India, Pakistan and America’s Mixed Signals
Ras Siddiqui December 30, 2001
#58 Posted by rsaxena on January 4, 2001 4:02:49 pm
re: shrinker
{We hindus are idol worshipping heathens,}
speaking of idol worship, i`m a little confused how some muslims can mock that while revering that big black box -- kaaba or whatever it is called - in saudi arabia. is that big box not an inanimate object as well?
{We hindus are idol worshipping heathens,}
speaking of idol worship, i`m a little confused how some muslims can mock that while revering that big black box -- kaaba or whatever it is called - in saudi arabia. is that big box not an inanimate object as well?
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#57 Posted by tahmed321 on January 4, 2001 1:45:16 pm
semipreciousme: how about our own paki generals? Hamid Gul was proclaiming before the US started action in Afghanistan that US soldiers were ``cream puff`` soldiers who would be chased away by his might talibans like (to use that tired old example) they (supposedly) chased out the Brits in the 19th century and the russians in the 20th century. When I read that I wondered if this man actually knew anything more about the world than mullah omar: The US has had war experience all across the globe. It has an economy and a culture and brains and technology that the Hamid Guls of Pakistan (let alone the taliban) dont even begin to understand. Even if they have visited this country and travelled all over it and even had some superficial cultural aspects rub off on them.
#56 Posted by cutandpaste on January 4, 2001 1:45:16 pm
Title: Respect For Other Religions
Author: Anees Jillani
Publication: Jung , Pakistan
Date: April 6, 2000
There lives even now a Hindu owner of a middle-sized Hotel in New Delhi who has a Muslim wife. She was married at the time of partition, was abducted, raped but later rescued by the armed forces. Her Muslim husband who had by then migrated to Pakistan was contacted by organisations handling repatriation of such women but he refused to take her back. She was lucky that she came across her present husband while living at one of the rehabilitation centers in early 1948. The young Hindu businessman married her and rescued her from the centre. He insisted that she could retain her religion. Wife of a prominent Pakistani was similarly abducted during partition. Many years later, she came into contact with a Pakistani who had gone to a tailor`s shop in Delhi. Working almost as a slave and without any access to the outside world, she stitched her husband`s name on a piece of cloth and secretly gave to the Pakistani. The latter managed to contact the husband in Pakistan but the husband, who had by then remarried, refused to have anything to do with her wife.
Karan Thapar, a conspicuous Indian Journalist, who recently interviewed General Musharraf on Door Darshan and who was given the general`s tie for praising it, narrated another interesting experience in one of his columns. He was watching an open-air theater about the Kargil war (Indians have nothing better to do than harp on this theme for the past one year now) when he started hearing two Indian jawans disapproving of a scene. Two Pakistani jawans had been captured by the Indians and after a thorough interrogation, they were shown as criticising Pakistan, its leadership, and its military. The Indian jawans sitting in the audience, who themselves had participated in the Kargil war, told Thapar that such a thing can never happen. Jawans even of an enemy can never criticise their own country, military and its leadership. The Indian media, and even some of the senior Indian army personnel, can routinely be seen praising the valiant performance of some of our soldiers during the Kargil war.
The moral of the story from the above three anecdotes is that not all Hindu Indians are rascals and villains; and not all Pakistani Muslims are angels going straight to heaven via Lahore. Both India and Pakistan are big nations in terms of their populations; and thus comprise all sorts of people. If India has produced Bal Thakeray, then it also has Nirmala Deshpande who led a 36-member women peace mission to Pakistan from March 25 to 31. We all know of similar contrasts in our country. What, however, distinguishes Pakistan from India in this respect is the presence of a Muslim community almost the size of Pakistan living within India. It simply cannot be ignored in a democratic-cum-secular setup. I first visited India in 1985 and found quite a few Muslims still cheering the Pakistani cricket team in a match against India. Not anymore. When asked now about their plight in a Hindu-dominated India, they say that they are fine; worry about your own self. Most of them are more perturbed about the state of mohajirs in Karachi than Hindu-Muslim riots in India.
This is, of course, not to say that India is a perfect example of secular model in the comity of nations. Far from it. It is a country where forces preaching Hindutva are in power and where the Babri mosque was demolished on December 6, 1992. However, what goes to the Indian system`s credit is the fact that the same Hindutva forces had to tone down their rhetoric and even their agenda to remain in power and win elections; construction of Ram mandir is no longer on NDA`s (National Democratic Alliance`s, of which BJP is a constituent) agenda and manifesto. The Indian premier himself called the day of destruction of the mosque the saddest day of his life and there are criminal cases pending against none other than the home minister himself for being involved in the destruction.
