Dear Pseudo Liberals, what is the point of belittling the sacrifices of our soldiers in ’65 war?

[Jackdaws]

Questioning a popular narrative that is falsely spread by the establishment is brave and patriotic. It is the blogger who seems unpatriotic.

 

[Samlee]

Waqas Ahmed should also look at Dr. S. Akbar Zaidi:

'History in Pakistan has been badly treated'
MALEEHA HAMID SIDDIQUI — UPDATED A DAY AGO


KARACHI: With Pakistan just two days away from observing Defence Day and marking the 50th anniversary of the 1965 war, historian and political economist Dr S. Akbar Zaidi dispelled ‘the victory myth’, saying that there can be no a bigger lie, as Pakistan lost terribly.

People are unaware of this fact because the history that is taught in Pakistan is from an ideological viewpoint, said Dr Zaidi during his thought-provoking lecture titled ‘Questioning Pakistan’s history’. “Students are not taught the history of the people of Pakistan rather it is focused on the making of Pakistan,” he said.

The event was organised by the Faculty of Social Sciences, Karachi University.

Dr Zaidi who also teaches history at the Institute of Business Administration, Karachi, began his lecture by raising a couple of questions: what is Pakistan’s history and is there a need to question Pakistan’s history. And when was Pakistan formed? Aug 14, 1947 or Aug 15, 1947? For him the fact we are still talking about historical events 68 years later that are apparently settled is interesting. “These events and questions have not been settled. They are constantly being reinterpreted, this is because history does not die, it keeps reliving by questioning facts and truths.”

Coming to the question when was Pakistan created, he said one obvious answer is it did so on Aug 14, 1947 but he read out an excerpt from a Pakistan Studies textbook in which it was claimed it came into being in 712AD when the Arabs came to Sindh and Multan. “This is utter rubbish!” he exclaimed, rejecting the textbook account. He said the first interaction with Muslims and Arabs occurred in Kerala in South India for trading purposes.

Some historians claim the genesis of Pakistan lie in the Delhi Sultanate or the Mughal Empire. He, however, reminded everyone that the India as we know today did not exist during the Mughal era. It was during the 19th century the concept of nation-state was formed. There are others who state Sir Syed Ahmed Khan laid the foundation for Pakistan. Dr Zaidi felt this statement was partially true, because Sir Syed always maintained that Muslims should get their rights but he had also said: “Hindus and Muslims are the two eyes of the beautiful bride that is Hindustan. Weakness of any of them will spoil the beauty of the bride.”

The 1940 Pakistan Resolution called for the recognition of Muslims within Hindustan and not for a separate entity, Dr Zaidi added.

Social history

He then led the debate towards the questions: “Is the history of Pakistan, a history of the people of Pakistan or is it the making of Pakistan?”As far as he knew everyone is taught a history that includes the Mughals, freedom movement, the Quaid-i-Azam leading the All India Muslim League etc but was completely unaware about the history of the Baloch and the Pakhtun. “I cannot understand Pakistan’s history without knowing the history of the Baloch, Pakhtun, Punjab, Shah Abdul Latif and his relationship with the land.”

He said he was ashamed as a Karachiite that he had been unaware of Sindh’s history. It was important to know about indigenous histories because the “issues we are confronted with, we would have a better understanding in dealing with them”. He gave the example of East Pakistan to illustrate this point. “East Pakistan has been erased from memory. The Bengalis of East Pakistan have been reduced to they were traitors, India interfered and East Pakistan decided to separate. But what about Pakistan Army’s role in its separation?”

According to Dr Zaidi, history in Pakistan has been badly treated due to several reasons. Students are forced to study history or Pakistan Studies as a compulsory subject and hence the focus is just to pass the exam and get over with it. It is focused on rulers and generals and not on the social history. He highlighted another important reason for history getting a step-motherly treatment, citing that it is a subject that is taken when a student is unable to get admission in other departments in universities.

