He Said, She Said temporal -- an excellent article. I forgive you all your sins too.

to the genteleman who thinks that the real constitutional experts sit in the Supreme Court, please note that those ``experts`` have probably already handed a draft of their next opinion justifying the referendum

to the rest of the world fixated on democracy or our lack thereof, Don McKinnon specifically, please take your democracy and stuff it. Democracy has failed us and is continuing to fail us. Yes, the cure for bad democracy is more democracy, but the cure for bad economic policy is not more bad policies.

Musharraf may not have done every thing my liberal heart desires but he has initiated more fundamental reform than any of the democrats who preceded him. Mush himself waxed lyrical about the police reforms and the devolution of power. What he forgot to mention was PEMRA, an independent body which regulates the electronic media, and more importantly is meant to dish out licenses for things like private TV and radio stations. Okay, so it has yet to grant any fresh licenses, but STN (aka PTV 3) has been privatised and at least the infrastructure for future growth has been set, which is far better than what BB did (forced STN`s shareholders to sell out to her hubby) or what NS did.

Democracy is wonderful in theory but I at least do not have the time to wait. I have one life and I would to see some reasonable results in this lifetime, not the next. We are stuck with dictators, whether they are elected PMs or army chiefs -- at least this one is honest and has a brain.

Aap Amrika Main Hotay Hain?? (Do You Live In America) Dear Ali,

You say that you are amazed when students graduating from one of the better business schools in Lahore want to get paid more than Rs. 5-6000 a month? Why are you surprised? In dollar terms, that amount works out to be about a hundred US dollars a month. In more practical terms, it adds up to about a months worth of petrol. After 12 years of primary education, a BA and a graduate degree, do you really think that people should be grateful if they make enough money to drive to work? How are they supposed to even think about independence, about a family, about all the rest that life entails on 5000 rupees a month? And if it is not possible for even the better educated and more talented young Pakistanis to make a decent living, what hope do the rest of the 140 million have?

I`m not saying that those students necessarily deserve to make Bill Gates kind of money but remember that a business school graduate in the US will, by and large, make enough not only to cover his petrol expenditures but also enough to cover his rent and living expenses. Is it any wonder then that those students all dream of moving to America?

Why I’m proud to be a Pakistani Dear Shandana,



May I add that your honesty and your writings are, at least in my case, among the things that make me proud to be a Pakistani. Bravo.

Pakistan, India and the Spirit of Chowk An unnecessary article which would have been better off not written is my reaction to this piece. I think there is a lot of force in what the comments above have said. In the end, you are only responding to people whom you dislike with the same petty-mindedness that you claim to be disappointed by.

Why the emphasis on civility, anyways? This is not some club in London where we are all gathered around, cups in hand and pinky raised. Perhaps that is what you intended but the fact that Chowk has grown bigger and and in a manner different from that intended by its founders is a good thing, not something to be decried. Desis are passionate people and quite often temperatures do get raised. But the important point is that we do talk here (rather than shoot each other). And the more important point is that the chowk-wallahs, the readers and writers who make up this community are fair-minded people who quite often intervene to reprimand people who break our unwritten rules of etiquette.

Trust people, Rehan Sahib, and they might even prove worthy of your trust. Yes, comments on Chowk are often harsh. But I would rather have an intense and brutal discussion than a mild-mannered chit-chat in which everyone concealed their true feelings.

As a Pakistani living in Pakistan, Chowk is one of very few avenues for me to directly engage with people across the divide. That opportunity is worth a lot to me and I treasure it. Please do not attempt to shut it down or narrow its scope. We need to talk to each other, and rude communication is still better than no communication.

Law, Development and How Not To Do It Dear AI #36

I am at a loss to understand your venom. For the record, I have never handled a case on behalf of any nationalised bank. In particular, I have never represented Habib Bank nor am I on their panel of lawyers. The only time I have ever represented any banking institution was on behalf of PILCORP about two years ago when I sued some gentleman for the return of approximately 3 lakh rupees for which I received the princely amount total of Rs. 16,500, which was then split three ways between me, my partner and my munshi. That amount was also declared as can be checked from the court files.

