Carnage and Casuality

re. HE #48: Good post! Very informative. ditto #63
re. _digit #49: Well said! saved me the trouble, and did so with your trademark eloquence.
re. rsaxena #whatever: Sure... send it over. Actually, I`m flattered you still read my posts (at least enough to decide where they belong! `sup? still haven`t been able to get yourself a life?)

re. intolerance of and violence against religious minorities in Pakistan.
Whatever the degree of ``intolerance`` (perhaps a more decriptive, precise word/phrase is needed) towards non-Muslims I cannot think of any instances where Pak Christians or Hindus have been killed, as have been Shias, for purely, or even primarily, ideological/theological reasons. The church massacres, heinous as they may have been, must corretly be viewed as `retaliatory attacks` for the US`s war on the Taliban (at least in the perverse logic of the perpetrators.)

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

Dear His excellency:

On Secularism

You wrote:

``I understand secularism as the state`s decision not to seek guidance from religious scriptures... ``

Why and how do ancient religious texts become important in how modern states are run? Why should the Government of any country take guidance from these often contradictory mythical books? Why isn`t our collective human experience good enough a model to guide us?

And how is saying that the state should be neutral in matters of religion and religious scriptures, an extreme position? None of this makes sense... In my view separation of church and state is a necessity for modern states like ours, and this is a considered opinion.

Meanwhile as Pakistanis we can only pray that Allah saves Pakistan from the `Islamic Ideology`.


On Iqbal:

You wrote:

`Before you debunk his ideas, you should at least know what he actually said.`

Aren`t you being a little too hasty in your judgement about me? Did it occur to you that I probably own the `reconstruction of religious thought in Islam` the book? Just maybe that I am well aware of his intellectual acumen.

I remain an admirer of Iqbal (and even more so of Jinnah) and the Iqbalian thought, but that doesn`t mean I agree with him on everything... perhaps had you known my previous ultra-nationalist incarnation (I will let you and others guess which one) on this board, you would have hardly accused me of this.

The truth is that Pakistan was merely born out of a fear of Hindu domination and not some idealistic notion of an Islamic utopia as you would have us believe. Perhaps that fear was somewhat justified given the rise of Hindutva and Soft hindutva within the secular Congress, but I also think that if magically one was to bring a time machine to Mohammed Ali Jinnah in 1940 showing him the theocratic abyss Pakistan has fallen into today, he would have gladly embraced Nehru and Gandhi for whatever his differences with them, they were nothing compared to the humongous gulf that existed between him and the thinking of the Mullahs. Advani is right... Jinnah had made many tall claims of Pakistan being a secular democratic state before and after independence.... today due to his followers, it is none ... neither secular nor democratic.

Now coming to the concept of `spiritual democracy`... great as it maybe, the whole idea is unworkable... and I am sure even Dr. Javed Iqbal, the keeper of the flame of Iqbal, knows it very well.

Here is my contention as a Pakistani secularist:

Pakistan has to realize that there is no point in looking west wards towards the so called Ummah for guidance in matters of governance... no need to look towards the taliban, iran, saudi arabia or even Turkey! The only model suited, the only model preferred by our founding father, Mr. Jinnah, is the `Indian Model`. Indian Democracy and the Indian secularism remain the only workable systems that can be applied to a state like ours... and that is the system we need to closely follow and adopt!

We need to realize that Pakistan was a Vedic/South Asian/Hindu nation before it became Islamic and that even today our unique position in the world is because we are the mix of all that... something of a sufistic nation, a mixture of Hinduism and Islam... and we must realize that as in Jinnah`s words `Blood is thicker than water`.


This is my view, it might be correct, it might not be... only time will tell.

-Manto

#62 by HisExcellency on July 25, 2003 3:35pm PT

That was a really good post, I`m glad there are at least some sensible Sunnis around, and I agree with you about the removal of the Taliban government, they do have a very deep rooted hatred not only towards Shias but towards anybody who doesnt follow the extremist version of Islam that they are so convinced is the right way.

#65 by UmerMurtaza on July 25, 2003 4:45pm PT
Like `bat` said, The taleban are responsible for the recent Shia massacre. OBL is also supposedly supported (financially) by the Saudi Arabian government, which is very strongly opposed to Shias because most of the leaders of Saudi Arabia belong to the wahabi Sunni extremists.

