Why Doesn’t the World Care?

>>>>>Unpleasant as these factors may sound, one must recognize that the world is not singling out Pakistan or its earthquake victims. Far less has been done for greater, albeit, man-made, tragedies. Ethnic cleansing in Rawanda, the genocide in Liberia and the famine in Darfur are recent examples of where, we as a world, failed to respond. The reasons for global indifference are the same; lack of affinity, absence of business potential, unsustained media coverage.<<<<

Aamir, rest of your rhetoric makes a little sense, but where did you read about “Famine” in Darfur?? Hello? It is “Genocide” and Pakistan, along with a few other G77 schmuks voted down any action against the Sudanese. Ask Jan Vandemoortele. World ain’t as stupid as you believe it to be. How come you so conveniently forgot to mention the helping hand India extended, which was refused by Pakis?

``.......Austria had almost successfully closed the door on Turkey’s 42 year dream of joining the EU. 57% of EU citizens (80% of Austrians) are opposed Turkey’s inclusion into Europe, based on paranoia of Turkey`s imperialistic past, but more on the thought of 75m Muslims gate crashing the white Christian clique....................``



What do you expect when platepissers devour these nations like cancer...................the latest example is a week long riots in France.....?????

its alleged `terrorist training camps`


Umm...alleged? You`re still in denial, aren`t you?

The day of the earthquake, India offered help when it was clear Pakistan had suffered more. Pakistan actually said they were doing fine and offered to help India in return. Maybe their dignity and honor were at stake? You think that doesn`t send out a signal saying you don`t really need help?

Even today, India has set up camps along the LoC to help people on the Pakistani side of Kashmir...Pakistan`s response: It set up camps to help Indian Kashmiris? WHY!! To show that you don`t need help and are actually capable of helping other countries? Guess the world got the message loud and clear..

The whole premise of your article is: we`re poor innocent victims and nobody likes us...

So why isn`t the world falling over itself to help Pakiland? A few pictures are worth a few thousand words...

Aamir Ibrahim...
You`ve analyzed the causes for the world`s meager response to Pakistan`s great tragedy well, but the sort of solutions that you propose aren`t likely, in my opinion, to contribute to greater understanding between Pakistan and the world`s non-Muslim countries. Perhaps the world ``might just start caring`` when Pakistan begins to care for the world - the world that believes in secular education (science and fact based) for all; basic human rights for all; equal opportunity for all; equal, free and full participation in the workings of the government for all; etc. Of course when I say ``for all`` I mean specifically, but not exclusively, women.
Erecting more barriers or retreating to a past era will not foster the understanding and care that`s in short supply these days.
mirmir

Donation for jihad generates One Billion Dollar a Year - so all you pakis have to do is divert that money towards re-development for next 5 years....

Anycase - the message is very clear.... you folks to have to clean-up your acts and become productive member in commity of nations..... first step is to stop jihad....

Aamir Ibrahim
Your analysis is quite correct. World is not helping Pakistan because it does not see Pakistan willing to help itself.

Pakistan allowed 73,000 Kashmiris to die rather than taking any help from Indians. While it may be good for the ego of Pakistani Army and Pakistani`s elite sitting in Lahor, Karachi and USA, it is not good for poor Kashmiris and world recognized it that way.

While Pakistani common people had to die because helicopters were not available, Indian helicopers were not used. Why do you think Nato and USA are not willing to deploy more helicopers? Because they are being fired upon on whatever they deployed!!

World also saw tit-for-tat medical aid camps. Whatever was motive of Indian aid camps on its side of LOC, Pakistan`s springing up camps for Indian Kashmir`s on Pakistani side of LOC was taken as proof that Pakistan is not serious and just playing games.

World also saw Mushy`s statements saying ``no budget cut`` for defence. Why should world help Pakistan when Pakistan wants to use its own resources for defence purchases rather than buying urgent material.

This ego building exercise by Pakistani military and elite is just resulting in more and more tragedy for Kashmiris.

I think your analysis is quite shoddy. Your premise that there must be other reasons for the world not to give so much within barely 9 months misses the important fact that it has only been 9 months. Donor fatigue is a real problem and it`s hard to raise a lot of money over and over within a short period.
I would agree with you however that the first-hand experience of tourists from affluent societies of the devastation brought about by the tsunami had a lot to do with the worldwide awareness and sympathy to the people affected. Kashmir otoh was isolated and even more so after the earthquake. It`s very hard to raise money in a case like this. Also consider the fact that the american public had fatigued out on account of the disaster in louisiana and mississippi.

I think your analysis is shoddy because the two reasons cited are sufficient enough. The rest of your post is pure conjecture that doesn`t hold up. Show me an editorial or a speech or some other proof from donor countries that cites the earthquake damage in the same breath as pakistan`s political shortcomings. You`d find a lot in the indian media but not anywhere else.

