Do Pakistanis deserve a democratic system?

Re:devkant

[..someone had said jinnah for bharat ratna. no jokes...this award is given to people who have done great service to india and who better than jinnah should get this award. ....]

Amen to that!!

I have an even better idea. How about we demolish/convert that Jinnah house in Bombay to build a brand new Ram Mandir there? Forget about Ayodhya, Jinnah`s house is the real sacred place for all hindus, since he is the real savior of hindus in the subcontinent. Yeah, Ram Mandir on Jinnah House!!!

Re: # 202

Dear VRV,

Abusing me is not going to change the facts which are:

1. The history I put up here is at complete variance to the official history promoted by the Pakistan government.

2. You have flip flopped. First you alleged Jinnah`s actions as GG were undemocratic and when shown that Jinnah exercised less powers than the president of the United States, you went back to claiming that Jinnah was unconstitutional. When asked how he was unconstitutional... you failed to provide a single provision of the Government of India Act 1935 and/or Independence of India Act 1947 which was violated.

3. You said Jinnah issed adaptation orders which some how made him a dictator (yet ironically with much less powers than the president of the United States- hence according to you USA is a dictatorship). Yet you failed to produce the exact nature of these orders, if at all they existed, and how these alleged orders violated the Government of India Act 1935.

So... atleast bring some structure to your thoughts.

#216 by VRV

What unassailable proof can be provided now? However the fact that even though Jinah sold his Delhi residence outright, he insisted on not only retaining the Bombay residence but on renting it out only to a small European family who would maintain it properly, plus the fact that Nehru prevented it from being declared as evacuee property at Jinnah`s request, should be sufficient proof.

Refer the following conversation:

``Sri Prakasa, don’t break my heart. Tell Jawaharlal not to break my heart, I have built it brick by brick. Who can live in a house like that? What fine verandas? It is a small house only for a small European family or a refined Indian prince. You do not know how I love Bombay. I still look forward to going back there,`` Jinnah had said.
Sri Prakasa, India’s first high commissioner to Pakistan replied, ‘``Really, Mr. Jinnah! I said. ‘You desire to go back to Bombay. I know how much Bombay owes to you and your great services to the city. May I tell Prime Minister that you want to go back there?’ He replied: ‘Yes, you may``’ writes Sri Prakasa in his memories Pakistan: Birth and Last Days. This conversation took place on July 30, 1948.

Jinnah’s sentiments were immediately telegrammed to Nehru and in accordance with his wish, to allot his house to any foreign consulate, permission, was sought from Jinnah who replied that not due to any racial feeling but because his house was built in European style he wanted it to go to a European family. He was formally offered Rs. 3000 for a month but he left the ball in India’s court to decide on fixing the rent as Indians prerogative. Jinnah while replying to a letter to Sri Prakasa had professed to look forward to meeting him on his return to Karachi, but, unfortunately, he could not do so as he died before that.

Nehru, on his part decided not to declare Jinnah House as an evacuee property and in a note to the Cabinet on March 7,1955 had said. ``I think we should further be prepared to make a gift of it to the Pakistan government,`` as documented in Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru. But, Nehru could not get approval from his cabinet.

The House Jinnah built.

Facts like this raise many questions as to whether Jinnah really wanted Punjab/Bengal partition and the resulting violance, rather than an amicable division of the British sub-continent into India and Pakistan. While yourself and other Indian interactors tend to believe the former, it appears to me Jinnah`s intent was the latter but was somehow thwarted by Nehru/Patel and the British.

``#203 by tahmed32 on January 16, 2007 5:57am PT
I have one interesting news for you though: Based on what you two write, using ranjit`s Excel (enhanced model) calculations and the fine reasoning by devkant, 99.9999999 % Indians now agree that Jinnah was right all along!! And by the same token, that Indian Congress and muslim maulvis and others who were opposing Jinnah were wrong. It took you people 60 years, but I am glad that you have finally seen the wisdom behind what we Pakistanis have been saying all along. :-) ``

sirji,

jinnah was right to have the partition and i am happy that all he got was a moth eaten pakistan. had india remained united, a bloody civil war would have followed and we indians would have lost much more of our land.

this 8% growth that india is achieving today would not have happened if we were united. it is we indians who are emotional fools who used to think that we had something in common with pakistanis. but now the truth has dawned on us and we are thankful that we are separated from you guys.

long live india and long live pakistan....peacefully of course.

someone had said jinnah for bharat ratna. no jokes...this award is given to people who have done great service to india and who better than jinnah should get this award.

rgds,

devkant.

