Pakistan under its Ethnic Shadows

re:#30 by i-am-the-cheese
The answer that you gave may satisfy me but is that the right answer? This is for Pakis themselves to figure out. I obviously cannot know what is going on in their minds.
Sridhar

re:#24 by HisExcellency
You guys keep harping on the Gujarat pogrom to prove a point but conveniently forget about the Shia-Sunni problem that has split Pak vertically. How many Shia doctors have been killed in Karachi alone? How many prominent Shia and Sunni leadera have fallen to this religious rivalry? I am too tired to keep posting Urls. I am sure you can do a google search and find answers to above questions.
Sridhar

re: Is Pakistan viable?
Pak is a geographical reality today. The big question as to: is this a viable entity can be answered only by Pakistanis as they know Pakistan better than anybody else. I can make a few generalisations though.
Pakistan would be viable if it puts into place a system that gives every state and every citizen a stake. Every citizen should feel that he ``belongs``. A lot of feeling of ``Pakistaniyat`` today is defined with respect to ``denial of Indian-ness``. Pak should evolve beyond this.
In this, i am encouraged by people like YLH who feel every one on Paki soil is a Pakistani, regardless of religion, ethnicity etc. That is the way to go.

Unfortunately, by sheer size and population, Punjabis have come to dominate Pakistan. They also have an over-whelming presence in the Army. As Army has ruled Pak for much of the last 50 years (directly or indirectly), a feeling of exploitation and being given a ``second class status`` has occupied the psyche of other ethnic groups like Sindhis, Baluchs etc. This is not good for Pak.
How can Pak ensure equal opportunitiies? I cannot think of a better way than democracy. Even if Pak dictators are unable to give up power, they should at least not interfere with local governance of states, districts etc and let an autonomous system (responsive to local population) evolve. That is the only way to ensure Pak`s survival.
Sridhar

Re: Montolives # 1

“If there was aberration it was the inclusion of East Bengal in Pakistan and that has since been corrected.”

Interesting interpretation of history!

Faruk

Not that same question again! Of course Pakistan is viable, fissures and all that. If it were to dissolve, it would have done so after the separation of Pakistan. Most Pakistanis think of themselves as Pakistanis, whatever else they may or may not think of themselves. So, quit worrying!

#27 by ballukhan

You are already scurrying for cover under fire from my counterargument. First you claimed that there are deep religious and ethnic faultlines in Pakistan. When I countered with facts and ground realities about religious harmony in Pakistan between Shias and Sunnis, you are now talking about ISI, feudals, local democracy and Ahmedis.

Once again your argument is frilled with half-truths. Here is some education for you:

Firstly, ISI is a professional organization comprising serving military officers-- not a militia of volunteer Jehadis. It has a charter and discipline of its own.

Secondly, the ISI is not actually growing in size. In Spring 2002, Musharraf shut down the Kashmir Cell of ISI and brought down ISI`s total strength down from 20,000 agents to 12,000 agents. This was reported in the international press as well.

Thirdly, the presence of rogue elements within ISI does not necessarily mean that the entire organization is Jehadi.. or that these rogue elements are powerful enough to have a say in policy making/implementation. A major or colonel does not have the same power as a 1-star or 2-star general. Policies are made by the latter.

Fourthly, the linkage between sectarian outfits like SeS/LeJ/SeM and the ISI/Army is rather flimsy and imaginary. At best it is a conspiracy theory.

Fifthly, the only Shia-bashing in Pakistan happens inside one constituency: Jhang. Rest of the 340-odd constituencies do not experience sectarian polarization.

Sixthy, although you are right about Ahmedi bashing, size of the persecuted Ahmediyya community in Pakistan is small.

Religious fault lines are too weak to destabilize Pakistan. Ethnic fault lines on the other hand are the only threat since the Sindhis and Baluchis comprise a sizable 15-18% of the total population and 56% of total area.

However, a variety of factors have dampened this threat.

