for Kashmir`` must be joking!!.

Umairr #: 56

``crypto: Your remarks are quite accurate.

Pakistan has not laid claim Indian Kashmir as part of Pakistan. Pakistan`s claim is that the Kashmiris should be allowed to vote and decide what they want to do with their own future; this includes remaining with India, declaring independence, or joining Pakistan. There were quite a few statements from the Pakistani govt. regarding this a few weeks ago.``

Can anyone believe what Pakistani Government says? They claim that they never were in Kargil, than they can withdraw the fighters. They say dead soldiers were not their, and than start crying for the bodies on humanitarian ground.

And who is ``government`` in Pakistan? only Military? is President not part of government? His last statement on this was that Kashmir is crucial to Pakistan`s existence and it is a part of Pakistan.

I know Umair, you will either duck the reply or will ask for the URL ..)

BTW, what is Pakistani government`s opinion about Baluchi people rights which were supressed during 70s. Would you give them their right?

Regards

The regime is talking about accountability and yesterday the toad faced information minister of Pakistan endlessly obfuscated issues on BBC hardtalk. Why does the dismissed General not initiate an inquiry in Mr. Ejaz ul Haq`s wealth ?

umairr #56:

oooh!!...once again!..

you say [``Pakistan has not laid claim Indian Kashmir as part of Pakistan.``]

``Indian`` Kashmir ???

Pakistan does not claim even ``Azad Kashmir`` to be part of it either. isn`t that true ?

[``Pakistan`s claim is that the Kashmiris should be allowed to vote and decide what they want to do with their own future``]

does the ``kashmiris`` include ``Azad Kashmiris`` too ?

i`ve been having a serious doubt:

whenever the international media (other than those in India and Pakistan) specifies ``Kashmir``, they mean the ``Whole of Kashmir``. they explicitly state ``Indian Kashmir`` or ``Azad Kashmir`` to refer those ``parts``. but a pakistani perspective invariably equates ``Kashmir`` with ``Indian Kashmir``.

and your reply seems to deepen my doubt. pls tell me: is that really so ?

crypto

crypto: Your remarks are quite accurate.

Pakistan has not laid claim Indian Kashmir as part of Pakistan. Pakistan`s claim is that the Kashmiris should be allowed to vote and decide what they want to do with their own future; this includes remaining with India, declaring independence, or joining Pakistan. There were quite a few statements from the Pakistani govt. regarding this a few weeks ago.

concerned #48:

umairr #51:

though the article does mention that a future Indo-Pak war might turn nuclear, it does not discuss the ramifications of a nuclear war.

the world is yet to face its first full-scale nuclear war. the course and results of a full-scale nuclear war may defy all the wisdom and logic that the conventional warfare has established. I seriously doubt that even the `traditional` nuclear powers, with all

their advanced technology, have an accurate idea of ALL the consequences and fallouts of a nuclear-war. India and Pakistan doesn`t stand anywhere.

I`d be interested in a site that discusses the consequences of a nuclear war. Better still if its about a nuclear-war between India and Pakistan.

That apart, there is a line in the article which makes me curious...It says:

[``In any Pakistani attack on India the focus of the attack would be Kashmir as they could expect assistance from the local militants as well as the fact that for some time now Pakistan has laid claim to Kashmir as part of Pakistan``]

Pakistan, claims Kashmir ?...is that true ?...if so, since when ??

crypto.

krashid # 44

Democracy means rule of the majority. Democracy coupled with basic protections for minority voices (religious, ethnic, political etc.)is known as pluralism. Strictly speaking a lynch mob can be a democracy. When American officials talk about democracy, they are essentially talking about political pluralism.

As far as China goes, the Great Leap forward and the Cultural Revolutions are man made disaters unparalleled in human history.

As far as democracy in Pakistan in the post 88 era, it never had a chance. Thanks to the military and anti-India elements in Pakistan.

It is hard to improve the economy when 60-70% of the budget goes to defense and debt servicing. That was true in the early 1990s. It is even worse now. It gets worse when an elected PM has no authority to pursue any sort of detente with India.

The essence of democracy is that you allow the elcted Prime Minister to complete a five year term and then face elections. Out of the four removals of elected Prime Ministers, I can justify the second removal of Benazir Bhutto.

krashid # 52

China abolished feudalism in the 1950s. In the late 1970s they started economic reforms. Their strict population control policies also helps. India started economic reforms in the early 1990s. China has a 15 year head start. I fully expect the Indian economy to match the Chinese economy in the long run.

