One Afternoon

ferozk #29 the distinction you make between free trade and fair trade simply gives cover to what is clearly dysfunctional practice in the long run from the point of view of all countries, rich or poor. politicians can use euphemisms to hide the fact that they are sacrificing long term interests of the country to gain short term brownie points from special interest lobbies. you and i dont need to do that on chowk, since we are a discussion group and not politicians.

the fact that the germans, french, japanese, US protect their farmers does not make restrictions on agricultural exports from developing countries right. the fact is that free trade ultimately benefits rich and poor countries alike, and the logic behind the theory of comparitive advantage in economics hold true as much today as when it was first put forward a couple of hundred years ago.

#10 by Romair on October 21, 2003 6:19pm PT
++
It is the fact that Indians know next to nothing about Pakistan, and thus get heavily influenced by anti-Pakistan sources, within their own country.
++
...i wonder if you could get another human to back up this theory....

...aah! shucks.... forgot to mention.. except Ahmadzai ofcourse!!!...

++
The average Indian view, and even the above average Indian view, of Pakistan is so different from the real Pakistan, that it is not even funny.
++

... could some one explain what was on romair ji`s mind!!!
++
this is the gist of my ten years of working, studying, eating, talking, evaluating, reading with and about Indians, on a daily basis
++
.. another one of captain clueless`s conclusions!!!

{{
Pakistanis can count tens of Indians amongst their friends, while Indians seem to have very few Pakistani friends whom they socialize with regularly.
}}

++
Also, Pakistan should completely open trade with India (other than in areas, where Pakistani businesses will get decimated), without worrying about whether India opens it or not.
++
...mmm...

...I would be the happiest man on earth if I could buy Ahmed Mango Pickle made in Karachi should India reciprocate...

luv,
CC
ps:- Romair!!! air for Air Marshall!!! but Rom??? read only memory???

Romair:
Itni lambi post?
This is an India-Pakistan friendship thread, so I`ll try not to digress too much (especially when I am in agreement with the substance of your original post) and respond only briefly:
-Any organization which says that the Iraqi press, where a mere word against Saddam could cost a person his life and where practically no one dared to vote against him in an election, is freer than the Press in India or even Pakistan, does raise doubts about its credibility.
-My remark about ``poison`` (treacherous Hindoo!) is based on the extracts from the Pakistani school curriculum posted more than once on this website.
-The media in both counries, I agree, tend to be quite chauvanistic . I see some positive signs in both countries in this respect. The private Indian TV channels frequently have Pakistani commentators when discussing India-Pakistan issues. Pakistan`s new Geo TV has gone one further and I think is even using Indian hosts for some of its programs. All this is to be applauded!
-I have dealt with your BJP/SSP comments already at other boards. If needed, we can take it up again sometime at another thread.

Dost-mittar #28: “Even when you say something that is hard to disagree with, you put in a somewhat harsh spin on it. You must have repeated a hundred times that Indians are ignorant about Pakistan, and you are right.”

You keep suggesting I put spin on things. Is it because you find the comments harsh, or is it because they are not facts. If they are not facts, then you have a point. If they are facts, then I don’t think you have a point. I am just giving my opinion that I have found Indians to know very little about Pakistan. This is what I have experienced, and this is what one sees on this site. I didn’t say Indians were evil. Quite the contrary. My main argument is that if they are able to meet Pakistanis, they will soften their stances. This implies that they are actually not the evil that some Pakistanis think them to be.

“You claim that Pakistanis are well informed about India, and you are wrong “

I have never stated that Pakistanis are, “well-informed” about India. In fact I think they (and I) don’t know a lot about India. All I have stated is that they know quite a bit more about India, than vice-versa. This is again, what I have experienced, in meeting with Indian colleagues daily. Invariably, we discuss India, because they know so little about Pakistan. Not because they are evil, but because they just don’t know. This can be seen by the knowledge Pakistanis have about India, on this site. It is definitely not great, but it is definitely more than what Indians know about Pakistan.

Maybe Pakistan should improve its film industry exports to India. There is little chance of that happening. The only other option is to let Indians visit Pakistan, as and when they want.

