The Baluchistan Issue Re: # 101
bbabu,
The article from the Washington Times that you posted relfects the growing schism between Pakistan and Iran. The latter has been growing incrasingly concerned about the frequent killings of Shias in Sunni-dominated Pakistan. Previously, under Pakistan`s ISI-supported Taliban regime in Aghanistan, thousands of Shias were summarily massacred by the right-wing Sunni Wahabbi Taliban regime. With the pogroms against Shias in Punjab and Karachi, Iran is now playing its trump card - Baluchistan.

Of course, the 180 degree U-turn by Pakistan in persecuting its former allies, the Taliban and Al-Quaida terrorists, has added a free-for-all atmosphere to the quasi-religious wars in western Pakistan. I think that the clampdown on the Sunni right-wing elements was always a facade meant to placate an impatient Washington and to draw maximum US aid for the cash-strapped economy of Pakistan. The alliance between Sunni right-wingers and the Pakistan army is very old, dating back to the Zia regime. It was meant to keep the secularists in check while prolonging army rule. The secularists themselves are nothing more than a hodge-podge of played out feudals backing either BB or Nawaz Sharif. Some have found it politically convenient and economically-advatageous to join Mushy`s Muslim League.

The picture that is emerging is one of confusion and musical chairs. You have the pro-Taliban NWFP with support from Pathan elements of the Pak Army, the Baluchi nationalists with backing from Iran, Mohajir nationalists in Karachi and Hyderabad backed by industrialists in that teeming city, and some say Indian backing also, the Sindhi nationalists backing the PPP, and lastly the most powerful feudals in Punjab with backing from the Mushy Government, the Muslim League, and the bulk of the Punjabi elements of the Pak Army. The PPP has been largely sidelined in the Punjab as has been the Nawaz Muslim League. There is great animosity between the MQM and the religous right. While they may appear to be similar, there is an unbridgeable gap between the PPP/Nawaz Muslim League elements and the MQM because of the bloodshed from the 80s and 90s. MQM will play the religious right against the secularists and claim Karachi/Hyderabad after these two have fought it out. The Army will have to split along Pathan/Punjabi lines if the rift between MMA and Army Government is not resolved soon. The pressure is building and hopefully cooler heads can prevail to avoid a full-fledged bloodbath in Pakistan. Nuclear weapons, developed by the Mohajir Dr. A. Q. Khan, did not necessarily bring peace and safety to Pakistan. This is a nightmare that is rapidly developing into reality. God help the poor people of Pakistan.

The Baluchistan Issue Re: # 99
bbabu,
{``I do not think there is any imminent danger of breakup in pakistan. ``}

You may be right. However, one group we are all ignoring is the MMA and their massive support throughout NWFP, Baluchistan, and even Karachi. They are just waiting for the military and secularists to fight it out and they are ready to move in and fill the vacuum. Because almost all the benefits of US aid and grants are going directly to Punjab, and the other three provinces are destitute, there is a good chance of violence breaking out against the army in all three provinces, simulataneously. I hope it doesn`t happen but events do have a way of working rapidly in Pakistan once violence starts.

Gladiator Musharraf of Pakistan Re: # 15
Amit,
What a positive and clear response from you. I couldn`t agree more. Unfortunately, people in power, regardless of how unfair that power is, do not relinquish it that easily. I am certainly not interested in bashing one ethnic group or another. What I don`t like is the domination over the entire country by that one group - just because it has the military might, paid for by everyone`s tax rupees. This is why the Bengalis left and this is why the other three provinces are fed up. Before this country falls apart, amid violence and all that gory stuff that happened in BD and partition, we need to rein in the Punjabi-dominated Pak army. This army, to my knowledge, has never committed violence in Punjab. Of course, an economic union with India, Pak army permitting, is the eventual answer. Such a union would solve the Kashmir problem without even trying. Kashmiris wold be part of India or Pakistan, based on current boundaries with free exchange of goods and services and a commitment not to resort to violence. Similarly, the three minor provinces of Pakistan would be part of the economic union without hegemony from Punjab or for that matter UP. This is similar to what should have happened instead of partition of India. But it`s never too late. Anything is better than the current misery called Pakistan.

