Analysis of Stunning Gains by Religious Parties in Pakistan’s Elections

#59 Prem:

Well said.

To many of the Islamic countries, ``self-determination`` is a vehicle to
impose islmaization or become islamic republics at the EXPENSE of
non-muslim NATIVE population. The same thing applies in kashmir, applied in E/Timor-Indonesia.

Many of the opinion writers would like to argue the same treatment like E Timor to be applied to Kashmir. What they don`t say, is that E Timor with its christian population wanted to become SECULAR to the chagrin of
Islamic Indonesia. The same opinion writers do not say anything about
southern Christian sudanese, non-muslim algerians who get massacred by the thousands everyday by the ``throat-slitting`` variety of Islamists.

Another sweetner put forward by the APHC and its allies are that Kashmir would always remain ``secular``; Please give me a break!
The APHC`s mentor, Pakistan itself is an Islamic country with an islamic dispensation; Even Bangladesh which started as a ``People`s republic`` soon converted to ``Islamic republic`` at the expense of the non-muslim native bangladeshi hindu population.

There are other ``moderate`` islamists who say there should not be an islamic country unless 100% of the population is islamic. So, what is their solution? To drive out the non-muslim population either through coersive, economic measures/political measures. coersive measures can take many forms; like property rights for non-muslims diff from muslims, inheritance rights, etc, including physical assualt as it happened in Bangladesh recently and in 1971 when hordes of Bangladeshi Hindus as well as Muslims just kept coming to West Bengal.(If you don`t believe this, take a picture of a tram crowd circa prior to 1971 and post 1971). Political measures include voting rights, legal rights (like non-muslim witness would mean less, etc)

Prem#59 #64

Incredible! you should be a leader, dude! Prem for prime minister!!!

Prem

Post #59. Jeez man, kick ass....I always thought you were a Candle Holder, Gandhi loving ``Give to the Pakistanis what they want type of guy``

Damn!!!!

Your focusing on the opinion poll regarding the value/wisdom of ``armed resistance`` is just brilliant. This widely-shared ``self-evident`` belief is one of about half a dozen fundamental intellectual and moral flaws in a worldview that will never offer its adherents anything other than permanent war, endless bloodshed, and infinite self-generated hatred of all others.

I am shocked that many of these ideas have been given a totally spurious veneer of religion. When that happens, most people immediately stop thinking, and structures of violence, repression, ignorance, and stagnation repeat themselves in place after place after place, decade after decade after decade.

Pretty sad, really. Completely uncessary. Let`s pray this devilishly violent cycle is broken one day. We can all help by never ever giving in to it.

Romair,
#58

Sigh...whenever Kashmir is discussed, you go on this moral pedestal..& everything else be damned...personally, I think you were a tad too self-righteous in your ``moral`` judgement of Prem. May I HUMBLY suggest that you or I or any MORTAL being DONT have the necessary wisdom to morally judge others. So lets leave these difficult judgements to Allah/Bhagwan/God shall we?!

ESPECIALLY since you are Kashmiri, you are too close to the situation because of your personal bias...to judge ANYONE on this issue

If you quote ``neutral`` experts whose biases match yours (including Gandhi); it wont make an iota of difference to the overwhelming majority of Indians. Gandhi is just as anachronistic in India , as Jinnah is in Pakistan. If you find that sad, hypocritical &/or immoral...so be it.. If every other Pakistani, ESPECIALLY Mushy (IMO, that Pakistani`s view counts...dont matter what other Pakistanis feel), thinks it sad, immoral or hypocritical...so be it!! What do you think the Indian response is?! ``who died & made YOU God?!``...Now if you lament that it goes against universal human values--pray play your violin; as much as your heart desires...wont make a difference..

Havent you been listening to what I`m saying? I`m not expecting you to agree with it; at least reflect upon it...

These are some REALITIES, as I see it..right wrong or indifferent...

1) lets start out with the recent opinion poll....an OVERWHELMING number of Chowkies favor armed resistance...so peaceful resistance is OUT of the question...& a moot issue.. I feel if you poll all the citizens of the Islamic world today...thats the figure it`ll match (I know the Chowk poll was not confined to muslims only)

2)Personally, I think in the ``real`` world, as it stands today...the Islamic world (though it condemns terrorism) believes in ``freedom fights``. The Islamic world appaulds the suicide warriors of Palestine( overwhelmingly) & blames the underlying reason SQUARELY on Israel ...& its sugar daddy..the US. They maynot approve of the suicidal bombing itself...but FULLY support the stand that Palestinians should FIGHT with armed resistance. The religion itself (as interpreted by the mullahs) glorifies & sanctifies these acts as supreme sacrifice in the name of Allah.

3)The moderate muslims (& nobody really knows what their actual numbers are) may say this interpretation of the Holy Quran by the mullahs is flawed. But their voices are NOT heard over the din of religious bigotry..pure & simple...

4)NOBODY in this world gives a rip about Kashmir (other than India & Pakistan). The ONLY time they will intervene (& NOT necessarily on Pakistan`s side) is if it affects THEIR interests.

5) The US is the biggest cheese in the world. What it says emphatically GOES. In fact Bush has said that, if the crunch comes, (& Bush ultimately defines what ``crunch`` is), the US will throw out Sadam, whether the rest of the world (even its allies) support it or not. You & I & everybody else may think its hypocrisy...doesnt mean beans...when core issues are irreconcilabe, might BECOMES right...F*CK universal human values...thats why I say ``basic goodness`` & ``basic badness`` are the two sides of the same coin of human mentality...

6)``morality`` by itself is a very very grey area..it all depends upon your point of view.. if Indians consider IOK their ``land`` & the current residents of that ``land`` should be INDIANS, who the F... is anybody in this world to tell Indians that thats immoral? If the current custodians of that land dont want to be Indians...then by all means..leave!..go to the Paradise called Azad Kashmir! Is anybody holding a gun to your head & preventing you from doing that?!

7)Please understand this...the dominant discourse in the US (the biggest cheese that matters) has set a precedent in this ``New World Order``. Even Russia is applauded today for fighting against Chechen resistance! Did the US criticise them? They may not agree on the type of gas or the tactic used...but the entire world (that has the power to matter) has given solid backing to Russia`s stance.

8)Ergo...other than the muslim world..EVERYBODY has a consensus that armed resistance by SEPARATISTS has to be fought & NOT compromised with...

9) Against that backdrop... do you think that the powers that be in this New World Order will take kindly to guerella tactics used by the Kashmiri separatists?!

10)Get off your Polyannish optimism, Romair, it prevents you from dealing with reality...no matter how evil, unfair & hypocritical reality is...its REALITY..either accept it or live in a dream world...your standing on the pedestal wont get a thunderous applause from the audience...

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

Folks...

Is there nothing expect Kashmir to discuss on these virtual pages...the land of South Asia has a history of over 5000 years and these 5000 years must given us more than just the topic of Kashmir to discuss...right?

It is just a bit ironical that both the Indians and the Pakistanis, who are the self-justified and self appointed moral champions of Kashmirs and are willing to fight over Kashmir to the last Kashmiri, have never bothered to ask, what and how the Kashmiris feel about the situation.

If the Pakistanis hate the Indians and the hate is reciprocated by the Indians towards Pakistanis and each is of the opinion that s/he is better than the other, then who will these poor souls hate, when their hatred has destoryed the very reason for their hate, Pakistan and India, and there is no one left to hate?

It is a lamentable sight, when hatred is the only reason to live; it is understandble that a person must live to hate, but to hate to live, as Indians and Pakistanis are wont towards each other, is a pity.

Ciao

Reply Zeejah #48

“so who won? MMA or God?... :)”

Depends on whom you ask. MMA supporters might even claim that both did.

re: romair # 58


You are confusing issues.

Having given you succinct answers earlier, let me explain my answers to you. Let` consider moral, legal, and pragmatic bases of what we are discussing:

MORAL ARGUMENTS:

``Kashmiri-self-determination advocates``

I believe that it is criminal for some Kashmiris to talk of the right to ``self-determination`` when by self-determination they mean the right to deprive other Kashmiris of the latter`s basic right of legal and constitutional equality. Thieves and bigots aiming to deprive others of property and liberty do not have a right to self-determination.

I believe that when such criminals begin mudering other Kashmiris, it is the duty of the government to hit them so hard that others like them draw lessons from their condition. That is simple governmental duty, as Jinnah recognized. Murderers do not have a right to self-determination.

I believe when these criminals-turned-murderers also begin collaborating with outsiders, they deserve no sympathy. They get none from me. They do not have a right to self-determination.

The ONLY moral obligation that any civilized country owes to any individual within its domain is to make sure that he or she has the same legal/constitutional rights as any other individual, and that efforts are consistently made to remove unofficial inequities that exist in any society. This obligation itself REQUIRES the Indian government that it allow no part of Indian Kashmir to ever join Pakistan-where such principles of equality are NOT currently recognized- or separate from the nation-when protections of a central authority will be lost. No country has the right to adopt the official policy of throwing any of its citizens to howling wolves.


