Game Theory and Pakistan

Sorry for hastily submitting it twice. How can I delete one of the two?

When a general grabs the top position in Pakistan, the game becomes infinite. When ever there is a possibility that the GEneral will have to choose, or may have to face the music of his own making, he changes the tune. The rules change, the rules that prevent changing of rules (i.e. writ of the land, aka the constitution) are changed by re interpreting the constitution. Pakistani Constitution is similar to the Holy Book, every body and his brother has a way to interpret it fir profit.
Pakistan Paindabad. Kab tak?

When a general grabs the top position in Pakistan, the game becomes infinite. When ever there is a possibility that the GEneral will have to choose, or may have to face the music of his own making, he changes the tune. The rules change, the rules that prevent changing of rules (i.e. writ of the land, aka the constitution) are changed by re interpreting the constitution. Pakistani Constitution is similar to the Holy Book, every body and his brother has a way to interpret it fir profit.
Pakistan Paindabad. Kab tak?

In response to Ali1 (Reply # 68)

Dear Ali:

Thank you for your response. I would appreciate if you reproduce the list on this forum. How could you tell from the list/name that a person is UPite or not (unless you know the person or his/her biodata)?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

P.S. On the Chowk, please address me with my first name.

Re: Mohajir

Los Angeles Times, Mohajir, Mansoor Ijaz and the problem of Descent:

Not even the Amnesty International has been allowed to get into Kashmir. Now, then, this Gentleman Mansoor gets there from New York for the Los Angeles Times.

Did the New York Times reject the writeup? One wonders.

The relationship among Nuclear Physics, Pakistan, investments, [I mean he is not Solomon....!]and sojourn in Kashmir as a journalist is interesting. My friend, krashid, has gone hoarse on the Chowk telling all and sundry that India does not allow any journalists to go into Kashmir, and yet we suddenly learn that Los Angeles Times has a special relationship with India to get this gentleman to saunter around the Srinagar`s Boulevard.

Now, this takes us to the question of his descent. Now and then Mohajir is sure about some things. Ijaz is sure about what he is. I am not. Incidentally, ``descent`` is a biological relation, not a domicile-related or a birth-place referent. The gentleman could not have descended from Pakistan. Perhaps one should be more careful about its use.

I must say that the whole thing read curiouser and curiouser as I went through it. Well ...,

Harish #67

My dear Harish:

I visited Chowk and yours was the only letter I read before I folded it. I did it because to address a letter written in the genre of your choice, it is not necessary to know the topic of discussion in depth, nor to become familiar with the history by reading all the previous letters. The item, as it were, stands alone for the pleasure of somebody to kick it to smithreens. I chose to do that:

You seem to be making a reference to posts #61, Concerned; #62, Cheraym; and #64, friend.

At the end of the letter you offer regards to them. Well, fine, although out of the level-headed ordinary.

But then after making promise of spilling blood, you wish to see them there.

Are you going to spill //their// blood or spill blood //with them// of somebody else, as yet unnamed?

After reading your post, the threat of spilling blood of -- concerned, friend, or that vitriolic-charming lady, from my favourite Southern State Cheraym -- this summer, sounds as more of your intention. ``( See you this summer on the slopes of the Himalayas..)``. [I guess, Hareesh, you are still spilling the blood of English language].

Be that as it may, it seems that a ``brain-challenged`` is talking about the ``intellectually challenged``. Now, that is pot calling the kettle black. Or, as a Jullunder lady who, failing to pick up our language would shout at servants in Punjabi, but taught our family - after indicating that Punjabi and English were very close - the meaning of ``chhaj té bolé, ChhaniN ki bolé``. I may be mistaken but it sounds pretty close to ``pot calling the... .``

Harish, my dear, till next time

RE Prof Bilal # 58

The list of 313 has been published several times over in Pakistani media. I read about it in an issue of Urdu Digest in the eighties. The 313 were a mix of CSS and PCS officers, and going by the last names, most of them were UPites. As for the reason of their dismissal, our guess is as good as mine.