#7 friend, you`re indulging in Romairian analysis. You`re superposing INDIAN reaction on world reaction. Most people who would give are hardly aware of any of the nuances. The governments, if anything, have made a commitment to shore up Musharraf and will do everything possible to make sure he remains popular.

Aamir,

Good post.
The reasons for the reluctance of the wealthy nations to give aid to Pakistan in the proportions needed, are, according to you:

A) No affinity - less tourism, less awareness, less on-the-ground exposure. And here you refer to travel advisories.

By all accounts of friends who have visited Pakistan, the hillstations are beautiful and the people hospitable to outsiders. But if I`m a resident of country X and if there are strong public voices and institutions in Pakistan (eg Markaz Dawa) holding my country responsible for events A, B & C and calling for armed jihad against X or a friendly country, Z, why would I want to come to Pakistan? Also, if French and Chinese engineers and reporters from international newspapers can be kidnapped or attacked with carbombs, where does the fault for my disaffinity lie?

Plus, it doesn`t help that if you do visit Pakistan as a tourist, you might have to radically change your lifestyle (dress, entertainment, easy legal access to alcohol, gender insensitivity) for the duration you are there. Compare, say, Nepal to Pakistan in terms of the options and freedom available to tourists, even in a country torn by insurrection.

B) Business Climate

Pakistan does not have the cheapest unskilled labour. Or the cheapest skilled labour. It has few institutions that can produce world-class academics, engineers and researchers. The public primary and secondary schooling system is a mess, what with ghost schools and low enrollment. Secondary school textbooks on biology have Islamic concepts willy nilly thrust into them. Works of literature are banned in Punjab University because they will inflame the volatile morals of Pakistanis. And to read Cowasjee and Hoodbhoy on the university education system is to feel pity for Pakistan.

Pakistan`s market is not the biggest in the world. The rich can already afford everything. The poor can afford nothing. And the middle class is very tiny.

So Pakistan is neither an inviting market nor a pool of skilled talent or a vast, employer friendly Free Trade Zone where you can hire docile, nimble-fingered women by the thousands.

Of course, exceptions are present, but this is my impression of the business climate in Pakistan.

After all this you swerve and say :

``If the outpouring of self generated funds continues and examples of scores of acts of selfless heroism remain unabated, it is unlikely for the world to crack the national cohesion Pakistanis have finally started exhibiting.``

Aamir, the world does not want to crack the national cohesion of Pakistan. I can`t understand how someone who shuns the oppressed-ummah Pakistan-as-permanently-betrayed victim mentality and goes on to identify so many material factors for the state that Pakistan is in now can suddenly make a volte face and conceive of the world trying to crack Pakistani unity. I might have misunderstood you here. Please correct me if I do.

And there`s the rise like the phoenix from the ashes metaphor. Suppose you do manage to mobilise the funds internally and you do not fall prey to earthquake relief fatigue (which I`m pretty sure you will, in the medium term). And POK/AJK is reconstructed. What then? The world will shrug it`s shoulders and say good for you. And continue on.

Frankly, Pakistan should move towards

1) Effective land reforms and minimum wage laws (which will upset the feudals)
2) Reconciliation with mainstream democratic parties (which will upset Musharraf and the army and the MMA)
3) Removal of Hudood Ordinances, repeal of PPC 295C, oversight of madrassahs and madrassah curricula and revamping of government school curricula (which will upset the beards)
4) The promulgation of a law banning hate speech against any group including *gasp* *shock* Israel (which will upset the beards since like communists, the beards are obsessed with ideological purity - ``Will the real revolutionary/momeen please stand up?``)
5) The drastic reduction in conventional defense expenditure (what good is your nuclear deterrent ?)
6) Free and compulsory primary and secondary school education in government schools, right up to class XII, complete with mid-day meals, free textbooks and uniforms and a national truancy inspectorate.
7) A no-blushes, straight up, highly visible, complete-with-free-condoms family planning program (gosh, the beards are going to be really upset before I`m through)
8) Special courts to try offenses against women from honour killings, gang rape-as-punishment-for-others`-crimes and domestic violence to right-to-run-a-marathon (serious upset-wala vibes from le beards I`m sure)
9) Criminalizing gun display, possession or use. ( will upset pretty much everyone)
10) Visible commitment towards not allowing Pakistani territory to be used to harbour terrorists or fugitives from other countries.

If you as a country do manage to do that, or even a quarter that, the world will sit up and take notice, will ``start caring`` and develop an affinity for Pakistan rather than harbour the fear and revulsion that it now provokes.

Bitter medicine, I know, and easier posted than done. I`m not holding my breath, either. But if you don`t move towards these steps, then best case scenario, you make a mammoth national reconstruction effort that corollarily affects A and B above. Worst case scenario, you end up neither being able to commit to an effective conventional defense system against India or a national reconstruction effort. You`ll also have lakhs of people refugees for years, possibly decades, a massive rise in social unrest and a maimed economy.