``Outsider-self-determination-advocates``

I believe it is absurd for outsiders to talk of the right of ``self-determination`` for Kashmiris on the basis of religion without giving exactly the same right to their minorities. Hypocrites carry no credibility.

When these outsiders not only talk of the these spurious rights, but actively engage themselves in criminal activities promoting the same, they cross a line that no Indian should ever accept. India should reserve the right to respond to these outsiders in the manner it deems most effective. Obsessively inimical states quickly lose sympathy.


``Indian-advocates of the kashmiri ``right`` to self-determination``:

Any democratic country can cohere and ensure everyone`s safety and respect only if its inhabitants agree on a basic principle of coexistence - that no group appears to completely threaten the existence of others, or that of the nation itself. Otherwise, we can look forward to much trouble. Nobody has a right to advocate that a nation of a billion people take such risks. We should not cut off our noses to spite our faces.


``Nehru said so bewailers``

Nehru said lots of things, as did Jinnah. Let`s leave the two happily burnt and buried.



LEGAL ISSUES:

I do not believe that either Nehru or Jinnah were playing fair with respect to Kashmir in 1947.

Even since then, neither India nor Pakistan have kept their hands clean of dirty shenanigans, unbecoming of the nations.

Consequently, the only thing that makes sense is to let Pakistan keep the Kashmir it has, let China keep the Kashmir it was gifted, and let India keep the Kashmir it has.

Trying to change the status-quo on the basis of fiftyfive year-old ``legal`` arguments at this time is not worth the cost of making such changes.


PRAGMATIC ISSUES:

1. Unlike free and regular elections, one-time referenda are an extremely flawed way of deciding things. People change their minds. Referenda of the sort being discussed here enslave people to one-time decisions. If Sindhi leaders who promoted the idea of merging their nation with Pakistan five decades ago were asked the same question today, they are unlikely to make the same decision in hindsight as they did when religious madness was at its peak and religious fears of each other were being sowed by vested interests. We can not let these elements play their dirty game again.

2. When one-time referenda are held, forces of religious fanaticism can and do whip up religious madness. Thus, referenda do not necessarily reflect the considered opinion of people. Nor are the people likely to stand by these opinions over the next hundred years. We have no right to use a fatally defective method to make momentous decisions affecting the lives of millions.

3. Everyday in India, a new separtist movement is born, and an old one cools off. Indian policy is/and should be to make sure that the benefits of a democratic set up gradually reach everybody. It can not be to let groups of people create their personal empires of bigotry. That is not the ideal any Indian should support.

========================

Do I believe in self-determination of the Indians from the British?

I would NOT belive in ``self-determination`` of Indians from the British under the following conditions: If

1. every britisher and every Indian had exactly the same legal/constitutional right in every sphere, including the right to occupy the throne.

2. Indians took part in British elections as equal members, deciding who would enter or not enter the parliament.

3. Indians could make sure that their languges/cultures would dominate in London, given their numerical superiority.

4. India had made its intention clear through its deeds and words that it would deprive its Christian population of their equal rights. That Pakistan was still granted freedom is a matter that does not seem right to me in a moral sense.

5. Britishers working in India had recognized India as their home, and did not look upon/ consider their stay in India as a bureautratic, if cushy, duty.

6. Given that Indians formed the overwhelming majority of the population, the courts, the parliament, even the palace for the Indian king/queen was shifted to India.

Under these circumsntance, I would not support Indian ``self-determination.``

And since Indians are a decent people, we would not even ask for ``self-determination.``

Self-determination is no absolute good. Pakistanis agree. As they proved in NWFP and Balochistan.

=======================

Do I believe in self-determination for Bangladeshis from Pakistanis?

I would NOT believe in Bangladeshi self-determination if

Each Bangladeshi was considered an equal citizens of Pakistan as any West Pakistani citizen.

Given that Bangladeshis were the largest numerical group, all central institutions were based in Dhaka or nearby, all major decisions were made in Dhaka in consultation with West Pakistanis.

If the dominant institution of Pakistan, the military, was largely a Bangladeshi outfit.

If a Bangladeshi who won the majority vote in Pakistani elections was allowed to become the Prime Minister, instead of being jailed.

If a completely alien culture and language was not brutally imposed on unsuspecting Bangladeshis, a group larger than any other group in Pakistan.

If Pakistanis did not treat Bangladeshis with utter racist and bigotted contempt. If in a country that didn`t take very kindly to Hindus, bangladeshis were not called aadha Hindu.

If West Pakistani military did not drag out Dhaka university professors and students from their dormitaries and kill them openly, along with millions of other Bangladeshis who perished only because they sided with Pakistanis in 1947.

If records did not exist proving that Pakistani army officers issued commands to murder Bangladeshis whose only crime was that they happened to be non-Muslims.

Under these circumsntance, I would not support bangladeshi ``self-determination.``

And since Bangladeshis are a decent people, they would not even ask for ``self-determination.``

Self-determination is no absolute good. Pakistanis agree. As they proved in NWFP and in Balochistan.

========================

What`s the point in holding hands and singing Kumbhaya?

None whatsoever, if our life is to begin and end with Kashmir. If that is going to be the basis of all our interactions, we should quit all efforts to reduce tension, dedicate all our efforts to making war, fight it out, until one of us is utterly and completely destroyed.

Holding hands and singing kumbhaya has meaning for only those who are willing to consider and work towards building an alternative mutual reality of peaceful coexistence.

I think that is a worth-while effort, a worthy enterprize, despite the heartbreaks it involves. Certainly, I don`t expect that everybody else will join me in this work. Many others are busy preparging for war. That`s their privilege.

Prem #55: Now we know where you stand. I would like to thank you for answering the questions directly. At least you are not a hypocrite now. You do not want peace and you are willing to state that openly.

You do not believe in peaceful self-determination for Kashmiris. Hence you support all the human rights violations being carried out against them by India. Nor do you support open journalism and freedom of press, since you don`t believe in allowing journalists access to Kashmir.

Do you believe in the self-determination of the Indians from the British and the Bangladeshis from Pakistan?

And how can a person who is supporting the killing of tens of thousands of individuals by his govt. talk about khumbaya and holding hands?

re: romair # 55

I hope, never in my life, do I have to avoid answering any question in a straightforward manner. Straightforward answers are always succinct. So, here they are:

A) ``could you state in one sentence whether you believe in peaceful self-determination for Kashmiris``

I do not believe in peaceful self-determination for Kashmiris.

B)

1) Given the opportunity, do you think a majority of the Kashmiris would vote to stay with India or separate? (Yes/No)

Yes. (longer version: I believe that given an opportunity, a majority of people in Kashmir valley (I think that is what you meant to ask, right?) will vote to separate.)

2) Was Gandhi`s stance on Kashmir based on self-determination for Kashmiris? (Yes/No).

I haven`t studied Gandhi`s writings on this, but perhaps yes.

3) Should the situation in Kashmir be exposed to the rest of the world through allowing the world press and HR organizations open access to it, thereby justifying India`s stance? (Yes/No)

No.

Prem #54: I am still unclear on your stance on Indo-Pak conflict. Barring your attempts at khumbaya, while simultaneously thwarting any peaceful solutions, could you state in one sentence whether you believe in peaceful self-determination for Kashmiris:

``If the people of Kashmir are in favor of opting for Pakistan, no power on earth can stop them from doing so. They should feel free to decide for themselves.```` (Mahatma Gandhi).

My stance on Kashmir is 100% identical to Gandhi`s, i.e. peaceful self-determination, and the fact that no force can stop Kashmiris from getting this self-determination. This is directly from one of Gandhi`s quotes. Gandhi was in the military as well. What are you theories on him giving such an opinion? Was it due to the structured environment, he was exposed to at one stage of his life?

Unfortunately, people like yourself, will not only try to stop this, they will even try to discredit the people who want to view this optimistically. I think you missed the following line in my previous reply:

``All these people are basically good people. .......I think the only problem is Kashmir. And in that, the main problem is misinformation...... That will end the, ``He said, she said,`` scenario. After that, I think a lot of opinions will change.``

The fact that you based your own argument on the following lines, which is exactly what I stated, indicates that you deliberately ignored what I sated,

``Individual psychological optimism is entirely different. It springs from one`s belief in the inherent goodness of human nature, the belief that residents of any nation are ultimately intelligent, capable, independent human beings; that these intelligent capable people will one day see what is good for them; and will assert themselves. ``

If you cannot even accept my optimism (specifically on Indo-Pak conflicts), and need to come up with a conspiracy theory to discredit this belief in me, then all I can say is may Bhagwan open up your mind and free it from hatred. People who are jealous of other people`s optimism have issues of their own. Maybe they want India and Pakistan to stay in a perpetual state of war.

Such are the arguments of individuals who want to avoid direct debates on issues and want to go off on tangents, where they feel more secure.

I have never once stated that Pakistan can militarily take Kashmir from India, nor have I ever stated that Pakistan should try to take any military action. I have always stated exactly the opposite, i.e. Pakistan should only fight purely defensive battles against India, and that there is no military solution to Indo-Pak problems. You can check my replies from three years back to today, with Chowk`s new feature.