Pakistan is only and only viable if it re-enacts the constitution of 1973 as it was on October 1999, and get rid of military dictatorship as soon as it can, otherwise there is no hope. I have travelled all across Sindh and Baluchistan in 80`s and early 90s, practically hitch hiking through rural areas, met people and listened to them. Keep in mind that, at that time Urban sindh was fighting a civil war among itself and rural sindh was a no man`s land for non-sindhis and was practically being ruled by dacoits and separatists. The anti-army and anti-establishment feelings were at the highest in both areas. I have come to the conclusion that there is only one thing that can save Paksitan from the carnage of 80`s and 90`s where state power was brutally used to supress any dissent, and that thing is constitution and rule of civilian law. The integrity of Paksitan is in danger not from ethnic faults but because of usurping army and an over oppressive, brutal, corrupt and unaccountable bureaucracy. In case any one has any doubts about what I have said, he must compare his notes with Bengalis.

#33 by rsridhar

In May 1, 2001, the Rodney Jones of Policy Architects International institute published a study on the Prospects of State Failure in Pakistan. In this paper, Rodney Jones outlined 6 potential centrifugal forces in Pakistan that could lead to state failure. He then proceeds to analyze each threat and concludes that:

1. Separatist potentials in Pakistan have been largely defused by demographic, political and economic change, and by the vaccination effect of the Soviet intervention and defeat in Afghanistan


2. Separatist potentials in Pakistan could only be reawakened in the contexts of: (a) war with India, or (b) sustained geopolitical intervention by a global power


3. Separatism had significance in Pakistan during the Cold War. The demise of USSR removed the most plausible external source of support for successful separatism in Pakistan


4. Ethno-linguistic or regional movements (e.g. in Sindh) could still stir up a lot of local disorder and tie up the security forces within Sindh (e.g. like the 1983 MRD movement against Zia). But this is a very different problem, and a much less serious a threat to the state than potentially successful separatism


5. Baluchi separatism had already been suppressed by the Army before Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The Afghan war practically buried the movement. Later Zia-ul-Haq coopted the Baluch into the power structure by giving them autonomy to control resource inputs, limit the effects of modernization and maintain their traditional authority over tribes and clans


6. Sindhi nationalist movement is the most significant separatist threat to Pakistan especially in the event of war with India. Sindhi political unrest is not totally vanquished today. With a highly developed language and compact culture, its separation could turn northern Pakistan into a land-locked country.


7. However, Sindhi nationalist impulse has been eroded by huge demographic changes, the integrative effects of Bhutto`s PPP having ruled Pakistan thrice, and some degree of success of Sindhi middle classes making their way into public employment.


8. Migration of Hindus from Sindh to India in 1947 deprived the Sindhi nationalist movement of its vanguard. Instead, the residual Sindhi population was swamped by in-flow of urbanized Urdu/Gujratis speaking Muslims from India. Later, Punjabis and Pashtuns migrated to Karachi and Hyderabad for employment. As a result, Sindhi political class was marginalized in its own province.


9. In 1972, the Sindhi Prime Minister Z.A. Bhutto declared Sindhi as official language of Sindh and initiated a quota system in government jobs and educational institutions. These measures took the steam out of the Sindhi nationalist movement


10. Separatist tendencies flared up during Zia`s rule in Sindh. But Sindhi nationalists failed to wrest leadership from the hands of Benazir Bhutto`s PPP which was committed to national integration and federalism in Pakistan


11. Sectarian organizations in Pakistan can unleash political violence and terror. However, these forces do not pose a separatist threat. There is no single organization in Pakistan that dominates the Islamic revival. Most Islamic organizations are non-sectarian in nature and are committed to federalism.


12. A greater threat to regional security emanates from the Kashmir issue, not the political unrest within Pakistan. The Kashmir issue is the primary source of nuclear, missile and advanced weapons proliferation in the subcontinent. A successful U.S. policy on Kashmir ``could not be allowed to be partial to either side, and this means not being partial to India by default or pretext. Cooperation in counter-terrorism, for instance, should be with both governments, not with one against the other``

# 19 by His Excellency

``The Yugoslavia example just scores a critical point: in the absence of democracy, a unifying ideology such as Islam, communism, fascism, etc. can also hold a nation together for several decades. ``

A viable nation should hold together for more than ``several decades`` instead of imploding at the first available opportunity. Ergo, Yugoslavia was not a viable nation even in the making.

On the other hand, a federation governed under democracy, is usually a nation in the making if it is not already one.