Gladiator Musharraf of Pakistan Re: # 14
Labyrinth1,

After a lot of soul-searching, I am finding that Altaf Bhai has considerable merit for his actions. When one is forced to negotiate, staring at the barrel of a gun, one undergoes several conversions once the gun is removed. Thank God for the MQM! At least the people of Karachi showed the Punjabi power establishment that the docile and meek bhayya type can fight back. My own family is a regular supporter and contributor to the MQM. We demonstrated against BB and Nawaz Sharif governments right in front of the Pak embassy in Washington, DC. You won`t believe how we had numerous busses from NY, NJ, IL, MI, PA, IN, and people flying in from as far away as CA. I wrote some unkind posts against Altaf Bhai`s visit to Indian, but now I can clearly understand why he is being so proactive. The Punjabis do not want to open Khokrapar border crossing. They want all Indian visitors, including our relatives, to come through Lahore. Who are they to decide? The world does not begin and end in that city.
Please keep up the good work for the benefit of the people of Karachi. We should not let Kashmir divert us from our real aim - a better life for all in Pakistan. Thanks,

Gladiator Musharraf of Pakistan Re: # 13
Labyrinth1,
{``what we can`t understand is Punjab`s Silence over Balochistan Operation in 7o`s , what we can`t understand is Punjab`s Silence over Army Action against MQM in Karachi in 90`s , what we can`t understand is why did the Army Officers said , ` we will not fire over our own brother and sisters in 77 ` in Lahore and then they shot Baloch leaders after that .
The inter provisional harmony was absent especially in Nawaz Sharif time where somehow Nawaz Sharif then PM, made Motorways from Lahore to Peshawer - absence of funds for Sind and Balochistan , forcing even investors to invest in Punjab and not go to Karachi acts like that made Sind and Balochistan angry . ``}

Mr dear friend Labyrinth1 (BTW my name is Salim ;), you hit the nail right on the head. It is this lack of compassion from the Punjabi elite that has disillusioned me about the prospects of survival for Pakistan. Punjabi females were irate over the rape of the female physician in Sui, but when it became apparent that the rapists could be Punjabis, they shut up. There is a tendency in Punjab to whitewash the sins of their own. You mention the Army Action in Karachi. I am a victim of this tragedy on a personal level. My brothers were both active with MQM in the late 80s. My father, through his connections, learned that the Punjabi Rangers were going to arrest and shoot my brothers (Bollywood now calls this encounter shooting). Naturally, my father, being alarmed, quickly arranged for his sons to be out of the country within days. I was 10 years old and to this day have nightmares of Punjabi Rangers coming to shoot my brothers and me. Tell me, my friend, should such experiences be easily discarded for the sake of ``Pakistani unity?`` I am describing real events that happened to real people. If it were not for my father`s Turkish contacts, all three of us brothers would have been shot in cold blood by this Punjabi Army of the Land of the Pure.
Thank you for responding to my message. Remember, the blood of innocents is not wasted. One day these goons will get theirs. Remember Saddam Hussein? Where is he now?

My Wishlist for 2005 Satish,
I have some more:

100. Pakistan becomes a true secular democracy with just sharing of resources among its 6 provinces :) After Punjab is split into three.
101. India and Pakistan agree on current LoC as International Border. It`s been that for over 56 years.
102. Pakistan restructures its military to a normal number commensurate with its population.
103. Islam is raised to the standard of a personal faith and not some international circus for the looney - UBL, Hajj, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia :(
104. The bulk of resources are spent on public welfare - education, health, training, improving sanitary condition
105. Urdu is abolished as the national and official language and replaced with regional languages in provinces and English as the official language
106. India and Pakistan relinquish nuclear weapons and force the mature club to do the same.
107. Hudood laws and anti-blasphemy laws are repealed in Pakistan.
108. All political parties, using religion as a base or even in their names, are banned.