Since we have a selective memory, few would recall that some Pakistanis demolished many temples as a reaction to the mosque demolition. Have you heard of any Pakistani ever arrested for destroying those temples or attacking the Hindus? There is a BJP government in power in the state of Gujarat that permitted its civil servants to join Kuppahali S Sudarshan-led RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh); the state government justified its action on the ground that RSS is not a political but a cultural outfit. This permission led to such an uproar in the Lok Sabha and such condemnation by the print media that the BJP eventually bowed to public pressure and withdrew the authorisation on March 8, 2000. The above anomalies may not be written or talked about in Pakistan but the world community is not deaf, nor is it dumb. They see India as a Third World country attempting to maintain democracy and secularism; they all wish it well because this is the system that most of them also subscribe to. On the other hand, ours is a country which is gradually shifting into the hands of mullahs who talk of Islamic bombs and missiles and who wish to rule the whole world. What an irony because, at present, they cannot even rule themselves. They see India as a country where even the minority communities surpass the population of their own nations and then there is Pakistan where even a single conversion of a Hindu or a Christian is reported in all the major dailies, including the English ones.
We can no longer have it both ways. We cannot aspire to be a fortress of Islam and wish Clinton and Tony Blair to be our best friends. If we want to be Green Fortress, then we will have to content ourselves with Afghanistan`s Mulla Omar and survive like Afghanistan. No one in the world is asking us to change our religions. Islam, in fact, is the second largest belief in many of the countries. All that the world asks us to do is to respect other faiths as well. It is not good enough to say that minorities enjoy full protection of the state. The minorities in Pakistan cannot vote with us; they cannot be elected with us; they cannot become ministers; they are almost non-existent in our armed forces and civil service and the judiciary.
Most important of all, we wish all of them ideally to convert to Islam for their spiritual salvation. I am not so worried about theirs as our own religion because our scale of corruption increases manifold just before Eid during the holiest of holy days in Islam.
Author: Anees Jillani
Publication: Jung , Pakistan
Date: April 6, 2000
There lives even now a Hindu owner of a middle-sized Hotel in New Delhi who has a Muslim wife. She was married at the time of partition, was abducted, raped but later rescued by the armed forces. Her Muslim husband who had by then migrated to Pakistan was contacted by organisations handling repatriation of such women but he refused to take her back. She was lucky that she came across her present husband while living at one of the rehabilitation centers in early 1948. The young Hindu businessman married her and rescued her from the centre. He insisted that she could retain her religion. Wife of a prominent Pakistani was similarly abducted during partition. Many years later, she came into contact with a Pakistani who had gone to a tailor`s shop in Delhi. Working almost as a slave and without any access to the outside world, she stitched her husband`s name on a piece of cloth and secretly gave to the Pakistani. The latter managed to contact the husband in Pakistan but the husband, who had by then remarried, refused to have anything to do with her wife.
Karan Thapar, a conspicuous Indian Journalist, who recently interviewed General Musharraf on Door Darshan and who was given the general`s tie for praising it, narrated another interesting experience in one of his columns. He was watching an open-air theater about the Kargil war (Indians have nothing better to do than harp on this theme for the past one year now) when he started hearing two Indian jawans disapproving of a scene. Two Pakistani jawans had been captured by the Indians and after a thorough interrogation, they were shown as criticising Pakistan, its leadership, and its military. The Indian jawans sitting in the audience, who themselves had participated in the Kargil war, told Thapar that such a thing can never happen. Jawans even of an enemy can never criticise their own country, military and its leadership. The Indian media, and even some of the senior Indian army personnel, can routinely be seen praising the valiant performance of some of our soldiers during the Kargil war.
The moral of the story from the above three anecdotes is that not all Hindu Indians are rascals and villains; and not all Pakistani Muslims are angels going straight to heaven via Lahore. Both India and Pakistan are big nations in terms of their populations; and thus comprise all sorts of people. If India has produced Bal Thakeray, then it also has Nirmala Deshpande who led a 36-member women peace mission to Pakistan from March 25 to 31. We all know of similar contrasts in our country. What, however, distinguishes Pakistan from India in this respect is the presence of a Muslim community almost the size of Pakistan living within India. It simply cannot be ignored in a democratic-cum-secular setup. I first visited India in 1985 and found quite a few Muslims still cheering the Pakistani cricket team in a match against India. Not anymore. When asked now about their plight in a Hindu-dominated India, they say that they are fine; worry about your own self. Most of them are more perturbed about the state of mohajirs in Karachi than Hindu-Muslim riots in India.
This is, of course, not to say that India is a perfect example of secular model in the comity of nations. Far from it. It is a country where forces preaching Hindutva are in power and where the Babri mosque was demolished on December 6, 1992. However, what goes to the Indian system`s credit is the fact that the same Hindutva forces had to tone down their rhetoric and even their agenda to remain in power and win elections; construction of Ram mandir is no longer on NDA`s (National Democratic Alliance`s, of which BJP is a constituent) agenda and manifesto. The Indian premier himself called the day of destruction of the mosque the saddest day of his life and there are criminal cases pending against none other than the home minister himself for being involved in the destruction.
