Here are some excerpts related to Pakistan, from President Obama’s 100 day press conference last night:
QUESTION: Can you reassure the American people that, if necessary, America could secure Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal and keep it from getting into the Taliban’s hands, or worst-case scenario, even al Qaeda’s hands?
MR. OBAMA: I’m confident that we can make sure that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is secure, primarily, initially, because the Pakistani army, I think, recognizes the hazards of those weapons falling into the wrong hands.
We’ve got strong military-to-military consultation and cooperation.
I am gravely concerned about the situation in Pakistan, not because I think that they’re immediately going to be overrun and the Taliban would take over in Pakistan; more concerned that the civilian government there right now is very fragile and don’t seem to have the capacity to deliver basic services, schools, health care, you know, rule of law, a judicial system that works for the majority of people.
And so as a consequence, it is very difficult for them to gain the support and the — the loyalty of their people. So we need to help Pakistan help Pakistanis. And I think that there’s a recognition, increasingly, on the part of both the civilian government there and the army, that that is their biggest weakness.
On the military side, you’re starting to see some recognition just in the last few days that the obsession with India as the mortal threat to Pakistan has been misguided, and that their biggest threat right now comes internally. And you’re starting to see the Pakistani military take much more seriously the armed threat from militant extremists. (link)
What do people think of this statement? I have a couple of thoughts below.Here are a couple of brief observations:
1) Notice that he doesn’t use the word “Islam” anywhere here. It’s implicit in his reference to the Taliban, but he’s not really focusing on the threat of global Islamic extremism. In the logic of this statement, if militants are steadily gaining ground in what is effectively a civil war, it is at least in part the government’s fault.
That is interesting, and a shift from the earlier Bush doctrine, which entailed talking a lot about Jihadism, and always insisting that “we have them on the run.” Obama is not particularly optimistic about the situation in Pakistan; quite the opposite.
2) Notice that Obama refuses to engage in speculation about what would happen to Pakistan’s nuclear weapons if the government were to be overrun by the Taliban. This is wise for two reasons. First, as President, he has to be much more careful about engaging in hypotheticals than he was as a candidate, when he made that famous comment about being willing to go around the Pakistani government to strike at Al Qaeda within Pakistan’s borders.
Second, his refusal of the question is wise, because I don’t think anyone is too worried about this particular scenario; the military is simply too strong. (There are, of course, other scenarios, many of which would not be good.)
I agree, I think President Obama handled those questions very well. What a change from the Bush White House days. I remember wincing anytime Bush said something about Islam or South Asia.
Pakistani forces are waging a half ass battle against Taliban as there are many Talibani sympathisers among the top brasses of Military. ISI has strong connections with taliban with their own agenda, otherwise why would a soverign nation hand of a province- SWAT to Taliban? It would be a shame if Pakistan fails as a nation to contain insurgent forces and also a major threat to India which is a soft target for any invaders.
Agreed. What’s your over-under on a new military coup? 2 months?!
I think everything he said was wise politically. But– I’m not sure if he “assured” the American people.
That said, I’m glad he avoided typical Wester hubris where we believe we have the best methods of solving crises abroad.
It is very likely that the nuke warheads are safe and the Taliban will never get control. However, the nuclear material is an entirely different story. I think it was Richard Engel who raised this issue on Colbert, that it is enitrely likely that Taliban could get hold of some nuclear material for a “dirty bomb”. Maybe I am a cynic but I am not convinced that the Pak army is “cracking down” on the Taliban.
I’m really disappointed in Obama’s foreign policy so far. He’s just throwing billions of dollars (that we don’t have) at the Pakistanis, knowing that the money will go into the pockets of corrupt politicians, instead of attaching strings to the aid. IT’S OUR MONEY (which we don’t have). Make the damn Zardari government use it RESPONSIBLY to destroy the militants. But apparently Obama is afraid of pissing the Pakistanis off. I never knew he would be so…weak and bad at this. I voted for him.
“On the military side, you’re starting to see some recognition just in the last few days that the obsession with India as the mortal threat to Pakistan has been misguided.”
Two words. Mumbai massacre.
I was wondering, there isn’t more than one or two hospitals in all of Balochistan, or Sindh that can treat deadly diseases despite there being something like 41 Medical Schools in the country. Also job opportunities, and an adequate education, FOOD AND WATER are hard to find anywhere outside of Lahore, Karachi, Islamabad.
You can fight terrorism with an army, but the reason why the Taliban has sway on some quarters is the fact that (a) Sharia Courts offer “quick and easy justice” when there are no local courts to settle disputes and (b) it certainly seems like no one in Islamabad or major cities cares about their fellow countrymen. We could have vaccinated polio out of the country, but electricity black outs destroyed the vaccine. All we had to do (and I was in Lahore at the time), was ask Lahorees, Karachites and Islamabadis to do without electricity for another 18 hours so they could preserve the medicines in Peshawar.
What do you think Amardeep?
Hi Basim (love your band by the way), Well, I’m a little unsure.
The story you’re telling is similar to what Obama is saying: the Taliban are growing in influence because the central government has been unable to live up to its commitments.
On the other hand, wiping out polio in the example you described, is clearly a western/foreign priority. There is a real story from a few months ago, where the same, “radio Mullah” in the Swat Valley I blogged about a few weeks ago, blocked an actual working polio immunization program run by an NGO, arguing that the immunizations were actually part of a conspiracy to make the men of Swat Valley sterile: link.