“You have said more than once that you hardly knew anything about India before you came to the US and that your views about Indians changed completely after you came in contact with them in the US.”

Yes, this is true. The only access I had to India, before USA, was through Indian movies. So I knew very little. Now, after meeting so many of them, I know quite a bit more. So now I know significantly more than what I knew back in Pakistan. And know even more about Indians than they know about Pakistan. Since Indians don’t get a chance to meet too many expatriate Pakistanis. But I still think I know little about India. So I am planning to visit it next year. After which I will know more.

“Pakistanis were worse than ignorant, they had swallowed the poison dished out to them from the kindergarten about the treacherous bania-brahmin hindoos.”

I don’t think this is true. Pakistanis are not fed poison from kindergarten about anything. I have nieces and nephews in kindergarten and never once have they come to me about any poison about India, nor have I seen it in any of their textbooks. They do know a lot of Indian movie songs, though.

You can find history books than present things differently than the Indian argument; but that is true for all countries. The main area where countries spread, “poison” is through their media and through their govt. statements. And both countries are guilty. I pointed this out in the Reporters without Borders reply, where I stated, “Similarly, if the Indian and Pakistani press is rated so low, then much of the information being fed to each other, about each other, is wrong also.”

I think both the Indian and Pakistani media indulge in poisining, as do their govts. The problem is that Indians do not have anything to counter that poison with, since they have no access to Pakistan. Not because they are evil. But because they have little access to anything Pakistani. Pakistanis do have some knowledge to counter the poison with.

“Reporters without Borders, when someone puts out something as absurd as the one posted by you, one should seriously question the credibility of the agency rather than accepting their ``findings`` at face value.”

I am not quite sure how familiar you are with Reporters Without Borders (RSF). If you do not have any familiarity with RSF, then I have to assume your comment is misplaced. It has a wide following and is recognized for protecting press freedom, around the world. It is the only organization that I know of that,

“The association defends journalists and other media contributors and professionals who have been imprisoned or persecuted for doing their work. It speaks out against the abusive treatment and torture that is still common practice in many countries.”

One cannot just disregard the opinion of such organizations, just because one disagrees with it. That is exactly what free press is not about. The BBC has a reputation to keep, and I am sure it does not just start quoting discredited organizations. Please take sometime to visit their site www.rsf.fr. The details in which they present information about Pakistan is pretty good. They have names of reporters who were beaten up, banned etc.

If you do have some factual information about RSF, which doubts their integrity, then please present it. I follow organizations like Amnesty International, Human Rights Wathc, Transparency International, RSF, etc. quite a bit. And base my opinion of world events on such organizations. Because I think govts. of countries have vested interests and always feed their citizens with information that serves their own causes. I believe one should never form an opinion about a peoples and societies, until one physically interacts with them. Since I cannot go to every country in the world, I rely on non-govt. international organizations, with credibility to form my opinion, rather than on national medias.

So I will have to take the RSF opinion. Unless you can provide credible information to discredit them.

“You are falsely accusing Romair of comparing the BJP with MMA. He equates BJP only with the terrorist SSP which specialises in murdering shias and other non-sunnis.”

I am not sure what this has to do with the current thread. But since you have brought it up. Yes, I do not equate BJP with MMA. All religious parties are not the same, just because they are religious. I am sure there are religious parties in India, that do not advocate killing minorities. MMA, to the best of my knowledge, has never killed anyone. Nor have any of their leaders adovocated killing anyone. They discriminate against non-Muslims, but they don’t kill them, in an organized fashion. There is thus a big difference.

SSP and BJP have directly killed people. And their top leaders have directly led killing individuals of different sects or faiths. SSP and BJP are both democratically popular in certain areas. The only difference is that the SSP does not have power in Pakistan. So they carry out their killings through underground terrorist branches. If they were to gain elected power in Pakistan, I think they would also kill through mob violence with state approval.

