Terrorism, Sectarianism and the Military

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

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

Assad:

``I`m not sure I`ll get an answer... but why is it that is a very definite majority of instances, it is Indian interactors who will begin resorting to crude nationalistic epithets (Pakis, Pakiland, etc)``

Hmm, you have us confused with the Angrez. I use Paki all the time and it is simply short for Pakistani. No epithet implied. Pakiland too is just a translation of Pakistan.

Now I am not saying epithets are not used. They are: Puke-istan and its variants, Jehadi etc and you will see them once in a while. But don`t confuse normal shortening of a word as an epithet. The Brits use it as a gaali for both countries. The desis don`t.


`` and ever-so-funny alterations of peoples handles?``

Thats something we learn in our schools. Not in class I mean, but in regular interaction. Your popularity to a large extent is defined by your ability to provide cutting edge wit at other people`s expense. I am being facetious ofcourse. :)

There can be NO peace between India & Pakistan; as long as Musharraf & his motley crew of generals are runnning the dominant discourse in Pakistan. Since Mushy & his denizens are firmly entrenched themselves in the power structure of Pakistan

---

peace with that country is not going to be in India`s naseeb.

If Pakistan ever has a PRAYER to progress in the 21st century; it has to make peace with India. India, OTOH can live with constant enimity with Pakistan & STILL progress--though will be able to progress much faster if there is peace.

I just came back from a 2 week visit to my beloved Bombay. Its been 10 yrs since I visited India. This visit gave me the rare opportunity to talk to Indians first hand & see for myself the changes that have taken in Bombay (in particular) & the India (in general) .

When an Indian goes to India after a hiatus of 10 yrs--all one does is go from house to house for breakfast, lunch & dinner...(family & friends get ``offended`` if you dont EAT at their house!!:))

The bottom line is that I was impressed with the economic & educational progress India has made in the past 10 yrs ( & that too with a guerella war fought in Kashmir, drought last yr & other social & political setbacks). Indians, today, are more confident about their future than Pakistanis are --(judging by the way the average Pakistani thinks on Chowk).

All this progress has continued DESPITE the war of a 1000 cuts. The dominant discourse among ``intelligentia`` in Bombay (atleast the ones I met & whose opinions I actively sought), is that peace is IMPOSSIBLE with Pakistan

---

as long as the Pakistani military is calling the shots . The most REVILED & DISTRUSTED Pakistani is the great Gen. Musharrraf himself.

Y`see, in the larger scheme of things it DOESNT matter what the Pakistani awam (both the educated & uneducated) think of India or ``Hindians``.The Pakistani awaam`s opinion has RARELY mattered in that country`s sad 55 yr history. The Indian awaam OTOH has played a part in shaping the future of India & continues to do so....so their opinions DO matter.

Indians are accepting the fact that Pakistan is a bad rash that India has to ``endure``

---

along with the 100s of ``bad rashes`` Indians have /are enduring . The miracle, IMO, is that India has progressed DESPITE that & has STILL retained a ``semblance`` of democracy; which (by 3rd world standards) is a ``pretty well running dysfunctinal political`` system.

When it comes to ENDURING hardship & still moving forwards; India deserves the World Cup. So; go ahead Pakistan & thump your ``pride`` to the world. The rest of the world`s opinion about Pakistan is far different from what the average Pakistani thinks of his country.

Unfortunately, your country is HIJACKED. The whole world knows it; but you continue to deny it. I`m not saying India is a shinning example; Jeeze--far from it!...but when we compare ourself to Pakistan`s plight today--India has some hope--after all!

Indifference of Pakistanis.

Pakistanis used to protest. I have heard and read (too young to have first hand experience) that people did come out against Ayub, they did agitate against Zia. In one case succeeded to ease the man out, in the other failed to have visible success.

I am pretty doubtful if it is possible to point out one or two straightforward reasons for the reluctance of Pakistanis to come out. Few are as follows:

1. People, poor and lower middle class, the usual nucleus of agitation movements, have realized that army or no army – government have nothing for them. Regardless of the colour of the regime they have got to go through same daily life hardships. So why risk even more.
2. Society with cyclic military intervention gradually lose the will, tradition and mechanism to agitate ... retiring in a sort of politically dormant state.
3. Non-Pakistanis cant have an idea about the magnitude of propaganda and indoctrination Pakistanis have been through till now about the invincibility, quality, patriotism, gallantry of the armed forces, literally elevating them to something extraordinary, capable of making no error. In every major chowk of bigger cities you will find an old tank, fighter aircraft model of missiles and so on. Thus rendering every direct and indirect talk/action against army as a capital offence. Reactions of some interactors to my modest piece of protestation should be enough to corroborate this.