Since we have a selective memory, few would recall that some Pakistanis demolished many temples as a reaction to the mosque demolition. Have you heard of any Pakistani ever arrested for destroying those temples or attacking the Hindus? There is a BJP government in power in the state of Gujarat that permitted its civil servants to join Kuppahali S Sudarshan-led RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh); the state government justified its action on the ground that RSS is not a political but a cultural outfit. This permission led to such an uproar in the Lok Sabha and such condemnation by the print media that the BJP eventually bowed to public pressure and withdrew the authorisation on March 8, 2000. The above anomalies may not be written or talked about in Pakistan but the world community is not deaf, nor is it dumb. They see India as a Third World country attempting to maintain democracy and secularism; they all wish it well because this is the system that most of them also subscribe to. On the other hand, ours is a country which is gradually shifting into the hands of mullahs who talk of Islamic bombs and missiles and who wish to rule the whole world. What an irony because, at present, they cannot even rule themselves. They see India as a country where even the minority communities surpass the population of their own nations and then there is Pakistan where even a single conversion of a Hindu or a Christian is reported in all the major dailies, including the English ones.
We can no longer have it both ways. We cannot aspire to be a fortress of Islam and wish Clinton and Tony Blair to be our best friends. If we want to be Green Fortress, then we will have to content ourselves with Afghanistan`s Mulla Omar and survive like Afghanistan. No one in the world is asking us to change our religions. Islam, in fact, is the second largest belief in many of the countries. All that the world asks us to do is to respect other faiths as well. It is not good enough to say that minorities enjoy full protection of the state. The minorities in Pakistan cannot vote with us; they cannot be elected with us; they cannot become ministers; they are almost non-existent in our armed forces and civil service and the judiciary.
Most important of all, we wish all of them ideally to convert to Islam for their spiritual salvation. I am not so worried about theirs as our own religion because our scale of corruption increases manifold just before Eid during the holiest of holy days in Islam.
#55 Posted by rsaxena on January 4, 2001 1:45:16 pm
re: sigalph
{A state minister for foreign affairs who is a Kashmiri Muslim and a Defense minister who is a lapsed Roman Catholic; and then people call India some Hindutva conspiracy. PLease!}
...and a muslim from down south, apj abdul kalaam, who is the father of our nuclear bomb and missiles development program...(he`s now teaching at the Indian Institute of Sciences and running an academic research program...if anything, india had the world`s first `islamic bomb` :)
{A state minister for foreign affairs who is a Kashmiri Muslim and a Defense minister who is a lapsed Roman Catholic; and then people call India some Hindutva conspiracy. PLease!}
...and a muslim from down south, apj abdul kalaam, who is the father of our nuclear bomb and missiles development program...(he`s now teaching at the Indian Institute of Sciences and running an academic research program...if anything, india had the world`s first `islamic bomb` :)
#54 Posted by shankar on January 4, 2001 1:45:16 pm
anybody,
I`ve never watched Al-Jazeera. Can anybody tell me what Al-Jazeera is saying about Kasmir? They are counterbalancing the Western media re Al-Qeeda.
The way Pakistan talks about India--Hindians are executing & raping Kashmiri muslim civilians by the thousands. Of course, they are quick to point out AI to bolster their claims.
Mullah Urstruly, of course firmly believes we hindus dont have a conscience. O well, people who worship sticks & stones & penis` cant very well have a conscience, can they?! I would like to tell him that the main reason why we hindus dont have a conscience is because we dont want to spend even a second in Heaven with people like him & Mullah Omar--burning in hell for an eternity is a preferable fate; but I wont.
What about the rest of the muslims of the world? Other than pathetic ``resolutions`` written on toilet paper at OIC conferences; why is their conscience not stirred with outrage? Please folks..I`m not talking about the vermin Al-Qeeda mercenaries; but regular muslims in the billion+ strong Ummah?!
No morchas in front of the Indian Embassy, no threats of sanctions or oil embargos? No regular editorials in Arab press like they do about Palestinians? No boycott of Indian exports--even in Saudi Arabia--which still imports more goods & services from India than gasp-Pakistan?!
Urstruly,
Since you take great pride in not ducking questions--Please explain to me why such a lack of conscience in the Ummah?
We hindus are idol worshipping heathens, we are SUPPOSED to be evil conscienseless kafirs. But what about the strange silence from the majority of non-Pakistani muslims?
Gee..maybe theyre terrified of bania anger; more than Allah`s wrath; huh?!
I`ve never watched Al-Jazeera. Can anybody tell me what Al-Jazeera is saying about Kasmir? They are counterbalancing the Western media re Al-Qeeda.
The way Pakistan talks about India--Hindians are executing & raping Kashmiri muslim civilians by the thousands. Of course, they are quick to point out AI to bolster their claims.
Mullah Urstruly, of course firmly believes we hindus dont have a conscience. O well, people who worship sticks & stones & penis` cant very well have a conscience, can they?! I would like to tell him that the main reason why we hindus dont have a conscience is because we dont want to spend even a second in Heaven with people like him & Mullah Omar--burning in hell for an eternity is a preferable fate; but I wont.
