The Future Is Another Country: 2050 And Beyond

Hot air or hate mail from Pakistan?



AFP [ MONDAY, JANUARY 28, 2002 8:23:24 PM ]



ODHPUR: A hot air balloon carrying a huge cut-out of a nuclear missile and hate mail from Pakistan landed on Monday in Barmer in Rajasthan, a police spokesman said.

A 22-foot (6.6-metre) high hot air balloon draped in the Pakistani national flag landed in Balai village, in Barmer, three kilometres from Jodhpur, and drew large crowds, S Sanghithir of the Rajasthan police said.

``We got the bomb disposal squad to screen the balloon for explosives. This is the second balloon to float into Rajasthan this week with hate mail from Pakistan,`` Sanghithir said.



END PEACE

I never knew that pakistan could make hot air. Romair, can you comment on this.

sincerely yours

YLH

DRUMZ #94
``Please feel free to write about something im remotely familiar with (enuff of this subcontinent crap) so that I can tear apart your posts like I do with everyone else`s``

Thats a very handsome offer, DRUMZ thanks I appreciate it and the friendly spirit:).

``subcontinental crap``
Well, everything said by someone from the subcontinent, is subcontinental by definition, alas. And subcontinentals donot suffer from an endemic whiteman problem of N. American proportions, they are not a species native to the subcontient, unlike kanjars, apparently, whatever those are. Are they marsupials, d`you think, you know like kanjar=kangaroo?

re: Layman

{{The few things that India cannot produce but has to depend on its neighbours for (eg energy), it can import from them}}

....what form of energy do you mean? if you mean oil, yes it has to be imported but it doesn`t come from neighbors. there are some natural gas fields in bangladesh, but who knows when they will be developed....

re: dost-mittar

{{Sorry, I don`t know anything re. his views about Indian economy or economic policy. But do management consultants have compassion?...}}

his views on the Indian economy are nothing new, but it`s the conviction he can bring to actually implementing needed steps that is of much value...one doesn`t need compassion for this job, just dedication and incredible energy...

arjun_m:

“Hey goatbrain....you are just mad because indian movies are watched by pakis(as well as iranians/araba and turks) while no one would spend 8$ to watch a paki movie.”

….you’re right…infact, i’m sure most ppl would shell out money not to watch a pakistani movie….

“Stop sending terrorists over and we might make a movie that shows pakiland in a good light...”

…gee, wouldja now?…really?…how munificent of you… (aside: but how would you attract ppl to the cinema in droves?….where will all the profits go?…who will the new villains be?….all those who wear polyester (zafarsaab not included), perhaps?…or maybe, as someone mentioned here, those ppl who put sugar in their daals…now if that’s not nefarious, i don’t know what is…)

Re: Dost-Mittar

``...Sorry, I don`t know anything re. his views about Indian economy or economic policy. But do management consultants have compassion?...``

Dost-Mittarji:

McKinsey & Co. have written and submitted a 10-year economic plan highlighting top-level priorities for the economy to the Govt. of India. Furthermore, Yashwant Sinha`s son was a partner at McKinsey.

Re: Dost-Mittar

``...Sorry, I don`t know anything re. his views about Indian economy or economic policy. But do management consultants have compassion?...``

Dost-Mittarji:

McKinsey & Co. have written and submitted a 10-year economic plan highlighting top-level priorities for the economy to the Govt. of India. Furthermore, Yashwant Sinha`s son was a partner at McKinsey. McKinsey (as do a lot of other management consulting firms) do a fair amount of pro-bono work -- this is more than one can say of many other companies.

