A Waste of National Resource

This has not been answered as yet. Are you sleeping well. Is your heartbeat normal? Be honest to yourself and answer it. It will restore your health.

You ARE wrestling whether to bacome a muslim or not (openly)--Just do it!

#107 by echoboom on February 3, 2004 12:45pm PT
Whereas It is heartening to note that you have the honesty to admit that like me, you too, include yourself among the class which is responsible for the mess we have created for the noble and God-fearing Pakistanis.

The others still have to be shown this light. The crows who think they look like swans (attire) and sing like nightingales (accent).

Please answer this so that a burden is lifted off your shoulders and you can go to sleep.
Does ANYONE has the answer? No wonder you guys don`t like the face in the mirror.

---

#55 by echoboom on January 31, 2004 3:39pm PT
This being Madressa board.
Reprodued from Omar Qureishi board, where it awaited unanswered.

For F.R.Khan in particular:

Name EVEN ONE student from such schools pre or post-partition who has been an achiever in ANY field. Jobs, titles, and positions, and life-styles are NOT achievements

---

#67 by echoboom on January 29, 2004 12:24pm PT
FerozeK:64

Your frustration and depression is understandabe. Still fiercely guarding american-accent?
Ears cocked to whatever is happening in Dixie? Still avoiding masjids and maulanaas.

Worry not. You WILL be re-nativised (assimilated? mainstreamed?) alongwith other english-accent-schools ( I wish I could call them madrassas but that would be elevating their status).

Name ONE student from such schools pre or post-partition who has been an achiever in ANY field. Jobs, titles, and positions, and life-styles are NOT achievements.

Let me elaborate Shaukat Aziz vs Agha Hasan Abadi.(madressa)--(you get the drift?)

now more from maktab and madrassas: abdul salaam, Quadeer Khan, Dr. Ali Rajput, abdul sattar edhi, Faiz, Iqbal, Pitras , Quasmi, Manto etc etc (you keep thinking of many others in ANY field and give me just ONE name) who is from accented-schools who can match them)

How does it feel to be in the gutter now. Yes I am in that gutter of the colonised-culture and that is THE issue here.

re: yasser # 122

Yasser, you are indeed lucky if you have few problems living in Pakistan. Unlike you, I cannot make a similar claim, because my personal levels of comfort are not a barometer of the levels of happiness in Pakistan.

As I said before, you and I will disagree on this issue.

I am perfectly happy living in Pakistan and compared to the majority of Pakistanis, I am lucky, but I am the exception and not the norm in Pakistan. My economic bracket and education and life style is not reflective of the average Pakistani and just because I do not have any personal problems, does not mean that Pakistan has no problems.

Ignoring the problems will not solve the problems magically and that if we do not solve our problems or admit our wrongs and learn from our past mistakes, we will continue to persist with bad policies, which will continue to harm the interests of Pakistan.

Hence, the iron law of diminishing returns will continue to haunt us.

My views may paint a lopsided view of Pakistan, because I feel that the Pakistan has followed more bad policy decisons than good policy decisons and in balance, the scales tilt against Pakistan.

Pakistan will indeed survive the both of us and it will improve when the citizens of Pakistan take an active interest in its well being and point out its flaws. The only way we can correct the problems of Pakistan is to admit it has problems and we have to openly discuss them and admit them and not pretend that all is fine and glorious in Pakistan.

Ciao

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

Ah ha so now all Pakistanis are idiots.. wonderful.
Fortunately I know enough Indians to know that not everyone in India is a `klunk` like you. If only you would not waste time here on Chowk convincing a stupid Paki like me of the greatness of bharat mata... maybe you would find a way to feed those starving 300 million people in your country.

Even a stupid Paki like me has to go to sleep some time.

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

Gujjubania ... instead of proving your inferiority complex to us why don`t you please come up with a way to feed those ``260 Million`` people that live in the most abominable conditions in your country?? And stop with the multiple posts... As for shangrila... you should ask this from all the Indian tourists that seem to be pouring in ...

So tell me why does it burn you up to hear the truth about Pakistan?

---

Feroz... dear friend... screw taliban, international affairs, constitutions and nuclear proliferation... tell me this ... what problems do you face living in Pakistan? Personally I have very few... call this fantasy bubble call it anything... I am happy where I am.

I think by not mentioning this and always mentioning the negative, and making absolutist statements like ... `this is wrong` ... `that is right` waghaira waghaira ... you give a lopsided view of the country. My question is `Will you rather be some where else?`

-YLH

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

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

re: Yasser

Pakistan is suffering from a law of diminishing returns, because Pakistan has a very bad habit of reinforcing failure. Pakistan just does not know or understand when to quit a bad policy, which instead of helping Pakistan`s interests, ends up harming it. We supported the Taliban even though the Taliban were internationally isolated and we continued to do till unbearable international pressure forced to stop supporting them. We could have supported the Taliban to a point, but we continued beyond the ``fail safe`` till our association with the Taliban actually ended up threatening to undermine our own security interests.

I can use Pakistan support of militants in Kashmir as another example of reinforcing failure till those militants started to threaten the very state, which was supporting them and in the process, our support for militants nearly, once again, isolated and in fact, undermined our stance on Kashmir. In education, we are reinforcing failure, because we seeking to reform the education system, which will be a failure, because the education system in Pakistan does not need reform as much as it needs to be re-structured.

In the case of A. Q. Khan, Pakistan denied the accusations and then, under pressure and undeniable evidence, admitted that it was guilty of proliferating nuclear technology. Then if that was not a worse case situation, we once again reinforced failure and pardoned A. Q. Khan and in doing so, suggested to the world and to the public of Pakistan that it is perfectly fine to the break the law in Pakistan and not be punished. The act of pardoning A. Q. Khan will be an example of diminishing returns, because the next person will see this as example and invitation to break the law. Instead of stopping such irresponsible behavior in our public officials, we have simply encouraged it and the more people persist in such a conduct, the less Pakistan will benefit in the long run.

Pakistan, as a state, is malfuctioning and it has no policy, which is capable of generating good options for Pakistan, because we are fatally cursed with this myopia of continually and stubbornly persisting with bad policies, which have negative implications for Pakistan.

You and I will agree to disagree on this issue. You have called my views absurd and that is your opinion and I respect it. Likewise, I find your refusal to admit the reality of Pakistan as a fine example of existing within a fantasy bubble, which seems absurd from a person of your qualifications. As to being a sane academic, I never claimed those qualifications. Absurdity has a grain of truth in it and absurdity and the willingness to tolerate it can create a healthy debate, which can only increase knowledge and understanding. Irrationality is a question of perspective and different perspectives are more valuable than a single persepctive. My statements might sound arrogant to you and your calling them arrogant do not defeat the reasons behind my statement, as much as they hint of your own arrogance based on the certainity of your own knowledge.

Ciao

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

ferozk

I never understood how a reasonable sane academic like yourself can make arrogantly absolute statements. Your statement is abstract and a matter of perspective.

George Bernard Shaw in 1948 congratulated Nehru on his up and coming inheritance of Pakistan few days after Jinnah passed away. Orriana Fallaci declared that Bhutto is the only hope for Pakistan... if he goes Pakistan goes.. Pakistan survived both Bernard Shaw and Ms. Fallaci ... it will survive your `realism` as well.

Ballu Khan

Secularism has had only one meaning and that meaning is what I am implying: The separation of church and state... it has no other meaning so don`t confuse the issue.

Nation is an imagined concept... to some Sindhis or Punjabis are a nation, to others Muslims are a nation, I only believe in Pakistan as a nation. That is me, but I am willing to accept that there are different concepts of nationhood... (Jawaharlal Nehru came to this conclusion late in life when he admitted that from different angles nationhood might have different meanings.)

How I want to accept violent Jehadis or tolerate them is beyond me ... if you could show me one statement that I have made to that end I`ll be grateful.


Rsidhar,

You know I don`t like getting into these Pakistan India matches... I have in the past posted about India`s growing economy and its potential... and I do believe that it will be one of the largest economies...


But can you explain this complex that people like Gujju bania suffer from? I love living in Pakistan and I have a comfortable life style... if I mention that why does it bite people like Gujjubania in rear end ? Did I say anything against India till he initiated an unprovoked attack for no ryhme or reason... methinks something is amiss.... is this some sort of an inferiority complex...


Gujjubania...

I don`t have time to look at your long and pointless posts.

Please get over your inferiority complex.

-YLH

re:#105 by Mantolives
Even though i myself do not buy this non-sense that ``India is shining``, which is a mere BJP electoral slogan, there is more than a grain of truth when Gujjubania says India is developing. It indeed is. The question is: are the benefits accruing to all sections of the society or are only the rich getting richer? It does look like the middle class is the main beneficiary of free market, what with its emphasis on education and IT skills. I will be a lot more excited when India makes the necessary changes in the Agricultural sector to free that sector from bureacracy so that its productivity rises manyfolds. Agriculture accounts for 25% of India`s GDP while IT and ITES account for a mere 2-3%.
The years of slumber, as you call it in the first several decades, were really one of building institutions. IITs, IIMs did not land from the heavens. It took years of nurturing. I dare say Pak cannot name even one institution of the calbre of IIT today.
Sridhar

re: Yasser

A simple misunderstanding can cause so much delight! (lol)

I am sorry that you were not keen on the statement about diminishing returns vis-a-vis Pakistan, but the statement is true and I stand by that observation.

Ciao

#110 by Mantolives on February 3, 2004 11:34pm PT
Can you clarify your predicament? Do you want a re-interpretation of ``secularism`` which would not hurt the sensibilities of the ordinary Islamist?
Do you want to create arguments for why Violent Islamist Jehadis should be tolerated by the modern States?
Do you think that Romair`s arguments are so devastating that one requires re-interpretation of secularism?
Why do you want to create a naturalist theory of ``Nation`` as a ``naturally-given`` and separate it from the ``State`` as an artificial construct?? Don`t you want to re-assert the ``naturalism`` and ``essentialism`` that is so pervasive in religious theologies about Nation and human essenses as ``givens`` of this world created by a metaphysical God?
Please clarify your posuition as a ``secularist``??

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

PS: As for your claim about `UN Nomenclature` ... that is not where the official name comes from... In the UN Nomenclature Pakistan is simply Pakistan and India is simply India. Iran on the other hand is Islamic Republic of ...

http://www.un.org/Overview/unmember.html

Official name is something quite different... India`s official name is Republic of India, though the first article defines it as Union of states. Vajapayee is the Prime Minister of the Republic of India. In the UN he is the Prime Minister of India.

Pakistani constitution`s first article says : `Pakistan shall be a federal Republic to be known as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan`.

Turkish constitution`s first article says: `Turkish state is a Republic` ... henceforth it refers to Turkey as the republic of Turkey... second article says `The Republic of Turkey is a democratic, secular and social state`

---

An aside : The constitution that Ataturk had given to Turkey (1924) actually had a state religion as well that is Islam... In 1928 this was amended at Ataturk`s instructions.. in 1937 secularism was made part of the constituion as a matter of state policy.

Gujjubania

Pyaray Betay... you spoke of GDP/Capita first and there is the difference is extremely small... as for PPP the difference is about 400 dollars ... India is approximately at 2530 and Pakistan is at 2100 after a decade of mismanagement.

The truth in real terms is very different.... because of the PPP poverty line is also different in Pakistan... and it often forgotten by these statistics churners that along the class divide needs are different ... which means in very real terms at a large percentage of those 34% of Pakistan`s poor are significantly better off than the 27% of the Indian poor.

So before you start attacking us why don`t you first come up with a creative solution to help those 300 million of your citizens who live on a subsistence level of less than a dollar a day.

I am sure it is a great achievment for a country 10 times our population to have an economy 10 times as large... Hats off to India.


Ballu Khan,

We the `secular fanatics` (as Romair likes to call a bunch of us) have been having this debate with him since 2001... I think I know a little better than you what he means. My purpose for bringing up the official name issue was that while we secularists only want to create a simple `Republic of Pakistan` ... the Islamist or Muslim minded people already have managed to call it the `Islamic Republic of Pakistan`. Anyway its clear from my post that I am talking about the official name.

The first time I read the Turkish constitution was in early 2000 and I quoted it on chowk extensively because I am and will always be a Kemalist at heart... I know enough to know that the word used there `Laicete` goes beyond simple secularism but also allows state supremacy and control over the church. It is also one of the 6 arrows of Kemalism which is the state ideology of Turkey.

In my letters in Pakistani newspapers I have often referred to the Indian constitution as the superior constitution ... I first read the Indian constitution as part of my research for the `Economics of India ` class that I took at Rutgers...then I read more about it as part of my research on perhaps the greatest man produced by your country i.e. Dr. Ambedkar.

I was well aware of the quotes your put up.

-YLH

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

I reproduce you words YLH--

``#92 by Mantolives on February 2, 2004 10:22pm PT
Romair,

``Secular Republic of Pakistan``

Do you know of any `secular` state which calls itself `Secular Republic`... name any secular state which has the word secular in it.

When you make a state secular you simply take religion out of governance... are Hindus in India not Hindu? Are Christians in America not christian? Are Muslims in Turkey and Tunisia not Muslim?

People and nations are not secular... states are ... Turks are a Muslim nation but their state is secular...

-YLH ````

Tell me now where did the ``Official Name`` figure in. Romair was talking about the ``State`` which obviously is ``constituted`` by its constitution and the Acts and Rules thereof- the Preamble being the defining characteristic of any Nation-State`s constitution and not its ``Official Name`` which is a UN desgination mainly for international nomenclature purposes. So stop indulging in semantics and being intellectually dishonest . I can see that you obviously require more education - how about starting with Rawls, Hayek , Habermas.... I can give you a list which you actually require to read if you think you have mastered you Pak Study books.

Whereas It is heartening to note that you have the honesty to admit that like me, you too, include yourself among the class which is responsible for the mess we have created for the noble and God-fearing Pakistanis.

The others still have to be shown this light. The crows who think they look like swans (attire) and sing like nightingales (accent).

Please answer this so that a burden is lifted off your shoulders and you can go to sleep.
Does ANYONE has the answer? No wonder you guys don`t like the face in the mirror.

---

#55 by echoboom on January 31, 2004 3:39pm PT
This being Madressa board.
Reprodued from Omar Qureishi board, where it awaited unanswered.

For F.R.Khan in particular:

Name EVEN ONE student from such schools pre or post-partition who has been an achiever in ANY field. Jobs, titles, and positions, and life-styles are NOT achievements

---

#67 by echoboom on January 29, 2004 12:24pm PT
FerozeK:64

Your frustration and depression is understandabe. Still fiercely guarding american-accent?
Ears cocked to whatever is happening in Dixie? Still avoiding masjids and maulanaas.

Worry not. You WILL be re-nativised (assimilated? mainstreamed?) alongwith other english-accent-schools ( I wish I could call them madrassas but that would be elevating their status).

Name ONE student from such schools pre or post-partition who has been an achiever in ANY field. Jobs, titles, and positions, and life-styles are NOT achievements.

Let me elaborate Shaukat Aziz vs Agha Hasan Abadi.(madressa)--(you get the drift?)

now more from maktab and madrassas: abdul salaam, Quadeer Khan, Dr. Ali Rajput, abdul sattar edhi, Faiz, Iqbal, Pitras , Quasmi, Manto etc etc (you keep thinking of many others in ANY field and give me just ONE name) who is from accented-schools who can match them)

How does it feel to be in the gutter now. Yes I am in that gutter of the colonised-culture and that is THE issue here.

Ferozek #101: ``but there others in Pakistan who still think they have the all solutions and they force those solutions down upon us. It is those people I blame. ``

Yes, this is my whole point. This is the group that should be blamed. This is the group that you and I belong to. And I would agree with you if you state that this is the group that is confused. However, this group does not define what Pakistan is.

However, from your initial comments, I got the impression that you were highlighting the fact that all of Pakistan is confused about its creation and their reasons from being there. Not just this group (which by the way isn`t confused either; it just needs to keep bringing up issues, which strengthen its positions, furthur).

Perhaps I misunderstood your initial comments.

Gujju Bania...

Yes we are well aware that finally after 50 or so years your amazing Land India has finally exceeded Pakistan`s per capita by 10 or so dollars.... and on the HDI it has finally over shot Pakistan by 10 places. What is India`s current ranking after years of `progress`? 128? 120..
And now only 300 million or so Indians live on an income of less than a dollar a day.

That is no doubt quite an achievement for the Indians.

-YLH

PS: I don`t like getting into these stupid India-Pakistan matches ... like Arundhati Roy put it ... our comparison and rivalry is like that of the two poorest communities in a village...

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

Ferozek,

Agreed with most of your last post addressed to me. If you recall I am the one who has been arguing for the longest time that Pakistan had more than just communal reasons for creation... for eg read my article `Muslim League`s Politics 1937-1947`... I am also saying the same thing... i.e. TNT is not solely based on religion, nor is Pakistan solely based on TNT.. so I don`t see a point of dispute . FYI I didn`t say that TNT was right either.. I said it was an imagined concept... so it was right for those who believed in it ...