People who are ruled by the Taliban will get swift, Draconian “justice” via the Shari’a courts, which might be good for certain kinds of disputes (say, property disputes). But they won’t get: women’s rights, infrastructure/economic development … or polio vaccinations.
I would want to see Obama trying to convince Zardari to do a better job at providing the services that rural Pakistanis need. I also think the west has to be willing to talk to the Taliban to ultimately get the better of them. But I don’t think it’s wise to presume that they will ever be good partners in producing the kind of South Asia I think most of us are hoping for.
While Obama has shown an admirable degree of nuance in dealing with Pakistan, unlike Bush’s hope that the Pakistanis would do the right thing – his overall South Asia approach is still unclear, and early signs seem to suggest that he leans towards rehyphening India-Pakistan. There was the initial attempt to have Richard Holbrooke include India, or the Kashmir issue, in his AfPak portfolio – which New Delhi successfully blocked. But after that, Obama seems to be ignoring the largest country in the region. My guess is that he is waiting until India completes its elections, so as to not appear that he was favoring one faction over another. Hopefully, Obama will not actually undo progress in one of Bush’s few foreign policy successes.
Are there ethnic tensions in Pakistan?
Do Punjabi Pakistani’s get along with the rest of Pakistan or is it all rainbows and butterflies?
Hmm.. Isn’t it a couple of days back when Pasthun-Mohajir clashes in Karachi killed around 30 people or so??.
The problem is not the bombs falling into the hands of the Taliban, ‘cuz the military is too strong. The problem is, in the absence of a strong government and chaos, some top military person sneaking off nuclear bombs/material to the terrorists, i.e., the threat is from within the Pakistani military.
Obama Admin is looking for practical solution to Pakistan problems. Few days ago Hillary Clinton admitted US also responsible for current situation in Pak.
Pakistani people need jobs. Instead of investing in weapons all western government and Pakistani government should invest in Industry but of course it is only possible once there is peace.
The Pakistani government, the Pakistani military and ISI and the Taliban are all on the same side. They are not real enemies. Never have been. Each scratches the others back. NY Times Article: Right at the Edge http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/07/magazine/07pakistan-t.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin
And we in the US pay billions of $ for them all, and a lot of our tax payer dollars we have no idea how it was used in Pakistan.
As for Zadari, he may be a weak PM, but his wife Benezir Bhutto and wife’s family were well involved with funding the extremists for decades, and Yossef Bodansky’s articles on Pakistan elaborates in more detail http://www.kashmir-information.com/Bodansky: Pakistan’s Kashmir Strategy Islamabad’s Road Warriors Pakistan’s Nuclear Brinkmanship Pakistan, Kashmir, and the Trans-Asian Axis
You don’t need the Taliban to get their hands on the nukes for nukes to spread far and wide when the Pakistani government itself has been trying at it for years: Saudi-Pakistani Nuclear Linkage Marks The Opening Of A Sunni Muslim Security Umbrella Pakistan’s Islamic Bomb
As for education, it also matters what is being taught by schools: “And this great historic discovery is taught to Std V students, “Previously, India was part of Pakistan.” ” from the article Pakistan Text Books Build Hate Culture Against India
Education (even undistorted education), money, and jobs alone will not prevent some people from becoming terrorists. The 9-11 terrorists were middle class and educated I believe. OBL is a Saudi billionaire, and their are other professionals in the terrorists cells. It may deter some, but there are plenty of educated, middle class or higher people who join as well. It did not stop either Bhutto from encouraging and strategically using extremist in their geopolitical goals as the articles in the previous post describes.
With an ally like Pakistan, the US does not need enemies like Al-Qaeda: “…Contrary to President Zardari’s claims, the LET is no “stateless actor.” In fact, the LET is and always was a creature of the ISI.
Throughout the war against Soviet forces in Afghanistan in the 1980s, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the United States, as well as other states, all sponsored the Afghan resistance fighters or mujahedeen. But Saudi Arabia and Pakistan were principally responsible for creating and sponsoring the most radical Islamic terrorist groups within the mujahedeen’s ranks. This nexus is what first gave us Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda and, later, Mullah Omar’s Taliban.
The same nexus also gave us the LET. In fact, bin Laden and his spiritual mentor, Abdullah Azzam, reportedly played instrumental roles in the LET’s founding. In the late 1980s, they met with members of the Markaz-ud-Dawa-wal-Irshad (MDI), an Islamist political party in Pakistan, and convinced its leaders to create a militant wing responsible for waging jihad in Kashmir. The result was the LET. And the struggle for control of Jammu and Kashmir, territory sandwiched between China, India, and Pakistan that had been disputed since the partition of 1947, would never be the same…. ” excerpt from article Pakistan’s Jihad.
FYI LET is in the US and other Western countries. Pakistan is the way it is because they have been busy since partition trying to expand their power through the military or through extremist forces who are their proxy force. Pakistan’s Militant Groups Build Web of Western Recruits “The Pakistani extremist group suspected in the Mumbai rampage remains a distant shadow for most Americans. But the threat is much nearer than it seems.
