With or Without Musharraf – A Mohajir’s Perspective re: #723 Salim_Chauhan

Since Sikhs conquered Peshawar in 1834, the British conquered Punjab in 1849 and the NWFP province was not created until 1901, I can accept H.S.Virk`s assertion that Punjab extended from Peshawar to Himachal Pradesh & Haryana in 1886.

Perhaps Karnal did become part of Punjab some time after 1849, instead of 1902.

That still does not explain why Liaqat is Punjabi, and Musharraf is not (as you claim). After all, Delhi was also part of Punjab in 1943 when Musharraf was born.

With or Without Musharraf – A Mohajir’s Perspective re: Salim_Chauhan

You describe Musharraf (born in Delhi, 1943) as a Mohajir and Liaqat (born in Karnal, 1896) as a Punjabi because Karnal was in Punjab in 1947. Now where was Delhi at that time? Was it in UP? No, it was in Punjab!!! The boundary of UP ended at Meerut which is 72 km north of Delhi.

So even Musharraf is not Mohajir if we take the status of Karnal and Delhi in 1947 as our litmus test :))))

With or Without Musharraf – A Mohajir’s Perspective re: Salim_Chauhan #718

The discussion about Karnal opens a new vista in this debate. The province of UP didn`t exist before 1902. A lot of migrants poured into Pakistan from this state in late 40s and early 50s. But there were also people from Gujrat-Kathiawar, Ajmer, Kerala, Bihar, Hyderabad and Bombay who migrated to Pakistan in late 1950s.

Salim, would you be kind enough to define what you precisely mean by a ``Mohajir``? Is this a linguistic identity or a geographic one? Is it an eternal identity or an ephemeral one?

With or Without Musharraf – A Mohajir’s Perspective re: Salim_Chauhan

A couple of days ago you stooped to the level of comparing me with a Roman soldier without clothes :)) Now that was personal attacks and character assassination.

I write these lines in the hope that the person reading them is capable of engaging in a mature discussion without getting defensive or resorting to racist remarks :)

With or Without Musharraf – A Mohajir’s Perspective {``Karnal was in Punjab province at the time of the 1947 partition. It is now in Haryana``}

Salim,

Liaqat wasn`t born in 1947 and Karnal only became part of Punjab in 1902. Before that it was part of the North Western Provinces of Agra & Oudh. The Sikh empire ended at river Sutlej so even Delhi (and Patiala) was part of North Western Provinces. The same North Western Province of Agra and Oudh was named UP in 1902.

Since Liaqat was born in 1896, he was not a Punjabi by domicile. Nor was he Punjabi by descent.

His father Rustam Ali Khan was landlord who lands were spread across UP and part of east Punjab. Liaqat started his political career in 1926 in the UP Legislative Council. All his life he contested elections from UP. Even in the epoch-making 1945 elections, Liaqat won from Meerut (which is in UP).

With or Without Musharraf – A Mohajir’s Perspective The views expressed by Salim Chauhan in this article represent a sociopath mindset that justifies its self-imposed isolation by resorting to perverted facts and historical revisionism.

The author asserted that Mohajirs face bloodshed, massacre and oppression at the hands of Punjabis. Yet he failed to provide historical or contemporary evidence of these massacres ever been taken place.

The author also failed to recognize that Mohajirs dominated the country`s bureaucracy during its first decade and therefore must share responsibility for any deeds (or misdeeds) committed during the formative years (1947-71).

Instead of recognizing facts, the author pursued his agenda of distancing Mohajirs from this era. Even silly statements were made. For example, the author informed us that Liaqat Ali Khan was Punjabi. (He was actually born at Karnal in UP).

The author also asserted that since most of the major players in 1971 crisis were non-Mohajirs, therefore Mohajirs must have been ``uninvolved`` in this episode. But what about the thousands of Mohajir bureaucrats who administered East Pakistan and several federal ministries? Could the military government headed by Yahya Khan function without the support of these civil servants? And what was the agenda behind singling out Punjabis when at least two of the major players (A.A.K.Niazi and Z.A.Bhutto) were non-Punjabis? Is it perhaps because the author is extremely prejudiced against Punjabis? Or is it because he is an Indian Hindu with limited knowledge posing as a Mohajir?