A robust question and answer session followed the talk during which students and teachers wanted to know why they were being taught distorted version of history, why the contribution of religious minorities to cities such as Karachi, Lahore and Peshawar was not mentioned in their textbooks, why does one have to wear separate identities and how can identification crisis be resolved to make Pakistan into one nation.

Dr Zaidi responded to these queries, explaining that Parsis and Hindus contributed hugely in the educational development of Karachi and in a similar manner the Sikhs in Punjab. “History in Pakistan is taught from an ideological viewpoint. Pakistan needs to be seen as a geographical entity.”

Referring to the distorted history, he said: “With the celebration of the victory in the 1965 war round the corner, there can be no bigger lie that Pakistan won the war. We lost terribly in the 1965 war.”

He appealed to the attendees to read Shuja Nawaz’s book Crossed Swords that exposed the reality of the war.

As for wearing separate identities, he replied there was no need to do so. “I can be a Sindhi, Hindu and Pakistani simultaneously.” He added that the diversity of nations should be acknowledged, since nationalities could not be imposed on people.

Published in Dawn, September 5th, 2015

'History in Pakistan has been badly treated' - Pakistan - DAWN.COM

Another "unpatriotic Pakistani" not playing along with the false propaganda taught as history in Pakistan....

I Have Severe Doubt About His Credentials.He Use To Call Himself An Economist At A Talk Show Rambling Aginst Privatisation But He Could Not Even Define Law Of Diminishing Marginal Utility.So He Started Calling Himself A Political Economist(Practically Considered A Pseudo Science By Mainstream Economists).Now He Has Suddenly Become A Historian


Trust Me I Have Heard This Guy Before He Is Sad Joke

Questioning a popular narrative that is falsely spread by the establishment is brave and patriotic. It is the blogger who seems unpatriotic.

I Hear Arundity Roy and Karan Thapar Are Pretty Unpatriotic In Your Country

I never thought we'd see a day were we doubted the sacrifices of our shaheeds...truly a shame

India Spent 350 Million Rupees On Celebrating 1965 "Victory" Must Be A Spillover Effect

 

[Musafir117]

Intolerant society in all aspects, not mater of agree or disagree no one wanna even bother to listen.

 

[Jackdaws]

I Have Severe Doubt About His Credentials.He Use To Call Himself An Economist At A Talk Show Rambling Aginst Privatisation But He Could Not Even Define Law Of Diminishing Marginal Utility.So He Started Calling Himself A Political Economist(Practically Considered A Pseudo Science By Mainstream Economists).Now He Has Suddenly Become A Historian


Trust Me I Have Heard This Guy Before He Is Sad Joke




I Hear Arundity Roy and Karan Thapar Are Pretty Unpatriotic In Your Country




India Spent 350 Million Rupees On Celebrating 1965 "Victory" Must Be A Spillover Effect

Of course not - Karan Thapar is a widely recognized journalist and well respected. Arundhati Roy is admittedly far too left wing even by Communist standards - she is well meaning but deluded.

 

[Nick81]

I Have Severe Doubt About His Credentials.He Use To Call Himself An Economist At A Talk Show Rambling Aginst Privatisation But He Could Not Even Define Law Of Diminishing Marginal Utility.So He Started Calling Himself A Political Economist(Practically Considered A Pseudo Science By Mainstream Economists).Now He Has Suddenly Become A Historian


Trust Me I Have Heard This Guy Before He Is Sad Joke

The piece also says that he teaches at the Institute of Business Administration. There is a subject called economic history; distinct from political history, which may be taught by economists. No in-congruence there. However, I cannot vouch for his overall academic credentials as I do not know enough about him.

......That would make sense had Akbar Zaidi given proper references other than just what he read on one place as truth(that is desi thinking I guess.. believe everything that comes out of one source as gospel). He mentions Shuja Nawaz but his book has its own critics and has a lot of counter narratives. Had Zaidi been a true intellectual, he would have mentioned the rest as well before saying that based on such and such accounts.. Shuja is more accurate.