#86 YLH

The IAF is known to land its planes in desert sand, jungles & oceans, sometimes upside dwon even. Can the PAF top that?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

SOLUTION:-

step 1: The Pakistani Army needs to get into politics full-time, or till 2007 AD anyway.

step 2: Elements from within the Pakistani Army who do not agree to #1, are to be sent on deputation to Saudia, UAE, Kuwait etc., thus freeing the US troops.

step 3: The Indian Army moves into the Pakistani Cantonments (most of the signboards are in the same colour and font) and safeguards Pakistani borders from Iranians, Afghans, Chinese and Mongolianm hordes.

step 4: Shut all madarsas in Pakistan which Pakistani Army has not already shut. Ditto in India. Rightwing Hindus will then get back to exercising.

step 5: Return my grandfather`s land in Jhang to me.

step 6: New companies formed, ``buy soap from Indo Pak Lever``, ``read the Times of India & Pakistan``, drive cars from ``Maruti Khyber Bolan Ltd``, drink Coke and mineral water bottled at and made by ``Coca Cola Sir Creek Ltd``, eat bhujia from ``Haldi Ram & Khan`` . . .

How about that?

(Takes a bow)

I get amused at the antics of the Chowkwallahs! On one hand are the arm-chair peace activists who are all

out to hug & kiss those across the border living happily ever-after!

And on the other hand we have the venom-spitting hawks who are out to nuke-out the subcontinent!

And all these with a few push and clicks of their computer MOUSE!

I doubt how Arm chair activism is going to change the future of the two countries, when the ground realities

are totally different with kashmiris, soldiers and common people dying daily on both sides.

Sudhakar

Re: Romair

``…This is the only solution for the Sub Continent. Not only Pakistan and India, but the whole SAARC area, needs to be turned into an EU type place. Perhaps a SAARC-U….``

I agree. I have come to the conclusion that this is the ONLY practical solution AND durable solution for the long-term. Wars are born in the minds of men (Ferozk said that first), and are initiated over such intangible things as `national-honor`. India and Pakistan have reached a stage where the only option left for each is to either destroy the other or accommodate the other. I would opt for the latter. We have been trying the former, and are close to becoming the laughing stock of the world. With `national-honor` of each on the line, a middle ground has to found that preserves it and promotes peace and all the good things that the more advanced countries of the world enjoy (prosperity, human rights, political rights, etc.). S. Asia learnt the concept of `nationhood` from the West, and it is time now that we also learn the other lesson that they have learned - cross-national political and economic unions. Fortunately, if we are wise enough, we can avoid the devastation that the two world wars produced in Europe, and absorb the lessons that Germany and France have taught each other.

``… This should mean all areas that want political independence should be allowed to get it…``

This may be one of the means to the end (EU-type S. Asia), but in the ultimate analysis, if the union is going to be as good as we feel it will be, there might emerge a tendency for many parties to join, rather than be left out. The example that I cite is that of EU and NATO (although the latter is purely a military union ) - there are many members who want to gate crash. Turkey, former Soviet bloc countries want to join the EU quite badly. The same applies to NATO. Chile wants to join NAFTA, etc. So, a lot of the separatists that we observe may realize that there is more to be gained by cooperation rather than exclusion. This is a radical idea, but I would rather pin my hopes on this, than spend my energy devising better methods of one-upmanship in the diplomatic and military arena.

``… Once political aspirations are fulfilled, then all the countries will automatically get into an EU type situation…``

Yes, this is what I have also stated above. But for the idea to be sellable (at least in India whose sentiments I am at a better position to gauge) it will have to be marketed as a milestone in a larger endeavor as part of a broader vision - i.e. EU-type arrangement.

All the other ideas that you propose on currencies, open borders, joint-visas, common passport, are acceptable and the details can be worked out.

``… The catalyst of all of this is, at least in my opinion, a solution to Kashmir issue…``

I think that a grand bargain will have to be reached between India and Pakistan on this. I believe that greater political rights for Kashmir can be sold in India, if the end game is something like the EU.

Look at some of the benefits and the positive energy it will release - immediate reduction of defence spending, solution of the Kashmir imbroglio, improved chances of civil institutions developing in Pakistan, knocking the winds out of the sails of the Hindutva and the Islamist political forces, better prospects for minorities in all countries, emergence of a union that will carry much more political/economic/diplomatic/moral clout internationally (almost sure admission to the UN Security Council), keeping other foreign powers out of the region. The last time this was done it required the wisdom of someone like Emperor Akbar to do it. We should try for the same, but use more humane methods - he used the threat of war (you are with us or against us), we should not resort to the same tactics.

