Can Pakistan Work?

It is not unusal for the people used to looking answers in one book alone are not finding satisfactory answers in this book, reviewed by Pervez Hoodbhoy. No single book alone can tell all past, preset and future precisely. I believe that it is his honest assesssment based on his knowledge, information, training and thinking. He could be right or wrong. One can go to a library and look at number of books published just 10 years ago and see how the predictions, predicaments and conclusion turned out to be partially right or partially wrong.

Knowledge is to be gained, horizon is to be bioadened and thinking is sharpened from reading such a book. One has to read several books on the subject and adding peersonal firsthand knowledge to develop a picture in mind.

This book clearly describes the possible dangers ahead and actually suggests doing something about meeting the challenges ahead of time. This is not a postscript or a history book book like Rise and Fall of Rome or British Empire.

Arguably, there are many assertions made by Stephen Cohen, which can be debated and proven wrong. For example right from the begining, he credits Pakistan creation to Hindu-Muslim divide and TNT. That is highly debatable because none of this mattered to the West of Jamuna river. People did not vote for the Unionists, Khudai Khdmatgars and others for Hindu-Muslim or TNT basis.

Author has rightly pointed out two sacred cows since the creation of Pakistan - Military establishment and Islam. But one does not have to be very smart to know this best known secret. Muslims were behind in every field that matters - social and economic indicators. So the role of Islam predated in letting its followers on a slow suicidal path before military joined in to make the decline path slippery and steeper. Once this broadline or conclusion is reached, one can add filler material to make it a book from the history of the region and Pakistan.

It is wrong to assume independent day as the starting point for everthing Pakistan is today. Nations are made by people and people in the region with aspirations, work ethics and morals existed much before. On many topics, 57 years of Pakistan only add few data points on a plot. The state of Pakistan can not be held responsible for inherent weaknesses of a nation at the starting point. The people of the region, except for some advances during British rule, were screwed due to the fact of converting to something that did not give as much importance to improvement in life as performing certain ritualistic cultural duties. If nothing else, then at least lowering the status of women started this whole screwing up process and people found lagging behind their non-Muslim neighbors in everything that mattered in this world.

Military early on realized their interests at stake under non-military leadership. They started carving out their share of the pie until it was necessary to have full authority over carving out their share of the pie. So they brought the pie to the miliatry headquarters by moving the military at the top of the government. They have the pie, knife and authority to cut whatever piece they like to cut for themselves.

The most important part of Stephen Cohen`s thesis is comparing Musharraf, despite favorable bias towards him, with Yahaya Khan. This part alone is causing most criticism from Musharraf lovers here at chowk. Since Yahya Khan is history and postscript can be written with much more accuracy, the future of Pakistan in the hands of somebody with the thinking of Yahya Khan is a very scary thought. In fact some of the similarity is coming true with the quick decisions to opt for mitary solution in Balochistan and Waziristan. The other similarity with Yahya Khan is poor professional skills, inability to make right decisions at the right time and flip-flopping on very serious matters like Uniform recently, to a childish level.

Like Zia before him, Musharraf was promoted for being dumbest of all and least threat to civilian government and liek Zia he looked absolutely dumb on the day he overthrew civilian government with making a story from Ibn Safi novel. He ran the country horribly until 9/11/2001 and attack on WTC towers came as his rescue just as Russians entry into Afghanistan came as a rescue for Zia. The effects of Zia are still there and the effects of Musharraf will also leave a dark shadow on the society.

Authoritarianism ahs never worked in Pakistan and did not work in the long histry before that due to the triabl frontier mentality of the people living in the region. They people were never trusted or included and in return people do not have fond memories of not a single ruler from the last 1000+ years. Pakistan needs inclusion of people, democracy, weak center, weak provinces and possibly strongest districts. Let the dust fly at the national and provincial capitals and all decisions to be taken at district levels with absolutely no curriculum guidelines for the textbooks. Decentralization along with promotion of native cultures are key to meeting the challenges posed by radicalism and militarism. Pakistan, through stong center, has put all eggs in one basket. Today it is Musharraf, tomorrow it might be a Mullah. The pople who dont want to be effected by the central government should not be effected by the federal government. Leave them alone. The Mullahs might have power in 4 districts but should not be allowed to play havoc with the destiny of remaining 50 districts.

