Survival of the Fittest

Urstruly,

Thanks for sharing your heartfelt thoughts on ``the best of intentions.``

I see your point; but I still have my points lying in the air.

Would you care to take a crack at them as well, please ?

- Prior to the war, when the Iraqis were going through what they went through, why wasn`t that worth any attention? Is it permissible for a Muslim Leader/Ruler/Dictator to mistreat his own people and become a menace, but walk around scot-free?

- Prior to any invasion when the Afghanis were tormented by none other than their own fanatic brigade, why wasn`t that alarming? After all, women were being abused under the sham of purdah; slavery and prostitution was being performed by the so-called clerics trying to act like virtue police. Even men were being tortured and killed. Their widows were forced to opt for beggary and prostitution. Since Afghanistan claimed to be a Muslim Country therefore these henious crimes were not highlighted/advertised. These things are not talked about anyways in the Muslim Countries. Who cares? Why have double policies when it comes to crimes conducted by the Muslims? Why not condemn and stand up against those policies and practices as well?

From your previous post, it appears that only human rights violation takes place at the time of a war. I would request you to browse through any Pakistani local newspaper and read the horrific stories in little cuttings, well advertised all over the papers. They involve all kinds of crimes against humanity. I do not read any of those papers any more since they do not add anything to my knowledge and serve as a reflection of how the Pakistani Society is progressing. What about that?

I do not mean to outwit you or compare apples to oranges; but the fact of the matter is that human life is taken for granted in the Muslim Countries in general. It may come across as a sweeping statement since I have not visited all the Muslims Countries around the globe & no offense intended, I have no desire to do so as well. But my sweeping conclusion on the aforementioned trend cannot be refuted for the writings are pretty damn clear all around us.

Just an FYI URS: When malpractices are hidden under the rug and fake impressions are cast then that society goes through more turbulence than imagined.

Out of sheer curiosity: Why aren`t the so called fanatics involved in any constructive activities in their own countries? Why are they focused on the West so much? Why do they destroy their own country`s infrastructure out of rage against the West? See, everywhere they go, they destroy vs. construct. When that`s a trend that they have been adopting on their own land, then obviously on other lands they will be scrutanized and looked over suspiciously. Now, if the argument is that the West was involved in initiating all the mess in their respective countries and now it`s the wake-up time. My point is that you were never strong to begin with. Obviously you gave an open invitation.
By the way, what is strength? Oil? Palaces? Nuclear Formula? Uranium?

Muslim countries should stop boasting about their natural resources and nuclear power stuff. There is much more to it. First of all there is no unity and no strength. If natural resources were to be the only measure of strength and unity, then Iraq should not have been where it is right now. Instead of Saddam`s monuments, the monuments of accomplished Iraqis should have been all over the place. Irony**2 is that two different sects belonging to the same religion cannot live under the same roof. There is way too much hatred.

Did not we read the story of the father teaching his three sons on the strength of unity?

Before you go out and curse others, at least acknowledge your own shortcomings for they will lae-doobo-fy you.

Note`` ``U`` in the above argument does not imply Urstruly. It refers to the Muslim Ummah.

George of the Jungle -- (the wolverine and other stories for nation-building ...)
(Originally intended as an article, I decided to send it in as posts, because this forum seems to be the right one ...)

-- George of the Jungle:

Arrogance combined with breathtaking stupidity is a problem.
This dangerous combination defines American policy today. Part of the policy is to now seek to render the United Nations `irrelevant` - never mind the fact that it was very much relevant when sanctions were needed against Iraq for a decade. The importance of the UN has always been in the forum it provided for all nations of the world, rich or poor, black, white, brown or yellow, brutal or kind - all nations belonged. It is possible that in spite of the rest of the world`s opposition the US administration is right - but I won`t hold my breath.
The International Herald Tribune quoted a Washington analyst:
``The Americans have ... made it known to countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt that they must modernize their forms of government and engage themselves clearly in the war against terrorism and Islamic extremism,`` he said.
``It is understood that from now on only pro-American dictators, that ally themselves totally with the West and clamp down Islamist currents, will be tolerated,`` the analyst said.

