Pakistan under its Ethnic Shadows

I think there is a sense of nationhood in pakistan. The ethnicities are important, but people do understand that Pakistan is their country and nation. The recent earthquake is an open example. The outpouring of grief and unity of the nation took many by surprise. People were united in their efforts to help their fellow countrymen in this hour of need. It is also wrong to compare pakistan with America. Each country has its history and background. The very idea of country and nationhood is always present in the minds and hearts of people, since 1947.

The harmony among different provinces is not as a threat as some suggest. To compare pakistan with Yogoslavia is not correct. It is true that Punjab is the dominent group in pakistan, but that does not make the punjabi people and the Pak army hostile to other provinces. Punjab has no designs for greater punjab. It is all myth. You also have to find reasons to point a fault in landlords of other provinces. They have deprived the people of their provinces of basic rights. It is not Punjab, but the feudal lords who are harming the provinces.

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

Tauheed:

``ahmedzai #142 you are too kind with your appreciation. ``

:-)

``Trabbi??? ``

Never heard of this one before, but I have been on junkies, will do it again.

Harimau,

I agree with your analysis..

ISI & the jihadi`s
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EK27Df03.html

Ref Mantolives #124

[At partition .. my dear friend... the Auranzeb loving, burqah-imposing, bearded Mullahs like Maulana Madni were in cahoots with the Congress Party.

Those supporting the Pakistan movement(the so called tntists) were not Islamists... but were aligarh modernists, ex-congressites, socialists like iftikharuddin, Faiz , a leading legal mindsof the muslims, barristers, and the sufies. And ofcourse they were led by the only politician in india to be called the Best Ambassador of Hindu Muslim Unity...

These are the facts of History ... denying them only strengthens those you want to defeat.]

Yet, it was the Islamic modernists who lost! Their victory was a tactical one and they got Pakistan. It didn`t take 3 years before the modernists and progressives lost to the mullahs.

The mullahs of India couldn`t quote the Koran to stop land redistribution from the zamindars to the farmers. The Hindu sannyasis stayed in their caves in the Himalayas meditating and stayed out of politics, letting India straighten out the mess created by the British.

The slogan ``Islam is in Danger`` was/is powerful enough to stop the Army as well as the socialists in Pakistan.

[Yes Let us call a spade a spade.]

No; let us call it a bloody shovel.

tahmed32:

~~the simple fact is: if you want a third world country to develop, job number one is to get government out of the way. welcome foreign investors, and accept the fact that along with foreign investments will come a mellowing of nationalist fervor inside the country. and this will be replaced by a sharpening of business fervor.
this is the simple lesson that nationalist third world politicians seem to have such trouble understanding~~

I think that third world politicians are the bane of third world people. I think that they wish to protece their corrupt comfortable status and use all sorts of ``anti imperialism`` rhetoric to this end, aided and abetted by Marxists, leftists and statists in the west.

The simple fact is that for over forty years after indeprendence India was an economic basket case. In the twelve years since the reforms started India`s economy has picked up, wealth is being created, people are coming out of poverty.

I read an article by a British professor about how India`s consensual politics means that reform is not coming fast enough, that we need to do more in regard of opening up of the economy. But that will come with time. There is an absolute consensus in India on its future path and the need to engage with the global economy and capital. (Except for the commies, but they are miniscule and irelevant)

The future is the free market. It will lessen poverty and unleash the entrpeneurialism lying latent in the Indian people.

Just look at how Indians succeed in business whenever they go abroad. In England, Canada, Africa, the USA, they are like the new Jews. In India the system screws the entrepeneur before he even starts. Or at least it used to. God Willing, more reforms will take place and India can concentrate on the important things...creating jobs, wealth and growing businesses. This will have the natural corrollary of bolstering pluralism. No successful economy can exist in the absence of cosmopolitaism and tolerance and equality of opportunity. This will be the biggest brake and preventative to the rise of obscuratanism and communalism in the long run.

ahmedzai #142 you are too kind with your appreciation.

as for indian cars i guess they are getting better now per the article rsridhar posted.

incidentally, if you really want to try your hand with a certified piece of junk, try the east german Trabbi. this was a masterpiece of nationalized industry, and a big joke in germany after that country reunified. i saw a tiny trabbi once sitting in the middle of big shiny west german cars that had quality and class written all over them (porsches, mercedes, bmw) in stuttgart, germany, and the shabby, rundown trabbi looked pathetic indeed.

i dont think they have too many Trabbis around anymore (i didnt see any last year when i was there which was in march/april last year i think.). presumably their owners exchanged them for real cars.

What happened in Khandahar Dec 99

http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl2024/stories/20031205003003400.htm

Tauheed:

Your points on website information on Musharraf`s drive, nationalization and Indian car industry expressed through various posts have been noted and appreciated.

Your commentry on an Indian car experience was impressive. I will be looking forward to trying my hands on one in the near future.

Btw, does any body know if Indian cars have made it to the USA?

re:#140 by ballukhan
You are right about that my friend. I do not have much idea what is going on in Indian Auto industry right now. I have visited India a few times in the last several years and seen other cars come into picture. But, the fact that India has actually started manufacturing a car (Indica) from ``level zero`` is a big surprise. I must say i am very pleased.
Sridhar

Maruti!!! Twelve years!!! MAn, you guys have no idea about Indian Auto industry now.

re:#135 by tahmed32
Thanks for your post.
My own impression of Indian cars is not a good one. That is why i asked you when you had ridden an Indian car last. The best i have seen of Indian cars (about 12 years ago when i was employed in India) was Maruti,which is not a real compliment. So, i too am surprised (pleasantly so) to see India make so much headway in the Auto manufacturing.
Sridhar

#113 by His Excellency

++++
This assumption [China will support Pakistan] was proven wrong when Zhu Rhongji and Chief of PLA asked Musharraf to withdraw NLI/Jehadi elements and instead pursue the diplomatic route. This was the biggest shock to Musharraf.
++++

The army can blame no one but itself for the boo-boo. It had purposely kept its civilian bosses in the dark about its plans in Kargil even as Nawaz Sharif and Vajpayee were taking a ground-breaking peace initiative in Lahore and in front of the Pakistan Minar.

The army had deliberately cut itself from political inputs that would have screamed at it, ``Look before you jump``.

It was not just naivety on the part of the military but a deliberate course of action to prevent political inputs from interfering with its Kargil fantasies. After all, it had already received political feedback when General Pervez Musharraf presented the plan earlier to Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. When Bhutto pointedly asked Musharraf what would happen after the Pakistanis take control of the peaks, Musharraf is reported to have indignantly retorted, ``I don`t understand your question, ma`am``!! Well, he was so taken up by the Prussian complex of the Pak military, that he was determined not to let Benazir stand in the way of his ``brilliant plan`` for the army of ``martial races``.

Musharraf had received feedback from a political channel (Benazir). He had so disliked the feedback that when he finally decided to put the plan into action, he decided to keep the Prime Minister (Nawaz Sharif) in the dark about his Kargil plans.

So General Pervez Musharraf has no one but himself to blame for not knowing how China was going to react in the wake of the Kargil invasion.

++++
Musharraf had assumed that since Nawaz had already okayed the Kargil plan months ago, the entire political leadership will stand by the operation. This didn`t happen. Deprived of political support within Pakistan, Kargil became Musharraf`s personal project.
++++

If General Musharraf were honest, he would have thanked Nawaz Sharif for extricating Pakistan`s military from the hole it had dug for itself in Kargil.