For years, Lashkar-e-Taiba has actively recruited Westerners, especially Britons and Americans, serving as a kind of farm team for Islamic militants who have gone on to execute attacks for Al Qaeda, a close ally. The Pakistani network makes its training camps accessible to English speakers, providing crucial skills to an increasingly young and Western-born generation of extremists…”
Mumbai Terror Group Trained American Jihadists “… In April, 2000, for instance, Virginia native Randall Todd Royer (pictured) went to a LeT camp in Kashmir. The place wasn’t hard to find, according to an opinion from U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema. Online newsletters gave out the group’s phone number and e-mail address, with the assurance that “requests for information about the jihad in Kashmir are welcome.” A recruiting center operated openly in Lahore, one of Pakistan’s largest cities.
Royer spent a month at the LeT camp, firing AK-47s and other weapons, and going through endurance training. In August, Seifullah Chapman made a similar trip, arranged by Royer, who called it a “straight path” to global jihad. There, Chapman spent thirty days in “weapons training” and “performing military drills.” …”
Besides all the other countries Pakistan is training and supplying extremists (India, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, American and other Western Jihadists…), Pakistan was also involved in training terrorists in Chechnya:
“…Islamabad became directly involved in the active support for the Chechen Jihad already in the spring of 1994. At that time, the ISI-sponsored Taliban offensive endangered the flow of Heroin from Afghanistan which served to finance the Chechen revolt. Islamabad intervened to ensure the continued flow of drugs, as well as capitalize on the relationship between the Chechens and ISI-sponsored Afghans, then maintained via Gulbaddin Hekmatyar’s Hizb-i-Islami as a front, in order to expand the ISI’s direct relations with the Chechen leadership. Consequently, between April and June 1994, a high-level Chechen delegation headed by a lieutenant of Dudayev’s named Shamil Basayev visited the ISI-sponsored terrorist training infrastructure in both Pakistan and Afghanistan. In Afghanistan, the Chechens visited the ISI’s training facilities in the Khowst area, then run under the banner of Gulbaddin Hekmatyar’s Hizb-i-Islami. In Pakistan, the Chechens had a series of high level meetings with the Pakistani leadership — particularly with Gen. Babar, Defense Minister Gen. Aftab Shahban Mirani, and General Javid Ashraf of the ISI (who was presented as the head of the ISI branch in charge of support for, and sponsorship of, Islamist causes). These three officials became the patrons of the Chechen Jihad, arranging for the establishment of a comprehensive training and arming program for the Chechens in Pakistan and Afghanistan. The Chechens also met with former ISI Chief, General Hamid Gul, and an aid of his named Col. Imam, who would assist the Chechens in arranging for local connections and contacts for their drugs and weapons smuggling operations. Moreover, Gen. Babar intervened with the Taliban leadership already in early 1994 to ensure the uninterrupted flow of Heroin from the Helmand valley. However, the Heroin was now shipped northwards to the airfield near Chitral from where the drugs, as well as a growing number of Chechens and ‘Afghan’ volunteers, were flown to Chechnya.
The training of the Chechens began immediately. The first hundred or so Chechens were added to the ISI-run training camps near Khowst where between two and three hundred Uzbeks and Tajiks were already being trained in guerrilla warfare and prepared for the export of the Islamist revolution into their homelands. Most important were the advanced sabotage and guerrilla warfare courses provided to a select few Chechens in the Markaz-i-Dawar center in Pakistan. In the Fall of 1994, in order to expedite the flow of expertise to Chechnya, the ISI organized mixed detachments made of recently trained Chechens and veteran Pakistani operatives, most of them with long combat experience in the ranks of the Mujahedin in Afghanistan. These forces brought with them large quantities of weapons and ammunition. In addition, fighters from an ISI battalion of Afghan Mujahedin stationed in Pakistan were also dispatched to Chechnya in late 1994 to bolster the Pakistani-Chechen detachments. These Pakistani-led detachments saw combat already around the first of 1995. Significantly, the ISI retained combat and tactical control over these detachments. The Pakistani commanders maintained radio communications with their HQ in Pakistan, not dissimilar to communications maintained between the Islamist forces in Kashmir and their rear bases in Pakistan….” excerpt from CHECHNYA The Mujahedin Factor
The hard truth is that terrorists do already have nuclear weapons, they already are in the wrong hands. Just not the stateless terrorists like Al-Qaeda. It is state sponsored terrorism – Pakistan. As the articles in the earlier post talk about, Benazir Bhutto meant that nuclear weapons brinkmanship be vis-a-vis both India and the US, and when Iran and Saudi Arabia get nukes thanks to Pakistan again as elaborated in the articles in the above posts, nuclear brinkmanship will be used against the US and other countries in those regions as well.:
“….We were all warned of this many years ago. When the Clinton administration sent cruise missiles into Afghanistan in reprisal for the attacks on our embassies in East Africa, the missiles missed Osama Bin Ladin but did, if you remember, manage to kill two officers of the ISI. It wasn’t asked loudly enough: What were these men doing in an al-Qaida camp in the first place? In those years, as in earlier ones, almost no tough questions were asked of Pakistan. Successive U.S. administrations used to keep certifying to Congress that Pakistan was not exploiting U.S. aid (and U.S. indulgence over the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan) to build itself a nuclear weapons capacity. Indeed, it wasn’t until after Sept. 11, 2001, that we allowed ourselves to learn that at least two of Pakistan’s top nuclear scientists—Mirza Yusuf Baig and Chaudhry Abdul Majid—had been taken in for “questioning” about their close links to the Taliban. But then, in those days, we were too incurious to take note of the fact that Pakistan’s chief nuclear operative, A.Q. Khan, had opened a private-enterprise “Nukes ‘R’ Us” market and was selling his apocalyptic wares to regimes as disparate as Libya and North Korea, sometimes using Pakistani air force planes to make the deliveries.….Recent accounts of murderous violence in the capital cities of two of our allies, India and Afghanistan, make it appear overwhelmingly probable that the bombs were not the work of local or homegrown “insurgents” but were orchestrated by agents of the Pakistani ISI. This is a fantastically unacceptable state of affairs, which needs to be given its right name of state-sponsored terrorism. Meanwhile, and on Pakistani soil and under the very noses of its army and the ISI, the city of Quetta and the so-called Federally Administered Tribal Areas are becoming the incubating ground of a reorganized and protected al-Qaida…” excerpt from Pakistan is the Problem, Christopher Hitchens in Slate
Let’s not forget Pakistan’s training of terrorists in East Asian – Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia, Burma, and Malaysia…. – with the help of Iran and China:
“…The case of the Islamist terrorism in and around the Strait of Malacca is extremely important not just because of the strategic ramification of the distabilization of such countries as the Philippines and Thailand. Taken together, this terrorism campaign is a classic case of the true meaning of state-sponsored terrorism. In this specific case, the Islamist subversion of several countries is intensified because of the strategic interests of a third party — the PRC — and, to a lesser extent, of its close allies. However, it is the close allies — Pakistan and Iran — who bear the brunt of the sponsorship of, and support for the terrorist escalation. They do so more because of the strategic calculations concerning the PRC than having vital interests in the Far East.
This is not to say that the bulk of the locally active terrorist and subversive are completely artificial. On the contrary. Local issues, outstanding grievances of the local population, existing indigenous terrorist and subversive organizations are exploited by the sponsoring states as the basis for their operations and a source for local support and legitimization. Once the sponsoring states take over an indigenous subversion and terrorist movement, the intensity of the armed struggle markedly rises and the character of the modus operandi of the local forces is altered, at times drastically, in order to serve the interests of the sponsors.
The local forces are active and willing participants in this cynical game of nations because it is in their self-interest to escalate their own fight against the local governments. In order to affect the desired escalation, the sponsoring states provide tremendous all around assistance — training, expertise, weapons, and funds — which the local organizations use for both the pursuit of their own indigenous objectives as well as for operations on behalf of the sponsoring states. Moreover, it should not be ignored that in principle, the intelligence services involved — mainly the Iranian VEVAK and the Pakistani ISI — the various Islamist operatives that they use to organized local on-site networks, and the local terrorists are all ideological brethren and genuine solidarity does exist among all the participants.
The mere presence of operatives and terrorists of the sponsoring states in the ranks of the local organizations legitimizes and sanctifies the close cooperation in what is essentially the furthering of the global strategic interest of the PRC and the Trans-Asian Axis (of which the Islamists are a major component). As will be discussed below, one of the outcomes of this state-sponsored escalation is the consolidation of a major forward base for exporting Islamist terrorism into the United States itself.
Indeed, Islamist forces sponsored by Iran and Pakistan and spearheaded by thoroughly trained local ‘Afghans’ are distabilizing the local states overlooking the Strait of Malacca. The Islamists are currently winning in Indonesia and Malaysia, influencing policies of local governments that are otherwise pro-Western. The Islamists are subverting Thailand — using both the local Patans in the countryside and spectacular operations by experts terrorists arriving from the sponsoring states — while also maintaining subversive infrastructure in Indonesia as deterrence for Jakarta, as well as taking over the struggle of the Rohingya Muslim minority in Burma to exercise additional pressure on Rangoon to cooperate with Beijing….” excerpt from BEIJING’S SURGE FOR THE STRAIT OF MALACCA
Pakistan is not the US’s ally. There is no point is funding billions of dollars to Pakistan since it pretty much goes to funding Pakistan’s geopolitical strategy via terrorism.
I love how Sameer takes over any post related to Pakistan, and starts Pakistan-bashing. Is it too much to expect any sensible discussion of Pakistan on Sepia? Also, see the Indian-elections post which for a while was full of people talking about how Pakistan was being taken over by the Taliban. Granted, the country has its problems (many of them) but there is no need for this constant stream of Pakistan bashing. I get that Sepia is an Indian-American dominanted blog (as the desi community in the US more generally is), but this kind of discussion makes non-Indians (and Pakistanis in particular) feel very unwelcome here. Just putting that out there.
Kabir, It’s useless trying to make your point here. It’s not just Pakistan bashing: do you see the nonsensical and vague crap the Hinduvat-American-Indians throw around about Bangladesh? It’s comically ignorant. Muslims are not welcome on this site, period. Most of the commentators are hardcore Indians, Hindus, raised on American media’s coverage of Muslim countries, a coverage that is pitifully empty on substance and reality. This is not a site for Pakistanis or Bangladeshis, and certainly not for Muslims. Racist Muslim-hating, Israel-loving posters like Yoga Fire or rob (or bloggers like Ennis and Amardeep and that other guy) are welcomed on the site, and would never be banned or warned. Save your breath and just come here just to quietly get a feel for what kind of empty rhetoric the posters throw out. I rather know what garbage they are swilling than not.