So far as saving the skins of certain bankers is concerned, my article has nothing to do with trying to prevent their investigation and/or trial. I have repeatedly stated that corruption of the sort indicated by you is undoubtedly criminal and should be punished.

My only point is that a loan default caused by purely business reasons is not a crime and should not be confused with genuine crimes. I also think that making all loan defaults into a crime will have a negative impact on economic growth in Pakistan as it will certainly discourage people from taking loans. None of that has anything to do with your concerns regarding the bank-wallahs.

It saddens me that you resort to such name-calling and to such insinuations. Your personal problems with Habib Bank may or may not be part of a wider problem, but they are certainly not relevant to the discussion at hand.

Urstruly # 35 and #34

What you are missing is the text of Ordinance IV of 2000 (dated 3.2.2000) which amended the NAB Ordinance, inter alia, by inserting Section 5(r).

I also disagree with you when you say that the NAB law leaves no room for absolute power. The Chairman NAB has the absolute ungovernable authority to pick up any person he likes and hold them in jail for 90 days while he “investigates” them. Quite often, this power is misused.

The best example of the misuse of NAB’s power is that of Siddiqul Farooq, the former chairman of the House Building Finance Corporation. After being picked up immediately after the coup, he simply disappeared. When his family filed a habeas, the prosecutor general stated in court that NAB did not have him. Another few months passed during which Siddiqul Farooq’s family finally managed to trace him to Malir Cantonment sub-jail and filed another habeas before the Supreme Court.

This time, the learned Prosecutor General appeared and admitted that yes, Mr. Siddiqul Farooq was in NAB custody and that he had been there for six months. His excuse was, that Siddiqul Farooq had been “forgotten after being dumped somewhere” to which the judges replied, thank Allah, he is alive. I am not making this up, that quote is taken directly from Dawn.

Undoubtedly, Siddiqul Farooq deserves no sympathy. But as a human being, he does have rights.

As you say, we can only hope for the best. But one cannot give blanket powers to people and then hope for the best. Powers must be subject to strict judicial control and must be defined. The NAB law either defines things too narrowly or leaves them open completely to the discretion of the Chairman NAB. There will be more horror stories tomorrow, not because he Chairman Nab is a bad person but because the law allows for discretion to be abused, and people will undoubtedly take advantage of that opportunity.

Law, Development and How Not To Do It Dear Urstruly (# 29)

I regret to say that you have misunderstood my point completely. My point was not that there is no definition of the term “willful default.” As per Section 5(r) of the NAB Ordinance, willful default is defined as follows:

A person is said to commit an offence of willful default under this Ordinance if he does not pay or return the amount to any bank . . . on the date that it became due . . . and a period of thirty days has expired thereafter.

Provided that it is not willful default under this Ordinance under this Ordinance if the accused was unable to pay, return or repay the amount as aforesaid on account of any willful breach of agreement or obligation or failure to perform statutory duty on the part of any bank . . . .

In short, the problem is not that there is no definition of willful default in the Ordinance but that the definition provided is so rigid. Willful default in Pakistan is like statutory rape in the US. In the US, it does not matter why you have had sex with a 15 year old girl. No matter how sophisticated she looked, no matter how drunk you were, the law presumes you to have knowledge of her being underage. Similarly, with the NAB Ordinance, the law presumes that all businessmen who have not returned their loans within 30 days of their being due have done so for dishonest or criminal reasons, and that presumption cannot be rebutted by showing that your business failed for commercial reasons etc. The only way you can rebut the presumption of criminality is to show that your creditor bank breached your lending agreement, which while a favourite argument in Pakistan, basically never works.

