In addition to regular comments to blog posts, I often get emails from readers expressing all manner of opinions. This week, following my recent post on the protests in Pakistan, I received a note from a graduate student in Boston named Wajiha Ahmed that was intelligent enough to provoke me to spend a little time replying. Wajiha had also, a few days earlier, published an Op-Ed in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (it was written while the protests were just beginning). Wajiha’s response to my response was essentially a full-fledged essay. I asked her if she would slightly revise her comments in defense of the Long March protests into something for Sepia Mutiny, as a sort of one-off guest post. She agreed, and the following is a one-time guest post by Wajiha Ahmed.
The comment Wajiha most objected to was actually made by me in the comments of the original post. I said, “I think there are some people looking at this that are thinking that what is happening is not simply the expression of free speech, but a rather naked attempt at a power-grab by Nawaz and Shahbaz Sharif. Given the security crisis in the country, a protest movement like this could be seen as irresponsible.” In my first email to Wajiha, I also wrote:
What prompted me to suggest that Sharif was acting irresponsibly was a personal conversation with a friend here in Pennsylvania named [KC], who comes originally from Lahore. [KC] said to me last week that the attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team in particular left him feeling extremely depressed, since it’s beginning to seem that the militants are increasingly coming down out of the hills, and their kind of Islam is increasingly driving the agenda of the country. Given what has happened in Swat and NWFP in the past few months, it may be that the real cultural-political undercurrent that needs to be addressed is the growth of that militancy. Not because of *America’s* war on terror, but actually for Pakistan’s own internal security and stability.
Below is Wajiha’s response to those points.
Guest Post by Wajiha Ahmed
I’m writing this post in response to Sepia Mutiny’s reporting on the second Pakistani Long March to restore a deposed independent judiciary and Chief Justice. The sentiment has been that a) it was irresponsible and could have possibly destabilized Pakistan, and b) energy should have instead focused on the ‘real’ problem Pakistan faces: growing ‘sympathy’ for militants. As I see it, however, we just witnessed one of the largest broad-based, secular, non-violent movements for the rule of law and democracy in Pakistan’s history. Of course, one event is not going to change everything. But democracy is not an event, it is a process. Therefore, rather than being reported with cynicism, this important civil disobedience movement should instead have been encouraged and celebrated. In the past year, Pakistanis have successfully forced out a military dictator (Musharraf) AND compelled an authoritarian leader (Zardari) to listen to their voices – a rare, uplifting story in these trying days.
[Wajiha continued] I’ll try to address the above-stated points, starting with the latter.
1) As far as the security situation, Pakistanis will agree that it’s a major problem. Almost half of the worldwide victims of terrorist attacks last year were Pakistani! And of course, the recent attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team and the subsequent death of eight Pakistani police officers triggered deep anger, shame, and sadness. While this threat is very real, I think we may have missed a few fundamental points.
First, some media outlets reported that terrorist groups took part in the march – this is false. Militant al-Qaeda and neo-Taliban elements who crossed the border after US-led strikes in Afghanistan are not ‘religious extremists.’ Rather, they are terrorists with an Islamic veneer. Why is this important? Because there is a common misperception that Pakistanis are sympathetic to these so-called militants—but those leaving in militant-occupied areas, whether FATA or SWAT, have left if they have been able to afford to do so. Those who lack the means are living under constant fear. During my time in Peshawar, Rawalpindi and Lahore this past summer, I met not a single Pakistani sympathetic to these terrorists –- and rightly so, since they are the ones suffering the most from these attacks. So why is the perception of popular Pakistani support for terrorism so prevalent? This belief may be due, in part, to an overall emphasis by policy-makers and media outlets alike, on linking the notion of “Muslim terrorists” or “Islamic violence” with religious and cultural explanations about Islam and Muslim culture, and thereby sidelining political ones. Implicit in this view is that every Muslim has the potential to become an ‘extremist’ or a terrorist—”moderate” Muslims have chosen to ignore this call to warfare, while ‘extremist’ Muslims have simply succumbed. A more accurate and responsible explanation of the recently conceived notion of “Islamic violence,” however, lies in an analysis of recent historical and political conflicts (see Mahmood Mamdani’s Good Muslim, Bad Muslim). There are dangers in being unaware of our possible biases – in this case, misinterpreting the Long March, and perhaps even Pakistanis themselves.
The ‘solution’ to the militancy problem most probably involves a regional effort to resolve the war in Afghanistan (see Rashid and Rubin’s article in Foreign Affairs) and a concerted effort inside Pakistan to reclaim militant-ridden areas. I won’t even try to pretend to have an answer to this dilemma– counterinsurgency is extremely difficult.
Second, many have pointed out that the involvement (probably opportunistic) of the JI and other right-of-center elements like the PML-N ‘prove’ that the Long March really wasn’t a liberal movement but one that incorporates ‘militant’ elements. But Pakistani religious parties (JI, JUI) are more similar to some factions of the BJP or Shiv Sena in India than they are to any militant terrorists in FATA and Swat. And just to emphasis, they have never received more than 14% of the vote and lost the 2008 elections.
Also, the PML-N is not a religious party. Yes, it is right-of-center and sometimes panders to religious conservatives, but so does the BJP in India. So does the Republican Party in the US. While Sharif has steadfastly supported the Lawyer’s Movement, personally, I think he needs to prove that he isn’t merely being opportunistic — but that’s up to the Pakistani people to decide. Since they quickly saw through Zardari, I’ll opt to trust their judgment.
