A counter challenge!

[Tiki Tam Tam]

The problem of Pakistan is an identity crisis, in that, though Pakistan was created to give the Moslems of India a homeland for Moslem, Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, in his inaugural address to the Constituent Assembly, desired Pakistan to be a secular nation where all could practise their Faiths without discrimination. There started the dichotomy in identity! Pakistan, a Moslem haven and yet wanting to be secular! Islam and secularism, even as per the Islamic scripture, is as nearbred as chalk to cheese. Dar ul Islam and Dar ul Harb!

While Jinnah may have desired secularism with a mere touch of Islamic supremacy, yet the psychology of the people did not, and rightly so, since they had suffered, as did Indians, huge riots that claimed millions of lives. Obviously, one could not forget their suffering and hence Islam took foundation uber alles, being the raison d’ être for Pakistan being formed! And it was not as per Islamic tenets of Far ul Islam and Dar ul Harb!

The people of the areas that became Pakistan were basically feudal and illiterate and their livelihood was in agriculture or the Armed Forces. On the other hand, those who migrated (the Mohajirs) were educated, emancipated and were people who were in institutions of a democracy i.e. lawyers, bureaucrats, petty businessmen etc. However, the important aspect was that they were rootless since their identity with “the soil" was left in India! Those who have been refugees can alone understand the heartbreak this is!

It was the Mohajirs who took over the governance and economy of Pakistan. Obviously, it was not appreciated by the original inhabitants of the areas that became Pakistan. The armed forces, composed of the original inhabitants, exerted to resume control of the area, and thus foundationed the psyche of martial law repeatedly afflicting Pakistan! The psyche of the Armed Forces being supreme has become so ingrained and powerful that it is ridiculously interesting that Pakistan is being currently ruled by a Mohajir i.e. Parvez Musharraf!

The Mohajirs, being educated and clever, realised that regionalism would leave them no place in Pakistan politics, which they were controlling (Jinnah was a Mohajir and technically a heretic since he married a non Moslem i.e. a Parsi), pulled out Islam as a all embracing card and as the be all and end all of Pakistan! Obviously, none could challenge that!

Providence came to the rescue of the Mohajirs – the Kashmir Issue wherein a Hindu ruler with Moslem population, acceded to India. It served both the Mohajir as also the Army (of original inhabitants) interests. Thus, Islam was supreme, and yet the Army was required to deliver. Practical application is more important than theory. Hence, the Army became the power behind the throne!

Thus, Pakistan is but a tussle for supremacy between Islam and the military and India is a convenient whipping boy for all ills that besot Pakistan! Even the British came for a beating since Radcliff (the one who worked out the boundaries) failed to give India to Pakistan!

The Pakistanis of today are most uncomfortable that India is taking its place in US' geostrategic vision!

In so far as Pakistan falling apart , the answer is simple. They are unable to reconcile with the problem of their support for Islamic terrorism in the name of Islam and the Caliphate and their dire necessity for progress by being a matured partner in the world comity of nations!

The terrorism that they had so far imported is coming home to roost i.e. NWFP, Lal Mazjid and the bombs that shook Benazir's motorcade!

Since you are so anti Mohajir, what have you to say?


If you can specially start a thread that is addressed to me, then here is one for you! I am merely being social and giving you back the compliment!

I am sure it will be closed.

Note I have not said this. This is from papers by scholars as I have indicated to AM. Paraphrased and concised.

I will also add I am no expert on the issue, though a keen learner I will admit.

 

[blain2]

Is the above your own opinion? If not then please post the source of the quotation.
Thanks

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Let's put it that it is a concised version of what I have read.

Consider it for what it is worth.

I sure would appreciate it being demolished in the event that it is incorrect since that is what is knowledge.

I am quite sure it can be.

I await such an education.

 

[Keysersoze]

Have changed the titles to both the threads you two are arguing in. try to keep it clean and civilised

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

I am civilised.

Any complaints?

If so, will change.

But why change the titles when I have posted?

I am curious why the other thread title was not changed earlier!

 

[blain2]

Thus, Pakistan is but a tussle for supremacy between Islam and the military and India is a convenient whipping boy for all ills that besot Pakistan! Even the British came for a beating since Radcliff (the one who worked out the boundaries) failed to give India to Pakistan!