You mentioned the plea bargain aspect of the NAB Ordinance favourably, but there are two major problems with it. First of all, you have to admit your guilt first and then beg for mercy. My argument is that pure default should not be a crime in the first place. Secondly, plea bargains are always decided by a judge. Under the NAB Ordinance, the Chairman NAB is a judge, jury and executioner all in one. And while General Amjad is a famously honest man, this law will still be there tomorrow when we are back to business as usual and people like Saifur Rehman are in charge. Would you trust Saifur Rehman with the powers that General Amjad has been given? I don’t think so.

So far as my practice is concerned, I have no problems with the NAB Ordinance. My problems with the NAB Ordinance are as a citizen.

Law, Development and How Not To Do It

Thank you all once again for taking the time out to reply.

Al # 20 and # 15

NAB is only putting the fear of God into the bankers because it is the biggest stick in town these days. Legally speaking, NAB can only investigate bankers after getting permission from the State Bank of Pakistan and that provision has been toughened up in recent days making it even more difficult for NAB to get after bankers. It is also generally expected that within the next 2-3 months, all investigative powers with respect to bankers will be taken away from NAB.

The reason for this change is that bankers have stopped giving out loans because they were so scared of NAB. In fact, Gen. Musharraf had to give a public statement telling bankers not to worry because businessmen were facing so many problems in getting loans.

So far as Habib Bank’s performance is concerned, no doubt it could have been better. On the other hand, HBL’s performance has been much better than NBP and ABL, two other nationalised banks.

In conclusion, I do not have a problem with NAB going after those bank-wallahs who have accepted bribes to reschedule loans. That is corruption, plain and simple, and deserves to be stamped out. I do have a problem with a law which states that every person who defaults on a loan shall go to prison for 14 years, irrespective of why he defaulted, and irrespective of whether he is in a position to pay the loan back. Such a law is not only stupid, but barbaric, and one may note that the constitutions of many of the states, eg New Jersey and Michigan, provide that no person can be imprisoned for non-payment of a debt.

Fuzair #20

While I am certainly a supporter of privatization, I did not recommend privatization outside the particular context of the nationalised banks. With regard to these banks, I would repeat that their privatisation would be a damn good thing as I think that the nationalised banks are responsible for more damage to Pakistan’s economy than any other factor.

On a more logical note, the fact that Renault and Qantas have done well has no relevance to what is going on in Pakistan. Those examples only prove (at best) that in rare circumstances, state-owned enterprises can be run as well as private enterprises. It does not prove that those state-owned enterprises which are inefficient and badly run cannot be improved through privatisation. You yourself say that Renault and Qantas functioned well because the State allowed them to function as “private sector firms but ones that just happened to be owned by the state.” If so, what is wrong with going the whole hog and getting rid of state control altogether?

In the case of Pakistan, just take a look at the various banks. Out of the five big banks, the one in the best shape is MCB which coincidentally is the only to have been privatised. Out of the rest, UBL and HBL are financially in far better shape than either ABL or NBP, and again coincidentally, HBL and UBL are being run on professional/free market lines, whereas NBP and ABL are still being run like Kafka’s worst nightmare.

I am well aware of the various stories regarding how Mian Mansha got hold of MCB. Let us assume that he underpaid for the bank. So what? Ever since its privatisation in 1991 (92?) MCB has made money for the state and the amount of money it has made for the state far exceeds the marginal difference in the sale price, even if it is possible that someone could have paid more money for it.

To take another example, PIA not only has a cricket team which is used to nurture cricketers, it also has a kabaddi team. Why does my money go to pay for kabaddi wallahs? What does kabaddi – or cricket, for that matter -- have to do with the stated objective of transporting people from point A to point B in a reasonable manner?