Finally, and most importantly, we can’t forget that this movement is really about the vast majority who took part in the Long March — lawyers, human rights activists, students, and concerned citizens who risked personal injury and incarceration to stand up for justice. My friend, Ammar, who took part in the now famous GPO chowk protest recalls:
As the police started shelling tear-gas indiscriminately, many activists started falling unconscious. A man who must have been in his 70s started yelling to the fleeing crowd (which included me as I could no longer breathe) that this was not a time to run but to fight… We resisted the police for over two hours, pushing them back many times…
The most memorable part of the evening for me was when Aitzaz Ahsan [prominent leader of the Lawyer’s Movement] defiantly entered the High Court building despite orders for his house arrest and the police officers stood in line to salute him. This meant a complete victory for the movement …
On one side, [what we witnessed] represented despair, state brutality and police repression. On the other, it reflected hope, resistance, and the passions and dreams of many Pakistanis. We had won not because of the generosity of the country’s leadership, but because of the countless sacrifices of lawyers and activists for the past 2 years with 15th March 2009 becoming the grand finale in Lahore. [Ammar Ali Jan’s complete account of his experience has been posted here]
Ammar’s words speak for themselves.
2) Now we move-on to the point that the Long March was somehow irresponsible.
If similar terrorist attacks occurred in another country, we would not ask its citizens to halt all activity for fear of ‘instability.’ The Lawyers Movement initiated the second march because Zardari broke the promises he made after the first one. If we agree that Zardari’s actions are undemocratic, then why are protests to demand accountability irresponsible? To be sure, Pakistani politicians rely on ‘micro rationality’ – a short-term view of political behavior – instead of ‘macro rationality.’ This tendency is partly an outgrowth of a structural reality: prolonged military rule (for more, read Ayesha Siddiqa’s Military Inc or Ayesha Jalal’s Democracy and Authoritarianism). The political system is authoritarian, and the Long March fought to change to this very tendency of the system.
The Lawyers/Civil Society movement has another responsible and important goal — reasserting and ensuring civilian control. For decades, Pakistan’s army and its powerful ISI intelligence agency defined domestic priorities. They prioritized the defense budget over badly needed infrastructure and education reform. They leveraged militant groups for their rivalries with India. They supported the Taliban in Afghanistan. Many of these same groups are the ones wreaking havoc in Pakistan today. Mitigating the power of the military is directly related to making sure that Pakistan’s establishment never supports militants again. I was thrilled that during this Long March, the military did not intervene or attempt to take control.
Pakistanis now know that the next time they are dissatisfied with anything, they can use civil disobedience to demand justice. Pakistan’s burgeoning news media revolution — dozens of independent 24-hour news channels have opened up recently — has further ensured sustained awareness.
Now that the judges have been restored, many have valid concerns about Zardari, Sharif’s intentions, and the future of Pakistan. I am sure most Pakistanis do as well. While the Movement is no magic bullet, it is an important step towards increasing the likelihood that Pakistan’s government will start to address problems of poverty, education reform, and democracy. I wish the Movement and its supporters best of luck -– they have an important struggle ahead of them. The movement is for democracy not a movement of violence.
I’ve put in bold some of the points I thought might be particularly key in Wajiha’s statement. Please respond respectfully to what she’s saying, even if you disagree.
Mr. Wry,
You still aren’t really responding to anything that I’m writing. It is important to acknowledge that there is both a powerful military dominating Pakistani politics, as well as democratic movements that are challenging the status quo (dictators and corrupt politicians).
You are a moving target — first you argue that Pakistani schools make Pakistanis anti-liberal. Then, when I give plenty of examples of how Pakistani voters vote against (and physically flee) Islamist/fundamentalist ideologies, you shift to arguing that mainstream politics is a sideshow and the military calls all the shots.
95 • Satyajit Wry said
Then why India avoid every chance of International intervention in the UN and even by UK, isn’t in India’s interest to solve this matter with US help who actually have great influence over Pakistani Army than anyone. Efforts like these make neutral minds wary of India’s intentions.
<
blockquote> Also, I’m afraid your commentary on the watersharing between India and Pakistan isn’t emblematic of the realities there. Here’s an actual academic source on the topic.
Thanks for the link but it India routinely violates it, see here, here and according to this research paper(pdf) water issue bound to turn into serious conflict.
I missed that part which Pakistani official call for it and where? No rouge groups videos please we all know how these groups incite hatred by threatening minorities even in great democracies like India.
Mr. Bery,
Actually, my statements have been pretty consistent.
Army rules pakistan–>Puppet civilian gov occasionally propped up when dictators fail or fall/popular movements arise–>Army still calls the shots–>Zia islamized army and civil society (especially public education)–>public education and madrassas have done a grave disservice to average pakistani–>this miseducation has further increased societal extremism and fanatics in the army/isi–>net result is more attacks on india.
I understand that the pakistani electorate is not a monolith, that there are some peace-loving liberals (usually educated abroad), and that political parties have influence; however, the army is still in ultimate control, funds and nurtures the taliban, all while pakistanis flee from the NW. indeed, benazir bhutto was allowed to rule by the army (in spite of her gender and sindhi ethnicity) provided she follow the army’s orders on kashmir, wmd, and india policy. this is why she was one of the most earnest advocates for extremism in kashmir. fundamentally, puppet civilian governments and popular movements do not change the ground reality for india, which must brace against renewed isi-sponsored attacks.