There were ofcourse Mohajir players in this crisis. General Rahimuddin, born at Kaimganj in UP, presided over the special court that tried Mujib for sedition in Faisalabad. The honorable general delivered a death sentence to Mujib, which was never carried out by Bhutto. So much for Mohajir neutrality :)

Historical revisionism was in full gear when the author asserted that Urdu tehzeeb was superior to Punjabi tehzeeb. Punjabi literature actually emerged 3 centuries before Urdu literature and ventured into social commentary much before Ghalib, Mir and Akbar Allahabadi`s era.

The funniest part of the author`s commentary was that he did not mention the post-1971 era!!! All his arguments and assertions related to the East Pakistan crisis and role of razakars.

The author skirted a discussion of APMSO, Sohrab Goth riots, Operation Cleanup, 1990 elections, the MQM split, Afaq Ahmed, MQM boycott of 1993 elections, bhatta policy of MQM, extra judicial killings, Altaf`s statements against Jinnah, the role of Mohajir general Usmani in Kargil and MQM`s election reversals in 2002.

Who expects a discussion of Mohajir issues to revolve only around 1947 and 1971 ???Perhaps an Indian Hindu. Because these are the only dates that stick in his mind. The first date represents an emotional trauma. The second represents the only military victory that a Hindu army has achieved during the last 4 centuries.

The limited nature of his arguments reinforces doubts about Salim`s identity. He is perhaps an Indian Hindu masquerading as a Mohajir, or a Mohajir who migrated from Pakistan back in the 70s :))

With or Without Musharraf – A Mohajir’s Perspective #667 Salim_Chauhan

{``this some subtle desire of yours to compare me with dead villains- I hope that you don`t detest e that much.``}

Dead villains is a Mohajir expression. I prefer the less subjective description i.e. ``Pitiable sociopaths``. They are sociopaths because their megalomania and insecurities render them incapable of social integration. With your racist tirades, you weren`t expecting me to compare you with Mandela, were you? :)

{``the bulk of this country was comprised of Bengalis and NOT Punjabis``}

Yes and no. Bengalis (54%) outnumbered Punjabis (27-30%) in population. But Punjab was larger in area (22% vs 15%) and constituted larger chunk of GDP. More importantly, Punjabis were 65% of West Pakistani population. If your Mohajir ancestors wanted to keep one language for both wings, they should`ve picked either Bengali (or Arabic or English). If they wanted two languages for the two wings, they should`ve picked Bengali and Punjabi. But the Mohajir elite picked a language spoken by only 2% of the population. They kept the reins of government in their own hands and shunted non-Urdu speaking people out of the echelons of power for more than a decade.

Mohajir apologists blame Jinnah for the language riots. Never mind that Jinnah died just 15 months after creating Pakistan. The Mohajir-dominated bureaucracy ruled Pakistan for another 11 years until Ayub`s military coup. They had ample time to address the language issue.

{``If we Mohajirs had our way, we would have ``forced`` some TEHZEEB into you instead of Urdu``}

This explains the Hindustoora jeers :) The underdeveloped tehzeeb of 2% of population didn`t find too many takers amongst the 98% population with richer cultures.

{``So now the Mohajirs took over Pakistan, its businesses, its institutions, and then looted, killed, murdered, raped, and tortured poor hapless Sikhs and Hindus - driving out the surviving ones into India?``}

Correction. Your Mohajir ancestors took over Pakistan, its business and its institutions after the Punjabi Mohajirs had suffered at the hands of Sikhs and Hindus.

{``We all know that the terrible suffering, slaughter, rape, and abduction were perpetrated on the Sikhs and Hindus of West Punjab by Muslim Punjabis. So, who now is rewriting history to suit one`s conclusions?
``}

We also know about the Muslim students paraded nude, raped and burnt by Sikhs in East Punjab... and dozens of trains to Pakistan carrying Muslim families arsoned by Hindus & Sikhs. Isn`t denying the suffering of these Punjabi Muslims an attempt to revise history???

{``since when did Rawalpindi or Islamabad become centralized centers of Pakistan for logistics reasons``}

Rawalpindi was the largest military garrison in British India and headquarters of Northern Command since 1886. It became GHQ of Pakistan Army in 1947 :) There was no point in setting up government in Multan (10 hours away from Pindi by road) and Karachi (2 days away). And besides, the development of Islamabad also helped develop the northern areas. Karachi was already a developed city, overpopulated and vulnerable to attack by sea. Islamabad is safely surrounded by mountains. Moreover, Islamabad was a planned city with clearly marked diplomatic enclaves, government blocks and residential areas. If keeping Pentagon/White House/Capitol Hill close to each other makes sense for the Americans, there is no reason why Pakistanis should not.

{``Very few Mohajirs were fighting anywhere - except serving as officers in the Punjabi-dominated Pak Army. the Ghazi ``Tiger`` Niazi head of the surrendering force was Punjabi.``}

What were these Mohajirs doing in the Punjabi Army in the first place? They weren`t conscripts, were they? :) If Punjabis were 65% of West Pakistani population, and West Pakistan provided bulk of the Army, what is so surprising about finding more Punjabi generals than Mohajirs or Pathans? Now who is spinning demographics to weave conspiracy theories here?

{``...escort them into friendly POW resorts in India``}

Pakistani soldiers were sent by the government and protected by Geneva Convention and military protocols. Sikh soldiers weren`t exactly bonding with their Pakistani counterparts. They were following the established norms which BTW Pakistan Army also followed six years earlier in the 1965 war. Armies follow these norms because they know that soldiers only carry out orders. Military Strategy and policy decisions are made by generals or presidents. Thanks for your intelligent comments :)

{``Bhutto only carried majorities in Punjab and Sindh and in fact NAP...was victorious in NWFP and Baluchistan``}

Correction: NAP only won in Baluchistan. In NWFP, it won only 3 out of 25 national assembly seats. Even in provincial elections, NAP did not carry NWFP since it only won 13 out of 40 seats. Bhutto at least won 1 national assembly seat in NWFP and could rightfully claim to represent West Pakistan with 81 out of 138 seats. What right did Awami League have to speak for Pakistan when they didn`t win a single seat in West Pakistan? Bhutto`s consensus building efforts during the framing of 1973 constitution speak volumes about his ability to take everybody along. Mujib on the other hand had adopted an uncompromising attitude and put up demands he knew West Pakistanis could never accept. That was the purpose of his demands.

{``NAP allied with Awami League``}

Salim mian, Mohajir News Network is not giving you fair and balanced khabrain :) NAP never allied with Awami League before or after the elections. Wali Khan just met Mujib on March 23rd, 1971 along with politicians from other parties to offer their token support in forming a govt. He said he was doing this only to avert a military operation. The offer was too late and half-hearted. Try reading history for a change, because writing it isn`t really working for you :)

{``The rest of your post is full of even more untruths and does not merit a rebuttal``}

I can rebut any arguments posed my way without insulting my interlocuters or accusing them of being anti-Punjabi, et al.

With or Without Musharraf – A Mohajir’s Perspective re: Salim

{{We should not get involved in this pernicious civil strife}}

Only if Mohajirs want to lose their relevance in present-day Pakistan.

If Mohajirs can`t set aside their prejudices and join hands with ``fun-loving`` PPP liberals, then Mohajirs aren`t really as secular as you think. Genuinely secular parties don`t let history and cultural differences stand in the way of great causes. These petty issues didn`t prevent Jinnah`s AIML from reaching out to Fazle Haq`s KPP and Sikander Hayat`s Union Party in 1940s.

Musharraf, MQM, PPP, ANP and several members of PONM have a natural anti-Mullah alliance. They can only hurt themselves by going their separate ways in the face of a unified Mullah platform.

With or Without Musharraf – A Mohajir’s Perspective The trouble with Salim`s version of history is that it is ``His Story``. This is the kind of writing that one can associate with Slobodan Milosevic or perhaps Cho Seung-Hui.

Mohajirs appear in this story as a savior class, that single handedly created Pakistan. Never mind that Punjabis comprised the bulk of this country and bore the brunt of bloody partition.

The Urdu language, spoken by 2% of the population, is declared national language of Pakistan. Never mind that Punjabis accept this language without protest (unlike the Bengalis) despite being 70% of West Pakistani population.

Mohajirs next bless this country by taking over its businesses, evacuee property, educational institutions and bureaucracy. Never mind that they refuse to allocate public funds to agriculture, which employs 60% of the workforce and 70% of GDP.

All is bliss in Salim`s Pakistan because Mohajirs are running the country from Karachi.
But then suddenly an evil Pathan president decides to move the capital from Karachi to Islamabad, just to suppress Mohajirs. Never mind that in other countries, state and local governments are not located in major cities for logistic reasons. In Mohajir Tales, such common sense actions cannot occur. Everything happens for only one reason... oppression of Mohajirs.

Next in Salim`s epic, Mohajirs use Aladin`s magic lamp and vanish from national scene vanish between 1970 and 1971. Never mind that they are still over-represented in bureaucracy and financial sector of Pakistan. Never mind that they are fighting in the Pakistan army and along side the army as razakars in East Pakistan.

Mohajir`s reappear after the war. The magic lamp runs out of oil. Now Mohajirs can distance themselves from a war they were very much part of.

Another villain enters the scene in this Mohajir bedtime story. A sindhi leader with an overwhelming mandate tries to address the economic imbalance between Sindhis and Mohajirs by introducing a 20-year Quota system in jobs and educational institutions. Never mind that interior Sindh was poor and underdeveloped. Who cares whether Sindhis (or for that matter any part of Pakistan) live or die? All that matters is that a couple million Mohajirs in Karachi and Hyderabad should get into universities, banks, govt departments and corporations.

Flash forward ten years. Now the Mohajirs are angry that they have to share Karachi with people from other parts of Pakistan. Never mind that Karachi belonged to Sindhis before Mohajirs moved in 50 years ago. But now it belonged to Mohajirs. And only Mohajirs. So Pathans must pay a price for taking over transport business. How dare a Pathan rickshaw driver kill a Mohajir girl even by accident? Entire Pathan communities must be punished in Sohrab Goth.

The Mohajir epic turns funnier still. Army, intelligence agencies, Punjabis, Chaudhries, Feudals, Bureaucrats, Waderas and Pakistan are now conspiring against Mohajirs. Never mind that Army and intelligence agencies themselves helped Mohajir leadership stand up to Benazir. Never mind that Mohajir leadership has been running Karachi for over 20 years unfettered by Punjabis, Army, Sindhis, waderas, ISI, bureaucrats, chaudhries, et al.

The villains and tragedies in this sob story never change. Baseless allegations are hurled but never proven. Hate is justified but never analyzed. Fortunately, many Mohajirs have grown tired of this fiction. The Qaid-e-Tehreek has been compelled to go ``Muttahida`` instead of ``Mohajir``.

Let`s see whether a generation raised on Mohajir particularism is now capable of graduating to national politics or not.

With or Without Musharraf – A Mohajir’s Perspective #486 by Salim_Chauhan

{{Punjab`s brave soldiers have been busy committing that kind of violence in East Pakistan, et al}}

Umm.. there`s a big difference between a national army comprising 50-60% Punjabi soldiers... and a Mohajir political party comprising 100% Mohajir criminals. But let`s say we accept your little analogy here for a second...

What were the Mohajir and Pathan soldiers doing at that time? Writing protest letters to the New York Times? Or were they arresting Bihari razakars for assisting the Punjabi soldiers? :)

You don`t suppose there weren`t any Mohajir soldiers at all, do you? Musharraf, K.M.Arif, M.Usmani. Moinuddin Haider and Aslam Beg didn`t fall from the sky after 1971 did they??

With or Without Musharraf – A Mohajir’s Perspective re: Salim_Chauhan

Massacres of 1947 were communal in nature, not ethnic or racial. It was not sparked by the politicians. Nor could they control it. Punjab has never seen violence of that kind either before 1947 or after it.

In contrast, the ethnic strife perpetrated in 1980s by MQM was political in nature. It was sparked by one political party and its leader to divide Pakistan and Sindh along ethnic lines and damage the PPP. Violence was used as a deliberate political instrument. Football grounds were turned into torture cells. Slogans like ``Qaid ka jo ghadaar hai, maut ka haqdaar hai``.

This violence is not an aberration. It is by design. And that`s a big difference!

With or Without Musharraf – A Mohajir’s Perspective re: Salim_Chauhan (various posts)

Now that you`ve placed all your cards on the table, let`s examine each of them and separate myth from reality...

Myth #1: Mohajir culture has superior ``tehzeeb`` than Punjabi culture.

Reality: Mohajir tehzeeb emerged with the advent of Amir Khusro in 13th century whereas Punjabi tehzeeb emerged 3 centuries earlier when Baba Farid wrote his first couplets. At a time when Urdu poets were still writing ``pop`` ghazals about chaand and bulbuls, Punjabi poets like Bulleh Shah, Waris Shah and Madho Lal Hussain were challenging religious dogma. Punjabi society evolved into a mature, moderate society centuries before the Mohajirs. Founders of two new faiths (Mirza Ghulam Ahmed, Baba Guru Nanak) and several reformers (Bahauddin Zakariya, Shah Shamas, Data Gunj Bakhsh) were produced by this land of five rivers.