Flouting International Laws-What is Dubyas Rationale? Re: # 24
Hamidm,
{``i agree with you - afghanistan and iraq are a good start , but there is a long road ahead .......... the fact of the matter is that other than turkey, none of the islamic countries, indonesia and malaysia included, have any established democratic credentials and the isidious idelogy of political islam is always lurking around the corner .......... in my view the main culprit in all this is saudi arabia``}

I couldn`t agree with you more. True democracy, along with firm secular credentials, is the road to human rights, peace, and prosperity for the entire Muslim world. I have visited Tukey in September and am returning in late January. What a delight to see a ``Muslim`` people not obsessed with Islam. One can hear the Azan while bars and restaurants continue to serve excellent Turkish Efes beer. In fact, Turkey is more like India than Pakistan, which started off trying to emulate its brother to the west - even copying its flag.

Of course Saudi Arabia and most of the Gulf monarchies are nothing more than a sham for the preservation of wealth for a few families, who owe their continued existence to American and British favors. Both Iran, and the future Shiite ``democracy`` of Iraq have to discover secularism before they can start functioning as democracies.

Pakistan is almost a hopeless case. It is a country looking for a reason to exist - other than a welfare state for military and ex-military people who have never won a war.

The Baluchistan Issue Re: # 95
bbabu {``After all Bengalis were pretty enthusiatic boosters for Pakistan in 1947. It did not take long before they wanted out. 24 years is a short time frame in history. Mohajhir support in creation of Pakistan did not prevent MQM-govt showdown.``}

The support for Pakistan in 1940s was genuine as is the disaffection with that nation among the people on the periphery of the power establishment in Pakistan, right from its inception. Bengalis were the foremost supporters of Pakistan as were the Mohajirs, without whose support the young country would have died in infancy. The shameful usurpation of all civilian power by Punjabis, though their paramount position in the armed forces, was the catalyst that brought Pakistan to ruin. It was dismembered in 1971 and the dark clouds of secession are covering the three disgruntled provinces today. Playing the role of the bully has gotten Punjab large gains in development, industries, and infrastructure. It may also make it a lank-locked country like Nepal and Afghanistan.

The Baluchistan Issue The dismemberment of Pakistan in 1971 changed the rules of the game as far as Kashmir is concerned. What was feasible and defensible in 1948 could not be justified in 1971 and therefore cannot be taken as gospel in 2005. While one can argue that Pakistan (the former West Pakistan, or in the future the lone remaining province of Punjab) is the sole heir for Muslims to the partition plan of 1946-47, the case for such an argument is not that crystal clear. Pakistan, now (and Punjab, even less, in the future) may represent less than one-third of the total number of Muslims in the sub-continent. What right can 30% of the people have to make a decision for the much larger majority. India is home to more Muslims than either Pakistan or Bangladesh. Don`t the Indian Muslims get to decide if one of their provinces should go to Pakistan or become independent? What would be the status of these Indian Muslims if Kashmir were to become part of Pakistan? Not only would they become fewer in numbers, but their own position would go from fifth columnists to maybe even worse. I, of course, do not want to think purely in religious terms and religious numbers. I am merely doing this because such perverted logic was used in the TNT to dismember India at the expense of the Indian Muslims, Sikhs, and those Hindus who found themselves in Pakistan.
A nation, founded on religious zeal, and functioning on the age-old provincial, ethnic, tribal, and linguistic lines of separation is bound to fall apart on those very lines.

The Baluchistan Issue Re: # 88
rsridhar,
{``All conditions that resulted in Bangladesh in 1971 exist today in Baluchistan.
1. A disenchanted population
2. A seperatist movement that is slowly gaining momentum
3. An unpopular military dictatorship``{

Rsridhar,
As one whose sympathies have almost always been with Pakistan, it disturbs me to admit that you are right in your first two items. ``An unpopular military dictatorship`` is a universal problem for almost all of Pakistan, not just Baluchistan. The crux of the problem is rather Punjabi domination that is resented by the three remaining provinces, and of course ``Azad`` Kashmir, Gilgit, and Baltistan. Pakistan has none of the safeguards that ensured the viability of the smaller states in the US Republic. Punjab dominates the armed forces, the civil servant class, and now the industries. Using its military might, Punjab imposed ``Operation Cleanup`` on the industrial center of Karachi and the ensuing murder, rape, and mayhem sent the city`s industries to Lahore in large numbers. The solution to the problem is the splitting up of Punjab into three or more smaller provinces, just as India did with E. Punjab. That will placate the Saraiki minority in Punjab and diminish the overwhelming nature of Punjab`s domination. Also, the armed forces need to be reduced in number and made more representative of the country`s demographics.