It grates both Pakistanis and Indians to see how foreign powers line behind each side in opposition to the other (e.g. Indians detest the Chinese intrusion into S. Asia, and the earlier intrusion of the Americans in the `50s. The Pakistanis hate the fact that Israelis are supplying defence equipment to India and may be installing devices at the LoC to check infiltration). We, have seen this before - 250 years ago to be sure - when the East India Company played off one princely state against the other to gain political domination. A devastating S. Asian war will once again make us the `white man`s burden` and invite the UN to install a Hamid Karzai-like figure on some parts or all of the region.

Now, on to the challenges:

a) Many in Pakistan may feel that this may be reversing Partition - Only Pakistanis can credibly speak for that. Any hint that Indian domination/hegemony is reasserting itself through `other means` will sabotage this. Personally, from what I have read about Pakistan, this may be an exaggerated fear, but it certainly needs to be approached with caution because it has the potential to be labeled as a `sell-out`

b) Religious right on both sides of the Radcliff line will oppose this tooth and nail - one can expect communal-inspired killings/targeted assassinations, and other provocative actions etc.

c) India and Pakistan lack the leaders to execute upon this plan, and nobody has either defined it well enough, nor has any attempt been made to sell it to their respective populations

d) Minimum common standards for conducting politics, economics and human rights will have to be evolved and adhered to by all member states. For example, persecution of minorities in one dominion will result in a backlash in the other.

e) If the process stops at (or even hints to stop at) the half-way point - ie many regions that want political independence get out and stay out, India will not go along. I think that Indians will go along as long as the outcome is something like the Cabinet Mission Plan (appropriately modified for the 21st century). I do not know all the details, but the danger is there.

Re: Pmishra2

``… Here is my suggestion: just go read the Pakistani press and you will be cured of your affection very soon…``

I think that Romair`s post should indicate that there is yet some hope. At many points on this path, we will have to be nuts and bolts practical, but at other points we will also have to learn to trust the other side. No pain - no gain.

``… Thugs like Bak Thackeray and the VHP-goons are running around are saying the most hateful and nonsensical things. If there are other major terrorist attacks tied to Pak extremist groups, minority institutions and figures may well be targetted. All of these are great dangers…``

Yes - imagine how the SA Confederation (we need to come up with a simpler, better name) will completely knock the wind out of the sails of these thugs, and discredit their ideology. Ditto for the guys on the other side, and the irresponsible Chowk posters who believe that written tit-for-tats are the best way forward. These people have hardly anything positive to say, but are in a position to cause a lot of havoc.

Re: Layman

``… Regarding your SAARC Union - you want to have your cake and eat it too. Free movement of people into India, single currency, all the economic benefits you can get out of India, but no political union…``

I do not think that Romair said that or implied that. I think that the benefits will be mutual. `National-honor` for all will be preserved. Defence outlays will fall. Movement of people may be regulated, and even if it were to be free it does not mean that the direction of traffic will be one-way only. Politicians will have less of an excuse to divert their minds away from social reconstruction, and towards demagogic ideologies. The political union between India/Pakistan will have to be much looser than, say that between the states and the Centre in India - it will have to be one like the EU model, where all states are politically on equal footing. Yet, all have to adhere to certain minimum standards and have an apex body at the top that regulates the affairs between member states. For Pakistan, it may mean adopting a secular polity internally (Musharraf seems to be articulating that carefully), and for India, it may mean giving much more political rights to Kashmir. These are just ideas - the actual concessions will emerge only through hard bargaining.

``… dont think India has anything to gain from a EU type union in South Asia…``

I disagree - our divergent ideologies and unsolved issues will likely keep India/Pakistan at loggerheads. Regional instability (like in Afghanistan) needs to be eliminated as an option. Greater stability will bode well for economic progress. Political differences will always give leverage to outside players who will always have their own interests ahead of local ones.