M.B.Z.Isphahani is on a perpetual high induced by god knows what.Isphahani sahib please hire an interpreter, your posts seem insightful - but only if the majority of chowkies could figure out what youre saying! Hey as long as it makes you happy...keep `em coming.

Pakistan Military in politics, Indian Jingoists, and the Global Mad Maulvis: a potential for disaster!!

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

ferozk #7 Good to hear from you after such a long time.

It is true that while Musharaff`s political actions are offensive, it is the economic aspect that is important. After all, ultimately, what matters is the economy, and political institutions are then forced by economic factors to change anyway. Indeed, the economy has picked up, and much credit goes to the strong economic team (ishrat hussein, shaukat aziz in particular). The growth rate has indeed been quite good past two years (6.4 percent projected this year), and no doubt the improved economic picture benefits from actions taken by the US government to ease the debt burden. Other positive things are the expected opening up of the US market to pakistani goods exports; spillover effects of FDI in call centers; the strategic gwadur port linked to newly constructed motorways, that has a potentially enormous hinterland extending to all of Pakistan and to central asian states and china`s sinkiang.

Whether all this will pay off in the end remains to be seen. Cohen`s pessimistic assesment of Pakistan is nevertheless a useful reminder of the dangers that face Pakistan today. But time (and God) is on the side of the Pakistani people, and the mullahs and the military are bound to be put in their proper place on the margins of pakistani society as the middle class becomes increasingly prominent due to economic growth.

By Pervez Hoodbhoy

*****
According to a popular but rather humor­less Pakistani joke, “all countries have armies, but here, an army has a country.”
*****

Separate electorates and the Pakistan Movement in British India were all predicated on the argument that one-man one-vote democracy is unsuitable for a pluralistic society like pre-partition India.

Shrill complaints against the ``tyranny of the majority`` was the foundation of the Pakistan Movement. But it is as ironic as it is apt, that in post-partition era, Jinnah`s Pakistan continued to be plagued by the very same premises that gave it birth, namely, that one-man one-vote democracy is unsuitable for a pluralistic society.

The ruling elite in West Pakistan which had once inveighed against the Hindu majority in pre-partition India, found themselves inveighing against the Hindu-tainted majority of East Pakistan. ``Separate Electorates`` and ``Parity`` were the neo-shibboleths to neutralize the majority voters in East Pakistan from having a significant say in Pakistan`s affairs.

Pakistan`s ruling elite could not live underthe ``tyrannjy of the majority``. So even in independent Pakistan it took to insisting on living under ``tyranny of the minority``!!!

Today, it is Pakistan`s military that has emerged as the crown jewel of Pakistan`s ruling minority.

#7 by ferozk

if left to a referendum, mushraff will likely get a nobel prize by 97% margin ..
no no not peace prize, the economics one.

Ralph,

You actually get what MBZ Isphahan is saying? I swear I have never managed to figure it out... despite concerted efforts...

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

re ijaz_gul #3:

Writers do carry their biases in their works. A writer who doesn`t carry his biases with him is more like a journalist. In the absence of indigenous talent we are forced to rely upon westerners to tell us about our countries.
The main reason why Cohen`s work is important is because his training as an academic forces him to look at Pakistan in a framework formulated by the familiar talk of social,economic and military parameters. He then tries to fit those parameters to earlier studies of other Asian and latin American countries and tries to come up with some scenarios. And that in a nutshell is what most professions are about. What passes for professional excellence is simply an ability to come up with a suitable remedy or diagnosis on the basis of some data.
As some others have pointed out, there may be pieces of data he may be misinterpreting or ignoring all together. Jim Rogers is a well known financier who invests globally and has been to Pakistan a couple of times-once by car and the other on a motorbike. He strongly believes that the country will breakup in a decade or so. You can take issue with his prediction...and he has been wrong several times, but you have to understand that his analysis is the result of the framework he adheres to that has paid rich dividends in the past. Pakistan may defy all these naysayers and go on to become a prospersous country...but that would simply imply under or overestimating the criticality of some other data point.

re urstruly aka Prostitute #1:

Not getting any clients lately? The mullah really needs your services.

later
-sac

chowk staff: I did not submit #9. My post seems to have disappeared. Could you please look into this?