So the moment I see anyone trying to reference me with a military solution to the Indo-Pak problem, it becomes very clear that they have an in-built bias. That they are trying to take the argument to a direction where they can make some justifications for India`s actions, rather than a direction where they have no argument. I have seen it so many times. I say India should allow human rights organizations into Kashmir to let the world see what is going on and I quote Gandhi and Wolpert.

All of a sudden, individuals like yourself and others, go on a tirade on military, Musharraf, how I want to occupy Pakistan through the military (for heaven`s sake, I am a private citizen, and a card carrying member of a civilian political party. What in the world do I gain from occupying Pakistan through the military. And how could I do so, anyways? And if that were my intention, don`t you think a more practical course for me would have been to stay in the military, rather than leave? I would appreciate it if you could explain in detail. If not, then why make statements like this. Is it allows the discussion to move away from the real topic.), and God knows what else, and how evil you think Pakistan maybe.

One has to form a basis to start a debate. Since we are on the subject, could I request and challenge you to answer the following direct questions. These are neutral questions, with no anamosity and only yes/no answers. I am still waiting for you and others to answer them directly, rather than giving theories on my past:

1) Given the opportunity, do you think a majority of the Kashmiris would vote to stay with India or separate? (Yes/No)
2) Was Gandhi`s stance on Kashmir based on self-determination for Kashmiris? (Yes/No)
3) Should the situation in Kashmir be exposed to the rest of the world through allowing the world press and HR organizations open access to it, thereby justifying India`s stance? (Yes/No)

shankar #51-53: ``If the people of Kashmir are in favor of opting for Pakistan, no power on earth can stop them from doing so. They should feel free to decide for themselves.```` (Mahatma Gandhi).``

The first question every Indian and Pakistani needs to be asked is whether they agree with the above. This separates the hypocrites from the honest people. I respect the Indian who says that they just want to fight Pakistan and will not have any self-determination in Kashmir, regardless of how many people get killed. They are honest. The people whom I don`t respect are the one`s who keep talking about peace and holdilng hands verbally, while completely the suppression of human rights. I would put Prem in this group. Their hypocricy is indicated by the unwillingness to answer direct questions.

Everyone has good and bad in him/her. It just depends on whether the good dominates the bad or vice-versa. The easiest way to check someone`s motivations is to see what kind of argument they present to a problem or a person.

Why do people want to discredit other people`s optimism.

Because they want to avoid the true argument. They will never anwser the question I ask, because deep down inside they know that what is being presented is a false picture and that what India is doing in Kashmir is wrong and that their own stance is in direct cotradiction with Gandhi`s (lets forget about Wolpert, for a while). You, at least, admit it. While most other Indians will not even agree to an open disclosure. If Kashmiris are wrong, well then disclose them to the rest of the world. What is the point of trying to analyze my background? Maybe I made up my whole background.

This is the misinformation I am talking about. People have been brainwashed. They will refuse to answer even obvious questions. They will start analyzing the person asking the question, when they have never even met him/her, in an attempt to avoid the question. What if I had said that I am actually a Hindu living in Karachi, and get prosecuted by Muslims, yet still presented the same arguments on Kashmir. At that point, Prem would have come up with a completely different theory on why I am optimistic. But he still would not have answered the straight forward questions, i.e:

I am actually in a position to give false theories, yet I don`t. The easiest thing for me to say would be that I work with Indians on a minute to minute basis and I think they are all morons and war-mongers and hate Pakistanis. You will never hear me say that, if anything, you will hear me say the opposite. Yet one sees so many people, including unfortunately you, who have never spent a day in the Pakistan military (or even Indian military) but have all kinds of conflict-based theories.

I am from Kashmir, I go there all the time and know the people. My grandparents spent their whole lives there, and left their life`s belonging there. Yet you will not see me say that Pakistan and India should have a military battle over it. I always try to give an argument based on UN, ICJ, human rights, self-determination, negotiations, open press freedom etc. But you will see people from as far off as Banglore, who have nothing to do with Kashmir, say that India and Pakistan should fight it out, if necessary, but India should never allow self-determination. This is bad enough, but then they will try to state that I am the one who believes in conflict.

This is all due to fears and false egos based on misinformation. Why can I say openly and honestly that Pakistan was wrong in East Pakistan and that Bangladeshis were correct in forming their own state, without coming up with theories about India`s involvement, yet people like Prem get tongue-tied and avoid the topic by pointing towards, ``evil`` Pakistan, and cannot make a similar claim about Kashmir?

If my argument on Indo-Pak conflicts was Pakistan-centric or Pakistan military-centric, shouldn`t I be supporting West Pakistan`s stance on East Pakistan? My argument is human rights centric, and that is why I think people like Prem are too scared to discuss it with me in the domain of human rights, and try to drag it into the domain of military conflict (where two countries can be blamed evenly). Why don`t I drag the 71 war into the domain of military conflict?

I still believe in the basic goodness of human beings. If that is a crime, well then shoot me. Maybe it is because I have had positive experiences with human beings of all colors and creed and nationalities. Why should I let negative people change my thought process?

I don`t think India can stay in a state of perpetual occupation in Kashmir, while not allowing anyone to see what is going on there. You seem to think that they shouldn`t, but they will and can. Prem seems to think that not only that they can but they should also. That is easier said than done. Soldiers are human beings. They are not machines. If you want to talk about pschological pressures etc., I cannot think of anything tougher than a soldier being in a lose-lose scenario of civilian occupation. Have you had a chance to talk to any Vietnam vets as your patients? (if you have, then you probably have more knowledge of this than me). They end up killing innocent civilians (which all professional soldiers hate doing, despite the propoganda) or they end up being killed by civilians whom they assumed to be innocent. And for what? No soldier was ever considered a hero for occupying civilians. No soldier wants to leave warfare against gurreillas as his legacy. They are trained to fight other armies, not civilians within their own boundaries.

Politicians have a lot of stamina for such wars, since they are sitting in the comforts of palaces, but the situation is different for the soldiers. Professinal oldiers, in any country, have a much stronger conscious than politicians and even than civilians (may sound odd, but I have found this to be true).

Pakistan and India have played all their cards on Kashmir. The last one was the deployment of the Indian forces. According to the emails I have received from friends in the military, India just about attacked Pakistan, when Pakistan tested the missiles. My friends told me they were working non-stop for four days, day and night to lauch a counter attack. Ask yourself a question.......do you REALLY think, India is willing to live with the type of situation in Kashmir and its after-effects in India, for the next hundred years? You seem to think it is willing to do so, but what is your analysis based on? If you were a soldier, would you like to spend ten years in Kashmir fighting a guerrilla enemy? Probably not. What makes you think any other human being would. How long can human rights organizaitons stay banned from an area, without at least someone noticing? I go to a lot of trade fairs and I know from experts that countries think ten times before investing in India and Pakistan due to nuclear war threats. How long before India (and Pakistan) have to take that into account?

All these things, and a belief that there is some goodness in human beings (even the one`s like Prem who try to discredit the optimism in others (sign of a sick mind, if you ask me)) is what forms the basis of my argument. The main force in Kashmir are its people. Musharraf, Vajpayee, Prem, shankar, Romair etc. are external powerless factors against such a powerful force.

Sooner or later, people will have to start giving yes/no answers to the questions, rather than avoiding them by giving long theses on optimism or politics or Musharraf. I think that time has just about come. The problem may not be solved soon, but things can only get better and not worse.

If that is too optimistic a scenario for some people, or if they cannot stand my optimism, then I can only feel sorry for them.

re: shankar # 52

To expect that anything good can come out of the mind of mushy is to expect that spring blossoms will burst out of a lunar rock.

But holding hands and singing khumbaya is important because we must put faith in common, average, every-day people. We must hold to be misguided the theories that the common Pakistani (or Indian) man or woman is utterly dumb, undeserving of respect, undeserving of an honest vote, or will remain, forever, an impotent cog.

After all, we are optimists! If change will not come from the top, we must hope it will come from the bottom.

Romair,

{{I remember reading or hearing somewhere that optimism is a sign of high self-esteem.}}

.....i think the WHOLE sentence should read....``...optimism is a sign of high self-esteem..OR Polyannish naievity``..

I`ve been a shrink for 20yrs now & in pvt practice for more than half of those yrs. I`ve come across 1000s of minds, from every culture...
In the US, psychiatrists in pvt practice see very very few ``crazy`` (ie psychotic) patients. ``Psychotic Disorders`` are only a few chapters in the vast field of Psychiatry. Most of the patients we see are ``Neurotics``...like you & I & everybody else on Chowk & beyond, who suffer from Mood Disorders, Anxiety Disorders, Personality Disorders etc etc...

Yes there is ``basic goodness`` in human minds...but there is ``basic badness`` in our minds too. Its ``universal``..not confined to hindu/muslim Indian/Pakistani...

Let me tell you that in this ``real`` world of ours...the Indian guy that you find very nice & professional & personable may just turn out to be a Jay...if you dig into his mind too deep. He may just be showing his ``basic goodness`` to you. At the same time, I`ve known a couple of real nice Pakistanis who are ``real Urstrulys`` behind my back. Heck..why ``personalise`` this to Chowk characters?...even the Pope knew that Hitler was butchering the Jews & didnt say a peep about it... I guess what I`m saying is that ALL human beings have their prejudices (even...gasp!.. `` neutral experts``)

When human beings feel VERY strongly about an issue...they will be willing to die for it. If jehadis are willing to kill themselves over their righteous cause...so will militant hindus. I hope you Pakis are still not buying that crap are hindus are inherent cowards. ...Just look at the sample of opinions of Indians here..vis a vis Kashmir..& these are the educated elite. I`m NOT judging their opinions as ``right`` or ``wrong``. I`m saying that India will not let go of Kashmir without a bloodbath. This aint India`s Vietnam...the overwhelming Indians strongly feel that Kashmir belongs to India...nothing short of a holocaust will make them give it up.


The heck with what ``ordinary people`` in Pakistan think..Mushy calls the shots. Mushy very frankly said recently in an interview..i think it was in Time...either Kashmir joins Pakistan or India,..the issue of independance is not an option.

Lets say, for the sake of argument, that a ``miracle`` happens & Kashmir is somehow ``solved``. Are you going to tell us that you think the army in Pakistan will just ``dissolve`` itself?! You think these generals will simply give up their perks for the greater ``good`` of the country?..Heck even the US govt has found a ``villan`` to justify bolstering their defence budgets! They are going to invent another reason to believe why India is a boogeyman. The same goes for India too.

Hey I got a PERFECT solution!!...Introspect on this O` ye introspective Pakistanis....Indians are ``beyond help`` when it comes to fixing their attitude about Kashmir. I mean c`maan...Maybe Pakistan should just accept that Kashmir is a lost cause...make LoC a permanent border...let all the Kashmiris in IoK who want to be Pakistani citizens pack their kit & cabbootle & move to PoK. I`ll bet you India will even reimburse their..er ``moving expenses``....Maybe a few dozen Kashmiri muslims will live in IoK..who knows, I mean at least Abdullah clan may stay behind....

I`m sure a reasonable guy like you, Romair, will agree to that solution. Yeah yeah...``but what about the opinion of the Kashmiris themselves; dont they have first dibbs to have their wishes & dreams met....u may ask``?!! Weeeelll, i guess they will have to compromise...at least 50% of their desires will be met...
A) they will become citizens of Pakistan..& all the rich benefits that go along with it
B) they can lead life of pure joy in Azaaaad Kashmir

I know you are NOT finding this funny..but I am..there aint no solution to this; pal...might as well nuke the whole place:)

Prem,
#50

Man...that was deeeep!..& wonderfully put..
I like optimists..no doubt about it...btw, where the heck is tahmed, these days? i hope he didnt take that haranguing on that ``bhayankar`` thread too personally:)

Pray tell me how all you optimists holding hands & singing khumbaya are going to change Mushy`s mind?! The guy`s a weasel .....I dont care how well Romair ``spins`` him to be the knight in shinning armor for Pakistan...he`s a weasel...pure & simple..& the buck stops with him.

Romair,

If my last few posts have ticked you off...do anything..give me all the gaalis you want...but please please please dont quote those urdu poets, hahn?!

A brown redneck from bfe Michigan like me aint got no cultural pizzaz to appreciate them...

Structural Optimism versus Personal Optimism

re: shankar # 36

shankar, you are trained to analyze the psychological motivations of men and women. And you do a great job of it. Individual pyschological trait of optimism, indeed, offers a magnificent advantage for those who have it.

However, there is a variety of optimism that has nothing to do with individual psychology, and everything to do with societal power relations.

If you look at the Pakistani army, you will easily notice that it (along with people associated with it in various capacities, direct and indirect) forms the MOST optimistic group of people anywhere on earth.

Why? Because its continued enslavement of Pakistani people is contingent upon the average Pakistani holding on to the optimistic belief that currrent structures and attitudes will bring him or her the ultimate deliverance, or success as the Pakistani army defines it for the nation.

I have been on Chowk for well over two years now. During this period, how many times have you and I read about romair`s declarations that ``Kashmir`` was about to be ``free`` within a couple of years? This kind of belief - and its regular communication to people - is absolutely critical for maintaining the legitimacy of the occupying army.

Such optimism (and such variations as that exhibited by hobbyty, since differences between hobbty and romair are completely superficial) is structural since it is promoted by institutions and then regurgitated by individuals. Its roots lie in the nature of societal power relations rather than in individual psychology. As such, its outcomes are entirely negative, with no redeeming societal value. Its function is to keep a nation happy while it is being pushed nearer and nearer the abyss.

Individual psychological optimism is entirely different. It springs from one`s belief in the inherent goodness of human nature, the belief that residents of any nation are ultimately intelligent, capable, independent human beings; that these intelligent capable people will one day see what is good for them; and will assert themselves. This belief sets a great store by the power and abilities of any people. The person who, for me, best represents this optimism is tahmed. This kind of optimism deserves great respect, and everybody`s support.

Since these two kinds of optimism are radically different in both their origins and their desired futures, they are bound to ultimately clash. It is in this clash, that I see my optimism. I think individual optimists in Pakistan and individual optimists in India should join hands, and help each other against structural optimists whose causes and interests are radically different from ours.

Ref Several posts of the Field Marshal

There is no way anyone could have said this better than Khalid Hasan. From the current issue of The Friday Times:

Here comes the hirsute brigade

Khalid Hasan

The Americans are no less worried by the election gains of the MMA than Pakistan’s barbers and hairdressers. Women are to be required to wear that awful thing called the hijab. Since the world began, women have tried to find new ways of beautifying themselves, and that is their privilege. The hijab is one invention that immediately turns a woman into something unbearably drab. If you put a hijab on Marilyn Monroe, she would be indistinguishable from, say, the late Phoolan Devi

ll things good and bad come to an end, and so have the elections. What is to follow is of course another matter. There may be uncertainty in the air but of one thing we can be certain. This is bad news for barbers. The hirsute ones are coming. General Pervez Musharraf who takes credit for everything, done and undone, true to form, has also taken credit for this phenomenon.

No longer can Pakistani representatives in Western capitals begin their conversations with, “But you know the religious parties have never taken more than two or three slots in parliament.” This standard opening served our diplomats and visiting delegations splendidly for many, many years. Often, it was able to clinch an argument and even during the years of Zia-ul-Haq when this dragon’s harvest was being well and truly sown, this gambit served to deflect criticism that Pakistan was going fundo. Well, surprise, surprise. Pakistan has gone fundo and Zia-ul-Haq rests in peace at last.

How can we ever express our gratitude to the Pakistan Army? Whatever we are today, we are because of our Bahadur Mussalah Afwaj (stirring sounds of the national anthem whose words 99.9 percent of the population of Pakistan is unable to understand, rise in the air. Stand up everybody). I think this grateful nation should pin another medal on the General Musharraf’s chest, though it appears to be running out of space. Perhaps he should be respectfully asked to put some of them in storage, as museums do with their art collections.

The Americans who have maintained near silence over the election results are no less worried about the future, speaking privately than, say the All Pakistan Anjuman-e-Araish-e-Gaisoo, or in less ornate language, Pakistan’s barbers and hairdressers. Between Maulana Fazlur Rehman, Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Maulana Sami-ul Haq “Sandwich”, Maulana Shah Ahmed Noorani of the India-ink beard, Prof Sajjad Mir who used to be perfectly normal once, believe it or not, should have at least a donkey load of hair, give or take a few kilos. It is hard to believe today that this country was created by that elegant, immaculately dressed gentleman Mohammad Ali Jinnah. Are they going to put a beard on his face as well? After all, a beginning has already been made by the federal secretary with his directive that all who draw their salary from the exchequer begin wearing “the national dress” whose only advantage is that the wearer will never know how much blubber he has put on.

My friend Mir Jamilur Rahman has warned in a newspaper piece that the holy warriors of the MMA are all poised to have Friday redeclared the weekly holiday. I suggest they go a step further and have Sunday abolished altogether so that it no longer exists on the calendar to dilute the piety of the faithful. Women are to be required to wear that awful thing called the hijab. Since the world began, women have tried to find new ways of beautifying themselves, and that is their privilege. The hijab is one invention that immediately turns a woman into something unbearably drab. If you put a hijab on Marilyn Monroe, she would be indistinguishable from, say, the late Phoolan Devi.

The MMA, writes my friend, is also determined to “end vulgarity and obscenity” on PTV. I would suggest, it go a step further and end PTV itself since, along with Radio Pakistan, PTV makes up the twin otters of dullness and disinformation. Like that poet in Julius Caesar, it should be killed for its bad verses. And what is it that the MMA find particularly sinful on PTV? It turns out that bareheaded women in sleeveless shirts and jeans do not let the maulanas sleep at night. Perhaps they have stolen a leaf from Mian Nawaz Sharif’s book who once wrote out a memo in his own hand directing that “these jean-jacket boys with long hair” should be banned from TV and, further, that the satellites that brought down “shameless Western programmes” should be “jammed.” Had he succeeded, we would have seen Star Wars in our own time.