Ref: #51 by faisaluno on July 17, 2003 6:18pm PT

Yes, Mr Faisal, I am physically as well as mentally just a kid. To tell you truth, I am not a very bright kid either. How can I be? Questioning the integrity, honesty and intentions of the military is by standard a proof that the dissenter is a moron. Thanks for your kind offer, please do recommend me at Dawn (children section).

To demonstrate my childness once again, let me repeat the question I have asked three times (Have yet to get a comment). Keep this point in mind and you will hopefully see yourself that in sahiban se kuch baeed nahin.

An interesting point put forward by some Raja Ibrahim on the discussion forum of the SAT. “By the way how can one respect/like or not hate those who can ignite an ammunition depot in the middle of a city of 1 million to cover up their own loot. Yeah, I am talking about Ojhri Camp. See, India (and Pakistan too) avoided civilian targets during 1965 and 1971. But our own generals didn’t mind putting a big city on fire themselves.
And you still talk about everything else but not the real crooks and have the courage/guts to defend/condone them.
I am sad, extremely sad to observe this inexplicable callousness.”

Before some of gentlemen start their typical emotional blackmailing about soldiers defending the motherland, risking their lives and so on, I would like to pre-emptively add:

I have absolutely NOTHING against poor guys standing guard on our borders while we sleep. I SALUTE them. Actually, some people tend to forget the tragic facts that those who lay down their lives on the borders are not who get awards and plots. In some cases we don’t even accept their dead bodies (remember NLI and Kargil). Many true Shaheeds normally don’t even get proper burial.
As someone wrote on South Asia Tribune, begum of a general with aching back has much higher priority at a CMH than that of a hawaldar from the LOC with Indian bullet in his chest.
See, that hawaldar will be put in a stinking jawans’ ward, while civilian drunk teenager son of a general will get the best possible treatment in VIP awards. Can anyone deny?

In short, a handful of senior officers, those very individuals who are very fond of playing messiahs, are in reality the biggest curse for the nation.

Re: 49

C`mon, Nasir.. its pretty well known that stopping a determined militant is pretty damn tough. especially suicide attackers. The Israelis are grimly determined to stop Palestinian attacks and have one of the most effective and ruthless counterterrorism outfits around. They surely manage to foil attacks, but so many get through. So to jump in and say that the army - actively or indirectly - encouraged the Quetta massacre is kinda disengenuous.

Just as a possibly pedantic point of order... the formal induction of bigotry into society was surely carried out by Bhutto and his Ahmedi-as-nonMuslim declaration. The actions of Zia in furthering that are acknowledged by all, including the army. And only warped individuals like Hameed Gul praise Zias policies.

I remain unclear as to why, if there is such a firm existing Mullah Military Alliance, why the mullahs are persistently indulging in actions and statements that seek to reverse anything domestic and foreign that the Musharraf gov has achieved. Well, except that to your eyes, they`ve achieved nothing or achieved negative results.. so is the MMA working to benefit your own desires? Egad.. Interestingly, the secular political parties seem much more closely tied to the MMA than the military does at this point.

And really.. referring people to the South Asia Tribune? Considering the difficulty that the people working there have in stringing together a sentence, I find their articles to be.. well, never mind. You really, REALLY have to hate Musharraf to find it worthwhile...

Cheers, AK

I`m not sure I`ll get an answer... but why is it that is a very definite majority of instances, it is Indian interactors who will begin resorting to crude nationalistic epithets (Pakis, Pakiland, etc) and ever-so-funny alterations of peoples handles? And this despite the eminently superior textbooks, GDI, water purity, decreased EM radiation etc!

Of course, even as I was typing this out, a message by dost-mittar (very much an exception to this almost-rule) popped up...

Cheers, AK

Hassan Nasir,

In direct opposition to your (and, OK, I`ll mention it) the SAT, have you peeked at Khaled Ahmeds article in the latest Friday Times? Be sure to keep your antihypertensives handy!