What about the rest of the muslims of the world? Other than pathetic ``resolutions`` written on toilet paper at OIC conferences; why is their conscience not stirred with outrage? Please folks..I`m not talking about the vermin Al-Qeeda mercenaries; but regular muslims in the billion+ strong Ummah?!
No morchas in front of the Indian Embassy, no threats of sanctions or oil embargos? No regular editorials in Arab press like they do about Palestinians? No boycott of Indian exports--even in Saudi Arabia--which still imports more goods & services from India than gasp-Pakistan?!
Urstruly,
Since you take great pride in not ducking questions--Please explain to me why such a lack of conscience in the Ummah?
We hindus are idol worshipping heathens, we are SUPPOSED to be evil conscienseless kafirs. But what about the strange silence from the majority of non-Pakistani muslims?
Gee..maybe theyre terrified of bania anger; more than Allah`s wrath; huh?!
#53 Posted by shankar on January 4, 2001 1:45:16 pm
wadera,
#61
That was a much more balanced post.
Yes, I do not believe that Mushy was aware of the attack on the Parliament. I also believe that if he had knowlege of such idiocy, he would have put a kaibash on it.
In this day & age, fighting for a cause (no matter how noble) by ``terrorism`` or a ``low intensity war`` is an excercise in futility. It destroys the ``morality`` of the cause & the ``freedom fighters`` or ``terrorists`` become as bad as the oppressors.
The US , being the sole superpower, has become the defacto ``class monitor`` & Great Britan, her dutiful assisstant. Right, wrong or indifferent, that is the New World Order. Countries that have the ``moral support`` of the class monitor will exploit it to the hilt & countries who are on the recieving end, will lament on the unfairness of it all.
Incidentally, during the Cold War, the US had always supported Pakistan over India. The ``patron saint`` of India was`nt the US or the ``free world``--it was the Soviet Union. Pakistan has been the beneficiary of billions of dollars of American aid, their best military weapons & training.
India has always known that the Americans primarily conduct foreign policy to further their ``interests``, NOT ideology. I wonder why Pakistan just figured that out, in the past 10 yrs or so.
Mushy understands that prior to 9/11, he was a ``nobody`` for the US. Suddenly after 9/11, he has become the Pakistani poster boy in the fight against terrorism. For all his faults, personally, I think Mushy`s a heck of a smart guy. He knows his strenghts & weaknesses & plays his cards very astutely & pragmatically.
I wonder if any of the international polling agencies have taken an opinion poll re how Pakistanis feel about Mushy. I`m aware that the BBC took a poll that revealed that a surprising high number of Pakistanis still support the Taliban (though the majority dont). I`d really like to know what Mushy`s ``approval rating `` is amongst his own people.
#61
That was a much more balanced post.
Yes, I do not believe that Mushy was aware of the attack on the Parliament. I also believe that if he had knowlege of such idiocy, he would have put a kaibash on it.
In this day & age, fighting for a cause (no matter how noble) by ``terrorism`` or a ``low intensity war`` is an excercise in futility. It destroys the ``morality`` of the cause & the ``freedom fighters`` or ``terrorists`` become as bad as the oppressors.
The US , being the sole superpower, has become the defacto ``class monitor`` & Great Britan, her dutiful assisstant. Right, wrong or indifferent, that is the New World Order. Countries that have the ``moral support`` of the class monitor will exploit it to the hilt & countries who are on the recieving end, will lament on the unfairness of it all.
Incidentally, during the Cold War, the US had always supported Pakistan over India. The ``patron saint`` of India was`nt the US or the ``free world``--it was the Soviet Union. Pakistan has been the beneficiary of billions of dollars of American aid, their best military weapons & training.
India has always known that the Americans primarily conduct foreign policy to further their ``interests``, NOT ideology. I wonder why Pakistan just figured that out, in the past 10 yrs or so.
Mushy understands that prior to 9/11, he was a ``nobody`` for the US. Suddenly after 9/11, he has become the Pakistani poster boy in the fight against terrorism. For all his faults, personally, I think Mushy`s a heck of a smart guy. He knows his strenghts & weaknesses & plays his cards very astutely & pragmatically.
I wonder if any of the international polling agencies have taken an opinion poll re how Pakistanis feel about Mushy. I`m aware that the BBC took a poll that revealed that a surprising high number of Pakistanis still support the Taliban (though the majority dont). I`d really like to know what Mushy`s ``approval rating `` is amongst his own people.
#52 Posted by semipreciousme on January 4, 2001 3:08:28 am
anaryan....interesting spin...but, as i remember, those russian generals were saying this all over the place...not just on american channels....but i guess they succeeded with those daisy cutters...not so much as a peep, huh?
#51 Posted by semipreciousme on January 4, 2001 3:08:28 am
Urstruly:
``US is a bad news period. It must be avoided like a leapor.``
....and you`re living where?...