Siddiqua, welcome to the Club. I liked your style and approach. You remind me of Dr. Siddiqua of Karachi, an expert on security affairs and very incisive and candid indeed.I have always enjoyed listening to her.

Pakistan`s nuclear Doctrine and Policy. Well I think the biggest contributer has been the Qaid e Azam University Islamabad and no US GI, on an instructional tour of Pakistan. In any case, military men are not the right people to be evolving such doctrines.

Tahmed seems an ISSB reject. His criticism is always very pointed and gives his biases away.

As for the brave man Hoodbouy,he always posts an article but never interacts.

Hi,

The nuclear programme began in 1955 with the establishment of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission, and the nuclear weapons programme began soon after January 20, 1972, after the Multan Conference of senior scientists, attended by Dr. Abdus Salam and others where Mr. Munir Ahmad Khan was made Chairman PAEC and incharge of the bomb project. Dr. A.Q.Khan came in 1976 and KRL was a project of the PAEC (Project-706). A.Q.Khan was handed over KRL only in 1980 when the plant had been commissioned and he was working under Project Director Sultan Bashiruddin Mahmud who reported to the Member (Technical) PAEC who was responsible to Munir Ahmad Khan. Dr. A.Q.Khan was incharge of only one step in a series of equally critical and challenging steps to the bomb, and the PAEC was the overall incharge of the nuclear programme all along. It was only that A.Q.Khan got all the media attention and the government patronized him as the front man of the programme so as to divert attention from the PAEC where the real and substantial work was being done.

It was the PAEC under Munir Khan that mastered the complete nuclear fuel cycle and built the bomb and conducted the first cold tests in 1983 and later in 1998 exploded the bombs in Chaghi. Uranium enrichment too was a complicated process in which PAEC provided most the technical support and manpower and helped A.Q.Khan build advanced generation of centrifuges. A.Q.Khan had brought designs of first generation centrifuge machines which failed to enrich uranium in Iran.

The plutonium contract was cancelled only in 1978, where as A.Q.Khan came in 1976, and KRL had already begun in 1974. So both the uranium and plutonium routes to the bomb were initiated simultaneously by Munir Ahmad Khan after 1972. Thus, A.Q.Khan`s contributions have been overblown by the press and the media all at the cost of a blatant distrotion of facts regarding Pakistan`s nuclear history.

Regards.

The evolution of Pakistani society during the last 57 years should be seen in historical context.

America`s path to peace, stability and economic might was not a peaceful and smooth one either:

• After winning independence in the 18th century, America remained a country divided on the issue of slavery for almost five decades.


• The Civil War ended slavery but hundreds of thousands of Americans died in this war. The American president who ended slavery was assassinated.


• Yet this new America still didn`t have proper communication systems until the 1880s when the first railroads were laid.


• Until 1882, America was still a white country with a modest economy (but great potential). After 100 years of independence, America opened its gates to immigrants.


• After decades of economic growth and peace, American society was torn apart by the Wall Street crash and the Great Depression. Millionaires became paupers overnight and crime skyrocketed


• Despite the ban on slavery, America was a segregated nation until the 1960s and 70s. Blacks and women didn`t enjoy the same rights as white men. Another series of feminist and civil rights movement redressed this change after almost 200 years of independence.

Clearly, a young nation like Pakistan has not experienced an economic upheavel like the Great Depression, or a civil war like the American Civil War. There is no segregation in the country. Reform has been slow but it has been bloodless.

M.B.Z.Isphahani # 13

Can you write two posts without blaming the problems of Islam and Pakistan on Jews, Americans, British, Hindus, Thackerys, RSS, Nasreen and Rushdie.

Do you use these words to cast a spell on the minds of Muslims? :)

Dear Hoodbhoy...

Can Pakistan work?

It better .... for our children`s future... we have no other place to go to. So let us join hands... let us undo Zia-ul-Haq`s legacy... and let us build the liberal polity that will ensure a successful and prosperous Pakistan...


On another note: Here is another article by Dr. Hoodbhoy....

Miracles, Wars and Politics
http://www.naseeb.com/naseebvibes/prose-detail.php?aid=2284&pg=1