``… it should be in India`s interests to ensure that neighbouring economies prosper…``

Yes

``… But India has nothing to gain from free movement of people from PK and BD into India or even vice-versa…``

Debatable but negotiable. How about free movement of businessmen, or tourists, or even labor? In any case, this issue should not allowed to become a show-stopper, even though I recognize that it easily can.

``… The smaller countries will forever shout about Indian hegemony blah blah while suckling at its teats…``

That is what leadership is all about - you cannot be a leader unless you can tolerate and take criticism in your stride. Don`t do that, don`t think about being a leader.

Re: Akash

``… Also there should be a pact between all the countries in the region that the political boundaries of the region are frozen…``

I think that this could be revisited for Kashmir within the ambit of a larger agreement on S. Asia (ie. re-unifiying Kashmir while granting them more autonomy). Indian fears of a communal-based Partition and setting a bad precedent for the rest of India will need to be addressed, while accommodating the wishes of the people of Kashmir. These are essentially what the UN Resolutions say - and it will please Pakistan, but attaining those objectives and extending the influence of India, while keeping the UN out of S. Asia will also please India. In the end, such things will have to be negotiated, and should not be used as preconditions.

This is a very high road for us to walk - the going will not be easy - but it will be well worth it. I see no other way.

Sorry for the long post.

Sadhana, what`s your secret?

It takes the chowkidars a day or so to get around to posting my stuff. Apparently, they have to play it backwards first to make sure there`s no secret codes to any ``sleepers`` embedded in them. Maybe they need to get them cleared by Ms. Rice. Yours, otoh, make it double quick. I think they keep you here so your detractors (most pakis) will stay around..

Sadna: ``Well, everything said by someone from the subcontinent, is subcontinental by definition, alas.``

True to an extent, however u must include the word crap in your definition. ``Subcontinental crap`` refers to the India vs Paki debate (U know, the one where all indians/pakis feel compelled to defend thier own countries like they work in the damn government).

Since I CEE through partisan polytricks, I use the unbrella term ``crap.`` Im sure S. Asians have opinions on things other then which country in their reagion is the gayest. Also notice the word S. Asian, which includes things like geography and culture unlike the useless ``Black, white, brown, yellow, red`` classifications. S. Asian refers to anyone with S. Asian heritage, not just native S. Asians.

Looks like im winning....

ANALYSIS

Asia`s New Hotbed of Moderation

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-000007323jan29.story?coll=la%2Dnews%2Da%5Fsection

Politics: Pakistan`s shift away from extremist Islamic groups will have effects far beyond its borders, many say.



By TYLER MARSHALL, TIMES STAFF WRITER

LAHORE, Pakistan -- President Pervez Musharraf`s decision to reshape Pakistan as a moderate Islamic state carries implications that extend far beyond its borders, many people in this region believe.

Among other things, they argue, Pakistan`s new moderate course will:

* Undercut extremist groups from throughout the Arab and broader Muslim world that have used Pakistan as both an important support base and a way station in the conduct of global terrorism. * Ease long-standing tensions in Central and Southwest Asia that in many instances date back to the end of the Cold War.

* Give hope to political moderates in other Muslim countries as they watch one of their own reset the course of a nation by means of a carefully argued case against militant Islam as a social ill.

For Pakistan itself, Musharraf`s plan--outlined in an address to the nation this month--signals an end to a quarter-century in which political power has flowed gradually yet steadily in the direction of conservative religious forces, turning the country into a haven for extremists.

Police Hold 2,500 With Alleged Ties to Militants

In the last two weeks, police have rounded up 2,500 people suspected of links to five banned militant Islamic groups. Although smaller sweeps have occurred before, only to be followed by the release of the detainees a few days later, the extent of the current operation and assurances from the government that many of those taken into custody will be prosecuted under Pakistan`s anti-terrorism law have lifted the crackdown to another level, observers believe.

After two weeks of relative calm, those affected by the crackdown have begun to react. On Sunday, about 2,000 religious conservatives staged a demonstration in Peshawar, near the border with Afghanistan, demanding an end to Musharraf`s new path. In Karachi, a group called Harkat Moujahedeen is believed to be responsible for the kidnapping Wednesday of 38-year-old Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl.

Although some moderates worry about a greater backlash and about Musharraf`s resolve to follow through on his plan, they still view the fast-unfolding events as a watershed.

``It`s the first time in the history of our country that these people are being pushed into retreat,`` said Kamila Hyat, joint director of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. ``It`s going to change the way we live and think.``

Because Musharraf`s speech was timed mainly to defuse the immediate threat of war with India--by signaling to New Delhi that he was prepared to crack down on terrorist groups launching attacks against India from Pakistani soil--some listeners questioned both the sincerity of Pakistani intentions and the breadth of the initiative.

However, reflections of the shift--including announced reforms of hard-line religious schools known as madrasas, a noticeable easing of long-standing constraints on intellectual debate, and apparently broad-based public support--have combined to convince many observers that it is not only real but highly significant.

One example: Najam Sethi, editor of the country`s most liberal weekly newspaper, the Friday Times, said in an interview that he is suddenly receiving invitations to address groups that once banned him as too provocative.

``It`s amazing how expression has been freed,`` said Khaled Ahmed, a columnist who serves as the paper`s most aggressive public voice. ``One speech, and the entire nation has turned moderate.``

One Pakistan-based Western diplomat who tracks political developments in the region is convinced that the U-turn is genuine.

``We`re watching the world`s second-largest Muslim country moving from extremism to moderation,`` he said. ``This is hugely important.``

Others seem to agree.

``Historic,`` said Secretary of State Colin L. Powell of Musharraf`s speech and the course it charted. During a stopover this month in the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) called it ``one of the most powerful, meaningful . . . consequential speeches we`ve heard from a leader in this region for a long, long time.``

The enthusiasm is understandable.

For the last 25 years, Pakistan has hosted an array of Islamic militant organizations drawn first by the Muslim world`s jihad against the 1979-89 Soviet occupation of neighboring Afghanistan and later by other causes, including resistance to Russian forces in the breakaway region of Chechnya, to ruling Arab elites in Algeria and Egypt, and to post-Soviet governments in Central Asia.

Pakistan was also the preferred transit route into Afghanistan for members of Osama bin Laden`s Al Qaeda terrorist organization. Many observers are convinced that without Pakistan`s kid-glove approach toward extremist groups, the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks against the United States would have been far more difficult to carry out.

``For militants from all over the Arab world . . . Pakistan has been crucial,`` said Rasul Bakhsh Rais, director of the Area Studies Center at Quaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad. ``Here was a large political and social space to organize, plan, strategize, regroup or seek shelter. Now this space is no longer available.``

Friday Times columnist Ahmed claimed that the brother of one of the assassins of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat used to taunt Sadat`s successor, Hosni Mubarak, from his haven in Peshawar by sending Mubarak threatening telex messages.

More recently, Arab recruits have been seen moving through the cities of Lahore, on the Indian border, and Karachi, on the Indian Ocean, apparently to terrorist training camps in the remote frontier areas of Afghanistan and eventual missions beyond. About 25 Arabs were spotted recently by one observer in the anteroom of the Lashkar-e-Taiba extremist group`s office in Lahore.

Lashkar-e-Taiba has been linked to several terrorist operations in Indian-controlled areas of the disputed Himalayan region of Kashmir and to a deadly attack on the historic Red Fort in New Delhi in late 2000.

Extremist Groups Had Government Allies

Evidence, mainly anecdotal, indicates that these extremist groups often operated with the protection and tolerance--and sometimes with the full cooperation--of the Pakistani government. One political insider in Islamabad recalled an incident in early 2000 when senior members of Pakistan`s Inter-Services Intelligence agency, or ISI, sat around a table plotting strategy at the Islamabad Hotel with the head of the extremist Hezb-ul-Moujahedeen, Syed Salahuddin, at the same moment that Foreign Minister Abdus Sattar was telling a news conference a few miles away that his country had no ties with terrorist groups.