Also, this makes Obama’s appointments of Indian-Americans and zionists in high positions that much more terrifying. If those appointees have 1/4 of the ignorance and 1/8th of the hatred of Muslims showed by regular posters who dominate the threads on this site, we are screwed. I wonder how many Muslim-Americans are noticing this trend and really understanding the magnitude of the kinds of policies these habitually and viciously Muslim-hating group will produce. If Muslims are not worried yet, they should be.
Wow Nilufer, I am surprised at the vitriol, that too from a Bangladeshi point of view ?? I must say I am really surprised. While I totally agree with Kabir that the posters like Sameer are absolutely irritating, and any Pakistan-related topics are generally too one-sided, but I must say that I cannot say the same for Bangladesh. Apathy, yes, but not antipathy. Also, have you visited many of the Muslim-dominated blogs, where death of kafirs are openly and frequently declared by the educated lot ?
Speaking from personal viewpoint, I even did some pro-bono work for Bangladesh. The officials there were very thankful and blessed me for my help. I did it because I felt this deep south-asian connections, and I never ever cared that they were Muslims and I am Hindu. And here you are sending out all these hate. While I understand Pakistan and India had this deep dark history behind them (insurgency, Kashmir etc etc), they are still bitter, but being of Bangladeshi origin, I just cannot fathom your hate. Did you forget your Muktijoddha’s so soon ?
So far in my life I’ve been accused of being a communist, a fascist, a misogynist, a homophobe, a “fag,” a Christian dominionist, a militant atheist, a Hindutvaadi, an “Al Qaida”, a terrorist sympathizer, a fascist, an anti-semite, and now an “Israel-loving” Zionist as well.
What I’ve taken from this is that I’m just good at pissing off extremists who are long on passion and short on logic.
wow. you are so smart yaar. and such humility too.
Wow, Nilufar, just wow–the fact that you appear to think “Israel-loving” is an epithet in the same league as racism or religious bigotry cert. demonstrates your, shall we say, rather large remove from American political culture. I’m just a simple Yindu-American lad grateful for the trade in arms and technology that India has developed (and, vice-versa) with our Yankee and Yehudi friends. . . .not as if India has any historical enemies or anything, right?
we are talking about the same israel that sent mossad to train ltte terrorists, as well as arm them, at the same time they were “helping” the indian forces, right? just checking…
Yes, that same Israel–not the political entity that controlled Jerusalem in c. 950 BC! Well, I don’t think Mossad are little angels (cert. the US and India have to be careful about tech. transfers to Israel, lest they end up sold to China), but the Gandhi’s and their lackeys were supporting the LTTE too, before they were intervening on their behalf, and then fighting, them, right?
they are part of the establishment and well entrenched. israel’s success has been by playing all sides of the game board very successfully. so, while you want to get what you can, the best you can assume is that it will allow you to keep up with your enemies since israel probably is in bed with them too.
Sure, fair points and all. But, nonetheless, I’m doubting that the Israeli arms-industry formed by these guys, which has become the largest supplier of weapons to India (by $-value) are exactly selling the same stuff to Pakistan. The Israelis are weird on China, I agree–probably because the former view themselves through the lens of a regional power. Perhaps India and us ABD’s can get Unkill to reign them in! 😉
I don’t agree with Nilufar or particularly condone the way she made her case, but I think we need to get back to the larger point about why discussion of Pakistan is so biased on Sepia. I don’t particularly think of myself as a “Muslim” and I’m certainly not an apologist for the actions of the Pakistani-government (whichever one is in power at the time), but I dislike seeing vitriol being spouted against the whole country any time a topic concerning Pakistan is brought up. If Sepia is meant to be a South-Asian American blog (rather than an Indian-American blog), I think this issue needs to be addressed. Either don’t talk about Pakistan at all, or discuss it sensitively and in context.
Also I think this rhetoric of Indians and Pakistanis as “enemies” has grown really old and is totally counterproductive. I don’t have problems with particular commentators here, though some of them (like rob) have self-professed ideological sympathies that perhaps prevent them from seeing issues objectively (unless all those posts about giving money to the BJP or RSS were a joke).
“Also I think this rhetoric of Indians and Pakistanis as “enemies” has grown really old and is totally counterproductive.”
seriously? Pakistanis just massacred over 175 civilians in Bombay. The fact that Pakistan is an enemy of India, and of the civilized world is not rhetoric, and its not old.
The Pakistanis who are suddenly pontificating about being against extremists are just hyperventilating because the monster they created is starting to consume them. Karma can be a bitch!
Bhramastra, I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt that you’re not a troll and thus responding to you. “Pakistanis” didn’t commit the Mumbai attacks. A particular group of terrorists did. Yes, they were supported and trained by certain elements within the ISI, but it is completely unwarrented to blame an entire population of 170 million people for that act.
Anyway, the larger point is that this process of “otherizing” each other and creating this type of rhetoric has over the last 60 years proven not to be constructive. It’s certainly not going to help us achieve a prosperous South Asia for all of us in the region.