To get back to where we had started from, my article was not about privatization. My point was simply that we cannot afford to have laws which scare people away from investing in Pakistan. So far as privatization is concerned, I think it would be a good thing, but that is another discussion. And on the subject of books, I would refer you to Daniel Yergin’s book, The Commanding Heights.

krashid #20

Again, the point is that you do not want to terrify everyone. Why would you want to terrify the investor looking to set up a factory in Pakistan? Under the NAB law, everyone who borrows money from now on faces the prospect of going to jail if his or her business fails, for whatever reasons. In other words, the consequences of taking a loan are now such as to terrify all reasonable honest people along with all corrupt people.

Even if one can justify such an approach, it still amounts to locking the barn door after the horse has bolted. People who have already defaulted and who have had their loans written off in the past are, by and large, not going to get investigated by NAB, no matter what General Amjad says. It is only those people who are currently in default or who may default in the future who have much to fear from the NAB law.

So far as your point about the difference to the common man from investment, the question is as to the alternative. There are articles appearing in the papers these days about how Pakistan should be like Cuba or Libya, i.e. self-sufficient. But just take a look around, people are voting with their feet. They are going to countries where they can set up their own businesses or work without fear of harassment or abuse, and they are leaving in droves. If you stop borrowing, you stop investment and ultimately, you stop growth. You stop economic growth, and the consequences are too fearful to imagine.

Also, once again, I am not saying that businessmen in Pakistan have a right to operate in crooked, illegal or unethical ways. All I am saying is that the NAB law insofar as it relates to loan defaults is a stupid law because it does not differentiate between genuine businessmen and crooks. If you want to hang Umar Sailya or NS for their tax returns, be my guest.

Taimurmalik #18

I have the greatest amount of respect for your revolutionary mind set and I sincerely hope you make it to the legal profession at some stage. I agree with your point that Pakistani society is so horrendously inbred that action against any person quickly involves large chunks of the decision-making strata and that one does need single-minded people like General Amjad to go out and nab the bad guys. My only point is that by framing the law so broadly, NAB is scaring off legitimate business which we can ill afford. In any event, the whole problem with default cases is that they are all unique and require a case by case approach. You cannot simply lay down a blanket rule that all defaulters are evil because the negative consequences far far outweigh the positive consequences of such an all-encompassing approach. NAB should go after crooks and NAB should try to stop corruption. But default, by itself, is not a crime.

Law, Development and How Not To Do It Al # 13

I think you have misunderstood my point, which was that by making all loan defaults automatically into crimes, we are only handicapping ourselves in the race to win foreign investment. So far as the sale of Union Bank and other “scandals” are concerned, I have no problem with NAB’s involvement, though I do still have a problem with the “third degree” methods invariably adopted by NAB. The larger picture point though is that a loan default, in and of itself, does not mean that the person defaulting is a criminal. This distinction is not recognised by NAB because the NAB law provides that every businessman in default is automatically a criminal, no matter whether he defaulted because of business reasons or because he siphoned off all the money. It is this automatic and irrefutable assumption of guilt which I think is moronic.

So far as the timing of this article is concerned, please note three things. Firstly, I have been writing against the NAB Ordinance and specifically the “willful default” issue ever since the law was promulgated (for proof, please check (I think) the December 99 issue of Herald). Secondly, this article was written approximately eight weeks before it was published by Chowk, and the precise date of publication was never in my control. Finally, NAB itself appears to have no problem with my integrity since I have been repeatedly asked to do work for them.

Krashid #12

The main thrust of this article is NOT repeat NOT that taking action against corrupt business practices is producing an environment of danger for business. The main thrust of the article is that defaulting on a loan cannot be turned into a crime unless the defaulting can be shown to have been done with deliberate criminal intent. The NAB law, simply put, does not discriminate between genuine businessmen and crooks. It assumes that any person who defaults on a loan does so for criminal reasons and with criminal intent. That assumption is mind-bogglingly stupid because you cannot have growth without investment and you cannot have investment without loans. I do not have a problem with NAB screwing criminals. I do have a problem with NAB screwing the rest of the country simply because the NAB wallahs do not have the faintest inkling of how business operates.