With best wishes to you, Pakistan and Pakistanis,
Aha_Snark
hoipolloi@gmail.com

Soy#10
You had me for a moment with ``Romairian analysis`` phrase.

I would beg to differ. While American public may not know about all nuances, their opinion makes (talk show hosts, etc etc) are aware. Everytime they mention ``a helicopter getting shot at``, you loose few million dollars worth of aid.

Pakistan`s tit-for-tat show was in news (CNN, BBC) etc for few days. After that people just got tired..

Regards

“Perhaps to both and perhaps to neither but there is no denying the emerging reality that both Islamabad and Ankara are gravitating to the same Islamic civilization which since 9/11 has picked up unprecedented momentum. The revival of religion, ``la revanche de Dieu,`` as Gilles Kepel labeled it, provides a basis for identity and commitment that transcends national boundaries and unites civilizations.”

This is where the problem is. An apparently well educated and well placed Pakistani is stuck in a mullah’s dream. The dream of Islamic civilization firmly planted in the minds of educated Pakistanis by the incessant state propaganda machine and lies of the Jamaat Islami type religio-fascist organizations is just amazing. This phenomenon is also afflicting new generation of Indians that talk about Dharama, Varna and Hindu civilization under the RSS influence.

There were many positive sides of the demise of the communist state and communism but the worst negative was that the debate moved from capitalism, socialism, communism, liberalism and conservatism to Christianity, Islam and Hinduism.

The demise of communism has actually resulted in the rise of religions. Which for human progress is much more disturbing than mho, socialism ever was. Socialism and communism never denied progress and acceptance of scientific reasons. Socialism was a failure as an economic system and communism was never a fully developed government/administrative system or ideology. Often it failed to fully account for human nature but still it was progressive enough to ask people to think and think hard on matters that belonged to the world and not to the supernatural.

A civilization is not based on regressive ideas. Humans are visionaries, they attempt to look to the future and not to the past. Religion can only draw strength from the past. Every new civilization was a little better than the old one. An old civilization has never replaced the new civilization. Islam or for that matter any religion is not a substitute or replacement of the Western civilization because western civilization is advanced, progressive and supports visionaries.
Religion is merely a reaction to the Western civilization.


9/11 has not provided momentum to the Islamic civilization. It has in fact shown Islam’s contradictions and regressive ideas. The analysis by the Islamist that 9/11 is actually helping them shows how out of touch they are with the reality on the ground.
With added scrutiny, it is becoming absolutely clear now that Islam does not provide any answer to the real problems faced by countries where Islam is a majority religion.

To some posters-

Indian help would not have amounted to much. India and Indians should help Kashmiris in India and that is good enough them. The refusal was correct as it would have created security and other problems. After so much noise, Indian could only muster $25 million. I think they should use that money to help Indian Kashmiris or Indian poor.
May be they should buy auto rickshaws for all the poor pulling cycle rickshaws, an affront to humanity.

aamir what you missed was a crucial point, in otherwise neatly balanced wrte up.
The fact the pakistan blew up the atom and has been prancing about as the sole Islamic Nuclear Power is THE MAJOR reason for a distinct lack of deep understanding here.
If Pakistan can spend this money on the bomb then surely it can look after itself.

That many people from pakistan (the columnists etal) forget to include this is sad. The full story needs to be told. Blaming Civilisational faults lines for this is dishonest - intellectual dishonesty.

#13 by HP on November 3, 2005 11:28am PT


This is where the problem is. An apparently well educated and well placed Pakistani is stuck in a mullah’s dream. The dream of Islamic civilization firmly planted in the minds of educated Pakistanis by the incessant state propaganda machine and lies of the Jamaat Islami type religio-fascist organizations is just amazing.


Maybe the real problem is that a majority of Pakis actually suport the idea of the ummah and the caliphate and all that pan-Islamic baloney...

while you may try to delude yourself into believing that a majority of pakistanis don`t support jihad/suicide bombing and Osama Bin LAden, the world is a bit smarter..I feel your pain...the pain of living on the edge..not knowing when the feds will kick down your door and deport you to gitmo(or worse, Karachi)..

Remember, Pakis trust their religious leaders more than they trust the army or police..and they think religion is more important than nationality..

Indians trust military and police, Pakistanis don’t: BBC survey

LONDON: Most Indians trust the military and police more than their politicians while the Pakistanis trusted religious leaders, according to the findings of the Gallup International Voice of the People Survey 2005 commissioned by the BBC World Service

The poll surveyed more than 50,000 people in 68 countries, representing the views of 1.3 billion citizens. It also found that most Pakistanis believed their religion was more important than nationality. Little control: On the question of which people were most trusted, 61 percent of the surveyed Indians cited the military and the police, 58 percent said journalists, while only one percent trusted politicians.