As for the extraneous factors, it’s pretty much common knowledge that pakistan has always been an outpost for the great powers. indeed, it was one of the primary reasons the british engineered partition. the fundamental truth, however, is that both china and pakistan know that pakistan is china’s israel.
Although we disagree with each other, Sanjeev, I am glad we were able to have a respectful conversation.
Regards,
SW
102 · Neena on March 24, 2009 02:27 AM · Direct link · “Quoteâ€(?)
Then why India avoid every chance of International intervention in the UN and even by UK, isn’t in India’s interest to solve this matter with US help who actually have great influence over Pakistani Army than anyone. Efforts like these make neutral minds wary of India’s intentions.
Neena, if you read my posts to Kabir and Sanjeev, I’ve already answered the questions about Kashmir, so please feel free to check them out. Long story short: why should India grant independence to kashmir or hand it over to pakistan when the sizeable and indigenous kashmiri sikh, hindu and buddhist populations there would have no future? Indian kashmir has a future for muslims, hindus, buddhists, and sikhs. A pakistani/independent kashmir does not.
Thanks for the link but it India routinely violates it, see here, here and according to this research paper(pdf) water issue bound to turn into serious conflict.
we can send each other links all day, Neena, but the Stimson Center is a respected academic think tank in the united states. india has honored its treaty obligations and routinely shares flooding data with pakistan. the fact that india even agreed to a treaty with pakistan is a tremendous show of neighborliness considering china has not agreed to one with india and refuses to even share flooding data.
I missed that part which Pakistani official call for it and where?
My pleasure. here it is again.. The speaker is Zaid Hamid, who I’m sure you’ve seen frequently on GeoTV. He is not from some “rouge group” but a defence analyst and security consultant in your country who has his own think tank.
The other was Pakistan’s federal minister.
I’m sure there are plenty more from Zia et al, but most of these, if available, are usually in urdu and without subtitles for english only readers
Hope this answers your questions, Neena. Later.
I think the following excerpt from an obviously well-meaning person defines the limits of negotiated peace at the present moment:
“Also, Mumbai unfortunately did have to do with Kashmir. As many analysts pointed out at the time, LeT and such organizations find it much easier to recruit terrorists when they tell them how India treats Kashmiris. Solving the Kashmir issue is a must for lasting peace in the subcontinent.”
looking at the ideological orientation of ‘Kashmiri freedom fighters’ and the state of affairs in Swat and Fata where their ideological brothers call the shots, it seems to me that while ‘solving the issue’ will result in ‘peace in the subcontinent’, it will be anything but in Kashmir itself. That the present of Swat and the recent past in Mumbai does not give you pause while arguing about the future of Kashmir is discouraging.
How the invasion of Pakistani forces in Kashmir were seen in the 1940s: http://www.jammu-kashmir.com/documents/abdulun48.html
Excerpts of the speech by Sheikh Mohammed Abdullah in the UN Security Council Meeting No.241 held on 5 February 1948 “…It was because I and my organization never believed in the formula that Muslims and Hindus form separate nations. We do not believe in the two-nation theory, nor in communal hatred or communalism itself. We believed that religion had no place in politics. Therefore, when we launched our movement of “Quit Kashmir” it was not only Muslims who suffered, but our Hindu and Sikh comrades as well….
The situation was worsening day by day and the minority in our State was feeling very nervous. As a result tremendous pressure was brought to bear upon the State administration to release me and my colleagues. The situation outside demanded the release of workers of National Conference, along with its leader, and we were accordingly set free.
Immediately we were liberated from the prison we were faced with the important question of whether Kashmir should accede to Pakistan, accede to India, or remain independent… We could not decide this all important issue before achieving our own liberation, and our slogan became “Freedom before accession.” Some friends from Pakistan met me in Srinagar. I have a heart-to-heart discussion with them and explained my point of view….
While I was engaged in these conversations and negotiations with friends from Pakistan, I sent one of my colleagues to Lahore, where he met the Prime Minister of Pakistan, Mr.Liaquat Ali Khan, and other high dignitaries of the West Punjab Government. He placed the same point of view before them and requested that they should allow us time to consider this vital question, first helping us to achieve our liberation instead of forcing us to declare our decision one way or the other. Then, one fine morning while these negotiations were proceeding, I received news that a full-fledged attack had been carried out by the raiders on Muzaffarabad, frontier town in the Kashmir Province….
While the raiders came to our land, massacred thousands of people — mostly Hindus and Sikhs, but Muslims too — abducted thousands of girls, Hindu, Sikhs and Muslims alike, looted our property and almost reached the gates of our summer capital, Srinagar, the result was that the civil, military and police administration failed. The Maharaja, in the dead of the night, left the capital along with his courtiers, and the result was absolute panic. There was no one to take over control. In that hour of crisis, the National Conference came forward with 10,000 volunteers and took over the administration of the country. They started guarding the banks, the offices and houses of every person in the capital. This is the manner in which the administration changed hands. We were de facto in charge of the administration. The Maharaja, later on, gave it a legal form….
I was explaining how the dispute arose — how Pakistan wanted to force this position of slavery upon us. Pakistan had no interest in our liberation or it would not have opposed our freedom movement. Pakistan would have supported us when thousands of my countrymen were behind bars and hundreds were shot to death. The Pakistani leaders and Pakistani papers were heaping abuse upon the people of Kashmir who were suffering these tortures.
