We had our own social ills which were exaggerated with the arrival of unnecessary Arabization during Bhutto's rule that was later formalized by Zia. We could have done without sectarian issues, we could have done without faux Islamic laws like Blasphemy, Zina etc and we surely want to run our own affairs but it all changed in those years.
There is always opposition to all religious groups but Majlis-e-Ahrar/Khatme-Nabuwat was a breakaway group created and funded by the Congress. Their intention was political and their purpose to stop the demand for Pakistan becoming stronger amongst the people of British India.
The Short And Sordid History Of Majlis-e-Ahrar-e-Islam | Pak Tea House
These people have every right to voice their opinion against Ahmadi's but when they spread hatred and instigate violence, then it become a state problem. Unfortunately they were able to get their demands to become a part of the constitution in this state. This all happened only after the Saudi's gave their stamp of approval and the pressure on Bhutto made him do the necessary.
The point is not who or what created K-N, but that religious bigotry and anti-Ahmadi sentiment was used in South Asia long before the Saudis did anything, and therefore cannot be solely blamed on the Saudis.
Like I said, the anti-Ahmadi movement existed since the 30's but they were only able to gain the kind of power that they did when the Saudis started to support them. In their view, Ahmadi's had been the worst thing to walk on this planet but it was just their view, however it become a part of the constitution through Saudi pressure and later a Saudi scholar.
And why did Pakistanis not oppose this 'anti-Ahmadi' movement then, if the only reason it became law was Saudi pressure on Bhutto? Where were the mass demonstrations and outrage against the vilification of an entire community in Pakistan?
Anti-Ahmadi sentiment in South Asian nations existed long before Bhutto did anything
The Saudi's say they are directly involved as participants in running the state of Pakistan
WikiLeaks Reveals Saudi Arabia's Role in Pakistani Affairs - TIME
So if they claim to be participants, then they also have a role in our pathetic state.
That is a rhetorical argument, not a factual one - a factual argument would involve evidence indicating direct Saudi pressure in enacting Blasphemy and anti-Ahmadi laws.
A factual argument would indicate Saudi involvement in promoting honor killings, rape by Jirga, marriages with the Quran, murders of female relatives over property etc.
I am not blaming the Arabs for all our ills, what I do blame them for is their involvment in the state of Pakistan which was furthered excavated our problems.
Pakistan's problems have been exacerbated by a lack of governance, a lack of security, corrupt law enforcement and lack of justice for the common man, and not by the Saudis. Even with the existing Blasphemy and anti-Ahmadi laws in place, an independent law enforcement and judicial system would not allow the promotion and perpetration of violence in the name of religion that occurs in Pakistan today.
As Pakistan commentators often argue, the problems in Pakistan are not the existing laws, flawed laws or lack of laws, the problems in Pakistan are the
lack of IMPLEMENTATION of the existing laws.
The Sauds even sent a scholar to implement laws in Pakistan which has caused nothing but problems for Pakistan.
Again, the problem is that Pakistan's existing laws are not being implemented and governance has gone to the dogs, and not the presence of a token Saudi Scholar here and there.
They were unsuccessful indeed but it would take a lot to prove Zafarullah wrong over such matters.
What it would take to prove Zafarullah wrong is irrelevant, I am just pointing out, in the context of our discussion, that the Saudis did not influence Pakistan's leadership at the time, and therefore that particular incident cannot be used as justification for the argument that the 'Arabs are imposing Arab values on Pakistan'.
However as time went by, the Saudi's were successful in forcing a particular interpretation of Islam upon Pakistani society through constitutional changes. Allama Iqbal's son came on TV recently and gave a complete detail of what occured in the 80's.
Was Jinnah secular? The Express Tribune
This was the first instance where foreign pressure caused Pakistani's to alter something that damaged the effectiveness of law in this country.
And how can you be certain that the Arabs forced Dualibi on Zia, instead of Zia inviting Dualibi and having him assist in the framing of his so called 'Islamic Laws'?
As for Maududi, he was the only one who was of the same thought process as the Saudi's and he became their man in Pakistan leading the way for its eventual Islamization.
But Madudi was not brainwashed by the Saudis was he? He chose to pursue a particular ideology, and promote it, of his own volition, as did his followers. If he was successful in pressuring the government to follow his ideological agenda, then again that speaks to the weakness of the Pakistani leadership, or perhaps the ideological inclinations of the Pakistani leadership.
The Saudis used their money to promote their 'religious beliefs', much like the Yanks are doing in terms of trying to project their world view in Pakistan, the fault lies with Pakistanis in not presenting an equally forceful narrative and building a vocal lobby to influence Pakistani leadership.
Pakisan's responsibility is to be factual in their standing, they should find their own faults which allowed this to occur and who are the "participants" in all this. The "participants" should be paid in kind, that is all.
Pakistanis are responsible for standing up to the Pakistani leadership when they take decisions that are supposedly 'alien to our demographic and culture', Pakistanis are responsible for thinking for themselves and vocalizing their opinions and pressuring their elected leadership to move the country in the direction Pakistanis want.
Creating bogeyman in the 'Arabis and Agencies' is no way to be 'responsible', and will change nothing.
Arabization is the forced implementation of a distorted and intolerant interpretation of Islam.
The what are 'Honor Killings, rape by Jirga, marriages with the Quran'?
'Pakization'? Is that something to be proud of in contrast to 'Arabization'? How about being responsible for our state of affairs and pressuring our leadership to reform the country and actually implement the existing laws?
We don't but our leaders do, especially over matters of religion.
But then the problem is the leaders we either 'elect', or support when they 'carry out coups'.
Why blame the Arabs for our own corrupt political class that we keep voting back into power, both through voting for them and apathy towards the electoral process?