Umairr #11 and MacGupta #9

There is no cavil with the proposition that loan defaults are a giant problem in Pakistan, quite often for the reasons indicated in Umairr’s reply. However, the assumption in Umairr’s reply that individual shareholder assets are protected in a corporate bankruptcy is technically incorrect but irrelevant in the context of Pakistan because every corporate loan here is invariably backed up by the personal guarantees of all directors. It would be incorrect to assume therefore that the real assets are protected from recovery by the “corporate veil.” Instead, the real problem is that the bad loans are grossly under-collateralised and that recovering on personal guarantees is an abysmally slow and inefficient process.

I do agree with Umairr, though, that the politicisation of the nationalised banks is largely to blame for the current set of problems. Loans have been repeatedly rescheduled in the past for reasons which had little to do with good business sense. Part of this had to do with the fact that the Pakistani corporate restructuring laws allow only for the liquidation of a company in default so that banks have very limited options in dealing with problem loans. But the major reason still was the inefficiency, corruption and absolute incompetence of the nationalised banks.

But, the solution for the bad loan problem is not to shoot every borrower or to stop people from borrowing in the future. Banks need people to borrow because that is how they make money. Again, the problem with the NAB law is that it makes every loan default into a crime. That makes no sense. And if NAB does not have the time to sift through the cases to find out who has defaulted for what reasons, then it should get out of this business altogether, as thankfully, it now appears to have realised. Look, even from a free market perspective, you want the process of loan recovery to be stakeholder-driven, not controlled by any sort of central coercive agency. Yesterday, loans were rescheduled because of political connections. Tomorrow, loans will be rescheduled because of Army connections.

Taimurmalik # 7

Firstly, I am not related to Faisal Saleh Hayat. In any event, so what if I was? What if it can be shown that I am completely biased? You still have to examine my argument on its merits.

I don’t think the NAB law is our best shot at getting things done. In fact, I think even NAB now recognises that it cannot handle loan default cases which is why all further arrests (as per newspaper reports) regarding loan default cases will first have to be cleared by a high-powered committee consisting of the Chairman NAB, the Finance Minister and the Governor, State Bank.

The bigger problem is that laws outlive us all. The British made “black laws” to deal with colonial uprisings and today our rulers use those laws to screw us. I wish this government all the best and I hope, with all my heart, that they succeed. But I see no reason to cheer when this government insists on shooting itself in the foot. The NAB law is a blunderbuss, an overbroad weapon which does not discriminate between right and wrong, between a good business hampered by bad luck, and a crook stealing money from my pocket. We cannot afford to be so indiscriminate.

temporal #6 and # 1



I hope you get hit by a large truck in the near future. But then again, that’s only my subjective opinion.

Narain # 5, sac #4 and pardesi #2

Thank you very much for your kind words. The whole point of writing for chowk is to get feedback and I appreciate your taking the effort to respond.

Umairr #3 –

As with most economic problems in Pakistan, the solution is to privatise. Start by privatising all banks, and then more importantly, privatise the bankruptcy process. What I mean by that is to change the bankruptcy law in Pakistan to insert provisions similar to those contained in Chapter 11 of the US Bankruptcy Code so as to make the entire reorganisation process one which is controlled by creditors, subject of course, to judicial oversight.

As I noted above, bad loans are a major problem. On average, DFIs and NCB (the state controlled credit sector) have about 25-27% bad loans in their portfolio as compared to foreign backs operating in Pakistan which have on average a 2-4% of their portfolios stuck in bad loans. The solution though is not to pick up industrialists and make them pay at gun point. Instead, as shown by the recent improvement in Habib Bank, the solution is to slowly turn the screws. Liquidate your worst losses, but work with the rest. Get some more collateral, force some management and operating changes, and above all, make the borrower do the dirty work of making his business run.