Cheers, AK

Hello - As far as textbooks in Pakistan read this report (The Subtle Subversion) by a Pakistani NGO, Sustainable Development Policy Institute at their website http://www.sdpi.org
It sounds like the rot in the teaching of History in Pakistan started in the Zia years - the fact that Pakistanis like this group and Mr. K.K. Aziz (of ``The Murder of History``) are dedicated to working towards a more balanced approach to the teaching of history in Pakistani textbooks, shows that this propaganda will not ultimately succeed … due to the efforts of Pakistanis themselves.

In India we need to be mindful that given the current political climate this could happen here. The ongoing debate about ``Nehruvian - JNU`` history and efforts towards politically motivated revisionism needs a society that is engaged. Bias in history is a tricky thing ... while history is always being revised in light of new research ... I hope (and expect) that Indian History will not be mangled due to politics.

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

Who is to blame for sectarian terrorism? Is a very good question?
Since 9o’s Pakistan became a play ground for Saudis and Iran’s
Who were fighting for what we call greater Islam and then there were
Taliban element of course which was more then exploited. Pakistan’s
Intelligence Agencies first warned Iran’s Interior Minister in 94 about there
Intelligence Agencies involvement in funding some of the Shiite’s Organizations working in Pakistan and then there were load of allegation and counter allegation from both sides. Then we (Pakistani Intelligence Agencies) had a break through in
Quetta we caught some cheques which directly showed Iran’s involvement in the
‘Greater Islamic game’, our foreign Minster and Interior Minster flew off to Tehran and the Iran’s again denied everything and then we showed them everything they needed to shut up their operation. Then we had elements like Lashkar-e-Jhanvi and
Sipe-Sahaba, which were made by ISI and had there backing in some of the operations, we had killings of doctors, lawyers and Hakims Seed and we all wanted to blame everything on MQM. It’s a bitter reality that what ever happens in Pakistan somehow or the other had Army backing to it at some level. ISI has created a state within a state where only khaki men is safe. I know it’s unfair not to blame Politicians in the game of greater Islam but the truth is they were not involved in state serious affairs any time.

His Excellency:

You cannot have it both ways. The term disputed territory means nothing. If Indian Kashmir belongs to Pakistan, then the Pak Army`s mission is to liberate it. Something which it has failed to do.

If Iindian Kashmir is Indian, then there is no coz for dispute and the Indians have no reason for aggression against Pakistan proper.

Which is it?

What next? Blame the army for the loss of the World Cricket Club?
The army may be responsible for many ills but hardly for sectarian violence. I have no doubt that army teaches the hatred for Hindus in the same way that the rest of the Pakistani institutions do but nobody ever accused it of teaching hatred of shias. Has anyone even tried to ascertain whether Musharraf himsef is sunni or shia?
The problems mentioned in the article are present in India as well where the army stays firmly in the barracks. The main culprit is the law enforcement agencies, especially the police, who lack the training to fight the communal viruses affecting their societies because they are themselves affected by it. It is time that the police are trained to view both the criminals and the victims for what they do and not what their belief or faith is.

HisExcellency #23

`` Fact: More sectarian clashes and deaths occured under civilian rule (1988-1999) than under military rule. Of the four military rulers Pakistan has had, only Zia promoted sectarianism. The other three were moderate rulers who espoused religious harmony and tolerance.``

Conveniently ignore the fact a lot of Sunni extremist groups have ties to the military.

`` Fact: Pakistan`s business community, professionals, middle class and international community like Musharraf. Only disaffected/corrupt politicians and Indians hate him. Since neither Indians nor corrupt politicians are relevant in Pakistani politics, Hassan Nisar`s article is simply reflecting a ``minority`` opinion.``

Why does Musharraf try a sham referendrum ? Run against a political opponent in a presidential election !!!

Maharana,

I sincerely doubt that you`ve seen a Pakistani textbook. I know I`ve never seen an Indian textbook. What I HAVE seen are the nature and quality of Indian interactors on chowk. And all I see is indoctrination and utilization of `conventional wisdom` thats on par with the most ignorant of Pakistanis. I`ve looked at primers on Urdu and English and have yet to find one in the market that has k for kaafir in it, just as an example.

By the by, if we have a humanitarian event where a Pakistani facility helps out an Indian because it has superior tech/services (yes, I know, its impossible, its ludicrous, its frelling science fiction, etc) I assure you itll be headlines in Pakistan and not quite as large headlines in India.