The point which really busted my balls was the law of diminishing returns.


Gujjubania,

I am glad you think I am a nice chap.... you in my opinion are a horrible and disgusting human being. I am sticking it out here... so keep prophesizing doom... lies don`t stand for ever...

-YLH

Ballu Khan,

I know you are not proficient in English language but atleast try and keep up with the context. I am well aware of the constitution of Turkey ... I was talking about the official name.. it was in context of Romair`s repeated complaint that secularism requires calling the state `Secular Republic`. The same goes for India... Last time I checked the official name of India was not `Secular Socialist Republic`. Ofcourse some one as idiotic as you would hardly know the difference between `Features` of a constituion vs its official name...example:

Official Name : Republic of India
Salient features of the constution: Federal, secular, democratic, socialist

Official Name: Islamic Republic of Pakistan
Salient features of the constitution: Federal, Islamic , Democratic

Official Name: Republic of Turkey
Salient Features of the constitution: Unitary, Secular, Republican Parliamentary democracy



So Grow up read more and then come debate with me... till then remain busy with your stupid fantasies of imperial exploitation and the great Independence struggle.


-YLH

re: Romair # 100

Romair; the blame rests with the military, feudals, the rich industrial elites, urban educated Pakistanis, the bureacracy and in general, who ever had much given to them, but did not give to the poor what was expected from them. I do not believe in the facist dictum that the victim is responsible for the crime and such, why would I blame the poor of Pakistan?

I am as much as a part of the problem and given my status in Pakistani society, I have been a disappointment and I know this and I admit this openly, but there others in Pakistan who still think they have the all solutions and they force those solutions down upon us. It is those people I blame.

Ciao

Ferozek #96: ``Who do you think that I am blaming? Also, when did you become such a populist?``

I don`t think you are blaming anyone. However, it does seem like you are pointing to the people of Pakistan, and stating that they are confused about their identity, i.e. they don`t know what they want, why they are in Pakistan, which direction to take it, why it was created, etc.

And the point I am making is that they, like most human beings, so know what they want. It is evident from talking to them, from surveys, from their immigration patterns. They want to achieve the first two levels on Maslow`s hierarchy, which primarily revolve around security and economics (food).

As they try to struggle for that, the few amongst them, who have power, continually try to wrap the country up in pieces of paper and in theories, which on one day describe it as religious, the next day secular, the third day cultural and the fourth day ethnic.

A slightly larger group, which does not have direct political power, but has its economic needs taken care of independenly of Pakistan (a group that nearly all Chowk wallahs belong to) tries to evaluate Pakistan by looking at these pieces of paper. They do this because this is what they have been trained to do under the Western system of education, they have been brought up under. And because on the social hierarchy of Pakistan, they are far closer to the politically powerful group, then to the average Pakistani - who is basically an uneducated farmer working in rural areas.

Since they see a lot of confusion in the Constitutions and the Theories and the Legal Systems, much of which revolves around religion and ethnicity, they automatically assume that everyone in Pakistan is confused about its identity.

What they should realize is that there is no confusion. The common Pakistani wants economics, not Constiutions. He is not in Pakistan because of Theories, but because based on the options he has access to, this is the best one. He does not have the luxury to study Ghaznavi, Ghauri or even Jinnah. In fact, he does not have the luxury to study at all. Hence his views are formulated by his immediate economic needs.

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

living the TNT,

There is agitation now by the ruling party to ban kite flying because it is a hindu custom and should be banned. There are thousands donating a few paise to the collection boxes in every shops so that jihadis could kill kafirs, per the dictates of TNT. In every mosque there is call for jihad and millions throng to them and listen, because it upholds pak creation of TNT. A few millions go to lasker meetings to hear about the killings of kafirs, to relive the acheivements of TNT.

re: Yasser # 88

The power went off and I was on the UPS. This is a follow up to my earlier post.

I have not made any U-turns. Starting from interact # 40 or around there, when this whole issue of TNT cropped up, the article I wrote talked about a need to re-examine the educational system in Pakistan and how the educational system was malfunctioning. There were a couple of posts, which talked about TNT and its influence on the Pakistani educational system and my argument, was that it (TNT in the historic context of Pakistan) needs to be examined.

History and the study of history forces us to be objective and review the past events in light of new thinkings and new experiences. History has to be continually re-examined and questioned. This can be also called revisonism, but by questioning and trying to understand events in different contexts, our awareness and understanding and knowledge also increases. Sadly, history and its lessons in Pakistan are not open to question and we teach history by forcing our student to memorize dates and acts of famous personalities and then vomit them as their exam answers. The inability to question history creates a historic dogma. TNT in Pakistan is a dogma. It is not open to question.

I was advocating that it should be questioned and you were defending it by saying that there was nothing wrong with TNT. I rejected TNT, because an objective reading of history suggests that there were more reasons to TNT and its claim can not be solely based on religion, as it is being taught and made to understand in Pakistan presently. I was arguing that TNT should be explained with all its nuances and not just as a religious reason for Pakistan. You seemed to object to that idea and argued other reasons for TNT than just religion. That is what I had been screaming all along but you never seemed to understand that point of logic. I have and had in fact, never changed the arguments, and it seemed to you that I had, because you were not willing to listen to what I had to say and you assumed, as you always do, when Pakistan is concerned that you a have monoploy to defend the honor and virtue of Pakistan.

Yasser, let tell you something quite honestly. You claim that you respect my opinions and in all opinions there will a healthy amount of disagreement between us. That is only natural and I accept that fact. In all honesty, I am not interested that people value or respect my opinions as much as I am that they tolerate and are willing to listen to what I have to say. I have bitterly disagreed with Romair, but he has been more than generous in listening to what I had to say unlike you, who were ready to judge and condemn me because I dared to disagree with you. The judgement of a person is not that his/her opinions are valued and respected by his/her peers, but that they tolerate the opinions of those, with whom they disagree.

Debates on issues on Chowk are nothing more than academic non-sense and they will not settle any outstanding issues of our time and they should not be approached in a personal manner, as if your worth as person will be judged if you win or lose an agrument on Chowk. We indulge in these debates for fun and as a trival pursuit and not to win or lose personal or national battles of honor. Since I am being honest and I hope you are not offened, please let me tell you that you have streak of being ``more catholic than the pope`` and you need to tamper that passion and develope a tolerance to hear dissenting views, no matter how idiotic you consider them because even idiots and morons have a point of view!

For your own information, I taught Pakistan Studies for two and half years at Aitchsion College and I was utterly disgusted by what was being taught. I stopped teaching from pre-scribed texts and used my own notes and reference materials to teach the students about history. I discussed the issue with the principle of Aitchison before hand and he gave me the permission to teach and ``make the boys understand`` and I did so ignoring the government provided texts. I was called anti-Pakistan and other assorted names by my own students when I challenged them to defend their historic believes, but I did teach them history and not fairy tales. My job, atleast how I see it, is to make my students understand and if that means I make them question everything, then it is my responsibility to force them to question and to develop skeptism and teach them that as far as education and knowledge are concerned, there are no holy cows in the temples, masjids and gurdwaras of knowledge.

Ciao

re: Romair

Who do you think that I am blaming? Also, when did you become such a populist?

Ciao

re Yasser

I have not made any U-turns. You assumed a point of view and refused to listen to me; you had already judged me.

Ciao

YLH-

You know soooo little of India!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is what the Preamble to the Indian Constitution says in explicit terms- ``...Secular Democratic Republic..``


PREAMBLE
We the people of India, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic and to secure to all its citizens : Justice, social, economic and political; Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; Equality of status and of opportunity; and to promote among them all Fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation; in our constituent assembly this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949, do hereby adopt, enact and give to ourselves this Constitution.``

What about Turkey with muslim majority???

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY


PREAMBLE (As amended on October 17, 2001)


PART ONE

GENERAL PRINCIPLES

I. Form of the State

ARTICLE 1. The Turkish state is a Republic.

II. Characteristics of the Republic

ARTICLE 2. The Republic of Turkey is a democratic, SECULAR and social state governed by the rule of law; bearing in mind the concepts of public peace, national solidarity and justice; respecting human rights; loyal to the nationalism of Atatürk, and based on the fundamental tenets set forth in the Preamble.

Romair,

``Secular Republic of Pakistan``

Do you know of any `secular` state which calls itself `Secular Republic`... name any secular state which has the word secular in it.

When you make a state secular you simply take religion out of governance... are Hindus in India not Hindu? Are Christians in America not christian? Are Muslims in Turkey and Tunisia not Muslim?

People and nations are not secular... states are ... Turks are a Muslim nation but their state is secular...

-YLH

Feroze wrote:

[I am saying that Pakistanis have to admit the truth that this nation was not created in the name of Islam. We have to stop harking to religion and using it as cause of this nation`s existence.]

It`s unavoidable. At the root of the Pakistan movement was Muslim anxiety of being dominated, and possibly politically and economically marginalized, by the Hindu majority. Whether or not this view was merited is another discussion, however the thing to note is that it was a Muslim anxiety. True, far from an Islamist vision - however not exactly the shared concerns of an otherwise unrelated group of people.

So although the movement for the creation of Pakistan was not ideologically Islamic (i.e. it was not an `Islamist` movement), it was a movement that addressed the (manufactured?) concerns of the Islamic community. It may be tempting to say ``Muslim`` community, implying the existence of a secular-Muslim identity - however that runs the risk of intellectually dishonesty. How far would Jinnah have gotten with Pakistan if he had consistently made it clear that although the state was for Muslims, Islam would have no place in it? This, to the extent that laws could be passed that would be fundamentally hostile to Islamic tenants. Would that concept have even been sensible to the Muslim populous?

Pakistan, was about addressing the secular concerns of a religious minority. Why this is simply being dismissed as a matter of ``economics`` is confusing to me. I agree that the Zia-style ``Islamified`` version of history has to be challenged. However, trying to downplay the role of religion in the creation of Pakistan is absurd. From what I understand, Pakistan was meant to be a ``modern`` state with an ``Islamic`` character. What that means is ambiguous, and to some possibly contradictory. I propose that it`s best left to the people of Pakistan to resolve any confusion on this matter, and not the historians or a handful of other academics.

#83 by ferozk on February 2, 2004 6:14am PT
I have seen these arguments, in its various shades told umpteen times- to the point of it losing its credulity.
TNT is unacceptable in any form- it was a product of Imerialist policy of divide and rule which our Indian Elites learnt well from their British friends. So forget it now and concentrate on your future living (Oh! I just lost these 30 seconds of my future thinking about the past wrongs).
Remember, living in the 21st century is about globalization- sharing and exchanging your ideas, thoughts, imaginations, inventions, skills, goods and services in a more integrated way- It is about living freely like ``human beings`` in a world unbounded by technology. It is not about creating hovels to fight imaginary ``enemies`` with TNT. We must try to integrate with the world than churn out reasons for why we should not!

Ferozek #84: ``My disagreement is that we do not claim TNT on economic grounds but on religion.``

This is what I have been trying to explain to you, and this is where I disagree with you.

Talk to the person, do not look at the driver`s licences that the govt. has issued to him. If his name is backwards on the drivers` license, if his adress is wrong, if his picture is upside down, it does not indicate a confusion in his mind. The confusion is only in the mind of the authority that is passing out the drivers` licenses.

His TNT is based on avoiding economic persecution based on his religion. The govt of the time`s TNT is what you are describing it to be.

Blame the lawyers and political scientists who came up with irrelevant Constituions and theories. Call them confused. Why blame the individual. He knows exactly what he is, who he is, and why he is in Pakistan (or outside it). It is all economics and that is the identity of Pakistan.

You will not find this identity by looking at Constitutions and at TNTs and at legal systems. These are all created and defined by a few members of the elite, and imposed on the country. I doubt most poeple are too bothered by them, one way or the other.

If today someone declares Pakistan`s to be Secular Republic of Pakistan, officially. Will everyone wake up tomorrow morning and become secular. If tomorrow someone declares it to be Islamic Republic, will everyone`s identities and belief systems completely change. I doubt it. Had Zia been a flaming liberal like Musharraf, would Pakistan have had a Shariah Court. Had Bhutto been an Ahmedi, would Ahmedis been non-Muslims? All actions and defintions defined on the personal whims of the ruling elite.

So, once again, identities in countries like Pakistan, where people have so little input into Consitutions and Theories cannot be defined by those Constitutions and Theories. Thus, the reason you cannot find the identity is because you are looking in the wrong place. Not because it does not exist.

Rozaiba,

I am glad you have read Mera Sahib and like it. It is in my opinion the best tribute to the life of Jinnah... Manto presents him as a man with immense inner strength, a lot of character and brilliance ... this was perhaps the first piece to actually touch the human side of the man. While I know that it is possible to admire Jinnah while being neutral or even anti-partition, but still having read Manto`s other works I don`t find him to have an opinion on the politics of partition. Like any sensitive man he was moved by human suffering though and that is what Toba Tek Singh is about.

Ralph,

I agree with you that Pakistan doesn`t need TNT to define itself... it exists. TNT should have been retired the day Pakistan was created. However TNT was not a combination of `Islamism` +`nationalism`... Islamism seeks to create an Islamic theocracy... those adhering to that world view were actually against the creation of Pakistan and were against the TNT. That is precisely why I requested all our Indian friends to read up on it first.

Please read NHK`s #38 for a more eloquent answer.


Ferozk,

I maintain that you can`t make generalizations about imagined concepts. TNT was a reality for those who believed in it in Pre-partition times. As for Pakistan... TNT logically should be completely and totally irrelevant. It is a nation made up of many subnational groups as well as many non-muslims... it certainly is no home for only muslims... it should be based on the principle of `Pakistani regardless of religion caste or creed.`

Also please acknowledge that you have taken a U turn in your argument.

-YLH

Understanding TNT

Pakistan doesn`t need TNT to justify its existence. It exists. That should be enough.

Why TNT hurts Pakistan?

TNT is best represented by Romair on Chowk (or his earlier soulmate hobbyty). If you are willing to believe in him, you will have a whole new world created for you. You can live in this fantasy world, completely satisfied, for as long as there is air in this bubble. Not many people outside this Romair-created world will find anything you say or do credible. That will not shake your faith, because the basic premise of this world is that you can always blame outsiders for being either anti-Pakistan or anti-Islam, or both.

This is what TNT does. It combines Islamism with nationalism. It then allows Islamists the pretence of being nationalists and vice-versa. Within the world of TNT, for people like Romair, this Islamist-nationalist transition is natural and smooth. Outside of it, it can only lead to confusion and constant chasing of chimeras. Within, the natural allies of Pakistani nationalists are Islamists. Outside, the natural allies of Pakistani nationalists are secularists. This TNT created spliting of the progressive Pakistani mind can`t be good for Pakistan.

institutionalisation of TNT,

The legalised marginalisation of ahmadias, the seperate electorates ( stll exists for local elections), blasphemy laws, jihadists fanning out to kashmir, chechniya.., the banning of basant, turning of blind eye to the killing of shias are the institutionalisation of TNT in pakistan. Essence of all this is that muslims cannot live with believers of other religions.

Pakistan since its creation has definitely moved in this direction and any move in this direction has been accepted and never reversed by any of the subsequent rulers. In fact it was fatyher bhutto who declared ahmadias as non-muslims and made a definite move in the TNt direction, only to be stregthened by zia.

Mantolives:

Though a work of fiction, the symbolisms and criticisms of partition in ‘Toba Tek Singh’- despite being from a ‘human interest’ point of view- were obvious. No one needs to ‘twist and turn’ what was being said in that story. I’ve often seen Pakistanis get irked by the consistent theme of that story that the only fools in the story were those dividing up the subcontinent.

Yes, ‘Mera Sahib’ was an excellent story and I greatly enjoyed it. Manto gave life to Jinnah in that story- something no one else has done since (until that is the movie ‘Jinnah’).

“and it doesn`t say much about you to compare a non-fiction work like `Sole Spokesman` to a work of fiction clearly open to interpretation beyond what was thought out by the author.”

Yes, fictional works are always more interesting and relevant (despite what it may say about me).

“I suppose the bug to be liberal has bit you too... the road to liberalism doesnot necessarily pass through New Dehli.”

I think I`ve always been liberal. It is again the result of being over-awed by liberal/leftist writers/poets (are there any significant right-wing writers or poets? Maududi don’t count). I wish Pakistan had more fanatic liberals… similar to Jinnah.

Cheers!

re: romair # 76

Romair, if economics and economic needs define Pakistan then I can understand that point of view. I can understand that the average person in Pakistan is not interested in anything other than where his next meal is coming from or whether he will have the means to pay his bills. I can understand economically, the Muslims of India might be better off in Pakistan than in India and that argument is open to debate. I have no grudge against the above explantions.

My objection is that we do not admit these things nationally and when we celebrate the August 14 each year, we do so on other arguments which have nothing to do with economics. The real reasons for Pakistan were that the Muslims of India could not compete with the Hindu majority economically and wanted to create their own independent state, where their economic interests might be protected. The Muslims, of their own actions, chose not assmilate politically and opted to maintain an exclusive existence and then when it became difficult for them to gain their political rights and in this, I blame the Congress for its stubborness, they opted for a seperate home land.

