Pakistanis in Afghanistan, Nothing New

Click Play To View

Well said Shah Nawaz!that is a good analyses of the type of sylabus that is being rammed down the throats of our students in Pakistan I mean the stuff about Islamiat and Pakistan Studies.No doubt about the fact that it is SPOOKY! you have used just the right word. Keep writing you do have talent but what on earth are you doing in IT? i dont think that is your cup of tea but you know better which part of the USA are you settled in? I might be visiting the USA next year because my daughter is now an undergraduate at YALE University and doing pretty well. dO get in tpouch if you read this note. Give my regards to your family.

Tariq Aqil

good article shahnawaz where are you and how are you?? what happened to your plans about joining the civil service? at the bottom of this page it says you are a software engineer. Have you also junped on to the ID band wagon?? do get in touch and let me have your email adress.

regards and best wiashes from your old teacher inIslamabad

Tariq Aqil

Amit #41
Since you are so polite, I`ll say I`m sorry for the harsh terminology in my previous post, but I think harsh terminology upfront is anyday better than civil war later, hope you will agree..

``we need to have a realistic attitude towards Islam, given its powerful influence`` ``I was simply speculating that if we had a better insight about Islam``

Amit, I am all for a better insight into Islam as religion or political philosophy, about how religion influences how Muslims relate to the world in different ways worldwide.

But firstly remember all these so-called absolutes are not graven in stone, these are things in evolution, just like the Indian state. Muslims like everyone else are finding their feet in the modern world and are doing it in different ways, just like everyone else. As Indians, Indian Muslims have every right to to find their feet in their own unique way in India and develop their own unique world view as Indians, just like Indian Hindus and other Indians.

Secondly, I donot see any sense in saddling Indian Muslims with the manifestations of political or religious Islam making their appearance elsewhere in the world. My neighbour in my hometown is a Muslim, but he is not a Saudi, an Afghan or a Pakistani, and doesnot have to answer to anyone for their stupid choices, until he makes them his own. If I am relentless in holding him to their choices, he doesnot have any room to make different choices. This unforgiving wish-fulfilling cycle about Indian Muslims among Indian Hindus troubles me greatly. Its like someone implying in every single interaction that because of the Mumbai riots, as a Hindu I cannot but have genocidal tendencies and malafide intentions toward Muslims, and refusing to consider the possibility that I might not.

(btw whether I saddle every Saudi, Afghan or Pakistani with the stupid choices their governments and fellow citizens have made depend on the circumstances).


``I know that our intentions are noble and that we Indians genuinely want everyone to live together happily as equal members in our society.``

``That should not be termed as being communal, as is often the case when someone questions the conventional wisdom``

Uff these terms. When a family has three sons, its not `conventional wisdom` that the family has three sons, its plain fact. You can`t change the number of sons by calling it ` questioning conventional wisdom`. Thats how Indians are, some are Muslims some are Hindus.

Now this is not to say the family with the three sons is living an idyllic life. But either the family and its sons can apply its minds to living `happily` or life can be wasted moaning or in costly lose-lose estrangements.

A chacha who got estranged a generation ago, with a uncongenial wife and with nothing better to do with himself may keep trying to incite rebellion against moms cooking and fathers regular drunken binges, but hey thats a chacha, not the head of the household, he has his own house, let him first realise his philosophy in his own household.

A real family at least has a choice to split up amicably when the sons grow up, where India is concerned its not a meaningful choice for either Muslims or Hindus.

I think Jinnah looked at Hindu-Muslim relations more as a landlord-tenant situation where yesterdays landlord had to become todays tenant. Jinnah and perhaps Islam presented an illusion that religious communities have a choice to separate themselves completely from each other though they have for generations lived side by side, well, IMO, this illusion has proved to be just that, an illusion. It was not possible to accomplish a complete separation and even as neighbours we are still not separated.

The harsh reality facing India, the world and various religions is that multireligious communities including Muslims and Hindus have to learn how to pursue common political goals together amicably, there is nowhere to go to avoid it. What terms we do so in India is Indians choice.

If Pakistanis as a country chooses not to be amicably reconciled with the fact that Hindus also live on the subcontinent, hey thats their own inherited problem, Jinnah is father of their nation not ours.



But that Muslims in India are not reconciled to living with Hindus, what basis do you have to imply this? What specifically do you think is irreconcilable about Hindu-Muslim problems in India?

(btw even if an `unchanging truth` in Islam decrees a political separation with the nonMuslim world(which its never been clear to me whether it does) well, bad luck, such an unchanging truth has to reconcile itself with the real world)

``in particular, we need to be vigilant about our borders and demographics. For e.g. in West Bengal and Assam, illegal immigration is seriously changing the local demographics and we may end up with a major problem down the line.``

Yes I agree we definitely need to be vigilant about migrations and demographic changes. I think India is, to some extent, perhaps not enough. But notice that Indian Muslims in the rest of the country have nothing to do with illegal migrations in WB and Assam or the potential political problems associated with it. A Muslim in Maharastra, has nothing to do with any incident created by an illegal Bangladeshi immigrant in Assam. So pl. donot keep generalizing.

Re:SameerJB#37

Sameer, the main dilemma for non-muslims is how to establish the right relationship with muslims. Many muslims have this notion that if only they were left alone and separate from the rest, they could establish a true Islamic system that would bring back their past glory. Since the non-muslim world including India, US, Russia, Israel etc. are constantly involved with muslims in some context, there is a tendency to blame them for all problems in the muslim world. Maybe,the rest of the world should step back and let the muslim countries go ahead and do their best in establishing a system of their choice. Let them try it out to the fullest and then we can discuss the outcome.

Re:sadna#38

Please do not misunderstand me. I am not blaming Indian muslims or anyone else for that matter. I was simply speculating that if we had a better insight about Islam, we might have had a cleaner, amicable partition such as that between the Czechs and the Slovaks. We might have been able to avoid all the partition communal riots, the trains full of dead bodies, the wars, the Kashmir problem etc. More importantly, our resources would have been devoted to devlopment rather than suppressing militancy in Kashmir. I know that our intentions are noble and that we Indians genuinely want everyone to live together happily as equal members in our society. However, the events of the past 50 years and the constant tension with Pakistan does raise questions whether our all encompassing secular vision was worth it.

In any event, as we move forward, we need to develop a well thought out policy towards Islam. We certainly want good relations with Islamic countries and equality for Indian muslims, but we need to have a realistic attitude towards Islam, given its powerful influence. That should not be termed as being communal, as is often the case when someone questions the conventional wisdom. In particular, we need to be vigilant about our borders and demographics. For e.g. in West Bengal and Assam, illegal immigration is seriously changing the local demographics and we may end up with a major problem down the line. The US which has an open attitude towards immigration is closely looking at people coming here from the Islamic countries. Clearly if muslims and non-muslims find it hard to live together, the only option may be to say, that we will be friends but we will each reside on our respective side of the fence.

re: Amit

{{ I am questioning the fundamental vision of Gandhi, Nehru et al. about setting up India as a united, secular nation. I think most hindus and non-muslims do not understand the nature of Islam as a religion. They want to treat Islam like any other religion, when it is completely unique in its influence over people and its ability to foster a special identity. Islam evokes a level of religious sentiments on a scale that is not experienced in any other faith. None of the other religions in India can be compared to Islam in this respect. Therefore, it is not surprising that partition took place; it is more surprising that we Indians could never understand why it was being demanded. }}

i agree....but what do we do now? this problem isn`t just for hindus and indians...every non-muslim in the world has to figure this one out b.c. Islam is everywhere...just the other day i was in singapore and there was a big controversy when the govt banned muslim headscarfs in public schools...keep in mind this is a country which treats its minorities more fairly than any other...where every law is enforced...where there truly is equal opportunity....in their quest to build a cohesive society, they have successfully integrated the buddhist, catholic, and indian (tamil hindus) population, but keep running into trouble with the muslims...is islam fundamentally at odds with the rest of the world? and if so, what is the best way to handle it?