The Pakistanis of today are most uncomfortable that India is taking its place in US' geostrategic vision!

In so far as Pakistan falling apart , the answer is simple. They are unable to reconcile with the problem of their support for Islamic terrorism in the name of Islam and the Caliphate and their dire necessity for progress by being a matured partner in the world comity of nations!

The terrorism that they had so far imported is coming home to roost i.e. NWFP, Lal Mazjid and the bombs that shook Benazir's motorcade!

I was unable to follow the linkages here....but its something like:

Partition - Muhajirs - domination in Pakistan - convergence with Army on Islamic ideals - Islamic militancy - feeling orphaned/heartburn due to the US-India honeymoon, militancy coming home to roost!!! Wow way too many angles here.

Others can take a stab at the other stuff if they wish to, I'd like to respond to above that is quoted. I think India being the whipping boy is an unfair statement. Its no more or less a whipping boy than Pakistan in the Indian psyche and media.

Both sides take solace in the fact that they have someone else to blame for their ills so you can't just call out Pakistan for relying on the good old whipping boy alone.

Additionally, there is no such a thing as "Islamic" terrorism. There is no sanction in Islam or the prophetic tradition to blow oneself up and kill non-combatants etc. Had something like this been in-built into the religion, then you would have been dealing with 1.5 billion members of AQ. What we do have are the fringe on the right asserting themselves. This is whats coming home to roost and its not all of Pakistan's own making or even specific to Pakistan alone. Certain events in the late last century took place which caused the extremist to become more assertive. Many of these people came to Pakistan from other countries and were successful in changing the psyche of at least some of the Pakistanis (who happened to be fairly non-violent prior to the 78 invasion of Afghanistan). We are having to deal with this now and are going through it. This is the current situation.

On the issue of Muhajir vs. locals, I believe what you have written may have been correct and even current but it would have to be like 4 decades ago. Over the past 40 years, others such as Punjabis and Pashtuns have become upwardly mobile and educated and are at par with those who migrated from India. So things are quite equitable at least concerning Muhajirs, Punjabis and Pashtuns. Sindhis and Baloch still require progress.

Lastly, there has never been a tussle between the Army and Islam over supremacy. At least the Army is quite in synch with its Pakistani yet Islamic identity.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The Mohajirs, being educated and clever, realised that regionalism would leave them no place in Pakistan politics, which they were controlling (Jinnah was a Mohajir and technically a heretic since he married a non Moslem i.e. a Parsi), pulled out Islam as a all embracing card and as the be all and end all of Pakistan! Obviously, none could challenge that!

Any substantiation of this? What exactly is serving as the basis behind those conclusions?

And the "Islam card", the way it is understood now, would have to be credited to Zia, would it not?

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

I was unable to follow the linkages here....but its something like:

Partition - Muhajirs - domination in Pakistan - convergence with Army on Islamic ideals - Islamic militancy - feeling orphaned/heartburn due to the US-India honeymoon, militancy coming home to roost!!! Wow way too many angles here.

Indeed Pakistan has too many angles to handle.

It requires no intelligence to understand that any new venture will always have many angles and it will require a Herculean effort to put it in shape!

Others can take a stab at the other stuff if they wish to, I'd like to respond to above that is quoted. I think India being the whipping boy is an unfair statement. Its no more or less a whipping boy than Pakistan in the Indian psyche and media.

Pakistan is no longer a whipping boy. The equation is on the mend. And Inshallah, it will succeed!

China is the worry!

Both sides take solace in the fact that they have someone else to blame for their ills so you can't just call out Pakistan for relying on the good old whipping boy alone.

The fools blame each other.

Additionally, there is no such a thing as "Islamic" terrorism. There is no sanction in Islam or the prophetic tradition to blow oneself up and kill non-combatants etc. Had something like this been in-built into the religion, then you would have been dealing with 1.5 billion members of AQ. What we do have are the fringe on the right asserting themselves. This is whats coming home to roost and its not all of Pakistan's own making or even specific to Pakistan alone. Certain events in the late last century took place which caused the extremist to become more assertive. Many of these people came to Pakistan from other countries and were successful in changing the psyche of at least some of the Pakistanis (who happened to be fairly non-violent prior to the 78 invasion of Afghanistan). We are having to deal with this now and are going through it. This is the current situation.

There is terrorism. Sadly, they use Islam as the base. That is why Dabong and others root for it, even though having destroyed world peace, it is destroying Pakistan!

Has Pakistan changed the psyche?

If so, why bomb Bennazir's convoy?

Would that happen before 9/11?

On the issue of Muhajir vs. locals, I believe what you have written may have been correct and even current but it would have to be like 4 decades ago. Over the past 40 years, others such as Punjabis and Pashtuns have become upwardly mobile and educated and are at par with those who migrated from India. So things are quite equitable at least concerning Muhajirs, Punjabis and Pashtuns. Sindhis and Baloch still require progress.

Does not appear so if one reads Dabong or my learned friend from the Think Tank, Road Runner and I am sure they are as good a Pakistanis as you! Or the Lal Mazjid chaps or the tribal rabble who are creating chaos in NWFP and FATA.

Lastly, there has never been a tussle between the Army and Islam over supremacy. At least the Army is quite in synch with its Pakistani yet Islamic identity

.

I cannot fight the history of Pakistan!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

In so far as Pakistan falling apart , the answer is simple. They are unable to reconcile with the problem of their support for Islamic terrorism in the name of Islam and the Caliphate and their dire necessity for progress by being a matured partner in the world comity of nations!

This is quite an inflammatory statement, that generalizes and stereotypes to the extreme.

While religion plays an important part in the lives of Pakistanis, and there is nothing wrong with that, that hardly translates to "support for terrorism in the name of Islam". An extremely small minority may subscribe to that POV, but that does not translate to what is concluded.

I'd say that this entire piece, with the exception of the struggle for Pakistan's identity (that is a natural part of the evolution of any society, and therefore perfectly acceptable) an incendiary piece of opinion.

Building bridges Salim?

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Any substantiation of this? What exactly is serving as the basis behind those conclusions?

And the "Islam card", the way it is understood now, would have to be credited to Zia, would it not?

Would not know from personal experience.

But sure form what I have read and asked you to read.

Let's not talk of Zia.

He is the ruin of Pakistan.

And Musharraf is left holding the can!

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

This is quite an inflammatory statement, that generalizes and stereotypes to the extreme.

While religion plays an important part in the lives of Pakistanis, and there is nothing wrong with that, that hardly translates to "support for terrorism in the name of Islam". An extremely small minority may subscribe to that POV, but that does not translate to what is concluded.

I'd say that this entire piece, with the exception of the struggle for Pakistan's identity (that is a natural part of the evolution of any society, and therefore perfectly acceptable) an incendiary piece of opinion.

Building bridges Salim?

Misunderstand me not.

Lal Mazjid is what? Is it not support for terrorism in the name of Islam and is there not support from the educated on this very forum?

Are those who support the minority?

If so, Musharraf would not be in a bind and assassination attempts not made from the military itself!

Imagine the illiterate and the gullible!

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

I'd say that this entire piece, with the exception of the struggle for Pakistan's identity (that is a natural part of the evolution of any society, and therefore perfectly acceptable)

I buy that.

But with a single religion of the State, it should have been axiomatic (no hedging and being Politically correct!) and not the confusion it is!

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

their support for Islamic terrorism in the name of Islam and the Caliphate

Have you not read about people wanting the Caliphate?

What are the slogans of the terrorists?

Why has jihad become such a foul word amongst the world population?

Is jihad a foul word?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Would not know from personal experience.

Wasn't born then, so neither would I.

But sure form what I have read and asked you to read.

Let's not talk of Zia.

He is the ruin of Pakistan.

And Musharraf is left holding the can!

But that is what I am alluding to, Pakistan was always a Muslim majority state, so whence this need for "creating the Islam card"? That already existed did it not? So the only major difference would have been the creature brought about by Zia, who was not a muhajir, and therefore would not fit in with the "story".

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Moderate Islamic card of Jinnah was fine and indeed, understandable.

Not virulent sabre swishing with head lopped off!

Or else why is the world so worried about Pakistani madrssas.


Why are the Saudis madrassas not in the picture and they are Salafis and strict Moslems, who take no nonsense!

The Islamic card was the only salvation for Zia to bring legitimacy to his military rule!

Did you know that the US Ambassador who blew up with Zia in the aircraft was a Jew? Correct me if I am wrong.