#29 by stuka

I regret the delayed response.

You asked:
``Fine. I agree that is the only issue. Now how are you going to get it?``

My response:
Your satire aside, I have responded to such questions before. I have always said that we need to wait, but keep raising the issue at each and every platform. I have gone as far as saying that trying to solve Kashmir issue under current backlash against Muslims is not in our favor. So we should wait for the better times, but enough hue and cry has to be made to keep the issue alive.

You wrote:
``Fact remains you need those Jehadis because your generals know you cannot win Kashmir in open war. If it involves the killing of Shias and the Talibanization of Pakistan and the marginalization of liberal society, so be it. Your establishment does not care and you are too dumb to notice the connection. By the way, would you like to comment on the Al Badr connection of the suicide bomber of Quetta? ``

My response:

The connection of this individual could be there, but you are going for an overkill.

1. Simply because few Afghan Mujahideens of yesterday formed Al Qaida and became terrorists later on does not mean that all Mujahideens were wrong. An overwhelming majority who participated in Jihad of the 80s is inactive now. Several of them are still pro-Americans.

2. Similarly, because CIA provided mis-leading information against tyrant Saddam`s Iraq to the Americans does not mean that whole CIA will be banned due to its inefficiency on this one count.

3. Closer home, just because few Indian soldiers have shot each other in Kashmir out of frustration does not mean that India would ban its Army by claiming that all Indian soldiers are regularly killing all other Indian soldiers.

If there is an Al Badr connection here then this is only 1 example of its kind. The fact is that this is the first example that a sectarian terrorist has come from Al Badr. The sample size is too small to make any scientific analysis and to come up with a conclusion.

Any person who comes up with a conclusion that freedom fighters of Kashmir are sectarian terrorists on the basis of this sample size would be dumb.

The truth is subsequent to 9/11, lot of Jihadi organizations have called off their Jihad. Therefore, thousands of their followers have given up Jihad as well. Any one attempting to go in a different direction would be a terrorist. If these thousands of people had any thing to do with sectarian terrorism, then whole of Pakistan would have been up in arms against each other. This has not happened. OTOH, a complete reversal has happened. The Mullas have jointly condemned such acts of terrorism. Although I am a anti-Mulla, In respect them for doing this.

The armed wings of sectarian parties have not participated in Kashmir. Lot of matter has been posted on sectarian parties by Faisal, His Excellency, Romair and more recently Urstruly has also expressed his viewpoint that these could have been formed by CIA to counter theocracy in Iran.

Pakistanis should feel comfortable in that there are no communal riots between any two communities despite killings. This proves that there is no sectarian hatred on people to people basis.

General Comment : If people were for once concerned about their own salvation than spending hours after hours writing posts quoting sheikh flah flah from Syria just to prove that shias are kafir, then perhaps Pakistan would be a much better place to live... infact the whole world would be a much better place...

What is this obsession with `kafirs` anyway?


`La Deen u kum wali u deen...`

Perhaps the people like the `Mainstream non-wahabi sunni` guy on this board should try and translate this Quranic Verse for once... or maybe they need a sheikh whatever from Kefaya land to translate it to them...

-Manto

Ref UmerMurtaza #65

[I was in the impresssion that Muhammed Daud, just before his overthrow by Taraki, had decided to accept the Durrand Line.]

Did Daud sign a formal treaty with Pakistan? If not, your government doesn`t have the fig leaf of a piece of paper to prove its claims.

Why is it that some Pakistani writers are now claiming that the original treaty was not for 99 years but forever, if Daud had agreed to a settlement of the frontier?

Has Hamid Karzai agreed to the Durand Line? Has the Loya Jirga of Afghanistan done so? How about the only ones who count: the tribes that are divided by the Durand Line?

UmerMurtaza:
OBL`s fed has shia groups ?! The taleban are responsible for the mass murder of shia hazaras among other things...i seriously doubt he has shias under his wing..

