Pakistan’s Choice

#506, Manto {``It is completely up to Mr Elahi... its his crossroads...``}

For all of our sakes, let`s hope that Mr. Elahi blooms into a Jenny and not a Joe McCarthy. :)

Salim

#507, Friend,
Yaar, dost, please do not commit frienlicide. Hostility was just mentioned as a contrast to your nic. Nothing sinister, mister. I was just having fun.
BTW, we caught you, you said ``Zalim.`` Any blue-blooded Hiindu would say ``Jalim.`` So, what excuse do you have for your proficiency in Urdu?

Good to interact with you. Sir, you are funny and witty. That`s all that matters. Being right is no one`s right. :)

Salim

Capt Clueless...say it ain`t so...

manto....is this true??

Letter in TFT

Army hands

Sir,

The recent government crackdown on religious seminaries is once again too little, too late. We have been hearing about General Musharraf’s enlightened moderation for quite some time but so far, ground realities are quite different. If he is sincere about making the country a liberal, secular and democratic state, like the rest of the civilised world, then why doesn’t he start this cleanup with the very institution which radicalised these madrassas in the first place: the Pakistan Army. One can visit any military base in Pakistan and see Quranic verses and religious slogans inviting Muslims to wage jihad against infidels displayed everywhere. Why can’t he do something about it?

The recent decision by the US to transfer nuclear technology to India, while denying Pakistan the same opportunity, is hardly surprising. Musharraf stresses that our nuclear weapons are in safe hands but nobody trusts him. The reason is that these “safe hands” have repeatedly toppled civilian governments and are still refusing to come under civilian rule, as in other functioning democracies. No wonder the Indian prime minister, in his recent visit to the US, exploited the current situation in Pakistan and raised concern about our nuclear program. Postponing the Pakistani PM’s visit to the US in order to avoid further disgrace will not help to improve our image abroad.

Our military rulers must understand that in order gain trust and respect in the eyes of the world community, we must not only terminate religious extremism at all levels of society but also restore true democracy in our country as soon as possible.

Shahid Ahson,

Wah.

GODot #505, {``The article itself is quite serious. However, this board is bursting with fun ...``}

I agree, my friend. You were so sincere in presenting the choices and discussing the options. Regardless of the ensuing circus atmosphere, you have managed to stir up debate and loosened up creative juices all over Chowk. Anytime you pass 500+ posts, you have succeeded. I thank you for your compliments and just to let you know, I always enjoyed your own humor and wit on Chowk UP.

Don`t worry about the party on your turf. There are some people who will have their fiesta anywhere, even at a funeral.

Thanks,
Salim

#513 by haroonellahi on August 4, 2005 11:33am PT


The solution to the problem of the Mullahs is quite simple.


sorry....you`re trying to have your cake and eat it too...First you say Kashmir is a really really important cause...unfortunately for you, your army has shown it`s incapable of taking Kashmir by force...the only option you have is the pinpricks from the jihadis...and to produce these jihadis, you need more madrassahs where they teach jihad...It doesn`t matter that YOU don`t support militancy for the kashmir cause.....your government does...

The Kashmir cause is a HUGE anchor around your neck...

death by a thousand cuts has become suicide by a thousand self-inflicted wounds...don`t believe me...just look at the newscasts of el-presidente squirming when trying to defend the London bombers pakistani connection...

Godot:
Very nice article.

Liked your definition of secular Islam, i guess any secular religion could have the same definition.

Raja

An interesting albeit offtopic op-ed..

The shift in US policy


By Tanvir Ahmad Khan

THERE has already been considerable comment in these columns on the recently announced Indo-US defence pact and the new US policy on nuclear collaboration with India. The main reason for revisiting these developments is to present a slightly different perspective.

There is an air of deja vu about the Pakistani concern that the sub-continental balance of power has once again been threatened by India’s greatly enhanced access to sophisticated military hardware and nuclear technology from the United States. The alarm bells are ringing partly because there was only a blurred focus on the process that led India and the United States to the present level of strategic cooperation. India was making steady progress in freeing its relations with Washington as, indeed, with other western states, from what George Perkovich, the author of ‘India’s Nuclear Bomb’, once described as that ‘infamous hyphen’ that had connected India and Pakistan in the calculations of outside powers since 1947. Indian diplomacy had increasingly challenged this hyphenated approach to South Asia.

The nuclear tests of 1998 gave a new lease of life to the traditional equation as strategic parity seemed to outweigh growing disparities in virtually all other fields. Perkovich had followed Kenneth Waltz’s criteria to determine if India was a major power and argued that a state’s power can be understood as a combination of its capacity to influence others to behave as it wants them to and, conversely, to resist the unwelcome influence of others. He was not convinced that India had already attained the status of a major power. India’s failure to browbeat Pakistan in the ten-month long military standoff reinforced this perception. India rightly concluded that its ongoing dialogue with the United States had to be intensified to upgrade its conventional as well as strategic capability.

Ever since the nuclear tests, the United States has maintained a continuous though clearly differentiated engagement with New Delhi and Islamabad. Experts like George Perkovich had assumed that India would not be able to radically alter the US stand on the nuclear issue because of the stringent US non-proliferation legislation. They are not exactly thrilled by the latest decision of President Bush.

But Washington Post’s Jim Hoagland has read the dynamics of the US policy in the era of neo-conservative dominance more accurately. Hailing the new “visionary bilateral agreement” on nuclear cooperation with India as “the first important accomplishment of George W. Bush presidency,” he considers the accord as a demonstration of a security strategy that “holds that the nature of regimes, rather than the nature of weapons they possess, will determine their relations with Washington.” Pakistan, he thinks, occupies a difficult and highly dangerous, middle ground for US interests. India now follows Israel in benefiting from this arbitrary interpretation of NPT and the US law.

There have been two dominant trends in the US policy towards South Asia since the Clinton era. In Pakistan’s case, the initial emphasis was on internal political and economic reforms, relations with the Taliban and pressure to get it to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty as well as accept a fissile material cut-off for future. Driven by the need to punish Afghanistan for the great atrocity of 9/11, President Bush enlisted Pakistan as the most committed ally in the war against terror.

The revised policy recognized the need to enhance Pakistan’s military capability — largely in the context of the anti-terrorist campaign. It also attached high priority to cultural and educational modernization to ensure that Pakistan does not become another Afghanistan. This was an intensive but essentially limited engagement with little relevance to the realignment of global power structure.

The decision to help transform India into a major global power had an altogether different context. The ideologues of the Bush era have tirelessly argued that the immense disparity in the military power of the United States and all other ‘major powers’ entitles it to pursue policies of unipolarity and unilateralism, be it the doctrine of pre-emptive intervention, Kyoto Protocols or the International Criminal Court.

It is, however, easy to talk about hegemonic doctrines but much more difficult to limit the dispersal of power, especially of the economic kind. The rise of other states and, more ominously, the increasing disruptive capability of non-state actors make for an unstable hegemony, an inconclusive imperium. Even the United States cannot dispense with the Bismarckian paradigm of the hub and spokes; it needs to ensure that emerging powers do not upset it. India’s self-image as a state that has outgrown the limitations of an Asian sub-region makes it a principal candidate for an alliance with a superpower asserting itself as the most powerful empire of human history.

Condoleeza Rice speaks of the United States’ relations with three major Asian powers—- Japan, South Korea and India as providing the “strategic context” in which Chinese ambitions could be restrained. This is an unfair view of China as it ensures its global eminence not by projecting military power but mostly by its spectacular economic success and its scrupulous adherence to the UN Charter(dude..ever heard of tibet?) . China’s unflagging commitment to export-led economic development gives it a great stake in international peace and stability.

Nevertheless, the new US policy towards India continues to be justified as an effort to build India as a countervailing power and a potential military ally of the United States in the inevitable confrontation with China. Obviously, the nuclear component of the new India policy would have a smoother passage through the Congress if China was painted as a potential foe.

The crystal ball that one can gaze into at this point of time shows intense competition and rivalry but no Sino-US or Sino-India military confrontation. Taiwan, perhaps the most contentious issue, will become a flashpoint only in the unlikely event of Washington encouraging it to declare independence. The recent Chinese formulation of ‘one country two shores’ strengthens the hands of Taiwanese opposed to severing links with the mainland. Furthermore, the economic interdependence between the US and China has now reached a level where conflict has become almost unaffordable.

Similarly, the Sino-Indian territorial dispute may take time for resolution but carries little risk of a resort to the use of force. Meanwhile, burgeoning trade, expected to increase from the present $12 billion to $ 100 billion, will always militate against India joining any military adventure against China. There is no gamble here on the part of the United States — only well calculated moves to ensure that India becomes an essential pillar of the American strategic architecture for Asia and not a member of a coalition of major powers prejudicial to American interests. The chances are that the US will protect its position by modulating its harsh unilateralism and settling for an acceptable global equilibrium propped up by India, China and other major powers. Pakistan’s real challenge is to find a place in this new order.