The Pure Ones also want to abolish co-education once for all. Why don’t they go ahead and abolish women themselves because the female of the species it is that appears to bother them the most. The great contradiction of the mullah is that while on the one hand he leches for women, he detests them at the same time. My first visit to Iran after the Khomenei takeover was instructive. Everywhere, there were signs that women should on no account be seen without the chador, nor should their hair be visible to the naked eye. It struck me that the edict had come not from women but men. Women had no problem at all with looking their best and wearing nice clothes. It was only the mullah who felt in need of “protection.” So the sinfulness lay not in the appearance of the women but in the hearts and minds of those who issued such decrees. It was they who needed moral reform.

At the height of the Taliban terror, Kishwar Naheed wrote a lovely poem that began: Wo jo bacheeyon se dar gaye (They who felt threatened by girl children). But the Taliban were across the Durand Line in Afghanistan. This is happening right here and now under the rule of a man who is afraid to be seen in public with his dogs. Mir Jamilur Rahman wrote that the MMA was also of the view that women should not travel by the same public buses as men. He added that if this were to be carried further, it could well lead to the demand that there should be separate passenger aircraft for women.

But more sinister is the determination of the MMA leaders to implement the Hudood punishments. It is typical of the hypocrisy of those who have ruled us that none of them had the decency or the courage to strike off these primitive laws. While Nawaz Sharif because of his father or out of his own inhibited outlook was unlikely to have done so, Benazir Bhutto was afraid that if she acted, the mullahs would come after her. What she did not realise was that they were going to come after her anyway. General Musharraf began on a promising note but soon retreated into the reactionary cocoon that Pakistani leaders have fashioned for themselves. The mullahs, thrown up by the general’s shenanigans and the genius of General Tanveer Naqvi, will begin to chop hands, stone adulteresses and blind others on the “an eye for an eye” basis before long. Is there someone to stop them?

Someone wrote to a newspaper the other day that he was going to leave Pakistan the day Maulana Fazlur Rehman became Prime Minister. Since no other country would give a Pakistani a visa, he was proceeding to Papua New Guinea where no such restrictions existed. My advice to him is to hurry before Papua New Guinea also slams the door shut.

actually wot happened in the elections was that firstly, the govt knowingly or unknowingly played into the hands of the bearded brigade by giving them a `book` as an election symbol... after that ofcourse, the `book` became the Holy Quran ... and ended up becoming the mullah who was standing for the `book`...a walking talking `Quran`...
then, ofcourse, the mullah`s on friday exhorted ppl to vote for the Quran and not for the Qaffirs...
and all the talibs in all the madrassas had ID cards... and used them to vote in mullah power...
so who won? MMA or God?... :)

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

#45 by Romair:

``I think the only problem is Kashmir. And in that, the main problem is misinformation. I think both Indians are Pakistanis should agree to allow completely neutral parties open access into Kashmir, on both sides, and let them show the whole world what is going on. That will end the, ``He said, she said,`` scenario. After that, I think a lot of opinions will change.``

Repeat after me: ``Kashmir is the symptom of the malaise between the countries and not the problem.`` Memorize it and be prepared to repeat it in class tomorrow morning.

shankar #36: I remember reading or hearing somewhere that optimism is a sign of high self-esteem.

I am actually quite optimistic on India-Pak relations, due to very practical reasons and experiences:

I have worked in the Pakistani military and have seen that side of things. I have worked with Pakistani civilians and have seen their views also. I have now worked with Indians on a hourly basis for five to ten years. This is a pretty broad spectrum. In all three of these situations, I have gotten along extremely and genuinely well with the groups and vice-versa. This cannot be a coincidence. All these people are basically good people.

I think the only problem is Kashmir. And in that, the main problem is misinformation. I think both Indians are Pakistanis should agree to allow completely neutral parties open access into Kashmir, on both sides, and let them show the whole world what is going on. That will end the, ``He said, she said,`` scenario. After that, I think a lot of opinions will change.

re: shankar to romair
``...If there is one thing I`m really jealous of you- its your undying optimism:)...``
I think that you should author a psychiatric profile on the Pakistani military mind. This undying streak of optimism has been noticed by others as well:
Shielded from most criticism and scrutiny, furthermore, the (Pakistan) army has pursued flawed strategies to wrest Kashmir from India. To this end,it has repeatedly made overly optimistic assessments of its own prowess,uncritically assumed the reliability of potential allies, and routinelyunderestimated India`s military tenacity and political resolve.
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20021101fareviewessay10000-p10/sumit-ganguly/pakistan-s-slide-into-misery.html

Re: Romair and Wolpert
I would like to add another tidbit to Wolpert`s lecture in Karachi in January. This lecture was delivered just before the Danny Pearl beheading in the same city. I wonder whether Wolpert, who makes numerous references to UCLA faculty and their spouses, knew what was soon coming for one of his colleagues, Professor Judea Pearl of the UCLA Department of Computer Science and Engineering? I know now, because Judea Pearl was my professor, and his son Danny was to die in a few weeks not far from where Wolpert was hectoring.

Re: Romair and Wolpert
In this battle of posting Web links to bolster one`s case, may I humbly submit this editorial from yesterday`s Washington Post (Nuclear Enabler: Pakistan today is the most dangerous place on Earth)?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8422-2002Oct24.html
Not only is it of more recent vintage than Wolpert`s speech, but the author is far more well known and recognized than Wolpert. A delectable quote, `Pakistan`s role as a clandestine (nuclear) supplier shatters the Bush administration`s efforts to paint that country as a flawed but well-meaning member of the coalition against terror. Pakistan today is the most dangerous place on Earth, in large part because the administration does not understand the forces it is dealing with there and has no policy to contain them.`
Elsewhere you had mentioned that you repose great faith in the average Pakistani voter. This newfound faith is news to us - for months you had been haranguing us that Pakistan does not need any elections and that democracy will never work!

re: Mush` s dilemma
The mighty ``muhajir`` and the ``ulimate whore`` has a dilemma. How to accomodate a third partner? The days when he had to contend with just one (Taliban) was fun. He is sure to be nostalgic about those days. Then came 9/11 and Uncle Sam wanted a piece of his A$$. Mush had no choice, so he spread his legs a little wider. Now comes MMA, asking for a piece of his ever-shrinking A$$. Mush knows this is going to be tricky but is putting up a brave face.
There was a time i thought Mush could actually be the best bet for Pak. How mistaken i was! This dictator is behaving like any other dictator would: like a self-righteous, megalomaniacal idiot. He thinks he has all the right answers. He goes thr` this charade of democratising Pak while concentrating more power in his own hands. Considering the 2 nations had similar problems and baggage to start with in 1947, how far have we grown apart!
Sridhar

Ref Field Marshal turned Political Analyst who is Always Correct #34

[My prediction about a status quo change in Pakistani politics proved true beyond my wildest expectation.]

Yeah, right!!!

[But who the hell would have thought maulvis would end up filling the vacuum.]

You mean, you didnt?

[However, one must agree that only the maulvis could have kicked out the feudals and the sardars. None of us armchair revolutionaries and Hoodbhoys could never have done it.]

Yes, only Allah, or His representatives on earth the mullahs, could have done it!

[In the next phase kicking out the maulvis should not be that hard.]

You planning to run against the Koran, boy?

[I think the Kashmir issue is closer to solution than ever (which may or may not mean much).]

It doesn`t mean much.

[It is killing both countries.]

You wish.

[Pakistan has basically given up its claim on Kashmir, and is willing to accept anything the Kashmiris decide.]

What claim has been given up? Plebiscite in Kashmir is just a codeword for joining Pakistan. Have you guys removed that clause about officeholders in Azad Kashmir and Northern Areas having to swear fealty to Pakistan?

[India has used its final trump card (piling up all forces on the Pakistani border), and it didn`t work. It is itself pulling back its forces, with no success vis-a-vis Pakistan, in Kashmir.]

We at least held an election that, even if `farcical`, is considered better than what you folks had in Pakistan, with an even better result.

[What else is left for both countries to do? Now India just has to agree on accepting the wishes of Kashmiris. How long is it willing to carry this economic albatross around its neck, in the current state? I think Indians are too intelligent to not realize that it`s about time to talk.]

Has Vajpayee said anything about talking to Mushy-boy?

[Once Kashmir problem is solved, the relations between India and Pakistan will be excellent within a decade, since there are too many commonalities.]

There is absolutely no way Mushy is going to modernize/moderate anybody in the next ten years, let alone in an eternity. So, we just have to put up with you Fakhrs.

Reply Shankar #36

Brilliant!

And I actually think that you`re right - Romair does look on the bright side of most situations, and that`s a good quality.

Ref Field Marshal #23

[One of the best sources of info is Stanley Walpert - perhaps the most knowledgeable, well-reputed and most quoted person on South Asia. He has written the most authoratative biographies of Nehru, Jinnah and Gandhi. Following is a speech he delivered in LA. It is a MUST READ for every Indian and Pakistani who wants to leave behind his/her biases and is willing to indulge in some introspection.