If there is a basis for TNT, its mostly on economic grounds and in that I agree with you. My disagreement is that we do not claim TNT on economic grounds but on religion. The seperation of Bangladesh on economic grounds proved the flaw or draw backs in TNT as justified under religion. As to history books and constitutions, they keep repeating the lies and keep claiming a mistaken view of history of pre-1947 India.

Ciao

re:Yasser # 69

Yasser, lets keep this simple. If Pakistan had nothing to do with religion then why do we keep harping about and keep justifying everything on religion since 1947? TNT as it is taught in Pakistan today is centric towards a religious view point and its justification resides in religion.

In case you missed the reasons for this flare up, I am saying that Pakistanis have to admit the truth that this nation was not created in the name of Islam. We have to stop harking to religion and using it as cause of this nation`s existence. We are not admiting the truth. We keep telling lies and keep pretending to believe our own mythology. As far as Islam is concerned, it is the only idea which is used for 1947 and without it, what was the basis for 1947? The reality is if we do not admit to religion, then we have to admit to the real causes for 1947 and we are not prepared to do that, because the lies we have created since 1947 are too powerful to be refuted.

My concepts are clear. I do not accept the Two Nation Theory. This does not mean that Pakistan will cease to exist as you seem to think if TNT is not believed, but simply that in order to justify TNT, we have corrupted our history and made a lie out of it. That is what I am objecting to.

Ciao

My Sahib
Godot



An English translation of Saadat Hasan Manto’s ‘Mera Sahib’





“It happened in 1937. The Muslim League was in its juvenility. I, too, was a young man. I wanted to do something. Anything. Besides, I was healthy and strong, and wanted to engage in a rumble. I wanted to look for trouble and pick fights. I was at an age when one longs to do something. By something, I mean to say, if not a great adventure than something!

“After this brief intro I return to the time when Ghalib was young. Don’t know if he ever participated in any political movements or not, but Yours Truly was a very active member of the Muslim League. Ghazi Corps was comprised of youths like me, and I was a sincere member of it. I stress ‘sincere’ because in those days I had nothing else.

“It was in those times that Mohammad Ali Jinnah came to Delhi. The Muslims took out a huge and a wonderful procession in his honor. Obviously, Ghazi Corps participated in this procession with full vigor. Our leader was Anwar Qureshi sahib. He was a strong young man who has been given an honor of, and is now known as, ‘Poet of Pakistan’. Our Corps’ youths were singing an anthem written by him. I don’t know if we sang in tune with each other or not, the only thing I remember is nobody cared about singing in synch.

“This historical procession started from Delhi’s historical Jamia Masjid and, roaring, passed through Chandni Chowk, Lal Kewan, Hoz Qazi, and Chawri Bazar and ended at its destination, meaning at the Muslim League office. In this historical procession people yelled “Qaid-e-Azam,” which was considered illegal, for Mohammad Ali Jinnah. A six-horse coach was provided for him. All members of Muslim League were there in this procession. There were lots of cars, motorcycles, bi-cycles and camels. But it was exceedingly well organized. Qaid-e-Azam, who by nature was a very civil and organized person, seemed very pleased to see such civility.

“I caught many of his glimpses. I don’t know my reaction the first time I saw him. Now, when I think about it and analyze it I conclude that, because sincerity is colorless, my reaction too was colorless. At that time if someone had pointed me to any man and had said ‘there is your Qaid-e-Azam,’ my adoration would have believed him. But when I saw him many times there in that crowd of people and cars, my ego was hurt: my Leader and so skinny…such a weakling! Ghalib has said: He comes to my house God blesses / Sometimes I look at him and sometimes I look at my house.

“It was his kindness and God’s blessing that he came to our house. I swear to God when I saw him and his frail body and then my strong physique, I wished either I contract or he expands. In the heart of my heart, to keep him safe from evil eye, I had prayed for him and his feeble body. The wounds he had inflicted were a common topic among his enemies.

“Circumstances change. Situation arose such that the art bug that was sleeping in me started to crawl. I felt like testing my kismet in Bombay in that field. I was attracted to drama ever since I was a kid. I figured maybe there I could show off my skills. Now, on one hand a desire to work for the nation and on the other, acting! A man is weirdly contradictory!

“I arrived in Bombay. In those days Imperial Film Company was at the top. It was difficult to get in, but somehow I got in. I worked as an extra for eight anas a day, and used to dream that I will be a top movie star one day. With God’s blessings, I am very talkative. I am not a very pleasant talker, but I am not that unpleasant either. Urdu is my mother tongue, a language the stars of Imperial Films did not know. Urdu helped me out more so in Bombay than it did in Delhi. Almost all the stars there had me read and write letters in response to those that came to them in Urdu. All this reading and writing for them did not help me, though. I was an extra and remained an extra.

“During this time I became friends with Buddhan, the very special driver of Saith Ardesher Irani, the owner of Imperial Film Company. Buddhan paid back my friendship with him by teaching me to drive a car in his free time. But his free times were brief, and I was always scared of the Saith lest he finds it out. I never really became a skillful driver. Without Buddhan I could drive the Buick on an alif-like straight road. My knowledge about the parts of the car, however, remained zero.

“I was obsessed with acting. But that was in my head. My heart still belonged to the Muslim League and Qaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah. At Imperial Film Company, on the Kennedy Bridge, in the Bhindi Bazar, on the Mohammad Ali Road, and at the Play House, we used to have a discussion, with groups of mostly Muslims, about the behavior of the Congress. Everyone at Imperial knew that I was a Muslim Leaguey and adored Qaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah. But it was a time when Hindus did not try to kill anyone who uttered the word “Qaid-e-Azam.” Pakistan was not yet on the horizon. I think when people at Imperial Film Company heard me praise Qaid-e-Azam they thought he was a film star and I was a fan of his. That is why one day the biggest film hero D. Blemoria said to me, ‘hey, here’s your Jinnah sahib,’ while moving Times of India towards me. I thought there was a picture of him in the newspaper. But I didn’t see it. So I said, ‘why, bhaiya, where is his picture?’ Blemoria’s John Gilbert style thin mustache expanded with a grin, ‘no photo woto, this is an advertisement.’ I asked, ‘Advertisement? What kind of advertisement?’ Blemoria took the paper back and showed me a long column and said, ‘Mr. Jinnah needs a motor mechanic who can take charge of his garage.’ I saw the ad where Blemoria finger was resting and said ‘Oh!’ as if I read the whole ad. The truth is I knew as much English as Blemoria knew Urdu.

“As I already told you, my driving was limited to driving a car on an alif-like straight road. I knew nothing about the mechanism of the car. Why does the engine start when you press the self, if some had asked me that question I would have said that because it is the law of motors; and why it sometimes doesn’t start, then I would have said that is also the law of motors and human intelligence has nothing to do with it!

“You’d be surprised to know that I noted down the address of Jinnah sahib I took from Blemoria and decided to go there the next morning. I neither thought nor expected to get the job. I just wanted to see him in his residence from up close. Therefore, taking my sincerity as a diploma, I arrived at his beautiful mansion, located near the Pleasant Road, on the Malabar Hill. Outside was a Pathan guard. He was wearing an enormous shalwar and a silk turban, was very clean, strong, and intimidating. His appearance made me very happy. I felt strangely satisfied that there was not much difference in his and my biceps, maybe of half-an-inch or so.

“There were many candidates. They were all standing with their credentials under their arms. I joined them. The funny thing was, forget about the credentials, I didn’t even have a simple driving license. My heart was beating hard just thinking I am about to meet Qaid-e-Azam any moment. I was still thinking about my heartbeat when Qaid-e-Azam appeared in the porch. Everybody turned attention. I moved to the side. With him was his tall and skinny sister whose pictures I had seen in many newspapers and magazines. On the side was his respectful assistant.

“Jinnah sahib fitted his one-glass round eyeglass on his eye and started to scrutinize the candidates. When his eye turned to me, I moved back further. Immediately his piercing voice was loudly heard, but I only heard “You.” I knew that much English. It meant “Tum.” But who was that “Tum” that he addressed? I thought it was the guy next to me, so nudging him I said, ‘I think he’s calling you.’ The guy asked hopefully, ‘me, sahib?’ Qaid-e-Azam said again, ‘No. Tum.’ His skinny but iron-like strong finger was pointing at me. My whole body trembled, ‘Ji, ji, me?’ ‘Yes.’ This three-knot-three bullet ripped through my heart and brain. My throat, which used to yell “Qaid-e-Azam,” was completely dry. I couldn’t say anything. But when he took off his monocle and said “All right,” I felt I might have said something that he heard, or he understood my feelings and said “All right” just to save me from further torture. He turned around and said something to his very handsome and healthy secretary and went inside with his sister. Totally confused, as I hurried to get out of there his assistant called me and said that the Sahib wants me present at ten o’clock tomorrow morning. I couldn’t ask the assistant why the Sahib wanted me; I couldn’t tell him that I was not at all capable and not qualified for the job for which Qaid-e-Azam put out an ad. The assistant went inside and I returned home.

“I was there again at ten the next morning. When informed I was there, the handsome and very well dressed secretary came out and, to my surprise, told me that the Sahib had selected me and wants me to take charge of the garage immediately. When I heard this I felt like spilling my guts and tell him that Qaid-e-Azam had misunderstood Yours Truly, and that I showed-up just to have a little fun; why are you putting this garage responsibility on these incompetent shoulders. But I don’t know why I couldn’t say all that. As a result, I was immediately given that responsibility and the keys were handed to me. There were four cars of different makes, and I only knew how to drive Saith Ardesher Irani’s Buick, and on an alif-like straight road at that. There were many turns to get to Malabar Hill, and Azad was going to carry not only his own self in the car. God knows how many different places for important work he had to carry this Leader to whom belonged lakhs of Muslims lives.

“I thought of dropping the keys and running away; run straight to my house, pick up my stuff, and catch the first train to Delhi. But I didn’t think this was the right thing to do. I figured tell the truth to Jinnah sahib, apologize to him, and return to the place where I really belonged. But trust me, sir, I did not get a chance to do this for the next six months.”

“How so?” I asked.

Mohammad Hanif Azad continued, “Listen to this now. The very next day I was ordered to bring the car. Those things that fly at times like these, almost flew. I decided that the moment the Sahib comes, I’d say salam to him, return the keys, and fall at his feet. But it couldn’t happen. When he came to the porch, I was so intimidated by him that the incompetent me couldn’t utter a word. Besides, Fatima sahiba was with him. To fall into someone’s feet in the presence of a woman, Manto sahib, was too much.”

I saw bashfulness in Azad’s big eyes and smiled, “khair, what happened then?”

“What happened then, Manto sahib, is that Yours Truly had to start the car. It was a new Packard. I started the car with the name of Allah, and took it out of the mansion very cleanly. When I got to the bottom of the Malabar Hill near the red light at the corner...you know what a red light is, right?”

“Yes, yes,” I shook my head affirmatively.

“Well, sahib, that became a problem. Master Buddhan had told me to just press the breaks and everything should be alright. In confusion I hit the break with such clumsiness that the car stopped with a sudden jolt. The cigar fell off Qaid-e-Azam’s hands. Fatima Jinnah jumped forward two balisht and started cursing at me. A deep fear seeped through my entire body. My whole body started to tremble. I felt dizzy. Qaid-e-Azam picked up his cigar and said something in English, which probably meant ‘lets go back.’ I obeyed the order. He asked for a new car and a driver and left for where ever he had to go. I did not get to serve him for the next six months after that incident.”

“To serve him like that?” I asked, grinning.

Azad also smiled. “Yes. You figure the Sahib would not give me another chance. There were other drivers. They served him. The assistant told the drivers the night before the car and the driver that were needed the next day. If I’d asked him about me he couldn’t give me a satisfactory answer. I found out later what was in Sahib’s mind. No one could say anything about him with any certainty, nor could ask him about such matters. He spoke only when he had to, and listened only when he needed to. That’s why, although being so close to him, I could not find out why he kept me like a useless car part.”

“It’s possible that he forgot about you,” I said to Azad.

A huge laughter came out of Azad’s throat, “No, sir, no. The Sahib never forgot anything even if he wanted to. He knew very well that Azad is breaking free bread. And, Manto sahib, when Azad breaks bread they are not little bread. Look at this built.”

I looked at Azad. I don’t know what he was like in ‘37 or ’38, but I saw a well built and a strong man sitting in front of me. You must have known him as an actor. Before the Division he worked in many films in Bombay. With his other actor friends he is barely making a living in Lahore these days. I found out last year from a friend of mine that this big-eyes, dark-skinned, well-built actor was a driver to Qaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah for some time. I had been, therefore, eyeing him ever since. Whenever I met him, I brought up the topic of his Master and collected his stories in my head.

With an intention to write this essay, when I listened to his stories yesterday, I saw a very interesting angle to Qaid-e-Azam’s life. What had struck Mohammad Hanif Azad most was that his Master liked physical strength. Just as Allama Iqbal liked those things that were tall and majestic, Qaid-e-Azam liked strong things. That’s why when he picked his servants, their health and physical strength was the first thing he noticed.

In those days, of which Mohammad Hanif Azad talked about, Qaid-e-Azam’s secretary was a very handsome man. All of his drivers had exemplary physical built. The guards for his mansion were also selected based on physical strength. What could be an explanation for this other than that, psychologically, although Late Jinnah was physically very weak but extremely strong from inside, he did not want to associate himself that was weak and feeble. When a person really likes something, he takes care of it real well. Qaid-e-Azam made sure all his well-built servants dressed very well. His Pathan chowkidar was ordered to dress his ethnic dress. Azad was not a Punjabi, but was at times asked to wear a Punjabi turban. This headgear is quite impressive and one looks very impressive in it. Qaid-e-Azam seemed very pleased by it and used to award Azad whenever he put one on. If one thinks about it, Jinnah being so conscious of his own frail body was his very strength of his strong and powerful life. That was evident in the way he walked, talked, ate, and thought.

Mohammad Hanif Azad told me that Qaid-e-Azam ate very little. “He ate so little I wondered how he is alive. If I were forced to eat that little my fat would’ve started to melt the next day. Despite him eating so little, four or five chickens were cooked every day. But he used to eat only a very small cup of a chick’s soup. Fruits were delivered everyday, and lots of it; but all of it used to wind up in the servants’ bellies. Every night after the dinner, the Sahib would check the list of grocery and give me a one-hundred-rupee bill for the next day’s dinner.”

“One hundred rupees everyday?” I asked Azad.

“Yes, sir, exactly one hundred rupees. And the Sahib never asked what happened to it. Whatever remained of it got divided among the servants. Sometimes thirty rupees remained, sometimes forty, and sometimes even sixty or seventy. He must have known that we kept the remainder, but he never asked for it. However, Miss Jinnah was very clever. She used to get mad at us and say we all are thieves. But the way the Sahib treated us we used to think of his things as our own. So we kept quiet when she would lose her temper at us. At times like that the Sahib would say to her sister, ‘It is all right, it is all right,’ and that would be the end of it. But once “It is all right” did not end it. Miss Jinnah kicked the cooks out, not one but both cooks. Qaid-e-Azam had two cooks at the same time, one was an expert in Hindustani food and the other in English food. Usually the Hindustani cook was a waste and did not do anything. He got to cook maybe once in months. Once in a blue moon he would get an order to cook, but Qaid-e-Azam did not really care about that food.

“When both cooks got kicked out,” said Azad, “the Sahib did not say anything. He did not interfere in his sister’s affairs. So he started eating out in restaurants. During this time we had a ball. We would take the car out for hours, hang out, come back and tell them we could not find a cook. Finally, both cooked were asked to come back by Miss Jinnah.”

If a man does not eat much, he either hates those who eat a lot, or feels very happy to see others eat a lot. Qaid-e-Azam ate very little but he was very happy to see others eat a lot. That’s the reason he used to hand out one hundred rupees everyday and forget about it. It doesn’t mean he was a spendthrift. Mohammad Hanif Azad recounts an interesting incident.

“One evening in 1939, by the Warli Beach, I was driving the white Packard very slowly with the Sahib in it. The low waves were touching the shore gently. It was a beautiful but slightly chilly evening. The Sahib was in a really good mood. I took advantage of it and started talking about Eid. He knew immediately what I was after. I saw in the rear view mirror he took his never-separating cigar out of his mouth and, his thin lips smiling, said in a broken Urdu, ‘Well, well, you suddenly have become a Muslim, try to be a little bit Hindu also.” Four days earlier Qaid-e-Azam had turned Azad into a Muslim, meaning that he had given him two hundred rupees as an award. That‘s why he advised Azad to become a little bit Hindu. But that did not affect Azad. In this Eid Azad came to the film producer Syed Murtaza Jilani to affirm his Musalmani when I saw him and further interviewed him for this story.