Kabir, although you seem to be very well intentioned, something we certainly appreciate, and while there may be many other pakistanis such as your self who espouse such a well-intentioned world-view, I think there have been many books, such as the one written by Aatish Taseer (Pakistani on his father’s side) that sadly have given Indians little reason to feel good about relations with Pakistan. Taseer had a very insightful interview with Outlookindia (the link can be found here) discussing the “other”izing of India in Pakistan. If anything, Indians have tried very hard over there years to avoid “other”izing Pakistanis, but here is the pattern we see:
Simla Accord –> Khalistani terror support Cricket Diplomacy –> Kashmiri terror support Lahore Declaration –> Kargil, Red Fort Attack Agra Summit –> Parliament attacks, Kaluchak Massacre, Delhi Diwali blasts, Mumbai train attacks (7/11) Joint Terror Mechanism –> Jaipur attack, Hyderabad attack, Bangalore attack, Ahmedabad attack, Mumbai (26/11)
Although your attitude on sepia is certainly positive, sadly, it is but a drop of goodwill in the tidal wave of hate that has been repeatedly hitting India. Most Indians would be content to forget about Pakistan and embrace globalization, but as Taseer’s account shows us, the attitudes in Pakistan are far from encouraging. Indeed, all India has received in returned for its goodwill and willingness to forgive is more blood and the unbridled hatred of the Pakistani Army. We know these attacks are meant to sow hate within India and to hurt its economy (death by a thousand cuts and all…)–so actions speak louder than words. Until the ISI and its terror nursery is dismantled, Hafeez Syed and Co handed over to India, and the Army sent back to the barracks (in practice not just in name), I’m afraid most Indians will be less than receptive to any new overture, and rightfully so. But thank you for your sincere comments.
Satyajit, No one is discounting the history between India and Pakistan, but let’s remember that it take two to Tango. India has not been wholely blameless in Indo-Pak relations. Anyway, my point is that comments like Bramastra’s above are riddled with fallacious logic. How does it make sense to blame an entire nation for the actions of one terrorist group? It would equally stupid for Pakistanis to blame all Indians for Gujrat or Americans to blame all Arabs for 9/11.
Regarding your and rob’s views on Babri, I didn’t get a chance to reply before that thread was closed, but basically I again think the logic is flawed. To me, the destruction of Babri (as someone I think pointed out) is an analgous act to the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas by the Taliban. It’s not even proven that there was a temple located where the mosque stood, and even if there were, it doesn’t follow that just because temples have been destroyed in the past, it’s justifiable to destroy mosques. These kinds of actions don’t suit India’s motto of “Unity in Diversity”.
Sepia is (I think) intended to be a South-Asian American space, not an Indian-American space (If I’m wrong, tell me and I’ll leave the site alone). But if that is so, Indo-Pak relations need to be discussed sensitively and respectfully. Most of us are here in the diaspora, so we should have some distance from the communalism and rhetoric that is ever present in the Indian and Pakistani media
Kabir, whatever may be the comments of others, I think we both know that you and I have been able to have a respectful and largely productive conversation (barring the initial and incidental sparring).
Regarding, Babri, garv’s typically ill-informed comments were again in true form when he discussed Bamiyan. The Buddhas of Bamiyan are dated to the Kushan period and were destroyed (dynamited) by the islamic fundamentalist Taliban, supported by Pakistan, to erase what remains of Afghanistan’s Pre-Islamic history. This is in line with the routine temple destruction which continues to take place in Pakistan and Bangladesh. The Buddha statues were not built upon, or even accused of being built upon, a Muslim structure. The entire foundation of the Babri Masjid, however, was thoroughly in line with Hindu architecture, and its demolishment (like that of the Mathura Krishna Temple and the Kasi Vishwanath of Varanasi) was thoroughly in line with the policy of Muslim empires on the Subcontinent. Archaeologists have written reams about this, and the efforts of Romila Thapar et al, have done very little to alter the truth: One of the most sacred temples in hinduism was destroyed to make way for the mosque. After the ulema refused to return that land for the construction of a temple and negotiations failed , babri was demolished. That garv is unskilled in basic logic to recognize the absence of an analogy here is unsurprising; however, I know you are a much more intelligent commentator than he is, so I think we’d be best to leave that comparison alone.
The Gujarat riots involved bloodshed among indians: muslim mobs attacked hindu innocents and hindu mobs attacked muslim innocents. Those riots were not directed at Pakistanis and did not take place on Pakistani soil. The thousands of indians (mostly hindu) who have died in Pakistani Army-sponsored attacks are in every way shape and form related to Pakistan and their deaths the result of Pakistani policy. The victims are Indians–not Pakistani. I’m sorry, Indians are innocent here and are rightfully upset at Pakistan.
Finally, you are right, this is a South Asian space and I absolutely enjoy exchanging viewpoints with other south asians, indian and non indian. But this is also a space for candid and constructive exchange. That means it should be about more than just lovey-dovey rhetoric so that we can all sing kumbaya. It means that here we can call a spade a spade (politely) so that we can hopefully exchange real insights among populations that can change attitudes. As for perspectives on Pakistanis, my comments earlier stand. While you indeed are seemingly polite and well-intentioned, Aatish Taseer’s experiences and story paints a very different picture about what is said and thought when the Sepia windows are closed or the Qawwali performances conclude. In short, I think many of the attitude changes you are rightfully and sincerely advocating need to start in your homeland first. As I said before, most Indians would be happy to forget about Pakistan and focus on the new century; however, there are many Pakistanis that begrudge India’s rise and India’s destruction remains front and center of the Pakistani radar. While I do appreciate being able to discuss these matters politely with you, that doesn’t mean I have any reason to forgive and forget the hatred that has been sown from Rawalpindi and Muridke alike.