Then, suddenly, Pakistan comes before the bar of the world as the champion of liberty of the people of Jammu and Kashmir….
I had thought all along that the world had got rid of Hitlers and Goebbels, but, from what has happened and what is happening in my poor country, I am convinced that they have only transmigrated their souls into Pakistan… “
How the events unfolded: http://www.jammu-kashmir.com/documents/jkindiancomplaintun.html
Text of India’s Complaint to the Security Council, lst January 1948. This complaint made by India placed the Jammu & Kashmir problem before the world body. The intention was to ask the world community to acknowledge Pakistani aggression on the people of J&K and to force Pakistan to vacate its troops from that state so that a final solution to the question of the state’s accession to India could be found.
“…”5. Events moved with great rapidity, and the threat to the Valley of Kashmir became grave. On 26 October, the ruler of the State, His Highness Maharaja Sir Hari Singh, appealed urgently to the Government of India for military help. He also requested that the Jammu and Kashmir State should be allowed to accede to the Indian Dominion. An appeal for help was also simultaneously received by the Government of India from the largest popular organisation in Kashmir, the National Conference, headed by Sheikh Mohammed Abdullah. The Conference further strongly supported the request for the State’s accession to the Indian Dominion. The Government of India were thus approached not only officially by the State authorities, but also on behalf of the people of Kashmir, both for military aid and for the accession of the State to India.
” 6. The grave threat to the life and property of innocent people in the Kashmir Valley and to the security of the State of Jammu and Kashmir that had developed as a result of the invasion of the Valley demanded immediate decision by the Government of India on both the requests. It was imperative on account of the emergency that the responsibility for the defence of the Jammu and Kashmir State should be taken over by a government capable of discharging it. But, in order to avoid any possible suggestion that India had utilised the State’s immediate peril for her own political advantage, the Government of India made it clear that once the soil of the State had been cleared of the invader and normal conditions restored, its people would be free to decide their future by the recognised democratic method of a plebiscite or referendum which, in order to ensure complete impartiality, might be held under international auspices. …”
As we know Pakistan never left the territories it occupied. There is only one goal as the LeT jihadist have openly said – that all of India be dissolved into Pakistan, all of India be an Islamic state, part of the Dar-ul-Islam (House of Islam) instead of the Dar-ul-Harb (House of War – non Islamic lands of the earth that are not yet subjugated).
This is the kind of thing that rightly leads to the widespread contempt for the Wagah candle-lighters. A completely backwards argument – oh. look the bad, bad USA made them take their money and turn islamist and kill their neighbors. What choice did they have? boo – hooo ! And, yes, they are all against terrorism but they want to discuss the evil imaginary “hindu-zionist” lobby first…
What a load of bakwaas…
Why is Pakistani society so addicted to foreign intervention in its affairs? Are they a bunch of children or just naturally a bunch of idiots? If so, maybe Pakistan itself needs to be taken over by the UN or supervised by its neighbors India, China and Iran as a kind of protectorate for the next 50 years, maybe once they have become somewhat mature they may be able to resist the temptation of freebees from one superpower or another…
Motivations of captured Mumbai Terrorist
Satyajit Wry,
I get the feeling you are not at all interested in honest debate. You keep asserting that “all informed observers” agree with your point of view, and everyone else is misguided or has their own agenda. Your mind is already made up. If you will excuse the analogy, this is like arguing with an Islamic fundamentalist. If I disagree with him, he will say that all “true Muslims” think this way, and I am a “kafir” for thinking otherwise. This is not how reasoned, intellectual debate moves forward.
Anyway, that’s all I have to say on this matter. It’s been good hearing other perspectives, but it seems unfortunately that there is no changing the mind of the Pakistan-haters on this thread.
Satyajit wrote:
[a lot of stuff] .. net result is more attacks on india. … [ alot of other stuff] do not change the ground reality for india
OK. But this is a post on Pakistan, not India.
Sanjeev has pointed out that you keep running from your own arguments (e.g, you cite MMA election win under rigged Musharraf rule, nothing about subsequent ANP win in a fair election). And 200 feudal families?! That’s an Ayub Khan era issue. (As Daniyal Mueenuddin has written, it’s not the industrialists, not the feudals, that are advancing. Look at the election results in more industrial northern Punjab versus less industrial southern punjab.)
Anyway, reading your comments one could get the unfair misimpression that, in your dogged repitition of your views, you are impervious to any outside argument.
Putting aside India — an overdone topic on this blog — I appreciate your agrument that the influence of the three A’s has not vanished. But the Lawyers’ Movement, and the “colour” revolution are a new element in Pakistan — a genuine civil society uprising for structural change. Yes, it is operating in an arena with the PPP, PML, Army, America, and even Allah, each of which look at it as a way to advance their own ends. But its the very existance of a mass uprising for the rule-of-law that is astonishing and impressive, and the fact that othetrs will try to use it to avance their own ends (as Nawaz tried to do) doesn’t really diminish the accomplishment.
Satyajit wrote I am glad we were able to have a respectful conversation.
Indeed. Let’s also try to make it an intelligent conversation. It requires only a little more effort.