Qaid-e-Azam’s private life is a mystery and will remain so forever. That is the general feeling. But I think his private life was so mixed-up with his political life that he had practically no private life left. His wife had passed away long time ago and his daughter married a Parsi against his wishes. Mohammad Hanif Azad told me, “The Sahib was in a great shock because of it. He wished his daughter had married a Muslim; the skin color or the ethnic background did not matter to him. His daughter argued that if he could marry to whom ever he wanted, how come he does not grant her the same freedom.”

Qaid-e-Azam had married the daughter of a very influential Parsi man. Everyone knows that. But very few people know the Parsi man was very unhappy about it and sought revenge. Some think he conspired to have Qaid-e-Azam’s daughter marry a Parsi. When I talked to Azad about it he said, “Only Allah knows. I only know that this was the second biggest shock to him after his wife’s death. He was greatly affected when he found out that his daughter married a Parsi. His face was a mirror of his feelings, and reaction to even a simple event could be seen on his face. A simple furrow in his eyebrow could become very scary. What must have gone through his heart, only the Late One could tell. What I found out from the outside sources is that he was very disturbed. He did not meet anyone for fifteen days. He must have smoked hundreds of cigars, and must have paced hundreds of miles in his own room.

“He walked a lot when he was in deep thoughts. In the dead of the night he would pace back and forth on the hard and spotless floor for hours. In calculated steps, from here to there, and there to here, in the measured distance, his white and black, black and white, or white and brown shoes used to make a strange tick tick sound as if a clock is telling the news about its life in a consistent manner. Qaid-e-Azam loved his shoes, perhaps because they were always at his feet and moved according to him.

“After fifteen days of constant mental and spiritual disturbance, he suddenly re-emerged. There was no sign of shock on his face any longer, although the sadness had left a slight wound in his neck. But it was still straight and stiff. It did not mean, however, that he had forgotten the shock.”

When Azad started to talk about this aspect of Qaid-e-Azam’s life a second time, I asked, “How do you know he had not forgotten that shock?”

Azad answered, “Nothing in a house can be hidden from the servants. Sometimes the Sahib would order to open a trunk. In this ship-like trunk were many clothes, of his late wife and of that disobedient daughter when she was a little girl. When those clothes were taken out, the Sahib would look at them with an intense quietness. Then a sudden sadness would cover his thin and very clean face. He would quietly say ‘It is all right, it is all right,’ take off his monocle and, wiping it, would walk away.

According to Mohammad Hanif Azad, “Qaid-e-Azam had three sisters: Fatima Jinnah, Rehmat Jinnah, and I don’t remember the name of the third one who lived in Dongri. At Jopati Corner, near Chinnai Motor Works, lived Rehmat Jinnah. Her husband was employed somewhere. Their income was very modest. Every month the Sahib would give me a sealed envelope that had money in it. He would also give me a parcel that perhaps contained clothes and things. I used to deliver these to Rehmat Jinnah. Miss Fatima Jinnah and the Sahib would pay visit there every once in a while. The sister who lived at Dongri was married. All I know about her is that she was well off and did not need anyone’s help. He had a brother. The Sahib would help him out routinely, but he was not allowed in the Sahib’s house.

“I had seen this brother of Qaid-e-Azam in Bombay. One evening, in a bar, I saw a man, who looked like Qaid-e-Azam, ordering half rum. The same feature, the same backcombed hair, almost the same white striped hair. When I inquired about him I found out that he is the brother of Mr Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Ahmed Ali. I kept looking at him. Sipping it slowly, he finished that half a glass of rum in a royal manner. It cost one rupee, which he paid as if he is paying a huge amount. From his attitude it appeared as if he is sitting at a bar in Taj Mehal Hotel, not in a flimsy and a cheap one. There was a gathering of Muslims just before the historic meeting between Gandhi and Jinnah. I had a number of friends at that gathering. They told me that Jinnah was on the platform giving a speech in his typical style, and far, at a distance, his brother Ahmed Ali, wearing his monocle, was standing in such a way as if he was chewing his brother’s words.

“Billiards was the only indoor game Qaid-e-Azam liked. He would order to open the billiards room when sometimes he felt like playing the game. Although every room was cleaned every day, the servants made sure the special room he ordered to open was very clean and everything in it was set properly before he walked in. Because I played the game a little, I was allowed in that room. Twelve balls would be presented to him, he would select and the game would begin. Miss Fatima Jinnah would stand nearby. The Sahib would light up a cigar, press it between his lips, and would analyze the position of the ball he was going to hit. He would spend many minutes in his analysis. With this angle. With that angle. He would weigh the cue in his hands and move his bony fingers on it as if it were a sarangi, mumble something, and take a position; but if another angle come to his mind, he would stop, think, make sure, hit the ball with the cue, and if successful, would look at his sister with a conquering smile.

“In the game of politics, Qaid-e-Azam was as careful. He would never decide immediately. He would analyze and scrutinize each problem as if it were a billiard ball. He would move his cue to hit only if he was certain. Before he struck, he would weigh his prey with his eyes carefully. He would consider all angles. He would select the weapon according to the size of his opponent. He was not a hunter who would pick up a gun and just shoot. He would make sure not to miss. He would know his prey’s every possible weakness before he aimed.”

According to Azad, “Qaid-e-Azam stayed away from the people who came by just to meet him. He hated useless and senseless talk; but only those talks that mattered, and even that had to be very precise and concise, in both what he had to say and hear. That’s why only a few people were allowed in his special room. There was only one sofa inside the room with a small side table on which he would drop the ashes of his cigar. Across the sofa were two showcases. He kept those Qurans in them that were given to him by his fans. That room contained his personal papers as well, where they were kept safely. He would spend most of his time in that room. There was no table there. If a person was asked in that room, he would stay at the door, listen, and walk out backwards. The empty side of the sofa had his papers all over it. If he wanted to write a letter, he would have the steno come in and take dictation. His tone had certain harshness. When he spoke one felt as if he was putting emphasis on those words that did not need emphasis.”

Judging from Azad’s testimonies, it seems the psychological reason for his harshness was his physical weakness. His life was more like a smooth pond, but he lived a life of a storm. Some people say that it was his inner strength that had him live for that long, that is, his awareness of his own physical weakness.

According to Azad, the Late Bahadur Yar Jung was among Qaid-e-Azam’s best friends. “It was only him with whom he was so frank. Whenever he came to visit, both men would talk about the country and politics like true best friends. At that time, Qaid-e-Azam would separate his outer shell from his inner self. He was the only one with whom the Sahib was so frank and open. One felt as if they were childhood buddies. When they talked to each other, one could hear the loud laughter coming out of the closed doors. Other than Bahadur Yar Jung, other Muslim League leaders, such as Raja Mahmud Abad, I. I. Chundrigarh, Maulana Zahid Husain, Nawabzadah Liaquat Ali Khan, Nawab Ismail, and Ali Imam sahib used to pay visit. But the Sahib dealt with them in a professional manner, not in a frank way reserved for Bahadur Yar Jung.”

“Khan Liaquat Ali Khan must have visited quite often,” I said to Azad.

Said Azad, “Yes, the Sahib treated him as if he were Sahib’s best student. And the Khan sahib listened to him very carefully, obeyed, and carried his orders. When he was asked to pay visit, sometimes he would ask me, ‘Hey, Azad, how’s Sahib’s mood today?’ I would tell him how his mood was. If the Sahib were not in his good mood, every wall in the mansion would know it.

“Qaid-e-Azam took great care in his servants’ character and personal behavior. Just as he hated bodily dirt and smell, he hated bad behavior and character. He liked his assistant very much, but was very irritated when he found out that the assistant was having an affair with an employed girl. He could not tolerate this irritation for long. The assistant was asked to see him, and was fired. But after firing him, the Sahib started treating him as a friend.”

Tells Azad, “Once I came home at two in the morning after having some fun. Those were the days when young blood feels certain pleasure for doing bad things. I thought the Sahib would not know about me coming in so late. But somehow he did. He called me in the next day and said in English, ‘You are developing a bad character.’ Then he said in a broken Urdu, ‘Well, we’ll have you married.’ So, when he went to Bombay from Delhi for a conference, I was married per his instructions. Although I am just a Shaikh, I am fortunate that only because of him I was married in a Sadat Family. The girl’s family accepted me because Azad was a servant of Qaid-e-Azam.”

I suddenly asked Azad a question, “Ever heard Qaid-e-Azam say I am sorry?”

Azad moved his fat neck in negation, “No. Never.” Then he smiled, “If by an accident he uttered the words “I am Sorry,” I’m certain he would’ve erased those words from the dictionary forever.”

I think this spontaneous response of Azad sums up the entire character of Qaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah.

Mohammad Hanif Azad is alive, in this Pakistan given to him by his Qaid-e-Azam. And now, on the map of this world, this Pakistan is struggling to stay alive with the leadership of Jinnah’s best student, Khan Liaquat Ali Khan. In this free country, outside the doors of Punjab Art Pictures, near the paan store, Azad sits on a broken cot and waits for his Master. He also prays for a better time when he would get his salary in time. He is even ready to be a Hindu, as his Master once told him, provided he gets that chance back.

He was very worried when I talked to him about Qaid-e-Azam’s life. He did not have money even for a paan. When I started to make small talks to relieve him from his worries, he sighed and said, “Sahib has died. I wish I had gone on that journey with him. It would be his open white Packard. I would be at the wheel. I would drive the car very slowly to his final destination. His frail body could not tolerate jolts, you know. I’ve heard, Allah knows right or wrong, that when the airplane with him on landed in Karachi, the engine of the ambulance that took him to the Government House was not in good condition. It stopped after going only a short distance. My Sahib must have been so annoyed.”

Azad’s big eyes were full of tears.

Saadat Hassan Manto was largely apolitical in his view on partition... people read too much into his story `Toba Tek Singh`....

How do you explain his laudatory sketch of Jinnah in his `Mera Sahib` ... what would drive him to write that piece? It is often forgotten that this was the only story which portrays the central figure in a favorable light?

I suggest you read some more before you make such sweeping generalizations. And this view of partitioning a land mass ... one : It has nothing to do with Manto who wrote essentially from a Human interest angle.. two: it is pure nonsense. One may ask why Manto leave for Lahore anyway... the truth is that because the state never owned up to Manto because of his libertarian literature, poor Manto has been left to be interpreted by people like you who twist and turn his works to create an absolutist version of partition.

Manto would have been horrified... and it doesn`t say much about you to compare a non-fiction work like `Sole Spokesman` to a work of fiction clearly open to interpretation beyond what was thought out by the author. I suppose the bug to be liberal has bit you too... the road to liberalism doesnot necessarily pass through New Dehli.


Ballu Khan

Grow up now.


-YLH

More obfuscation by YLH- now he utilizes expressions like ``legitimate`` demand of TNT (I must post this to Shabana).
YLH, tell me how I am wrong in stating it as a modern version of TNT (minus any religion!) which can be utilized effectively by my Vadapavlanders?? Please state why my Vadapavlanders cannot demand a new Nations and ask for a ``legitimate`` transfer of power. My Vadapavlanders have been around for thousands of years- they have a distinct eating, farting, puking habits. They share the same ```world view`` and share same daily-weekly-monthly prayers to the Vadapav God. They even have a great constitution and economic policies in offing with the motto of converting the entire world into Vadapaveaters. Tell me how you ``logic`` works (or does not work) for my Vadapavlanders who fear being s@rewed by their Bhelpuriwalas, Biryaniwalas, Sambharwalas majority in the Indian confederation.
I understand all the convoluted historiographies we have here on this board to understand where you actually stand. So forget it!! You mistake your pride in being a PAkistani to require a re-articulation of the stupid TNT theory with its ``naturalism`` and ``essentialism`` .

Always going off topic we are. Saadat Hasan Manto`s short story `Toba Tek Singh` is the BEST source for gaining an understanding about Partition of 1947. All other books- `the emergence of Pakistan`, `sole spokesman` etc. pale in comparison. However, most Pakistanis would be deeply offended by SH Manto`s analogies that all the leaders were fools in trying to partition a landmass.

For today, Pakistan does not need any explanation for why it was created as no one ever feels the need to talk about it`s raison d`etre.

Anyway, I still think English should be primary language of instruction for schools. Simply because the poor consider the knowledge of english as something better than knowing Urdu.

TNT as re-interpreted by Manto is based upon an ``essentialistic view of human solidarity``-(I hope he understands what I mean by that) with a theological ontology of social objects and identities

#72 by Mantolives
//...I am the only one here saying that Pakistan should exist without the aid of theories and ideologies, ...//

Exactly. You are the only one..... Albeit your point is valid: that a state should exist as it is..... But in case of Pakistan, that`s just pure fantasy......The situation as it stands on the ground in present-day Pakistan, precludes such an ideal outcome.

After 56 years of pulling hard in negative direction, Pakistan does need some theories and ideologies....this time some positive ones.

Pakistan is in the middle of very big cesspool. It needs directions/guidance to move to the safe shores. That guidance would come from a positive agenda/ideology.

Ferozek #65: ``Sir, you are not making any sense. I am not entirely certain, what is your point of view. You seem to be confused and in clearing your confusion, you are only contradicting yourself.``

I think there is a huge difference between how you and I view Pakistan. To me, Pakistan is the view and habits, priorities and customs of its people. To you, Pakistan and Pakistanis are Constitutions, History book and Theories (TNT). I am trying to take a very practical view of it situation and identity. You are looking at it totally from a theoretical point of view.

I don`t think there is any contradiction in the minds of the mainstream citizens of Pakistan about why they are in Pakistan, and thus the identity of Pakistan. The contradiction, as I pointed out, only exists in the minds of people who study only theories and Constitutions. For everyone else (perhaps 99% of the country), Pakistan is a place where their economic necessities are being catered for better than they would be in any other option they have.

As I pointed out, it is only on Chowk and air-conditioned living rooms where discussions of the type you are pointing out, take place, to define the identity of Pakistan. Not in normal everyday Pakistan. Over there, it is just economic survival.

Let me take each point one by one:

1) Constitution: How many Pakistanis can even read the Constitution of Pakistan? How many have read it? How many actually care about it? How many know what it is? It is not like the USA, where everyone has enough time (and money) to study every amendment.

I can make a bet that 90% of the country, if not more, doesn`t care one way or the other about the Constitution. It behaves the same way, in its daily life, whether there is a Constiution or whether there is a Martial Law.

The criteria by which it judges any govt. is how much improvement the govt. brings to his/her everyday life. For example, it will judge Musharraf`s govt., not by what it did or did not do to the Constitution, but by how many jobs it creates. If this govt. creates millions of jobs, do you really think people will care what the hell it did to the Constitution?

It is a sign that Pakistan is still at a stage where economics need to be satisfied. There is no confusion on this. People will support the govt. which can bring about the best economic uplift, not the one which can author the best Constitution. Only people who have their economics looked after (like you and I) have enough time to discuss Constitutions.

2) History Books: Two-thirds of the population never went to school. So they obviously don`t even know what is in the history book. Out of the remaining, probably only 10% or so got to the level, where they studied history. Out of that, hardly anyone took history and Pak Studies classes seriously in Pakistan. So how many people are being, ``brainwashed`` by history books.

Do go and try to have a discussion with a peasant farmer (easily the profession practiced by most Pakistanis) about whether he is interested in Ghaznavi and Prithviraj, and see what he says. He is interested in how much water his crops are going to get.

3) TNT: This is theory, as the title suggests. It is thrown around, once again, not amongst the average Pakistanis. Everyone knows they are in Pakistan to make a living, not to satisfy some theory. Why do they leave Pakistan for greener pastures, when they can?Wouldn`t they stay in Pakistan, if they believed in theories.

Once again, these are debating points, created for discussions by theorists.

Bangladesh separation was the classical exmaple of how economics works. Bangladeshis separated not because it stopped believing in a theory. They separated because its people felt they were not getting a fair share of the economic growth from West Pakistan. Once again, it was economics. Their breaking away, or the non-migration of all Muslims from India, merely strengthens the fact that economics decides everything.

So if the point you are making were that we need to redo our history books, and that TNT was not based on religion, and that the Constitution contradicts what the people give importance to, then you have a valid point. These changes need to be made.

However, the point you are trying to make is that Pakistanis and Pakistan itself does not have an identity or is confused, based on what is in written by a few professors in the history books, what is written by a few lawyers in a Constitution, or what is written by a few political scientists about TNT.

This point is completely invalid. Pakistan`s identity is not from documents, written by a super-elitist group, to satisfy their own needs and ambitions. Pakistan`s identity is the behavior of the poeple of Pakistan. And their behavior is based on their economic needs. The ones who thought they would be better off in India, stayed there. Those who thought they would be better in separating, formed Bangladesh. The remaining believe in Pakistan. That is their identity.

The only group that is confused are the people who write the Constitutions, and the history books and debate TNTs all the time, i.e the super-elite. Even they are not confused, they are just pushing their agendas, or just want to debate things to satisfy their own curiosities. But you cannot simply extrapolate the wordings of this elite to assume that the whole country does not have an identity and is thus confused. That is a huge jump, with no facts to back it up.