I, thus, see no difference with an SSP leader killing a Shia in a drive-by shooting, and a BJP leader killing a Muslim in mob violence, in areas where they are elected. However, if you would like to think that a Pakistani political organization, with elected individuals, which kills minorities in an organized fashion, is worse than an Indian political organizations, which does the same, then that is your opinion. And you have a right to it. However, I think both to be equally bad.

Do keep in mind that the SSP does win democratic elections and is a democratic party. Adn they may actually do more to improve the economy of Jhang, than the feudals who have been running the area. Just like the BJP may improve the economy of India, moreso than Congress. But the deciding factor in this comparison is to see what is done to the leaders of political parties, who advocated or participated in the killings of minorities, by their parties disciplinary committees. In both BBP and SSP, their parties never took away they memberships of such leaders. In fact, they defended them, and in some cases, even promoted them furthur.

On a sidenote, I would like to suggest that you try to argue my points. Rather than just getting defensive or offensive. If you notice, I try to make it a point to include a Pakistani reference with every Indian reference, just to ensure Indians do not get offended. My references are from well-recognized websites, run by the organizations themselves. This includes www.bbc.co.uk, www.bjp.org, www.rsf.fr etc.

Please keep in mind that I find many of your comments about Pakistan and Islam etc., and other things I am associated with to be quite harsh, also. But I attempt to debate them. For example, in your reply, you have stated,

“put in a somewhat harsh spin on it” – this implies I am spinning the truth and not actually telling what I think to be factual.

“Pakistanis were worse than ignorant,” – This is a personal attack on all Pakistanis. I have only stated that Indians don’t have knowledge of Pakistan (just like I think Pakistanis have very little knowledge of Bangladesh). I have not stated that Indians are ignorant. In fact I find them to be very knowledgeable on many issues.

“they had swallowed the poison dished out to them from the kindergarten about the treacherous bania-brahmin hindoos.” – This is another personal attack. I have never stated anything like this about Indians, much less about little Indian kids in kindergarten. My main argument is that Indians just don’t know about Pakistan. Not that they have swallowed a poison. You have gone on to attack little Pakistani kids, who are in kindergarten.

Similarly, I find some of your name-calling and attacks, and those of many other Indian (and Pakistani) interactors to be unreasonable. But never once, have I attacked you, nor any Indian interactor. I generally ignore the individuals whom I considered unreasonble. And address the ones, like yourself, whom I consider to be reasonable. I only attack someone when someone doubts my integrity. Not when they doubt my argument. I would encourage you, and others to do the same.

So once again, if you find incorrectness with my info, or don’t agree with it, please provide a counter argument, as you did about Allah Ditta. I interact on this site, to learn from others, and update my info. If you look at everything I state, as an attack on India, then please view everything I say about Pakistan as an attack on Pakistan. You will realize them to be neither. And you will notice, that many Pakistanis think I disagree with them, far more intensely, than I disagree with Indians.

As for the harshness of my comments: I am, perhaps, an opinionated person, with strong beliefs. That is not a crime. But I am more than willing to change those beliefs, provided someone provides facts.

I do have one rule though: The moment someone starts reducing themselves to personal attacks or national attacks, is the moment when, in my opinion, they have lost the argument, since it is an indication that they have run out of facts. At that point, I move on to the next person to interact with.

Ref dost-mittar #28

[Harimou:
You are falsely accusing Romair of comparing the BJP with MMA. He equates BJP only with the terrorist SSP which specialises in murdering shias and other non-sunnis.]

Thanks for the correction. My memory must be going! Most likely because in the last week I have practically switched off my brain when reading the rants and raves of the Fearless Investigative Journalist from Bombay.

Romair:
[If Allah Ditta is a movie actor in Pakistan, and the whole Pakistani film industry goes under, due to Indian films, and Indians refuse to hire Allah Ditta in Bollywood either, then wouldn`t All Ditta be out of a job? What would he do? If Bollywood agrees to hire him, then he would be ok. But what if they don`t, because they are not willing to completely open trade. Shouldn`t Allah Ditta get a bit of protection, in such situations.]