It was the military`s arrogance that led to the situation. It had purposely kept the civilian bosses in the dark about the Kargil adventure it was planning even as Nawaz Sharif and Musharraf were engaged in peace talks in Lahore:

++++
Since Clinton had described Kashmir as a nuclear flashpoint, the assumption was that U.S. will immediately press for summit level talks between India and Pakistan to resolve this dispute. Instead, Clinton refused to discuss Kashmir will Nawaz Sharif until Pakistan withdrew the NLI/Jehadis.
++++

Once again, this was the military`s fault. The plan had been rebuffed by a Prime Minister earlier. But the army of ``martial-races``, led by its misplaced and ill-directed Prussian complex, was so determined to go ahead anyway that it made no attempt to try to analyze Benazir Bhutto`s feedback. When the invasion finally got launched, the political boss (Nawaz Sharif) was not in the loop. The Prime Minister was allowed to get into the loop only when it became apparent that the military needed all the help it could get to extricate itself from the hole it had dug for itself.

ballukhan #131 my post to rsridhar responds to your post as well i think: the indian car industry is picking up (as rsridhar points out), but this was clearly not the case UNTIL the government gave up on its traditional protectionist policy.

the simple fact is: if you want a third world country to develop, job number one is to get government out of the way. welcome foreign investors, and accept the fact that along with foreign investments will come a mellowing of nationalist fervor inside the country. and this will be replaced by a sharpening of business fervor.

this is the simple lesson that nationalist third world politicians seem to have such trouble understanding.

ahmedzai #134

on protectionism. agreed that time bound protectionism could possibly work. this of course is the ``infant industry argument`` that was popular in the 1950s. Trouble is, as experience showed with the infant industry argument. that some infants refuse to grow up. :-)

on export rebates: you are quite right. in fact last september i remember my brother telling me that export rebates had been lifted on oriental rugs exports e.g.. the current economic team that musharaff has pulled together (particularly finance minister and state bank governor) are very sound professionals indeed and have done much to strengthen pakistan`s economy in my view.

on musharaff: i must say his recent madrassah reform initiatives (which were recently posted on the pakistan embassy websites) seem to make a lot of sense - rather than destroying them, he is harnessing them by introducing nonreligious subjects in the syllabus. also adding funds so they can get proper lab and computing equipment. thus, IF he can pull it off, he would in one stroke have changed madrassahs from being a major problem for pakistan (and indeed the world) and into a major part of the solution to the problem of illiteracy. so my prayers are for his initiative to succeed. but time will tell...

rsridhar #130 i checked that article, and indeed the indian auto industry has changed the tune it had been playing for 50 years. But that simply reinforces the point I was making to ahmedzai (namely, that nationalization does not work).

Thus, to cut and paste from the same article that you posted (and thanks for the posting which brought me up to date): ``Not long ago, India`s auto industry was a laughing stock. Its two best-known cars were a 1940s Morris model called the Ambassador and a 1960s Suzuki-derived model called the Maruti 800. But that was then. Today, for instance, the Mumbai-based Dilip Chhabria Design Pvt Ltd (DC Design) is seeking to take on Pininfarina and Bertone, the Italian standard in international car design, by designing and building concept cars, prototypes and limited-production runs. ``

And article goes on to say: ``Until the mid 1990s, the Indian auto sector consisted of just a handful of local companies. However, after the sector opened to foreign direct investment in 1996, global majors moved in. By 2002, Hyundai, Honda, Toyota, GM, Ford and Mitsubishi had set up their manufacturing bases here. ``

This is precisely my point: for 45 years the indian auto sector was protected by the protectionist policies of successive indian governments. IF the indian governments had been listening to institutions like the world bank, they would have made this switch a long time before: before korea and china in particular even had anything like an auto industry.

As for my ride in an indian car, that was in the late 90`s when i stopped over for 24 hours in new delhi and used the opportunity to go around the city and see lal kilah and so forth.

ahmedzai to please note this as additional evidence of the point i was making.

Tauheed at 129:

On protectionism:

I agree with every bit you said. When I was talking about protectionism, I had in mind the one provided to its Engineering sector by Korea. Korea provided protection to its fledgling industry in 1960-70`s through a time bound moratorium, meaning that industry was allowed protection for a specific period till the time they developed competency to take international challenge head on by 80`s.

On Export Rebates:

On Export Rebates, I believe that if you ask your brother now, he will tell you that most export rebates have been withdrawn. Also, on the other hand, Government is showing much resilience in releasing the rebate related funds when approached, because it wants many documentry evidences. However, e.g., India still continues with them. As a result, although its fcy is highly rated, its lcy is rated below par by international rating agencies.

On Musharraf:

Previously, I was of the view that Musharraf could not have banned the religious parties, because of their immense popularity in the Pakhtoon belt. He just wanted to let the feelings of Pakhtoons vent out through elections. But more recently, I have been questioning my own stance. For example, why at all he let the age of the voters come down by couple of years? His intelligence agencies must have informed him that only the religious parties would gain tremendously by organizing voting of their madressa students.

After analysing all of this and much more, and more importantly, watching the behaviour of my older folks who happen to be extremely pro-JUI for a real life example, I am still of the opinion that Musharraf did a fine thing. I would leave my arguments for an off-line session with you (we can always agree on a mode for doing that :-))

The ``martial race theory`` version 2.0, the ``incompetent hindoo theory``

From:
http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/nov2003-weekly/nos-23-11-2003/pol1.htm#9 (interview with Ayesha Siddiqa)

“The 1965 war was an ill-planed war by the Indians who fought with unclear objectives. So, Pakistan won in terms of saving itself”

“Pak military, on the whole, is better trained than the Indian military. This particularly applies to the Pakistan Air Force that is a far more capable service than its counterpart”

“In addition, India has some flaws in planning that might not necessarily help in translating an acquisition into a capability.”

#129 by tahmed32 on November 22, 2003 10:46pm PT

Ditto!
Even in Indian context rebates should be uniform and rationalized- multiplicity of rebate schemes should go? but the babus at DGFT are slow to change! I have seen some the auto manufacturing units in India- they are as good as any other in the world- the problem is that we do not have proper market segmentation done by the Auto players- and that is why there is not much competition - the auto companies have ensured that their models do not even compete with each other in the same segment- so oligopolistic tendencies are still around- but the models are worth their value- so I disagree on this point.

#105
S.K. Malik is not a great name to qoute writing on Islamis Strategy. He was a conformist writer who headed the strategy department in the university with shady credentials. I am sure, hardly any one studying war cared to study him. I never did in my years as a student and thought very low of whatever he wrote.
#128 nahok,
Perhaps even today, the armed forces are the most multi racial. For instance, Sindhies are now in every arm and service in considerable numbers. No one with a domicile can pass off into the sindhi qouta and thats a positive. Perhaps the lessons that we are trying to bring out were already registered. Very recently, the Northern Light Infantry has also been integrated int the main army.
Secondly, the role of Army in East Pakistan had more to do with the perceptions against India than any spirit of religiously motivated war. Every soldier from the army and very politician thought believed that the Bengalies were abetting with the enemy. As already highlighted by #39 urstruly. atrocities were committed on both sides. The massacres were started at the regimental centre at Chittogong much before March 25.

I VERY SINCERLY FEEL THAT INSTEAD OF ARUING OVER THE PST, WE SHOULD ALL CONTRIBUTE MORE POSITIVELY ON HOW PAKISTAN CAN MOVE FORWARD IN A BETTER WAY. LET US LIGHT OUR OWN CANDLES.

#129 by tahmed32
`` i have ridden in indian made cars, and with all due respect they are still junk after 50 years of protection..``
With due respect, Tahmed Sahib, which are those Indian cars? And when did you ride them? Have you ridden in Indica? I am told it is being exported to the European market under a different name. Surely it cannot be a junk.

Read the following:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EI03Df01.html
Excerpts:

``The Indian-made sports utility vehicle Scorpio received a singular response in Detroit early this year, not just for its design but also because of its cheaper price tag. Tata Motors, the country`s second-largest car maker`s small Indica convinced MG Rover of the UK to sell it to the UK market as the City Rover. Others like Ford`s mid-sized car model Ikon, Maruti`s Altos and Toyota`s Indian-made multi-utility vehicle have found ready buyers in a number of American, European and neighboring countries.``

http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20031001-013327-9125r.htm

http://www.india-emb.org.eg/Archives/Sep.16,%2003/India%E2%80%99s%20Auto%20Exports%20Zoom.htm
Prejudice can always be fought with a little knowledge.
Sridhar

ahmedzai #125 both nationalization nor protection are counterproductive. in pakistan, the banking sector was thriving and progressive. habib bank, UBL, national bank all had computerized in the 1960`s while banks in other third world countries were still manual. these agencies were headed by visionary men. bhutto then nationalized these banks (thus securing control over their funds as well) and they went down the tubes. the attitude of the bank staff became that of babus, with a public-be-damend attitude. banking is the lifeblood of any economy, and bhutto killed it.
jobs are not created out of thin air - you need to have a competitive product. otherwise all you are doing is robbing peter to pay paul. i still remember what Dawood (industrialist) told the workers when handing over control of the factory he had built: he warned them that running a factory is not as easy as they thought. time has proved him correct.

as for protection: indian IT has taken off not because of protection but despite it - for many years the indian bureaucrats did not (and still do not) know how to kill the industry by demanding bribes and so on. what was protected in india was not IT but things like the car industry - i have ridden in indian made cars, and with all due respect they are still junk after 50 years of protection. as for pakistan, my brother is in the export-import business, and he says the best thing the government could do for pakistan exports is to get rid of export rebates: export rebates open up room for money making through fake exports, and serious businessmen like him who actually generate exports for pakistan are hurt.

the soviet union provides an vast example of everything wrong with nationalizations and undue interference with the market by the government.

on musharaff, first it is not for him to give a chance to democratic parties to play their role. pakistan belongs to all pakistanis, not just to the man with the biggest guns. i dont know what chances he gave to the secular parties, but i do know that he bent the rules to make it easier for mullahs to win (by accepting their trash madrassah degrees as equivalent to bachelors).