Amit # 27, 36

Amit, despite the fact that what you wrote is just what every Islamist says as well, do you realize how close you have come to declaring Islam a cult?

Nothing in history or common sense supports this view.

I would go a step further. I will completely question the facile traditional wisdom propounded equally by both Islamists and enemies of Islam: that there is ANY element of Islam that is unique to Islam.

There is NOTHING uniquely evil or uniquely good about Islam (sorry Zeemax).

Yes, there are forms of Islam, just like forms of any other religion, that are like cults - actually ARE cults. And these cult forms have a deep urge to export their cultist thinking in all directions.

The hard truth is as follows: many/most Islamic nations have gotten trapped within this cultist form of religiosity. This was not always so. But for many historical/psychological reasons cultist thinking has been on the rise in many Islamic nations (just as it has in India, and we have to fight our own cultists of all religious persuasions).

The problem is that cultist thinking is like a blackhole: cults are almost impossible to break out of, unless they collapse on their own -- which they invariably will, but after exacting huge human and social costs.

The challenge for all of us is how to tackle this mass cultist religiosity. And many Muslims themselves acknowledge that, as things stand currently, they face this challenge more acutely than many others.

Amit #36
Amit, I find your reasoning to display the simplistic grotesqueness seen in the hideous logic of bloodthirsty mobs during communal riots, where one neighbour is killed for the crime of following the same religion as another neighbour, an extreme and futile exercise in intellectual laziness.

``That way, we would have no Kashmir problem, no cross-border terrorism, no communal rioting, no Babri Masjid issues and no reason to quarrel with Pakistan``

You lay the blame of Indo-Pak problems solely on the presence of Muslims in India. Your earlier arlier thesis was that Pakistani Muslims hate Hindus because of their Islamic fervor and because Islam is a unique religion. Now you seem to be saying they hate Hindus and think of India as enemy BECAUSE India has Muslims. How does this conclusion follow?


Then you lay the blame of communal problems in India solely on the Islamic fervor of Indian Muslims, again, on what basis? There is a longknown connection between politicians jostling for power and communal riots, for example it was Hindu Congress leaders who would engineer riots in places like Ahmedabad using their supporters among the goons, both Hindus and Muslims. Other glaring examples which had nothing to do with Muslims are the Hindus who killed Sikhs in `84, the language riots in various states, attacks on Christian worshipping places and the ethnic conflicts in the Northeast.

``The events in Afghanistan and Pakistan over the past few months are an eye opener, as all of us are groping to understand Islam``

Again, very grotesque reasoning. Even though it was THEIR OWN governments which were in the thick of action in the events of Pakistan and Afghanistan, ordinary Afghans and Pakistanis donot burden themselves with so much guilt, responsibility and questions about their nationalism which you are putting on the shoulders of the vast number of lawbiding peaceful Indian and Bangladeshi Muslims who played absolutely no role in these events. You make these events a basis for questioning the basics of Indian nationalism, but not the basis of Pakistan nationalism. Again why?

The correct interpretation of the post-Independence period and the events in Pakistan and Afghanistan is that the two nation theory and the communal hatred which is required to sustain it may be effective for creating religiously pure nations, but such hatred only retards such nations further progress. Progress these days is in peaceful coexistence and attention focussed on improving ordinary peoples lives irrespective of religious identity. Indian Hindus need to contemplate the lessons learned about the futility of beign obsessed with exclusively religion-based identities.

I for one have full faith that Indian Muslims are in the process of creating a more positive identity of their own and contributing to the positive identity of Indian nationalism while resolving any contradictions between their nationality and religion. But I think the major obstacle delaying the process are their Cassandra-like countrymen who stupidly choose to burden them (Indian Muslims) with responsibility for every stupid thing every Muslim elsewhere in the world does.

Amit #27: Intersting little discussion going on here. Your observations are undeniable but other explanations are possible besides yours. What you consider the strength of Islam through examples of a boy in Chicago or a well-educated Afghan can be considered as exceptions to the norm, found in every society and religion. Actual problem is society allowing or indifferent or appreciating such extremists.

I have mentioned many times the effects of mind control through education system, media and government using it to extend their identity based on ``not-India``. Additionally the concept of virtuous life and its rewards in afterlife is very powerful force in favor of such exceptions. According to Islam, defending religion and spreading the true words of god are among the highest quality virtues. Here let me answer one of my own earlier question to which Harimau answered. It was: why has god forsaken Muslims, in the last several centuries, for being followers of his true words in comparison to non-Muslims? The answer by a ``true`` Muslim would be that this world is temporary or a mirage. God will not forsake Muslims in the eternal life, supposed to be after judgement day. The problem with this arguement is that the miseries of this world are a reality whereas the promise of a future good life is a hope, myth or simply defending the basic tenets of Islam and not the miseries of this world.

Well, if this is the case, why do not most Muslims try to buy an insurance for eternal bliss in afterlife? All of them actually wish this insurance and, Amit, your observation of ``strength`` of Islam in terms of strong feelings towards other Muslims is a direst result of this desire to be counted on the side of true message of god and thus hope to insure a seat in heaven.

Other way of explaining your onservation is the tradition of Muslims to consider Islam, a complete guide to living according to god`s choice. The total submission and belief in religion as ``deen`` helps protect and promote otherwise very weak basis of Islam. Islam will always need total devotion, unconditional submission and Muslims remaining tied as closely as possible to the bases. Because of this, Islamic base is extremely fortified with centuries of pouring in of concrete to its foundations by its followers through outwardly in-the-face opposition to all non-Islamic philosophies. The problem is that over zealous efforts to strengthen its bases have left little time to think about and improve the building itself and it is crumbling due to poverty, misery, illiteracy, obscurantism, literal exegesis etc etc. The structure above the foundations is there for all to see. The strength in the foundations has made it very rigid and uncompromising on the basics - because compromising on the basics or foundation principles decrease the probability of entering heaven in the afterlife.

So Muslims will find great strength for sticking together on the basis of strong foundations, irrespective of the building above the foundations. Non-Muslims successes as well as hostilities will keep giving strength to Muslims brotherhood based on foundations with little interest to tackle miseries resulting due to poor condition of the visible part of the above ground structure.

Due to the rigidity of foundations and pathetic condition of the house, it can not stand a jolt. The fear of collapsing from the jolt of reforamtaion will keep the reformation and reformers at bay. A reforamtion will be too radical and risky for Islam to face.