All bilateral trade agreements are on a reciprocal basis. And they have built-in adjustment clauses for a smooth transition. They also have clauses to provide some degree of protection to an industry which is seriously threatened.
Now to your specific example. You chose the wrong example. Because of his physical attributes, Alla Ditta is more likely to displace Lalloo Ram of UP in the acting department. Pakistani song writers will also more likely replace the tuk-bandi writers masquerading as poets in the Indian Films. In the entertainment industry, those who are likely to be displaced are the technicians and off-camera people who wont initially be able to compete with their Indian competitors. But then, Alla Ditta will probably get a job as a technician, receptionist, usher, etc. in the local cinemas which will see a revival because of the legal imports of Indian films. And he might find a job in the moribund tourist industry which might begin to flourish. You never know how the mysterious ways in which the invisible hand of economics will work.

re:Romair and SR

A point of clarification. Nations, even though they might have free trade arrangments, will always protect their primary industry, which is agriculture. The reasons are purely political and this can be seen in the subsidies given to French farmers against the EU policies or the subsidies given to American cotton growers. The Germans have a tariff, which limits the import of beer, because beer manufacturing is an important industry and in the politically significant state of Baveria, it is a major political issue. There is a bit of mercantialism in all nations trade policies, which is why most nations call for ``fair trade, not free trade``. The world is purely mercantialist. Nations like India and Pakistan are seeking to increase their foreign currency reserves and increase exports, because surplus foreign currency accounts compliment economic strenght, which is then channeled into military and ipso facto, political influence. India proves this addage brilliantly and Pakistan is desperately trying to follow the example.

In a holistic sense, free trade seems like a logical argument, but in reality it will always boil down to fair trade and that fairness will be determined by the politics. If the idea behind free trade is to open the market and let the market decide the price distributions on a fair price, then it should be encouraged for the sake of competion it will generate. However, that means that the governments will have to end their mercantialist policies and remove all subsidies from their agriculture sectors. This is highly unlikely and these agriculture subsidies are the crux of the debate as the WTO approaches around the corner. Is Pakistan willing to remove the subsidies to its cotton growers and let them compete in the world market despite all their inefficent production values? Is India willing to end its farm subsidies and risk a political crisis, even though it will improve the production efficiency of the Indian agriculture? This is politics and here, the concern is the political will and not economic rationales. :)

Ask Allah Ditta and he will support fair and not free trade.

Ciao

Feroz Khan:
Thanks for sharing your experience with us. It is somewhat different from what we have seen described on TV here. The scene described on TV here is somewhat macabre of Rangers and BSF jawans staring menacingly at each other while being egged on by their respective partisan crowds. But maybe, that was all for the benefit of cameras.
People have been talking about opening the border for as long as I can remember, yet the border keeps on getting more difficult, fences more difficult to cross and towers taller and more high tech.

Romair:
Even when you say something that is hard to disagree with, you put in a somewhat harsh spin on it. You must have repeated a hundred times that Indians are ignorant about Pakistan, and you are right. You claim that Pakistanis are well informed about India, and you are wrong. And let me quote an authority you cannot disagree with: Field Marshal Romair. You have said more than once that you hardly knew anything about India before you came to the US and that your views about Indians changed completely after you came in contact with them in the US. The fact is that while Indians before Kargil were largely ignorant about Pakistan, Pakistanis were worse than ignorant, they had swallowed the poison dished out to them from the kindergarten about the treacherous bania-brahmin hindoos.

Re. Reporters without Borders, when someone puts out something as absurd as the one posted by you, one should seriously question the credibility of the agency rather than accepting their ``findings`` at face value.

Harimou:
You are falsely accusing Romair of comparing the BJP with MMA. He equates BJP only with the terrorist SSP which specialises in murdering shias and other non-sunnis.

great article F.R.Khan. i visited the border only once during the NCC training. the guard change ceremony is really interesting.

romair ji

`.......It is the fact that Indians know next to nothing about Pakistan, and thus get heavily influenced by anti-Pakistan sources, within their own country. And that there are no financial and business ties between the two countries, which usually result in quick solutions to political problems. . . .`

This statement you must have repeated thousand times. Now I really feel that I should respond ( normally I avoid). What exactly Indians are to know about your country. I can claim to know more about it then perhaps even you do.