#113 His Excellency

++++
Musharraf had assumed that since Nawaz had already okayed the Kargil plan months ago, the entire political leadership will stand by the operation. This didn`t happen. Deprived of political support within Pakistan, Kargil became Musharraf`s personal project.
++++

If General Musharraf were honest, he would have thanked Nawaz Sharif for extricating Pakistan`s military from the hole it had dug for itself in Kargil.

It was the military`s arrogance that led to the situation. It had purposely kept the civilian bosses in the dark about the Kargil adventure it was planning even as Nawaz Sharif and Musharraf were engaged in peace talks in Lahore:

---

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_23-11-2003_pg3_5

Daily Times, Pakistan
Sunday, November 23, 2003

``The Kargil episode is a very sad and tragic part of our history. The more you go into it, the more traumatic it is. Nawaz Sharif did not get to know about the Kargil exercise at the right time. When this whole thing was being conceived and being put into motion, the prime minister of the country did not know about it. They very consciously only provided him an outline of the exercise in which the focus was totally different. It didn’t involve the armed forces or crossing the Line of Control. When it was brought home to him in May 1999, there was not much that he could do. He was only involved in a damage control exercise, which eventually damaged him. I still recall my conversation with him where I recommended that he let those who had conceived this operation complete it and handle it militarily. But Nawaz Sharif said no. He said that it would not only harm the strategic and military interests of Pakistan, it would also damage the military might of Pakistan. So we had to forego our political egos in the interest of the country.``

---

# 121 Romair

++++
No one teaches any Martial race theory in Pakistan.
++++

Perhaps it is not taught in classrooms at Kakul. But apparently the beleief survived 1971 into at least 1999. That is why Pakistani jurnalists thought it fit to bring it up afresh in the aftermath of the Kargil fiasco. I have already quoted a couple - Altaf Gauhar and Ardeshir Cowasjee.

++++
I do think it did exist in the previous generation (around 71 times), specifically with respect to Bengalis.
++++

Yes, it did exist. It was the general view of the army officers, that the people of East Pakistan were not even good Muslims and, obviously, by implication, that it was the divine-ordained duty of Pakistan`s military officers to do everything possible (including murder and rape) to turn East Pakistanis into good Muslims.

The Shah of Iran could have never used his army to perpetuate the perks and privileges of Iran`s ruling elite because ordinary Iranian soldiers were not willing to turn on the common people of Iran on the orders of the Shah. Unfortunately, in Pakistan in 1971, the situation was very different. From 1947 thru 1971, ordinary soldiers of Pakistan had been brainwashed into believing in the British propounded ``martial races`` theory, and into believing that East Pakistanis belonged to an inferior race. The ordinary soldiers had been persuaded to believe by their officers that it was their sacred duty to punish East Pakistanis because the East Pakistanis were not good Muslims!

Pakistan`s army officers had institutionalized racism to the point where the soldiers were willing to believe that they were engaged in rape and murder to save Islam in East Pakistan. Veteran Pakistani journalist Z.A. Suleri (father of writer Sarah Suleri) has written how shocked he was in 1971 to find Pakistan army officers nonchalantly joking about the on-going rapes in East Pakistan as a service to the Bengalis to improve their genes! Much the same story was confirmed in accounts of DAWN correspondent Anthony Mascarenhas.

Yahya Khan`s predecessor was no better. Altaf Gauhar, in a series of articles, had written how ``Field Marshal`` Ayub Khan had become victim of the racist view within Pakistan`s army that one [West] Pakistani soldier was more than a match for ten ``Hindu`` soldiers. Fortified by this racist belief, the ``Field Marshal`` had put into motion the ``Operation Gibralatar`` in 1965. It was a foolhardy deed that would unleash a chain of events that would ultimately lead to his own overthrow in 1969 and the surrender of the Pakistani army in Dhaka on 16th December of 1971.

re: Romair`s fantasies
``The military war was lost by India, before it even started, at the moment Pakistan occupied the peaks....``
Ha, Ha, Ha!
This guy cracks me up like nobody else. We need to give our Chowk Marshal a special commendation for his `` flights of fancies``.
Sridhar

#110 by tahmed32

On Nationalization:

``The nationalizations you mention were driven by his ego rather than common sense, since he wanted to become the Wadera of Pakistan, even though people had elected him on a different understanding.``

It is documented that he nationalized businesses to protect the jobs of many people, who would have lost them for businesses going bust subsequent to BD debacle. This is the best argument that has been given for his nationalization drive. Instead of nationalization, if he had opted for protectionist policy, that would have been much better. Protectionism would have first ensured that the businesses survive and then it would have led to industrial growth in Pakistan that by 1990 could have become competent to ward off any foreign threat. Indian industry thrives today because of their protectionist policy of the yore.

On Musharraf:

``More important, is there any hope that there are better days ahead for our people? You seem optimistic with musharaff, and so far he does seem to be focussing on many of the right things.``

Please read Musharraf`s noting of crime against women in the guise of honor killing today. His statements would prove to be ground-breaking. He took note of the event where a woman in Multan was killed in the name of ``Ghairat`` by of course bay-ghairat`s of our society.

``He has made mistakes (most notably in suppressing the secular parties). But there is some hope here. He is certainly not a complete disaster like those before him. ``

He did not suppress the secular parties, but Nawaz and BB. He gave all the chance to PPP at least to shed off the personal worshipping of BB and to form Government. PPP squandered the opportunity and now runs the risk of getting totally marginalized in the days to come.

Ballu Khan

I suggest you read up a little before you decide to undo anything.

At partition .. my dear friend... the Auranzeb loving, burqah-imposing, bearded Mullahs like Maulana Madni were in cahoots with the Congress Party.


Those supporting the Pakistan movement(the so called tntists) were not Islamists... but were aligarh modernists, ex-congressites, socialists like iftikharuddin, Faiz , a leading legal mindsof the muslims, barristers, and the sufies. And ofcourse they were led by the only politician in india to be called the Best Ambassador of Hindu Muslim Unity...


These are the facts of History ... denying them only strengthens those you want to defeat.

Yes Let us call a spade a spade.

Musharraf as a worthy successor of Zia-

The Quranic Concept of War by Brigadier S.K. Malik, sponsored by the late General Zia-ul-Haq. It is a much more reliable guide to Pakistan`s psyche and behavior than the pronouncements of soothsayers at the Wagha border and the pontificating columnists in the English language media. It is a damning indictment of the Indian intelligentsia — dominated by the ‘Secularists’ — that there is almost no public discussion this work of great importance. Even worse, when brought to their attention, it is hastily ignored. Reasons of course are not hard to seek.

The Quranic Concept of War is required reading for Pakistani officials — both military and civilian. An Urdu booklet titled `Jihad` summarizing it is carried by Pakistani soldiers as well as so-called militants. Copies of this booklet have been recovered from the bodies of killed Pakistani fighters. Incidentally, both the Government and the media must stop using terms like ‘militants’ and ‘militancy’. These are trained Pakistani and Afghan soldiers and the so-called militancy is really an invasion. Call them invading soldiers. Also, why ‘deport’ Pakistanis caught with RDX and other deadly material instead of punishing them as mass murderers?

As far as the book is concerned, General Zia recommends it to ``both soldier and civilian alike.`` According to him, ``JIHAD FI-SABILILLAH is not the exclusive domain of the professional soldier, nor is it restricted to the application of military force alone. The book brings out with simplicity, clarity and precision the Quranic philosophy on the application of the military force, within the context of the totality that is JIHAD.`` In other words, all the resources of the state must be subordinate to the Islamic military machine in pursuit of its cause. This is the policy that successive Governments in Pakistan have been following. It has nothing to do with Kashmir and everything to do with conquest by Jihad.

