The Chicken Hawks Of Pakistan In response to rajanjua (Reply # 52)
Dear Janjua Sahib:

I support your position. Thanks!

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Refusing the Sitara-I-Imtiaz In response to Jay (Reply # 83)
Dear Jay:

Interesting suggestions. In view of your interest, is it a bit too rude to ask you to enlighten us with your versions of the partition of India, the issue of Kashmir, and the plight of the Mohajirs (particularly the MQM)?

I would like to deliberate with you on these issues once you get your article(s) published on the Chowk. Good luck!

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Refusing The Sitara-I-Imtiaz In response to shammi (Reply # 190)
Dear Shammi:

Your statement: ``Guys, if the best that you can do is to slant your perception of reality by quoting extensively from readily available web-material, then I pray that as you gradually mature you will come to realize that those who live in glass houses should not throw stones at another, and that there is more to be gained by self-criticism than by criticizing others.``

My reply: I agree. Let us worry about our problems first.

Chowk cyber-war is most likely to produce more enemies than friends. Let us appeal to the good side/sensibilities of all ``Others``.

And, let us be thankful that there are still some people in this world who have the moral courage to decline symbolic awards from the states that are ``generally`` ruled by scounderals. Why scounderals prevail? Because, the people don`t resist and assert themselves. Any comment?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Refusing The Sitara-I-Imtiaz In response to Mateen (Reply # 95)
Dear Mateen:

Your statement: ``If a chap makes it to the rank of brigadier and upward, he has ACHIEVED that rank in merit despite all that FEROZEK or BAHMED et al are trying to say. Ipso facto, the award of any IMTIAZ medal to him/her ( yes, we do have some females who have been awarded!) is well considered and deserved - and I do feel proud of getting it on merit!``

My reply: Is this a reply of my Reply # 70? What I am trying to say? Please elaborate. I have not yet challenged anybody`s merit? In my post, I was talking about the way our country ``generally`` functions? My focus was on tendencies not certainties. I have always maintained a distinction between the military personnels and the institution of military. I also distinguish between ``the military for defense`` and ``militarism``. I am not opposed to the former category per se, I do oppose militarism. It is the logic of militarism that has immensely hurt our national development and cohesion. Please comment.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Refusing The Sitara-I-Imtiaz In response to Mateen (Reply # 58)
Dear Mateen:

Your statement: ``PLEASE DO NOT RUN DOWN YOUR COUNTRY`S RECOGNITION OF YOUR MERIT.``

My reply: This statement needs to be qualified. We cannot limit Pakistan (our homeland) to the ruling elite. We have seen enough of them. Unfortunately, a lot of them are either scounderals or the overt/covert/tacit supporters of those scounderals. Silence against authoritarianism and inegalitarianism can never lead to necessary social change. Individuals like KRashid and Pervez Hoodbhoy makes sense to a lot of Pakistanis who have long been concerned about the state of affairs in Pakistan.

Pakistan and Pakistanis needs to shun colonial and neocolonial practices and work for the building of a model political community of people whose basic human and citizenship rights are adequately protected in the spheres of the state and civil society.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

P.S. We need to know why the talent of ``only`` a very small fraction of people is recognized? Any comment.

Refusing The Sitara-I-Imtiaz In response to krashid (Reply # 54)
Dear K:

Your statement: ``If our army don`t give much medal, it might be due to poor economic situation and may be there is no more land left in Pakistan to be distributed to them.``

My reply: The issue of giving a medal is not related (I presume) with the grant/lease of agricultural or non-agricultural land. Medals don`t cost much. Another land reform under the danda of army (and in the interest of army and other loyalists) is sufficient to make the army (particularly the officers) happy. Likewise, a new dam project (even if relatively small) can also be used to significantly enhance the value of existing arable land.

For additional insights, please see Vakil Anjum`s ``Siasat Kay Firoun`` (Pharoes of Politics), published by Ferozsons in 1992.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Refusing The Sitara-I-Imtiaz Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy is one of those lucky/privileged persons who have ever been considered positively for a national award.