Therefore whatever the boy in Chicago is saying is the right path, if defending Islam and a place in heaven are the main concerns.

________________________________________________

Stuka: Writing in English is better. All bets are off once it is not English. There is no second choice, third choice,..........

Harimau: I have already responded to your post. To me, non-theism is better than theism and polytheism is better than monotheism, if one can not live without definitely accepting, believing and practicing a religion.

Saminashah: I am sure, you and I will have a good discussion soon, on some more earthly and perhaps Pakistan-related topic.

Rsaxena: Don`t take out your dislike of the grandson of a Punjabi, Mohathir Mohammed on a future Punjabi grandfather, Stuka -what? 30-40 years from now?

Re:Akash, Rsaxena, sadna

I am questioning the fundamental vision of Gandhi, Nehru et al. about setting up India as a united, secular nation. I think most hindus and non-muslims do not understand the nature of Islam as a religion. They want to treat Islam like any other religion, when it is completely unique in its influence over people and its ability to foster a special identity. Islam evokes a level of religious sentiments on a scale that is not experienced in any other faith. None of the other religions in India can be compared to Islam in this respect. Therefore, it is not surprising that partition took place; it is more surprising that we Indians could never understand why it was being demanded.

In a way, it would have made a lot more sense if we had embraced the two-nation theory in its fullest. That means, we could have accepted partition whole heartedly including muslim majority areas of Kashmir, along with a complete, peaceful transfer of minorities. In other words, Pakistan would be 100% muslim and India would be 100% non-muslim. Of course the agreement would have included lasting friendly relations with Pakistan. We could have then constituted a secular India among the other religions in India, while Pakistan could have forged out a positive identity around Islam. That way, we would have no Kashmir problem, no cross-border terrorism, no communal rioting, no Babri Masjid issues and no reason to quarrel with Pakistan. By blindly insisting on an all encompassing secularism, we ignored reality and are stuck with all these problems as we adamantly try to prove our point in Kashmir and other places.

At this point in time, we cannot implement such a solution any more but in 1947 it was a distinct possibility. The events in Afghanistan and Pakistan over the past few months are an eye opener, as all of us are groping to understand Islam. We were all fed with this line that all religions should live together in one secular system. It is not just India, but other non-muslim nations like USA also believe in this notion of universal secularism. However, it is clear that this theory is seriously flawed and we should debate it as we shape future policies. The US is itself trying to understand Islam, given the events that have occured. Maybe we Indians should also think about it.

Stuka---34

``Tundee e baad e mukhalif sey naa ghubraa aye uqab

Ye tO chultee hai tujhhay oonchaa uraanay keliyay``

aadab urz hai!

Hamzad:

``There is complete calm & serenity in the eye of the hurricane or tornado.Only those on the periphery are flailing & thrashing about.``

So how`s life on the periphery?

Amit,

While I appreciate your thinking outside the box, I have to register my concerns with what passes for Islam nowadays. The Islam in Indonesia in respect to the East Timorese, or the superstitous Islam that indulges its followers in their conspiracy fantasies, the cultish, nationalistic and violent interpretations that encourage desparate young men to act like arrogant jihadi criminals, or the outrageous by any human rights standard interpretations of Islam that subject its Muslim women and non Muslim countrypeople to kanjaroo courts and civil systems-these Islams are a grave concern to everyone.

Amit

``. I think non-muslims need to understand it and not get offended by it; rahter they should respect it as a unique attribute of Islam.``

Great, we ae not offended. And all of us Hindus should castrate ourselves and bow before the ``such`` Muslims,and join in their cheering. The non-Moslems(read Hindus) should respect Muslims who slap them and abuse their religion. Wah, kya kahne. Is this the result of slavish mentality your upbringing has engendered in you. A man without a modicum of self-respect is worse than animals. Thank God, there are more self-respecting Hindus than you would ever think. The Indian nationalism and civilization has survived and flourished for 5000 years by its own innate strength and will continue to do so in future. We dont need your advice, Sir.

re: Amit

{{ My point is that Islam is an extremely powerful faith, whose impact is really profound on people. It is an entire way of life and it influences people to a degree that cannot be imagined in other religions. I think non-muslims need to understand it and not get offended by it; rahter they should respect it as a unique attribute of Islam. }}

it is not that easy...Islam has an in-your-face quality, which inevitably offends non-Muslims...of course there are individual Muslims who are exceptions, but the religion as a whole is different...Islam is a complete way of life, with a very large public aspect...non-Muslim countries can never provide that public aspect to Muslims...therein lies the source of much friction...

Amit--27

``faanoos bunn kay jiss kee hifazat havaa karay

voh shammaa kyaa bujhhay,jisay roshan khudaa kray``

Fanoos:lamp glass,chandelier.

There is complete calm & serenity in the eye of the hurricane or tornado.Only those on the periphery are flailing & thrashing about.

How beautifuly has the poet utilised this in the above couplet.

``Islam tiraa deis hai,too mustafavee hai.``

My country is Islam,my citizenship travels with me & no one has the power to take it away from me.The rest of the activity in the world is abode & transport management which must be entrusted to those most capable professionally,irrespective of creed or color.Such material management is called secularism....& it is & will always be harnessed by belief whether enunciated in constituition,Bill,Manifestos,or earth-motherhood.

re: stuka

{{Jithey AnNy da sawal hai, meri mat maree gayyee hai kee udey naal panga lewan? :) Changi kudi hai, Sameer saab, gustakhi maaf, post tey mai waise dal ditta see.}}

...cut it out..no funny languages allowed...stick with hindu/urdu or English...

Amit #27
`` because in the long run Indian nationalism is no match against Islam``
If you are speaking wrt Kashmir, have you forgotten that India has Muslims too?

If you are speaking generally, are you saying India cannot survive as a multireligious country?

The negative emotions of hatred for others cannot provide a firm foundation for anything meaningful, the instances you mention are not instances of Islamic fervor but of hatred of India/Hindus.

Re:SameerJB#24

Sameer, you have certainly more insights about the muslim world than I have. I was observing the phenomena in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where young people from well to do families show passion for their religion at a level that I can barely imagine, including a willingness to give up their lives. I will give you two examples.

Recently on CNN, there was an interview with a family in Islamabad. The family was economically well off and living in a posh house. The oldest son was openly saying that he wants to join jihad against USA and his parents did not seem to be too upset about it. Similarly, I was watching a local Pakistani channel in Chicago called Pakwatan TV, which airs some really nice shows on Pakistani music. They were telecasting their annual banquet, where various cultural events were taking place. At the end, a six year old boy came on the stage and launched a vitriolic attack against India and Hinduism. He was saying that India attacked its own parliament, India would break up like Russia etc. and finally he was mocking multi-handed gods and godesses etc. Now if this was a Jamaat function, that would be understandable, but here well to do Pakistani Americans in Chicago were wildly cheering on this young kid in a Pakistani function.

My point is that Islam is an extremely powerful faith, whose impact is really profound on people. It is an entire way of life and it influences people to a degree that cannot be imagined in other religions. I think non-muslims need to understand it and not get offended by it; rahter they should respect it as a unique attribute of Islam. If some Pakistanis think that they can circumvent the religion and establish a secular system, they are clearly underestimating the faith. A more realistic approach is for Pakistan to build a system around their religion. In the same vein, India should really evaluate whether it can hold on to Kashmir, because in the long run Indian nationalism is no match against Islam and I doubt whether Kashmiris will ever become Indians.