The instrument of this is Jihad — ``the most glorious word in the vocabulary of Islam`` — which both the author and President Zia describe as total war. ``Jehad is a continuous and never-ending struggle waged on all fronts.`` Another point that Brigadier Malik makes is that the war should be carried out in the opponent`s territory. ``The aggressor was always met and destroyed in his own territory,`` he tells us. This of course is exactly what Pakistan is doing. But the doctrine goes further to encompass the whole world: ``It was the cause of humanity in general and not just the Muslim community in particular,`` informs Brigadier Malik. It is a universal doctrine, to be applied to all of us, and not just the believers. So India is only a stepping stone in taking its campaign to the whole world. In other words, Pakistan under its new doctrine sees itself as the instrument of Jihad as ordained by God.

#104 by Mantolives on November 21, 2003 5:12am PT

Sorry Manto,it is time we called a spade a spade. The secular minded have to undo the propoganda by the Islamists and hindtva elemnts in the sub-continent- of which TNT is the most sophisticated exposition which we have seen.

No one teaches any Martial race theory in Pakistan. I went through years of training and do not recall any classes or refernces to Martial race. Karachi, theoratically a non-Martial race area, has produced the most Chiefs in the Pakistan military, of any city in Pakistan.

Kargil was probably planned years ago. Just like counter strategies are planned and studied in detail, even if they never get used. At the time of Kargil, the Cheif of Army Staff (Musharraf) was from a non-Martial race (assuming within Pakistan, Punjabis and Pathans are considered the Martial race). His main General Staff officers was Muhajir also.

Interestingly the Chief of Air Staff was from a Martial race (Punjab). However, the PAF was against Kargil (I know this almost from the horse`s mouth). PAF made a presentation pointing out why it should not be done. The PAF leadership is generally quite a bit more worldly-wise than the Army leadership. In fact, the PAF did not even participate in Kargil. Other than moving some aircraft close to the are.

Kargil was brilliantly carried out tactically. I know the Colonel in Engineers, whose unit was the first to reach the peaks and do the pre-planning phase, before the fighting troops moved. However, politically and probably inter-services manner also, it was terribly planned. And whomever wins the political war wins the war, even if they lose the military war. The military war was lost by India, before it even started, at the moment Pakistan occupied the peaks. The political war was lost by Pakistan, before it even moved to occupy the peaks.

Interestingly, after Kargil and the coup, Musharraf literally got rid of a big portion of the PAF high command, when the retirement time of the incumbent Air Chief arrived. Musharraf (as CMLA) appointed the new Air Chief, who was quite a bit junior, superceeding quite a few senior Air Marshalls. All of who then retiredThe general rumor was the Musharraf had gotten rid of the PAF top command, due to their lack of support in Kargil - , including the guy who was earmarked to be the next Chief, but opposed Kargil, and was thus not made the new Chief.

The guy who was appointed the new Chief, Mushaf Mir, later died in an air crash (he may have been NHK`s batchmate or close in seniority). Apparently, he himself, did not expect to be appointed the Chief, by superceding so many senior officers. Following is from his interview:

``Q: Since you were appointed CAS by superseding several senior officials, what was your response to this new challenge and whether you were expecting this decision at all?

A: While the appointment came unexpected, my response was one of thanks to the Almighty and a personal resolve to devote each moment of my tenure to transform the PAF into a more efficient and hard hitting force....`` (http://www.pakdef.info/pids/paf/interview.html)

So Musharraf, a non-martial race guy, led the Army in Kargil, while the PAF Chief (a martial race guy) did not agree to it. Then Musharraf and a core group of Muhajir generals (non-martial) carried out a coup, and got rid of a completely Punjabi (martial race) govt., and no one in Pakistan, including the martial races, complained. Then Musharraf got rid of a lot of Martial race PAF generals, and no one complained.

I never heard the word Martial race in my military career. Though I do think it did exist in the previous generation (around 71 times), specifically with respect to Bengalis. The only place I have heard of it now, is from Indians on this site.

#117 by His Excellency

++++
Do you really think chowkies here are going to accept your ludicrious assertions.....
++++

The ``ludicrous assertions`` are by well known Pakistani journalists. I have quoted Altaf Gauhar and Ardeshir Cowasjee. And I can quote more. If Dawnites and Newsites can accept these ``ludicrous assertions``, I don`t see why chowkies won`t.

++++
This is exactly what makes Pakistanis proud of the Army.
++++

Well, even General Pervez Musharraf seems to be apprehensive that Pakistanis are not proud of the Army and understandably so:

---

http://jang.com.pk/thenews/aug2003-daily/09-08-2003/oped/o4.htm

The News, Karachi, Pakistan
Saturday August 09, 2003-- Jamadi-us-Sani 10, 1424 A.H

A candid talk
by Mir Jamilur Rahman
mirjrahman@hotmail.com

..... President Musharraf expressed his deep concern over the anti-armed forces propaganda in the national media. He detailed the misperceptions created by the negative reporting. President Musharraf should not get unduly perturbed on this trend. It is the natural and logical outcome of overexposure of the armed forces in the public affairs. Never before in the history of Pakistan the military personnel have occupied so many public offices. Its omnipresence in every sphere of public life and its omniscient attitude has not endeared it to the people. It has replaced the bureaucrat as the perennial target of public scorn. It has forgotten the old adage that familiarity breeds contempt. It is now the armed forces personnel who run the public utilities, supervise the sports, regulate the utility tariffs, and catch the thieves under NAB, head the postal department, the universities and research institutes. With a public exposure of this magnitude the criticism would not only continue to flow but become intense too.

---

Pakistan`s army is not a national one, it is one of ``martial-races``. In practical terms, it means that 80% of Pakistan`s army is from only five districts: Attock, Rawalpindi, Chakwal, Jhelum and Gujrat in Punjab; and three districts of NWFP: Mardan, Peshawar and Kohat.

Sindhis, like the East pakistanis in pre-1971 Pakistan, have negligible representation in the military. And this creates the same type of alienation. Most of the land allotted in Sindh, for example, is owned by an officer from the recruitment area between the Indus and the Jhelum. When an absentee landlord from a different area controls a large tract of land in another province, complications are bound to arise.

And even within Punjab, there is scope for resentment. Dr. Hamid Hussain has written extensively on the fauji-feudal synergy in Defense Journal (Karachi) and Covert Action Quarterly (Washington DC). He was most perspicacious when he wrote:

``The system of allotting agricultural land to serving and retired military officers have ..... contributed to the wedding of senior army officers to landed interests and corresponding class commitment.``

In fact, as Dr. Hamid Hussain has pointed out, it is Pak military that now epitomizes the worst of feudalism:

``In Pakistan, preferential patronage and threat of coercion are the two principle instruments through which work is accomplished. This means that local government will provide prompt services to the lands of the Army officers. In the case of irrigation and
water supply, paved roads and timely provision of seeds, fertilizers and pesticides, preference is given to army officers` properties.``

And recent articles (by Pervez Hodobhoy, for example) on the Okara Military Farm has shown that the military is as determined as the ``best`` of the hereditary feudal lords to retain its feudal privileges even in Punjab.

How coercive the military can be to protect its corporate and feudal interests was amply illustrated in recent articles on the Okara Military Farm. Here`s something to mull over by anyone who might have have the illusion that the military feudals are more benign than the heriditary feudals:

---

The Friday Times, Lahore, Pakistan
August 15-21, 2003

EDITORIAL
Okara peasants, military and national interest
by Najam Sethi

``..... the arrogance of the OMF (Okara Military Farms) can be gauged from the text of some letters written by senior officials to relatives of the allegedly offending tenants threatening them in clearly unlawful terms. We are in possession of two letters sent to the OMF ``employees``, dated Aug 26, 2002, and Jan 24, 2003, by the farm officer, a major. These show the mindset of the military authorities towards the Okara tenancy issue in particular and civil-military relations in general. In one of the letters, the major writes in English: ``It has come to our notice that your parents/relatives living in chaks of Mil Farms are involved in anti-state activities. You are directed to motivate your parents/relatives to desist from anti-state activities and to co-op with the Pakistan Army and Pakistan Rangers. If you will not do this for the state, appropriate disciplinary action will be taken against you.`` .....``

---

#117 His Excellency

``Do you really think an army that has been sending its generals regularly to attend US military courses for the last 30-40 years can be that ``child-like``?``

Well, let`s take ``Field Marshal`` Ayub Khan. He was a Sandhurst graduate. But nonetheless, Pakistani journalists have written of his child-like trust in martial-races theory. In fact, even his ghost written autobiography (Friends Not Masters) reeks of racist bigotry against the majority of his compatriots!