(http://www.lawac.org/speech/wolpert.htm)

Wolpert`s views on Musharraf, as well as his views on Indo-Pak conflict resolution (and Gandhi`s), are 100% identical to what I have been trying to say for two to three years.]

So, like I actually went to that website to see what Wolpert has to say about Kashmir.

And he says, like, the `K` in Pakistan stands for Kashmir and so the Kashmir Valley must go to Pakistan. He doesn`t address, like, what India must do with its 120 million Muslims. I know what he would have said, like, India should behave in a Christian manner and keep them in India while only Kashmiri Muslims should be allowed to go to Pakistan, taking Kashmir with them. Like I have no problems with the Kashmiri Muslims going to Pakistan, except that they aren`t taking like any immovable property with them.

And he says, like, Ladakh should go to China. This would, like, sit well with the Field Marshal who is perfectly willing to sell, like, everyone to China.

And we all thought, like, Yasser Latif Hamdani was, like, the only fan of Wolpert!

Ref hamidm2 #20

[MMA`s moderation drive has started .....

``One of the parties in the group has attacked the choice of Akram Khan Durrani as nominee for chief minister of North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) because he lacks a beard.......

..... and yet there are some hopeless fools on the chowk who actually believe that the mullah can change his spots ..................]

Too much Macallen seems to have caused you to quote from the Bible, The Other Book: ``can a leopard change his spots or the Ethiopian his skin?``

In keeping with the dominant religious discourse in Pakistan, you might want to ask, ``Can the mullah shave his beard?``

//#34 by Romair ..... Pakistan has basically given up its claim on Kashmir, and is willing to accept anything the Kashmiris decide. India has used its final trump card (piling up all forces on the Pakistani border), and it didn`t work.//

why do you think ``Pakistan has basically given up its claim on Kashmir``? Among other factors - it is also because India has sent a very clear message to Pakistan Army on how far it could push the envelope. Uncle Sam now knows the Paki contribution to the global terrorism - so also the rest of the world - including their Chinese benefactors. The game is basically up for Paki Army - no support from anybody for any more misadventures against India. With nukes under tab of uncle sam - what else could Pakis do!!!

With kashmir out of the way - there is no more hindoo bogeyman to beat against. the stage is set for a very nice domestic fireworks inside the land of pure. With the Fundos (MMA - rhymes nicely with ``Mama Mia``) in charge in Islamabad the snake pit of pakistan is now everybody`s headache - not only India`s. With J&K settling down after a ``cool`` election shower, hindoos are planning to drive straight on the economy road and watch the show from across the border. Mushy boy is getting ready to perform a heck of a circus a with clowns MMA and ring master USA.

Romair,
#34

If there is one thing I`m really jealous of you- its your undying optimism:)
Please dont ever give it up, even if I think its kinda Polyannish...

even in the unlikely event God condemned you to hell, these are the ``Top 10`` things you`ll say to ..er..revitalise yourself:

1) Atleast I wont have to spend an eternity with the likes of OBL & Khoemeni...
2) We S.Asians can tolerate any amount of heat...
3)Think about the unlimited chinese food & bhelpuri I`ll get to eat..
4)I wont have to worry about praying 5 times a day & fasting for a month at a time..
5)Most of the sexy sluts will be going to hell, so I wont mind my company that much!
6)besides...orgies & debauchery will be perfectly kosher..er halal, so even better..
7)we can always kidnap...i mean borrow... a few houris from heaven...different ones every day & night...
8)you heavenly guys have to treat them like sisters...
incest is prohibited in your hallowed dimension.....you characters can be sure they are going to do a hell of a lot more than feed us grapes...
9)it seems the only thing one gets to do in heaven is grovel at the ``feet`` of God & then flit like faires from one cloud to another, playing a harp..twang twang, twang twang....maybe fun for a day or two...but for an ETERNITY!! yikes!!! foggetaboutit!!!
10)pain & suffereing is a good thing...it makes one introspective & change for the better...in 10 yrs or so, hell will become more successful than Singapore!...

rozaiba #31: I agree with most of what you have stated.

Most maulvi leaders say a lot of stupid things. I think they say them to get votes or cause problems for sitting govts. I doubt they are so stupid in reality. After all, they seem to have outsmarted everyone by winning so many seats. And they have been in politics for decades and many drive SUVs and live in big houses with multiple kids studying abroad.

I think they are all politicians first and maulvis second. They, like all politicians, want power. They are just using religion. Now that they have it, they will soon water down their stupid comments. If they don`t, then I think they are really stupid.

Anti-MMA Punjabis should consider themselves lucky that the PML(N) didn`t realize it would lose so badly, and thus refused to ally itself with the MMA. Had they done so, their combined candidates could have won big in Punjab. For example the JI candidate, Hafiz Salman Butt was a joint PML(N)/MMA candidate in Lahore and he won (I got to hand it to the Lahoris, they vote for every thug student leader and every corrupt Sharif brother, but they don`t vote for Imran Khan who built a free cancer hospital for them. Go figure.).

People were really fed up with the staus quo politicians, for all the right reasons. That is the only reason why they voted for maulvis. I don`t believe the conspiracy theories some people on this site are throwing around, trying to justify democracy on the one hand, while simultaneously trying to discredit the people`s vote. One cannot have it both ways. If someone doesn`t accept the people`s vote since it didn`t turn out the way they expected, then they shouldn`t cry for democracy when dictatorships are in power.

shankar #28: You seem to have given up. Since I consider you one of the sane Indian voices on this site, that is quite unfortunate.

I certainly haven`t given up. Infact, these elections have revitalized me. Even though my party got its butt kicked (one seat), by the maulvis. My father was approached for an NA seat by PTI. He didn`t take it (thank God, since it would have been an embarrasing loss), but he is still an active member, and for some strange reason I feel like we are really making a difference (even though we aren`t because PTI only won one seat).

My prediction about a status quo change in Pakistani politics proved true beyond my wildest expectation. But who the hell would have thought maulvis would end up filling the vacuum. However, one must agree that only the maulvis could have kicked out the feudals and the sardars. None of us armchair revolutionaries and Hoodbhoys could never have done it. In the next phase kicking out the maulvis should not be that hard.

I think the Kashmir issue is closer to solution than ever (which may or may not mean much). It is killing both countries. Pakistan has basically given up its claim on Kashmir, and is willing to accept anything the Kashmiris decide. India has used its final trump card (piling up all forces on the Pakistani border), and it didn`t work. It is itself pulling back its forces, with no success vis-a-vis Pakistan, in Kashmir.

What else is left for both countries to do? Now India just has to agree on accepting the wishes of Kashmiris. How long is it willing to carry this economic albatross around its neck, in the current state? I think Indians are too intelligent to not realize that it`s about time to talk.

Once Kashmir problem is solved, the relations between India and Pakistan will be excellent within a decade, since there are too many commonalities.

23 by Romair:

``One of the best sources of info is Stanley Walpert - perhaps the most knowledgeable, well-reputed and most quoted person on South Asia. Following is a speech he delivered in LA. It is a MUST READ for every Indian and Pakistani who wants to leave behind his/her biases and is willing to indulge in some introspection.``

If, after more than 300 years of colonial rule, we in the sub-continent still need a white man to tell us what is wrong with our neck of the woods, then I don`t think any power in the Universe can help us.

Romair, Why are Pakistani students and doctors being refused visas to the West, why are Pakistan sailors not allowed to disembark at ports and why does the name Pakistan turn up in just about any corner of the globe where a terrorist incident occurs? Just read a sampling of letters to the editors in Pakistani newspapers and you get the feeling that the most unwanted person on the planet is a Pakistani. A little bit of introspection is in order here before passing judgement on any other country.

Be that as it may, if you want to quote unbiased opinion, 19000 people were polled for the Weasel Awards Competition (weasel being defined as anyone who is trying to get away with something). For the award of the Weasleliest Country, Pakistan tied with Iraq for 3rd place with 18 % of the vote, just behind Saudi Arabia in second place at 23%. If there`s any consolation, all three countries were way behind, no surprise, France with 34%. See http://www.comics.com/poll/show_results.jsp.

romair:

If the religious parties support has declined in Punjab, that says something. Right after the war in Afghanistan began, it was only on the first friday that there was some level of protest against it on Mall road Lahore. If it weren`t for the media attention, there was nothing to suggest that a superpower was out to get the brother muslims in afghanistan.

so MMA has made good use of sentiments where it could. that the faujiz were out to break the ranks in other parties (releasing loan defaulters like sherpao and others) helped MMA further.

in any case, deobandi-wahabi based parties are deeply detested in most Punjabi circles. Even the tablighi jamaat`s processions are mocked.

i haven`t met many politicians. I have met maulana fazl-ur-rahman. he is arrogantly stupid.

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

is there possible for PML Q or PPP to follow the agenda of MMA as one of these have to get MMA support to from Govt....steps announced by Fazalur Rahman and Qazi Ji are.....

- elimination fo Co Education .......which is practically not possible right now considering the current available education resources and infrastructure, any sudden change to already effected system will bring great disbalance for both genders in level of education

- Some one has to explain me,how having Friday as holiday making Pakistan more Islamic country?...changin holiday is not a joke as used by Mr Bhutto for political gimmik in 1977.