To illustrate the problem, let me use your own dot.com VC experience. As per Businessweek, the reason why Silicon Valley is the number one incubator for new businesses in the history of capitalism is because people are not afraid of failure there, in fact, venture capitalists even prefer people with a few bombs under their belt. Now imagine changing the rules in the Valley so that every dot.com entrepreneur who went belly-up would also land in jail, along with all of his directors. Who would borrow money then? And if nobody borrowed money, how would businesses grow?

There is one school of opinion which has even argued that credit is a fundamental human right. I don’t know if I agree with that perspective but certainly credit is one of the fundamental factors in economic growth, as shown by Alan Greenspan’s recent efforts to engineer a soft landing for the overheated US economy by raising interest rates.

Don’t you think that making all loan defaults punishable for 14 years is a lot more problematic than a few basis points?

Temporal # 1

First see my comment above. As to the rest of your comments, I fail to see their relevance but here goes.

Revolutionary viagra is one thing but you want to make sure that the revitalised institution is used to screw bad guys, not the ordinary person. NAB is not helping the problem. It is only making things worse.

We The Proud Pakistanis Saeen, the problem now that we don`t produce great men, but what we do with them: Liaquat Ali Khan was assassinated as was Hakim Saeed. Edhi was driven away by the MQM and has only just returned. Akhtar Hamid Khan was shunned by the government all his life. Asma Jehangir has survived one assassination attempt already and cannot move without a bodyguuard. And as for Abdus Salaam, no Pakistani government has ever officially recognised his services in the way that he deserves merely because he is an Ahmedi.

In any event, life isn`t about what great people do, it`s about how ordinary people live their lives. If you think that we have a ``modern, vibrant and progressive`` society here in Pakistan, then either you don`t live in Pakistan or the marijuana which grows wild in many place has affected you. Are you aware of the blasphemy laws in Pakistan? Are such laws really a sign of ``vibrancy``?

Leaving all of that aside, ask the people of Pakistan where they want to live and most of them will reply either the US or Canada. People are voting with their feet, saeen, if nothing else, and nothing you think can change that reality. I love my country as much as anyone else, but I can`t fool myself into thinking that I really should be proud of what we have achieved.

40 Sayings Of A Modern Sufi Master Saying No. 5 instructs us to run away from those with bad beliefs in the same way as we should run from lepers. Not only is the analogy flawed but so is the message. We shouldn`t run from lepers because lepers are also God`s creation and need our love and compassion, perhaps more so than non-lepers. In any event, leprosy is one of the least communicable diseases known to man.

At a more abstract level, this saying is a perfect illustartion of the dangers of ignorance. Go sit with people who have bad thoughts my friend, you might learn a lot. After all, how true is your faith if you have to constantly protect it from the rest of the world? The great saints have been those who have embraced the imperfections of this world, not those who have closeted themselves away in a cave. As for me, I rest my faith in the belief that only by constantly testing my thoughts against all that the world has to offer can I be sure that I am not on the wrong path. Admittedly, I am not out there hugging lepers, but I only have admiration, not contempt, for those who do.

Songs of love and devotion For God`s sake, man, come out of your ivory tower and try and deal with our problems. At the end of all the gibberish that you insist upon citing, your conclusion is still that the Shariah is the Shariah and if you don`t like it, then you just have to lump it. Why? Who said that the Quran is unalterable? Who said that the Quran itself is part of the Divine Essence? Not the Quran itself. If you had read more books on Islamic history you might have realised that the debate as to whether the Quran was created or uncreated formed a very important part of early Islamic intellectual development. I don`t want to love God. I don`t want to lose myself in the nameless wonders of cosmic contemplation. I want to live a decent human life. I want freedom of thought. I want dignity for my wife and daughter, all of which things your religion denies.