Concerned # 61, cheraym # 62, friend # 64

Umairr nor any other Pakistani need reply to my posts. We (Indians and Pakistanis) disagree on Kashmir. I was just pointing out to some of the more ``intellectually challenged`` Pakistanis why their argument on Kashmir holds no water. This is one issue which words can not settle. War is the only way. And this would have been an even more preferable option in `47, as opposed to the ``peace`` we have enjoyed these last 53 years. See you this summer on the slopes of the Himalayas.

Regards,

Harish

To Umair, Furair, FerozK and all other military types,

Read this interesting article from Defence Journal, ``A monthly magazine dedicated to projecting the Armed Forces of Pakistan in their True Perspective``

http://www.defencejournal.com/2000/apr/war-lost.htm ``The war of lost opportunities

(Part I) by Maj (Retd) AGHA HUMAYUN AMIN``

Sequence of events stated by this article is

1. Pathans aided by Pakistani army officers in civilian uniform attacked Kashmir

2. Maharaja signed (not this word) instrument of accension

3. Pakistani army, somtimes by disobeying the civilians masters, joined the fight

4. Overriding British suggestions against opening another front, Sardar Patel decided for action in Hyderabad

5. Indian army enters and pushes back Pathans and Pak army regulars

Regards

In response to SameerJB (Reply # 63)

Dear Sameer:

Your statement (of course out of context): “In Punjab and Sindh, in the areas of education and business, Muslims remained behind their non-Muslims neighbors all the way to 1947.”

Comment: Is this statement still true in the larger South Asian context both in terms of the quantity and quality of education? If yes, what do we need to do to bring much need social change?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Harish#60, Concerned #41,

Umair won`t reply!! Don`t waste your time on him.

Regards

harimau (#57): The momentum for a trend or fashion has to do with many factors. There are many many instances where a particular trend attracts a large number of followers in one area and does not gain popularity in other places. As I mentioned in my previous post, not just in South India, but within area of majority Muslim population of Indus valley, large numbers of people retained their Hindu religion. If it was anything like, covert or lose your head or perish, they would not have survived through centuries of Islamic empires.

A trend gets going in religious terms through a combination of factors including magic, miracles, marketing, publicity, propaganda and, of course, benefits. The most nefefits are those of earliest converts. They were usually yeomen, vassals and people of affluence like officials and land-holding individuals. It works like a pyramid scheme, similar to Amway business where the later convertees get no benefit. That is what I meant by stating that there were no benefits for the future generations of Muslims in almost all areas of life. In Punjab and Sindh, in the areas of education and business, Muslims remained behind their non-Muslims neighbors all the way to 1947.

Let me give a known example from my ancestral area along the river Ravi. A Sufi named Makhdoom Jahanian Jahan Gasht is credited for coverting large number of people on both side of Ravi. He was aristocratic, a favorite of Firoze Tughlaq and not at all people priest. His lifestyle and buddy-buddy with the elite led to the conversion of few big land owning families for the reasons as simple as praying for pregnant women to have son instead of daughter. Over time many more people converted from the artisan classes and those who provide survices to elite.

The success of Evangelic Christianity in the tribal belt, in my opinion, is more economical and social. A model society, according to modern Christian missioneries is a city model with social services including schools, healthcare and other benefits. It helps a lot for backward and rural tribes to become Christian and enjoy some of the benefits of modern city life without moving to cities.

I hope you understand that these are just opinions and not expert opinions. I would like to hear what you think were the main reasons for successful conversions in certain parts of India and unsuccessful in others.

Regards,

Sameer

Harish:

If you follow up Chowk regularly, I like many other regulars of Chowk asked questions in your line to Umairr, he never responds, but comes back with same rattling after a few weeks. Keeps on harping ``rights of Kashmiris``.... This is exactly the problem, and that is why there is no logical solution to Kashmir.

As in a joint family, one has to sacrifice for the greater good of the family, Kashmiris have to think what is the right thing they should do also!