I received my driver`s license from the Ontario govt. In it, they wrote my name backwards, i.e. Raja Umair, instead of Umair Raja. I carry this license around all day. Now does this mean that I am a confused person? Do I not know what my own name and identity is, since I live with an important document that has my name backwards?

Is it the license that defines who I am, or do I define myself, based on what I think my name to be? Does the backward spelling of my name define a confusion in me, or a confusion in the govt. elite who created the license for me?

The fact is that I know exactly who I am and what my name is. And when someone asks, I tell them. If they ask to see my name on my license, I show it them, and explain to them, that the govt. is confused, not me.

Similarly, the people of Pakistan know exactly why they are in Pakistan, and that is thus their identity. If you want to understand that identity, then look at the people. For some reason, you and a few others, keep trying to define that identity, by looking at their drivers` licenses. If their name is backwards on their drivers` license , that does not mean they are confused. It means that the govt. elites who made the drivers` license are confused.

I am thus asking you to define the people by their actions and what they say. You keep basing all your arguments on what their drivers licenses say (in this case Constitution, history books, TNTs etc.).

PS: But while you have quoted examples of it, you haven`t shown how they are destructive.

Mohar 11

Agreed

#70 by Mantolives
///....I am beginning to feel most people discussing TNT haven`t made an effort to understand the concept first. ///

On the otherhand - that`s exactly what I have done - I have understood the concept of TNT. That`s why I have cited examples (theoritical) both inside and outside the Pakistan ( e.g. blacks in USA ) to show that TNT as a legitimate tool for minorities is dangerous and destructive.

I hope you are reading my posts. I have NOT equated TNT to Pakistan, Islam or Sharia.

It is quite clear that Ballu Khan is not gifted when it comes to English comprehension. Now it is back to petty insults and no real logic. These are typical scare tactics of the fanatical Pakistan bashers... I think people know me enough to know where I stand. I am the only one here saying that Pakistan should exist without the aid of theories and ideologies, and that the two nation theory is irrelevant to modern Pakistan. A Pakistani in my estimate is any citizen of Pakistan regardless of religion caste or creed.

As for Indian Muslims... maybe that might be the end result... or maybe this time around the majority will come to its senses and assuage their fears as the citizens of a Multicultural state ... in any event I don`t give a damn.

HA! I can see YLH getting support from those who want theocracy to be practised in its full spirit in the 21 st century Pakistan. So YLH is the chief ideologue of the modern day TNT- this time clothed in another enticing discourse. And the irony of it- He is willing to let TNT be extended to its ludicurous dimensions.
And the Churchillian test- I do not think it is even worth a second look- it is just one of the white man`s posturing to legitimize the imperialist policy of divide and rule. By this test the Indian muslims are now ready for another round of TNT- And YLH can become the latest ideologue for the power elites who love this game of divide and rule.

66:

In my opinion it is neither wrong nor destructive ... I hope you got the answer in #61.


I am beginning to feel most people discussing TNT haven`t made an effort to understand the concept first. Some are equating it to Pakistan, others with Islam and Pan-Islamism, and others think it means Islamic sharia.

``All I am simply saying is that Pakistan has to admit the truth that its reasons for a seperate homeland for the Muslims of India were based on issues, which had nothing to do with religion. We should admit this truth and teach the population of Pakistan this truism, which will end the confusion for once and all. We as a people are not overtly religious and we are not too keen on the ideals of Islam as practiced in a Middle Eastern context. Our understanding of Islam is based on the historgraphy of Islam as it evolved within the Muslim experience in India and not in Saudi Arabia as most of our diehard compatriots wish and hope.``

Agreed. And I don`t see what I am saying different. Nor do I think you have an understanding of TNT which has nothing to do with religion per se. I can`t believe a lecturer of history like yourself is giving an end all be all verdict about an imagined concept. An imagined concept is never right or wrong but is relative ... if TNT was wrong because it stressed common religious culture, then you call to question most nations. If it was wrong because Bangladesh was created then I think NHK has inadvertently rebutted that in #38 ... in any event you should ask yourself what was the nature of this TNT, did it ask for a separate country as a definite thing, and if it did, did it ask for a confederal nature of the state or more than one Muslim countries??

In any event I will be the first one to say that Pakistan as it was created on August 15th 1947 had nothing to do with the the two nation theory but was a legal transfer of power. In any event Jinnah refuted any arguments for TNT continuing to define nationhood with that first speech and by making a Hindu the law minister of Pakistan clearly symbolizing a paradigm shift. Logically TNT could only exist in a United India and had no rationale after 1947 atleast in Pakistan ... when Shabbana Azmi calls for a separate Muslim `secular` leadership she affirms the existence of TNT in India.


Pakistan DOESNOT need TNT to define itself. It will exist and the law of diminishing return hasn`t set in. Last I checked you were the one questioning it. You were arguing that Pakistan will unravel if Islam is not the binding force... now you have taken an about turn. I am saying on the other hand TNT which was a valid theory for pre partition India has no relevance for Pakistan today. Pakistan is defined by the four subnationalities as NHK has pointed out in #60.

Nor do I think there is any need to do away with the confusion as long as a constitutional federation can ensured. Sadly you are more confused than all of us ... because on one day you argue one thing and on the other day you argue the exact opposite. Perhaps you should clarify your own concepts before you try and explain away what you meant and said.

Also Read #61, #62

-YLH

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

#61 by Mantolives
//..(though as makers of Pakistan they don`t want to... I know cuz I am half shia) wants to separate and does so legally atleast I wouldn`t have a problem..//

Sure , you wouldn`t :). (By the way, bengalis were also ``maker`` of Pakistan - they too separated, didn`t they. )

But That was NOT my point though - I don`t know how active and wide-spread shia and sindhi separitism is on ground. I just used them as ``theoritical`` examples to show you how dangerous your principle ( TNT as tool for minority to assert itself) is.

I can as well give example of blacks in USA. They are/were economically subjugated, they are culturally different. They can as well use TNT as a tool to assert themselves! So can the mexican-americans! But that would be totally destructive.

#60 by nazarhayatkhan
//..Unfortunately, we are still confused...//

I think all this confusion and tendency to clutch and straws like TNT to define Pakistan comes from a very basic flaw in Pakistani psyche ..... which is its compulsive desire to be ``Not-India``. That negative aganda of nation building has led to all kinds of confusions and concotions.

That negative agenda has led pakistanis to a situation where they have started to imagine themselves to part of Arabs or Central Asia or whatever. There can be nothing more pathetic than this - Where have you seen a group of people of reasonble inttellignence who try to re-invent their whole ancestry? Arabs snigger at pakis. Central Asians are just amused.

Pakistan must start having a Positive Agenda.

re: Romair # 43

Romair, I am truly sorry to state this and I do this with respect and humility towards your viewpoints. Sir, you are not making any sense. I am not entirely certain, what is your point of view. You seem to be confused and in clearing your confusion, you are only contradicting yourself.

Romair, economics and security are and may be non-religious ideas and concepts, but if you read the constitution of Pakistan, it makes clear in no uncertain terms that all laws in Pakistan will based on Islamic principles and the goverance of Pakistan will be based on Islamic ideals. This means that everything in Pakistan, by the virtue of its constitutional paramountancy of Islam, has created a conflict of interest. Nothing in Pakistan can exist without the imprintur of Islam and even secular ideas and concepts have to be re-interpretated within a Islamic understanding. Sir, when all your laws and ideas of government and goverance are based and grounded in such legalities, the concept of a nation-state that emerges is based on a theocracy and in a theocracy, secular concepts/ideas have no place.

Romair, if people of Pakistan do not follow the ideas of religion or principles of Islam in their daily lives, as you suggest, then that implies that the state of Pakistan is practicing official hypocricy by attributing its logic to Islam. If such is the case, then why are we not removing the said articles and declarations from our constitution, which claims Islam as the basis for our nationalism and raison d`etre?

This how this whole debate started. It started when I pointed out that Pakistan, as a state, is flawed because it has many contradictions which have not been adquately explained. Now, by stating your reasons and arguments, you have brilliantly proven my point by stating a very real contradiction within Pakistan itself and that is; the difference between what we claim and what we practice.

Thank you for your kind support!

Ciao

re: Stuka # 53

Nazar was correct. He said it much better.

We are really a confused nation and since our history has effectively torn out our roots and refuses to accredit our past, we are in a limbo. Our history, if you read the official tales begins in 711 AD when Mohammad Bin Qasim landed and before that, we never existed. In a religious sense that might explain the last 1300 or 1400 years of our existence, but it does not explain our cultural and social evolution, which has pre-dated the arrival of Islam. We do not admit to that past and we create our ``own history`` and if you read Pakistani history text books, you will discover that only Muslims have lived in this region; ruled this region; developed this region and still exist in this region. The history of India, to which we belong does not exist in our intellects and we think that the history of India is subordinated to our history and not the other way around as it should be taught.

Pakistani history textbooks are openly dismissive of this fact and they refuse to teach the history - objective and a neutal history - and if you study them, you will find to your horror that only Muslims history matters in the history of India. We refuse to acknowledge the contribution of the Indian culture or history or politics to the development of Islam in India and thus fail to realize that Islam has fused within the rubric of India and has been influenced by its exposure to Indian cultural,, social values and politics. Our history teaches us of a Muslim historic existence, which is in complete isolation of all other religions, and other influences. Hence, we are confused and have to reconcile our past with our present, which was artifically created and has no basis in the past; the real past of our common existence.

re: arjun_m

I have no idea how it will be solved, but the best option is make the LoC into an international border and exist within the new status quo. In fact, that status quo already exists and all its needs is an official confirmation from India and Pakistan, but mainly from Pakistan, to accept the LoC as a reality. It will happen, because Kashmir is not going willy nilly to Pakistan or India and if the LoC is not an option, then the independence of Kashmir becomes an issue, which both India and Pakistan are not too keen to support. Hence, since beggers cannot be choosers, LoC will be made into an international border and this will end the problem.

re: Yasser # 50

TNT is a moot point. It was never right and Maulana Azad Kalam said so clearly and TNT died when East Pakistan became Bangladesh on December 16, 1971. Pakistan will always exist and there is no danger of it going quietly into the gentle night and the reality of Pakistan as a nation state cannot be denied.

I am not interested in the value of an act of a British parliament or if the power was transfered legally and those agruments, can be debated endlessly. All I am simply saying is that Pakistan has to admit the truth that its reasons for a seperate homeland for the Muslims of India were based on issues, which had nothing to do with religion. We should admit this truth and teach the population of Pakistan this truism, which will end the confusion for once and all. We as a people are not overtly religious and we are not too keen on the ideals of Islam as practiced in a Middle Eastern context. Our understanding of Islam is based on the historgraphy of Islam as it evolved within the Muslim experience in India and not in Saudi Arabia as most of our diehard compatriots wish and hope.

In this sense, TNT is flawed because a lot of Indian Muslims opted not to move to Pakistan and chose to stay in India and that means, in a contempory sense, the issue of TNT was not totally agreed upon by the Muslims themselves in India. If the Muslims had whole heartly supported the concept of a nation-state based on TNT and religion, they would all have migrated en masse to Pakistan!

If the issue of TNT was debated and rejected by Muslims in India before partition in 1947 and then by East Pakistanis, themselves Muslims, when broke away from West Pakistani Muslims and created Bangladesh. If religion could not prevent the ``batwara`` of Pakistan in 1971 and keep Muslims together, then the logic of TNT in a pre-August 1947 India asking for a seperate homeland for the Muslims on the basis of religion makes for a weak argrument.

Therefore, we have to explain the logic of 1947 on issues that are not related to religion, because that is the only method, by which the demand for Pakistan makes sense in a historical, constitutional and economic sense. The real issues and whose denial by the majority forced the Muslims to seek the division of India as the final recourse to a constitutional deadlock.

Ciao

`Asiya expressed her utmost desire to visit Srinagar, ``But I would love to come by Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus,`` she said.`` `

So she hasn`t been to Srinagar... will Rsidhar explain how then does that rebuff any claims that Romair has made? Does she have a point of reference?

Let us be a little more logical.

And if anyone is wondering what the churchillian test is :


`` I must record my own belief , that any attempt to establish the reign of Hindu numerical majority in India will never be achieved without a civil war... The muslims numbering 90 million.. the word `minority has no relevance or sense when applied to masses of human beings numbered in many scores of millions`

(Winston Churchill, December 13th 1946 at House of Commons)

Churchill`s was the most notable opposition position because the entire house of commons was dead set against the League and the Pakistan idea at this point. Fearlessly and courageously as always Churchill put forth the dissenting position against the left.

-YLH

Mohar 11

My dear friend ... please keep in mind that TNT didn`t start off by asking for a separate country but those who had reluctantly come into its fold waited 80 years before opting for a separate country which mind you has legal roots in an act of parliament. Pakistan and TNT certainly are not interchangeable.

Any minority let alone Shiites (though as makers of Pakistan they don`t want to... I know cuz I am half shia) wants to separate and does so legally atleast I wouldn`t have a problem. Indeed this is the way of the world as East Timor has shown us ... and they didn`t even fulfil the churchillian test.

However I forgive you for missing out on half the discussion... there is no ethnic nationalist communalist or sectarianist leader of repute who wants to separate... the most ardent opponents of Pakistan including the Mullahs, and the progeny of the frontier gandhi are in favor of the federation... and the most extreme ethnic nationalists want a literal implementation of the Lahore Resolution which is infact the corner stone of the Republic.
We are not against separatists (bunch of tribals along with a bunch of Lahori elite `marxists` holed up in a cave don`t count)... but bring a separatist who can actually translate his/her ideology into actual support of the masses. The truth is that Sindh which Indians imagine to be the hotbed of separatism votes over whelmingly in favor of a federalist and staunchly Pakistani Nationalist Party in every free election. G M Syed for example was a major failure, so is PONAM eventhough PONAM asks for the implementation of the Lahore resolution.


Ballu Khan

I suppose only if a Pakistani totally surrenders to your way of thinking which is not very enlightened mind you despite all the posturing will you consider him worthy.

I am not interested in any Indian separatist... and I think NHK is doing a good job inflating the big Indian head. I just hope it doesn`t burst.

Stuka # 53

(The irony is that no one in India is busy discussing the TNT. No one cares. Pakistan is a reality. Why it became one, should it, shouuld it not have...make interesting drawing room conversations)

I did not want to get into this discussion - it has been thrashed umpteenth time on Chowk. I only responded to Jay & Ferozek & wrap it up. But the reason why it does not seem to die away is because there ``is actually something amiss``.

India does not need to discuss TNT because it does not believe in it. We are also not discussing it to convince India of ``Pakistan Reality``.

India is secure in its skin - its nationhood, its past, its heritage.

Unfortunately, we are still confused. We need to know our heritage, our link with our past and to define ourselves clearly to ourselves as to who we are - for the simple reason of being at peace in our own skin. Are we Arabs, Central Asians, South Asians or what other concoction?

The closest that we can come to a logical convincing arguement is that Pakistan is a nation composed of Punjabis, Pashtoons, Baluchis & Sindhis sub-nationalities of South Asia.

TNT figures nowhere in this arrangement - and thus this illogical term should not find any place in the definition of the Pakistan as a nation. This causes confusion and is disruptive.

But DEFINE we must - and not let the confusion persist. Except for this rationale of the four sub-nationalities forming the nation called Pakistan, there is no other justifiable cause for its existance.

Now let us have a glass of water - and forget this issue.

re: condition in POK (or Azaad Kashmir)
Romair has said in the past that Kashmiris in POK are better off than Kashmiris in the Indian Kashmir.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-467586,curpg-2.cms
Here is the full article that rebuffs his notion:

`Islamists have not allowed PoK to prosper`

ANI[ SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 01, 2004 12:40:48 AM ]

She went on to add that recently after the Saarc conference Pakistan has even promised to rein in these organisations, therefore, there is no need to furnish proofs that militants were operating from Pakistan-controlled area. ``Now Indian intelligence agencies should find out their (militant organisations) present address and inform the world that where they have been shifted.

Asiya said that with the opening of Srinagar-Muzaffarabad road, people of PoK will come to know the real status of Jammu and Kashmir.`` She added, ``They will also compare their development with Jammu and Kashmir and thus in due course the propaganda machinery will itself fizzle out.`` She concluded.

Asiya Afroz Ghul, the firebrand woman activist, said that during last 56 years Pakistan has only exploited the natural resources of the region and even has denied to fulfill its basic needs.

``Pakistan is using our resources like rivers and forest and has not even given us the royalty,`` she said. She said that the area has immense potential for tourism but the government has altogether neglected this field.

Condemning the 1947 tribal attack on Jammu and Kashmir by Pakistan army and tribals of North West Frontier Province, she said that the incident actually has paved the way for bifurcation of Jammu and Kashmir. She said that in PoK the kids are being taught Pakistani version of history only, thereby blinding them from facts.