- Sending US forces back home,,,i dont think PPP can follow this agenda and PML Q has to think 1000 times beofre doing this....it could bring great danger to Pakistan security and no Govt in power spcly PPP & PNL Q afford that.

- Cable channel.....well cutting pakistan from the world ,,,,not make sense, as ther are few paki channels to on cable like Indus, Jeo News etc.....However it seems any Govt can take this action to please MMA by not thinkin the concequences...

- Intrest free economy,,,,u got b kiddin,,,,,,any way, Qazi Ji knows its not possible in current econimic situation,,,l


So what PPP and PML Q will do, may b this is one of the reason for current deadlock situation ........MMA knows if they want to keep whatever vote bank they have , they cannot withdraw their demands,,,,,,PPP ,KIngs Party, i m feeling great sympathy to these parties....,
-

Romair,

As you like to point out, my views are that of a layperson. I`m just pointing out how I see things as they stand today. I maybe right, I maybe wrong....in any case, my view is not going to make any changes or difference in the ``real`` world...or even in Chowk, for that matter...Far be it in my power (or yours) to affect the view of the leaders of India & Pakistan.

I think you know where I stand vis a vis the Kashmir situation. However, as you can see, it is a minority view even among the Indians on Chowk. Whether you or I or anyone else thinks its a shame or a sad commentary of the dominant discourse of our times; its immaterial.

So this is how, insignificant ol` me, sees it....whether I`m right or wrong , wont make any earth shattering difference in the real world or in Chowk...Ultimately, the only judge, whose opinion is important is God`s...

1)IMHO, God seems to be totally disgusted when His children fight & kill each other (& invoke His name, in the same breath). So I think He has washed His hands in these matters (whether its Kashmir, Palestine, Kurdistan, Chechnya) or any other conflict in this world. So, basically, I feel He is going to let His children do what the heck they please & leave all divine judgements to the after-life.

Hey..thats just my ``guess`` ....& your ``guess`` is as good as mine...

2)the rest of the world is REFUSING to take sides on the ``core`` issue of contention between India-Pakistan. At the most, if its ``internationalised``, the world mumbles something to the effect that India & Pakistan should talk. When India refuses to talk because of X,Y or Z reason (ofcourse, they blame Pakistan for X, Y & Z)...the world just throws its hands up & indicates ``do what you goddamned well please, after all, its your graves..not ours!``...

I have not seen ANY country(s) outrightly coming on Pakistan`s side & twisting India`s arm.

3)Every country views this problem, from the perspective of THEIR interests....``human rights``, ``freedom`` & other universal values make nice ``feel good`` speeches for leaders to espouse in State of the Union speeches...but foreign policy is based on INTERESTS & INTERESTS only...anybody who laments that it should`nt be so, ought to wake up from their naieve slumber...

The way I see it, this is what the world is telling Pakistan about its ``righteous`` stance...

a)US & the West: ``Clean up your own ``sh*t`` first...before you fight for someone else`s cause....cos your ``sh*t`` is a greater potential threat to the Western interests than Kashmir``...(by that I mean Pakistan being a ``safe haven`` for Al-Qeeda)``

They really dont care whether Pakistan thinks Kashmir is ``their`` cause...

..Now that the MMA has a greater say & want the Americans out; & Pakistan being suspected as the country that gave the N.Koreans nuclear knowhow...it isnt helping Pakistan`s cause any...

b)Islamic world: ``polite murmurs of ``support`` & ``solidarity``, but gives India a wink & nod...& its ``business as usual`` with India..

c)China: sitting on the fence. Tilting politically with Pakistan, but has refused to be confrontative with India. In fact, China is boosting business & tourist relationships with India. Certainly no ``arm twisting`` there..

d)Rest of the world: ``we dont give a sh*t what you guys do...we have our own problems to deal with``..

4)Forget about Wolpert...Gandhi has long been an anachronism in India...just as Jinnah is in Pakistan...As a whole, Indians are becoming more militant. Even moderate Indians are turning confrontative. Mistrust for Mushy (& by extension for Pakistan`s army) is UNIVERSAL...

So no matter what Wolpert says, wont make a difference..

Now you can spin this any way you want & lament how evil India has become...the bottom line is India is saying ``we dont give a sh*t what Pakistan thinks of us & if Pakistan feels that they can bleed India, they got another thing coming``...

So Pakistan can celebrate a million ``moral victories``, to her heart`s desire; lament how evil India is, to her heart`s desire; quote the poems of Ghalib & Iqbal to her heart`s desire...call India unintrospective & ``shameless`` if you want...India`s answer to Pakistan is the same :``who f-ing died & made you God?!``

Right, wrong or indifferent...that is REALITY..atleast how I see it.
So Indo-Pak relationship is doomed in the forseeable future. Both countries would rather live in a toilet; than admit they are wrong....that is the naseeb that humans ``earn`` when they have false pride...the rest of the world, ultimately, gives jacksh*t what happens to S.Asia...they have their own demons to confront...

IMHO, when God Himself doesnt intervene...why should any country?
In such situations, might BECOMES right. The weaker party always claims ``moral`` victories & the stronger party always creatively twists morality to suit its own interests. Heck, if the strongest & ``greatest``nation sets that example...why should any other country be different?! This is not just the US...EVERY dominant civilisation has bullied weaker civilisations in history. The more things change, the more they stay the same...

Reply Ferozk #14

“The ``name of the game`` of the 2002 parliament is compromise and unless MMA learns to comprmise on some of its positions, it will find itself becoming increasingly isolated in the affairs of the parliament and it will revert to its original intention, which would be that of a nusiance party ``spoiling the broth`` for the other political parties in parliament.”

Jee HaaN Ferozk Sahab, yeh tho maiN ne bhi kaha thha – I’m just wondering what you think they will actually DO? Are they ambitious enough to compromise, or do you think that they will remain focused on beards and burkahs? Is their extremism sincere or opportunistic?

“Hence, there is no reason to fret over the election results, because in a Mitternichean sense…”

I remain, Sir, in awe.

Regards

Reply Arjun_m #12

Arjun – your point about the Turkish Army/Islamic parties being on opposite sides when it comes to democratisation/secularism is taken. I’m not so sure that the Army/Islamic parties are such great buddies in Pakistan, however – remember, there IS a fatwa out on poor old Mushy. The IPs are not monolithic.

rozaiba #24: Quick answer: Less

Detailed Answer: The parties that constitute the MMA contested the previous election as an alliance of all religious parties, except JUI(F). The later contested independently. The alliance did not win any seats in all of Pakistan. JUI(F) won 2 seats out of the total NA strenght of 210+. The total religious seats were thus, less than 1%. I think JUI(F) won one seat in Southern Punjab and one in Baluchistan.

Shah Noorani, Qazi Hussein, and Fazl-ur-Rahman (actually his father Mufti Mahmood) are amongst the oldest political leaders in Pakistan. Noorani and Mufti Mahmood were part of every joint opposition against sitting govts. since the Bhutto days.

MMA, with their current success, seems to have scared the bermuda shorts and spaghetti-strap shirts off nearly every Chowk Pakistani. For some reason, I am not scared. I actually think it is part of a cleansing process. Maybe I am naive. Or maybe I have a lot of faith in the common sense of the average Pakistani voter, and feel that, once he is freed from the shackles of the, ``mainstream, all of a sudden liberal and progressive`` angelic feudals, he will not let Pakistan down. The maulvi brigade, are a different type of problem, but they are a stepping stone to that freedom

the MMA`s strength in the Punjab assembly is less then 3%.

Does anyone know if that is an increase or decraese from prior years?

shankar #13: The topic you are discussing is very subjective. Different views, depending on whether one is from India or Pakistan. I would highly suggest that Indians and Pakistanis rely on international sources for information on their conflicts. This is what I always do.

One of the best sources of info is Stanley Walpert - perhaps the most knowledgeable, well-reputed and most quoted person on South Asia. Following is a speech he delivered in LA. It is a MUST READ for every Indian and Pakistani who wants to leave behind his/her biases and is willing to indulge in some introspection.

shankar #13: The topic you are discussing is very subjective. Different views, depending on whether one is from India or Pakistan. I would highly suggest that Indians and Pakistanis rely on international sources for information on their conflicts. This is what I always do.

One of the best sources of info is Stanley Walpert - perhaps the most knowledgeable, well-reputed and most quoted person on South Asia. He has written the most authoratative biographies of Nehru, Jinnah and Gandhi. Following is a speech he delivered in LA. It is a MUST READ for every Indian and Pakistani who wants to leave behind his/her biases and is willing to indulge in some introspection.

(http://www.lawac.org/speech/wolpert.htm)

Wolpert`s views on Musharraf, as well as his views on Indo-Pak conflict resolution (and Gandhi`s), are 100% identical to what I have been trying to say for two to three years.