So we now have jungle law ... But paradoxically, because of this, countries are seeking equilibrium.
With the US dictating changes to its liking, every nation is structuring its relationship with the US. Extremist ideologues are driving the US to redraw the Middle East along pro-Israeli lines but the US approach in the sub-continent will be different from Iraq or Afghanistan, because in this case Pakistan is already serving US interests.
The US military possesses incomparable command of strategic and tactical logistics and communications, and is the reason for their total dominance in the wars it has fought in the last decade. No nation can fight the US directly in a war unless they counter the power of the US Air Force. Kosovo, Afghanistan have brought into focus what may have previously been an abstract theory. Only forces operating under thick vegetation cover or very rough terrain can hope to reduce destruction from the air.
What is obvious is that in a Jungle with one power dictating terms, smaller countries have to look after themselves and become unified.
We too have to seek equilibrium.

-- The Wolverine

While on a trip through the Canadian wilderness, I saw an amazing confrontation between a wolverine and a grizzly bear. A forest ranger later explained that the wolverine most likely had cubs in a den nearby, based on my description of it`s ferocity and refusal to give ground, in spite of the fact that it faced a grizzly that must have weighed over 600 kg and about 140-150 cm in height. I was higher up on the mountainside and saw a brief flurry of fur and earth, sharp and harsh snarls and then saw the massive bulk of the grizzly backing away from the bare-toothed wolverine. It was over very quickly with a short, growling standoff, and then the grizzly slowly retreated.
The grizzly could have broken and torn the little wolverine - but I saw it would have been at bloody cost to itself. That small animal was capable of inflicting serious damage, even to a large grizzly, and the bear simply had no motivation to get into a scrap where he would have absorbed some punishment.
We are in the position of the wolverine.
But we need to look after our own `family` first and not worry about `grizzlies` charging upon us.
A two year military service program could benefit our people in several ways. Allocation of some of the military budget for programs that train the soldiers in not just fighting but also in management, logistics, technical and medical skills would prove ultimately beneficial to the country when the men and women go back into civilian sectors. It allows us to both create a means of training and educating our people. The immediate needs however are the fair treatment of the Baluch, addressing the concerns of Sindh`s water needs, providing clean water to all of Pakistan, providing a labor/agriculture base for people so that some of the poverty can be reduced, building the infrastructure for good schools/teachers, and putting into place a fair and just court system. If these projects are started and results are seen on a muncipal/neighborhood/village/city level then Pakistan will have nothing to fear. In fact, these projects HAVE been started by the Musharraf government - these and more.

(I have split up the post - rest to follow ...)

Post 2 - continued:
-- A policy of cooperation and the bringers of fire.

Relying on tactics of war to `win` is foolish - that is where our problems lie and that is certainly not where we will find our solutions.
The US is not in our neighborhood, geographically, but India is. As with all neighbors, we have to co-exist.
The relationship between the US and Pakistan is one which exists because Pakistan serves the needs of the US. The direction Musharraf is taking is agreeable to the US - notwithstanding certain issues (like nuclear weapons and extremists) that are of concern to the US.
Pakistan is not going to be attacked. Iraq was attacked because it was a threat to Israel (first and foremost) and it has oil (a close second). Pakistan does not threaten Israel and is of strategic value to the US. So rest assured, there is no attack in the immediate future. What will change the scenario is if Pakistan poses a threat because of any loss of control of it`s nuclear weapons. For that contingency, US has troops and bases inside Pakistan and in Iraq, not to mention Qatar, Kuwait etc -the US presence is here for a while and they are not about to leave. Occupying Iraq, etc for the next couple of years provides a controlled base to operate from in the Middle East.
The fact that the US and Pakistan national interests do not coincide in some areas does not necessarily mean military conflict in the immediate future.
Our solutions lie in the direction we take to rebuild Pakistan.
What stops us? Leadership? With Musharraf and the team he has, we are doing better than under all the years under Benazir and Nawaz. What he needs is support from the politicians. The political arena requires a different sort of boldness from the military arena - it requires a boldness of compromise and the vision to negotiate from it. A leader needs to make bold moves but boldness becomes habit only with experience. Pakistan needs politicians who can act with statesmanship, not protest. They may find it hard to accept President Musharraf`s method for implementing it but it seems a start and perhaps the only way forward.
Externally, turning the alliance with the U.S. into a reasonably beneficial relationship (without becoming too Washington-centric) depends upon Pakistan`s success in its internal policies.
The kind of beneficial projects that keep this balance and can be started immediatly are a US sponsorshop of Pakistani expatriates, who could go back to Pakistan (temporarily, if they choose) to work in the public works field, technical, legal, and construction fields. Funding and salaries could come from the already approved aid packages for Pakistan.
The story of the animals who stole fire and brought it down in a relay race seems to me an analogy for the flame of knowledge, which has moved from civilization to civilization - a relay race.
The flame of innovation and knowledge now resides in the west. Those who wish to learn, must go where the flame is and then bring the warmth of its knowledge back.