Stuka
``TEMPER...TEMPER... :)``
....more like SEVERE exasperation with all people who take war so lightly...and unfortunately, pak and india seem to have more then the normal quota of these trigger-happy idiots...
``US is a bad news period. It must be avoided like a leapor.``
....and you`re living where?...
Stuka
``TEMPER...TEMPER... :)``
....more like SEVERE exasperation with all people who take war so lightly...and unfortunately, pak and india seem to have more then the normal quota of these trigger-happy idiots...
#50 Posted by sigalph235 on January 4, 2001 3:08:28 am
re sarwar 73
Even though the sob is an ex-socialist, I am beginning to like the finesse and Rumsfeld-like bluntness of George Fernandes. A state minister for foreign affairs who is a Kashmiri Muslim and a Defense minister who is a lapsed Roman Catholic; and then people call India some Hindutva conspiracy. PLease!
Even though the sob is an ex-socialist, I am beginning to like the finesse and Rumsfeld-like bluntness of George Fernandes. A state minister for foreign affairs who is a Kashmiri Muslim and a Defense minister who is a lapsed Roman Catholic; and then people call India some Hindutva conspiracy. PLease!
#49 Posted by nasah on January 4, 2001 12:59:25 am
````INDIANS reject salom from a zionist imperialist. Indians will always oppose any kind of imperialism anywhere.
Dont dare to equate Israel with India.
Leave our foolish stupid leaders, but most of Indians support Palestinians and they will support Palestinians till they get complete justice for all horrors done to them.
My salut to all brave Palestinians fighting for their just rights and my new year prayers for their success.`````` (CHANDAN)
A true Indian, indeed!
Dont dare to equate Israel with India.
Leave our foolish stupid leaders, but most of Indians support Palestinians and they will support Palestinians till they get complete justice for all horrors done to them.
My salut to all brave Palestinians fighting for their just rights and my new year prayers for their success.`````` (CHANDAN)
A true Indian, indeed!
#48 Posted by anarayan on January 4, 2001 12:59:25 am
Re: #68
semipreciousme,
``….to be fair to romair, there were also many russian generals, veterans of the afghan war, telling america to stay out, warning it of the calamitous consequences of fighting in afghanistan…``
You`re too gullible I think! Let me explain ...
Notice how the russian general on CNN looked a lot like Ivan Drago (Rocky IV)...including the haircut. Notice how he spoke with a `typical` russian accent. Notice how he `happenned` to be in his army fatigues...in a studio interview...and with the top 3 buttons undone !
The american media controls american opinion...we all know that, don`t we semipreciousme ?! Mostly they do this with a great amount of finesse.
Why did they want to project the taliban as great warriors? ...for the same reason as Iraq`s revolutionary guards were given imaginary superpowers in 1991. To make the use of massive force against a much weaker enemy easier to accept.
Now coming to the Afghanistan. The legendaery mujahideen is a making of the american media. Unlike our nations, the american taxpayer usually needs to be shown where his dollars are going. Nobody`s going to agree to spend billions of $$ halfway around the world or a rag-tag bunch of savages...unless the said savages are somehow `interesting`.
The mujahideen never stood their ground and fought the russians. And how could they..? A rag-tag bunch totting kalashnikovs and the odd rocket launcher. Their backbone was american money, weapons, planning and other support, not to mention pakistani support. Only somebody sitting on a sofa in detroit can imagine the russian army defeated singlehandedly by the mujahideen.
The CIA was probably very much comfortable with this idea...the mujahideen believe they beat the russians...the Pakistanis believe they made all the difference. Our job is done...the russians are out...lets pack up and leave quietly.
And Ras Siddiqui is saying today ``why only pakistanis...why not americans``??
I think the greatest worry of America in afghanistan was not these poor bstards holding pea-shooters and some hyperbole. It was probably how make the american people and the world accept the dropping of daisy cutters.
regards,
Chowkies Note: Rocky IV is a movie and not to be confused with Ali1`s third sibling!
semipreciousme,
``….to be fair to romair, there were also many russian generals, veterans of the afghan war, telling america to stay out, warning it of the calamitous consequences of fighting in afghanistan…``
You`re too gullible I think! Let me explain ...
Notice how the russian general on CNN looked a lot like Ivan Drago (Rocky IV)...including the haircut. Notice how he spoke with a `typical` russian accent. Notice how he `happenned` to be in his army fatigues...in a studio interview...and with the top 3 buttons undone !
The american media controls american opinion...we all know that, don`t we semipreciousme ?! Mostly they do this with a great amount of finesse.
Why did they want to project the taliban as great warriors? ...for the same reason as Iraq`s revolutionary guards were given imaginary superpowers in 1991. To make the use of massive force against a much weaker enemy easier to accept.
Now coming to the Afghanistan. The legendaery mujahideen is a making of the american media. Unlike our nations, the american taxpayer usually needs to be shown where his dollars are going. Nobody`s going to agree to spend billions of $$ halfway around the world or a rag-tag bunch of savages...unless the said savages are somehow `interesting`.