Also, Qadiyan is in Gurdaspur district and it is true that Ahmediyas have had a substantial presence in Gurdaspur. Radcliffe may have been prescient to know that Ahmediyas are actually non-Muslims and the 51(or 50.6%) majority from the 1941 census is not enough to treat that district as Muslim majority and would have awarded the district to India. 🙂
Good one 🙂
I see the rediff jihadis have entered the ring and the grievance soap box has been opened up. I am surprised no one has mentioned yet about how the percentage of Hindus in Pakistan in 1940 compared to 2009. NOBODY can kill that virus on SM.
he..he.. I think people arguing for the Indian side should follow this technique if someone brings up Gurdaspur, Hindoo-british conspiracy blah..blah..blah.. This is pretty effective.. Ask Pakistanis to make Ahmediyas as Muslims back and then we would admit that Muslims were really in a majority in Gurdaspur. 🙂
I’m guessing people arguing for the Pakistani side could more effectively make use of the Indian double standards in Junagadh and Kashmir.
Realistic (non-jholawala) assessment of pakistani history and impact on the region –
PAKISTAN’S ACHIEVEMENT – How India has been set back by decades
There is a wierd “angry orientalization” of Pakistan, both in these comments and elsewhere, that impedes a deeper appreciation of developments in the nation. I sometimes get the sense that people want to angrily talk about Pakistan as one person — instead of a complex set of people, institutions, and politics. I understand that the wounds of Partition run deep, and I understand that there is a significant history of conflict that triggers deep anger and nationalist fervor (on all sides).
But I am surprised at the level of anger and dismissiveness I read towards developments like the Long March and the Lawyers Movement. Many Pakistanis are genuinely and deeply excited about these pro-democracy developments. Many Pakistanis don’t want to live under military dictators, and many Pakistanis want responsive governments that prioritize basic human needs. These realities are so obvious to me that it feels embarrassing and patronizing to even write them in this comment.
I hope people on this blog might take the time to view the photos, the footage, the news reports — beautiful moments of Pakistani optimism and hope for a better government.
Long March and the Lawyers Movement. Many Pakistanis are genuinely and deeply excited about these pro-democracy developments
Okay, I’m not very knowledgeable about these matters, so forgive my question if it’s basic – but can there be any democracy movements without a free press…what is the state of Pakistan’s first amendment rights (speaking in US jargon)? And are women allowed to vote? And the few ethnic minorities that are still there in Pakistan…can they also participate?
sometimes people have shown popular news reports from Pakistani media, and I’m astounded by what I’ve seen (and SM is my limited knowledge of Pakistani media, so I understand my viewpoint is limited)…you have people discounting that the Mumbai terrorist can’t be Pakistani b/c he’s to dark (lol) and the journalist interviewing this deluded guy doesn’t even question that. It’s just sad.
Kabir # 90 – “Also, Mumbai unfortunately did have to do with Kashmir. As many analysts pointed out at the time, LeT and such organizations find it much easier to recruit terrorists when they tell them how India treats Kashmiris. Solving the Kashmir issue is a must for lasting peace in the subcontinent.”
In my opinion, by making the above statement you, an obviously educated and seemingly liberal individual, have provided legitimacy for the terrorists who murdered 165 innocent Indians, Americans, Europeans and Israelis in Mumbai last year.
This reminds me……the other day a Kashmiri Hindu friend whose mother was one of the first to be killed, in 1989, because of her religion [ she was shopping in downtown Srinagar, clad in a sari] told me that, he could easily forgive her assassin if the gun man [yet to be arrested] was a poor, illiterate young man who was schooled only in a Pakistani Madrassa, taught only the Koran, and told only that Allah demanded he kill the Hindus in Kashmir who are Islam’s enemies, but, my friend said, he would never forgive those educated Pakistani elite who are using Kashmir to divert their citizenry’s attention from real issues of roti, kapda aur makaan, or those Pakistanis who, after every attack in India, take to the air waves and the web, telling the world that, this is all tied to Kashmir.
116 · Sanjeev Bery said
Sanjeev, very well-said. I think “angry orientalization” is an excellent characterization. And you are right that people react like there is only one Pakistani viewpoint, not a multiplicity as in every other country. This is like taking the BJP viewpoint to be representative of all Indians or the far-right viewpoint to be representative of all Isreaelis. It completely hampers sensitive, intelligent discussion.
118 · Manpreet said
Manpreet, it is simplistic and reductive to think that just because I am making an intellectually honest (but of course debatable) point that the terrorist attacks in Mumbai and bad Indo-Pak relations in general are tied to Kashmir, that I am at all legitimizing the methods used in Mumbai. I don’t even really know how to respond to that. I have repeatedly condemned religious fundamentalism of all of kinds on Sepia. If we are so quick to assume that the “other” holds such reprehensible views, I don’t know how any sensible discusiion can move forward.
The point that I made above was also made immediately after Mumbai by Arundati Roy and William Dalrymple in their Op-Ed pieces. If you think these writers are “pro-Pakistan” and “anti-India” or that they are legitimizing terrorism, then I really have nothing more to say to you.
Kabir: As you like debating crazy people, may I suggest a place where you will probably like debating the wingnuts at their mother ship.
Pagal, I don’t like debating crazy people, I guess I just give them more of the benefit of the doubt than you do:) But, I’m getting tired of constantly defending Pakistan to the haters on this thread.
Pagal – Is it wingnut to say that that, people like Ajmal Kasab should be forgiven, and the blame lies with the elite?
123 · Manpreet said
Manpreet,
Just so you know, you have just engaged person who by his own admission is a ‘Pagal_Aadmi’ and who’s previous two handles were ‘Al_Mujahid_For…’ and then ‘Al_Chu*iya_For_…’.
122 · Kabir said
Kudos to you, feeling is mutual. It’s strange that so called “enlightened literate” individuals can’t have civil and impartial discussions while we at the Pakistani side are ready to take the blame for our short comings. Guess free media teaching some too much hatred.
“The ‘solution’ to the militancy problem most probably involves a regional effort to resolve the war in Afghanistan (see Rashid and Rubin’s article in Foreign Affairs) and a concerted effort inside Pakistan to reclaim militant-ridden areas. I won’t even try to pretend to have an answer to this dilemma— counterinsurgency is extremely difficult.”
What would really help and be a solution to militancy in South Asia is if someone would help these Muslim misunderstanders of Islam like the ones in the article below know the real Islam. Apparently they don’t realize that terrorism is un-islamic. If Pakistan won’t give up militants as their proxy force fighting in Afghanistan and India, then there never will be any real solution to the militancy problem.
Pakistan militants strengthen in heartland http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gvs-qnwlwy-lPuv5mJP-VNaLf5cwD9740F500 “…In classrooms nearby, teachers drilled boys as young as 8 in an uncompromising brand of Islam that called for holy war against enemies of the faith. Sitting cross-legged on the floor of the Dar-ul-uloom Madina school, they rocked back and forth as they recited sections of the Quran, Islam’s holy book.
Both facilities are run by an al-Qaida-linked terror network, Jaish-e-Mohammed, in the heart of Pakistan, hundreds of miles from the Afghan border that is the global focus of the fight against terrorism. Their existence raises questions about the government’s pledge to crack down on terror groups accused of high-profile attacks in Pakistan and India, and ties to global terror plots.
Authorities say militant groups in Punjab are increasingly sending out fighters to Afghanistan and the border region, adding teeth to an insurgency spreading across Pakistan that has stirred fears about the country’s stability and the safety of its nuclear weapons….
…Pakistan outlawed Jaish in 2001, but has done little to enforce the ban, partly out of fear of a backlash but also because it and other groups in Punjab were created by the powerful intelligence agencies as a proxy force in Afghanistan and Kashmir, a territory disputed with rival India.
“You can say Jaish is running its business as usual,” said Mohammed Amir Rana, from Pakistan’s Institute for Peace Studies, which tracks militant groups. “The military wants to keep alive its strategic options in Kashmir. The trouble is you cannot restrict the militants to one area. You cannot keep control of them.”
Apart from the martial arts and horse riding center, Jaish militants openly operate two imposing boarding schools in Bahawalpur, a dusty town of 500,000 people. Food, lodging and tuition are free for their 500 students, paid for by donations from sympathizers across the country. A top police officer said the schools and other hard-line establishments in the area were used to recruit teens and young men for jihadi activities in Pakistan’s northwest or in Afghanistan. He spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue….
…Last year, the governor of Pakistan’s border region warned that insurgent commanders and suicide bombers were increasingly coming from Punjab. Afghan police officers also say Punjabi fighters are becoming common there.
“Pakistani citizens, and especially Punjabis, are the Taliban trainers in the area for bomb-making,” said Asadullah Sherzad, police chief in Afghanistan’s insurgency-wracked Helmand province, adding there are around 100 Punjabis at any one time in that area of Afghanistan….
Actually, the equivalent of ‘solving the issue for a lasting peace’ is already being tried out in Swat (and was tried out at least twice in the Afghanistan-Pakistan border areas over the last 3 years). Let us keep an eye on how successful that strategy is and what kind of human cost is being paid for it. The slightly odd thing is that the actual interlocutors have never even offered to discuss peace or hidden their broader agenda but the liberal voices are convinced as always that making nice will make them become politically responsible and abandon their visions of religious armageddon.
That is so ironical. I don’t understand your position. Do you believe in the ideology of Pakistan, or in your view Partition was a mistake that is too late to be undone, so we might as well live with it?
Kabir, Ikram, Sanjeev,
Interesting, so basically you guys have attacked my intelligence, compared me to fundamentalists, and accused me of Orientalising Pakistan. The odd thing about ad homs is that people are usually guilty of the very thing of which they accuse others. If you guys want to willfully ignore facts ranging from army control, to feudalism/land reform, to puppet democratic leaders, that is your prerogative. But please, instead of just reverting back to insults or blanket statements that have nothing to do with anything, read some academic papers on your topic of choice, and make sure they address all of pakistan’s history. By looking at individual protests at an individual point in time while ignoring broader trends in the country’s history, you not only gain a misplaced understanding of actual developments, but mislead the average reader who is told he should celebrate the lawyers’ protest or the long march, when in a few years time we’ll be back to square one again. Please understand, I say this all with the utmost civility, but being polite doesn’t mean i have to agree with the many questionable assertions that have been made.
Nevertheless, while the tone may have change with your respective posts, mine will not. Gentlemen, adieu.
119 · Kabir said
But how does BJP hurt Pakistan ? Whereas “angry orientalization” of Pakistan is hurting the whole world, and especially India. Yes, BJP (in my opinion) is doing harm to India, but that’s none of your business if it is not hurting your country. But people of your country are directly attacking India (reminder: Mumbai).
Kabir, you keep complaining about ‘Pakistan hate’, but honestly, what you see here is the frustrations of the people wallowing up at constant denials and excuses made by Pakistani elites to justify/excuse the terror from their soil. I, for one was really happy with the people’s spirit in Pakistan, but your (and some others) constant excuses from Mumbai to Ulfa just is so frustrating. And you are talking about hatred ? The commentators in the blog you forwarded are dripping with hatred. I would be surprised if some of them are not the Talibans themselves. You will hardly find anyone so extreme here. So it seems, your definition of hate is normalized by the country you speak.
128 · Lupus Solitarius said
Hi Lupus,
I’ll be glad to explain my position. First of all, I am an American (grew up almost entirely in the states) of Pakistani-origin. I consider myself a South Asian and not just narrowly a Pakistani. I am a secular liberal, and don’t at all identify as a “muslim” except perhaps culturally. I study Hindustani music, and enjoy Indian art, culture, and rituals. I believe these represent the best of our shared cultural history.
Personally, I wish the subcontinent had not been partitioned. I wish that Jinnah and other politicians as well as the Muslim minority had not felt there was a need for it. I wish that Pakistan did not have to define itself as an “Islamic Republic” but could define itself simply as a Republic.
What I object to on this thread and am trying to counter is the essentilization of Pakistan and the focus solely on the negative aspects on “Islam” and “terror”. I was trying to bring some balance to the discussion and present another perspective, but I’m tired of trying to play “defender” of Pakistan, so I think I’m going to retire from this thread.
One last thing though. Zee asks “how does the BJP hurt Pakistan?” When Varun Gandhi basically says that all the muslims in India should go back to Pakistan, I think that the BJP hurts Pakistan. It’s also parties like the BJP that keep parties like the Taliban and far-right religious parties in Pakistan alive. If incidents like Gujrat hadn’t happened, I think there would be less support for the far-right in Pakistan. Perhaps this naive, but hey international relations are complicated like that. As South Asians, we have a common history, and events in one country often directly influence events in the other country. This is why Indians are rightly concerned about Pakistan’s internal affairs and why Pakistanis have a stake in who wins the Indian elections.
Kabir –
Thanks for the kind words. Have you spent much time on Chapati Mystery? I think Manan Ahmed (Sepoy) has a good sense of the kind of discourse you, Ikram, myself, and others might thrive off of — critical but not dogmatic in criticism, intrigued by the human condition, engaged. I’ll continue to post here as well, but perhaps we all need to be more selective in who we engage.
Thanks Sanjeev, I’ll have to check out Chapati Mystery 🙂
Aha !!! So finally its all BJP’s fault. I get it. I think the solution is easy. Eliminate BJP and you have eliminated Taliban, who knew !!! (Obama, your drones are targeting the wrong people)
Actually I’d say it was the converse. If not for the constant threats coming from jihadis wanting to fly the green flag over all India and the serial bombings of train stations the more extreme wings of the Hindu right would not have pulled as much support as they do.
I mean, it’s not like Muslims are the only ones who are subject to communal violence in India. At least 250 Hindus died there too and every one of the 1,000 or so dead is a tragedy. But the only story anyone ever hears on the other side of the border is one about a fabricated expansionist Hindu India that wants to devour them. I just don’t see how any peace or stability is going to be possible when a Pakistan defines itself entirely based on its own enmity and willfully constructs a narrative intended to keep it going.
“What I object to on this thread and am trying to counter is the essentilization of Pakistan and the focus solely on the negative aspects on “Islam” and “terror”.”
Kabir, you are mistaken in this. The comments here are mostly in reaction to this from Wajiha Ahmad’s response:
“During my time in Peshawar, Rawalpindi and Lahore this past summer, I met not a single Pakistani sympathetic to these terrorists –- and rightly so, since they are the ones suffering the most from these attacks. So why is the perception of popular Pakistani support for terrorism so prevalent?”
This is – and I am not sure how to sugarcoat this – denial. It is a bit like telling someone devastated by the war in Iraq that one has spoken to Americans and no one likes war – or some similar non sequitur. Whatever foreign policy issues someone may or may not have pro or anti-US/Iraq, the war is not a justified response to anything. And to demand that these foreign policy issues be resolved in some unspecified way before civilians in Iraq stop paying with their lives is to be a de facto supporter of the war however liberal and reasonable one may think one is.
On a personal level, I understand you are disappointed by the level of discourse. I am in turn disappointed by what passes for liberal in Pakistan.
Canada’s Former Prime Minister Trudeau to the Washington Press Club:
Wunderbar, Wajiha’s comment is not denial, though you may think it is. I, too, have spent a considerable amount of time in Pakistan (I spent two years there during college) and I did not meet anyone who is sympathetic to terrorism. People may have certain views about Kashmir or Indian policy in general, but apart from groups like LeT, no one thinks that killing innocent civilians is justified. People in Pakistan are mostly like people everywhere else, trying to get IT jobs, raise their families, perhaps immigrate to Europe or the Gulf. The poorer sections of the population are just trying to survive. Their concerns are the price of flour and oil, stuff like that. Unfortunately, those living outside the country, pretty much only hear the views of the radical right-wing elements. This obviously leads to a very distorted picture of the country.
and, yet, jihadis are “respected” (see my note above on the pakistani terrorist caught in mumbai), collection boxes for the kashmir jihad abound and large segments of the population believe that the hegemonist hindu state of india is about to cross the border and take over the country. Whenever there is a terrorist strike, the first thing discussed is whether Mossad and RAW had a hand in it, and many people express the thought that “no muslim could have done such a thing” or “Who gains from this? Only the USA, India and Israel”.
So what are we to conclude here? I think its pretty clear – vast segments of the pakistani population do not want to face up to the fact that their culture and country condones and supports mindless violence for various “root causes” and are totally mesmerized by bizarre conspiracy theories. And, of course, when you ask them if they support terrorism, the answer is NO.
And, yet, you believe you are a “liberal” and “open-minded” thinker?
Kabir, I know you meant hate-begets-hate. But the “haterade” was really started by covert ops in Pak. Anyway, we will keep on arguing about it. Also, although I understand you might not have met any fundies (neither did I in India, and I have lived a lifetime there…depends where you live), but brother, they are recruiting from that good-people pool. So, we should be all worried and not think that they won’t ever affect us. I loved most of Wajiha’s article, except that sentence made me turn off. I do know most of the pips in Pak are civil and peace loving. I just wish the politicians did not make the issues of other countries their own to deflect attention abt real issues. Think about it, if the hindus in India start taking offence abt what’s happening to hindus in Bangladesh, Malaysia etc and go for Jihad: Ridiculous and should be thwaked in the head with drones in my opinion, and not sympathise and make excuses!!
I think it is better that we top arguing and think about better solutions. I think if there is a strong govt in Pak, who is interested in its development, we will have better relation due to trade. The whole south-asia can be IT-superpower and peaceful…one can dream. Maybe we should have a union like EU someday, but only after all those talibs and extremist are thwaked. And then Kashmir wouldn’t be a problem maybe…just maybe.
Zee, I agree we should stop arguing and look for better solutions:) An EU-type situation would be ideal.
Yes. That’s correct. One can dream.
M. Nam
For the next 50 years at least, we should only concentrate on being good neighbours. And we need good fences. Real good ones.
Kabir, Neena, I think the problem isn’t the crazies, like Satyajit or Alberuni, its what you would expect to be normal people who can’t really think about Pakistan as its own place (see above, YogaFire mangling Trudeau’s aphorism about how small countries relate to big countries — Pakistan is not the bigger country!).
You certainly don’t have to be sympathetic to Pakistan to have intelligent thoughts on the topic (see Nitin Pal at The Acorn blog, an Indian Nationalist with smart things to say about Pakistan), but you do need a level of emotional detachment. You can’t be the “Angry Indian” (or the Angry Pakistani, a rare creature at SM). Perhaps this blog, which has many strengths, isn’t suited to that kind of discussion. Head over to Chapati Mystery. Manan has a really good Pakistan Day post.
Kabir – You and Wajiha were/are asking your compatriots the wrong question: instead of querying, “do you support terrorism?”, next time ask them, whether they support the right of “Kashmiri” Mujahadeen to conduct armed warfare against Indian/Hindu ocupation of Kashmir, even if that means Hindu/Muslim civillians will die by the thousands?.
p.s. i put kashmiri in quotes so as to draw attention to the reality on the ground – hundreds of punjabi and pushto speaking mujahadeen cross into indian administered kashmir claiming to be kashmiri, so as to give their cause, which is to create mayhem in india, an indigenous patina.
p.s.s. deep down i would like nothing more than kashmir to go back to the way it was, and pakistan and india to be closer than the countries in the european union. but the wounds are too raw, and ground reality in pakistan too hopeless. so it’s easier for individuals with my experience to cut our losses and push our govt. to ensure our safety at any cost, any.
Ikram,
Why do dismiss posters such as satyajit or alberuni as ‘crazies’ ? You may not agree with their viewpoints, but do you have any counters to the points they’ve raised ? I’d say its a lot more interesting to engage with people with different views, as long as the conversation doesn’t deteriorate to personal insults..
And here I thought you might be heartened by me acknowledging that what happens in Pakistan actually matters to Indians.
Seems like the implied definition of crazy here is someone who doesnt agree with the posters view. That view is not too different from that of the fanatics, innit?
Are we sure everyone has the same definition of terrorism and of innocent civilians? When the Pakistani people were asked if they supported terrorism, what is their understanding of terrorism? Perhaps what other people consider to be terrorism, is not to them terrorism. Plus who is considered “innocent?”:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,344409,00.html “A question-and-answer session with Imam Abdul Makin in an East London mosque asks why Allah would tell Muslims to kill and rape innocent non-Muslims, including their wives and daughters, according to Islam Watch.
“Because non-Muslims are never innocent, they are guilty of denying Allah and his prophet,” the Imam says, according to the report. “If you don’t believe me, here is the legal authority, the top Muslim lawyer of Britain.”
The lawyer, Anjem Choudary, backs up the Imam’s position, saying that all Muslims are innocent. Click here to watch the interview with Islamic lawyer Anjem Choudary. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maHSOB2RFm4&feature=related
“You are innocent if you are a Muslim,” Choudary tells the BBC. “Then you are innocent in the eyes of God. If you are not a Muslim, then you are guilty of not believing in God.”
Choudary said he would not condemn a Muslim for any action. “As a Muslim, I must support my Muslim brothers and sisters,” Choudary said. “I must have hatred to everything that is not Muslim.””
Kabir, I am up for dreaming, and hoping, and extending a friendly hand; but then again news like the following, make the denials from Pak side to become consternation and frustrations at the Indian side: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/26/world/asia/26tribal.html?_r=1&hp
If the talibs are still being supported by Pak intelligence for Afghanistan, one can only imagine, how India is being dealt with. I agree with Lupus, that India needs very strong fences first.