On one count though, I do think you are correct, and that is that this post is meant to talk about political developments in Pakistan, which I think we absolutely should do. If you would be kind enough to oblige, I would be interested in hearing your insights on the average Pakistani’s view of Zardari, Kayani as well as Sharif’s chances of regaining power. Thoughts?
I think the point of Sameer’s posts was to prove that the fallacy around the thought ‘the nukes are safe with Pakistani state’.
Kabir,
Though it is perfectly natural for you to feel the way you do about ‘posts involving Pakistan’, please appreciate that what Sameer has posted is very relevant in the current context.Also, the Pakistani people are not targeted in most of the comments (trolls are the exception), it is always the Pakistani elite -Army, Political/Feudal Class, ISI, militant islamis fundamentalist groups- that is talked about.
So, I think you can give the benefit of doubt to this forum as well.Interestingly, as a center-right person myself, I found that bloggers here take extreme care to sound politically correct, and have always attempted to keep the context and sensitivities of people in mind.At times, the ‘fixation with Manmohan’, the unchecked venom from communal socialist types here grates on my nerves as well.But I found that there are very few places where we see a balanced discussion.On SM, on most posts, I find such balance.
I don’t think we can equaate bashing of pakistani institutions and the elite with pakistan bashing.Unless you happen to belong to one or more of these institutions or social class.
Satyajit, I think we just have to agree to disagree. I don’t find anything wrong with Garv’s analogy. To me, destroying a part of your heritage for ideological reasons is similalary repugnant whether done by muslims or hindus. Also, Wikipedia informs me that that Archeological Society report has faced heavy criticism as being biased, so it has not been completely proved that there even was a temple there. However, like I said that’s not the issue.
Also, I feel you are again being too one-sided and it seems to me blaming Pakistan for a conflict that involves both countries. The Kashmir problem is complicated, and Pakistan perhaps has a legitimate opinion that a plebesite should be held or that Kashmir should be part of Pakistan (I’m not saying I totally agree with this view, I think Kashmiris should have a right to decide if they want to be independent). Of course, this doesn’t excuse “jihad” or proxy war or whatever, but let’s not pretend India is the innocent victim, because that’s intellectually dishonest.
I don’t know what the average Pakistani’s views are about anything. I am an American and have spent most of my life here in the states. I do know most people don’t like Zardari very much. He has no qualifications to be president other than he is Bhutto’s widower. Most Pakistanis (esp. Punjabis) don’t want to live under the Taliban’s version of Islam. Even in Swat and NWFP, much of the demand for sharia was because the civil justice system is ineffective in addressing people’s concerns (I’ve gleaned much of this from reading the NYT, various blogs, and from speaking with the people I know, who are educated professionals)
Kumar, I’m sorry but I have to disagree with you. Sameer has a history of posting on Pakistan-related posts, and he always posts articles that paint the most negative and biased version of what is going on in Pakistan. Also, when it comes to Pakistan related posts, I have often come across sentiments like “whatever is happening, they deserve it” or “wouldn’t it be great if the whole country disintegrates”. Thus, there is absolutely a balance problem when it comes to discussion about Pakistan. There’s a fine line between criticism of Pakistani institutions and blanket bashing of the whole country, and I find that at times commentors cross that line.
Kabir,
You make a few sound points, but, damn!–you do go way overboard:
I’m sorry–that statement is flat-out false. As in, “Did Pakistanis commit the Mumbai attacks?” Correct answer: “Yes.” “Did Brazilians commit the Mumbai attacks? Correct answer: “No.” Please try not to jettison Logic 101 in your defense of the “land of the pure.” (And who, exactly, is your bogey-man that wants to punish all 170 million Pakistanis for the attack–I’m a Hindu-nationalist “extremist,” and yet even I only want targeted attacks plus the “independence” of Balochistan (w/ US naval base at Gwadar) plus de-nuclearization.) 😉
Kabir,
Thanks. I didn’t realize you were a pakistani-american. Anyhow, I appreciate your insights on Zardari–which, pretty much corroborates what other pakistanis have said. What about Kayani and Sharif? There are rumors that Kayani is basically waiting for Zardari’s misrule to hit a fever pitch so he can institute a popular and official military takeover. Considering sharif’s investment in hair implants, I imagine he hopes to make a powerplay some time in the near future. What do think those chances are given your ear to the ground there?
Just to address the points you made, the analogy that garv made is utterly ridiculous. the babri masjid was destroyed NOT because it was emblematic of islam’s history in india but because it was specifically built to desecrate a hindu temple in the second holiest city of hinduism. That some wikipedia contributors would attempt to question the Archaeological Survey of India’s unbiased findings is unsurprising considering that people like Romila Thapar actually tried to whitewash temple destruction by Mahmud of Ghazni–who was noted to have gazed upon the Keshavdeo Temple at Mathura, remarked that such a wonder would take 200 years to construct, and then incinerated the temple with naptha and sulpher. So, none of this changes the fact that the foundations and pillars are in line with Hindu architecture and its destruction in line with the practice of many of the Mughal Emperors, Delhi Sultans, Islamic Raiders (especially considering Babur gave up wine and declared himself a Ghazi shortly before the Battle of Khanua against Rana Sangh). Rob’s analogy, though rather impolitically phrased, is more apt. What would muslims have done if mosques in Medina or if the Kaaba had faced the same fate and a church were constructed upon them or it? If hindus were bent on erasing the history of islam in India, I don’t think the Quwwatul Islam (Might of Islam) Mosque or Qutb Minar in Delhi would be left standing as they are today. That most hindus concur with your perspective on preserving one’s heritage should be obvious to anyone who has visited India. And really, Pakistan and Bangladesh seemed to have made a virtual annual ritual of tearing down temples, so it’s really the pot vs the kettle here.