Very few foreigners work in Iran anymore. Indians did work in Iran in the 1970s before the war broke out. Iran has a high unemployment (30-40%). It is unlikely desis will ever work there.

Umairr #51

I think you are delibrately overlooking one

thing: Pakistan needs at least 200 missiles to

finish India off.

On the contrary. Pakistan would be all done in 20.

No more Kashmir problem

Sigalph 235 # 50.

I did not say in my article that democracy is bad.

I just stated the fact that in thirld world (or for that matter 2nd world) America makes sure that democracy works in its favor. It uses not only CIA but also other methods to make sure it happens.

Compared to that we as a nation have to think what is in our interest. Like China although not democratic is poised to have the largest economy of the world in less than a decade, due to its pro-people policy. And that is why America is trying to put a third rate economy as India to counterbalance China by giving it a permanent UN membership seat. (Pitting India against China and trading with China itself).

So with Iran. Inspite of all efforts by America, Iran is putting all its resources to infrastructure and education.

As far as migration. Why should I migrate to India when I can earn more in my country or for that matter China or Iran. (Many doctors and engineers from Sub continent used to work in Iran for economic reasons). Also going to Saudia and other Arab countries is for the same reason.

concerned #48: Thanks for the URL. Actually, the technical information is quite accurate. It doesn`t take into account the use of nuclear weapons however.

This is what I think would happen if an all out war broke out between India and Pakistan, and if no one was able to stop it.

For the first few weeks, things would remain even. India would have to remove most of its troops from Kashmir to occupy them on the Punjab/Sind border. Pakistan would thus make very strong gains in Indian Kashmir, because the local population would support the Pakistani troops. It would be impossible for India to fight the Pakistani troops, the Kashmiris and the religious volunteers in Kashmir. Pakistan would eventually gain control of a major portion of Indian Kashmir.

India would focus on the Punjab/Sind border. After the initial few weeks of stand-off, India would gain advantage due to the much larger size and budget of its armed forces and economy. Pakistan would not be able to sustain the war for too long a time. India would eventually make a breakthrough, and attempt to divide Pakistan into two parts by destroying bridges, roads etc. connecting the north of Pakistan to the south.

If the situation reached such a stage, Pakistan would use tactical nuclear weapons (if Pakistan has them) against the Indian troops. India would do the same against Pakistani troops in Kashmir.

If the situation was still not brought under control, both countries would launch strategic nuclear missiles against each other. Pakistan`s major cities would all be destroyed. Most of the Indian major cities within the range of Pakistani missiles would be destroyed.

Chowk would only have Non-Resident Indians and Pakistanis as interactors, because Indians and Pakistanis in their respective countries would have been bombe back into the stone age.

re krashid # 44

For all your criticism of a pluralist liberal representative democracy, here are a few eternal words of the late Sir Winston Churchill:

DEMOCRACY IS THE WORST FORM OF GOVERNMENT, EXCEPT FOR ALL OTHERS TRIED.

Funny how rather naive semi-philosophers can actually claim that Communism or `limited democracy` is better than the Anglo-American variety! No wonder that`s why there is a bee-line of people wishing to immigrate to Cuba and Iran!

I guess even though the Communists lost the Cold War, their apologists never stopped shooting blanks in the dark!!!!!!

Devolution of power is the need of the day, no doubt.

But not SHAM devolution, as outlined by the junta.

The strings will be still manipulated by the centre, and the identities of the provinces will be slowly eroded.

The system is akin to what the One Unit was.

The devolution scheme announced seems to be simply a dilatory tactic and/or an attempt to build a constituency of civilian Quislings by the junta.

this is for umairr -

indian first strike and pakistan first strike analyzed in detail.

http://www.alphalink.com.au/

The post war period has shown that professional soldiers make lousy, and anti-people rulers, either serving the cause of vested interests or stooges of foreign powers.

Pakistan`s history, too, bears out this fact.

Ayub, prior to toppling the government he had taken an oath to be loyal to, had been on the payroll of the CIA for quite some time.

Zia was the kind of person about whom his Commanding Officer, Gen. Niwazish Ali had written in his ACR, `` he is unfit to be an officer in the Pakistan Army, `` which, mind you, is a third rate army commanded by tenth rate generals.

Events after October 12, 1999, till date, have gone to show that the present junta too, will do all it can to exacerbate the agony of the deprived people of Pakistan.

It is worth a study in sociopolitics how some people can support military rule.