Chaos – Thy Name is Pakistan

muqaddam,

I don't have time to discuss this idiotic proposition that you put up... but with a 65% 35% (actually 72-28) you would have two warring communities ....

No discerning Indian Hindu would entertain this idea secular or not... because conventional wisdom is that a successful nation state always has a cultural majority of 80% or more... from an Indian standpoint it would have been a disaster of immense proportions if they would have to contend with Muslim majorities on the fringes... under fiercely particularist leaders like the Tiwanas and Daultanas in Punjab, Fazlul Haq, Suhrawardy and Abul Hashim in Bengal ... Khuhros and GM Syeds of Sindh... and even Bacha Khan types in NWFP .... who then would constitute a 30% minority at the center. It would be a constant veto on India's progress.

The only solution/alternative to partition was the Cabinet Mission Plan... which no matter what A'nulls and Sadnas of chowk say... did not give Muslims parity at the center but created an organic federation atop three sub-federations... in other words India would have all the benefits of the present... or almost all of them...

tahir #5:

You wrote, "There is only ONE correct way specified in the Book, the rest is misguidance."
This is what the followers of each Islam, e.g., Sunni, Shia, Wahabi, etc. believe in; this belief does not resolve the inherent problem. As an extreme example, the Qadianis, followers of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, also have the same Book, Quran, yet their understanding is fundamentally so different that they are called infidels by other Muslims. Only God knows which understanding is correct.
Wishing you well,
Mohammad Gill

Mr. Gill,

I live in Islamabad Pakistan. I live there with my family... and we've gone through the chaos you refer to ... but I am afraid it is not as bad as people here in California make it out to be.

Currently visiting the US, people keep asking me about Pakistan... and I think all these doomsday scenarios you have going in the media- especially here- are mostly fiction.

The issue with Pakistan remains its army which is not in tune with national interests. And because army-centric policy makers dominate our policy-making... the situation is perhaps best reflected by the Economist article on Pakistan's economy in the last issue (23 April-May 1st)...

This constant justification you guys seek... the sentence "we would have gotten a better deal from Hindus" blah blah is just hogwash really because it has no real bearing when such what-ifs are rubbish. Why must we be continuously held to this standard? We exist period. And nor should say those people who attached a certain amount of idealism to the idea of Pakistan in 1947 be held accountable for subsequent failure of successive generations of living up to it.

Please- I ask you as a Pakistani citizen living in Pakistan-to stop this exercise of self immolation every time something goes wrong in Pakistan. I spent last night discussing Indian elections and politics with two very smart Indians from chowk itself... and what they said struck me ... it is not that India does not have the problems we have... or that India is this perfect utopia that people make it out to be... but Indians don't indulge in this unnecessary exercise of self immolation which goes beyond academic inquiry... and is in the realm of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder... an national OCD of sorts. Indians don't have it. We do.

So please... atleast those Pakistanis who live abroad spare us Pakistanis who live in the country. This is an appeal to your sense of reason and balance.

After all that has happened in pakiland(and elsewhere) in name is islam - you still want an "Islamic constitution"?... Unbelievable!!!

I have mentioned this before. Had the partition had not taken place, Hindu-Muslim ratio of the undivided India would have been 65:35, the Hindus not enjoying a brute majority and the Muslims being a minority not to be pushed over. Just the right balance to keep things quiet and peaceful.

Re: # 4Phil,

"different branches of Islam..."

Like Nine Zero branch, Raiwind branch, Swat branch, GHQ branch? There's only ONE correct way specified in the Book, the rest is all misguidance.

Gill sahib

((( I have said it in the past and repeat it here also that different articles concerned with civic and social life be taken from different branches of Islam and included in the country’s constitution. Such a constitution should then be called Islamic constitution)))


Excellent suggestion.I second you on this.

Mr. Gill,

If you're talking about a certain large jar (πιθος pithos) in Greek mythology, carried by Pandora (ΠανδώÏ?α) that contained evils to be unleashed on mankind (ills, toils and sickness, but finally hope), it was called PANDORA'S BOX (and not Pandora box)!

Gill Sahib,

Your first sentence contains what I believe is a historical falsehood - or at least a highly contestable statement. But the motive for the creation of Pakistan is a topic that has been discussed to death, so I will let it pass for now.

Let me raise a basic definitional issue: who or what is a mullah?

Everybody parrots that Mullahs were opposed
to Pakistan but nobody explains or states why
they were opposed to Pakistan!
On what grounds did they oppose creation
of Pakistan?