(Continued in the next post ...)

Post 3 - continued:
-- Rebuilding

Democracy can only work if the inner components and foundation is in place first. The ill-thought out calls for early elections in Pakistan bring this sharply into focus. What we needed first and most of all were courts of law that worked for the people, clean drinking water, a functioning set of muncipalities.
Elections are just an embelleshment on a real democracy, they do not define `democracy`. Musharraf knew this. He started the process of law, of muncipal projects, and asked for three more years. Instead of which the US and some of our own people exerted pressure on him to let the `democratic` process take place. What we have now is an elected prime minister all right - with the same old network of politicians and no fundamental system to safeguard the rights of anyone - just more cronyism. What we did was backwards from what should have been done.
Most of what is in this post is aimed at leadership - but all leadership comes from the population - so it applies equally to all of us. I`ve pointed the finger at the `silent moderate majority` of Pakistan but the truth is that the majority of us - silent or otherwise - have failed Pakistan. If we silently leave the debate open to only the extremists we can expect a rise in extremism (for example after Friday namaz - the moderate ones simply go home and the only ones doing the talking are generally extremists).
The problem is we are exchanging views in a vacuum - not with the mullahs or the feudals or the common person. How do we talk to them? The majority of Pakistanis do not read Chowk.
It is not the role of the critics or protestors to provide solutions. They are there to galvanize the insiders to find alternate solutions. We must become aware enough to realize that the `threat` is not from those who criticize but from our own failure to judge ourselves. This is the hardest thing to do.
The value of honest critics is such that if we did not have someone to criticize us, we should take it upon ourselves to find one. We should look at people like Cowasjee, Pervez Hoodbhoy, Asma Jehangir etc as gifts to us. We have principled men like Imran Khan who refused to merge his party under pressure - he took the honorable path and came through with his integrity intact and stands courageous.
Pakistan is reversing its long decline, thanks to the present government. At the same time, this government has been hesitant, tentative, as though it was not certain that most Pakistanis would support it, when boldness was needed.
Where was the strong and vocal show of support from the moderates?
In all our history we have failed to find political stability, partly because political parties used the democratic process to suppress opponents and then create the climate of cronyism and corruption that is ultimately dishonoring and disfiguring. The compromise that Musharraf has created could represent an opportunity to short-circuit the destructive old ways -it is perhaps our best chance for a decent government.
Pakistan needs statesmanship, not protest.
The opposition parties have been squabbling and demanding `democracy`. We don`t know what that means in the local mohallas. For that reason, small steps need to be taken on a local level to let the concept of voting and civil services be understood. If the parliment members continue to denounce anything and everything it does, the result will be continued instability. The opposition can make their case far more effectively if they unite for the purpose of rebuilding the institutions we need. The issues of the LFO or of Musharraf holding both military and Presidential offices is not the problem. To put it plainly, if the opposition can use their position constructively, in questioning, in challenging the government on its decisions and policies, then they will be practicing democracy in its finest form.
And more importantly, they will have provided themselves with legitimacy and respect for having done so, in the eyes of the people and the parliament. A working parliament will prove the case for the military to allow civilian rule.
This is what we need!

(Continued further in the next post ...)

End of posts - thanks for reading!:

-- Leadership

Intolerance seems to be a characteristic of both insecure countries and insecure people.

Tolerance comes with confidence.
And confidence comes with security.
Security is created when we are at peace with others and our neighbours
And we are at peace with others when we practice tolerance ...!
This is a self-generating cycle.
The question is how do we begin the cycle? As a begining we can take care of simple items:

conduct
honesty
integrity
selflessness

Yes, these things are common sense. However they are not common practice.
So what must a leader do? There is no point in lamenting a lack of morale and discipline. You must plan for it. This is a short list - I find these thoughts to be of value to me:

- Leverage power, but do not be seduced by it`s trappings and build Raiwinds or buy manors in Surrey.
- A leader always takes the initiative.
- Pushing events before their time is less important than their ultimate achievement.
- Leaders must be present at every level - a leader`s success is determined by the leadership of his lieutenants.
- There is no quick way to develop leaders. They must learn throughout their lives, gaining insight from any and every source.
- Loyalty. A leader must understand that disagreement is NOT disloyalty.
- Courage. Critics also display courage when they criticize.
- it is not necessary to win every battle, but it is necessary to win the important ones.
- A leader himself must be accountable and take responsibility.
- Credibility. By BOTH enemies and friends.
- Greatness is made possible through personality extremes (defined by extreme risk-taking.)
- How we bear trials is a measure of our discipline.
- Discipline is a way of conducting ourselves.
- Demanding more discipline than is required is an abuse of power and can only lead to rebellion. Lax discipline undoes morale.
- To rule over all the tribes/provinces in Pakistan, each tribe/province must feel like it belongs. The army is one institution where all members belong, regardless of origin and background.
- Never threaten the security or esteem of another unless you are prepared to deal with the consequences.
- Be approachable to BOTH good and bad.
- Be compatible to the policies of the nation and its people. Otherwise you will fall to deceit to accomplish your own ambitions, and will ultimately lose.
- ALWAYS reward those with character and integrity.
- Rishwat is an usurption of respect and makes you a beggar. A beggar may bow in front of his lord, but he demands that another grovel in front of him as well. That is the mark of a beggar. Real deference results in unyielding loyalty.
- If a leader is corrupt and seeks personal gain, the nation is empty and will fail.
- The corruption of a nation is a direct measure of the corruption of it`s leaders.
- Risk taking must be compatible with the ability to sense the precise moment to act.
- A nation cannot prevail if its leadership is confined to one man. Imagine a tripod - the leader at the apex with institutions, society, ideology forming each of the supporting legs. If any of the legs fail, the peak will topple.
- Worthy causes meet with the most resistance. Only when opponents are threatened do they become vocal in their opposition.
- Never appoint acting ministers. They remain uncertain as do the people.
- There is a difference between being principled and being inflexible.
- Adapt - but do not compromise

(My compliments to all the interactors - this is a good debate!)

#280 by hamidm2 on April 29, 2003 8:29pm PT

[...... why would anyone from india or pakistan go across the border to do any kind of charity work - it is silly when you can find plenty of starving and dying people your own side ......... charity begins at home, unless you are out to prove something that doesn`t need proving .......... what drivel!.... now i have heard it all ......... the fact of the matter is that as long as india and pakistan are in a state of undeclared war, it is quite unpatriotic for folks on either side to offer comfort to the enemy ......... ]

Very well said!!!! For the first time in quite a while, I find myself totally in agreement with you, hamidm2 Sahib. Folks on both sides have been brought up on the hate-the-enemy rhetoric for so long, it has almost become an instinct, something that has seeped down to the subconscious. And in any case, as you said when there are enough people dying in your own backyard, why would you even want to think of doing charity across the border? It would take a hypocrite to ignore sufferings of his own people and reach out to his enemy.

tahmed

... you must be kidding ...``Fortunately, things are much better in real life. I know at least one Indian who regularly contributes to a nonprofit hospital near Multan in Pakistan, for example. My own brother (a doctor in the US) went about three years ago to a hospital in Chennai to help set up a special surgical unit``........

.......... i have never heard such nonsense before ...... why would anyone from india or pakistan go across the border to do any kind of charity work - it is silly when you can find plenty of starving and dying people your own side ......... charity begins at home, unless you are out to prove something that doesn`t need proving .......... what drivel!.... now i have heard it all ......... the fact of the matter is that as long as india and pakistan are in a state of undeclared war, it is quite unpatriotic for folks on either side to offer comfort to the enemy ......... americans did not send money to russia during the cold war and the british did not go on tours of berlin during ww-2...........try taking a trip to cuba or even buy a cuban cigar in the us - your liberal but traitorous posterior is likely to end up in jail............ you third world types don`t even know how to carry on a decent cold war ..........

