Valentine

Re: majumdar # 10

The problem is that in Pakistan the politicans have never been responsible. ;)

As to India, it is time that we stopped comparing our common problems with one another in hopes that ``your`` problem is worse than ``mine``. A problem is a problem and whether it is an Indian problem or a Pakistani problem, it still remains a problem. On the other hand, if we are able to forge a common ground against solving the problems, then that is another issue. :)

A lot of people, will disagree with me, but I have started to group people into two small and simple groups; those that can help Pakistan and those that do not want to help Pakistan. The rest of the classifications are useless. Civilian and military leadership, in my eyes, is in the same boat if they are not interested in helping Pakistan and given their past behavior, it seems that they are only interested in their own egos. In Pakistan of 2006, the time for talking is over and now, we have to put our money where our mouth is or simply shut up! Pakistan of today needs actions, which materialize tangible results and has no time to waste on well meaning rhetoric.

In my opinion, this civilian-military debate is a waste of time and it was in that tenor, that I reacted to your post. :)

Ciao

Feroze sahib,

Re: #6

You seem to be under the impression that civvy politicians of Pakistan are devils and elsewhere they are angels. Assure you that is not the case- at least in India. What you have seen in Lahore is small change compared to what I have seen in India personally- the Congress sponsored genocide of Sikhs in Nov 1984. To that you can add Gujarat 2002. And mind you these are not one-off incidents politicans have regularly been creating problems. I should add that the damage Indian politicians create is much bigger than what happens in Pakistan for the simple reason that Indian politicos wield much more power. Yet I have yet to hear any Indian that democracy or political parties be done away with.

Further if politicians do behave badly at times they do behave responsibly as well. For instance Congress, UF and BJP governments have over the last decade or so broadly followed consistent policies on foreign and economic matters as they have recognised that the national interest demands so.

If Paki politicos indulge in irresponsible action, I don`t really blame them. Having been denied any real constructive role or powers, it is natural that dont feel any responsibility either.

Regards

It was the politicians...the MMA to be precise at the forefront. with a lot of support from other cowardly and ignorant mullahs.

when they were bringing busloads of men from gujrat, gujranwala and elsewhere, it was obvious this was an anti mush rally rather than any form of peaceful protest against the cartoons as it was meant to be.

the authorities though, should have been better prepared and hence hundred of thousands of ruppees would not have been wasted.

Re: # 3

Yes, I agree with your views.

There is a very real vacuum in Pakistan and that is the danger. This vacuum will further enlarge, because with the elections approaching fast, one cannot discount the fact that Islamabad will continue to seek to marginalize the mainstream political parties in favor of hammering some understanding with the MMA. There is total alienation in Pakistan with the so called main political parties, because even though the people are tired of the military rule; they are not so trusting of the PPP and PML-N either. The people of Pakistan may not approve of the military in power, but past experience has taught them not to come out on the streets and ``take bullets`` for the sake of Benazir Bhutto or Nawaz Sharif because ``it will be different this time around``.

No one on the street believes in the Charter of Democracy and it is only the ``Coffee Table`` segments of Pakistan, which are discussing the pro and cons of the CoD. The grind of daily problems is so over whelming that most people are busy keeping a job and hoping not to be robbed or killed on the way to their jobs and back. There is a new divide emerging in Pakistan and the new battle lines are: those who are in politics, be they the military or the civilians against those who are not in politics. The average person has not seen his/her prospects imprioved under any government; military or civilian but only has seen the civilian and military reap the benefits of power for themselves and their future kin. Pakistan is thus, becoming a highly individualistic society, where the general perception is that the state will not provide anything, beause the state itself is the problem and this explains, the ever growing and increasingly accepted cycles of anarchy in Pakistan.

The end result is that Pakistani cities, and its urban places are dividing up into political ghettos, under the rule of a different political party and these parties are armed; so we are now seeing the growth of an urban warlordism in urban Pakistan where these political parties to dominate the city and the government plays one of them against the other.

Result: total chaos.

In this sense, your point about Waziristan is very insightful. There is so much dissatisfaction with the usual politics, that if the Taliban sweep outside of FATA and into Pakistan proper and they can arrest the lawlessness and bring justice and order, the people of Pakistan will accept them. This acceptance need not mean that they agree with the religious philosophy of the Taliban, but they will support the Taliban simply because they are tired of living in a state of uncertainity and would welcome some idea of a continuity in their daily lives. The environment, which natured and supported the Taliban in Afghanistan in the early 1990s, can now be seen and experienced in Pakistan and hence, there is a very accepting political enviroment in Pakistan, which can easily Talibanize Pakistani politics.

Five years ago, this conclusion might have seemed as a fantasy scenrio in some political science class discussion, but today; its is a portent of a reality.

The amusing aspect of this development is that if the Talibanization of Pakistan has to be stopped, it will mean that both the military and civilian politicans will have to stop their turf fights and it also means that within the civilian politics; the civilians will have to agree to stop their own political infighting and end their personal political fueds. It would mean that the constitution of Pakistan has to be given the primacy it derserves and it means that the political rights and previleges between the center and the provinces will have to re-agreed in a consensual manner. It means that the people of Pakistan will have to be provided with the basic constitutional rights, which narrows the political window through which a Talibanization of Pakistan can occur.

Ciao

Shekhar -- that was in jest -- Kargil was the dumbest misadventure of a dumb adventurer soldier of fortune...

Re: # 1

With all due respects to your view point, I personally saw the riots and experienced the destruction. The Mall, which was burned was only a few minutes walking time away from my house. I could clearly see the mobs of young people running on the Mall and everyone in the neighborhood knew, who was leading them and who was organizing the mayhem. It was the political parties, which were behind the riots and in fact, the religious parties had nothing to do with them and in fact, were trying to prevent the acts of destruction.

There was tearing gassing and some of the tear gas shells landed in the garden in the front of my house blinding my mother. The gas entered our house and would not leave; further choking my mother with their fumes.

The blame for the politicans instigating the riots is because they were behind it and the political parties took the opportunity, when the government relaxed its ban on public assembies in Lahore. Though the reason was to protest the publishing of the offending cartoons by a Danish newspaper, the political parties wanted to use the pretext as a demostration against the Musharraf government. In this case, the politicans are to be blamed for their acts and seeing the riots personally. Lahore is a very familar city and everyone in Lahore know, who supports whom against whom politically speaking.

This is not about the army-civilian wet dreams of power; it is about a break down of law and order and who was behind it. In my eyes, when civilian politicans do a wrong act, it is still a wrong act and it will NEVER be a right act just because they are civilians! I have nothing against blaming and holding the army responsible for its deeds in our history, but I am not naive enough to believe that civilian politicans are like angels, who have descended from Heaven, as some manna, for our mutual benefit and thus, must not be judged too harsly.

Ciao

Nasah..... you said.
...the gutsy man whose chest swells up with the pride of Kargil --
Is there really anything about Kargil for the General to feel proud about? Anyone please clarify on this....

``There is no point in blaming politicians or political process for the hopelessness in Pak because the Army holds the real power.``(Mujamdar)

exactly -- the politician did it -- the politician did it -- the pet phrase of the elite in Pakistan -- blame the politicians not the army -- as if politician are such an EXCEPTION in Pakistan -- and the army government is the RULE in all other countries.

politicians politicians -- in which country they are not corrupt -- there may be a little variation qualitaively and quantitatively from country to country -- but politician as politicians -- are born corrupt and power hungry..

corruption and power -- are the two universal driving force and the incentives for the ladies or gentlemen of the politics -- and the medal flashing gentlemen of the GHQ -- to work their tail off for their `party` and their country.....

.....and pleeze don`t tell me hijacking an elected government at gunpoint by the Generals is not corruption and not dishonorable conduct...

it is....

yet the the POLITICIANS are the ONLY ONES who are NORMALLY supposed to govern most of the civilized countries -- NOT the army Generals.

Exception are just two --

one Burma/ Myanmar where the uniformed cruel jokers -- whose only barrack training is how to bravely baton charge their own unarmed people -- and how to exhibit their valor to a 98 pounds skinny soft spoken steel-willed lady by tormenting her under perpetual house arrest....for a decade

and the other in Pakistan -- who can`t get to decide whether to put a civilian sheep-skin over his khaki wolf skin - or go brazenly with both for another 7 years thru the backdoor....

....the gutsy man whose chest swells up with the pride of Kargil -- has no guts to face an election even against a woman -- even after he has equalized the playing field for himself -- by magnanimously exiling his two main opponents one of which is yet another frail woman --

if the General has real guts why doesn`t he face a woman (corrupt) politician in general elections 2007 and demonstrate his indispensability by soundly defeating the woman on the merits of his God-ordained immaculate honesty -- an not be afraid like an elephant of an ant...!

it`s the Army....not the politician...if the politician in Pakistan -- whether he or she -- is marginalized -- the masses did not do it -- the army did it. Period.

Feroz: In a slightly complicated way you have essentially made the comments that:
The mainstream political parties have become marginalised or disconnected from the people (by their own or the establishments acts). This disconnection means that the average protest may in its self turn into out of control acts of violence.

There is off course a historical parallel to this, circa 1968 when a seemingly untouchable Ayub Khan, who had given the country double digit growth (which did not translate into double digit investment in education and health) and marginalised the opposition political parties, suddenly faced a mass outbreak of political unrest. These protests were triggered by a random act of police abritrariness and the whole cheenai chor charges against cabinet members. The difference is Pakistan is institutionally and governance wise far weaker than in the 1960`s. You are also right about the political vacuum, as we all know nature abhors a vacuum (physics 101), the beste xample of that is Waziristan, but it`s an accepted fact political vacuums create political polarisation.

If you break it down, people like Asghar Khan, Cowasjee et al are right our leaders never learn from history.

Glad your analyzed it....cud u provide proof of the fact that manufacturing industries r in their infantile stages........?

Feroze sahib,

There is no point in blaming politicians or political process for the hopelessness in Pak because the Army holds the real power. It is a vicious cycle, lack of democracy undermines the political process and weak political processes undermine confidence in politics and hence a return to real democracy.

Regards