If it is a correct reading of unfolding events, it is not very difficult to work out Pakistan’s options. It is probably not open to Pakistan to seek a fundamental review of Washington’s strategic decision to assist India at the expense of India-Pakistan balance of power. Similarly, it is extremely unlikely that the US will extend comparable nuclear-related equipment or technology to Pakistan. It is time to recognize that Washington uses NPT and other international instruments in the nuclear arena selectively. But there is, at this point of time, no need to distrust American assurances that Pakistan’s conventional military needs will be considered sympathetically.

The present balance of power is rather fragile. The army is probably capable of playing a defensive role. When it comes to airpower, India has SU-30 Ks, Mirage 2000s, MiG-23s and MiG-27s strike aircraft and MiG-29 air defence fighters. Pakistan’s Mirage IIIs, Vs and Q-5s and around 30 aging F-16 aircraft cannot provide a balance without the induction of new F-16s and that too if they arrive with the required avionics. Pakistan Navy has not known the baptism of fire that the army and air force have gone through but it has used the limited funds available to it intelligently to maintain reasonable defensive capability with submarines and light guided missile ships.

Pakistan cannot match India’s defence expenditure, especially with open-ended Indian acquisitions from the United States, without accentuating existing distortions in Pakistan’s economy. But a carefully calculated ratio of forces will have to be ensured till India-Pakistan detente takes firmer roots.

Regrettably, there is still a crucial role for strategic deterrence. Pakistan has to free itself of any external veto on research and development on nuclear weapons and delivery system as India is not likely to accept a strategic restraint regime that compromises its major power status. China has countered the possible ABM capability in Taiwan and elsewhere in the Asia-Pacific region by R&D dedicated to the refinement of its nuclear forces without opting for Soviet style warhead parity. Meanwhile, we have to preserve our faith in the process aiming at neutralizing the historical animosity between the two nuclear-capable neighbours. The difficulties encountered en route should be an argument for re-doubled efforts and not for abandoning the journey.

Notwithstanding its close and somewhat domestically controversial ties with Washington, Islamabad has expended greater energy in diversifying its external relations than in a long time. Admittedly, not all the initiatives have borne fruit as yet. Russia, for one, has not responded adequately to Pakistani overtures. With Iran, where distrust of Pakistani establishment runs deep, there is still a long way to go. Pakistan has to demonstrate, whenever the occasion demands, that it would never be a part of the siege Iran is threatened with. Domestic compulsions of the Kabul authorities and visceral anti-Pakistan feelings of some elements of the erstwhile Northern Alliance will continue to create difficulties but Pakistan has to stay the course in pursuing cooperation with Kabul, and through Afghanistan further afield with Central Asian states.

The kingpin of a long-term policy designed to assure Pakistan’s due place in the eventual global equilibrium — a place defined by its intrinsic strategic importance —- continues to be China. It will be a mistake to take this vital relationship for granted. It too requires proper nurturing. History has shown that an exaggerated Washington-centric policy did not serve Pakistan well. This is the right time to persuade the United States that the high importance that Pakistan rightly attaches to relations with it does not obviate the need for developing ties with other countries some of which may not find favour with it at a particular moment of time.

The writer is a former foreign secretary.

The solution to the problem of the Mullahs is quite simple. Their main voting banks are those people, who are not as economically solid as as the middle, upper-middle class, and upper class. Therefore, one would have to adopt a multi-pronged strategy in order to cut the supportive legs of the Mullahs.

One would have to carry out this out tactfully, carefully, and patiently. Dislodging a mindset, which has entrenched itself from the flawed policies following `79 is going to literally be a David vs. Goliath battle. The masses can not, at no point in time, be given even the slightest indiciation that their/our majority religion Islam, is in danger. The phrase, `Islam is in danger` on it`s own is charged with enough energy to unravel any political establishment in just about any Muslim-majority country.Pakistan is no exception to that. No one should be allowed to misuse our religious inclinations to incite a revolution or something of that genre to suit their own sinister designs.

1. Introduction of Chemistry, Physics, Liberal Art Subjects, non-Islamic literature, and `Civic Studies` co-existing peacefully with Islamic studies should be the norm.

2. The government should consider declaring war agaisnt illiteracy and unemployment, and the youth who graduate from schools and institutions should be oriented in such a way that they can actually take part in the practical economy.

3. Adopting English language for all Pakistanis as our second national language will be a great victory for Pakistan. It will be a correct attempt at shortening the gap between the middle-upper classes and the lower class. This is the need of the hour! If the Shiv Sena can see the light in this decision, then we should be able to aswell!

Re: # 513

Mr Elahi,

Since I have so RUDELY invited myself to Chowk....

{{Introduction of Chemistry, Physics, Liberal Art Subjects, non-Islamic literature, and `Civic Studies` co-existing peacefully with Islamic studies should be the norm.}}

Just how da` f*ck does Pakistani Islam EXIST PEACEFULLY with Science...

The first Paki scientist who says
``Gee...looks like Darwin`s Survival of the Fittest
or the ``Theory of Evolution`` makes sense..``

He will be arrested for blasphemy. While in jail he will be murdered by a dukkar Paki fellow inmate. That inmate will be given a ``mullah`` pardon for being a valiant mujahadeen of Islam.
And the ``cycle of Paki life``...
will go on & on...
till your blighted nation drowns in the gutter it has dug for itself.

While all you ``islam ka mashoor pehelwans`` are drowning in your own filth...
You can collectively gasp

---

``IT WAS A HINDU_JEWISH_CHRISTIAN_BHUDDIST`` conspiracy!!!

Re # 497 & 508

Romair,

I’ve very clearly stated my background and who I am in my essay My Identity. Combine that with my Bio and you would know everything about me, including what I look like. It will answer all your questions you asked me. I may not live in Pakistan anymore and have given up its citizenship, but I do have a great deal of affinity for Pakistan and am a well-wisher of that country.

You are perhaps correct that our views are probably more aligned than they diverge. I do not consider Pakistani mullahs to be “the” problem for Pakistan, either. I just shudder at the thought what would follow if they grab power in Pakistan.

To me the only solution to the mullahs and economic rut in which Pakistan finds itself today lies in education. Beginning from primary schools, make education free of cost to all children and change the curricula to include employable skills that’s heavy on math, English, and science. Get rid of negative history and stop demonizing India and the Hindus and putting in everybody’s head that they, or anyone else, are Pakistan’s enemy. Most importantly, teach only the gentle and tolerant version of Islam. When that generation of Pakistanis grows up with analytical abilities, not seeing India as enemy, and a religion that teaches kindness and tolerance, the mullah problem from Pakistan will die a quiet death and Pakistan would have secured a prosperous economic future.

I’m out of time to discuss Iran. But to summarize: I’m not a fan of Iran’s political and social setup and will loathe to live in a country like that.

Re: # 511

godot,

{{I may not live in Pakistan anymore and have given up its citizenship, but I do have a great deal of affinity for Pakistan and am a well-wisher of that country.}}

You tell him; kid!!!
...
besides what gives ``his highness`` the right to speak for Pakistan?

He`s just an ISI mole who hi-tailed it out of Amrika, when 911 happened..
(Maybe the FBI has a file on him)
& sought refuge in a rat-hole in Canukistan..

His ``cover strory``...I work for an Indian..
I meet 1000s of Indians everyday,
I know everything about everything...
has been blown to smithereens!

{{. I do not consider Pakistani mullahs to be “the” problem for Pakistan, either. I just shudder at the thought what would follow if they grab power in Pakistan.}}

Trust me...
the army, the ISI & the Azaaaad Kashmiris have been sleeping in the same bed as the mullahs.
Each party has been USING each other, for their OWN shameless agenda

Each side seems to think that ``the other`` isnt the main problem...
they use each other to have an orgy with the innocent awaam of Pakistan...

Yup!
They are the TRUE patriots of Pakistan...
Gee.....the ``smell`` his EVIL patriotism...
wafts all the way to Amrikistan...

Its because of BUTTfakhrs like him...
innocent Pakis are being harrassed in Amrika everyday..

Khuda Hafiz

Mantolives, I made a comment, where I completely retracted my statements regarding the betrayal issue. Also, you insulted Don first by making a statement regarding the status of the elite, and then he responded to you. Then you`re fight agaisnt him was futile, and you subsequently labelled me guility for being `those who wreak havoc in Pakistan`. This you did so as you felt I betrayed you by condemning you for comparing Don and Ossama. Coincidentally, as you were throwing a fitt on MSN about how I betrayed you, concurrently I was on the phone with Don, discussing a way to settle this issue, therefore, you are the author of all the problems.

Also, I attended the insitution you taught at from kg-1 to grade 3, and was set to make a come-back in 9th, but did not do so. Any hows, let`s just stop indirectly scoring points on eachother shall we? I think thats the last thing Pakistan needs.


The Supreme Court of Pakistan has raised about 12 objections to 12 articles of the Hasba Bill, which the Mutiada Majlis Amal (MMA) wants to be made into law in NWFP.
If the Hasba Bill is applied in it`s present form, it will be highly detrimental to creativity and and to the Arts.

Regarding the issue of Iran, the Iranian Revolution was a popular uprising agaisnt an illegitimate government, or infact, agaisnt the illegitimate Shah regime. The silent majority finally stood up to the dictorial and retrogressive policies of the Shah, who had absolutely no legitimacy of ruling Persia.

Right now, as far as electoral transparency is concerned, Iran most likely has the most transparency in it`s elections in the entire Muslim world.

Iran`s clerics are not justified in disqualfying those people from contesting elections, who they feel are not fit to run. Simmilliarly, Turkey`s policy of disqualifying people from contesting elections is also flawed as it is agaisnt the democratic nature of an egalatarian election. Furthermore, the Saudi Arabian policy of enforcing the hijab on all Muslim females is also fundementally flawed as is the French policy of forcibly removing the hijab, turban, and skull cap from the heads of minority-faith students in her public schools.

Opposite ends on the extreme line to be quite honest!

But Godot, I have a solution to the potential dilema you have raised concerns about. The Judiciary of Pakistan needs immediate reforms. The creation of a truly independent election council is also highly neccassary. These two institutions will serve as two of the main lines-of-defense agaisnt extremist-oriented political parties in Pakistan.

You see, there is no one simple solution to this problem. One needs to take several steps in many different fields in order to sovle the problem. One would be to introduce a more modern curriculm, another would be to increase spending on human development, primary-education, and higher-education.




Also, Tahmeed, I have never heard what you have said regarding Shariah law. Can you please expand on it?

Dear Godot...

Sorry for irrelevant question...

but when you say you are an Oracle consultant.... does that mean ERP?

Re: # 509

CRM.

Godot #488: Perhaps we are debating the same point from different directions. I think mullahs are a problem in Pakistan. But not nearly the main one. You seem to think they are THE problem. In my opinion, Pakistan is not a mullah country. It goes against its ethos and history. Do keep in mind that mullahs, united across all of Pakistan, won only two seats in the previous elections. Had the USA not bombed Afghanistan, they would still be at two. Sheikh Rashid - the furthust thing from a mullah - by himself won two seats.

``a la Iran; unless of course you don’t have any issues with the Iranian political and social setup.``

Actually, I do have issues with Iran`s political set-up. I don`t think maulvis should vet the candidates for Presidency. But not nearly as many issues as I have with Pakistan`s. Iran, at the moment, is probably the most well-established democracy in the Muslim world. Iran is ranked 102 on the World`s HDI. Pakistan is ranked 143. Iran has been ranked by MIT to be full notch ahead of Pakistan in scientific development. Their film industry is putting out some of the most unique material in the world.

I think Iran is one country that is going to be well on its way in about twenty years. Everything there is happening organically, through an internal process. First the secular and very pro-West dictator Shah was kicked out, internally and organically. Then the mullahs took over in a pseudo-democracy. Now there are movements against them. They will eventually be out, also. This is how countries progress........

In the meantime, there are very few countries in Asia that have better relations with their neighbors than Iran. Iran has great relations with China and Russia. It has good relations with Pakistan, India and Afghanistan (now). It has excellent reations with Iraq (now). It has OK to good relations with Europe (other than nuclear stuff). The only two countries that it has terrible relations with are USA and Israel.

I see a lot more in Iran than mullahs. I think you maybe too obsessed with mullahs, which is why that is all you see there. You need to look deeper into a society, than that. Even a person like Tariq Ali, who is a self-proclaimed apostate, and hates religion of all kind (probably the biggest anti-mullah Pakistani ever) has the same views about Iran, that I do. In fact, do listen to the speech Bill Clinton made about Iran, at Davos. Nearly opposite to your views......The only thing that can mess up Iran`s progress is if Bush attacks them, under his axis of evil theory.............If he does attack, then the mullahs will become really really popular there........

But, just for the sake of argument, what is your solution for getting rid of mullahs in Pakistan? Should they be shot? Excommunicated? Shipped out to sea? What if they get democratically elected? Should religious parties be not allowed to take power, a la Turkey (where they eventually took over, anyways)? I don`t support mullahs, but I do realize them as a part of Pakistan.

$503 Friend`s hostility!!
Hai ram! yeh kya keh rahe ho!!
Mere dil ke huzaar tukde kar ke rakh diye, zalim. Aab mein iss jindagi se kya ummedein rakhun!

Though Godot is correct about you. Even though you did show your colors earlier, you appears to be fun