#276 by hamidm2 on April 29, 2003 5:38pm PTsay,

+ “let the indians stew in their own bhaji dost-mittar, until we can actually do something about it - in the meanwhile we should focus on forming an alliance with the french so that abdul can vacation in paris ..........” +

Definitely!! Don`t EVER make freinds with ugly Indians. Chi chi!!!
And then don’t you all ‘handsome Pakis’ look so much like the ‘handsome French’??? I think so.

And previously you looked like the fair Arabic/afghani (before you became an ‘ally’ of USA).
And also you claimed, your ancestors had roots in handsome Arabic when you wanted to carve out your own land out of Indian land in 1947.

+ Pakistan needs to go full blown towards China. +

All Pakis to eat lots of Chicken Biryani and all sorts of animals. Start eating ‘cockroaches and dogs’ like their best friends Chinese. And thus after becoming ‘full-blown’ ...Pakis can move full blown towards China.

And then end up looking a bit like the handsome Chinese too (a bit Arabic and French, a bit American...anything but ugly Indians). Watch out!!!!!

tahmed32 # 275

The percentage of Indians who seek confrontation with Pakistan is much smaller than the percentage of Pakistanis. Maybe not on chowk. I have a lot of Indian friends and cousins who could care less about Pakistan. They could not even name the four provinces of Pakistan. They would not know Pakistani military/ISI backed the Taleban.

A lot of Indians have fierce battles/debates/discussions with other Indians over a whole host of domestic issues in India. Such discussions over domestic issues in Pakistan do not exist. This lack of discourse over Pakistan`s future ought to be a concern for all Pakistanis.

The only discussion I have seen Pakistanis have is whether to have an Islamic system or not. In my opinion this whole demand over Islamic system is a bunch of BS.

I have no problem and no enemity with Romair, ustruly etc. in the chowk. They express viewpoints that I would never read in a Indian newspaper. I do not agree with what they say always.

``Pakistan needs to go full blown towards China.


Typical Paki talk. While it may be in Pakistan`s interest to become closer to China, it is more important for them to learn Chinese pragmatism.

China is stronger than Taiwan, yet, it has never overtly used force to force reunification. The Chinese government has never raised national expectations to a fever pitch where normal relations become strained.

Compare Pakistan and you will see that regardless of Pakistani-Chinese bhai bhai, the two countries lie far apart in ideology. India and China are actually closer in terms of projected self interest.

dost-mittar,

``Whether it is urstruly, romair or even the great hamidm, they all have assorted prescriptions for what Pakistan should or shouldn`t do. But they all agree on one thing. The permanent hatred of Hindu India must be the unalterable pivot around which a long-term Pakistan policy has to built``........

............you are right - it has become a pathological condition among pakistanis of all ilks .......... personally i think pakistan should completely ignore india until it accepts the fact that kashmir is a legitimate dispute that has to be settled ...... however, it is not wise to use the jihadi lashkars to fight a proxy war, not because there is anything wrong with killing horrible hindoos, but because these lashkars are destroying what little is left of pakistani civil society ......... they should all be rounded up and strung up from the nearest tree or packed off to guantanamo.......... having said that, if our clowns in khaki were capable of waging a sucessful war in kashmir it would be perfectly okay to march on to sirinagar and maybe on to delhi - it would be a ``just`` war............unfortunately, the only war these jokers are capable of fighting is the one against the hapless politicians in islamabad .............

..........and there is really no need to have ``friendly`` relations with india ..... there is no point in playing cricket or importing sub-standard construction steel from the wrong side of the border - there are plenty of re-rolling mills producing junk from junk in gujranwala and gujrat .........personally, i feel we have more in common with the wine and cheese loving french than with some vegetarian brahmin from chennai ............. i say, let the indians stew in their own bhaji until we can actually do something about it - in the meanwhile we should focus on forming an alliance with the french so that abdul can vacation in paris ..........

ferozk #270 Do indeed rage. But direct your rage at the situation that is most needful of this rage. If any broken crystal needs to be put back together, any trampled plant that needs to be nurtured, it is the Pakistan Constitution. And you will find enough injustice languishing in Pakistani jails - the poor and the weak.
You may not agree with me that the US intervention in Iraq is first and foremost a stroke for liberation of the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator. And we have gone round enough circles on this one.