But then ,you are Indian.. why take anything positive about Pakistan.. its not in your nature... and to reach that conclusion I have hundreds and thousands of accounts to support my view.

Mr. Zaidi was giving a lecture to an audience. Firstly, such events are timebound and concise by nature, and secondly, witthout a complete transcript we can only assume that the writer has summarized the entire talk. As for Shuja Nawaz's book, I am yet to read it - I have procured an EBook and will begin reading shortly. Right now I am in the middle of reading Frontline Pakistan: The Struggle With Militant Islam by Zahid Hussain.

As for your point about Indians and what they think of Pakistan, you may have a point. But let me nonetheless tell you my personal experience. I come from an extremely liberal educational background, where Marxism freely intermingled with post-modern deconstruction to create a milieu of cultural relativism. It is during those days that I was acquainted with some noted Pakistani academics. To give one example, I read Asma Jehangir in a context totally unconnected with her criticism of the Pakistani state and military. I had instant respect for her intellectual prowess. It was later that I became aware of the complete body of her work.

Similarly, I used to follow Najam Sethi for interesting and thoughtful commentary on the state of affairs in Pakistan, and not to hear criticism thereof. Gradually I became aware as to how this brave journalist has been persecuted for plain-speak in the past. Other names that come to mind in this context are Ayesha Siddiqua and Pervez Hoodbhoy.

You might believe that I have cited these people as they criticize the Pakistani state and military and therefore are useful to the Indian narrative. I am at a loss to explain to you that it is not the case at all. It is usually not the conclusions, but the methods of epistemology they use, fundamental premises and reasoning that I find appealing. We in India share the same approach to academics, and are therefore comfortable with the works of these intellectuals and journalists. You might also suggest that we are not comfortable with others as we are biased against them. On that, I can only ask you to take me at face value - we struggle to understand the academic process followed by most Pakistani scholars. Many of the works coming out of your country don't seem to adhere to rigorous academic standard. Are you not aware how frequently people in Pakistan simply dismiss an expert on any field as being incompetent or biased? Why do you think this has happened, if not for a sufficient body of proof regarding genuine incompetence and vested interest in Pakistani intellectualism?

 

[SQ8]

The piece also says that he teaches at the Institute of Business Administration. There is a subject called economic history; distinct from political history, which may be taught by economists. No in-congruence there. However, I cannot vouch for his overall academic credentials as I do not know enough about him.



Mr. Zaidi was giving a lecture to an audience. Firstly, such events are timebound and concise by nature, and secondly, witthout a complete transcript we can only assume that the writer has summarized the entire talk. As for Shuja Nawaz's book, I am yet to read it - I have procured an EBook and will begin reading shortly. Right now I am in the middle of reading Frontline Pakistan: The Struggle With Militant Islam by Zahid Hussain.

As for your point about Indians and what they think of Pakistan, you may have a point. But let me nonetheless tell you my personal experience. I come from an extremely liberal educational background, where Marxism freely intermingled with post-modern deconstruction to create a milieu of cultural relativism. It is during those days that I was acquainted with some noted Pakistani academics. To give one example, I read Asma Jehangir in a context totally unconnected with her criticism of the Pakistani state and military. I had instant respect for her intellectual prowess. It was later that I became aware of the complete body of her work.

Similarly, I used to follow Najam Sethi for interesting and thoughtful commentary on the state of affairs in Pakistan, and not to hear criticism thereof. Gradually I became aware as to how this brave journalist has been persecuted for plain-speak in the past. Other names that come to mind in this context are Ayesha Siddiqua and Pervez Hoodbhoy.

You might believe that I have cited these people as they criticize the Pakistani state and military and therefore are useful to the Indian narrative. I am at a loss to explain to you that it is not the case at all. It is usually not the conclusions, but the methods of epistemology they use, fundamental premises and reasoning that I find appealing. We in India share the same approach to academics, and are therefore comfortable with the works of these intellectuals and journalists. You might also suggest that we are not comfortable with others as we are biased against them. On that, I can only ask you to take me at face value - we struggle to understand the academic process followed by most Pakistani scholars. Many of the works coming out of your country don't seem to adhere to rigorous academic standard. Are you not aware how frequently people in Pakistan simply dismiss an expert on any field as being incompetent or biased? Why do you think this has happened, if not for a sufficient body of proof regarding genuine incompetence and vested interest in Pakistani intellectualism?