HisExcellency:(62)
Thanks for that post. It gave me some valuable information..it is very heartwarming to see so many concerned sunnis...

bat#64
[You said you cant pray behind them, i find that a little extreme but i understand it..]

heck! they don`t pray behind any one who isn`t barelvi and vice versa. they have divided the muslims into god knows how many sects and still have the cheek to claim to be the one on the RIGHT path.......

HE,

Can you explain why OBL`s terror fed has a number of shia groups if he is so anti-shia. Thanks.


Harimau,

`It cuts both ways. Afghanistan has never recognized the Durand Line and it is well-known that the Pak Govt`s writ doesn`t run in the tribal areas.`

I was in the impresssion that Muhammed Daud, just before his overthrow by Taraki, had decided to accept the Durrand Line.

Umer M.

re: #56 by bat

Thanks for your post. I am Sunni and have Shia friends who endorse the clarifications in your post. Here are some facts that might interest the chowk interActors...

During the second Benazir Bhutto government (1993-96), the federal government formed a task force to tackle the Shia-Sunni problem. As part of that task force, my father helped launch a media campaign on Pakistan Television and Radio Pakistan. (I assisted him with some research.)

In this campaign, the government introduced a special 1-hour program that brought together Shia and Sunni scholars to advise people on zakat, social and personal problems. The scholars would receive letters and telephone calls from anonymous people and then discuss the solution in the light of Quranic teachings. The purpose of this program was to dispel the propaganda that Shia beliefs are different from Sunnis. Since PTV and Radio are the most effective media in Pakistan, this program really helped in reducing the number of sectarian incidents between 1994 and 1996.

However, the extremist Sunni organizations are very well funded by their Wahhabi benefactors in Saudi Arabia. In 1995, they arranged for a jail-break in Sukkur Jail. About 23 convicted sectarian terrorists escaped (including Akram Lahori and Riaz Basra).

Since the PTV media campaign had already dispelled misconceptions about Shias, the only plank available to Sunni extremists was Misconception#6 i.e. Shias disrespect the first 3 caliphs.

Thus to protect the honour of Abu Bakr, Usman and Umar... the Sunni extremists formed Anjuman-e-Sipah-e-Sahaba (Conference of the Army of Prophet`s Companions). In Islamic context, the word ``Sahaba`` refers to Companions of Prophet Muhammad. The ass (sic!) was later renamed to Sipah-e-Sahaba-Pakistan (SSP) with Maulana Azam Tariq as chief.

The SSP gained momentum during the latter months of Benazir`s government. Quite a few Shia mosques in Thokar Niaz Beg area of Lahore were attacked in broad daylight. The escaped 23 convicts played a critical role in this sectarian resurgence. In 1995, the Commissioner of Sargodha (a Shia) was murdered while playing tennis in the Police club by Riaz Basra.

In retaliation, the Shias got Iranian money to set up the Sipah-e-Muhammad. The two organizations started attacking the various propaganda offices of each other across Punjab and Sindh.

During all this time, the SSP used Saudi money to print inflammatory material against Shias and used their Jhang headquarter as the distribution point. However, the weak PPP government of Benazir needed Maulana Azam Tariq`s support (he had four MNAs) in the National Assembly. So Benazir couldn`t move against the Maulana but still wanted him to restrain himself and not embarrass her government. At her behest, my father met Riaz Basra and the SSP chief Maulana Azam Tariq in an attempt to convey the message. Although Azam Tariq was still amenable to some sane advice, my father found Riaz Basra to be utterly fanatic. He even invited my father to leave government service and join SSP in its ``quest to rid Islam of its Shia cancer``! When my father conveyed the minutes of this meeting to Benazir, it was decided that SSP should be split.

Maulana Azam Tariq was arrested and then convinced to expel Riaz Basra from his party. He complied. The pragmatic Azam Tariq decided to pursue a political career instead of a sectarian one at that time.

But Riaz Basra formed his own faction called Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (the Army of Jhang). Since SSP was formed in Jhang, Basra wanted to remind SSP members that his party was the real Sunni extremist party... so they should join him instead (many did).