Myth #2: Mohajirs conduct political discourse in a more civilized manner than Punjabis.

Reality: Mohajir politicians assassinate their political opponents, extort money from businessmen and thrive on ethnic hatreds. We can look at the record of MQM, the only Mohajir movement to get the picture. First, this party attacked the Pathans in Karachi. Next, it attacked the Sindhis. Next, it turned on the Punjabis. And when it had captured power, it turned on Mohajirs themselves. Even journalists like Maulana Salahuddin, philanthropists like Hakim Saeed and middle class champions like Azeem Tariq weren`t spared.

In contrast, Punjabis never conduct their politics with the gun. Dialogue and compromise are preferred instead.

Myth #3: Mohajirs are more educated than Punjabis
Reality: Not in absolute terms. The best universities in Pakistan are located in Punjab and the number of graduates produced in these universities now exceeds the number produced by universities in Karachi and Hyderabad. Disappointed with Mohajir student politics, many Mohajirs now prefer to study in Lahore, Faisalabad and Rawalpindi...

Even in relative terms, there are no statistics to substantiate the claim that Mohajirs are better educated than Punjabis.

PS: I used the term ``Mohajir`` only because you prefer to call yourself that. Otherwise, I don`t think there are any Mohajirs in Pakistan. Almost all of them, including the self-styled Mohajir Mandela (i.e. Altaf Hussain), are born in Pakistan after 1947.

With or Without Musharraf – A Mohajir’s Perspective re: Salim

{{Pakistan, at best, is an exercise in futility. In a worst case analysis, it holds the prospect for further strife, degeneration, continued attempts at more hegemony by a single province, more dismemberment, increased oppression, incessant terrorism, more bloodshed, and a catastrophic civil war}}.

Who will dismember Pakistan? Outside powers or internal forces? Increased oppression/ From whom? Directed against whom? What is your definition of degeneration? Your analysis (if we can call it that) sounds like an exercise in futility.

With or Without Musharraf – A Mohajir’s Perspective re: Salim


{{We need to restore and strengthen our relationships with ethnic Sindhis, Pathans, Baluchis, and Punjabis who have lived in Karachi for generations}}


An honest admission indeed. You are the first ``self-described`` Mohajir who had admitted that Mohajir politics is responsible for damaging the relationship between Mohajirs and other ethnic groups in Karachi. Now here are a few steps you need to do to mend this relationship....

a) Stop referring to Mohajirs as ``We`` and start referring to all Karachiites as ``We``. This will hurt your Mohajir nationalism, but will strengthen Karachi. A small price to pay for your lofty ideals.

b) Stop demanding repatriation of Biharis without consulting Sindhis. They too have a right to determine when and how many Biharis should they share their economic resources with.

c) Stop taking credit for the creation of Pakistan. While it`s true that Pak movement was launched from U.P. in the 1930s, this movement remained weak and urbanized until Pathans, Sindhis, Bengalis and Punjabis joined it in early 1940s. If Punjab had not thrown its weight behind Jinnah in 1940, Pakistan would not have been created. Mohajirs would be working as barbers and tailors in Delhi, instead of professional managers and govt ministers in Karachi.

d) Stop blaming Punjabis for the suffering of so-called Mohajirs in 1960s and 70s. The Urdu-speaking community practically ran the bureaucracy from 1947 till 1960s. They were over-represented in govt ministries only because they were better educated than other ethnic groups in Pakistan. But with the growth of literacy and return of democracy in the 1970s, it was inevitable that Punjabis, Pathans and Sindhis would begin to dominate in civil & military bureaucracy. If Mohajirs came to Pakistan for the sake of economic independence, they did the right thing. If they came to Pakistan to perpetually dominate the other ethnic groups, they were only deluding themselves.

e) Ethnic politics has no role in a Federation formed on Islamic ideology. Even moderate schools of Islam (e.g. Sufism, Barelvi school, Ahmediyya sect) look down upon caste, biradiri or ethnic affiliations.

Violation of Civilians by the Army in Pakistan Re: #11

That`s a new one, really. Got any scoop... or are you just regurgitating conspiracy theories, eh??

Violation of Civilians by the Army in Pakistan Do you know the name of this Colonel? I can get this information to Lt.Gen. Hamid Javed, the president`s chief of staff.