However, I hope that you will not end this rage with Iraq, and direct it at the situation that also needs this rage - the state of political development within Pakistan. In Pakistan, we have met the enemy, and he is us. (In the Greek Philosopher Pogo`s - just kidding - immortal words).

dost mittar #260 You are basically right in pointing out this common theme of continued confrontation with India as a matter of policy for the three posters (and no doubt others from Pakistan) you mention. To be fair, I may add that the same can be said for the same proportion of Indian posters in chowk.

I also agree that it is in Pakistan`s interest to in fact try to end this confrontation. And I may add that it would be in India`s interest too, even though I agree that India is ten times bigger and in the foreseeable future is likely to outstrip Pakistan in economic growth.

But note that all three posters you mention are sitting in North America. Do you really think these posters really care about the well-being of the future generations of Pakistanis? From all indications, chowk is a rich man`s game for many posters (Indian and Pakistani) who enjoy the easy access to the internet they have in the west to have the only conversation they are capable of: squabbling over Kashmir, and/or gloating over the misery of their less fortunate people they left behind in Pakistan or India. There is hardly anyone who comes to chowk with the express purpose of seeking better understanding between Indian and Pakistani expatriates.

Fortunately, things are much better in real life. I know at least one Indian who regularly contributes to a nonprofit hospital near Multan in Pakistan, for example. My own brother (a doctor in the US) went about three years ago to a hospital in Chennai to help set up a special surgical unit - and neither side cared about the India-Pakistan politics. I could give many more examples from real life. And I am sure in real life most of these posters are in fact much more reasonable than they appear on chowk. I am the eternal optimist. Chowk, as Stuka says, is basically pass time. So you can cheer up if you have read one too many post on that seems to indicate this depressing trend towards mindless hostility.

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

Dear Zeemax

Ref # 241

Thanks for your excellent, well thought-of, and educating response. I think we are in agreement on various issues related to WTO; some of which have been mentioned in the article also.

Your suggestion on leaving the luxury is very well founded. We have two choices, either keep on doing what we are in the economics, or behave and discipline ourselves, while we still have the time. The aggressive, Purchase Power Parity Based marketing of the MNCs in Pakistan, throughout late 70s, 80 and even 90s have snatched even the patloon and any semblanceof dignity from the poor man. Now we are addicted to spending what we don’t have to maintain the lifestyle that was created by this PPPB culture. I am glad that this Nilam Ghar (Tariq Aziz fame) cultural of PPPB, has now turned its face to India. But the damage to the very base of Pakistan has already been done.

I remember, probably in 1989, when I was working on my research thesis, I met with Henry Ford of Pakistan; I am forgetting that gentleman`s name at this moment but even then I preferred to call him Henry Ford. That gentleman designed, engineered and built the very first light duty truck made 100% in Pakistan. By the time I met him he had just completed a successful run of his prototype and he was manufacturing the first saleable batch in his workshop. He was a well spoken gentleman with a dream and ambitions as high as Himalayas. I was hopeful that I was witnessing the making of Pakistan`s very own giant like that of Daewoo or Hyundai. Then one day, several weeks after that meeting, I was walking down the university road near Hasan square when I saw the first of his trucks on the road. It was a surreal feeling looking at a pickup truck hauling a mountain of goods tied under a tarp and cruising at probably 80kms an hour. In the lane beside that a Suzuki truck was also cruising at the same time at the same speed. I sat down on the sidewalk overwhelmed with emotion and tears started flowing down my cheeks. That day I understood why women cry when they see their newborn the very first time. One man had made it, only and only because of his vision and an iron will.

The dream was short-lived. After first Gulf War Japan forced Pakistan to subsidize diesel and reduce tariffs on light diesel engine vehicles. Henry Ford could not compete. He did not have a lobby in the corridors of power. We all knowingly and unknowingly killed Pakistan`s Henry Ford.

Later, as we know now, that there was absolutely no need at that time to get under pressure from Japanese government. It was the hunger of the corrupt elite and politicians that they needed to embezzle and fill their own pockets from whatever source the money could come into the country.