You struggle to follow which Pakistani scholars is the question. After all, if all you are looking at in terms of Pakistani scholars are the rabble rouser then none of your own assessment of Pakistanis will be genuine either. I can judge the character of all Indian women by Sunny Leone for that matter and claim that this is now a frequent occurrence in Inia since that is the first evidence I stumbled upon.

Somehow, I doubt your scholarly studies are grounded in academics if you would trust Najam Sethi's views on a subject such as Kargil as compared to say ACdre Kaiser Tufail. It is as ridiculous as any dictator claiming that their military training provides them will the capacity to run a country.
Needless to say I would be delighted to read Pervaiz Hoodboy on physics but would take any word of his on military tactics with a bucketful of salts, or is the definition of "expert" in the field somewhat different for India? Im at a loss.
By that principle we can all claim to take irrelevant experts and place their opinions on the forefront since those opinions SUIT what we want to hear.

So by your own admission, your selection of "experts" is confined to the negative pablum you want to hear about Pakistan and anything that might post a different positive light is to be dismissed immedietly. Hence, at the end.. you only end up with the same narrative as I said; despite your supposed "academic" motives, you are dishonest in your research and selection.

By contrast, I consider one of the most authentic overview of say a subject such as the Indian Pakistani air war in 1965 to be written by PVS Jagan mohan.. An account accepted by India as well. The difference is that I am out to look for both positives and negatives for both nations, you have clearly stated that it is not so for yourself.

That is the difference right there between an Indian character and one from Pakistan.

 

[Jf Thunder]

its their job, to say everything against what the majority is saying, and then making themselves look cool

 

[Spectre]

You struggle to follow which Pakistani scholars is the question. After all, if all you are looking at in terms of Pakistani scholars are the rabble rouser then none of your own assessment of Pakistanis will be genuine either. I can judge the character of all Indian women by Sunny Leone for that matter and claim that this is now a frequent occurrence in Inia since that is the first evidence I stumbled upon.

Somehow, I doubt your scholarly studies are grounded in academics if you would trust Najam Sethi's views on a subject such as Kargil as compared to say ACdre Kaiser Tufail. It is as ridiculous as any dictator claiming that their military training provides them will the capacity to run a country.
Needless to say I would be delighted to read Pervaiz Hoodboy on physics but would take any word of his on military tactics with a bucketful of salts, or is the definition of "expert" in the field somewhat different for India? Im at a loss.
By that principle we can all claim to take irrelevant experts and place their opinions on the forefront since those opinions SUIT what we want to hear.

So by your own admission, your selection of "experts" is confined to the negative pablum you want to hear about Pakistan and anything that might post a different positive light is to be dismissed immedietly. Hence, at the end.. you only end up with the same narrative as I said; despite your supposed "academic" motives, you are dishonest in your research and selection.

By contrast, I consider one of the most authentic overview of say a subject such as the Indian Pakistani air war in 1965 to be written by PVS Jagan mohan.. An account accepted by India as well. The difference is that I am out to look for both positives and negatives for both nations, you have clearly stated that it is not so for yourself.

That is the difference right there between an Indian character and one from Pakistan.

People usually read what re-enforces their PoV, kind of a masturbatory exercise of intellectual nature, anything which makes them uncomfortable and challenges their long held presumptions are ignored or lampooned.

Applies to most people including me. Not as such a difference b/w Indian and Pakistanis but difference b/w a true scholar and others. I am not saying this is bad, sometimes it is necessary - You don't want you soldiers to suffer from uncertainty and doubts over their course of action - therefore they are presented with a picture without any shades of gray, applies equally to masses keep them placated and calm as sheep.

Sometimes national interest dictates forming a particular narrative and re-enforcing it with media, entertainment and books written by otherwise excellent academics and scholars. 1947/1962/1971 are such cases with regards to India and Pakistan.

We all like our dinner cooked and served not baring it's teeth and claws.

 

[Politico]

most of these people r mouthpieces for india and raw

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Waqas Ahmed should also look at Dr. S. Akbar Zaidi:

'History in Pakistan has been badly treated'
MALEEHA HAMID SIDDIQUI — UPDATED A DAY AGO


KARACHI: With Pakistan just two days away from observing Defence Day and marking the 50th anniversary of the 1965 war, historian and political economist Dr S. Akbar Zaidi dispelled ‘the victory myth’, saying that there can be no a bigger lie, as Pakistan lost terribly.

People are unaware of this fact because the history that is taught in Pakistan is from an ideological viewpoint, said Dr Zaidi during his thought-provoking lecture titled ‘Questioning Pakistan’s history’. “Students are not taught the history of the people of Pakistan rather it is focused on the making of Pakistan,” he said.

The event was organised by the Faculty of Social Sciences, Karachi University.

Dr Zaidi who also teaches history at the Institute of Business Administration, Karachi, began his lecture by raising a couple of questions: what is Pakistan’s history and is there a need to question Pakistan’s history. And when was Pakistan formed? Aug 14, 1947 or Aug 15, 1947? For him the fact we are still talking about historical events 68 years later that are apparently settled is interesting. “These events and questions have not been settled. They are constantly being reinterpreted, this is because history does not die, it keeps reliving by questioning facts and truths.”

Coming to the question when was Pakistan created, he said one obvious answer is it did so on Aug 14, 1947 but he read out an excerpt from a Pakistan Studies textbook in which it was claimed it came into being in 712AD when the Arabs came to Sindh and Multan. “This is utter rubbish!” he exclaimed, rejecting the textbook account. He said the first interaction with Muslims and Arabs occurred in Kerala in South India for trading purposes.

Some historians claim the genesis of Pakistan lie in the Delhi Sultanate or the Mughal Empire. He, however, reminded everyone that the India as we know today did not exist during the Mughal era. It was during the 19th century the concept of nation-state was formed. There are others who state Sir Syed Ahmed Khan laid the foundation for Pakistan. Dr Zaidi felt this statement was partially true, because Sir Syed always maintained that Muslims should get their rights but he had also said: “Hindus and Muslims are the two eyes of the beautiful bride that is Hindustan. Weakness of any of them will spoil the beauty of the bride.”

The 1940 Pakistan Resolution called for the recognition of Muslims within Hindustan and not for a separate entity, Dr Zaidi added.

Social history

He then led the debate towards the questions: “Is the history of Pakistan, a history of the people of Pakistan or is it the making of Pakistan?”As far as he knew everyone is taught a history that includes the Mughals, freedom movement, the Quaid-i-Azam leading the All India Muslim League etc but was completely unaware about the history of the Baloch and the Pakhtun. “I cannot understand Pakistan’s history without knowing the history of the Baloch, Pakhtun, Punjab, Shah Abdul Latif and his relationship with the land.”

He said he was ashamed as a Karachiite that he had been unaware of Sindh’s history. It was important to know about indigenous histories because the “issues we are confronted with, we would have a better understanding in dealing with them”. He gave the example of East Pakistan to illustrate this point. “East Pakistan has been erased from memory. The Bengalis of East Pakistan have been reduced to they were traitors, India interfered and East Pakistan decided to separate. But what about Pakistan Army’s role in its separation?”

According to Dr Zaidi, history in Pakistan has been badly treated due to several reasons. Students are forced to study history or Pakistan Studies as a compulsory subject and hence the focus is just to pass the exam and get over with it. It is focused on rulers and generals and not on the social history. He highlighted another important reason for history getting a step-motherly treatment, citing that it is a subject that is taken when a student is unable to get admission in other departments in universities.

A robust question and answer session followed the talk during which students and teachers wanted to know why they were being taught distorted version of history, why the contribution of religious minorities to cities such as Karachi, Lahore and Peshawar was not mentioned in their textbooks, why does one have to wear separate identities and how can identification crisis be resolved to make Pakistan into one nation.

Dr Zaidi responded to these queries, explaining that Parsis and Hindus contributed hugely in the educational development of Karachi and in a similar manner the Sikhs in Punjab. “History in Pakistan is taught from an ideological viewpoint. Pakistan needs to be seen as a geographical entity.”

Referring to the distorted history, he said: “With the celebration of the victory in the 1965 war round the corner, there can be no bigger lie that Pakistan won the war. We lost terribly in the 1965 war.”

He appealed to the attendees to read Shuja Nawaz’s book Crossed Swords that exposed the reality of the war.

As for wearing separate identities, he replied there was no need to do so. “I can be a Sindhi, Hindu and Pakistani simultaneously.” He added that the diversity of nations should be acknowledged, since nationalities could not be imposed on people.

Published in Dawn, September 5th, 2015

'History in Pakistan has been badly treated' - Pakistan - DAWN.COM

Another "unpatriotic Pakistani" not playing along with the false propaganda taught as history in Pakistan....

this thread was written in the response of this exact story.

 

[SQ8]

People usually read what re-enforces their PoV, kind of a masturbatory exercise of intellectual nature, anything which makes them uncomfortable and challenges their long held presumptions are ignored or lampooned.

Applies to most people including me. Not as such a difference b/w Indian and Pakistanis but difference b/w a true scholar and others. I am not saying this is bad, sometimes it is necessary - You don't want you soldiers to suffer from uncertainty and doubts over their course of action - therefore they are presented with a picture without any shades of gray, applies equally to masses keep them placated and calm as sheep.

Sometimes national interest dictates forming a particular narrative and re-enforcing it with media, entertainment and books written by otherwise excellent academics and scholars. 1947/1962/1971 are such cases with regards to India and Pakistan.

We all like our dinner cooked and served not baring it's teeth and claws.

That has to do with the majority of desis we see here sadly.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

That would make sense had Akbar Zaidi given proper references other than just what he read on one place as truth(that is desi thinking I guess.. believe everything that comes out of one source as gospel). He mentions Shuja Nawaz but his book has its own critics and has a lot of counter narratives. Had Zaidi been a true intellectual, he would have mentioned the rest as well before saying that based on such and such accounts.. Shuja is more accurate.

But then ,you are Indian.. why take anything positive about Pakistan.. its not in your nature... and to reach that conclusion I have hundreds and thousands of accounts to support my view.

''Before belittling the contributions of these men, and then blaming the reaction on some ISPR conspiracy, it would be great if these authors get down from their high-horses and try to understand the people they are trying to preach to. Maybe, excuse me for this crazy theory, people will respond positively to your criticism if after writing 150 articles against Pakistan Army, you write one article appreciating something they have done (I’m looking at you Cyril Almaeda). And maybe if you write in a balanced and objective way for these ‘jaahil Pakistanis‘, showing that the aim of your criticism is to improve the Army not to destroy it, then Pakistanis may not believe you work for Modi.

But then again, there aren’t a lot of people who hope to get their 72 virgins by being balanced, moderate and objective''

This was the main cruzx of this thread that i wanted u guys to look at.

Like i say learn from indians. They do exactly this in their reports even while criticizing themselves or praising Pakistan.

 

[nForce]

Like i say learn from indians. They do exactly this in their reports even while criticizing themselves or praising Pakistan.

Praising Pakistan for what ? What kind of reports are those ?

 

[GreenApple]

They are Marxist anarchists, they don't even believe in the state. I hope our agencies are checking their activities.[

Dear Pseudo Liberals, what is the point of belittling the sacrifices of our soldiers in ’65 war?

• BlogOpinion
• Waqas Ahmed
• September 5, 2015 7:26 pm
• 26 Comments

We all know for a fact by now that terrorists are “brainwashed zombies product of mullah ideology of Zia/Saudi[insert whatever you want here]”, that is a well-established fact by now. And that is very well. We have blackened tons of perfectly good newsprint to preach this mantra. But there is another brainwashed gang in our midst and this one didn’t go to the medressahs, they went to universities abroad.

While the extremists on the right get paid with 72 virgins, the ones on the left are paid in NGO consultancies, op-eds in NYT and journalism fellowships. The difference lies only in the type of heaven they believe in, the heaven somewhere above the clouds or the heaven on the western hemisphere of this earth. The reality of both is hotly contested and beyond the scope of this short blog.

One uniting factor for both these gangs is they both see the world in black and white. As I said, ink and paper worth millions have been spent on the lunacy of the right, lets talk about the left for a change and their wholesale hatred of our military.

The Pakistani military, like all armies in the world, has a bit of everything. They have stories of courage as well as corruption, they have had good leaders and bad, selfless martyrs and black sheep. It is a worthy cause to expose, shame and ask for investigations against the corrupt, and black sheep of our army. It is a noble and brave act to write, speak and act against the people who harm our country, willfully or ignorantly, inside our Army’s ranks or outside. And it is stupid to believe that everyone in our army is an angel from heavens.

On the other hand, it is equally stupid to believe that everyone in the Army is in it for the plots and the lands, or that all officers are rich beyond belief, or that they all call us “bloody civilians”, or that they all are madmen hellbent on destroying our precious democracy. However for some, believing these things is a rewarding enterprise. The people who constantly write for army and constantly write against army have no overlap. There is no desire on both sides to be objective, to appreciate what is to be appreciated and to condemn what is to be condemned. That is where they both lose their credibility.

Another defining aspect of the lunatics on the left is their failure to understand the imaginations and aspirations of Pakistanis. Take the example of the recent Twitter trend against Dawn newspaper. I am sure Dawn editorial staff will dismiss it as another outburst from “ignorant, brainwashed Pakistanis – most probably fueled by some shadowy ISPR funds”, and this patronizing attitude towards the average person is the core of their problem. They, in their high and mighty castles of self-righteousness fail to even understand what the 65 war stands for in the mind of an average Pakistani. They did not take into consideration what 6 September means for a Pakistani before embarking upon their arrogant campaign of “teaching Pakistanis whats what”.

6th September, 1965 and the memorial we hold every year is not about Operation Gibraltar. As you may or may not have noticed, we do not celebrate general Musa Khan or Yahya Khan or Maj Gen Akhtar Malik, we do not show their photos on TV neither are there any songs about their heroism or ‘brilliant strategic wisdom’. What we do celebrate every year is the courage and selfless devotion to country of the thousands who did not hesitate to give their lives when the country needed them. We show Major Aziz Bhatti on TV, the songs we play are for him and many like him. This is the day to thank the nameless faceless hundreds who were ready to jump into fire so that no harm may come to this country.

We remember the sheer madness of good men who left their families behind to fight and die not for any gain or glory but to do what they considered their duty. We celebrate people like M M Alam who represented the epitome of skill and fearlessness. We celebrate Aziz Bhatti and his handful of men willing and able to stand against an overpowering enemy. We celebrate the fact that we faced an army many times our size and we resisted bravely, we did not give up Lahore and Sialkot. More than that, this is the day we pay tributes countless others who have died for our country before and after 65, not generals but ordinary soldiers and officers on the ground. We pay tributes to those who continue to die, believing, perhaps foolishly, that their deaths and sacrifices will mean something to their countrymen.

Before belittling the contributions of these men, and then blaming the reaction on some ISPR conspiracy, it would be great if these authors get down from their high-horses and try to understand the people they are trying to preach to. Maybe, excuse me for this crazy theory, people will respond positively to your criticism if after writing 150 articles against Pakistan Army, you write one article appreciating something they have done (I’m looking at you Cyril Almaeda). And maybe if you write in a balanced and objective way for these ‘jaahil Pakistanis‘, showing that the aim of your criticism is to improve the Army not to destroy it, then Pakistanis may not believe you work for Modi.