Since, Indian movies and stars are your theme, let me start from Hardaan-e-Deepak, then Dildar Parvez Bhatti and his Sheeshe da Ghar and then the fact that he was lost child of Hindu parents who had to leave because of partition, Uncle Urfi ( Shakeel) Atthar Shah khan ( Zaidi ), Moin Akhtar and his marvrellous comedy, Uncle Sargam, Haiga, Maasi museebti, Bhushra khan doing parody and a spoof on Tahira Naqvi, Ruhi Bano and her top class acting, Mahtab Chaana and her two or three ? marriages and her removal from a stage show because of Zia`s edict about women`s covering head, Ismail Tara`s spoof on Nurjehan and latter walking out of the programme specially produced foer her, Pak movie Aaina- a frame by frame copy of Jheel ke Us paar of India, Muhammad Ali, and his wife Zeba, Raahat Kaazmi and his wife and now very very poor production of plays and programmes in present times.

I hope this will give you some idea about my knowledge of Pak stars and glamour. So, please don`t say that Indians do not know anything about it. I can write another essay on your economy, politics and society but don`t want to bore further. Whatever I have typed that is from the era of non internet times and so nothing picked up from cyber space.

Since, you are a Rajput, I can also tell you that there is a big Rajput industrialist in your country who when got his son engaged came to India ( Rajasthan) to confirm that girls side is actually rajput and belonging to their caste. The same patriarch did not allow his grandson` rukhsati to his own house because the girl was from shaikh family and the boy and girl had to leave for States immediatly after their marriage.

This should be enough. I can go on and on but lack your energy level to keep on thumping on keyboard.

Regards

Romair at # 10 wrote:

``It is the fact that Indians know next to nothing about Pakistan, and thus get heavily influenced by anti-Pakistan sources, within their own country``

They are the anti-Pakistan source outside of India, especially in the West. Do your analysis of Indian community in the USA/UK and you will find that out.

SR: #14: ``Romair [``...Pakistan should completely open trade with India (other than in areas, where Pakistani businesses will get decimated), without worrying about whether India opens it or not. ...``]

Such good suggestions you make and then ruin them by putting a protectionist clause in paranthesis.``

I am not an economist. So I retract my clause. It should now state,

[``...Pakistan should completely open trade with India (EVEN in areas, where Pakistani businesses will get decimated), without worrying about whether India opens it or not. ...``]

My main motivation for free(r) trade with India is actually not economics. Nepal, Bangladesh, etc. have free(r) trade with India, and it hasn`t done much for their economies. I assume it wouldn`t do a whole great deal for ours, until we get things like corruption and tax systems in order. My main motivation is to get businesses interacting with each other, so that they can serve as a platform for problem-solving.

Just out of curiousity, don`t all, ``free trading`` countries have free trade, except in areas, where there own industry could get completely wiped out?

If Allah Ditta is a movie actor in Pakistan, and the whole Pakistani film industry goes under, due to Indian films, and Indians refuse to hire Allah Ditta in Bollywood either, then wouldn`t All Ditta be out of a job? What would he do? If Bollywood agrees to hire him, then he would be ok. But what if they don`t, because they are not willing to completely open trade. Shouldn`t Allah Ditta get a bit of protection, in such situations.

re: SR #14

Thank you for the historic correction. I mentioned Punjab Club in Lahore, because Radcliffe used to stay there during his visits to the city. He used to walk the lawns of the club contemplating his decisions.

re: kaurasach # 7

There was no papable tension at Wagah. What you have described as ``tension`` is/was noting more than tangible exitement at glimpsing Indians or Indians glimpsing Pakistanis in reality. The atmosphere was relaxed.