I don’t think that the elite of society is going to give up their luxury at this time, they would rather find other creative ways of corruption to maintain their lifestyle. It has to be forced upon them. At this time when anti-West feelings are at max and people are just looking for the ways to boycott the Western products aka PPPB products, people`s sentiments can be marshaled and disciplined through awareness.

re: Field Marshal`s fantasies
Proof that Chowk`s Filed Marshal has started smoking cocaine again:
1. ``Pakistan is not a religious state nor is it a secular state. It is somewhere in between...``
My comments: Field Marshal is neither an intellectual nor a moron, somewhere in between.
2. ``Its growth rate should be 4.5% this year (according to UN). And then 4.7 to 5% next year. And then onwards to the holy grail of 6% growth rates.``
Cocaine can do this. It instils a sense of euphoria and then you do not know what you are talking. Reality check for the Field Marshal:

http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/rsepResources/si/feb03/southAsia.asp
Excerpts from the above Url:
A) ``The main factors underlying the country`s growth are increased supplies of labor and capital, along with overall efficiency or total factor productivity (TFP)......A recent study (IMF 2002) of total factor productivity in Pakistan paints a telling picture. The IMF found that for 1961-2001 as a whole, Pakistan experienced only moderate TFP growth (0.5 percent annually). This finding suggests that most of the country`s growth can be accounted for by increased amounts of labor and capital, with efficiency gains playing a relatively minor role.``

B) ``William Easterly (2001) has termed Pakistan`s experience ``growth without development``. Easterly contends the country`s poor social indicators have lowered the productive potential economy and its ability to service its high debt. His observations along with the patterns of total factor productivity are suggestive of possible explanations for Pakistan`s failed take-offs, despite a fairly respectable overall growth rate of 5.4% over the 1961-2001 period: a certain degree of development and growth was attainable with a skilled managerial elite and unskilled workers, but over time, this strategy ran into diminishing returns, as human capital did not grow at the same rate as the capital stock. Adding in weak governance and limited economic reforms aids in explaining slowdown in growth from the late 1980s to present.``

C) ``The Musharraf reforms appear sound and well intended, although it is too early to gauge their progress. One thing is certain, however: the country has a long way to go before high rates of growth can be restored. A recent World Bank report on Pakistan, notes that despite the general perception prevailing among the public that governance has improved in the last few years, Pakistan still ranks 74th out of 102 countries in the CPI (Corruption Perception Index).``

D) Development versus Terrorism:

``The growth and productivity patterns noted above are certainly suggestive that Pakistan is a classic example of a country fulfilling Krueger and Maleckova`s description of a terrorist breeding ground. Clearly, large segments of the population have become weary and frustrated with the country`s lack of economic progress, especially now that the Indian economy is pulling away with a much higher and accelerating rate of growth. The country`s patterns of growth, productivity and institutional failure noted above, seem to fit in well to a more formal model of terrorist development recently devised by Bremer and Kasarda (2002).``

Field Marshal may look at the graph shown in the above URL. It shows how nations, which start out as Agricultural economies, make the transition to an industrialised status. Look where Pakistan is in this graph. It is in good company of its muslim brothers Egypt, Saudi Arabia. Look where India and china are. They are on the path to industrialisation but still have a long way to go before they can be called ``highly industrialised`` and prosperous (or the First World). But they are on the right path. See how terrorism can stifle growth. Add to this Pak`s woes of lack of sound infrastructure, high military spending (to gain that elusive parity with India), concentration of wealth, lack of social mobility, feudal infrastructure and you get the picture.
Other URLs:

http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/rsepResources/si/dec02/southAsia2.asp

As per the above Url article:
``The average GDP growth of 3.3% per annum in the Musharraf years is the lowest in 12 years. Admittedly declining rapidly in the late 1990s it was still on average 4.6% during the 1990s, with 7.7% in 1991-92 and 6.5% in 1995-96.
Overall investment as a percentage of GDP has been declining steadily from 20% in 1991-92 to 17.3% in 1997-98; it went down below 14% in 2001-02. This is the most serious manifestation of an economic slowdown because it will affect not only the pace of economic growth in the coming years, but also many other key sectors like employment and exports.
Both the public and private sectors share this decline in investment; but public sector has declined more rapidly in the past 10 years—from 9.1% to 4.7% of GDP—while private investment has gone down from, 10.1% to 7.6% of GDP. In the public sector, development expenditures have declined from 6.7% of GDP to 2.8% of GDP.
Exports have continued to stagnate and will probably be lower than $8.9 billion in 2000-01 against a target of $10 billion.
The rate of unemployment has also gone up from about 5% in the early 1990s to 7.8% in 2001-02.
A major indicator of macroeconomic stability, the fiscal deficit, having improved to 5.3% of GDP in 2000-01 again deteriorated to 7% of GDP in 2001-02.
According to the Asian Development Bank (2002) the incidence of poverty increased from 26.6% in FY 1993 to 32.2% in 1999. The report goes on to conclude that development spending has continued to decline and that it is highly likely that the incidence of poverty in Pakistan today is significantly higher than in FY 1999. ``
How terrorism can affect economy:
http://www.dawn.com/2002/05/21/op.htm (by Javed S Burki)
For a more detailed study of where Pak`s economy is going, go to
http://web.nps.navy.mil/%7Erelooney/Villanova.pdf

3. It is when the Field Marshal talks about foreign policy issues that one wonders if he has lost touch with reality.
A) ``Israel would love to have Pakistan recognize it. Pakistan is one of the few Muslim countries that Israel has some respect for and actually fears also. A lot of US Jewish money would start flowing into Pakistan, if Pakistan recognized Israel.``
The Pak-Israeli relationship is complex. From Pak`s side, the relationship never took off due to intense hatred of the Jews in Pakistan. Any govt trying to normalise relationship with Israel has run into problems. Israelis on the other hand have been pragmatic and nor averse to normalising relationship with Paksitan. Their main concern today is Pak`s nuclear status and what it means to Israel. For a more detailed study on this complex relationship, go to the following Url:
http://64.58.76.136/search/cache?p=Israel+and+Pakistan&ei=UTF-8&vm=i&n=20&fl=0&url=13mRIi76KysC:www.tau.ac.il/jcss/memoranda/memo55.pdf

B) ``Pakistan needs to completely reduce its dependencies on the USA. Keep it as a friendly acquientance, rather than as an involved disturbance. Don`t love it and don`t hate it...``.
Pray, let the Field Marshal enlighten us how Pakistan is supposed to reduce its dependence on USA if its economy is sustained utterly and so completely by IMF (which in turn is under the stranglehold of US policy makers). IMF today runs Pak`s economic decisions. Pakistan has lost its economic independence to IMF and by extension, to USA.

C) ``25 years from now people will be migrating to China like they migrate to USA or Canada. Pakistan needs to be the first in line.``
Ha, ha, ha, ha. Thanks for giving me a good laugh. What else are you smoking, Mr Romair. Is it just Cocaine?
Look at the graph that is shown in the first Url i have posted. Look where China is in that graph. China has a long way to go. With recent impediments like SARS, its economy is on a negative spin. Its labor laws, bank reforms, etc are archaic. Its lack of transparency is being talked about today in CNN and MSNBC. China presents a rosy picture but like the proverbial Roman God Janus, it has two faces. It shows its best face to the world but hides its ugly face. The world is today getting a sample of that ugly face during this SARS outbreak. Do not hinge your country`s hope on China. Besides, China fears Pakistani terrorists and its relationship with Pak is strategic (to embarass India) and not economic. In fact, its trade with India today has easily crossed $ 3 billion and is growing. Indian IT giants have set up shops in China. And, recently, George Fernandez was in China and was well recieved. So, as and when China ceases to perceive India as a threat, its strategic relationship with Pak will change. So, it would be wise for Pakis not to depend too much on China.

China, besides, is a long term player. Not 25 years but may be in 75 years China will be where Romair thinks it will be. And, for God`s sake, why does the Field Marshal want Pakistanis to migrate to China even then?
Looks like, towards the end of this post, the effect of cocaine has worn off. Now, Mr Romair is making more sense. I agree with him when he says that the concept of muslim Ummah is nebulous. I also agree that Pak must sue for peace with India and concentrate on economic development. Can Mr Musharraf, who has failed twice (Kargil and Agra summit) succeed a third time? Only time will tell.

Sridhar