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

``Thirdly, the presence of rogue elements within ISI does not necessarily mean that the entire organization is Jehadi.. or that these rogue elements are powerful enough to have a say in policy making/implementation. A major or colonel does not have the same power as a 1-star or 2-star general. Policies are made by the latter. ``

that is precisely the problem, the order to attack the Indian parliament or to protect Dawood in Isloo doesnt come from some ``rogue`` agent but from the 1-star and 2-stars themselves.

Pakistan`s destiny has been controlled from inception by the 3 As - Allah, America and the Army and not necessarily in that order!

General Pervez Musharraf has continued with the same tradition. He has inducted some 600 military officials to take over top civilian posts (from chairman of cricket board to chairman of WAPDA) for which they have no training. And he has imposed the LFO on the country to institutionalize the army`s supremacy.

Pakistan`s military is essentially a tribal entity, rather than a national one. 80% of the military is recruited from 5 districts: Attock, Rawalpindi, Chakwal, Jhelum and Gujarat in Punjab; and 3 districts of NWFP: Mardan, Peshawar and Kohat. Under the circumstances, military dictatorship has always meant dictatorship of the recruitment area over the rest of Pakistan. Under military dictatorship, the geographical concentration of Pakistan`s military is inevitably a force multiplier for the centrifugal forces.

The erstwhile East Pakistanis are no longer around to be kicked around by the Pakistan`s army which continues to enjoy a monopoly over power in what remains of Pakistan. So, it is now the ordinary citizens of Pakistan, especially those not belonging to the chosen tribe, that must bear the brunt of the army`s boot.

Continued military dictatorship make Pakistan less viable as a nation rather than more viable.

Military dictatorship is making Pakistan less viable as a nation rather than more viable. 80% of the military is recruited from 5 districts: Attock, Rawalpindi, Chakwal, Jhelum and Gujarat in Punjab; and 3 districts of NWFP: Mardan, Peshawar and Kohat. Under the circumstances, military dictatorship has always meant dictatorship of the recruitment area over the rest of Pakistan. Under military dictatrship, the geographical concentration of Pakistan`s military is inevitably a force multiplier for the centrifugal forces.

Pakistan`s military is a tribal organization, rather than an organization representative of Pakistan`s diverse population. When this tribal entity hogs power, it inevitably strengthens the ``centrifugal forces``.

The East pakistanis were the first to rebel against this millstone of military dictatorship. It came not long after ``Field Marshal`` Ayub Khan celebrated Pakistan`s decade of development. The East Pakistanis instinctively knew why they had failed to see the ``development`` first hand.

The situation hasn`t changed except that the East Pakistanis are no longer there to be kicked around. Military boots now must kick butts in West Pakistan itself. The military remains the most pampered group in Pakistan. Its land grabbing has strengthened the ``centrifugal force``.

Sindhis, for example, are poorly represented in the military - so most of the land allotted in Sindh is owned by a Punjabi or a Pushtun officer. When an absentee landlord from a different area controls a large tract of land in another province, complications are bound to arise.

---

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_20-10-2003_pg3_3

Daily Times, Pakistan
Monday, October 20, 2003

Is there any hope for democracy?
By Dr Hasan-Askari Rizvi

..... the military, especially the army, has expanded its corporate interests to such an extent that it is now present in all major sectors of state and the society. This is manifested through induction of mostly, but not exclusively, retired military personnel in important state and semi-state institutions. The other strategy for enhancing the military`s influence is the phenomenal expansion of the undertakings of four charitable foundations established by the three services. Now, some of the paramilitary forces are also planning to set up charitable foundations for generating material resources for their personnel.

The military`s business, commercial and industrial interests have expanded so much that they have stakes in all major domestic state policies. These developments have practically overwhelmed large civilian sectors. As a matter of fact, there is hardly any exclusively civilian sector left. .....

---

http://www.dawn.com/2003/10/15/op.htm#3

DAWN, Karachi, Pakistan
15 October 2003 Wednesday 18 Shaban 1424

Khakis` inroad into civilian sector
By Zubeida Mustafa

..... By providing them with employment, the military leadership has managed to create a growing constituency whose allegiance is assured. Awarded not just jobs but also land grants, contracts, industrial permits, etc the servicemen act as anchors of stability in the system.