The government offered such support because many of its conservative leaders saw these groups as sharing Pakistan`s national goals--such as maintaining strong ties with Afghanistan to the west and breaking India`s grip on much of Kashmir.

``Most jihadis are natural allies of the army,`` said former ISI Director Hamid Gul, widely considered the midwife of Afghanistan`s Taliban regime. ``They are pursuing the same objectives.``

But on Jan. 12, Musharraf rejected the extremist option and declared these groups de facto enemies of the state.

The crackdown on militant groups is expected to further calm tensions in parts of Central Asia already quieted by the Taliban`s demise. Nations headed by former Soviet-era leaders had come to view Pakistan as a troublesome accomplice to the Taliban and a supporter of extremist groups.

Uzbekistan, for example, claimed that an Islamic militant named Juma Namangani had used Karachi as his starting point and the Afghan border areas as his launch pad for a guerrilla campaign against the Uzbek government.

``Musharraf`s new direction will provide a better understanding for Pakistan`s relations with these countries,`` Rais said.

The impact of Pakistan`s shift on the larger struggle between advocates of moderate and extremist Islam is far harder to assess, Pakistani observers believe. Newspaper editor Sethi believes that the collapse of the Taliban and the rout of Al Qaeda have already triggered a reassessment in the Muslim world about the limits of hard-line Islam.

``People all over the Arab world who were drifting to the extreme are now coming back toward the center,`` he said. ``Musharraf has demonstrated a state can do this too.``

Others, however, note that cultural, linguistic and historical differences are likely to diminish the impact of Musharraf`s move in the Arab world.

Javed Iqbal Cheema, head of the Interior Ministry`s National Crisis Management Cell, which is coordinating Islamabad`s crackdown against extremists, agreed that Pakistan`s new course will affect Arab governments` thinking. But Cheema quickly echoed the sentiment of many moderates here: The international community, he said, must work to resolve disputes in the Middle East and Kashmir that feed extremist sentiments.

Cheema added that Musharraf`s new policy was timed not just to defuse the threat of war over Kashmir but also to crush extremists while they were still reeling from the defeat of their cause in Afghanistan.

``They are confused, in a state of shock,`` he said. ``Now is our chance.``

Deeper change in Pakistani society--erasing a generation`s worth of conservative religious influence in areas such as the judiciary, education, civil service and the military--could take decades, observers believe.

``There will be dogged resistance,`` Sethi predicted.

The extent of conservative Islam`s inroads in Pakistan was illustrated several years ago when Bashiruddin Mehmood, then a respected member of the nation`s Atomic Energy Commission, delivered a scientific paper at a seminar proposing that the country`s energy problems could be resolved by harnessing the power of Muslim supernatural beings known as jinn. Mehmood was arrested in October in connection with unspecified activities in Afghanistan, though he was later released.

Broadening both public education and the narrow Koranic focus of the madrasas is seen by many as the key to long-term change.

``Education is crucial,`` noted Anis Ahmad, a scholar at the International Islamic University in Islamabad. ``It`s values that change a society, not a police crackdown.``

jay: I have been reading your replies with a lot of interest. I am never quite sure how to reply to them. I do have to admire your stubborness and straightforwardness.

One thing I do understand is that the more I read your replies, the more my admiration for Jinnah`s foresight continues to grow. All the Indians who continue to try to understand why Pakistanis wanted a separate country, need to read Jay`s various replies, for their answer. Pakistan needed to be, and was, created not due to any two-nation theory or a simple desire of one religious group to separate from another. It was actually created because Jinnah felt that someday India would slowly be dominated by people with Jay`s views about Muslims and their desires. One can agree with such views or disagree with them. But it is obvious that such views exist, and are on Chowk for everyone to see.

P.S. Jay, I would like to ask you one question: Do you vote in Uttar Pradesh?