#114 by nakhok

+++
The ``cowardly part`` is the result of an inane belief and child-like trust in the martial-races theory. In this respect, Pakistan`s army has chosen to remain stuck in the era of cavalray warfare. It was so in all the four wars of 1948, 1965, 1971 and 1999.
+++

This inane beliefs and child-like trust seems to be emanating from your mind alone. Do you really think an army that has been sending its generals regularly to attend US military courses for the last 30-40 years can be that ``child-like``? Do you really think chowkies here are going to accept your ludicrious assertions like ``Pakistan`s army has chosen to remain stuck in the era of cavalray warfare``. I mean c`mon... Your hatred of Pak Army is understandable. This is exactly what makes Pakistanis proud of the Army.

There can be no military solution to differences between Pakistan and India. Pakistan`s military must cease to see itself as the Prussians of the subcontinent. General Pervez Musharraf had done a disservice to the subcontinent by planning a military solution via Kargil even as the civilian leaders of Pakistan and India were talking peace in Lahore. It was as wrong as it was imprudent.

Altaf Gauhar was, by no means, the only writer to blame Pakistan`s military for its Prussian complex in the aftermath of the Kargil fiasco. Here`s one from the doyen of Pakistani journalists, Ardeshir Cowasjee:

---

DAWN, Karachi, Pakistan
18 July, 1999

End Game?
Ardeshir Cowasjee

..... As for our war-mongers and zealots, the uneducated and ignorant majority,
they should be informed by the government in power that India makes a formidable foe.
Its armed forces are twice the size of ours, making it impossible for us to sustain a military conflict. Economically, if reserves are anything to go by, India is forty times our size. It is of no use us propagating the myth that one Pakistani soldier is equal in strength and courage to five Indian soldiers. Our retired generals, colonels, air marshals, wing commanders, admirals and commodores do us a disservice when they air their views on the national media and relate how, whenever Muslims have gone to war, it has been against a foe far superior in number but their spirit of sacrifice and their valour have always made them victors. Wars now cannot be won without global sympathy and support. Propaganda must have credibility behind it. .....

---

The four wars mentioned by Altaf Gauhar (1948, 1965, 1971, 1999) were all wars of the post cavalry warfare era. But so brainwashed were the Pakistani military by its belief in the ``one Pakistani soldier = ten ``Hindu`` soldier`` theory, that they leaped before looking into everyone of the four wars.

I am not sure if martial-races theory had any validity even in the heydays of cavalry warfare. And in the modern era, it is simply an overt symptom of racist bigotry.

HE, Nakhok:

You people are having a very foolish argument. Bbesides, when did Altaf Gauhar become the know all judge of the Pakistan Army? His opinion is just that, an opinion. I would say that the only time the 1 Pakistani = 10 Indian statement was actually spoken on record was 1965 by Ayub. Niazi too made some equally idiotic statements like his ambition to overrun India to connect West and East Pakistan, but his statements were not ethnocentric.

113, 114: My reading of the situation finesse`s the difference between both the responses:

``Firstly, this is not a reflection of martial race theory. It is a reflection of Pakistan`s accurate assessment of India`s military preparedness in 1999. The fact is that India was ill-organised and unprepared for Kargil.``

Well this assesment wasnt so accurate wasnt it? Indian Army showed an ability (after the initial misreading of the situation) to move a very large amount of troops and artillery rapidly into the region (we could have moved an entire corps if we wanted). It is this tremendous increase in logistical capability that took the Pak army by surprise. To bring the Air Force into play early also showed ability in the higher command to take a combined arms approach. These are the responses that Pak`s were ``ill-prepapred`` for.

To assume that Indian troops are demoralized, ill-prepared, disorganized and that the Indian army will immidiately run to the political leadership and sue for peace, is but another form of delusion similar to the ``martial race theory``. This argument is similar to the Pakistani teenagers on the net who insist that PAF due to its ``superior`` training/jazba is more than a match for the IAF.

``(d) India will not expand the theater of conflict due to fear of nuclear escalation``

Fact is that India did not escale anywhere along the international border. But between the two extremes of all-out war and right away sueing for peace there were a wide range of options available to the Indians which the Paks didnt think through clearly.

#113 by His Excellency

++++
The cowardly part is pure exaggeration; Armies plan operations for geo-strategic reasons, not to prove their bravery
++++

The ``cowardly part`` is the result of an inane belief and child-like trust in the martial-races theory. In this respect, Pakistan`s army has chosen to remain stuck in the era of cavalray warfare. It was so in all the four wars of 1948, 1965, 1971 and 1999. Altaf Gauhar made that clear very very explicitly in his ``Four Wars, One Assumption`` when he wrote:

``..... all these operations were conceived and launched on the basis of one assumption: that the Indians are too cowardly and ill-organised to offer any effective military response which could pose a threat to Pakistan.``

Mercifully, General Pervez Musharraf has been jolted, first by the Kargil fiasco, and then by the American ultimatum after 9/11. And that is why he is now perturbed enough to publicly admonish those that continue to dream of unfurling the Pakistan flag atop the Red Fort.

It is important for General Pervez Musharraf to strive to transport the military mentally forward from the age of cavalry to the age of modern wars - otherwise its inane trust in the martial-race theory and in the vulnerability of the ``cowardly and ill-organized`` enemy can accidentally trigger a nuclear war in which no tactical finesse will prevail to prevent a catastrophe for Pakistan and India alike.

#112 by nakhok

++++
Altaf Gauhar was very very explicit in this article written in the aftermath of the Kargil misadventure when he wrote, ``..... all these operations were conceived and launched on the basis of one assumption: that the Indians are too cowardly and ill-organised to offer any effective military response which could pose a threat to Pakistan.``
++++

Firstly, this is not a reflection of martial race theory. It is a reflection of Pakistan`s accurate assessment of India`s military preparedness in 1999. The fact is that India was ill-organised and unprepared for Kargil. (The cowardly part is pure exaggeration; Armies plan operations for geo-strategic reasons, not to prove their bravery)

Secondly, Altaf Gauhar`s article ignores the primary assumptions of Kargil, which had nothing to do with race, bravery, Red Fort, etc. These real assumptions of Kargil were:

(a) China will support Pakistan.

This assumption was proven wrong when Zhu Rhongji and Chief of PLA asked Musharraf to withdraw NLI/Jehadi elements and instead pursue the diplomatic route. This was the biggest shock to Musharraf.

(b) U.S. will stay neutral.

Since Clinton had described Kashmir as a nuclear flashpoint, the assumption was that U.S. will immediately press for summit level talks between India and Pakistan to resolve this dispute. Instead, Clinton refused to discuss Kashmir will Nawaz Sharif until Pakistan withdrew the NLI/Jehadis.

(c) Pakistan`s political leadership will mobilize public support for the intrusion

Musharraf had assumed that since Nawaz had already okayed the Kargil plan months ago, the entire political leadership will stand by the operation. This didn`t happen. Deprived of political support within Pakistan, Kargil became Musharraf`s personal project.

(d) India will not expand the theater of conflict due to fear of nuclear escalation

India instead threatened to blockade Karachi and attack across international border.
Between June 6 and July 9, both countries traded nuclear threats a dozen times.

Unless you are wedded to the defunct `martial race theory`, I suggest you expand your list of favorite Pakistani analysts... to get a richer, more complete understanding. The `martial race theory` was applicable in an era when soldiers fought on horseback with bayonets, swords and rifles. In modern wars, we don`t have horse-mounted cavalries and swordsmen. Howitzers, fighter jets, submarines, missiles and tanks are the new `martial races`.

#109 His Excellency

++++
You have misread Altaf Gauhar`s ``Four Wars, one Assumption`` article.
++++

No, I have not. The title itself, ``Four Wars, One Assumption`` tells it all. Altaf Gauhar was very very explicit in this article written in the aftermath of the Kargil misadventure when he wrote, ``..... all these operations were conceived and launched on the basis of one assumption: that the Indians are too cowardly and ill-organised to offer any effective military response which could pose a threat to Pakistan.``

++++
General Niazi`s troops were outnumbered in East Pak, not outfought
++++

This was just another way of hanging on to the martial-race theory in the aftermath of 1971. ``An army of martial-races cannot possibly be out-fought ..... It was all a grand conspiracy ..... Furthermore, it was outnumbered.``

++++
To build Jehadi morale against a larger Indian Army, the Pakistani generals may even have encouraged such notions. But the Army cadres themselves don`t believe in such theories.
++++

Altaf Gauhar`s article, ``Four Wars, One Assumption`` very clearly indicates that the Army rank and file had continued to believe in the martial-races theory atleast thru the fourth war, namely, the Kargil misadventure of 1999.

In the aftermath of Kargil and the American ultimatum after 9/11, General Pervez Musharraf may have belatedly realized the folly. Hence his admonition to those that dream of unfurling the Pakistani flag atop the Red Fort. Unfortunately, the martial-races theory had been nurtured among Pakistani soldiers (rank and file) for so long, that General Pervez Musharraf cannot force a change overnight. But he must keep on trying because such foolhardiness can accidentally trigger a nuclear war where no tactical finesse will prevail to prevent a catastrophe for Pakistan and India alike.

++++
If the Army believed in martial-race theory, it wouldn`t have bothered to think about such tactical aspects.
++++

Even an army of martial-races thinks about ``such tactical aspects``! And, needless to say, it automatically assumes that the ``cowardly and ill-organised`` enemy is incapable of coping with its superior tactical finesse.

The bottom line is that General Pervez Musharraf and his army continued to believe even after 1971 (perhaps, especially after 1971) that Pakistan`s military can be ``outnumbered`` but cannot be ``outfought``. So a dose of ``such tactical aspects`` is all that was deemed necessary to send the numerically superior Indian army packing!

tahmed

One should not be so blinded by prejudice as to totally denounce a person...
Bhutto had good qualities and bad... to deny either is an injustice to History... In the end his fall was because of his ego... but as the facts of the case have since then revealed... he didn`t deserve to be hanged.

The fact that Bhutto was unable to overcome his character flaws was only to our detriment because the man had tremendous potential.

-YLH

ahmedzai #107 you are quite right in that there was a perception of bhutto being a champion of the poor. and indeed that was the only time i have seen our poor, suffering people actually get excited in huge numbers with any politician.

unfortunately, as you note, the whole thing was a cruel joke he played on the suffering poor of pakistan. His was driven not by any concern for their suffering but by his own ego. The nationalizations you mention were driven by his ego rather than common sense, since he wanted to become the Wadera of Pakistan, even though people had elected him on a different understanding.

The man deserved to be hanged.

More important, is there any hope that there are better days ahead for our people? You seem optimistic with musharaff, and so far he does seem to be focussing on many of the right things. He has made mistakes (most notably in suppressing the secular parties). But there is some hope here. He is certainly not a complete disaster like those before him.

#102 by nakhok

You have misread Altaf Gauhar`s ``Four Wars, one Assumption`` article. While he does impute martial-race theory to Ayub Khan`s 1965 and Yahya`s 1971 wars... he never states that the Pakistan Army started Kargil in 1999 to unfurl Pakistani flag at Red Fort in Delhi or to demonstrate a superior martial race at work. In 1999, the Army based its intrusion on the element of surprise, secrecy and tactical advantage. Not on the basis of martial race theory. The goals of Kargil were also not to conquer Delhi or hoist Pakistani flag at Red Fort. Kargil`s goals were specific: control the Srinagar-Leh highway, alter the LOC, put pressure on Srinagar and internationalize the Kashmir conflict.

It may be that the Jehadis believed they were fighting for conquest of Delhi. But there is a difference between Jehadi assumptions and Army`s assumptions. Jehadis are not the brain behind any operation. They are just the brawn. You may be right about Jehadis believing in martial-race theory. To build Jehadi morale against a larger Indian Army, the Pakistani generals may even have encouraged such notions. But the Army cadres themselves don`t believe in such theories. Such theories died in 1971 when sheer numbers dictated the outcome. (General Niazi`s troops were outnumbered in East Pak, not outfought)

This is evident in the brilliant planning of Kargil itself. Instead of relying on the ``superior martial prowess`` of Pashtun NLI troops, the Pak Army relied on element of surprise, secrecy, early snow meltdown and tactical advantage (of heights) in Kargil. If the Army believed in martial-race theory, it wouldn`t have bothered to think about such tactical aspects.

Scott, 106

I believe that a civil--and hence a developed--society requires political correctness and for one to be sensitive to others’ feelings in terms of race and ethnicity.

``Quite frankly the Pathan probably found nothing abhorring about it.``

I’m not so sure about that. He may not have shown it, but I’m certain that deep inside he resented that a great deal and, if continued, the build-up of that resentment will manifest itself one day in bloodshed.

Your post did make me laugh, though. :)

Tauheed at # 87:

``ahmedzai/rozaiba: bhutto was worse than ethnocentric. he was bhuttocentric.``

LOL.

Indeed, most people believe that he was Bhttocentric and that this is a reality.

I was talking about the perception though. It is well documented that in his election campaign, he addressed and won over the poor, majorly from Punjab and Sindh. Also, he had the support of many Urdu-speaking stalwarts. This he was able to do in addressing each of these ethnic groups in their language.

His major economic blunder was nationalization of institutions that led to lack of quality of products and lack of management skills that confront Pakistan today.

I always thought why some TNTs cannot grow up:

---

I found the solution in the Pakistani text books which clears the riddle

---

The Pakistan Social Studies textbooks prescribed for Standards IX and X under the title `Pakistan Ideology``

``Pakistan ideology is based on the ideas of Islamic system and it was also a reaction to the Hindu and British exploitation of the Muslims of the sub-continent. It was a revolt against the prevailing system of India where the Hindu nationalism was imposed on the Muslims and their culture.`` The textbook further goes on to say ``The Hindus and Muslims, in spite of living for centuries could not forget their own individual cultures and civilisation and kept away from each other. They could not amalgamate in each other`s way of life to become one nation. The main reason for this difference of cultures, civilisation and outlook was the religion of Islam which cannot be assimilated in any other system as it is based on the principle of …oneness of God….On the other hand, Hinduism is based on the concept of multiple Gods. How a nation who believes in the multiplicity of Gods could bestow its belief in oneness of God and there lies the difference between Hindu and Muslim way of thinking.``

Godot 98 - ``The boy made a mistake in doing something. The Punjabi owner turned to him and said (quite loudly) in anger, “You idot. You are a goddamn Pathan and will remain one.” Fresh from the US, I found that attitude abhorring and absolutely mind blowing. I couldn’t believe my ears. What I found most disturbing is that both individuals, the Punjabi and the Pathan, took that as a matter of fact``
Quite frankly the Pathan probably found nothing abhorring about it. The panchod Punjabi will panchod speak his panchod mind quite freely as and when its panchod required. Its as normal as breathing and all of us who have lived in this panchod land know it. And I for one hope that the panchod politically correctness will never influence the panchod Punjabi.
-
Scott

Dear Ballu Khan,

Moderation is required in your understanding of partition... I am surprised how a n intelligent person like yourself can go making such statements.

-YLH

```...........1947 simply drew boundaries around cultures that were distinct anyway. Punjab and Bengal were exceptions, rather than the rule. .............``

Propagandist!! Pakistan was built on the blood of Indian muslims of Northern Indian (OUnjab, UP, Bengal ect.) by the TNT minded elites like His Excellency . This cultural theory is just a bloody lie!!!

#97 by His Excellency

++++
Old concepts like martial-race theory, etc are now scoffed at.
++++

The news of the death of martial-race theory is a gross exaggeration.

Belief in martial-race theory and the dream to unfurl the Pakistani flag atop the Red Fort have carried over into the 21st century, alive and kicking. But the Kargil misadventure and the US ultimatum to Pakistan after 9/11 offer a glimmer of hope. It might finally nudge Pakistan`s ruling elite to be weaned away from their chauvinistic and irredentist staple.

Altaf Gauhar (who had been editor of DAWN and information secretary under ``Field Marshal`` Ayub Khan) wrote a very candid article right after General Pervez Musharraf`s Kargil misadventure (1999). It was titled ``Four Wars, one Assumption``.The article clearly indicate that ``martial-race theory`` was alive and kicking even in 1999 under General Pervez Musharraf. Here`s an excerpt:

---

The Nation
(Reprinted in Pakistan Link of 9/10/99)

Four Wars, one Assumption
Altaf Gauhar

..... In our fifty-two year history we have fought two fully fledged wars with India and engaged in two military episodes: the 1948 tribal adventure and the current Kargil misadventure.

The latter military episodes, were both launched under civilian governments, but the 1965 and 1971 wars were fought by military rulers, Field Marshal Ayub Khan and General Yahya Khan, without any consultation with the people or their representatives.

The point is that all these operations were conceived and launched on the basis of one assumption: that the Indians are too cowardly and ill-organised to offer any effective military response which could pose a threat to Pakistan. Ayub Khan genuinely believed that,”as a general rule Hindu morale would not stand more than a couple of hard blows at the right time and place.” (Ayub Khan: Pakistan’s First Military Ruler, page 328). .....

---

The martial-race theory has moulded the psyche of Pakistan`s military for so long that it can`t really transcend it in a short time. But the Kargil misadventure seems to have knocked some sense into General Pervez Musharraf. His decision to succumb to USA ultimatum on the morrow of 9/11 wouldn`t have been possible without the sobering 1999 experience in Kargil.

So sobering were the Kargil misadventure and the post 9/11 American ultimatum, that within months of 9/11, General Pervez Musharraf was publicly rebuking the hotheads for sustaining the dream of unfurling the Pakistan flag atop the Red Fort:

---

The News International, Karachi, pakistan
Thursday, June 07, 2001-- Rabi-Ul-Awall 14,1422 A.H

CE asks Ulema to avoid irresponsible statements
By our correspondent

ISLAMABAD: Chief Executive General Pervez Musharraf on Tuesday described statements like hoisting of flag on Red Fort, made by some Pakistani leaders, as ``irresponsible`` and called upon Ulema to look deep into the damage caused by such statements.

``These irresponsible statements are causing sufferings among the Indian Muslims and as a result, Pakistan is being dubbed as a terrorist state,`` he said .....

---

The Friday Times, Lahore, Pakistan
June 29 - July 5, 2001

A n a l y s i s

The general speaks his mind
by Khaled Ahmed

..... [General Pervez Musharraf] pointedly asked the bearded audience why they felt the need of challenging India constantly and promising to the Pakistani people that they would `soon` fly the green flag on the Red Fort in Delhi? .....

---

The News International, Karachi, Pakistan
Wednesday, June 13, 2001-- Rabi-Ul-Awall 20,1422 A.H

The summit`s prerequisites
by MB Naqvi
mbnaqvi@cyber.net.pk

..... Deprecating the dangerous loose talk of some Jehadis that they will not only carry Jehad into India but would fly Pakistan flag on Delhi`s Red Fort, [General Pervez Musharraf] berated their lack of concern for its impact on Indian Muslims. It is unnecessary to emphasise how foolish this militaristic notion of conquering India by force of arms is, quite apart from the fact that there is no earthly reason why any Pakistani should want to conquer India-despite its perceived faults. .....

---

Temporal:

I don`t know why you are tapping my back in agreement. However, yes, we agree. All this fuss is much ado about nothing.

#91 by m_souza

+++
Pakistanis(most of them) are ex-hindus who were once forced to convert but now love shariat and everything abt it
+++

This is a myth. Conversions occurred in these areas due to the efforts of religious scholars and sufis. There are no recorded incidents of people being force to convert under threat of death, torture or confiscation of property.

+++
Most of all....paki identity and unity lies in hate-india/indians(their previous self), hate-hindus(their previous self too) policy. Maybe they feel it is necessary to do so because only by rejecting and disowning any remains of their previous hindu/indian selves can they seriously move on and start to belong...
+++

You can`t really examine Pakistani attitudes towards India in isolation from the Kashmir dispute. As soon as Pakistan won a new state, the Kashmir issue fell into our laps from the sky.

Since Indian movies, music and festivals such as Basant are popular in Pakistan.. I don`t think Pakistanis hate Indians or Hindus as such. BTW, Nepal is a Hindu state which has excellent relations with Pakistan.

I don`t think Pakistanis hate India just to feel culturally different. These cultural differences existed even before 1947. A Gujarati Indian has little in common with a Punjabi, Pashtun or Baluchi from Pakistan. There may be some cultural similarities between Sindhis in Pakistan and Rajhasthanis in India... or the Punjabis living in Haryana and Pakistani Punjab.

Cultural similarities between Indians and Punjabis exist only in the states that were partitioned in 1947 (i.e. Bengal, Punjab). Rest of India has nothing in common with Pakistan. The foods are different, languages are different, customs are different. Muslims living in Kerala or Tamil Nadu will perhaps feel like a fish out of water in Karachi, Quetta, Lahore or Peshawer. And vice versa.

1947 simply drew boundaries around cultures that were distinct anyway. Punjab and Bengal were exceptions, rather than the rule.

rozaiba:

frankly my dear:)

pakistan is...
you are...
i am
others are

so what`s the fuss about?

...t

Zakkk, 96

You know, about a year ago, I was in Lahore buying something from a thela. The owner of the thela, a Punjabi, had a fifteen year old boy, a Pathan, as his helper. The boy made a mistake in doing something. The Punjabi owner turned to him and said (quite loudly) in anger, “You idot. You are a goddamn Pathan and will remain one.” Fresh from the US, I found that attitude abhorring and absolutely mind blowing. I couldn’t believe my ears. What I found most disturbing is that both individuals, the Punjabi and the Pathan, took that as a matter of fact. I did wonder, though, if that Pathan boy harbored any resentment against that Punjabi (or, in fact, because of that one person, for all Punjabis).

Now, I’m not recounting this tale to tell you that I think all Punjabis are racist. What bothered me is that how open racism is in Pakistan. There is an absolute lack of sensitivity when it comes to dealing with another ethnic group. I agree with you that this kind of behavior and racist slurs should be absolutely banned in Pakistan. Pakistanis need to be taught from an early age that all people are created equal and that “you do not want to treat someone the way you do not want to be treated as.”

#89 by godot

+++++
HisExcellency and Rozaiba

This is an “opinion” piece that is based on observations and thoughts, not a research paper with a long list of bibliography. If you are familiar with “Op-Ed” articles you would know what I mean, but apparently you are not.
+++++

I have no problems with your ``opinion`` piece and please don`t get offended if my counterargument comes across as too aggressive. In a milder vein, I believe that your
reality map needs updating and a broader perspective. You have yourself admitted that you migrated to the US in the 60s/70s. Is this right? If it is, then perhaps your analysis of present-day Pakistan needs a fresh re-think.

Until the 1970s and mid-1980s, Punjab was still an economically prosperous province but backward in education and infrastructure. Even middle class Punjabis had racial bias against Urdu-speaking people. Terms like ``Hindustoora``, ``Bhaiyya`` and ``Muhajir`` were used for people belonging to the Urdu-speaking community. Similarly, Punjabis had this notion that Sindhis are cowards and lazy, and Pashtuns are stupid and greedy.

But that was 20 years ago. Now it is considered unfashionable and boorish in Pakistan to use racial slurs against other communities. Literacy rates have risen. Old concepts like martial-race theory, etc are now scoffed at. Attitudes have changed. We are not living in the Pakistan of 20 years ago in which literacy rates were 18% and urbanization was just 15%. Now literacy rates are approximately 35-40% and urbanization is 30% as well. This means greater exposure and awareness.

The 1990s ushered in a new era of corporate Pakistan in which an MBA or BBA degree was more important than your ethnic background. In Pakistan`s corporate world today, there are no ethnic groupings. Similarly in the political arena, there is no classification of people as Sindhis, Balochis, Punjabis, Muhajirs or Pashtuns. A common Pakistani identity has already evolved in these circles. In Pakistan`s cities, a common culture and concept of nationhood has become a reality.

You might argue that urban population is just 30% of total population. What about the remainining 70%?

IMHO, the common Sindhi and Balochi`s immediate problem is water, job, health, illiteracy and fear of his Sardar. He is too engrossed in these problems to worry about national identity, authentic nationhood, meaning of Pakistan, and Islam.

The Sindhi/Balochi`s problem is poverty and feudalism. Not Pakistan. Not India. Not Allah. Not Punjab. Not the Army. And not lack of democracy... because even if we restore democracy, the common Sindhi and Baluchi will still have to vote for his Sardar.

Pakistan, Allah, Democracy... these terms will only make sense to the common Sindhi/Baluchi once he is free of feudalism... and able to think for himself.

In Punjab and NWFP, feudal power was smashed by land reforms. Now we only have dozens of small landlords.. who sometimes lose their own seats in an election. But there are no feudal lords such as Nawab Gurmani, Nawab of Kalabagh, Nawab of Bahawalpur, etc who were a law unto themselves. As a result, Punjabis and Pashtuns are better integrated with each other today.

People of Sindh/Baloch. need economic empowerment which can only be achieved by smashing feudalism first. If we can do that, we will never again have to ask futile questions about ``Pakistan ka matlab kiya`` and ``what is Pakistan`s identity``? The answer will present itself even before we ask for it.

godot #91 If you see the debate on this article as being limited to whether or not ethnic issues threaten pakistan`s existence, then the answer clearly is a simple no.

Reason: regardless of what individual communities (ethnic, religious) want, states do not simply fall apart as a result of some group wanting out. The overwhelming military advantage of nation-state armies over any internal force ensures that. Even east pakistan, a thousand miles away with relatively meagre pakistani forces of a little of 100,000 men in a country of then 50 million people, did not have a hope of breaking away without india intervention. Biafra tried to break away from Nigeria in the 1960`s, and even the relatively weak Nigerian forces were enough to prevent that. The Soviet Union broke up largely because it was allowed to do so without any serious military intervention from the kremlin. The russian government decided to draw the line on chechens, and chechnya isnt going anywhere.

So, while we will always have idiots calling for the ``Liberation of .......`` (you can fill the blanks with any ethnic group in Pakistan), that isnt going to happen.

On the question of values, I am glad you agree. However, you may consider it noble, but that is much more to this concept than being noble. I consider this to be issue to be central to the future success of pakistan as a nation.

I`d say Pakistan needs an anti racism law...that would be a start! The level of racism at times is quite staggering.

dost-mittar No93

~~Fully and totally agree. I’d add to that any nation that was “created” “unnaturally,” such as the US (as opposed to Britain or Japan)~~

Britain gives the illusion of being a homogenous, and a ``natural`` nation. In actual fact, what we know as Britain is an artificial construct which was settled around the end of the seventeenth century when the English armies finally managed to destroy the Scottish and Welsh states and made them subservient to the English Crown. The first victims of the British empire were Scotland, Wales and of course, Ireland. The troubles of Northern Ireland are a legacy of the English brutality that forged the nation of what is now know as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Nationalist sentiment and hatred of England has always been strong in Scotland and Wales. It persists to this day.

Did you know that Wales has its own language? Welsh is an ancient Gaelic language and if you go to Wales you will hear it spoken everywhere and all the road signs are written in English and Welsh. The ancient Scottish form of Gaelic is almost extinct now, a victim of English cultural hegemony.

godot:
``“Any nation state needs a reason to justify its existence.”

Fully and totally agree. I’d add to that any nation that was “created” “unnaturally,” such as the US (as opposed to Britain or Japan). ``

...as a well-meaning outsider, I would advise you not to go there. Wasn`t Pakistan created for a reason and isn`t that reason still valid? If you try to find a new reason, you might start peeling the onion skin.
There is much greater heterogeneity and ethnic pride in India and still a notion of Indianness seems to be developing there in a sort of natural evolution without anyone trying to impose it from above. I think that the same is happening in the case of Pakistan.
The best thing to develop a sense of nationhood would be to get on a fast track to economic growth, which would create a large middle class with a vested interest in the nation. And if the price for that is to end a never-ending confrontation with a larger neighour, so be it as long as that neighbour does not threaten the status-quo.

rsaxena, HisExcellency

what this rona-dhona abt paki identity.....

we all know pakis are not arabic....

Pakistanis are ex-hindustanis so how can they be arabic or Iranians

Pakistanis(most of them) are ex-hindus who were once forced to convert but now love shariat and everything abt it

Most of all....paki identity and unity lies in hate-india/indians(their previous self), hate-hindus(their previous self too) policy. Maybe they feel it is necessary to do so because only by rejecting and disowning any remains of their previous hindu/indian selves can they seriously move on and start to belong...

Well I feel that the geographical entity as a STATE (Pakistan) came easier said than done. It is the psychological approximate of nation, nationhood or nationism, whatever you may call it that is still evolving.

Pakistan has to be seen as an amalgam of various ethnic groups whose roots seldom overlap. The Punjab is largely Matriarchal society, that taking a que from Nazar Khan`s article has produced more romantic heroes than leaders and rulers. Though it has the largest majority, it is also the most flexible and compliant. NWFP is a largely patriarchal society with a very strong sense of tribal identity, though it has always remained at the cross roads of invasions. The sense of being Pathan is very strong and outlives petty tribal differences specially when they have to live outside the frontier. Both Baloch and Sindies (majority are of Baloch descent) are fiercely independent and have their common hero in Mir Chakkar Khan Rind. However they remain in the clutches of the worst type of tyranny in the Sardari system. In some remote areas like NokChah in Balochistan, most people have not seen Pakistan beyond the nearest water hole. On all peripheries, the hold of the tribal and feudal chiefs is final. Somehow I feel that Pakistan`s Mahattir will come from Sindh or Balochistan. I also feel that the word Muhajir is an insult to the concept of Pakistaniat.

However, there is a brighter aspect. All major towns and cities are distinctively Pakistani and there is a very strong sense of the Pakistaniat. This is particularly true of our cricket that has played the most significant role in inculcating nationalism. I have seen kids as far away as Taftan, Amri and Suntser playing cricket and trying to become Imran Khans and Miandads.

Political elites and the Government of Pakistan have thus far failed to transfer the seeds of modernity and modernisation in such areas in particular and rest of the country in general. I wonder, if the state has the capacity to reform the society. It is therefore time for the private sectors to step in for the socio economic development leading to societal fusion. Human resource development at grass roots will usher a new era of complementary cooperation while overriding irritants.

Herein lies the future of our generations.

Rafay Alam, 85

“Any nation state needs a reason to justify its existence.”

Fully and totally agree. I’d add to that any nation that was “created” “unnaturally,” such as the US (as opposed to Britain or Japan).

The children in Pakistan must be taught what “Pakistan” means in secular terms. A “Pakistan” based solely on “Islam” is not the glue that will hold the country together. America was never defined as a “Protestant” nation, but was defined in secular terms: “Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness.”

I like your idea of the ideology of “Freedom” very much for Pakistan. This can certainly bind people together if this ideology can be put in terms that common people of Pakistan can understand it well. However, if this ideology is not addressed properly and cleverly, the shortsighted hard-core Islamists in Pakistan will find an excuse to shoot it down.


Zakkk, 78

Thank you, Zakkk, for making an excellent point. That is precisely the point I had in mind when I said that a concrete and a realist solution to be put in place and acted upon to save the country before the ethnic polarization gets out of control. However, you said it a lot better than I did (or could).

For Pakistan’s sake, I hope the Center is paying attention to people like you.


Adnan, 77

“I don`t find your article insightful because it never offers any solutions or suggestions.”

- Adnan, I suggest you read the article one more time...and this time pay attention!

“...it paints a picture which is bleaker than it really is...”

- Perhaps. I will be very happy if I’m unequivocally proven wrong in my perception. However, by your own admission, there is an element of truth in what I’m saying.

“Hope you don`t take it as a personal attack”

- Not at all! Good friends disagree all the time. I think a healthy disagreement (ie, without malice) makes a friendship stronger :)


Tahmed, 83

I have no qualms about the universality of humanity you keep driving towards. I think your views in that respect are quite noble and I’m in full agreement with you on that. Nor I have any issues with defining “values” as they pertain to a “nation.” However, that’s not the debate here.

The debate here is: 1) whether ethnic polarization exists in Pakistan at a level approaching danger, and 2) if yes, then how to address it for the well being of Pakistan as a well-integrated and a cohesive united nation.


HisExcellency and Rozaiba

This is an “opinion” piece that is based on observations and thoughts, not a research paper with a long list of bibliography. If you are familiar with “Op-Ed” articles you would know what I mean, but apparently you are not.

HisExcellency: You are too India-obsessed and too full of it to be taken seriously.<