SammerJB

Thank you for the invitation. Would love to be part of any such brotherhood. I noticed your presence on WWW.APNAORG.ORG and read some of your thoughts there. It is an excellent website.

Jithey AnNy da sawal hai, meri mat maree gayyee hai kee udey naal panga lewan? :) Changi kudi hai, Sameer saab, gustakhi maaf, post tey mai waise dal ditta see.

Ref SameerJB #: 24

[Why would, otherwise, god has forsaken Muslims in favor of non-Muslims?]

On another board I had asked the questions: Is Allak playing you guys for fools? Was Prophet Muhammad playing a huge practical joke on you guys?

You must admit that those two possibilities are within the thoretical, but not theocratic, realm!

Good article Khar Saheb; consider it additionally a welcome from a Rajput to a Jat. Lets have this bond of Punjabi identities transcend the Islamic brotherhood feeling Amit is talking about. And you too, Stuka, could join the brotherhood but only after you stop altercation with my friend, AnNy :)

Amit the feeling you are talking about is really a manufactured feeling. The consent building through extremely one-sided and mythologized Islamic education in Muslim countries over a long period has succeeded in creating a sympathy for each other among the have-nots of Islamic world. The haves really don`t give a damn about the phenomenon you are talking about. The Saudis and other Sheikhs, for example do nothing for Muslims in need except buying influence and new wives. The common feeling of Islamic untouchables or shudras, the Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Indians, Afghans etc feel for each other more than Somalis dying in thousands during famine. The Shudra Pakistani peace Keeping forces imbued with pan-Islamic feeling went there and befriended with Muslim Somalis until one day they ambushed and mowed down 25 of them in cold blood. You will be surprised to know the feelings in Islamabad towards Afghan refugees. There is almost total mutual alienation and deep hostilities between them. Only thing Muslims are united is hate for rich, non-Muslims and Western cultures. Leaving aside the contribution of jealousy, it has to do with feeling of following the only true godly path and yet others beating the sh1t out of them in prosperity, progress, good governance and just society. Somehow they feel it is due to colonialism, neo-colonialism, cheating, plundering and stealing. Why would, otherwise, god has forsaken Muslims in favor of non-Muslims?

Muslims have killed lot more Muslims fighting among themselves than fighting against non-Muslims throughout history.

Moreover, where state sponsored fantasizing Islam is weak, as in villages, the brotherhood feeling towards anybody except within village is non-existent.

All you can really say is that those who actually think the way you mentioned are more vocal, vulgar, arrogant, law breaker, bearded and so on.

There are always good reasons for any phenomenon. Perhaps ome billion Muslims around the world are a reminder and proof of evolution. I wonder why the heck Darwin had to go to Galapagos Islands? This last one is just a joke!!!

YLH:

Imo Gandhi did not support Khilafat for cynical reasons. You have to understand that religion was a big part of Gandhi`s life, and I think he just felt more comfortable with people who were religious in nature, be they Hindu or Muslim.

I don`t think Gandhi was capable of seperating religion and politics at all. His secularism was ``respect for all religions`` rather than it being ``seperation of church and state``. Jinnah`s secularism was the latter. He was a man of this world, not the next, and therein lied the essential difference between the two. In fact the former is the definition of secularism in the Indian constitution rather than the latter, leading to (again, in my personal opinion) problems, because where does the respect stop.

this is in reply to Mr Amit, you have good relations with Iran for one reason that you do not

share a border with them ,secondly a common

History and what is the point you are trying to make here???? to become like iran to have good relation with india, but iam soory ....if only it was so easy, hey!we have good relations with CHINA

though,hint hint ....

Reply Amit # 20

``Unlike other religions, Islam is unique in its ability to evoke very strong passions on a very large scale. As a hindu, I find it hard to understand...I can never imagine any hindu dying for his religion...``

Hmmm...run this by a Ram Bhakt and see if they agree with you.

Khar Sahib,

I think it is very important to analyze the macro effect of Islam on a community. Unlike other religions, Islam is unique in its ability to evoke very strong passions on a very large scale. As a hindu, I find it hard to understand but I think Islam creates a feeling of an extended family. Just as one gets very emotional about one`s family, the same way muslims feel a sense of belonging that generates extremely strong impulses regarding the faith. For instance, I can never imagine any hindu dying for his religion, whereas it is a glorious thing for muslims. So, when you have such a powerful force in your midst, how do you handle it ?

One option is the Turkish model which tries to suppress this force. This model has not been very successful and it has no chance of widespread implementation. The second option is autocratic rule by sultans, dictators etc. who tend to exploit this force to latch on to power. The results are really lousy, as has been proven with Pakistan. The third option is the Iranian model that embraces Islam and develops a democratic structure around it. This is a very difficult process, but it is perhaps the only reasonable manner to develop a democratic, civil society in a Islamic nation. A key thing to remember is that a conservative, religious society does not have to be a fanatical society, that indulges in foreign policy adventures. Maybe an Iranian type model may ultimately prove to be ideal for Pakistan. By the way, Iran has excellent relations with India.

Well stuka .. atleast Jinnah was not criticized for the supporting the obscurantist Khilafat movement.. :) that honor was left for Gandhi and Ali Brothers.

``weren`t hesitant in criticizing leaders like Gandhi, Jauhar Brothers and Jinnah. ``

HAIN???? Kya kaha? criticized Jinnah? yeh kaisey ho sakta hai. Duniya key akeley farishtey ke Tauheen hai yeh. All because Gandhi made him look bad ;)

Romair:

``One wants to convert Pakistan into Turkey, the other into Saudi Arabia. ``

Very true, very true. Let Pakistan be Pakistan, according to it`s own soul. Neither of the two countries above are great role models. If you are to take a role model, then India under BJP would be a good one. I don`t mean this sarcastically at all

http://atimes.com/ind-pak/DB06Df01.html

Pakistan shifts proxy war to India`s east

By Sultan Shahin

Map

NEW DELHI - The Indian government is gradually coming round to the view that the attack on policemen guarding the American Center in Kolkata on January 22 marks the shifting of the theater of Pakistan`s proxy war.

Though official spokespeople continue to claim that militant infiltration in Kashmir is continuing on the previous scale, a feeling is growing that the focus of Pakistan-sponsored terrorist activities is now moving to India`s east and northeast, as Pakistan may not be able to defy strong international pressure to close shop in Kashmir.

A realization is gradually dawning upon India`s security officials that Pakistan`s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency has been preparing for such an eventuality for a long time. As well-informed analyst Hiranmay Karlekar writes in his column in the Pioneer newspaper (January 25): ``The ISI, in collaboration with sections of Bangladesh`s intelligence outfits and fundamentalist Islamic organizations, has been training and supporting northeast Indian insurgent outfits like the United Liberation Front of Asom [Assam] (ULFA), both Khaplang and the Isaac Swu-Thuingaleng Muivah groups of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN), Bodo rebels in Assam and tribal insurgents in Tripura for years.