Asiya expressed her utmost desire to visit Srinagar, ``But I would love to come by Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus,`` she said.``
Sridhar

#50 by Mantolives on January 31, 2004 11:09am PT

YLH back as the apologetic for the Paki power elites. I would like to recruit him as the chief ideologue for my Vadapavland- a land of Vadapav eaters. I am sure the Indian separatists can also ask for his services.

Ralph:

opposition to kite flying is for these reasons:

-illegal use of kite-strings - strings are coated with `chemicals` and others are `metallic`
-illegal strings end up slitting throats of other kite-flyers
-due to the intense kite-flying that goes on, power failures occur all day long(as the ritual of kite-flyiing ends up tampering with powerlines)
-typically a couple of dozen kids get run over by vehicles while they are competeing to chase cut kites floating in the sky. other kids and elders fall off their roofs.

Regradless, I would say that I`ve never seen any other festival (religious or otherwise)anywhere in the world celebrated with as much vigor as Basant is in Lahore.

#50 by Mantolives
//..To me the TNT was not wrong but a fact... it was also a tool for a minority to assert it self..//

So TNT was not wrong ... and it is a legitimate tool for minority to assert itself. Fair enough! Now - theoritically speaking - if shia minorities in pakistan ask for a separate country for themselves - are you going support it? After all, Shia and Sunnis don`t get along very well - they can as well be Two different Nations. In fact Shia-Sunni relationship is now worse than Hindu-Muslim problem ever was!

Similar principle would apply to Sindhi minorities too. After all - they complain about economic subjugation by Punjabis - don`t they? Just like muslims complained about economic subjugation by hindus - in the undevided India. ( As pointed out by Romair )

Which means - anytime a group feels it cannot compete with another group - it can just use TNT ``tool`` and breakway. Is that the way for the world from now on?

This being Madressa board.
Reprodued from Omar Qureishi board, where it awaited unanswered.

For F.R.Khan in particular:

Name EVEN ONE student from such schools pre or post-partition who has been an achiever in ANY field. Jobs, titles, and positions, and life-styles are NOT achievements

---

#67 by echoboom on January 29, 2004 12:24pm PT
FerozeK:64

Your frustration and depression is understandabe. Still fiercely guarding american-accent?
Ears cocked to whatever is happening in Dixie? Still avoiding masjids and maulanaas.

Worry not. You WILL be re-nativised (assimilated? mainstreamed?) alongwith other english-accent-schools ( I wish I could call them madrassas but that would be elevating their status).

Name ONE student from such schools pre or post-partition who has been an achiever in ANY field. Jobs, titles, and positions, and life-styles are NOT achievements.

Let me elaborate Shaukat Aziz vs Agha Hasan Abadi.(madressa)--(you get the drift?)

now more from maktab and madrassas: abdul salaam, Quadeer Khan, Dr. Ali Rajput, abdul sattar edhi, Faiz, Iqbal, Pitras , Quasmi, Manto etc etc (you keep thinking of many others in ANY field and give me just ONE name) who is from accented-schools who can match them)

How does it feel to be in the gutter now. Yes I am in that gutter of the colonised-culture and that is THE issue here.

Was Pakistan created for religious reasons or for economic reasons? It depends on whom you are asking this question, and in Romair`s case, when you are asking him this question.

Here is another question Pakistanis may want to ponder. Why is there a strong and repeated demand to ban kite flying in Lahore, even though it is obviously such a popular pastime there?

Is this opposition to kite flying basically economic in nature, scientific, health-related, or fundamentally religious?

If you ask Romair, he will give you any answer he thinks will fit his need for the hour. But other Pakistanis have to uncover motivations that may not be entirely wholesome. Otherwise the whole truth will always be elusive.

FerozeK, NHK:

The irony is that no one in India is busy discussing the TNT. No one cares. Pakistan is a reality. Why it became one, should it, shouuld it not have...make interesting drawing room conversations.

That is why I find it easiest to accept Manto`s thesis. Nations do not need theories to justify their existence. Maybe in 1948 u did, certainly not now.

Minus his `religion/secularism` argument, Romair`s post 37 has hit the nail on the head. He has summarized the Pakistani nationalist position clearly and cogently.

``saarc union and single curency`

Khuwaishay eisee kay hur khuwaish pay dum niklay

So much was made of this saarc summit nothing concrete came out of it. All the great leaders and statesmen posed and smiled for cameras but at the end of the day ... nothing... except a few nice sounding acronyms like `SAFTA` which is a pipe dream.

Meanwhile much more low key at the ECO summit in Islambad, the Finance ministers of Turkey, Pakistan and Iran laid the foundations of the Trade and Development Bank with 60 million SDR ... Bhutto`s dream that Koruturk and the Shah shattered in the mid 70s is now being revived...

I find it sad that elderly gentlemen are busy debating an idea which is relative and an imagined concept.

To me the TNT was not wrong but a fact... it was also a tool for a minority to assert it self. By the same logic Pakistan was the conclusion/end of TNT and not its beginning. To continue to define nationhood in Pakistan on the basis of TNT is over kill. TNT could only exist in all India level. TNT exists in India today ... whether we like it or not. As for Pakistan ... logically it should be irrelevant. The Constitutional Act of British parliament which replaced British India with the successor dominions ... sought to replace two communal nations with two geographical ones.

More nations have emerged on the map of the world on the basis of common religious culture than for any other reason... Israel, East Timor, Turkey/Greece with a re run in Cyprus, Bosnia/Serbia, the conflict in Ireland, Shia-Sunni conflict in Iraq are some of the recent examples of this phenomenon. History of Europe shows us how deeply associated the emergence of nation states was to religious differences. It was the escape of the puritans from Europe which laid the foundations of the United states of America, which continues to be a deeply Christian nation though a secular state for all practical purposes.

Secularism (separation of church and state) is not the product of multi cultural societies but homogenous ones where there is a struggle between the clergy and the state .. and state comes out on top. It is possible however that secularism might over time convert an entirely homogenous nation to a multicultural one as seemed to happen with the US. It is not through the repudiation of history but the elevation of the secular state that it has happened.



The point is that we wanted Pakistan, we got it through a legitimate process and transfer of power. Whether we want to make it secular or not is entirely up to us. The debate over the two nation theory can be academic but it certainly not a determining factor, nor does it undermine us. Any leader in Pakistan who takes up this issue is just plain stupid. Let us give up this attitude of always towing the line to prove one self liberal. Who cares if Jay bashes me? It amuses me to no end that a disgusting humanoid like him is trying to spit skywards. Let us not be in awe of anything.

-YLH

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

Ferozek # 39, Jay # 41

I agree with you both. TNT was a bad idea to begin with. We might as well say so, take a shower & get on with life.

As long as we do not openly jettison it, the religion factor will keep on cropping up again & again.

I was vague in my last post on the issue since I felt we were already heading towards that end.

Only a few months back, when I was talking about the Economic Union, I was feeling a bit out of place - something that can be only dreamed about. But the events have moved much faster - talk of SAARC union & common currency now.

Some day, some bold Pakistani leader will make this statement & bury this contradiction for ever. And get us out of this torturous confusion.

Nazar 38:`` TNT, right or wrong, was about Muslims & not Islam. Pakistan was supposed to be a Muslim country & not an Islamic country with Islamic Code. ``

I doubt that any historian can disagree with you on this one ... succinctly put.

The point gentlemen is that despite the confusion and despite Islam Pakistan will survive.

As for Romair sadly he has never actually tried to understand what these various words mean... especially `secularism` .. he will keep repeating the dictionary definition which he chooses to selectively misinterpret.

On the one hand he says Economics is NOT secular (God knows what that means) and on the other hand he keeps telling us that PPP (which gave us the 1973 constitution which Islamic and the slogan `Islam is our religion`) is secular. I am confused... Rsidhar is confused ... half the chowk populace is confused....

To paraphrase Jinnah (since that is the approach ferozk is using) ``Romair is Peter Pan he never learns or unlearns anything`

-YLH

re: Romair`s last post
``Statistically speaking, the 47 Muslims` opinions turned out to be correct, as the economic living standards of Pakistanis (and their physical and political security) is quite a bit higher than that of Indian Muslims.``
If you are speaking of statistics, quote the statistics, Idiot.
This guy keeps inserting this seemingly innocuous statements which are not accurate. Pakis need to know the truth if they are to redeem themselves and save their country.
I have strongly argued that this ``India is shining`` thing is a BJP propaganda but even i wil concede that India of today is doing much better than Pakistan: economically. Many of us in Chowk have posted statistics and i will not repeat those again. Romair can choose to be blind but even he cannot be this stupid.
As far as physical security is concerned, some muslims (i won`t say all because India has more muslims today than Pak and if all muslims had migrated, India should not be having any muslims left) felt they may not be secure in India after 1947 and migrated to Pak. But is every Paki secure in Pak? How about the Shias who get targetted and killed in Karachi? How about the Ahmadiyas?
No doubt many Pakis have prospered in Pak but many have also perpetuated a system of exploitation that died swift and fast in India viz the Feudal system. Feudals or Zamindars are still a force in Pak while, barring Bihar and some parts of UP, they are gone from India. Pak also harbors the highest number of illeterates in South Asia. And, i am not even talking about the condition of women.
My advice to Romair: smell the coffee everytime you write a post. He will be respected more if he is objective. I as an Indian (NRI) have no problem accepting that there are a lot of scars on the face of India. Will Romair do the same?
Sridhar

re: Romair`s fantasies

``Thus, if you go outside the domains of Chowk and of living rooms conversations, you will notice that no one in Pakistan is bothered about secularism and religion. They practice both equally, depending on which part of Pakistan they are from``
Again, not accurate.
Pak has 98% muslim population and is an Islamic theocratic state. Pakis do not know what secularism means. Respect for other religion does not amount to secularism. Secularism is : non-interference in religious matters by the State. It happens all the time in Pak.
Sridhar

ferozek #39: ``As to the issue of economics being equated with secularism, which you and Romair seem to suggest, and credit the idenity of Pakistan within an econmic reason, that assumption runs contary to the logic of the Pakistani constitutions of 1956, 1960 and 1973.``

Please read my reply #35. I stated the following:

``Economics (and security) are neither a religious nor a secular concept. They are instinctive and in-built human needs, developed over thousands of years of evolution. Religious people want economic and personal security as much as secular people, and vice-versa. What to talk of human beings, even animals want economics and personal security, as a natural instinct. And one would have to agree that animals do not have the intelligence to differentiate between the concepts of religion and secularism.``

So I don`t equate economics with secularism (nor with religion). It is infact a concept independent of both. Which has been the basis of my whole argument. Pakistanis` interest in Pakistan is as an economic entity, not as a religious or secular one. Their immigration patterns to more religious and more secular countries indicate that. These patterns are always based on economic reasonings and not on religious or secular (or democratic) ones.

Thus secularism and religion are two concepts that are just given importance by a small minority, in Pakistan, which already has its economic needs taken care of.

``You and I may agree to secularized history of Pakistan`s birth, but we are a minority viewpoint. The rest of the nation does not share our version of history on the issue of creation of Pakistan.``

This is a huge misconception. I just finished a book on the Shahi Mohalla of Lahore. It goes into the details of the lives and history of the dancers and prostitutes who live there. I have lived in feudal Punjab, as an adult, as well as in backward parts of NWFP.

There is one thing I can tell you. Nowhere in these places did I ever hear a debate on secularism or religion, or on what the reason of creation of Pakistan happened to be. The Shahi Mohalla book is interesting in the sense that it points out how lives of Pakistanis for generations are based on the cultural and socio-economic systems of, not their country, not their province, not even their own city (Lahore), but their own mohalla (neighborhood).

People in all these areas have one thing on their mind: how to ensure their economic survival. It is economics that drives them. Not some abstract concepts of religion or secularism. And that is why they are in feudal Pakistan and in the Pakistani Shahi Mohalla and not in the ones in the neighboring country. They are still economically better off in Pakistan.

Thus, if you go outside the domains of Chowk and of living rooms conversations, you will notice that no one in Pakistan is bothered about secularism and religion. They practice both equally, depending on which part of Pakistan they are from. Not because they are taught that, but because that is a part of their culture. The girls in Shahi Mohalla have sex in a completely Westernised and secular manner (with no religious overtones), with different partners every month, and seem to dislike maulvis. Yet they mention the world God in every conversation, and regularly go to Data Darbar and carry out, ``mannats`` as a main part of their lives. Much of their answers about what they do, is based on the simple fact, that this is where God put them.

The lifestyles of all of the above are tackling the economic realites of life; not religious or secular ones.

It is only a small minority that has tried to turn everything into a debate on religion, and into a debate on secularism. In my opinion, both groups have equally hijacked the real debate, which should be on economics and personal security. Primarily because they have nothing better to do (since they are wealthy enough to survive in both systems) and because it makes a good political agenda.

Every survey in Pakistan (and its mainstream culture itself, as shown above) indicates that Pakistanis do not want to be a maulvi state, nor do they want to be a secular state. And hardly any of them can remember what they were taught in the Pakistan Studies books in school (2/3rd are too illiterate to have even studied TNT). What they want are jobs and physical security. I can make a bet people will vote for anyone who fixes the roads and gives them electricity, without worrying much about his religious or secular credentials.

So I doubt anyone in mainstream Pakistan debates TNT or Jinnah, and secularism and religion, everyday, like it is done on Chowk. Most people have too many economic problems to think off.

Since we`ve suddenly become so enamoured with ECONOMICS 101, lets start respecting economics by first calling for the elimination of the most UNPRODUCTIVE element of society- the soldiers.

secondly, economics has no religious basis. however, one may as well say that the difference between `secular economics` and `islamic economics` is the same as the difference between `gaye soap` and `sufi soap`.

at the three or four election rallies i`ve been to, i`ve never heard or seen any of the people petition to their representatives to build a new mosque, or a madrasa, or a koranic learning center. it`s always fix sewerage, bring furniture to schools, electricity, clinics. these are all issues more important then those closer to religion.

meaning of TNT,

so many ranging from ylh tp nazar have tried to interpret the intent and meaning of TNT. The amazing fact is that no one cares to understand the meaning in terms of what has happened in pakistan. There is no point in devining the meanings from, the words of the dead, it has to be understood from the living reality of pakistan.

The hoododo and blasphemy laws and jihad have survived the military rule, a democratic rule and even a female prime minister. The meabibg of TNT is simply islam. Pakistan has done very little to improve the economics of pakistan, the military spending is testimony to TNT, the nadrassas are the re creators of TNT, shis akilling are the continuation of TNT, the hordes coming in from chechniya to australia are the revalidation of TNT.

There is only one hope for pakistan, and repudiation of TNHT and the men associated with it is the beginning.

re: nazarhayatkhan # 38

There is no denying the fact that army has been a problem. India is doing Pakistan a great service and it is forcing Pakistan to open up and liberalize trade/economics. Once Kashmir is setttled or solved, Pakistani army will have no reason to consume Pakistan and it will die a natural death of its own. Pakistani army will leave politics on its own.

Ciao

re: Yasser # 31 & Romair 37

There seems be some misunderstanding.

The reasons behind the creation of Pakistan were constitutional and economic and had nothing to with Islam. I am not arguing this fact, as you seem to wrongly assume. The fact is that majority of the Pakistanis think and believe that Pakistan was created in the name of Islam for the Muslims of India. Our history for the last 56 years has stressed this point and this rationale forms the basis for the ideology of Pakistan. There is a believe that Pakistan is and was supposed to be an Islamic state. No one has bothered to educate the average Pakistani that Pakistan was supposed to be a Muslim state, where Muslims of India could enjoy their constitutional and economic rights without fear of being dominated and marginalized by a non-Muslim majority.

The argument is if as a nation accept your conclusions about a nation state not needing ideologies to survive and we argue that Pakistan was a result of a constitutional requirement, then we have questioned the basic believe/values of what an average Pakistani thinks to be the reason for the creation of Pakistan. You and I may agree to secularized history of Pakistan`s birth, but we are a minority viewpoint. The rest of the nation does not share our version of history on the issue of creation of Pakistan. Therefore, we have to convince them that what they were taught is wrong and we have to teach them the real reasons behind the creation of Pakistan. Once we do that, we have questioned and rejected the TNT version of Pakistani history based on religion and in that sense, we have negated our own historic explanation of 1947 and the basis for Pakistan existing since then.

On the other hand, if what you suggest is true, then the question is: why do we still maintain the fiction over TNT and religion and not tell the truth; what is preventing us from telling the truth? The truth being that Islam was simply used as a political slogan to unify the Muslims of India in order to secure their political, constitutional and economic rights. The idea behind 1947 might not be flawed, but since 1947 there are many contradictions which have originated as a result of the hypocricy, by which Pakistan has evolved as a nation state and how its origins have been explained to justify its existence. 56 years later, the contradictions and their lack of explantions are making the idea of 1947 look flawed, because the lies are not reflecting the truth; for the last 56 years, we have been trying to push a square peg into a round hole.