However, if Indians are unwilling to believe me, because I am a Pakistani, I can understand. If they are unwilling to believe Wolpert, I am concerned. If they are unwilling to believe the man they themselves call Mahatma, then I am afraid they are doomed. If my views, Wolpert`s views and Gandhi`s views on such a situation are identical, then would it be incorrect to state that Indians perhaps are unwilling to indulge in any introspection?

I thought they`d win quite a lot of seats, the scale of the sweep was shocking though, special thanks should be made to the following groups for the MMA`s success;

1) The Intelligence Agencies; by splitting the PML and other parties they allowed the MMA to win on seats where they normally polled 2nd or 3rd. They also tipped the playing field for certain candidates
2) Nawaz Sharif, who invoked the principle of the enemy of my enemy conceding countless seats in Punjab and NWFP to ensure the defeat of the Hum Khyalis
3) Aftab Sherpao who did the same, allying himself with the MMA and PML Quisling to ensure the ANP and in particular BB`s partys defeat (special mention of course to Naseerullah Baber who both the MMA and Sherpao were gunning for)
4)Low voter turn outs which favours well organised parties,
5) Qazi Hussain Ahmed applied a highly successful formula which he used in the local govt elections, he focused on striking up local alliances for the MMA, this worked well in the frontier where he shared power with the PPP-ANP in Peshawar and other places.
6) The PPP stabbed the ANP in the back with their electoral alliance, by fielding candidates agaianst them and basically dicsouraging their workers from voting for ANP candidates and vice vera.
For the MMA, they could theoretically expand on this victory if they try to take control of the PML(N) who despite losing badly did poll a large number of votes (in fact they exceeded the MMA) increasinly rudderless the PML (N)`s lower rank and file could be added to the MMA especially in Punjab..but that would depend on how quick the MMA dumps Nawaz for the kursi..
Their win in Karachi has a lot to do with the pashtun influence their, general disenchantent with the MQM and it`s thuggish style of governance, and the JI`s local govt control of Karachi and Hyderabad.

For the politicos the next serious election run should be the next local govt elections in less then 2 years, the constituent parties of the MMA have histocirally never done well in local elections so that should be interesting. For those who want detailed breakdown of seats polled the best web site around is http://www.heraldelections.com

why is mma so loud on coeducation and so silent on bomb blasts?

MMA`s moderation drive has started .....

``One of the parties in the group has attacked the choice of Akram Khan Durrani as nominee for chief minister of North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) because he lacks a beard.

A statement issued by the Jamaat-e-Islami said the central council of the alliance had not been consulted, and stressed that the chief minister`s appearance should comply with Islamic Shariah law.``.......... BBC

..... and yet there are some hopeless fools on the chowk who actually believe that the mullah can change his spots ..................

Romair

Your post was unfortunate. Nawab Sahib being opportunist? opportunist to do what - earn plots? import/export liscences? unpaid loans? I think Nawab sahib is the only MAN alive in Paksitan today who has always stood tall against any adversity, be it the dictatorship in uniform or fascism in the clothing of ganji jamhooriat or jiali jawani jamhooriat. He has always challenged the forces who have ever violated the constitution of Paksitan. How can he be opportunist? His character assasination cannot reduce his stature. But then people assasinate the characters of prophets too. This 80 year old, bony skeleton of a young man will always be remebered in the annals of history of Paksitan as the rebel with the noblest of the causes. May God protect him and give him long life. Amen.

sadna #15: Yeah, it will be nice to have a regional distribution of winning parties in Pakistan although for Pakistanis it is straight forward win in Pushtu speaking areas that stretch from northern tip to well into Balochistan on the western side. Most of the MMA leadership comes from this area as well.
Aside from that the victory at one or two Karachi seats is also in largelt Pushtu speaking areas. In Lahore, three seats to JI are definitely assisted by PML(N) support. Islamabad always had a sizeable JI support among Mohajirs and most Mohajirs did not switch to MQM like in Karachi. Additionally arrival of large number of Afghans has produced support for Fazloo and the winning candidate had strong ties to shopkeeper community in Islamabad. Reducing of each constituency size in this election (by increasing the number of seats from 200 to 272) also increased the influence of Afghans in certain constituencies in Karachi and in Islamabad. Until this election, Islamabad did not have enough population to have a full seat. Neighboring villages were part of Islamabad constituency where local caste/ baradri/ tribal affiliation as well as local sufis group were strong and tipped the balance in one of their candidates. This time, Islamabad city had one full seat and neighboring villages another. The Islamabad-I seat went to MMA and Islamabad-II went to PPP with backing from local sufis/ pir group.
PPP won in rural sindh and southern Punjab whereas Sarkari parties won mostly in rest of Punjab (excluding Lahore) and few in Sindh and Balochistan.
If fair and free elections are held again soon, MMA will lose at least half of their gains because PPP, ANP and other parties will put up joint candidates against them in NWFP, the MQM will work on better voter turnout and PML (N) will not make alliance with MMA in Lahore. The Sarkari party will lose almost two third due to PML (N) and PPP alliance n Punjab. A new mandate is terrible scenario from Musharraf`s point of view.

Urstruly: I hope you are not serious about Nawabazada being the conscsoius of Pakistan. I certainly don`t consider that guy the the conscious of anything. All he does is show up when someone needs to confront the govt., gets his five minutes of fame, and then leaves. Has he done anything productive, in any capacity, other than that? Please read Journey to Disallousinemnt by Mazari, which describes Nawabzada`s opportunism in detail.

Ferozkek: I agree with your comments.

I think people`s assesment of the, ``mainstream`` parties being deliberately sidelined by Musharraf in the areas where the religious parties won is incorrect. The mainstream parties like PPP and current members of PML(N) never win in areas where MMA has won (NWFP, Baluchistan, urban Sindh). The political parties with influence in NWFP were ANP, NAP, PML(Q). In Bhutto`s original big win in West Pakistan, in early 70s, PPP got one NA seat combined in NWFP and Baluchistan. The only influential PPP family in NWFP are Sherpaos, and they have split away and joined Musharraf`s camp in this elections. The powerful PML folks in NWFP are Gohar Ayubs, Saifullahs and Mir Afzals types. All of them were part of the Q league in this elections. ANP generally supported Musharraf. Asfandyar Wali was Musharraf`s envoy to Afghanistan. NAP`s Ajmal Khattak supports Musharraf.

So the MMA defeated purely pro-Musharraf parties in NWFP, i.e. the parteis he was supporting, not the ones he was sidelining. They defeated Saleem Saifullah (Q president of NWFP branch), and Mir Afzal`s nephew Abbas Sarfraz (minister in Musharraf`s govt.), Gohar was sidelined due to Bachelors degree condition (his son ended up winning. Asghar Khan/Omer Asghar Khan is also very popular in Hazara area. And he is a strong supporter of Musharraf (Omer was a minister in Musharraf`s cabinet).

In Baluchistan, the parties in power have always been ethnic Baluchi sardar parties/independents with some PML(Q) power. Not the mainstream PPP and PML(N) parties. All the PML leaders again migrated to PML(Q) in this area. The Baluchi sardars were neither pro nor anti-Musharraf.

In Karachi, (where MMA won also), they defeated MQM, another strong Musharraf supporter.

So the MMA actually defeated all pro-Musharraf parties. If Musharraf rigged the elections in the areas where MMA won, he did a very poor job, since his own supporting parties lost.

Anyone supporting democracy, has to tolerate the MMA, even if he/she hates them. They were voted in by their constituents. Pakistan is not a maulvi country. MMA was voted in (rightly or wrongly) to improve living conditions by the poor, not to make Pakistan more religious (otherwise MMA would have won every election). One cannot blame the poor folk for voting for them. After all rural NWFP and all of Baluchistan is literally the most backwards areas in the world. What the hell have non-religious parties ever done for them?

I think the MMA will end up moderating itself far more than it will religionise Pakistan. After all, it isn`t easy running a province. If they banish co-education, where are they going to find the money to put up separate schools? If they end interest lending, what are they going to do about the loans taken out by NWFP govt? And where will they get new loans for development? How are they going to get foreign investment into NWFP, if they completely try to alter Pakistan`s foreign policy?

People also need to keep in mind that MMA leaders are politicians first and maulvis second. They cannot agree on each other`s interpretations of Islam, yet they have agree on political expediency. Are Qazi and Fazl great Islamic scholars? No. But they are powerful politicians. They are using religion to get into power, just like Army uses guns, businessmen use money, feudals use land, MQM uses the Punjabi bogey, sardars use ancient tribal traditions. Now that they have power, they are not going to sacrifice it by taking a confrontationalist stance with the central govt. They are shrewd enough to send their kids to USA for studies, while simultaneously saying they will end co-education because they feel it may get them more votes. The moment they realize it will lessen their vote bank, they will change directions, like all politicians.

All said and done, MMA is a bad option. But a better option than the status quo feudal parties (which are still in power through the PPP and PML(Q), but their power has been diluted by the MMA), which had completely destroyed Pakistan.

The minorities and well-off men and specially wel-off women will however be adversely effected by the MMA. This is the group all of us Chowk Pakistanis belong to.

But all the doom scenario conspiracy theorists need to be asked one question: Do you really think things could get any worse than they have already gotten under the status quo leaderships