The mujahideen never stood their ground and fought the russians. And how could they..? A rag-tag bunch totting kalashnikovs and the odd rocket launcher. Their backbone was american money, weapons, planning and other support, not to mention pakistani support. Only somebody sitting on a sofa in detroit can imagine the russian army defeated singlehandedly by the mujahideen.
The CIA was probably very much comfortable with this idea...the mujahideen believe they beat the russians...the Pakistanis believe they made all the difference. Our job is done...the russians are out...lets pack up and leave quietly.
And Ras Siddiqui is saying today ``why only pakistanis...why not americans``??
I think the greatest worry of America in afghanistan was not these poor bstards holding pea-shooters and some hyperbole. It was probably how make the american people and the world accept the dropping of daisy cutters.
regards,
Chowkies Note: Rocky IV is a movie and not to be confused with Ali1`s third sibling!
#47 Posted by khokan on January 4, 2001 12:59:25 am
Los Angeles Times
January 3, 2002
COMMENTARY
Musharraf Is as Good as Gone
By SIMON HENDERSON
[Simon Henderson is a London-based adjunct scholar of the Washington
Institute for Near East Policy who has written extensively on
Pakistan`s nuclear policy]
As the tension between India and Pakistan appear to ease, the days of
Pakistani military dictator Gen. Pervez Musharraf as president are
probably numbered.
Confronting India to liberate the Muslims of the divided state of
Kashmir is a basic ethos of the Pakistani army. Before Sept. 11,
supporting the Taliban had ensured that Pakistani rather than Indian
influence was dominant in Afghanistan. Since Musharraf is now tainted
with failure, his brother officers are almost certainly already
selecting his replacement from among their ranks.
Unless Pakistan`s current thinking can be changed, the next leader has
a single card to play and only a short window of opportunity in which
to play it. As the U.S. government knows but is careful not to say,
Pakistan`s small arsenal of atomic bombs is superior in design and
efficiency to India`s. Pakistan`s Hiroshima-size bombs will work while
India`s might perform disappointingly, as did the bomb it tested in
1998. Furthermore, Pakistan`s missiles work better than the Indian
equivalents.
Pakistan achieved this temporary advantage by, from India`s
perspective, cheating. While India took pride in the largely
indigenous development of nuclear weapons and missiles, Pakistan
struck nuclear deals with China (India`s regional rival) and arranged
missile sales from North Korea (probably just for money).
Musharraf`s logic was to raise tension and so force international
intervention in Kashmir, leading to a referendum among its people to
choose between Indian or Pakistani sovereignty. Confidently (perhaps
overconfidently) expecting Kashmiris to choose Pakistan would
strengthen the Islamic republic while deepening schisms in the Indian
confederation.
If such tactics require encouraging Al Qaeda-linked Kashmiri militant
groups to carry out terrorist outrages in India--as in the attack on
the parliament in New Delhi on Dec. 13--then, from Pakistan`s point of
view, this was legitimate.
In tolerating the activities of the militant groups (perhaps even
knowing their plans), Musharraf seems to have completely misread the
messages he has received from the U.S. since Sept. 11. Although not
reported, CIA chief George Tenet was already lecturing the visiting
head of Pakistan`s feared Inter-Services Intelligence on U.S.
exasperation with Islamabad`s effective patronage of Osama bin Laden
before the jets crashed into the World Trade Center twin towers and
the Pentagon. Washington promptly organized another three days of
meetings to ram home the message, ``Don`t play with terrorism.``
President Bush has limited policy options while U.S. troops are still
hunting down Bin Laden, Mullah Mohammed Omar and residual Al Qaeda
cells and needs Pakistan`s help to do it. But having U.S. military
commanders now regularly visiting Pakistan will enable Washington`s
message to be passed on directly to Pakistan`s top generals. British
Prime Minister Tony Blair can say the same when he visits the region.
Part of the message should also be that Pakistan cannot afford to
engage in an arms race with India. Pakistan has a population of about
145 million compared with more than 1 billion Indians. India`s gross
domestic product of $2.2 trillion is eight times that of Pakistan`s,
and its industrial base is far more extensive. In such a race,
Pakistan is cast in the role of the Soviet Union, which was bankrupted
and forced into collapse in its effort to match U.S. military
spending.
Washington also must restrain India`s military posturing as the
immediate crisis abates. In coming months, both countries may feel
tempted to carry out more nuclear tests to iron out the glitches in
their arsenals, as well as to conduct more flight tests of missiles.
Beijing`s assistance might be useful to the U.S.; two weeks ago
Musharraf went for talks with the Chinese leadership and seems to have
received less than a green light for his strategy.
Is there anyone in the Pakistani leadership ready to recognize
reality?