Gladiator Musharraf of Pakistan Re: # 11
Labyrinth1,
{``Mushraff is someone who has a vision for Pakistan and agree or not for whatever reason Pakistan has gained in Mushraff`s Rule . In the end of the day a good leader is someone who delivers - be it a civilian or military man .
Musraff or Bush whoever makes Pakistan , Pakistan will be loved and blessed by Pakistanis like me ``}

I can appreciate your genuine sentiments. The problem, however, is neither Musharraf nor the people of Pakistan. The issue is the Punjab-centric mentality of the establishment. Everything is done for the benefit of the feudal class of Punjab and its antiquated ``social security`` dole based on military ``service.`` The people of Pakistan are being fooled constantly into thinking that patriotism means stuffing money into the coffers of the majority province. Lately, there has been a new awakening among the non-Punjabis to this age-old ruse. The Bengalish, who were the real impetus behind Pakistan in the first place, recognized this farce over 35 years ago. With Indian help, they succeeeded in determining their own destiny and not be dictated from Lahore, 1000 miles away. Karachi, Quetta, and Peshawar should do the same. Any wonder what Altaf Bhai was doing in Delhi recently?

What Does It Mean to be a Muslim in a Secular Country? Mr. Gill,
An excellent essay about our times and how ordinary day-to-day people can be affected by events. Being a ``Muslim`` in a secular society SHOULD be no different than being Jewish, or Christian, or Hindu, or nothing. I do not want to belong to a social club or a religious one for that matter. I like to think for myself and decide my position based on the facts I perceive and the conclusions I reach - at that time and subject to revision through further research. I could not live in an Islamic Republic or any other type of theocracy. Lately however, through the actions of others, being a benign ``Muslim`` is difficult to sustain. Live and let live is what I hope the conclusion is for everyone. Religion should never be the determining factor for economic systems, nationhood, partition, or political philosophy.

The Baluchistan Issue India has forged a strong nation out of a heterogeneous group of people. Pakistan has created heterogeneous people out of a nation united in the name of Islam.

Gang-rape in Sui Re: # 40
Arjun,
{``or if they happened, they were justified because they were part of a military operations(i`m not making this up...salim actually said this on UP)...``}

I am flattered to find that the eminent Indian interactor is paraphrasing me. Yes, the Pak army`s record in treatment of its own civilians is at the best, dismal, except in Punjab, which is where most of them hail from. The record speaks for itself:

BD - 1971
Karachi - 1989 - 1999
Wana - 2004
Baluchistan - 2005

Raping, killing, torturing happened in Karachi during civilian ``democratic`` governments of BB and Nawaz Sharif - so let`s not be hasty in blaming military rule for all rapes. It sure makes all those charges against Indian military`s behavior in J&K sound very hollow. Sorry folks, I got to call it as I see it.

The Baluchistan Issue Re: # 92

Mohar11 :{``After 15 years of breeding and feeding jihad in name of Kashmir, pakis suddenly realize that this simple truth. Well, better late than never. ``}

Mohar,
Nothing is static. One has to constantly evaluate the situation. What may have been right in 1948 could have changed by now. I have always tried to look at Kashmir from the viewpoint of what is good for the Kashmiris. Frankly, as of right now, they should be better off in India. The only problem I see is the presence of vast numbers of Indian troops in populated areas. If India moved the troops to the LoC and let the locals conduct their own affairs, the tension would subside. Joining Pakistan would only put the Kashmiris in the proverbial ``from the firepan to the fire`` jeopardy.

Gladiator Musharraf of Pakistan Re: # 9
Amit,
As usual you raise two excellent points:
1. succession
2. too many napoleon`s dreaming of becoming top banana

I don`t have answers to either, because frankly, coup d`etats are performed on an ad-hoc basis and almost never have a master plan for the end-game.
Hopefully, Pakistan can find an answser to the problem of dictatorial civilan regimes that usurp absoute power, causing the people to beg for military intervention.
Thanks,