``Failed state``

Yes, Pakistan has failed on a number of fronts. Maybe more often than India has. Maybe much much more often than US has. States are not always able to attain what thy set out to do. In the co ntext of south asia, the states have failed against illiteracy, poverty, ignorance, stupid rites and rituals, obsessions with medieval mindsets, controlling domestic ingrown terrorism, exporting terror (one country in particular), obsolete police systems, crime against women etc.. The list is long. and is common to all south asia. In this sense both India and Pakistan are ``Failed states``.

However, mainly Pakistan has failed utterly in its ``attempts ???`` to evolve a proper POLITY where India has succeeded quite well.

The unfortunate fact is that Pakistan continues to have a primitive polity which has not been given an opportunity to develop. The feudal eco-social system ensures that the political class continues to remain hopelessly feudal and correspondingly corrupt. The total weakening of the moral fabric of the politicians, the army and the society at large has resulted in a stage where it would be futile to expect a decent set of democratic leaders. The army despots, especially the current one is found acceptable to a vast majority- including most of our intelligentsia. The most frustrating part is that even though the universal truth ``democracy rox, army sux`` should be applicable to Pakistan in equal measure-- but in the short term, democracy (choice between the BB & the Sharif) only scares Pakistanis away. In the long run, however, democracy can be the only solution.

Re: # 211

typo corrections:

#211 by VRV on January 16, 2007 6:33pm PT
Re: # 204

Zee,

I need an unassailable proof abt the assertion of Jinnah wanting to settle in India.

(I knew that he wanted to visit his home and this was corroborated by the account of a Congressi girl who shot an angry letter to Jinnah abt division of the people of India. BUT NOWHERE IT`S SAID/MENTIONED THAT JINNAH WANtED TO ``SETTLE`` IN BOMBAY. Moreover he knew that he`s having advanced TB disease which wud consume him too soon. Then why he`d come to Bombay to settle?? I need proof Dear Zee!)

As for Bounday Commission, it was an arbitration. It`s binding on all parties. If some Tom/Dick were given the job and that guy too gave a similar verdict, u guyz were going to say the same thing.

The terms of ref were known. Any guy with average intelligence cud make his own guess as to whether his/her district wud be part of India or Pakistan. Jinnah said it very clearly that MIGRATION HAD TO TAKE PLACE when partition is affected i.e even b4 the BOUNDARY COMMISSION WAS SETUP. The writing on the wall was very clear abt the turn of events....Jinnah knew what shud happen when his Pakistan is created. He `preferred` migration of non-muslims.

As for opinionated sentences like Nehru and Gandhi were villains but Jinnah was a saint...eh, there cant be another funnier description! Yasser can keep such `belief` to himself.

``Still it is a mystery to me as to what was all the hurry in this boundary award business, why the job was given to someone who had never been to India before, and why his award was agreed to be final by both parties in advance. ``

---

Radcliffe used the pencil of peace to partition India. It`s meant to be the pencil of peace but to me, it`s Reaper`s pointed tail......

---

P.S: for the sake of record I need to reproduce this sentence on Nehru from Pakistan`s official biography of Jinnah written by Hector Bolitho: page 49:

---

Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, the MORE SCHOLARLY of the three..........

---

(The Jinnah`s biographer whilst mentioning Jinnah, Gandhi and Nehru...an unexpected burst of frankness.....).

Re: # 214
Correction:

`I went back to my postings and I was not the first to use the term `failed state`, but ...`
instead of
`I went back to my postings and never did I use the term `failed state`, but `

Re: # 212 Tahmed32

Your blood pressure is getting high and you are having trouble thinking coherently. Unbelievable? How about this:

``And a ``failed state`` is a meaningless term that can be used to mean anything - as you have just done.``

I went back to my postings and never did I use the term `failed state`, but the massive chip on your shoulder had you reading words that I did not type! Infact, you were the first to use it in our interaction (post #209). Ha! Are you gaming me in some weird way? Or did the words just sputter out involuntarily and subconsciously as you were thinking of Pakistan!!! Since you used the term first and then went on to state that it `is a meaningless term that can be used to mean anything` you just prove to me that you have lost your marbles! Anyway, you figure this out!