The post-Sept. 11 arrest, under U.S. insistence, of two retired
nuclear scientists--top experts in reprocessing plutonium who had been
meeting Bin Laden--shows the extent to which the country had been
playing with fire. Could U.S. pressure be applied for allowing
political parties--banned since Musharraf`s 1999 coup--without
releasing the genie of anti-American street sentiment?
In the short term, the U.S. may have to acquiesce to the emergence of
yet another military leader. Musharraf no longer has the standing to
offer concessions in the talks with India that he is seeking. Combined
with a more constructive policy on Kashmir by Indian Prime Minister
Atal Behari Vajpayee, tensions could be eased, giving time for the
Afghanistan campaign to finish. India and Pakistan must be persuaded
that their conflict is not a zero-sum game.
January 3, 2002
COMMENTARY
Musharraf Is as Good as Gone
By SIMON HENDERSON
[Simon Henderson is a London-based adjunct scholar of the Washington
Institute for Near East Policy who has written extensively on
Pakistan`s nuclear policy]
As the tension between India and Pakistan appear to ease, the days of
Pakistani military dictator Gen. Pervez Musharraf as president are
probably numbered.
Confronting India to liberate the Muslims of the divided state of
Kashmir is a basic ethos of the Pakistani army. Before Sept. 11,
supporting the Taliban had ensured that Pakistani rather than Indian
influence was dominant in Afghanistan. Since Musharraf is now tainted
with failure, his brother officers are almost certainly already
selecting his replacement from among their ranks.
Unless Pakistan`s current thinking can be changed, the next leader has
a single card to play and only a short window of opportunity in which
to play it. As the U.S. government knows but is careful not to say,
Pakistan`s small arsenal of atomic bombs is superior in design and
efficiency to India`s. Pakistan`s Hiroshima-size bombs will work while
India`s might perform disappointingly, as did the bomb it tested in
1998. Furthermore, Pakistan`s missiles work better than the Indian
equivalents.
Pakistan achieved this temporary advantage by, from India`s
perspective, cheating. While India took pride in the largely
indigenous development of nuclear weapons and missiles, Pakistan
struck nuclear deals with China (India`s regional rival) and arranged
missile sales from North Korea (probably just for money).
Musharraf`s logic was to raise tension and so force international
intervention in Kashmir, leading to a referendum among its people to
choose between Indian or Pakistani sovereignty. Confidently (perhaps
overconfidently) expecting Kashmiris to choose Pakistan would
strengthen the Islamic republic while deepening schisms in the Indian
confederation.
If such tactics require encouraging Al Qaeda-linked Kashmiri militant
groups to carry out terrorist outrages in India--as in the attack on
the parliament in New Delhi on Dec. 13--then, from Pakistan`s point of
view, this was legitimate.
In tolerating the activities of the militant groups (perhaps even
knowing their plans), Musharraf seems to have completely misread the
messages he has received from the U.S. since Sept. 11. Although not
reported, CIA chief George Tenet was already lecturing the visiting
head of Pakistan`s feared Inter-Services Intelligence on U.S.
exasperation with Islamabad`s effective patronage of Osama bin Laden
before the jets crashed into the World Trade Center twin towers and
the Pentagon. Washington promptly organized another three days of
meetings to ram home the message, ``Don`t play with terrorism.``
President Bush has limited policy options while U.S. troops are still
hunting down Bin Laden, Mullah Mohammed Omar and residual Al Qaeda
cells and needs Pakistan`s help to do it. But having U.S. military
commanders now regularly visiting Pakistan will enable Washington`s
message to be passed on directly to Pakistan`s top generals. British
Prime Minister Tony Blair can say the same when he visits the region.
Part of the message should also be that Pakistan cannot afford to
engage in an arms race with India. Pakistan has a population of about
145 million compared with more than 1 billion Indians. India`s gross
domestic product of $2.2 trillion is eight times that of Pakistan`s,
and its industrial base is far more extensive. In such a race,
Pakistan is cast in the role of the Soviet Union, which was bankrupted
and forced into collapse in its effort to match U.S. military
spending.
Washington also must restrain India`s military posturing as the
immediate crisis abates. In coming months, both countries may feel
tempted to carry out more nuclear tests to iron out the glitches in
their arsenals, as well as to conduct more flight tests of missiles.
Beijing`s assistance might be useful to the U.S.; two weeks ago
Musharraf went for talks with the Chinese leadership and seems to have
received less than a green light for his strategy.
Is there anyone in the Pakistani leadership ready to recognize
reality?
The post-Sept. 11 arrest, under U.S. insistence, of two retired
nuclear scientists--top experts in reprocessing plutonium who had been
meeting Bin Laden--shows the extent to which the country had been
playing with fire. Could U.S. pressure be applied for allowing
political parties--banned since Musharraf`s 1999 coup--without
releasing the genie of anti-American street sentiment?
In the short term, the U.S. may have to acquiesce to the emergence of
yet another military leader. Musharraf no longer has the standing to
offer concessions in the talks with India that he is seeking. Combined
with a more constructive policy on Kashmir by Indian Prime Minister
Atal Behari Vajpayee, tensions could be eased, giving time for the
Afghanistan campaign to finish. India and Pakistan must be persuaded
that their conflict is not a zero-sum game.