As to the issue of economics being equated with secularism, which you and Romair seem to suggest, and credit the idenity of Pakistan within an econmic reason, that assumption runs contary to the logic of the Pakistani constitutions of 1956, 1960 and 1973. The Pakistani constitution maintains that no law or practice, which is against Islam or sunnah, will be allowed in Pakistan. The idea of secular economics would not work, because the economics of Pakistan will have to be within the ambit of Islam and sunnah and thus, the Islamic and religious nature of Pakistan makes it impossible to have an identity of Pakistan based on the principle of secular economics. To paraphrase Jinnah - what secular economics, whose secular economics are you two gentlemen talking about?

If on the other hand, Pakistani economics are secular, then why is Pakistan still trying to abolish interest based banking on the basis of religion and why is Pakistan still attempting to bring its economy under Islamic guidelines and practice its economy as said in Islam and sunnah? If the economy of Pakistan is being influenced by religion and religion is the motivating factor in Pakistani economy, then the term secular economics or Pakistani economy is secular is meaningless. Economics is a secular concern in the rest of the world, but it not a secular concern in Pakistan, because Pakistani economy is being influenced by Islam and ispo facto through religion.

If the pedestrian understanding of secularism is the seperation of religion from politics, then it assumes that secular economics will mean the seperation of religion from economics. This defination does not apply to Pakistan because of Pakistan`s constitutionalism which seeks to create a theocracy under the principles of Islam and hence, you gentlemen need to further fine tune your arguments, because of the contradictions which are cropping up as a result of your theoretical argument od secular economics and the reality of Pakistan based on a theocratic constitutionalism of Islam.

Therein lies the problem. Pakistan has too many contradictions, which do solve themselves easily, because there is gap of incoherence between the reality of our past and the theorized nature of that past and how it is justified.

Ciao

Romair # 37, Ferozek

That was a good post. Muslims in the Muslim Majority Provinces (Pakistan -1940 Resolution) have done well economically.

However, I have my doubts whether they got the full political freedoms, another objective of the Resolution. (half the time under Army)

In fact, Bangla Desh separated just in 24 years because of this lack of political SAY.

Breaking off of Bangla Desh did not necessarily show a failure of TNT. Because the Lahore Resolution talked of STATES & not STATE.

But since we are not in the habit of analysing our failures, we continue to misunderstand the TNT. TNT, right or wrong, was about Muslims & not Islam. Pakistan was supposed to be a Muslim country & not an Islamic country with Islamic Code.

Our biggest misfortunes have been the ARMY`s meddling in the politics - its fixation with India and its bringing in the radical Islam.

Anyway, now there is no need to dig up old graves. Finally, we seem to be on the right course. We made our U-turns against Taaliban & Radical Islam.

And we made our biggest and most beneficial U-turn in our relations with India - and that too at the SOURCE - the Army going for the normalization.

One only lingering black spot is the Army`s still nosing in politics.

But, all in all, the going is good. We simply did not have a couragous stateman who could rectify our wrong directions years back. The civil society, intellectuals & media has been calling for these U-turns for years.

The poor man has no say and does not matter in Pakistan. He only slugs out the foolishness of its leaders.

Ferozek #various: I think I will have to agree more with Mantolives, than you, on this one. As I have pointed out many times before, the main thrust of my arguments is always based on economics, and not on religion/secularism, India/Pakistan, democracy/dictatorship etc.

So I will look at the creation and current existence of Pakistan, from an economic point of view, i.e. have the Pakistanis accepted Pakistan as an economic entity. If they have, then that (at least to me) is the definition and identity of Pakistan.

Going back to the creation of Pakistan, it was basically an economic occurence. It was a state primarily for Muslims. But not because they were Muslims (otherwise Pakistani Muslims would be demanding a state in USA and Canada and Dubai, as well). But because they felt that their economic and physical security would be better protected in a state separate from India (specially after Nehru would not agree to a Montreal-like status for Muslims).

Statistically speaking, the 47 Muslims` opinions turned out to be correct, as the economic living standards of Pakistanis (and their physical and political security) is quite a bit higher than that of Indian Muslims.

I have thus always felt that this comparison between the economic condition and personal security of Indian Muslims vs. Pakistanis is the true justification of the creation of Pakistan, i.e. the day the living standards and physical security of Indian Muslims (not Indian Hindus, but Indian Muslims) is higher than that of Pakistanis is the day the reason of creation of Pakistan will be proven wrong. I don`t see that happening any time soon.

Secondly, do Pakistanis accept Pakistan as an economic entity. Yes they do. Regardless of whether they accept it as a religious or ethnic entity (or even a political entity). There are no major or minor separation movements going on in Pakistan. And as hard as any leader tries, he/she cannot get people to follow him/her for one.

The Pakhtunistan movement is long dead. Baluch separation is long dead. The Jinnahpur idea never took off. Sindudesh is dead. This is despite the fact that Punjab dominates Pakistan, like no other state/province dominates any other country in the world. In fact, the issues that the smaller provinces and ethnicities have had have never been with Pakistan. They have been with Punjab.

At the same time, it should be highlighted that when a group of Muhajir Generals took out a fully Punjabi establishment, no one in Punjab complained. And even now, there isn`t a single Punjabi in the main power positions in Pakisan, yet Punjabis aren`t complaining. The PM is a Baluch. The Chairman Senate is a Sindhi. The COAS is a Muhajir. As is the President (same guy). The leader opposition will be a Pathan or Sindhi.

So people of all provinces have accepted Pakistan, in whatever form it exists.

Why have they done so?

Because they know that as poor as Pakistan maybe, it is economically still their best option. Pakistanis Punjabis are more empowered than Indian Punjabis (a major portion of this group actually tried to separate from India) and dominate the country, while Indian Punjab is a tiny part of a huge country. Pakistani Pathans are much better off economically than their cousins in Afghanistan. Pakistani Muhajirs are better off economically than their cousins in India. Pakistanis Sindhis are better off than the Muslim versions of their ethnicities across the border. (Don`t know how Baluchis compare to Iranis). And Pakistani Kashmiris are far better and safer than their cousins across the border.

All of this is not to put down India or Afghanistan. Many Indian communities are doing much better than any community in Pakistan. Just to show why the particular communties in Pakistan are still sticking with Pakistan.

Hence, Pakistanis adopt only two economic options. Option one (the prefered economic option) is to get out of the country, towards the West, if you can. Anyone who can leave, generally leaves. However, option two is not to demand a provincial or ethnic separation, nor to migrate to bordering countries. It is to be a part of the economic entity called Pakistan.

Pakistanis have thus accepted that while they may drown in Pakistan, they would drown faster if there was no Pakistan. In today`s world, it is not any, ``ism`` or religion or ethnicity that decides nationhood. It is economics. In the new world, economic unions are stronger than any other kind of union (be they religious, cultural, secular, ethnic etc.). And I think all Pakistanis have accepted Pakistan as a viable economic home and unit. So whether they accept it as a religious or ethnic home, becomes immaterial - at least based on my views, which state that all personal decisions are made on the basis of economic and physical security.

So if a Sunni kills a Shia, and a Muhajir kills a Sindhi and a Punjabi slaps a Pathan, it is a sign of mismanaged country. Not a sign of a country that does not have an identity.

#30

`Karachi is to Bombay what Delhi is to Lahore is a good analogy. I am from Karachi and I still think that Lahore is small provincial backwater capital. . . .`

eeeeeeeshhhhh. there are some positive things to be said about `small provincial backwater capitals`. . .khair, am too tired to defend a lahore that no longer exists anymore!

Mantolives #29: ``Generally agreed ... however Economics is a secular concern ... and so according to you an average Pakistani is secular in his concern.``

This seems to be a sensitive point amongst many on Chowk.

Economics and personal security are the two driving forces for human beings, in my opinion. They rank far higher than religion/secularism or anything else, including democracy. In Pakistan (and in India`s) case, this can be seen by the migration patterns of its inhabitants. When they immigrate to countries, they only look at economics and security. Hence maulvis will go to USA. And secular Hindus will go to Saudi Arabia.

The above has been the basis of every debate I get into on this site, regarding religion/secularism or democracy/dictatorship.

Economics (and security) are neither a religious nor a secular concept. They are instinctive and in-built human needs, developed over thousands of years of evolution. Religious people want economic and personal security as much as secular people, and vice-versa. What to talk of human beings, even animals want economics and personal security, as a natural instinct. And one would have to agree that animals do not have the intelligence to differentiate between the concepts of religion and secularism.

Generally, people who are leaders in pushing the ideas of secularism or religion are themselves quite secure economically (otherwise they would be concentrating on economics). Hence secularism or religion does not affect their two basic needs.

The mistake they make is that instead of tying their religious or secularist ideas explicitly into a higher economic standard for their voters, they stop short. The religious folks argue that if one follows Islam, things will get better. They point to 7th century Arabia. How will that happen? They don`t bother to explain. Similarly, the secular folks argue that if a country becomes secular, things will get better. They point to 21st century USA. How will that happen? They don`t bother to explain either.

So religion and secularism is presented as the, ``end,`` when it should be presented as a means to an end, while specifically defining the steps needed to get to that end, i.e. economic growth through sound economic policies, practiced by an honest leadership. Neither parties do a good job of explaining these steps.

The reason is that these steps are not based on religion or secularism. They are based on ecnonomics and good governance. Two concepts that are almost completely independent of secularism and religion.

Pakistan will obviously not turn into 21st century USA, just by beocoming secular. If that were the case, it would have been well on its way, since, other than Zia`s time, it has been generally a secular state. It may well turn into 21st century secular Iraq. Moreso, India has been completely a secular state, and it should have been USA by now. Interestingly, India is experiencing its highest growth rates, under probably the most non-secular regime in the world.

Similarly Pakistani will not turn into the successful society of Muslim history, if it implements Shariah. It may well turn into 21st century Afghanistan. If Shariah was the end (and not a potential means to an end), then all the countries that have some form of Shariah would be thriving.

There will always be minority groups in every country, that will cling to religion or anti-religion, as their most important voting factor. In the USA, the Christian Coalition will always vote Republican, regardless of what is going on. And the liberal (in the US sense) will always vote Democrat. However, the deciding votes (mainstream) will always come from how well the economy is doing.

Similarly in Pakistan, the overwhelming majority will not worry about secularism or religion (once again look at immigration patterns to places like Saudi Arabia). They will vote for the person who can get their kids a job and provide electricity to their village. Politics, specifically in poor countries, is always about local potholes and lightbulbs. Rarely about abstract high-level concepts like religion and secularism. It only reaches that stage in places where either secularism or religion is the main cause of potholes not being fixed. Or where all the potholes have been fixed.

So if the religious JI fixes the potholes in the poor neighborhoods of NWFP, better than the secular ANP did, then I think they will win even more. If religous JUI gets the peasants of Baluchistan out of the control of the secular tribals, then they will win more also. And if JI in Karachi creates more physical security for the people than the secular MQM, then it will win more.

Not because people are voting for religion, or against secularism. But because they are voting for economics and security. In such cases, only those people will continue to vote for secular parties, who are not affected by potholes and jobs, i.e the ones like us, who are quite well off, and can afford to vote solely on secularism or religion.

Similarly, eventually, the rise and fall of secular parties like PPP and ANP etc. will be based on how well they solve economic problems. So far, they have a disastrous record of solving such problems. PPP, primarily because it is feudal and corrupt. No amount of secularism is going to help them solve such problems. This is what is leading to the rise of religious parties. The rise is not due to religion, but due to the economic corruption and mismanagment of the secular parties.

This brings us to economic policy. This (and human rights - of not only the minority, but the majority, as well) should be the driving force of every debate on govt. And in case of third world countries, I think this is even more important than democracy.

That is why, those making secularism and religion the deciding factor in politics are completley missing the point. Those are not major issues with poor poeple. All surveys in Pakistan indicate that. Those can only be issues in countries where the basic human needs of its citizens have already been taken care of. Pakistan does not fall into that category.

a waste of chowk space,

Here we have ferzok giving advice to the pak govt to focus on education,a new rip van winkle, unaware of the reality of pakistan.
The govt schools of paqkistan are remaining vacant, used as goat sheds, no teachers are appointed so taht the ilks of tahmed can say that children go to madrassas because no govt schools. This represent part of the govt policy, to provide fodder for the jihad, to support the notions of strategic depth and bleeding by a thousnd cuts. There is no point in telling what is good for pakistan, the problem is that your notion of goood is not what the pak abduls want, that is not what the very ideology of pak creation demands.

The ferzoks are simply echoing the sounds of the yanks, the madrassas are the source ov terror,. In fact they are the source of lot more, terror is the only aspect that the yanks and indians are bothered about.
It is the madrassas that has created the blasphemy legislation, the hoodood ordinance and alot more. The madrassas are only teaching the essence pf pak creative idea, the original ideological contribution, the TNT.

What is in pakistan is a world view, a TNT-islamic view. The wahabism existed for a long time, it flourishes in saudi, but it did not produce the taliban, the chechniyan and kashmir terrorists. It is a new strain from pakistan, TNTism, and that is the root ccuase of madrassas, that is what is guiding the pak society. That is what is preventing the people like you frojm mentioning that thousands of pakistanus have died in afghanistan and kashmir. For a so called educated like you, ahaheed never dies, and you support themn , you believe in the ideology, even though you never went to a pak madrassa, you are part of the TNTism that guides pak society.

Ferzok,

Instead of writing advice on what pak govt should do, it may be very informative if you could reflect on the Kashmir day holiday coming up on 5the february in pakistan.

That is the source of all pak problems that you talk about, that is the most popular manifestation of TNTism, the TNT starin of islam that supports and sustains the nadrassas. You have to accept the essence of kashmir day, the symbol that muslims cannot live in peace with any other religionists. Madrassas only produce woriiers that enforce the TNt idea.

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

With all due respect your last post was just plain disgusting... Pakistan has survived nay sayers and self styled realists like you... it will continue to exist.

The idea was neither flawed nor wrong ... In 1947 the rationale was not Islam, it was the solution to the communal problem. There was a legal transfer of power, and two successor states emerged to replace the empire. It was done through a British act of parliament. Nationstates don`t need `ideologies` or idealogues or theories or religions to exist.. nationstates can and will exist... and a sense of identity can develop which is all encompassing.

We don`t need `One` sense of nationhood to survive ... we don`t need a `ratonale` ... we are because we are... just because a Sindhi is proud of his Sindhi heritage doesn`t make him a secessionist.... Most Sindhis vote for mainstream Pakistani Nationalist parties ... and this is the case through out other provinces as well. Pakistan doesn`t need a consensus on why Pakistan, and I don`t think thjere is a dispute where it is... there is not a single ethnic nationalist of any repute who wants to opt out of the federation ... the most they want is the whole hearted implementation of the 1940`s Lahore Resolution ... and the revision of the concurrent list.

If Asfandyar Wali Khan, the progeny of frontier Gandhi, Fazlu, the progeny of the deobandi mullahs, and Jamaat e Islami, people who intensely and totally opposed Pakistan have accepted the federation, and if MQM doesn`t want to secede, on what basis are you opining?

The fact of the matter is that sadly you want to earn brownie points... you want to convince other chowkies of your liberalism, and this is the easiest way you could think of... self analysis you call it ... but what should I call this kind analysis which indulges in sensationalism and `shock` ... if exaggeration is a pillar of your `analysis` how can you call it `realism`.


-YLH

re: Mantolives # 29

Yasser, that is the problem defining Pakistan along religous lines is an over kill, but we as a nation do not agree to a defination and hence, the endless debate over the issue of religion.

re: nazarhayatkhan # 28

You have summed up the problem. Minorities do not really enjoy any constitutional rights and if they do, there are legal/constitutional lucanas which limit or they them their rights and they are no better off than third or fourth class citizens.

Agreed that Pakistan needs to leave religion, but what does Pakistan do in absence of Islam? Do we negate the whole concept behind the actualization of Pakistan and if we do, then what was the rationale for 1947?

The logic of the system or the state in Pakistan has collapsed and it has entered, what you can sarcastically call the realm of diminishing returns and the more we persist and try to right a flawed idea, the more problems we will create.

re: stuka # 24

Karachi is to Bombay what Delhi is to Lahore is a good analogy. I am from Karachi and I still think that Lahore is small provincial backwater capital and when things improve in Karachi, I will return to my old haunts. The Karachi I left and miss is the old Karachi of pre-Zia days. It is a Karachi of the 1970s, when life was simple and enjoyable and Karachi was lively and not crime ridden as it is now.

Ciao

stuka,

I think I know my wife a little better than that ... she loves the laid back relaced peaceful Punjabi atmosphere of Lahore...

I personally like Karachi better because it is more cosmopolitan and international... infact we too have our little Lahore vs Karachi debates ... only she the karachite like Lahore and I the Lahori stand up in defence of Karachi. We are not the average Lahori and Karachite either... our pride is Pakistan collectively.

Romair,

Generally agreed ... however Economics is a secular concern ... and so according to you an average Pakistani is secular in his concern.

Both your land prices and your little fortune in the KSE are because of excess liquidity in Pakistani banks... why is their excess liquidity ... perhaps a leaf out of Greenspan`s Economics will do.