However, during actual lowering of the flag ceremonies, there is a feeling of nationalism, which does produce the atmospherics of a ``tension. That is only during the ceremony. I was at Wagah about two hours before the ceremony and saw the daily routine of the guards and what was unmistakable was the humanity of the occassion. There was a Pakistani student who shouted for the BSP guard to pose for a picture and guard obliged. There were Indians who were walking past a Pakistani ranger and were surprised to see the Pakistani ranger smile at them and even more surprised at smiling back at him! :)

There was a level of humanity at Wagah, which was hard to miss and in all, I think that none of us, regardless of our alligence to different flags, can surpress the human instincts for social contact. I saw that instinct break barriers and produce smiles that afternoon. One lesson I learnt, which really affected me was that humanity cannot be denied and it cannot be repressed politically or otherwise, because it goes against the grain of our human evolutionary process.

re: Temporal # 1

LOL

Ciao

Interesting piece of news, that kind of involves Pakistan and India.

According to the BBC, an independent organization, called, “Reporters without Borders (RSF)” has rated the independence of the international press, and has come up with some interesting figures. Many of which would be surprising to many on this site:

- They rated 166 countries on freedom of press
- Pakistan and India rated identically - both at 128
- Bangladesh is at 143
- The lowest ranking Arab country is Kuwait at 102
- But here is the interesting part. Iraq under Saddam Hussain rated at 126. So its press was more free than India`s and Pakistan`s
- USA and Israel rated at 41 and 44, respectively, when reporting on domestic issues
- But here is the really interesting part. America is rated at 135th when reporting on issues in other countries. And Israel is rated at 146th when reporting on issues in other countries

Information about the report is at http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2003/10/031021_pak_india_media_rza.shtml)

So basically, according to BBC (and Reporters Without Borders), Iraq had more freedom of press under Saddam, than it does under the USA occupation. This is quoted on the BBC site. In fact, Iraq had a freer media, under Saddam, than Pakistan and India (and Bangladesh) currently have. And the Arab countries have more freedom of press than India and Pakistan, as well. While China and Iran have less freedom of Press than India and Pakistan.

Just goes to show, people need to rely on surveys, from credible agencies, to get the correct information about other countries. If the USA press is rated below Saddam’s press in Iraq in Press Freedom, then probably much of the information being fed to us, via CNN, is incorrect. Similarly, if the Indian and Pakistani press is rated so low, then much of the information being fed to each other, about each other, is wrong also.

Following is what the RSF site says about India and Pakistan, in their introduction: http://www.rsf.fr/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=316)

India: ``The nationalist government has proved intolerant toward journalists who investigate sensitive subjects such as corruption or the situation in Kashmir. The imprisonment of Kashmiri reporter Iftikhar Gilani and the harassment of the staff of the news web site Tehelka.com were evidence of the deterioration in the situation for press freedom in 2002.``

Pakistan: ``Gen. Pervez Musharraf did not keep his promise to respect press freedom. The ubiquitous security services harassed the country`s few investigative journalists, while the adoption of new press laws posed a threat to the relatively critical tone of the print media.``

Veeresh sahab,

``What do we do about this, other than blaming our now well past and clear colonial rulers? I wish I knew.``

Aap ka kabhi Dubai aana hota hai? Let me know if you`re coming this way. Kebab khaingay!


Aamir

Ansari #19 . . . well, ````India is the easiet to drive into, book into a hotel and take a walk in the city.`` . . . there is a lot of truth in this simple statement:-

a) If you are any sort of foreigner, then with any sort of motor vehicle with a carnet, you can cross at any time. Exclude Indians, Pakistanis, and Indian/Pakistani vehicles, including diplomatic.

b) Include radical religious leaders from Pakistan who enter like royalty with their SUVs and drive around now and then.

c) There are a few points along the border where this happens in truckloads, as well as in a booming trade in stolen cars/bikes.

d) There are a few cases on record of people riding across inadvertently. Latest, a fine young man landed up in Jammu on a Pakistani motorcycle, drove around unchallenged, and got nabbed only after he tried to pay for fuel with Pakistani money at an IndianOil pump. Wonder what he was thinking about?

+++

A similar situation, in reverse, existed between East & West Germany in the `70s. Indians and Pakistanis, especially seafarers, could happily cross from one country to the other, while the Germans and other Europeans simply could not.

+++

Yes, we choose to be fooled. What do we do about this, other than blaming our now well past and clear colonial rulers? I wish I knew.