``Its plans include the separation of the whole of northeastern India from the rest of the country and the creation of an autonomous Islamic state in the northeast comprising parts of Assam, Nagaland and Myanmar. Should it ever come close to success in implementing its plans, trouble in the Siliguri-Islampur corridor, hampering movement of troops and supplies to the northeastern states, would be of critical advantage to it.``

According to Indian government sources, the basic objective of the ISI in Bangladesh is intelligence encirclement of India. It uses the strategy of supporting and fomenting insurgency in India`s northeast and encouraging militants of various shades in different parts of India. It makes direct use of Bangladesh territory to infiltrate its agents and saboteurs across the border.

Of particular advantage to the ISI is the long and porous India-Bangladesh border which makes crossings either way easy, particularly when there are elements all along it to facilitate the process. According to reports in the Pakistani media, India has recently moved more forces to the India-Bangladesh border. This may be part of an effort to stop or at least reduce infiltration of militants from this border.

The recent incident in Kolkata is not the first of its kind in West Bengal. On December 22, 1994, two boys in Domkal in West Bengal`s Murshidabad district discovered several bombs very near a temporary dais from which Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, now chief minister of West Bengal and then an important minister, was to address a public meeting on December 24 along with other functionaries of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI-M).

This may explain why Bhattacharjee has gone out of his way in condemning and acting against the latest terrorist outrage, though his colleagues in the party were not inclined initially to implicate Pakistan or the ISI. CPI-M politburo member Sitaram Yechury had indeed accused Home Minister Lal Krishan Advani as having ``jumped the gun`` in pointing fingers at the ISI without adequate information.

Having investigated the Domkal incident, reports Karlekar, India`s Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) concluded that an organization called Ahl-e-Hadith (AeH) was involved. The same organization, it further believed, was behind five explosions that occurred on trains in different parts of India on December 6, 1993, the first anniversary of the demolition of the Babri Mosque, and 42 others - not including the serial bomb blasts in Bombay on March 12, 1993 - in various parts of the country from 1988 to 1993.

One reason for this conclusion was that the explosives used in the Domkal bombs were the same as in the five train and 42 other blasts. The Domkal bombs also had the same kind of timers the five railway bombs had. Besides, the other 42 blasts had occurred in areas marked by acute communal tension where they could have triggered riots. Murshidabad district had been such an area for quite some time then. The CBI also believed that three of the five people sought for questioning in connection with the blasts were hiding in West Bengal.

The CBI was convinced that the ISI was behind the bombs. The conculsion is corroborated by Yossef Bodansky in his book Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America. ``The ISI actively assists bin Laden in the establishment of an Islamic infrastructure in India ... The primary venues for the distribution of Islamic literature and incitement material are the institutions run by the Ahl-i-Hadith religious charity which is associated with Lashkar-i-Toiba, an Islamist Kashmiri organization.`` Under the command of Abdul Karim Tunda, the Lashkar-i-Toiba is already responsible ``for several bomb explosions``.

Thus by the end of 1994, according to Karlekar`s information, the ISI, which had started operating with the utmost freedom in Bangladesh after Begum Khaleda Zia became prime minister in 1991, had already established a significant presence in West Bengal and was even in a position to shelter wanted persons from other parts of India in the state. Using Bangladesh as its springboard and aided by West Bengal state government`s complacency, it extended its network far and wide in the state in the next few years, using it as a staging area for its agents entering from Bangladesh to carry out terrorist acts in other parts of India and for sending people from different parts of India to Bangladesh for onward journey to Pakistan and Afghanistan for training as agents. It established ``safe houses``, planted ``sleepers`` - agents who merged with the local people and remained dormant for long periods before acting - and centers for recruiting agents.

The ISI built up a substantial presence in several areas of Kolkata and almost all districts of the state bordering Bangladesh - with the Siliguri subdivision of Darjeeling district in the north receiving particular attention. All this was dramatically brought to light in January 1999, when Delhi police arrested Syed Abu Nasir, a Bangladeshi who had crossed over from Bangladesh to bomb the US Embassy in Delhi and the US Consulate General in Chennai. He reportedly revealed during interrogation that he and his team of nine had gathered in Kolkata in December 1998. From there, the three Indian members had been sent to Siliguri to establish a support base in collaboration with ISI agents stationed there, while the six ``Afghans`` - a generic term used to signify Afghans as well as various Arab and other terrorists trained in Afghanistan by al-Qaeda - went to Chennai. The three Indians who went to Siliguri were subsequently arrested while the six ``Afghans`` managed to disappear.

The ISI`s activities in the area attracted further attention during the Kargil war when a blast in a train in North Jalpaiguri station on June 24, 1999, directed at a group of soldiers traveling to Kashmir, killed two of them and injured 16. There were several other attempts to sabotage the movement of troops and equipment from northeastern to northwestern India. These incidents clearly underlined the reason for the ISI`s activities in Siliguri. Northeastern India`s sole direct land link with the rest of the country passes through the subdivision, particularly the narrow Siliguri-Islampur corridor.

Indeed, according to Indian intelligence sources, the ISI has long been providing assistance to insurgents in the northeast in a variety of ways, including helping them run their training camps in Bangladesh. After the installation of the Awami League government in Bangladesh in 1996, the Indian insurgent groups were asked to leave Bangladeshi soil. But dominant groups such as the National Socialist Council of Nagaland-Isaac Swu/Muivah (NSCN-I/M), ULFA, All Tripura Tiger Force (ATTF) and National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) continued to function in that country in a more covert manner by forging local-level links with Bangladeshi security forces.

Initially, in March/April 1997, Indian intelligence sources perceived some decline in insurgent activities and the militants, mainly belonging to ULFA and NSCN-I/M, had started winding up their overt activities and shifting their camps temporarily to Myanmar. But through support from such parties as the Bangladesh National Party (BNP), Jamaat-e-Islami (JEI) and Freedom Party (FP), the militants started reorganizing themselves and re-established their camps in Bangladesh.

The ISI has managed to establish a rather intricate network in Bangladesh, thanks to the presence of the residue of pro-Pakistan sympathizers after 1971 and the influence it wielded between 1975 and 1996 when the Awami League was out of power. The period from 1991 to 1996, when Khaleda Zia was prime minister of the BNP government, proved particularly fruitful. During this period the ISI was not only able to subvert various local agencies, including the army, but also ran training camps for northeast Indian insurgents with the consent of the government.

After the Awami League government took power in June 1996, there was a review of government policy and official patronage of such anti-India activities was withdrawn. However, on account of loyalties built up over the years, and religious indoctrination and rampant corruption in the ranks of both Indian and Bangladeshi security forces, networks continued to facilitate movement of Indian insurgent leaders and also supply these groups with arms.

The ISI obviously realizes the importance of mobilizing anti-India and pro-Pakistan political elements in Bangladesh and bringing them to power with a view to securing state patronage. It has therefore nurtured the BNP while in and out of power, shoring it up up politically and financially. It has done the same with various rightist parties such as the FP and JEI. More recently the ISI has been playing a leading role in patching together an alliance between these rightist parties and assisting them in devising and launching a strategy to dislodge the Awami League from power.