It is as simple as that.

Now don`t ask me again what is the greater good for India, it has been explained so many times by so many people. It is the same logic why India is not supporting ELAM in Srilanka.

what? no roars from the lion of kashmir, once confronted with inconvenient questions yet again?

sigh...i guess one would have to wait for yet another new guy to appear on chowk for the lion`s target and we would go through this cycle once more...

i hope not. please spare us umairr!

Umairr # 43

“Take Pakistan completely out of the picture for a moment. Assume that whatever Pakistan has been doing [in Kashmir] is incorrect. Now what should be the humane solution to the problems of Kashmiris. Should it be a solution that you want for them, or should it be a solution that they want for themselves.”

Let me ask you Umairr. What exactly is the problem of the Muslim Kashmiris? How would you define it? Is it that a large amount of Muslim Kashmiris don’t want to be a part of Hindu majority India? If the answer is yes, lets not leave it at that, as most Pakistanis do, but delve deeper into the problem. Is this enough of a reason for people to break away - because they simply want to? In your opinion, do people need valid reasons to become independent from a larger group? When that desired independence directly affects the freedoms of other people (as did the independence of Muslims of Northwest India impact the freedoms of the non-Muslims in the region in 1947), I think a valid reason is required. What do you think?

What valid reasons might Kashmiri Muslims have? They say that they want to break away from India because they are a religious MINORITY, and they are afraid of religious persecution from the Hindus. Whatever one thinks about how valid those fears are, the basic message is that as a MINORITY, Muslim Kashmiris don’t want their rights trampled on, just as the Muslims of Northwest India didn’t want their rights trampled on in ‘47. So what do some of these Kashmiri Muslims want? They want, as did the Muslims of Northwest India in 1947, a separation or partition from the rest of India along religious lines.

But I have a problem with this. My problem is that all these religion based partitions in the name of “minority rights” trample over the religious minorities who are forced to leave their native lands whether they be Pundits in Kashmir or Sikhs and Hindus in 1947. This is the ultimate hypocrisy of Pakistanis in general and in particular with regard to Kashmir. Why don’t you admit it Umairr? You don’t care about humans. You only care about Muslims.

This is what Pakistanis do not understand about Indians. We don’t harp on Partition because we “can’t get over the fact that Pakistan is no longer a part of India.” If Pakistanis want to live separately, by all means go ahead. But why do they have to steal our land to do it? In order for Pakistanis to assert their own “rights” and “self-determination,” they have to force everyone else (about 18 million in 1947 I think) to surrender their own rights and “self-determination.”

India insisting that Kashmir remain a part of the Indian union does not curb the freedoms of Kashmiris -- Muslim or otherwise. The Indian union doesn’t care what Kashmiris do so long as all people, belonging to whatever religious or ethnic community, enjoy the same rights guaranteed in the Indian constitution. And if Kashmiri Muslims don’t want to interact with Kashmiri Hindus, no problem – no one is forcing them to. But if Kashmiri Muslims want to force non-Muslims to leave as did the hypocritical Pakistanis in ’47 in the name of “minority rights,” that is a problem.

So what’s the solution, Umairr? I’ll tell you. Give it up. Stop thinking you’re argument is so logical. Why hasn’t the world embraced Pakistan’s position on Kashmir? Maybe because they understand that religious based amputations are not a solution to one group of people not liking another. Or maybe there are other reasons why the world fails to see Kashmir the way Pakistan does…maybe its the dastardly work of the brilliant Indian lobby, eh Umairr? After all, they’ve been so effective in all other arenas these past 53 years.

Regards,

Harish

In response to Ali1 (Reply # 58)

Dear Ali:

You wrote: ``(Almost all the 313 CSS officers kicked out by Bhutto were UPites). What is the source of your information? Were they all CSS officers? Are you suggesting that the UPites were overwhlmingly corrupt and/or inefficient? Or, were they victimized because they were UPites?

I personally tend to doubt the veracity of your statement. So, please clarify.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad