Last Rites in Kashmir or a New Journey?

Re: # 78

``Netizen #73 You say you deliberately (and not unintentionally, as I assumed) illustrated my point (thus reinforcing it) even as you were trying to argue against it. ``

i am not arguing against your statement. I agree with you, I have no love for muslims and islam. For that matter for any religion. I just consider islam as Arabian nationalism, nothing more than that. I just wonder to what extent people believe in things without questioning it. Simply because they were born in a family that professes a particular religion.

Netizen #73 You say you deliberately (and not unintentionally, as I assumed) illustrated my point (thus reinforcing it) even as you were trying to argue against it.

ha! ha! I dont need to say anything then - and let you prove and disprove yourself at the same time. All in one post.

Re: # 79

Why was Ghaffar khan imprisoned?

``In today’s NWFP, nobody even talks about that referendum. Politics has moved way beyond 1947. I am afraid today Jinnah would win any referendum in NWFP with a 90% majority ``

the world has changed several times. Forget about Jinnah, even if that Bangali Baba (islamic fanatic from Bangla) stands he will win easily. Its NWFP after all, other than Islam and Kalashnikov what else do they have?

I am also not sure of the British angle in creation of Pak. They would even be happy to have several smaller hindu (if i may) countries rather than a united country. Like the arabs (some 20+ states), easy to influence. (Can you imagine if all the arab states become one country controlling oil reserves). THe british were definitely too weak to shoulder any further responsibilities.
But if the nationitself is bent on destruction, why would they stop it. Theres are saying in hindi `` ghar ka bhedi Lanka dhayee`` (sorry for the errors) something like a mafia man ratting on his own people.


``if the attempted coup had not failed in the early 50s, Pakistan would have been a communist state today.``

whats the scoop on that? my inderstanding is that no muslim nation can EVER become communist. Simply because as a communist you become atheist, which muslims have a hard time in swallowing. THey are programmed diferently since early childhood.

#75 by Netizen

I have read that article at rediff.com too. Raman is just recycling what many Indians writer have been saying for a long time and w/o any relevant fact to prove their theories.

I am personally an admirer of Khan Ghaffar Khan but the fact is that he lost referendum over Pakistan issue in 1946. So if Raman claims that NWFP was against the creation of Pakistan than that is not a fact. In today’s NWFP, nobody even talks about that referendum. Politics has moved way beyond 1947. I am afraid today Jinnah would win any referendum in NWFP with a 90% majority much to the consternation of Wali Khan s/o Ghaffar Khan. Balochistan had two areas one under the princely state of Qalat did haggle over it.
Both Khan Ghaffar Khan and the Khan of Qalat were looking to have their own independent areas and were not talking about staying with India any way.

The British role in India and their allege support of Jinnah has not been proven by any document so far available at British India library and it is just a theory. Like the one currently being discussed on Sulekha.com that Gandhi Ji was a British agent and loyalist.

If somebody talks about a country serving or not serving western interests, he first have to define what western interests were that the British wanted India or Pakistan to serve. By the time Brits left India, they were pretty much past their prime and after that, they have just followed the US lead in the international affairs.

Once India and Pakistan became independent countries, Brits had no control over the direction they took and if the attempted coup had not failed in the early 50s, Pakistan would have been a communist state today. What guarantees British had that Nehru or Gandhi would always lead India?

So talking about Western interests is just hogwash and there is no substance to it.

This whole thing is just off topic and has been beaten to death on this site already. If you are interested in that debate, please search the archives.

Watch the indian establishment quietly close ranks and clamp down on Kashmir.Especially after Babu Singh`s mouth-off about J and K.To top it off, India has an ultra-nationalist President who is the Commander-in-Chief and he is the presiding deity of the indian system of government.Singh has no option but to backtrack and soft-peddle on this ``CBM initiative`` mess.Singh also has a July 18 summit with Bush in DC.He will have a chance to explain things in person to Bush about why he has to backtrack a bit.We indians are an ultranationalistic lot, despite our diversity.

Re: # 81

tahmed:


``Surely you are not unaware that hindu nationalism existed prior to 47!! RSS e.g., was formed way before partition, as I understand. Gandhi was murdered by a hindu extremist. Even the Congress had a few prominent hindu extremists (Patel I think was one of them). ``

Gandhi was murdered because he was too cozy towards pak. He was again on fast so that india could deliver several crores to pak and to prevent him from going on a pilgrimmage to pak. Anyway, if you have forgotten, Gandhi was Congress`s foremost leader, a party accused by you of being a hindu chavunistic party. So one hindu nationalist party kills the leader of another hindu nationalist party? Man i am lost now....

of what significance was RSS at that time? Even Yasser, while defending Jinnah, never mentioned of the threat from RSS. He was all against Gandhi and Congress.
Congress was as against RSS as it was against ML. Still now that they are the main opposition parties. Congress doesn`t even mind to sleep in bed with Indian Muslilm League. Jan Sangh (RSS) hardly use to win any seats until 1992, after Babri.

Jinnah was more afraid of subjugation through Congress than from RSS/Jan Sangh.
Regarding Sardar Patel, simply because he defended Iok and rebuilt the somnath temple, are these grounds for being a hindu nationalist?
As there was Patel as home minister so was Maulana A.K. Azad as education minister.