After June 1996, on account of an unfriendly party being in power in Bagladesh, the ISI has had to give up its earlier brazenness and work covertly through various channels. While some operations are still controlled from the local Pakistani mission - where the ISI unit was said to be headed by A H Qureshi, a minister-rank official - a larger part of anti-Indian activities are conducted through various mosques, madrasas (seminaries) and attached training camps across the country, and through Pakistani agents and facilitators placed in various private organizations and political parties. There has also been liberal use of the country`s press for anti-India propaganda with communal overtones. The aim is to keep anti-India feelings high so that no government is ever in a position to accede to Indian requests for information about northeastern militants, and to stalemate Indian influence in Bangladesh.

The ISI makes use of prominent Bangladeshi names and institutions for its purposes. Indian officials cite the example of the Beximco Group - which employs about 600 Pakistanis and whose owners, Sohel and Solman Rahman, are alleged to have pro-Pakistan sympathies. Beximco Group has been allegedly used as conduit for funds to the BNP. Prominent local politicians Salauddin Qader Chowdhury, Syed Iskander (brother of Khaleda Zia) and Anwar Zahed, who are ensconced in the BNP, are alleged to have a well-documented history of indulging in arms trafficking into India`s northeast.

A number of other commercial establishments, namely Ibnesina, Islami Bank, Habib Bank, Pak Land and Lever Brothers, with known Pakistani links, and front organizations of fundamentalist parties like the JEI, Tablighi Jamaat, Jamaat-e-Tulaba and Jamaat-ul-Mudarreseen, allegedly serve the interests of the ISI. Moreover, Pakistan sympathizers within the army, various intelligence agencies and the bureaucracy continue to aid the ISI.

Indian officials allege that apart from intelligence operations conducted by Pakistan`s mission in Dhaka, agents are being sent directly from Pakistan for specific tasks such as training, briefing, supervising, providing funds, and meeting with militants. Some people collaborate with the ISI for political and religious reasons. Salahuddin Qader Choudhary and his brother Giasuddin Choudhary - both BNP leaders and alleged arms smugglers - are actively involved in abetting fundamentalists, militant groups such as Harkat-ul-Jihad, and rightist political parties such as JEI and IOJ. Notorious terrorist Abdul Karim Tunda from Chittagong, and Pakistan-trained alleged terrorist Asif Khan, who visited India to foment trouble during the last general elections, fall into this category.

The ISI is also said to have connections with non-governmental organizations such as Islamic Relief Organization and Junudul Muqawat Al Islamiya, as well as with madrasas such as Rabeta in Ramu, Cox`s Bazaar. The latter is a nerve center of all ISI operations in Greater Chittagong. Pakistani agents regularly visit and hold meetings there with Indian outfits like ULFA, NSCN-I/M, NLFT, and All Tripura Tiger Force.

The ISI`s intelligence operations include provision of funds to political parties - Gholam Azam of JEI and Salahuddin Qader Choudhary of BNP are allegedly to have received huge amounts for fomenting agitations - and militant outfits on Bangladesh, India and Myanmar. It also organizes recruitment and dispatch of potential mujahideen from madrasas and the youth wings of JEI, Shibir, IOJ etc, for induction into Indian territory to create disturbances.

If Indian apprehensions are correct, the east and northeast may present even greater challenges for Indian security agencies than does insurgency in Kashmir. If reports of India having increased its strength along the border with Bangladesh are correct, it may mean that India is already conscious of the dangers represented by ISI networks and its ambitions in the area. Since Pakistan does not have a border with India in the east, India may not even be able to denounce this in the familiar terminology of cross-border terrorism.

Reply Hamzad Afaqui # 14

``It is this `education`` which is the real bane of our society.``

Clearly sour grapes.

kim--13

It is this `education`` which is the real bane of our society.The guys here were trained to earn a living,by doing repetitive tasks,which they mistake for an education.

Those who earn more money and have more poerful jobs are considered ``educated`` in slave-lands.A propensity to adopt kanjar attire,speak contorted & ventriloquistic english,express a proud inability to read/write urdu/farsi/arabie,condoning adultery/drinking/fornication/deviancies and being mortified at loving their own parents.

This is called ``education`` in Indo-Pak.The other kind are obscurantists,back-ward,Parent loving,children-caring,and RELIGIOUS.

But they do somehow know they they WILL be accorded religous last rites.In the end they do have firm faith in the goodness of the pious ones.

SPM #11

``being educated and still believing bs like that?…. ….serves them right…``



Semipresciousme

So an educated man cant make mistake ?

What about thousands of other educated (doctors & engineers)who made the right discision of choosing to go to Canada & America but ended up as phlebotomist, physician assistant ,drafts man ,cook,mechanics,plumbers..or even non professional work . Should you not pity them for ``for believing bs like America & canada is heaven ``

If you have not heard of people who went back disillusioned & thousands more tired of dole in U.K. & Canada...... may be some one should compile the non talked about & unwritten stories of unsuccessfull dejected ``educated who made the right discision of throwing there lot, hook sink anchor with the west but came back empty ``

In hind sight everyone can be 100% correct .When `joan of arc` let herself be burnt she probably also is served right for believing in bs that burnt her alive.

One thing that needs repetition is the fact that the famous Fatwa to migrate was given by none other than the Mullah Azad, who is considered a great Indian Nationalist leader by the Indian revisionists.

Revisionism is a disease not uncommon to many other countries... but we should strike it down in our own Pakistan.. because it has impeded our progress. Once again, I must thankyou Mr.Khar for so eloquently expressing my deepest feelings :)

Sincerely

“Immigration to Afghanistan) Early part of the twentieth century large number of clergy from the Subcontinent gave a Fatwa that India is Dar_ul_harb because it is ruled by the British and Muslims should migrate to a Muslim countries. Thousands of Muslims took the advice as a word of God. Sadly many of them were professionals, like Doctors, Professors and civil servants, who sold all their belongings and headed towards the Afghan Border. Many were not allowed to cross and had to return to nothing but to start afresh. The unfortunate who made it across did not live happily ever after. Many educated professionals were forced to do menial labor, while some who managed to get jobs faced a comical situation”

…being educated and still believing bs like that?…. ….serves them right…

“Dr Israar- It is hard to conjecture whether he is a worst medical doctor, a profession he never practiced or a worst Mullah. Although Dr Sahib himself did not feel the need to cross the border but was the most prolific in interpreting the Hadith of the Mahdi coming from the caves backed by black turbaned youth, vis-à-vis bin laden aided by the Taleban.Dr Israar a man of dubious character, extremely sectarian in philosophy, had his daughter married on the 10th of Muharram, igniting sectarian riots in Lahore.”

….ah yes, the estimable mulana israr….according to him everything, right down to the poverty in pak, is a jewish conspiracy…but to be fair, he runs a couple of quran schools/colleges in lhr which provide a pretty balanced education by teaching english, math, computers etc along with the quran….

…. have fun dueling it out with our resident mulanas hydra, afaqui and co…

dear Mr. Khar

This piece did not have to be so unbalanced for you to have made your point, one with which I believe a majority of Pakistanis would agree. What a sad. incrdible and ignorant cast of characters. God carries Pakistan in the palm of his hand, how else can we explain the devastation at the hands of the obscuritanists, that we have avoided.