On a more intellectual (or even jurisprudential) plane, your basic assumption that law (as opposed to fundamental principles) remains unchanged and unchangable is where you go wrong. The Quran is a great document and tells us all sorts of good things but law either grows with the times or it dies. People like you avoid the sterility of choice that a blinkered view of Islam imposes by retreating into mysticism. Please, step out of your shell and realise that Islam does not have all the answers. Your Islam has failed for centuries and your pseudo-mysticism is simply a cop-out. If Islam is to be a vibrant and relevant force in todays world, it will only be because millions of ordinary Muslim reject your rigidities and instead try to do the best that they can to deal with the challenges of the modern world.

Oliver Wenderll Holmes once said that the life of the law has not been logic but experience. Islamic law is no exception.

The Case for De jure Legalization The short version of a majority of the comments that have been placed so far is that once you legalise alcohol, you have no choice but to legalise heroin/marijuana/child prostitution. Logically, the argument is moronic because (a) people in the West do generally distinguish between alcohol and other, more powerful stimulants such as heroin and the distinction is not seen as without justification and, (b) even Pakistan allows the legal sale and consumption of other drugs, i.e. caffeine and nicotine.

The point which has been overlooked is that institutionalised hypocrisy on such a large scale corrodes the national fabric and the widespread consumption of alcohol -- along with its legal prohibition -- makes for a society which is, quite literally, two-faced.

The final point is that despite 25 years of prohibition, no change in Pakistani drinking habits has occurred. Alcohol is different from heroin and trying to stamp it out in Pakistan is not going to succeed anymore than it did in the US. So, the government might as well make money off it.

By the way, the current price of a bottle of J & B in Pakistan (specifically Lahore) is about Rs. 2200 ($40 approx). The same thing costs less than $ 20 wholesale/duty free. That difference would not only go straight into the pocket of the government but as a tax, it would be a lot less retrogressive than the taxes on electricity and petrol which we as Pakistanis are forced to suffer. Personally, I think even the poor people of Pakistan would rather have their tax burden lightened than have their tax dollars wasted on some futile masquerade of a prohibition effort which only gives extra opportunity to the police and the customs-wallahs to make some money on the side.

Cheers.

An Open Letter to Gen. Pervaiz Musharaff No kidding, they`re living in DC! Had they actually been living in this poor benighted country of ours, they might have realised why so many people here are supporting the coup. Yes, democracy is a great thing, but let us not confuse it with what Nawaz Sharif was doing. Where were you guys when Najam Sethi was getting tortured? In DC, huh? Now get over your bloody outrage and for God`s sake let someone do something good for this country. Sure, the General could fail. But I`ll take the possibility of success with the army over the sure death of this country under Nawaz Sharif any day.

Deprivation Dear Shandana,

I hope that someone somewhere finally has the sense to cradle the jagged pieces of your soul and give you the security and the love that you deserve. I mean that because there are so few honest people in this snakepit of ours that we call Pakistan, and it takes not only honesty but courage -- very rare courage -- to write the way you do. Our wishes, as always, are with you.

My Ode to Rishtay Hey, as a happily married desi guy, might I just add that while men may start off as pigs they do eventually evolve into higher life forms capable of conversing with -- and even entertaining -- women. The problem is that we desi men have no practice in actually talking to ``women`` (excluding sisters, mothers etc) and we are not taught how to by our popular culture (so when did you see Amitabh Bachan ever having a soulful discussion?). The point is -- give people time to evolve. Otherwise, best of luck in your search for the perfect rishta.

In the Supreme National Interest Must we be oppressed with broadsides from such blithering fools? I expect a higher standard from Chowk in the articles it selects for publication. This pretentious mish mash of disjointed ideas only provides fuel to those who see Pakistan as an intellectual wasteland. To take just one idea, the thought of providing disaffected and unemployed youth with Kalashnikovs can scarcely be taken as sane. Yes, it will scare Vajpayee, but more importantly, it will scare the living daylights out of Pakistanis as well. In fact, take a good look at the current Newsweek article to see what kind of trouble has already resulted from arming the madressahs.