Netizen #75 You write ``Hindu nationalism in 47? could you please elaborate a bit more. ``

Surely you are not unaware that hindu nationalism existed prior to 47!! RSS e.g., was formed way before partition, as I understand. Gandhi was murdered by a hindu extremist. Even the Congress had a few prominent hindu extremists (Patel I think was one of them).


As for the rediff article, just switching a word here or there (my use of ``afraid`` rather than the exact word used int he article) does not change the substance - the writer is clearly off his rocker when he tries make it appear that Pakistan was a creation of the British to make India weak. The entire thrust of the article is quite absurd.

Re: # 85

Raja Pakistani,

If there would not have been paks desire to have kashmir and indias stand to maintain it, Jinnah and gandhi would been confined to history books. Also, the difference in religion (which in fact was the basis for partition) and indias substantial muslim population keeps on stoking the fire.
Apart from the political standpoint of who will govern the country there were not any substantial issues b/t pak and bd. And being not lying next to each other takes care of the border problems.
Hence comparing indo-pak relations to pak-bd is totally inapproriate.

I think a new aspect should be introduced into this debate, to get a better idea of the different views on independence:

What are our Indian colleagues views on the creation and independence of Bangladesh. Did it have a right to break away from Pakistan? Was India correct in supporting the breakaway? Another point that is important to note is that East Pakistan broke away from an entity called Pakistan. While Pakistan broke away from the British Empire. The entity India being created one day after Pakistan..........

The second point that should be discussed is the kind of attitude Pakistan has towards Bangladesh. Is there the same kind of hatred in Pakistan for Mujeeb, that exists in India for Jinnah? And is there the same kind of dislike in Pakistan, for Bangladesh that exists in India for Pakistan?

Pakistan is a racist construct which means land of the pure, by implication it means others are probably impure.

Pakistani flag is comparable to Confederate flag because the very design defines the dichotomy of Muslim greens and non-muslim whites, a divisive - segregationist view in my opinion.

Romair:
Bangladesh and every other future province of pakistan has the right to seced from the Federation using Jinnah`s twisted communal logic.
In Bangladesh case, West Pakistan got a free ride of sorts for the horrendous crimes Army commited there on the behest of Commander In Chief Yahya Khan. Japanese Imperials were wiped out from the face of the earth for doing something of the same magnitude.

RE: HP:
``people of Pakistan are generally democratic and live with diversity of opinion. ``

I agree fully, though as a trend upper-middleclass urban Pakistanis are an exception.

Re: # 89

more eg. Sahir Ludhianvi, Habib Tanvir, Safdar Hashmi too were/are left inclined. But I am talking about the masses not individuals. recent eg. malaysia, afghanistan.

``Neti baba you need to do a whole lot of reading about Pakistan before you comment on any thing about Pakistan. ``

or maybe I will just learn from enlightened souls like you :)

``Who was that Ghar ka bhedi? ``

in ramayana, it was ravanas brother. In sub-continents history there are too many.

#84 by Netizen

“Why was Ghaffar khan imprisoned?”
He opposed the army on several occasions. He never opposed Pakistan after 1947. His brother became a chief Minister of West Pakistan in the 50s.

“whats the scoop on that? my inderstanding is that no muslim nation can EVER become communist. Simply because as a communist you become atheist, which muslims have a hard time in swallowing. THey are programmed diferently since early childhood.”

Your understanding is absolutely wrong. Pakistan always had an active Communist Party and baring a few Hindus, all members and activists were born and raised as Muslims. Both Communists Parties in India have members and Activities who were born in Muslim Families. One prominent name would be Kaifi Azm, Shabana Azmi’s Father.

I am an atheist from my school and college days in Pakistan. Nobody did anything to me. All Muslims wanted me to marry their daughters. I have never been to any Mosque in my life after I was 11 years old. My father did not know how to offer prayers nor do I and I have not taught anything about any religion to my kids either. We go to Pakistan often and nobody dare touch my kids or me. I strongly oppose any attempt to make Pakistan an Islamic state.

In 1950-51, a group of Army officers and the Communist Party of Pakistan attempted to overthrow Liaquat Ali Khan. He was the Prime Minister then. They failed and were arrested.

Neti baba you need to do a whole lot of reading about Pakistan before you comment on any thing about Pakistan.
Who was that Ghar ka bhedi?

#88 by Raw_Dust

``though as a trend upper-middleclass urban Pakistanis are an exception``

How many upper-middleclass urban Pakistan do you know? I know a lot at least in Sindh and Karachi and they don`t care and mostly welcome diversity of opinion. Fairytales are never true.

romair, most people in india dont give 2-hoots for bangla desh or jiye sindh or anything. only concern was large refugee population and the way govt put a VAT of 20% on things like bus-tickets to pay for refugees. there is no moral support from indian people for bengali freedom fight. mukti-bahini support was mostly at government-army level. no big rallys collecting funds for bengali freedom fighters that i recall..they got their ammo form indian army straight

Re: # 91

I support indian intervention to protect hindus. Apart from that nothing more. Doesn`t make much difference whether it is BD or pak. May be things would been nastier on the NE front had pak still stayed. It was said that indian forces will be welcomed for the forst 10 days, the 11th day it will be viewed as a Hindu occupying force. India just took advantage of paks fault, same as pak took during punjab disaster and currently kashmir.
May be if pak had stayed to our east, checking illegal BD migration would have taken a higher priority.