``Tolerance is the major ingredient missing in present day religious education. There can be no unity till Muslims learn to respect each other for their diverse beliefs, there is no one kind of Muslim and no Muslim has a right to judge another Muslim, we are different but one in the eyes of the compassionate and merciful God.``

to which we should add pluralism, and the pluralism of salvation of individual adherents of varing faiths which forms the moral framework for the freedom of conscience.

Which sane, God loving, God fearing, Pakistani would challenge this??

Back to Jinnah

By Ardeshir Cowasjee

When, on that rare occasion, we have heading this country a liberal man who preaches tolerance and who tells us that Pakistan was envisioned by its founder as a modern, free-thinking, liberal, secular state, in jump the mulla-maulvi faction, the obscurantists, the thesis writers, the great thinkers, some of whom were not even a gleam in their mother`s eye when Jinnah was around, who flail their arms and shriek `treason` at the word secular, and who with their narrow-minded thinking, intolerance and bigotry claim falsely that they are `Islamic`.

In a recent interview with Newsweek, Musharraf spelt out his vision of what Pakistan`s founder had in mind for his country, a vision he intended to bring to material form. Naturally, editorials were written expressing horror, protests poured in from all sides, and then entered his obsequious spokespeople with the inevitable `clarification`. And so it will continue, for much time to come, for as long as this nation is kept illiterate and uneducated and unable to reason, think, look around at the world it inhabits, and comprehend what it must do to fit into it. But we must never give up; we must continue to press home the points pressed by the man who gave this nation a homeland.

Three months before the partition of the subcontinent, in an interview with Doon Campbell of Reuters, Jinnah firmly stated: ``The new state will be a modern democratic state with sovereignty resting in the people and the members of the new nation having equal rights of citizenship regardless of religion, caste or creed.`` He repeated this on August 11, 1947, whilst addressing the members of his Constituent Assembly, making it doubly clear to them that religion is not the business of the state. He told them: ``You are free, free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State.`` He could not have been more explicit.

Our learned men have it that the first steps taken in the Republic of Pakistan towards the framing of a constitution was the moving of the Objectives Resolution in the Constituent Assembly on March 7, 1949, by the prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan. The view is that this Resolution was intended to be a mish-mash of the general principles of an `Islamic` state and the accepted concepts of a modern `democratic` state. What the mish-mash has resulted in is a variety of conflicting interpretations, the orthodox and the obscurantists claiming that the Islamic tenets dominate and the more progressive, forward-looking plumbing for the democratic parliamentary way of governance.

When it was moved, the non-Muslim members of the Assembly expressed their fears that were the Resolution to be passed maulanas would gain the upper hand, and some questioned the phrase stipulating that the ``state will exercise authority within the limits provided by Him.`` What are the limits proscribed by God, they asked, and who will define those limits? Will it be the mullas or the gentlemen of a more liberal bent of mind? Could a non-Muslim become the head of state, for example? Liaquat Ali Khan`s response was rather ambivalent--in an Islamic state, he said, it would be ``absolutely wrong to say that a non-Muslim cannot be the head of administration under a constitutional government.`` Maulanas held differently and firmly : ``The Islamic state means a state which is run on the exalted and excellent principles of Islam [and it] can be run only by those who believe in those principles....``.

Dispute and divergence of view, disagreement and differences from day one. Yet, the honourable gentlemen of the Assembly, most of whom must have been present on August 11, 1947, when Mohammad Ali Jinnah laid down for them the principles which he wished to be embodied in the constitution of his country, took it upon themselves that day to repudiate the man responsible for putting them where they were.

Hasan Zaheer, of the erstwhile all-powerful CSP, in his book `The Separation of East Pakistan`, writing on constitution making, has this to say on the contentious Resolution: ``Liaquat Ali Khan, while moving the Objectives Resolution, claimed that since it provided for the exercise of power and authority of the state `through the chosen representatives of the people`, the Resolution naturally eliminates any danger of the establishment of a theocracy.

Little did he realize the opening that the Resolution was giving to the obscurantists and what the Munir Report called `political brigands and adventurers, even nonentities` to exploit the name of Islam in mundane political affairs and jolt the foundations of the state from time to time. None of the three covenants of the Muslims of the subcontinent, which spelled out the unanimous demand for a separate Muslim homeland, or homelands--the Lahore Resolution of 1940, the Madras Resolution of 1941, and the Pakistan Resolution of the Legislators` Convention of 1946--or the debates leading to these resolutions had mentioned anything about an Islamic state. Over the years, the Resolution proved a perennially divisive point of reference in the polity of Pakistan.``

It is this Resolution which forms the preamble to the Constitution of 1973, and it is this Resolution which, as Article 2A, is a substantive part of the Constitution, and which has more than proven that it is indeed not only highly divisive but also destructive. And, to boot, our great makers, breakers and amenders cannot even get it right. In the preamble, in one sentence, the original resolution has been adhered to: ``Wherein adequate provision shall be made for the minorities freely to profess and practise their religions and develop their cultures;`` whereas in Article 2A which forms the Annex to the Constitution in the very same sentence the word ``freely`` has been omitted. Whether this was done wittingly or unwittingly is not known, but the question is that after the passage of 16 years since 2A was inserted by PO No.14 of 1985 why has it not been corrected? Is there a motive behind the omission of the highly pertinent and important word? Were our amenders plain sloppy, or were they wicked?

Musharraf rode in on horseback, and now is riding high. So far he is on the right track. His reflexes are sound. He has not yet heard messages from on high. But he does need to shun the oleaginous perennial sycophants who equate being with him as being in the presence of greatness, or who praise him fulsomely for his penetrating mind, his iron resolve, his calm demeanour. He does not need to be glorified or exalted. He needs to be supported.

Mallik Shanawz Khar

So there are many Mullah & Maulanas with varied opinions......Who is forcing or Putting Gun in your head to follow them...

There are even more diverse interpretations of Indian history &Hinduism..Arya Samaj ,Brahmo Samaj,Anand Margi ,Bhagvan Rajnesh,Krishna murthi ,Satya Sai Ba Ba ,Ram Krishna Pramahansha,Swami Vivekananda,Not to speak of Vrinda Van,Advaity Dvaitya followers ,Smiritis & manusmiritis in hinduism......Yet Indians go about there business .

Why should Israr or Fazlu,or Sami or Brailli bother you .You have everyright to disagree with there opinions as you yourself know that any ordinary muslim can do everything that a ``Moulana`` can do from birth to death ritual including Namaz.

AAMEEN!

A warm welcome to CHOWK Mr. Khar

The question now is: Who will listen?

I enjoyed your writing very much!

Ras

re: shrinker

{{Wow! you could have fooled me:) The same guy who confidentally stated Pakistan will be the next Singapore in 10 yrs.}}

...that was before someone pointed out the ridiculous GDP growth rate needed to achieve that...so much for his `logic and fact-based` posts here...

Romair,

{{This is not saying much, since I have generally been pessimistic. But I am now cautiously optimistic.}}

Wow! you could have fooled me:) The same guy who confidentally stated Pakistan will be the next Singapore in 10 yrs.

{{Everyone (except me and a few other people) greatly underestimated Musharraf.}}

Yada yada yada...you`ve said that about a zillion times now; flip the chapati over, Nostradamus:)

__________________________________________________

Hi Zeemax! Welcome back! Dont be such a stranger anymore... We need a pessimist like you to balance Gen Optimist Romair...