As for being one-sided, I think any objective account of history would validate what I’m saying, especially considering Pakistan, which hired pathan raiders (who raped and pillaged kashmiris) to take over that princely state in 1948, first injected violence into the dispute. Moreover, I think if you asked the almost half a million Kashmiri hindus who were ethnically cleansed from kashmir at gunpoint, or the 100,000 Ladakhi buddhists, I think they might have another opinion on Kashmiri independence or joining Pakistan. Heck, if you talk to Kashmiris in POK, I think they too might have another opinion on joining Pakistan, considering the Punjabi colonialism that has transpired there and the oppression of the Baltis in the Northern Areas. History has shown that an Indian Kashmir has a future for hindus, muslims, sikhs, and buddhists. A Pakistani or titularly independent Kashmir (which would either be a colony of Pakistan or another vassal state of China anyway) does not. Frankly, all things considered, Pakistan has no locus standi on the matter, and the Indian sense of victimhood justified.
Anyhow, as you said earlier, let’s just agree to disagree and move on. I would much rather refocus the discussion on political developments than unrelated and unproductive tangents such as babri or temple demolishment in pakistan/bangladesh. I do appreciate your insights on the political situation in Pakistan so please do keep them coming. Thanks for the perspectives.
“Pakistan and Bangladesh seemed to have made a virtual annual ritual of tearing down temples”
Can you provide some evidence of this — and by that I don’t mean sources that see feverish imaginations as reality. Peer reviewed articles would be great since annual rituals are such fun fodder for academics.
Some good analysis http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikKJgd7GlZ8
Nations with worst religious tolerance by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom’s annual report(2008)..
A U.S. government panel listed 13 countries Friday as “egregious” violators of religious freedom.(http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/05/01/religious.freedom/index.html)
No surprises..Pakistan is well placed in the top 10!!
I don’t buy this whole “few bad apples” in Pakistan being terrorists theory.
The elite in Pakistan had no issues with sponsoring and supporting these “few bad apples” to murder Indian citizens – Muslim and Hindu. Now that these monsters are getting closer and closer to Punjab, the “moderate” Pakistanis suddenly have a problem with them.
Also, I’ve had enough of Pakistanis trying to equate internal issues of India with Pakistan sponsored terrorism foisted up other nations. India is a democratic country with Internal problems that Indians will deal with using internal mechanisms available. There are plenty of Muslims, lower castes and other in power in India, and localized conflict is something that India needs to deal with, and does not need any help, or advice from Pakistan.
For all I care, Pakistan can do whatever the hell it wants internally, as long as they dont foist terrorism upon us.
rob, it’s nice to see that you are once again calling for the dismemberment of Pakistani territory, true to your Hindutva beliefs. Something that I totally do not agree with. Pakistan must retain it’s territorial integrity.
Brahmastra, Pakistan cannot leave India alone for the same reason that India cannot leave Pakistan alone. Our post-Partition history is still fraught with issues, chief among them Kashmir. Kashmir has to be settled diplomatically, one way or the other (either LOC made permanent border, Kashmir made independent, whatever), otherwise conflict will continue. Many commentators including Arundathi Roy and William Dalrymple have made that point. I realize they are not really popular among the BJP/Hindutva fest that this site has become. I just hope you guys don’t get elected in India. All we need is Pakistan to fall to Muslim fascists and India to be taken over by Hindu facists.
Oh yeah, and rob Pakistan isn’t giving up any nukes until India does so as well. With “Hindu nationalists” like you around, it would be extremely foolish to do so.
Pakistan should be forcibly denuked by all civilised countries of the world. India is a democratic country with sane people who have a no-first-use policy on nuclear weapons. Pakistan does not.
Also, the extremists of Pakistan belong to an entirely different class than the “Hindu fascists” of India. I know it’s fashionable for Pakistanis to group India and Pakistan, Pakistani Islamic extremists and Hindu extremists together and sing kumbaya saying “we are like each other onleee” but the reality is far far different.
Kashmir is an internal problem of India. Pakistan needs to deal with its internal problems and stop pretending to be some kind of saviour of Indian muslims. Most Indian muslims know otherwise and are doing much better in India than they will ever do in Pakistan.
Bhramastra, Kashmir is not an internal problem of India, it is an international problem concerning both India and Pakistan. In case you’ve forgotten, the issue has been taken to the UN. Pakistan has a legitimate view that as a majority-Muslim state, Kashmir should have been part of Pakistan at Partition. Regardless of the outcome, the issue must be solved diplomatically.
You have no right to act like Pakistan is not part of the “civilized world” and India is. At this point, I am going to treat you like a troll and stop respondingto you.
Sorry Kabir, if the Pakistanis have a legit point of view on Kashmir based on the Two Nation theory then the Sangh Parivar conception of India as a “Hindu state” also has merit. Do we really want to go there? Why should Kashmir’s minorities accept being absorbed into a country that is constitutionally defined as Muslim? Self determination as a secular nation is a fair request, but I am unimpressed by UN resolutions favoring what is tantamount to ethic cleansing and religious discrimination