But then again, there aren’t a lot of people who hope to get their 72 virgins by being balanced, moderate and objective.

Waqas Ahmed is Editor, Digital Media, at Daily Pakistan Global. You can reach him at waqas@dailypakistan.com.pk

..you have hid the facts and truth and lied to honest citizens..
But how long can u supress the truth / knowledge? Its like ray of sun, it will shine sooner or later.
I foresee that from next year onwards only pakistani establishment would be 'celebrating' ..not the educated and enlightned class of the society.

 

[Nick81]

Of course not - Karan Thapar is a widely recognized journalist and well respected. Arundhati Roy is admittedly far too left wing even by Communist standards - she is well meaning but deluded.

More importantly, neither Karan Thapar, nor Arundhati Roy are branded as Pakistani agents and I am yet to hear anyone accusing them of being on anyone's payroll. Same goes for the hundreds of academics and journalists who question the established narrative in India. This "selling out for money" theory seems to be a Pakistani favourite.

After all, if all you are looking at in terms of Pakistani scholars are the rabble rouser then none of your own assessment of Pakistanis will be genuine either. I can judge the character of all Indian women by Sunny Leone for that matter and claim that this is now a frequent occurrence in Inia since that is the first evidence I stumbled upon

I think you quote without context. Neither did I say all Pakistani intellectuals are rabble rousers nor did I dismiss all of them. I pointed out the troubling coincidence that Pakistani intellectuals, academics and journalists who are most renounded around the world are usually villians at home. If you wish to contest that, you will have to come up with something better

Somehow, I doubt your scholarly studies are grounded in academics if you would trust Najam Sethi's views on a subject such as Kargil as compared to say ACdre Kaiser Tufail....
....Needless to say I would be delighted to read Pervaiz Hoodboy on physics but would take any word of his on military tactics with a bucketful of salts, or is the definition of "expert" in the field somewhat different for India? Im at a loss.
By that principle we can all claim to take irrelevant experts and place their opinions on the forefront since those opinions SUIT what we want to hear.

You are conflating non-related issues. I would like to read/hear Najam Sethi on foreign policy, Ayesha Siddiqua on the military's role in Pakistani society, Asma Jahangir on human rights, and Pervez Hoodbhoy on the state of education and innovation in Pakistan - and not in the jumbled up manner that you stated.

So by your own admission, your selection of "experts" is confined to the negative pablum you want to hear about Pakistan and anything that might post a different positive light is to be dismissed immedietly. Hence, at the end.. you only end up with the same narrative as I said; despite your supposed "academic" motives, you are dishonest in your research and selection.

Is it my fault that the most well-known commentators from Pakistan comment negatively about your state of affairs? You make it sound as if I go looking for negatives and accidentally stumble upon these non-entities. You don't seem to realize that these people are the most widely followed personalities from Pakistan. Maybe you should suggest to them that they should show greater patriotism in speaking about Pakistan's state of affairs?

By contrast, I consider one of the most authentic overview of say a subject such as the Indian Pakistani air war in 1965 to be written by PVS Jagan mohan.. An account accepted by India as well. The difference is that I am out to look for both positives and negatives for both nations, you have clearly stated that it is not so for yourself.

I read all I can. One cannot go "looking for positives and negatives" as you stated, unless you have a pre-conceived notion to begin with. Not all issues can be reduced down to good/bad dichotomies, which is one of the most basic tenets of honest analysis.

That is the difference right there between an Indian character and one from Pakistan.

I am afraid that the reputation carried by Pakistani intelligentsia in general does not back up your claim.

That has to do with the majority of desis we see here sadly.

What is this pejorative reference that you keep making about "desis"? You use this term in contradistinction to what exactly? The Western Intellectual Tradition?