#46 Posted by sarwar on January 4, 2001 12:59:25 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#45 Posted by tahmed321 on January 3, 2001 2:01:35 pm
shammi #64 Maybe, as you kindly propose, I can be president of pakistan and you can be prime minister of india. :-)
But seriously, I was pleased to see Ayaz Amir`s straight talk on the question of jehadis. These are criminal organizations and need to be dealt with as such by both India and Pakistan. Ayaz Amir`s stratight talk on this issue was therefore most encouraging. Aside from getting rid of these organizations, we need to get rid of the madrassahs too. And even as I write, there are people working in Pakistan to change their syllabus to introduce proper education.
The real task ahead for both countries of course is eliminating poverty. That is something we can all do something to help without being heads of state. And that task will unfortunately will not be over in our lifetimes, no matter how much progress we make. But one day, before this century is over, South Asia will emerge as an area of peace and properity in the world. Kashmir and jehadis will be mere footnotes in history, and this ``South Asian renaissance`` will be the real story.
But seriously, I was pleased to see Ayaz Amir`s straight talk on the question of jehadis. These are criminal organizations and need to be dealt with as such by both India and Pakistan. Ayaz Amir`s stratight talk on this issue was therefore most encouraging. Aside from getting rid of these organizations, we need to get rid of the madrassahs too. And even as I write, there are people working in Pakistan to change their syllabus to introduce proper education.
The real task ahead for both countries of course is eliminating poverty. That is something we can all do something to help without being heads of state. And that task will unfortunately will not be over in our lifetimes, no matter how much progress we make. But one day, before this century is over, South Asia will emerge as an area of peace and properity in the world. Kashmir and jehadis will be mere footnotes in history, and this ``South Asian renaissance`` will be the real story.
#44 Posted by tahmed321 on January 3, 2001 2:01:35 pm
Bodenheimer #66
The mistake you are making is equating Pakistan with mullahism. The facts are the opposite of what you believe: Pakistan was formed by secular people and over the opposition of the mullahs. Maudoodi (the man who dragged religion into politics) did not come to Pakistan from India until several years after Pakistan had been in existence and he decided to try his luck in gaining power in Pakistan. Despite repeated attempts to run elections, there had never been an Islamist in power - with the notable exception of General Zia. And Zia forced himself into power, and not once dared to hold proper elections. So, while you may find it emotionally satisfying to condemn all Pakistanis as followers of mullahs, the fact is that in making such statements you are only condemning yourself as an opinionated, hate-filled ignoramus.
As a physicist, I would expect you to be more sober and realistic in your assessments than the wild generalities you have been making about muslims and Pakistanis. For a professor, you have no excuse for such irrational thinking. I am satisfied (and I have met people from all over the world,including Israel), that the vast majority of humanity, regardless of religion or nationality, are decent people who live their lives without carrying the burden of the hatreds that one sees on chowk from some people (including you and your friend). To equate them with a handful of criminals who happen to belong to their religious or ethnic group reflects the same line of thinking as these criminals.
The mistake you are making is equating Pakistan with mullahism. The facts are the opposite of what you believe: Pakistan was formed by secular people and over the opposition of the mullahs. Maudoodi (the man who dragged religion into politics) did not come to Pakistan from India until several years after Pakistan had been in existence and he decided to try his luck in gaining power in Pakistan. Despite repeated attempts to run elections, there had never been an Islamist in power - with the notable exception of General Zia. And Zia forced himself into power, and not once dared to hold proper elections. So, while you may find it emotionally satisfying to condemn all Pakistanis as followers of mullahs, the fact is that in making such statements you are only condemning yourself as an opinionated, hate-filled ignoramus.
As a physicist, I would expect you to be more sober and realistic in your assessments than the wild generalities you have been making about muslims and Pakistanis. For a professor, you have no excuse for such irrational thinking. I am satisfied (and I have met people from all over the world,including Israel), that the vast majority of humanity, regardless of religion or nationality, are decent people who live their lives without carrying the burden of the hatreds that one sees on chowk from some people (including you and your friend). To equate them with a handful of criminals who happen to belong to their religious or ethnic group reflects the same line of thinking as these criminals.
#43 Posted by sarwar on January 3, 2001 2:01:35 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- laddu: Re: # 218 Mian, Aap hi... The Correct Turn
- tahmed32: kaalchakra #210 tradition, old... The Correct Turn
- tahmed32: laddu mian: your understanding... The Correct Turn
- chaltahai: What good is giving... The Correct Turn
- chaltahai: Damn kaal...not much difference... The Correct Turn
- laddu: Re: # 214 Umm......that Hadith... The Correct Turn
- laddu: Re: # 204 "the rest... The Correct Turn
- chaltahai: Cool story tahmed. The... The Correct Turn