What the fck does `atoot ang` have to do with this anyway? Why are you so fixated on what India thinks? Worry instead about about Negroponte and the PBS experts are saying instead of coming with your wild-ass asinine responses. Did you read the interview by the Head of Afghanistan`s National Security Directorate (NSD), the country`s intelligence service, Amrullah Saleh?
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/taliban/interviews/saleh.html

A delectable quote: ``There is [a connection] between Pakistani extremist groups and Afghan Taliban. The breeding ground for insurgents is the militant madrassas of Pakistan, so it requires a very strong political will to crack down on all those networks, which [is] not happening. For example, if you look at the pattern of propaganda in the Pakistani media against Afghanistan -- and some of the papers are state-sponsored papers -- they clearly try to undermine the Afghan government.``

So, before you comment on `Indian habits`, you might want to check with your Afghan neighbor first! Also, check with Negroponte about what he told the US Congress last week, you enraged wounded bull!

And then again you bring up `71 and the ghost of Indira Gandhi and some forgotten radio speech out of nowhere - to what end? You are incapable of thinking clearly and just confirms my fears that your country is headed into a morass. In front of you, Musharraf does indeed look like a genius!

Why do these pakis in US ``wannabe Indian``? All these Paki girls are giving semi nude pics in Indian magazines and hanging with Hindus at NJDesiClub and admitting that they are more Indians than Low class conservative mullah creatures from Land of Pure .... Check New Jersey Desi hangout clubs.

PewResearch #210 On the economic front - India has as much a stake in peace as Pakistan does. So, here again, Pakistan does not need to prove anything to India as you were indicating.

And a ``failed state`` is a meaningless term that can be used to mean anything - as you have just done. if it is a ``failed state`` why is India, 35 years later, not just talking about peace but no longer talks about Kashmir being an ``atoot ang`` of India (the stock phrase used by Indian politicians from back then)? Pakistan is a ``failed state`` only in the dreams of Indians who cant get used to the idea.

I didnt discuss the future because, while agreeing that this was the right way to look at India-Pakistan relations, you slipped back into the old Indian habit berating Pakistani leaders and Pakistan. When you are willing to discuss something other than berating Pakistan, then you can come back and tell me I have a chip on my shoulder. But you cant have it both ways - have nothing but negative things to say about Pakistan and then complain that someone has a chip on his shoulder for setting the record straight.


btw: 1971 was hardly a military achievement given the situation (you wont find this easy to accept, and I am too tired to explain, so you are welcome to disagree), and it is sad that Indira Gandhi herself (as I recall hearing her say in her radio speech back then) needed to point this out as being ``revenge`` for a thousand years of defeat at the hands of muslims!!

Re: # 204

Zee,

I need an unassialable proof abt assertion of Jinnah wanting to settle in India.

(I knew that he wanted to visit his home and this was corroborated by the account of a Congressi girl who shot an angry letter to Jinnah abt division of the people of India. BUT NOWHERE IT`S SAID/MENTIONED THAT JINNAH WANtED TO ``SETTLE`` IN BOMBAY. Moreover he knew that he`s having advanced TB disease which wud consume him too soon. Then why he`d come to Bombay to settle?? I need proof Dear Zee!)

As for Bounday Commission, it was an arbitration. It`s binding on all parties. If some Tom/Dick were given the job and that guy too gave a similar verdict, u guyz were going to say the same thing.

The terms of ref were known. Any guy with average intelligence cud make his own guess as to his/her district wud be part of India or Pakistan. Jinnah said it very clearly that MIGRATION HAD TO TAKE PLACE when partition is affected i.e even b4 the Bounday COMMISSION WAS SETUP. The writing on the wall was very clear abt the turn of events....

As for opinionated sentences like Nehru and Gandhi were villains but Jinnah was a saint...eh, there cant be another funnier description! Yasser can keep such `belief` to himself.

``Still it is a mystery to me as to what was all the hurry in this boundary award business, why the job was given to someone who had never been to India before, and why his award was agreed to be final by both parties in advance. ``

---

Radcliffe used the pencil of peace to partition India. It`s meant to the pencil of peace but
to me, it`s Reaper`s pointed tail......

---

P.S: for the sake of record I need to reproduce this sentence on Nehru from Pakistan`s official biography of Jinnah written by Hector Bolitho: page 49:

---

Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, the MORE SCHOLARLY of the three..........

---

(The Jinnah`s biographer was mentioning abt Jinnah, Gandhi and Nehru).

Re: # 209 Tahmed32

`Intellectuals` like you have confirmed my worst fears - that Pakistan and its elite is still fighting the last war:) The new front is an economic one, but the massive chip on your shoulder lets you see the world only one way - explosions and missile strikes! Ha:) That chip also makes you think that I spoke under a `pretense of moral or intellectual superiority`. Nice try when objective evidence is hard to find. Not that I want to debate the past since you yourself in your post #195 appealed to look towards the future (which is what I was inviting you to do)!