Very interesting article.

It is good to see constructive criticism, instead of pure hatred against one group or another. Usually, the secularatics (secular fanatics) and the relgionatics (religious fanatics) go after each other from the two extremes, with hate-based arguments directed only towards the destruction of each other, while the other 90% of Pakistanis (the non-fanatic secularists and the non-fanatic religionists) suffer. One group wants to bring a revolution in Pakistan because of fifteen century Europe, the other because of eighth century Arabia. One wants to convert Pakistan into Turkey, the other into Saudi Arabia. One defines his character on his relationship with a liquid called wine, the other with a piece of bark called maswak. Both lost in their self-centered world, that only revolves around their extremist views, with total disregard for what most Pakistanis want. Anyone who builds his whole argument on hatred against any other group has nothing much to offer, I am afraid.

Pakistanis, rightly or wrongly, in my opinion want a moderate, tolerant, sectarian-free but religious society. They want quite a bit of religion in their private life, and some religion (not a whole lot, but some) religion in their public life also. But most of all, they want economic growth and physical security. Anyone who can bring such growth to Pakistan, will be popular, regardless of his/her religious or secular tendencies.

It is a well accepted fact that Pakistanis do not want the current religious leaders in elected office (that is different from wanting some religon). I certainly don`t. They never vote for them. And now with the new policies of the current govt., these leaders are completely through. They won`t even get the little support they use to get. The Bachelor degree rule is specifically targeted towards them, by Musharraf (and towards the feudals). In one sweep, he has disqualified almost all the top religious politicos and 60% of the current feudals. The women seats at local and national level will also hurt the mullahs. Elected women will never support mullahs, after seeing how women were treated under the Taliban.

At the same time, one cannot use hatred of mullahs as a badge of character and honor. Pakistan has been ruled by secular individuals (except Zia), and has been destroyed by them, and not by mullahs (mullahs would probably have destroyed Pakistan also, but they never had any power). If the only thing a person has to offer is his/her secularism and hatred of mullahs, then I am afraid he/she should get the boot also.

What Pakistan needs is a leadership, secular or religious, that can raise the economic standard of the poorest Pakistani. Plain and simple. It needs an Ata-Turk whose main claim to fame is not shipping Mullahs to sea, but to ship poverty to sea (something no Turk has been able to do). It needs an Amir-ul-Momineen whose claim to fame is not introducing Shariah, but introducing universal education (something no Arab has been able to do).

I was never more pessimistic about Pakistan than during the Nawaz Sharif days. BB and NS, and their cronies were robbing Pakistan silly. I have never been more optimistic about Pakistan, in my whole life, as I am today. This is not saying much, since I have generally been pessimistic. But I am now cautiously optimistic. Everyone (except me and a few other people) greatly underestimated Musharraf. He has completely turned the beaurecracy on its head. He has split up the corrupt business politicos. He has put the mullahs into retreat. He has not tried to turn Pakistan into Turkey (even though his own personal views are inline with the Turkish society), and he is cleaning out the miltitary. The large number of promotions to General ranks yesterday, will include people, whose ideology is perfectly inline with Musharraf`s. Now if he can only get rid of the feudals and their politically ambitious kids.

I raised my rating of Pakistan from sell to neutral about one year ago. Now I am raising my rating of Pakistan`s future from neutral to cautious buy.

Good article. We need to see more articles like this regarding religion. Instead of the extremist religous hate or love articles we always see.

``The effect of this policy would be twofold. It attacks the heart of the Molvi Industry . This policy decentralizes the extremely centralized structure of Molvism. More innovation is required in the field like handing over marriage ceremonies to professional lawyers, instead of Mullahs, with the pretext that they memorize the required Ayats for marriage. If a Muslim can perform all the culturally ritualistic acts himself or without the Mullah, like making a child Muslim, burying the dead, then the interaction between the Mullah and the ordinary citizen is minimized. The more the government cuts back on the opportunities available to the Mullah to interact with the citizen, the more the government is cutting back on the Mullahs sources of revenue, sources of mithai. The more long-term effect it will have on curbing the spread of this medieval plague by making the industry less lucrative and attractive.``

Well said! Welcome to Chowk.

Aisha Fayyazi Sarwari

Mr.Khar,

Nicely Done. I loved the examples:

``(Immigration to Afghanistan) Early part of the twentieth century large number of clergy from the Subcontinent gave a Fatwa that India is Dar_ul_harb because it is ruled by the British and Muslims should migrate to a Muslim countries.``

More specifically it was Mullah A K Azad, the `progressive secular nationalist` and the `intellectual` of the Indian revisionist Historians dream who gave this famous fatwa. Ha ha .. what a drumming down :)

``- The Khilafat Movement, spearheaded by the Jauhar Brothers and Mr Gandhi. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions took to the streets for a drunk Turkish Khalif, languishing in his harem. Mr. Jinnah did not join the Khilafat movement and criticized Gandhi for dirtying the politics of the subcontinent with religion. Eventually the Turks led by Attaturk booted out the Khalifa and brought the movement to a humiliating end.``

I remember once reading my cousin`s Matric Pakistan Studies book, and I asked him after reading about Khilafat Movement, if he knew why Jinnah`s name was never mentioned in the entire Chapter... the poor kid didn`t have a clue.

Thank God my parents put me in a British School where even for Pakistan Studies we had books like `The Formative Phase` and `Pakistan studies a Political Economy` both Oxford Published excellent books which presented the facts as they were and weren`t hesitant in criticizing leaders like Gandhi, Jauhar Brothers and Jinnah. Mr. Hamza Alavi and Mr.Khaled Bin Syed are the only famous Historians in Pakistan with a nationalist Pakistani view who takes a negative view of the Khilafat Movement other than moi ofcourse :)... Mr.Jinnah`s view of the Khilafat Movement was justified and vindicated.

``- Sayed Saheed Braili. A man completely illiterate but enthusiastic for war. Fervently rallied the Muslims in the present day NWFP region to wage Jihad against the Sikhs. Many battles were fought, won and lost. Mr. Braili himself was martyred while fighting the Sikhs. Legend has it, his head was cut while fighting and his body fell into the river. End result, the natives of the region, predominately Sikhs and Muslims were so weak after endlessly waging of religious war against each other that it paved the way for British to dominate the region.``

Not for the same reasons, but for others, I have an eternal dislike for figures like `Ahmad Shaheed` and Syed Barelvi, and Shah Wali Ullah.

What a drumming down of the Mullahs, Mr.Khar you are my kinda guy ... Here is an article I wrote on revisionism by Pakistani Historians in particular relation with Mr Muhammad Ali Jinnah our founder who incidentally never mentioned `Pakistan Ideology` during his struggle for Pakistan :

http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/

Nice write up, dude!!

Marginalize the Mullah(s).

Add one item. Since in Pakistan, the military calls all the shots, why not make it obligatory for everyone born in Pakistan to serve atleast 2 years in military service.

This way, every ordinary pakistani can get all the perks, privys, pay associated with military or atleast claim it. Just like OBL had access to dialysis in nice military hospital, even though he was not a pakistani citizen, atleast ordinary people can get treatment as well.

Thanks