Nazar and ferozk

I think Nazar is absolutely right ... and even if you think in terms of history it is logical. Communal Muslim Nationalism reached its logical and just conclusion with Pakistan .. we wanted Pakistan, we got it .... now defining Pakistan along religious lines is over kill.

Hence the call for a secular Pakistan which is as old as Pakistan itself.


-YLH

Ferozk # 16

(Islam is the only thing, which binds us as a nation and without the rationale of Islam, Pakistan has no argument to justify a sovereign national)

How do the Parsees, Christians, Hindus get bound into this nation? As a second class citizens in a constitution which says that ``no law shall be repugnant to Quran & Sunnah``?

I think there are some basic fundamentals topsy-turvy here. There are many wise men on Chowk who have been discussing this issue. We have to come out of the RELIGION BOX completely & find our nationhood in our history, rivers, mountains, culture, language.

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

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

YLH, i have siblings born in lahore, but dont think they will get a visa yet. Soon enough. Good luck with your new life.

Regarding tripling of real estate in pakistan over the years, does it take into account inflatoion? Because although indian real estate over say last 12 yrs has done well in rupee, it has not done well in terms of lower inflation currencies. On the other hand most single family homes in urban east coast north america have shown 70-150% improvement in the same time period.

Mantolives:

``She left a cosy job in Washington for Lahore not because of me but because LAHORE IS WHERE SHE WANTS TO LIVE. She thinks Lahore is absolutely the number one place to live on earth ... and you know what I believe her. ``

She thinks this even though she is from Karachi. That IS wierd. I bet she is saying that to make you feel happy. I have yet to ever meet a Mumbaikar who appreciated Delhi more and I am drawing a comparison between Bombay/Karachi and Lahore/Delhi.

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

Lahore is definitely the place to be around bassant, but i was there six-months ago and didn`t like it. I think a lot has changed for the worst. Before there were no ``chins chins``, but now, unfortunately there are and they make life a living hell. As far as this article is concerned, i strngly agree with the writer that education is the most important thing that Pakistan needs right now. Just imagine when the religious madrassas are doing a better job than the government, there is a serious problem. I hope Musharraf gets to change some things and cuts down the military budget. I mean the military budget leaves little for anything else. The bombs have been created, now maybe the time is to land on moon or do something greater. I guess landing on moon would be something, since the United States is planning for Mars in about 15 years.

``because who cares what you, or anyone else thinks when that ain`t the truth... maybe it helps our Indian friends feel good about themselves so be it.`` (Mantolives)

Dear Mantolives as far as the proliferaion is concerned I disagree with you. There is overwhelming evidence that Pakistan was involved. I certainly don`t know to what extent, but i`m sure you have heard retired general Bag saying `yes we did told the Libyans and Iranians about nukes and where to buy the stuff in the black market because we wanted to have a strategic alliance to our west.` There is nothing wrong with that becasue if the United States can guide Israel than why can`t Pakistan. But you see, the problem arises when such cooperation is unveiled. I mean it`s highly unlikely Israel would ever say, `gee the United States assisted us in making the bomb so we could fend off the Arabs. Thanks United States.` But let`s not be hard on the Libyans and the Iranians, i guess they were in a tight spot and finally understood that making the bomb is expensive.

This is what Pakistan needs.

Chursee Parachaa and other westoxicated ones. It is quite understandable why western and pagan `values` are so valued by your kind.

It is also interesting to note that the faminists (ones devoid of feminism) never made it an sahria law an issue here

---

KANO, NIGERIA, 6 Jan 2004 (IRIN) - A Shari`ah Islamic court in northern Nigeria has sentenced a man to death by stoning for having sex with his 15-year-old step-daughter and making her pregnant, court officials said on Tuesday.

Umaru Tori, 45, was sentenced to death for adultery last week by a court in Alkaleri, a provincial town in Bauchi State.

His step-daughter was sentenced to 100 strokes of the cane, to be administered after she has given birth to her baby, since she was an unmarried minor.

A senior official of the Bauchi State Shari’ah Court of Appeal confirmed the judgment and said both convicts had a 30-day period until January 29 in which to appeal against their sentences.

Bauchi is one of 12 states in Nigeria`s mainly Muslim north that began adopting strict Shari`ah law four years ago.

This prescribes several controversial sentences, including stoning to death for adultery, the amputation of limbs for stealing and public flogging for drinking alcohol.

While some amputations and floggings have been delivered, no one has so far been executed by stoning in Nigeria.

Tori is the eighth person to be sentenced to death by stoning in northern Nigeria in the past three years.

So far three death sentences have been overturned on appeal, the most recent being that of Amina Lawal, a 32-year-old single mother. Her sentence was quashed by an appeal court in Katsina state in September.

Lawal`s case attracted a wave of international interest and outrage since the man she had accused of fathering her baby simply denied having sex with her and was acquitted.

Four people are currently awaiting the outcome of their appeals against stoning sentences in Nigeria.

Two are former lovers in Niger state and two are men in Bauchi state convicted of separate sexual crimes.One was sentenced to death for sexually molesting three teenage boys. The ofther confessed to adultery with his neighbour`s wife after putting her in a spell.

The application of strict Shari`ah has heightened tension between Nigeria`s Islamic north and the largely Christian south. This has given rise to periodic outburst of sectarian violence in which thousands of people have died in the past four years.


[

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

Interesting discussion between Mantolives and Ferozek.

Considering the fact that both actually live in Pakistan, I think they are in a good position to comment. A good addition would be someone who actually attends the maddrassahs, and comes from a poor neighborhood in Pakistan (however madrassah students don`t have Internet connections).

Commenting from the outside, as an expatriate, should not carry as much weight as the comments of those who are in Pakistan. After all, if a person is unwilling to marry the ugly (or beautiful) girl, then I am not sure what right that person has to comment on her ugliness or beauty.

Thus, us expatriates, can only comment on Pakistan in a theoretical manner. Unless we are willing to go there and do something about it, our opinions are mere opinions. In that sense a student of a madrassah, or his teacher, has more right over Pakistan, than we do. His whole future is tied to it. Ours isn`t.

At the same time, we can comment on the things that occured while we lived there.

If one looks at the national characteristics of Pakistan, a few things stand out (at least to me):

- Pakistan(is) have a tendency to get themselves into trouble, based on emotionalism and even arrogance. They try to punch above their weight. Perhaps because they have had to do that to survive, vis-a-vis India. However, we have gotten ourselves into too many holes because of that.

- At the same time, Pakistanis have an uncanny ability to adjust and re-adjust, just when everyone thinks it is too late for them. This has happened again and again

- And Pakistanis have a lot of resilience. Pakistan has survived in one of the toughest neighborhoods in the world, with two gigantic adverseries breathing down its throat at one point or another (India and USSR)

I think due to the above, people have been writing off Pakistan since its birth. Yet it is still around, kicking and screaming. And it is still able to get out of the trouble it gets into, at the last moments. It has recently made a strategic adjustment on Kashmir, just when everyone thought it was too late. It has made a strategic adjustment on religious militancy, just when everyone thought it was too late. And it has been able to hold its own against its neighbors (Iran, Afghanistan, and India).

The biggest thing that will strengthen Pakistan is the introspection (to the point of cynicism) of its people. If a Martian were to read the comments on this site, he would think India was a much much better place to live than Pakistan. Yet the people who have visited both places, seem to point out that there is no difference, with many saying that Pakistan has better infrastructure and less visible poverty. According to asiaweek, Islamabad is the best city to live in South Asia (Lahore was not ranked, otherwise it would have been up there as well).

In my opinion, Pakistan needs ten good men (or women) to straighten it out. It is all about finance and economics. A good finance team, allowed to do what it wants, will straighten out any country. I have thus never been too concerned about military dictators or civilian dictators. I am more concerned abou the Finance Ministers

Who is running the Finance Ministry and the State Bank and Habib Bank and the Stock exchange. That is what counts. More so than who is running the country. I think the current finance team (all civilians) is good. They have done a good job over four years. If they get to continue for another five to ten years, they will sort things out.

I have made good money on my investments in the Karachi Stock Exchange, while I have lost on the NYSE. And my small piece of land in Pakistan is worth three times what it was a few years, while my tiny apt in North America is still where it was five years ago.

Would I move my business to Pakistan today. Definitely not. But I do know that if Free Trade opens up in South Asia and the business image of Pakistan is improved (which is bound to happen after the whole world has put Pakistan under a microscope), I will be the first in line to open up an office in Islamabad.

The next five to ten years are crucial. As long as Shaukut Aziz and Co. are around, things may turn out to be alright. Chowk could use more articles on the details of Pakistan`s economics, and a few less on religion in Pakistan, as well as fewer on Pakistan vs. India. The average Pakistani is far more concerned about economics, than about religion/secularism or India (or even democracy).

arjunm, and ferozk

I don`t mean to criticize you, ... I always take your criticism in good spirit. However what I meant when I said what I said was that I don`t share the pessimism that the prophets of doom keep sharing with us on this website.

The irony is that I live in LAHORE, in a middle class neighborhood.... I am not a protected elitist living isolated from the mainstream of Pakistan ... most people on this website are expats who love to exaggerate. I personally have no problems living in Pakistan... infact my personal opinion is that my quality of life is a notch or two higher in this country than it was in the US.

While I want Pakistan to be a Modern Democratic Secular Republic because that is what I think it ought to be , and I would probably change a few other things about Pakistan as well but at the end of the day, secular or not , democratic of not , modern or not, I am quite satisfied living where I am living ... my life style is a decent life style and I am happy with it ... screw the politics of it all .... I don`t care if the world thinks that we are proliferating nukes, or that we are all turban wearing jehadis ... because who cares what you, or anyone else thinks when that ain`t the truth... maybe it helps our Indian friends feel good about themselves so be it.


My joy is to see my wife, Aisha Sarwari, happy. She left a cosy job in Washington for Lahore not because of me but because LAHORE IS WHERE SHE WANTS TO LIVE. She thinks Lahore is absolutely the number one place to live on earth ... and you know what I believe her.

The point is that I am happy here... and those of you who are coming down to Lahore this Basant will see why... there is a reason why many of your own Indian singers like Sukhbir and stereo nation consider Lahore home... and why India`s who`s who pours into Lahore around feb.

-YLH

I think there is a basic misunderstanding by feroz on this subject which compromises the credibility of his thesis. One must understand that Islam is a unique religion which does not differentiate politics as a non-religious behaviour. Politics is an integral part of human social life and Qura`nic message overwhelmingly addresses the social and political issues not only at individual level but at the level of family, community, nation and then internationally. Islam is not a religion of monastries it is a religion of pragmatism and activism. So maddrassas present an alternative political solution to the problems that face us. Madrassa education is radical because it strikes at the very base of the status quo that has imprisoned us for so long and humiliated us for so long.

This is a problem with the radicle activism that as you try to suppress it, it springs back more radically because it is this very suppression that caused the emergence of radicalism in the first place. As you suppress more you actually feed it with new blood - and by doing that you make it even more credulous and appealing to even those who were previously indifferent. It has been the human psychology for the past 10,000 years since the man started civilization and if this psychology has changed recently then it might be the greatest discovery of 21st century so far.

re: mantolives # 5

Yasser, Pakistan is not a perfect society. It has many flaws and faults. Pakistan is divided into two worlds; one is reality and the other one is fantasy. We all know which part we live in.

I admire your sense of hope and idealism and I am too cynical and too jaded by experience to have any sense of latent idealism left in me. Pakistan`s hope does rest in idealism, but an idealism which is pragmatic. Sadly, we as a nation were created on the basis of an idealistic ideology and since our birth as a nation, we have been unable to balance our idealist ideology with the realism of our existence. As Bill Millam, the American ambassdor, once told us - we live in the stars. We need to start living in reality and stop thinking that not only do we live in utopia, but utopia cannot exist without us.

Yasser, by all means be idealistic and hope, but do not make idealism your only hope and only hope in the idealism of your cause.

re: arjun_m

Arjun, I hope if you do not mind if I answer your comments here.

I agree with you and the question you have asked of Pakistanis. I think that Pakistanis need to ask and answer that question themselves. In fact, I think that you should submit that question to the Chowk poll. It would be really interesting to see the results.

re: Romair # 14

Romair the problem is that madrassa system in Pakistan has never been documented and there is no information as to what happens within them. The government of Pakistan is not interested in any educational reforms. Period.

Universial education in Pakistan can never be attained, as long as there is distinction between the modes of instructions as Rozaiba correctly pointed out. Pakistani society practices apatheid on many various levels and unless this discriminatory practice is ended, Pakistan will never be able to fuse as a nation. Even after 56 years of existence, we have no sense of nationhood or nationalism for Pakistan, but have a sense of provincialism which prevents any national cohesion. Islam is the only thing, which binds us as a nation and without the rationale of Islam, Pakistan has no argument to justify a sovereign national status.

Ciao

please visit
www.thecitizensfoundation.org

Everyone seems to have an opinion about madrassahs. Has anyone in Pakistan actually carried out a detailed study on Madrassahs. What is taught where? Who funds them? What they are teaching? etc.

Currently, the madrassah debate seems to be divided along religious lines. Those who are pushing religion, love them. And those who are anti-religion, hate them. I don`t think too many people comment on them from an educational point of view.

The only person on this site, who was able to provide a curriculum of madrassahs was Naqshbandi.

#5 by Mantolives on January 28, 2004 9:26am PT

Chill off Manto! this could be one of the best moments of your life!!
forget this Chowk full of Islamic loonies and supporters of Tora bora thugs. Come back to chowk after an year or so- till then try to appreciate the feminine side of your life. This would help you develop a true revulsion for the Jehadi stuff in Pakistani society.

Good article. The reference to madrasas reminded me of something. Though I`ve come across many madrassa students, I`ve only really talked to one of em on a public wagon ride to Gujranwala. He was studying for his physics exam. His level of knowledge seemed quite impressive as was his desire to learn.

I think most Pakistanis outrightly dismiss madrassa education- and for many right reasons. Yet, these schools do not only brainwash you ideologically. Meeting the kid on the wagon, it seems like they are much more successful in teaching non-religious studies than government schools or even some private schools are.

The choice I always see Pakistanis stuck with are that between pride and ego and nationalism versus economics. Pride and ego and nationalism in impoverished societies are a hallmark of fascism. It causes tremendous inequalities at all levels. If the rich and privileged 5% can get access to english language schools, why the fuk should the government force the 95% to study Urdu in public schools? If the rich and privileged feel their kids are better off learning english, why assume the poor 95% do not feel this way?

mubarik mantolives on your shadi..we had no idea :)...one reason for my pessimism about Pakistan is everyone I know who has visited Pakistan since 2001 (when I was last there) sez one thing..the increase in poverty is striking and so is the major changes that are going on..

In case anyone missed it.

90: (from ali Minai board)
Your posts arent ``iron free``, they are irony free...

---

No it IS /iron-free ; meaning, for those who are already sanguine and have good-humours (again no error here either).

My writings are not meant for those who went to english-schools.Your humour-defficiency is understandable.

Progressives are known to be dour and drab..the can`t-haves.

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

Mantolives

``Or maybe my wife gave me a new lens to view Pakistan with. `

Who is the unlucky girl. Boy she must be desperate. Anyway, my best wishes to both of you. If we will ever meet, I will tell her that you were desperate as well.

Congrats

#5 by Mantolives on January 28, 2004 9:26am PT
Or maybe my wife gave me a new lens to view Pakistan with

---

Mubarak-salaamat, mubarak-salaamat.

Humm huay, tumm huay, kay meer huay
uss kee zulfoN kay subb aseer huay.


``Mukalamaat-e `falatooN naa likhh sakeey lekin
Issi kay zoar sey tooTaa, tlsm-e aflaatooN.``

aur aap kee ahliyaa tO mashallah mukaalmaat bhee likhtee haiN.



Oye buchh kay mundia moaRR toN.

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

The kind of pessimism that Pakistanis generally show about their own country some times makes me wonder if I live in the same country as them. I am sorry... I just don`t just seem to view things the same... maybe I live in a very positive environment... maybe my city, my village and my environs are located somewhere totally separate from the rest of Pakistan...

I know ... maybe I am burger family... maybe I am elitist... though I am considerably less so than other soothsayers of this site... but the Pakistan I live in is a very positive, and egalitarian place.

Or maybe my wife gave me a new lens to view Pakistan with.

F R Khan

I do not think any one is listening - Musharaf, Government, Parliament.

Unless the money spent on education is increased to at least 3-4 % of GDP, there is no hope. Presently, I think it is 1 & 1/2 %.

If you pay your teacher less than the Cook, you will get poor Cooks teaching in the schools.

There is also no need to set up any more committees. There are Reports Galore already available on the remedies of our education system. What was always needed was the commitment to dish out the MONEY.

To us, Kashmir, Ummah, Bomb, tanks, aircraft etc were always more important.

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

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

Good article as always, just one point...South Asian state have lost their raison d`etre a long time ago, most if not all have failed in their obligations to the people. The Madrassah system is more closely linked to the 1980`s, and the huge sums of money that were floating around...