``As for ``strategic ability``, I think Pakistani leadership has done quite well...while Indian leadership waited for Pakistan become a failed state ``

Yup, Pakistan failed as a state in `71. (Need I remind you? not that it gives me any pleasure). Just thought that I might mention to puncture your assertion. All your ranting about BJP and stuff - who cares? How is that relevant here? Calm down - have some sherbet, pal. Have a nice day! Try to make up your mind where you want to look towards: past or the future?

PewResearch #208 You assume that Pakistan needs to demonstrate its innocence and good intentions etc. to India - rest assured the only thing Pakistan needs to demonstrate is a few well timed missile shots and a few well timed nuclear explosions. That was all the demonstration India needed for BJP honchos to come running to Pakistan to assure Pakistanis that Pakistan was here to stay. :-)

If you want to have a serious discussion on India-Pakistan politics, then wake up from this dream-world and realize that India is not exactly the US and peace will only come when Indians stop their pretense of moral or military or intellectual superiority and learn to respect neighboring countries.

As for ``strategic ability``, I think Pakistani leadership has done quite well. Notably: 1. Given the ``brilliant`` maneuvering whereby India`s ability to overrun Pakistan through sheer numbers has been replaced by India`s projection of military power being stopped where the Pakistani border begins, if this reflects lack of strategic vision by Pakistani leaders as you say, then that is fine as far as Pakistan is concerned. 2. Going further back, given the ``brilliant`` maneuvarings of Indians in pre-partition days (e.g. the Quit India movement), Pakistan came into existence while Indian leadership waited for Pakistan become a failed state (and, while Indian leaders seem to have given up on that hope after 60 years, that hope is alive and well with a number of Indians on chowk obviously).

Like I said, with enemies like BJP and other Pakistan haters, Pakistan doesnt need any friends - or strategic military thinkers. As the guy being chased by a bear said to the other guy - all I need to do is run faster than you. Thus, in terms of strategic thinking, all we Pakistanis need to do is think more clearly than Indians - which so far has proved to be a no-brainer. :-)

So, perhaps Indians need to develop some ``strategic ability`` if India is to play a role in the region that is as influential commensurate with its population size. As the brits used to say in colonial days ``Big empires and small hearts dont go together``. That would be the first step towards this strategic ability. I hope Manmohan Singh has it, and of course i hope Musharaff reciprocates as well. So far they are doing better than any past leader - Indian or Pakistani - that I can think of.

Re: # 207 tahmed32
I am not as optimistic as you are for the reasons that are borne out in the PBS interviews. I do not think (as you appear to) that `changing regional realities (economic stakes, military stalemate, increasing middle class), are definitely geared to push the two countries towards peace`. While peace would be a desirable outcome, it is by no means the ONLY possible outcome. There are many ways to do this wrong and only a few ways to get it right: Pakistan is still demonstrating that its commitment to GWOT is superficial. Building successful nation states is not an easy thing to do and Pakistani leadership has not demonstrated a strategic ability to do that. Further, a lack of wholehearted commitment to GWOT raises an existential issue for Pakistan`s viability - not something that I will wishfully disregard. I do not share your pollyanish optimism that things will be automatically OK. Things can get a WHOLE LOT worse as they have previously in Pakistan`s history. You ignore this possibility at your own peril. Questioning the credibility of PBS interviewees at this grave hour comes across as recklessly ignoring warnings that are flashing all around you.

PewResearch #205 Time will tell I think. WHile I thank you for posting the PBS interview, the fact is that the guess of these ``experts`` is no better than your guess or my guess or anyone else`s guess. No one can say for sure (not even musharaff or singh) if the current peace offorts of India-Pakistan will bear fruit, e.g.

While there is truth to the military meddling in politics in Pakistan (which is what the interviewee focuses on), that by no means is the only factor in play - more fundamental forces include global economic and technological changes as well as changing regional realities (economic stakes, military stalemate, increasing middle class), and these are definitely geared to push the two countries towards peace. If one is to make forecasts beyond the horizon of a few short months, then one cannot ignore these more fundamental fators in play.

Re: # 205

I meant to write, `Unwillingness to confront the inconvenient truth by Islamabad
is not a recipe for a turnaround. ` Did not mean to imply ‘by Tahmed32’