Large chunks of retired servicemen have been made quiescent by giving the armed forces a large share in the economy through the foundations which have been set up (Fauji, Bahria and Shaheen). They have virtually emerged as big industrial/commercial empires with assets and investments said to be to the tune of at least $5 billion. They provide 18,000 jobs to the retired and serving servicemen and constitute a substantial part of the national economy by operating over 40 enterprises ranging from airlines, banks, industries, security services, leasing companies to bakeries. .....

..... The infiltration of the servicemen into the civilian administration amounts to tightening the military`s grip on the power structure. The army`s presence in politics is already a controversial issue. But when members of the armed forces begin to control key posts in the administration the army`s hold on society as a whole becomes stronger. Furthermore, the division between the haves and the have-nots tends to deepen as a neo-military class enjoying better privileges comes to the fore. This militarization of the country`s administration will eventually destroy the traditions espoused by civil society. .....

---

Excerpts from:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23614-2002Nov21.html

Washington Post
Friday, November 22, 2002; Page A01

Pakistanis Question Perks of Power
Many Say Military Confuses National Interest With Its Own
By John Lancaster

.....

``Some critics go a step further, accusing the military of deliberately stoking tensions with India, particularly over Kashmir, to justify its hold on resources and power. ``Peace would be a disaster for the military,`` said Pervez Hoodbhoy, an anti-nuclear activist and MIT-trained physicist who teaches at Quaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad.``

.....

``There is no denying the military`s dominant role in Pakistan. The military owns the best farmland and several of the largest industrial conglomerates. Retired or active-duty military officers run the ports, postal service, electric utilities, sports federations, telecommunications authority, culture ministry, mineral development agency, anti-drug police, railroads, civil aviation authority, national shipping company and Pakistan`s biggest steel mill. They hold top administrative posts at the best universities. Many ambassadors are retired officers.``

.....

``Under an arcane point-based system that dates to the British Raj, the military also rewards its senior officers by allowing them to purchase agricultural and urban land from the army`s vast inventory of real estate at prices far below market value. A number of these properties are grouped into ``defense societies`` in tony suburbs of Karachi and other major cities. The societies are administered by the Defense Housing Authority, which ensures the provision of municipal services. Officers who acquire such land often develop it as rental property or sell it for hefty profits.``

......

``One of Pakistan`s most coveted addresses, for example, is the blandly named Army Housing Scheme II, which is built on the site of an old antiaircraft battery in the upscale Karachi suburb of Clifton. A gated community protected by paramilitary troops, the development consists of spacious, Mediterranean-style villas grouped around a playground and an elaborately landscaped Japanese-style garden. Nearby are clothing boutiques, jewelry stores, restaurants and a yoga studio.``

.....

``Installing men in uniform in civilian businesses and institutions did not begin with Musharraf. In 1980, Zia established a 10 percent quota for military personnel in civilian government jobs. But Musharraf, by all accounts, has taken the process further than his uniformed predecessors, dispatching military ``monitoring teams`` to key civilian agencies and replacing top officials with senior officers.``

---

#43 by bongdongs

++
the order to attack the Indian parliament or to protect Dawood in Isloo doesnt come from some ``rogue`` agent but from the 1-star and 2-stars themselves.
++

India accuses ISI of orchestrating the attack on Indian parliament but Pakistan denies this allegation. Why don`t you argue your point on the basis of proven facts instead of dubious allegations and conjectures?

A parallel (although considerably more sophistiscated) analysis on India can be found in Sulekha.com called ``Why India is a nation`` by Sankrant Sanu.

Why India is a nation

#40 by nakhok

++
A viable nation should hold together for more than ``several decades`` instead of imploding at the first available opportunity. Ergo, Yugoslavia was not a viable nation even in the making.
++

Yugoslavia was a basket case even before it became a nation in 1940s because of intense religious rivalries between Serbs and the rest. The centrifugal forces in Yugoslavia were so strong that even democracy couldn`t hold them together. Tito`s socialism and benign dictatorship backed by a powerful military proved more successful than democracy in keeping the country together. This only proves that there are some states in this world, that can only be kept intact with force and dictatorship. Democracy does not work in such states.

Democracy is no doubt a strong centripetal force. But it doesn`t necessarily guarantee national cohesion. If there are irreconcilable religious differences between ethnic/religious groups in a country, even democracy will fail to hold them together. Willingness to compromise is a pre-requisite for democratic process to function properly. In Yugoslavia, you needed a charismatic fauji to run the system.