When Nawaz Sharif became PM, Riaz Basra assassinated a Police DIG in Gujranwala. The same month 60 Shia worshippers were killed in Karachi. Nawaz Sharif formed a committee to formulate a policy against sectarian violence. But before this committee could do anything, Riaz Basra began to threaten judges, police officers and even federal ministers of retaliation. Atleast 4 judges of Lahore High Court refused to accept cases against LJ activists because of telephone threats from Riaz Basra. In 1998, Nawaz Sharif`s motorcade passed over a bridge in Raiwind... the bridge blew up after 30 minutes. Nobody got hurt but Basra effectively sent a message to Nawaz Sharif.

Riaz Basra was able to do this because of the sanctuary provided by Taliban in Khost. Given the anti-Shia hatred of Osama Bin Laden, Riaz Basra was welcome in Afghanistan. As a result, Basra would plan an attack on some Shia mosque, send money through Hawala to an operative in Karachi, and then execute the attack from Afghanistan.

The removal of Taliban government is therefore a blessing in disguise for Pakistan. Pakistan needs a major intelligence operation backed by Police and Rangers to destroy the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi. These people have deep pockets and incorrigible hatred for Shias. They cannot be reasoned with.

re: #61 by arjun_m

Peace talks will at least reduce the conflict to manageable levels (i.e. pre-1999) where the two countries continue to talk tough or engage in diplomacy without triggering war.

Mobilization or war does not suite Indian interests either because it will scare investment away. Remember the travel advisory for India issue by U.S. last year? Perceived country risk is as bad for India as for Pakistan. Only Jihadis don`t understand this concept.

There is an interesting article in SA Tribune by Balraj Puri.

http://www.satribune.com/archives/jul20_26_03/opinion_balraj.htm

Basically he is arguing that India should explore a relationship with Pakistan in between the two choices of romanticized brotherhood and chauvinistic outrage. Successful talks do not mean permanent end to violence in Kashmir or removal of all differences between India and Pakistan. And failed talks also do not mean that India and Pakistan must go to war.

Whether peace talks fail or succeed, both countries will have to live with their differences without destabilising the region. For Pakistan, this means preventing infiltration (or atleast reducing it to acceptable levels). For India, this means preventing a war.

These peace talks will only lead to conflict management... not conflict resolution. Perhaps we will have to wait for another generation to resolve the conflict. For now, conflict management will do.

Re: Naqshbandi..

You dont have to agree with what shias believe in. Similarly, noone can say who a kafir is and who isnt. Thats for God to decide.
Just be tolerant and accept the differences.
We dont preach and we dont begrudge people who dont share our views, then why should that treatment be meted out to us?
I dont know of such an extremist shia group that you talk about, but im sure there must be because quite frankly and unfortunately theyre everywhere - then again there are wahabi sunnis right? thats the sunni extremists..
The bottom line is there are differences but its important to be ok with that. You said you cant pray behind them, i find that a little extreme but i understand it..

re: #53 by Mantolives

Spiritual democracy and politics were never given a fair chance in Pakistan. An essential element of Islamic democracy is education.

Iqbal was perhaps the most brilliant Indian intellectual of his time who wrote in Persian, Arabic, Urdu, English and German. Besides a Masters in Philolosophy from Punjab University, he also studied at Cambridge and finally got a Ph.D. from Munich University. To eludicate his ideas, I am providing a link to Iqbal`s masterpiece ````Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam``:

http://www.allamaiqbal.com/works/prose/english/reconstruction/

Before you debunk his ideas, you should at least know what he actually said.

In a country where 50-60% people are still illiterate after 57 years of independence, democracy and spiritual guidance cannot find true expression. Illiterate/semi-literate people can be easily be swayed by political demagogues and religious fanatics.

Nevertheless, the slow spread of education is bearing fruit. Twenty years ago a military dictator could imposed naked dictatorship in the country. Now, a veneer of controlled democracy is necessary. Musharraf was compelled to share his powers with Zafrullah Jamali.

The same Mullahs were happy to let Zia-ul-Haq wear his uniform. Now they are pressurizing Musharraf to quit as Army Chief. The only difference is political maturity. Elected politicians are answerable to the masses. And the masses expect some sort of constitutionalism and rule of law.

So I am very optimistic that Pakistan is slowly progressing towards the destination outlined by Iqbal and Jinnah. Settlement of Kashmir issue and regulation of madrassahs will remove the remaining obstacles in this journey.

..patrick, dude, can it..