I agree that there are a lot of problems in our homeland. I also believe that our national resources were rarely allocated with the intention of making Pakistan a modern, progressive, and respectable state and society. Let me remind all of my friends that Pakistan is a land of great potential, but our ruling/power elite have created hurdles (and opportunity costs) for millions of smart and budding Pakistanis to show their real potential.

If Dr. Hoodbhoy has declined the award for professional reasons than I don`t support his stand. If he has declined to protest against the way our country functions, then I wholeheartedly support his stand.

Our dilemma is a national one. We have failed to make our people the true, loving, conscientious, and law abiding citizens of a free and egalitarian Pakistan. We need to invest in human development to ensure a better future for our coming generations. As long as we fail to do so, all national awards and similar gestures/activities/celebrations have only little and symbolic meaning.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Obsession with Borderline Issues TO Asad_K and Other Chowkwallas:

I am going out of town for a few days. Asad, I will write a response to your post as soon as I return.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Obsession with Borderline Issues In response to adnan_672 (Reply # 306)
Dear Adnan:

Your statement: “barring Mr. Jinnah the rest of the rulers were all dictators”

My reply: I respect Mr. Jinnah. However, please see my Chowk articles for my mixed feelings about him. If dictatorship is an antithesis of democracy, then on a scale of 1-10 (1 being a pure democracy and 10 being a pure dictatorship) we may identify various shades of democracy/democrats and dictatorship/dictators.

Your statement “ur claim that `JI and other religious parties` have always supported dictators has yet to be supported with facts (specificallt vis-a-vis JI)”.

My reply: This is not what I wrote. I said: “As far as JI and other religious interests are concerned, they have always supported the dictators as long as their interests were (overtly or covertly) served.” So, I did not make a blanket statement. I come from Karachi and I do remember well that JI (at least in Karachi) was against both Ayub Khan and Z. A. Bhutto (dictators or otherwise). You can’t read my sentence without the qualifier (i.e. “as long as their interests were (overtly or covertly) served”).

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

P.S. JI has long been working on a particular agenda very very systematically. There are a lot of JI agenda sympathizers in and outside Pakistan who have sufficient political and non-political influence in Pakistan. Could you explain to me why JI has not died so far despite her poor electoral victories?

Obsession with Borderline Issues In response to adnan_672 (Reply # 305)
Dear Adnan:

Your statement: “u seem to be somewhat of a fan of Asghar khan”

My reply: Fan of Asghar Khan? No, not really. I am not even sure that I will actually cast my vote in his favor. But, I do appreciate when people talk sense.

Your statement: “need i remind u that it was this very person who due to his lack of foresight not only weakened the PNA cause (his constant refusal to come to any power sharing formula with the other components of PNA) but also paved the way for Zia and the army idiots to take over”.

My reply: I have revived my interest in Pakistani politics after a long break. Specific details are not on my tips. You perhaps are right that Asghar was one of those who wanted the army to take over during the last days of Z. A. Bhutto. The people of Pakistan have a right to know why Asghar Khan did what he did? Why he could not figure out a political resolution?

Is it linked with the way an existing regime controls and uses the coercive state apparatus, leaving all issues of rights, decency, and dignity aside? If so, who is to be blamed and to what extent? Is there something wrong with our culture of dominance and subordination? Are we really a living nation?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Obsession with Borderline Issues In response to rajanjua (Reply # 302)
Dear Janjua Sahib:

I agree with you that my sentence “can be construed to mean that people with military background usually don`t talk sense”, while I also agree with you that such an implication “is true in a lot of cases but not most, certainly not all.” By the way, Ashgar Khan is not the only person who has talked sense. Retired Air Marshall Noor Khan is another such person who has, at least in the case of ISI, talked sense.

Let me now say something to further qualify my statement. My biggest difficulty with the Pakistani military is regarding the fact that it imposes heavy opportunity costs on the nation on the whole. This is not to deny that Pakistani military has played a positive role in some aspects, and in some parts, of Pakistan.

I support General Musharraf’s seven point agenda, though his recent statement regarding making Pakistan an ideal Islamic and modern state has really perplexed me. I think, General Musharraf has wasted a golden opportunity to put Pakistan on a new, visionary path. I must make another important qualification. I do not support Military coups as well as the military’s desire to overtly or covertly dominate the social relations of state, economy, or civil society. I was opposed to Nawaz Sharif’s style of governance, but he should have been remove democratically (a political process). Was he removed because he didn’t want to be dictated by the military? What happened to all the charges against him? Why he is living in a safe haven if all the charges were true?

As Pakistanis, we must ask why the Pakistani politicians have failed to deliver. Is it sufficient to blame everything on their alleged/real corruption? Being knowledgeable actors, the politicians need to inform the people of Pakistan: Why they continue to fail? What role other important actors play in their failure? What role has the military and other coercive state apparatus played in the same?

I view the whole idea of the National Security Council with great concern. In my view, it is an indirect way to keep the politicians under the thumb of the military (a military of a society that is intensely corrupt, inegalitarian, and divided on the basis of class, ethnicity, religious sects, places, etc.).

In my view, the direct and indirect control of politics by the military has created difficulties for Pakistan’s ability to figure out creative political and diplomatic ways to reduce her defense expenditure without jeopardizing her status as a safe and secure state in the comity of nation. Here we need to understand the culture of our so-called marshal races. Are we, as a country/nation, inadvertently doing some dirty job for other nations/countries at the cost of our national health? In other words, are other countries/nations, by providing peanuts and by knowing our internal and external difficulties, using us to their advantages?

Janjua Sahib, can you provide a satisfactory answer to the questions raised by me?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Obsession with Borderline Issues In response to Romair (Reply #: 293)
Dear Umair:

I wrote: ``Depite his military background, Asghar Khan has often talked much sense.``

You asked: `` Why do people have such biases against other ethnicities, religions and professions?``

My reply: I expected this kind of remark from you. But, what biases? Aren`t you unnecessarily biased in favor of an establishment that is a major source of Pakistan`s underdevelopment, uneven development, and poor human development?

I know your loyalty to the military and military discipline does not allow/encourage you to develop a critique of the military? Fortunately, there are a few people like Retired Air Marshall Asghar Khan who appear to put the national interest before the military interest. Do you see the difference? Hence, I wrote: ``Depite his military background, Asghar Khan has often talked much sense.`` What kind of bias do you see in my statement?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Obsession with Borderline Issues A CALIPHATE IN PAKISTAN

For an interesting opinion piece, “A Caliphate in Pakistan”, by Benazir Bhutto, see:

http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/apr2001-daily/11-04-2001/oped/o2.htm

Please remember that General Musharraf ‘s regime wants to make Pakistan an ideal Islamic and modern state.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Obsession with Borderline Issues GENERAL MUSHARRAF`S PLACE IN HISTORY

For an interesting opinion piece by (Retired) Air Marshall Mohammad Asghar Khan, President of Tehrik-i-Istiqlal, on “General Musharraf`s place in history”, see: http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/apr2001-daily/11-04-2001/oped/o1.htm.

Depite his military background, Asghar Khan has often talked much sense. I doubt if his party would ever win more than a few seats in most parts of Pakistan.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Obsession with Borderline Issues In response to krashid (Reply # 285)
Dear K:

Thanks! I am a bit out of touch with the current situation in Pakistan (as reported in the Pakistani newspapers). The alliance between the PML and the PPP is most likely to be one of convenience. It is very unfortunate that General Musharraf has so far missed a great opportunity to strengthen Pakistan through a political process.

I think, Pakistan needs a new Constitution – a Constitution that puts the military in its proper place. The notion of National Security Council is a bad idea. This will reinforce the influence of military on Pakistani politics. What kind of affects such an organization have on Pakistan`s national unity? I am not so sure.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Obsession with Borderline Issues In response to krashid (Reply # 268)
Dear K:

Your statement: “To counter the rising tide of sub-Nationalism and People`s Party, ARD, Muslim League alliance, the dictators as ever need their trusted Islamic lieutenants.”

My reply: As far as JI and other religious interests are concerned, they have always supported the dictators as long as their interests were (overtly or covertly) served. What kind of transparency is needed in such matters? Is transparency realistically possible?

What evidence is there for the subnational (potentially separatist) movements? Why the ARD and her constituent parties have shied away from winning the support of the people in various parts of Pakistan? Is Islamic rhetoric the only viable instrument of social control and/or state/governmental legitimation?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad