Omar1984
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2008
- Messages
- 12,296
- Reaction score
- 0
You probably never been to Pakistan in your life.
If you have this much hate for Pakistan and wish the worst for Pakistan, what are you doing in a Pakistani forum?
Does this country look like a failed state to you?
- Thread starter Omar1984
- Start date
- Status
You probably never been to Pakistan in your life.
If you have this much hate for Pakistan and wish the worst for Pakistan, what are you doing in a Pakistani forum?
BaburCM
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2009
- Messages
- 918
- Reaction score
- 0
Are you frustrated or something? Were you expecting that this forum would be filled with anti-Pakistan sentiments? That's a very naive thought. I believe that the amount of freedom that you are enjoying on this Pakistani forum cannot be enjoyed by Pakistanis on Indian forums.
I have not only blamed ISI but India's DIG also.
As far as China is concerned, it is definitely using Pak against India so that India gets less chance to focus all it's resources on China whether you believe or not.
Screaming Skull
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2009
- Messages
- 1,451
- Reaction score
- 0
Hey Mr. Omar...pls do post more pics of Pakistan...I for one wud like to see Pakistan from a Pakistani's perspective....I hv had enuf of this failed state BS...nations dont fail overnight...
Omar1984
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2008
- Messages
- 12,296
- Reaction score
- 0
Watch the video. I posted enough pictures and you shouldn't make comments about a country you never even been to. Pakistan had made a lot of developments over the past few years. I know you dont like hearing that but its true.
NSG_BlackCats
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2009
- Messages
- 852
- Reaction score
- 0
Show me any one of my post offending Pakistan..I will leave this forum. By the way if the mod feel i am using offending language he can ban me or remove me from this forum.
I am never been to Pakistan. But a lot of net friends from pakistan.
Screaming Skull
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2009
- Messages
- 1,451
- Reaction score
- 0
Hey what s dat...read my post carefully...may be u misunderstood what I hav written...
NSG_BlackCats
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2009
- Messages
- 852
- Reaction score
- 0
Omar1984
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2008
- Messages
- 12,296
- Reaction score
- 0
Sorry that comment was meant for your fellow countrypeople on this thread.
Is Pakistan a failed state?
Pakistan is a failed state because it was created on the wrong belief that mere religious homogeneity among people is enough to keep a nation united. As long as the army has a say in governance, democracy can never take roots in Pakistan..
THE NATION-STATE of Pakistan was born out of two beliefs, both equally wrong. One, Muslims can live the life of a believer in Quran only in an Islamic state. Two, Muslims, as minorities, cannot expect equality in an independent India dominated by Hindus. The partition seed sown by Muslim poet-philosopher Muhammad Iqbal, in his writings and in his presidential address to the All India Muslim League, in 1930, sprouted and grew along with undivided India’s freedom movement.
Bowing to the wishes of Jinnah-led Muslim League, the British government partitioned India into two nations and gave them independence in the midnight hour between August 14 and 15, 1947. Thus, Iqbal’s dream of an independent state for Muslims comprising the Muslim-majority provinces in northwestern and northeastern India came into being.
In other words, the creation of Pakistan was based on the belief that Muslim identity is sufficient to keep a nation together and Muslims can live peacefully only under an Islamic dispensation. However, the sorry state that Pakistan finds itself in shows why such a belief is wrong. In fact, Pakistan is one good example that mere religious homogeneity among people cannot keep a nation united for long.
While Iqbal and Jinnah looked at the Muslim identity, they failed to take into account the cultural, linguistic and group identities of people. In other words, diverse and assorted clans, tribes, and linguistic and cultural groups that had nothing in common except for their affiliation to Islam came together to create an Islamic nation called Pakistan.
True, like India – which too has a huge population that belongs to different religious, linguistic and caste groups – Pakistan also could have emerged as a strong and vibrant democracy if it had taken efforts to build its democratic institutions to give power to the people and create in them a sense of belonging. Unfortunately, Pakistan did no such thing and instead chose to sustain itself as a republic-democracy on its Islamic identity and to a large extent on anti-India feelings.
Also, unlike in India, where secular leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru and others made efforts to take every caste, and religious and linguistic group along, Pakistan did nothing to unite the diverse clans and groups present on its soil. The reason for this could be the untimely death of its founding father Jinnah, who was secular in his outlook. If Jinnah had lived for another 20-25 years after independence, like Nehru, perhaps Pakistan would have emerged as a mature democracy. But that was not to be.
Result? East Pakistan split from Pakistan and became Bangladesh, in 1971, largely because the West Pakistanis had no time or concern for the Muslims in the eastern wing. The formation of the Karachi-based political party Muhajir Qaumi Movement (later renamed Muttahida Qaumi Movement) in the early 1980s to represent Urdu-speaking Muslims, who migrated from India to Pakistan in 1947, showed how mere Islamic identity had not got the immigrants equality. And, the four provinces bordering Afghanistan in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) have all along remained a part of Pakistan only on its map, but in reality have been administered by the tribal elders. There have been sectarian clashes between Sunnis and Shias.
The political situation in the Pakistani mainland has been no better. Even a cursory glance at the political history of Pakistan would reveal that the country was ruled by military presidents for about 36 years in its 60 years of independence (1958–71, 1977–88 and from 1999–2008)! In such a setup, democracy could never bud and take root.
The successive military rulers of Pakistan did all that they could to hang on to power at the cost of political parties and democratic intuitions, which has today made Pakistan dependent on its army for even remaining as a single entity.
In other words, Pakistan is in a Catch-22 situation. If you remove the Pakistani army from the picture, Pakistan will fall apart, for the tribal and clan loyalty of people is much stronger than their Islamic identity. But as long as the army has a say in governance, democracy can never take roots in Pakistan.
That brings us to the question whether Pakistan is a failed state. It is. However, it can become a success as a nation-state if it realises that building democratic institutions that give power to people is more important than harping on the Islamic identity.
Jinnah’s vision of Pakistan as a “modern, moderate and very enlightened” state is possible only if the Pakistani people are allowed to have a say in how the country should be run.
Pakistan is a failed state because it was created on the wrong belief that mere religious homogeneity among people is enough to keep a nation united. As long as the army has a say in governance, democracy can never take roots in Pakistan..
THE NATION-STATE of Pakistan was born out of two beliefs, both equally wrong. One, Muslims can live the life of a believer in Quran only in an Islamic state. Two, Muslims, as minorities, cannot expect equality in an independent India dominated by Hindus. The partition seed sown by Muslim poet-philosopher Muhammad Iqbal, in his writings and in his presidential address to the All India Muslim League, in 1930, sprouted and grew along with undivided India’s freedom movement.
Bowing to the wishes of Jinnah-led Muslim League, the British government partitioned India into two nations and gave them independence in the midnight hour between August 14 and 15, 1947. Thus, Iqbal’s dream of an independent state for Muslims comprising the Muslim-majority provinces in northwestern and northeastern India came into being.
In other words, the creation of Pakistan was based on the belief that Muslim identity is sufficient to keep a nation together and Muslims can live peacefully only under an Islamic dispensation. However, the sorry state that Pakistan finds itself in shows why such a belief is wrong. In fact, Pakistan is one good example that mere religious homogeneity among people cannot keep a nation united for long.
While Iqbal and Jinnah looked at the Muslim identity, they failed to take into account the cultural, linguistic and group identities of people. In other words, diverse and assorted clans, tribes, and linguistic and cultural groups that had nothing in common except for their affiliation to Islam came together to create an Islamic nation called Pakistan.
True, like India – which too has a huge population that belongs to different religious, linguistic and caste groups – Pakistan also could have emerged as a strong and vibrant democracy if it had taken efforts to build its democratic institutions to give power to the people and create in them a sense of belonging. Unfortunately, Pakistan did no such thing and instead chose to sustain itself as a republic-democracy on its Islamic identity and to a large extent on anti-India feelings.
Also, unlike in India, where secular leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru and others made efforts to take every caste, and religious and linguistic group along, Pakistan did nothing to unite the diverse clans and groups present on its soil. The reason for this could be the untimely death of its founding father Jinnah, who was secular in his outlook. If Jinnah had lived for another 20-25 years after independence, like Nehru, perhaps Pakistan would have emerged as a mature democracy. But that was not to be.
Result? East Pakistan split from Pakistan and became Bangladesh, in 1971, largely because the West Pakistanis had no time or concern for the Muslims in the eastern wing. The formation of the Karachi-based political party Muhajir Qaumi Movement (later renamed Muttahida Qaumi Movement) in the early 1980s to represent Urdu-speaking Muslims, who migrated from India to Pakistan in 1947, showed how mere Islamic identity had not got the immigrants equality. And, the four provinces bordering Afghanistan in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) have all along remained a part of Pakistan only on its map, but in reality have been administered by the tribal elders. There have been sectarian clashes between Sunnis and Shias.
The political situation in the Pakistani mainland has been no better. Even a cursory glance at the political history of Pakistan would reveal that the country was ruled by military presidents for about 36 years in its 60 years of independence (1958–71, 1977–88 and from 1999–2008)! In such a setup, democracy could never bud and take root.
The successive military rulers of Pakistan did all that they could to hang on to power at the cost of political parties and democratic intuitions, which has today made Pakistan dependent on its army for even remaining as a single entity.
In other words, Pakistan is in a Catch-22 situation. If you remove the Pakistani army from the picture, Pakistan will fall apart, for the tribal and clan loyalty of people is much stronger than their Islamic identity. But as long as the army has a say in governance, democracy can never take roots in Pakistan.
That brings us to the question whether Pakistan is a failed state. It is. However, it can become a success as a nation-state if it realises that building democratic institutions that give power to people is more important than harping on the Islamic identity.
Jinnah’s vision of Pakistan as a “modern, moderate and very enlightened” state is possible only if the Pakistani people are allowed to have a say in how the country should be run.
Pakistan is a failed state, says US lawmaker
Describing Pakistan a 'failed state', an influential American lawmaker has underlined the need for the United States to tie aid to Islamabad [Images] with the Islamic nation, to ensure that the lawless areas bordering Afghanistan are not used by terrorists to launch attacks like in Mumbai.
If Pakistan is not able to do that, the United States itself should go in, Congressman Frank Pallone told a meeting organised by the Indian community to pay homage to the victims of Mumbai terror attacks [Images] and to call on the Indian government to take tough measures to ensure that such incidents are not repeated.
More than 500 people, including a large number of community leaders belonging to all ethnic political parties, business and activist organisations, attended the meeting where a petition was circulated for signatures urging the US government to move a resolution in the United Nations Security Council, seeking to declare Pakistan a terrorist state.
Paying moving homage to the victims at the meeting held in Fords in New Jersey, the Democrat from New Jersey also called on Pakistan to take strong action against the organisations which are advocating secession of Kashmir from India, to ensure that they do not continue their activities.
But Pallone, who is the founder of the Congressional Caucus on India, cautioned against going to war with Pakistan, saying it would be a 'huge mistake'.
The continuing terrorist attacks on India, he opined, bring out the need for more close cooperation with the United States in fighting and rooting out the scourge. "I believe that going to war would be a huge mistake. I think, we have to look at this in a broad perspective," stressed Pallone, the member of the US House of Representatives.
Pallone said terrorism has affected the United States, India and Western Europe. "I think the lesson that needs to be learned is that the terrorists want more violence. They are basically opposed to negotiations," stressed Pallone, the US Representative from New Jersey.
Another influential lawmaker Senator Robert Menendez, Chairman of the subcommittee on foreign assistance, also called for ending aid to the countries, which are unwilling to fight terrorism in their own territories.
Expressing their full support to whatever steps the Indian government takes, the community leaders called for strong measures to fight terrorism and warn Pakistan in no uncertain term that New Delhi [Images] would not tolerate terrorists planning attacks on India from its soil.
On their part, they pledged to continue to lobby with lawmakers to keep a steady pressure on Pakistan to take urgent steps to fight terrorists on its territory and linking aid to its successes in reining in terrorists.
Stressing the need for the United States to put more pressure on Pakistan, Pallone said it is essentially a failed state as the central government does not control most of the territory.
It is clear that even when it outlaws an organisation, it continues to work through agitations, madrassas (religious schools) and social activities, Pallone underlined.
He said if they (terror group) continue to exist by providing educational opportunities and social services, the Pakistan government has to go there and provide those services and not let these groups do the job.
Describing Pakistan a 'failed state', an influential American lawmaker has underlined the need for the United States to tie aid to Islamabad [Images] with the Islamic nation, to ensure that the lawless areas bordering Afghanistan are not used by terrorists to launch attacks like in Mumbai.
If Pakistan is not able to do that, the United States itself should go in, Congressman Frank Pallone told a meeting organised by the Indian community to pay homage to the victims of Mumbai terror attacks [Images] and to call on the Indian government to take tough measures to ensure that such incidents are not repeated.
More than 500 people, including a large number of community leaders belonging to all ethnic political parties, business and activist organisations, attended the meeting where a petition was circulated for signatures urging the US government to move a resolution in the United Nations Security Council, seeking to declare Pakistan a terrorist state.
Paying moving homage to the victims at the meeting held in Fords in New Jersey, the Democrat from New Jersey also called on Pakistan to take strong action against the organisations which are advocating secession of Kashmir from India, to ensure that they do not continue their activities.
But Pallone, who is the founder of the Congressional Caucus on India, cautioned against going to war with Pakistan, saying it would be a 'huge mistake'.
The continuing terrorist attacks on India, he opined, bring out the need for more close cooperation with the United States in fighting and rooting out the scourge. "I believe that going to war would be a huge mistake. I think, we have to look at this in a broad perspective," stressed Pallone, the member of the US House of Representatives.
Pallone said terrorism has affected the United States, India and Western Europe. "I think the lesson that needs to be learned is that the terrorists want more violence. They are basically opposed to negotiations," stressed Pallone, the US Representative from New Jersey.
Another influential lawmaker Senator Robert Menendez, Chairman of the subcommittee on foreign assistance, also called for ending aid to the countries, which are unwilling to fight terrorism in their own territories.
Expressing their full support to whatever steps the Indian government takes, the community leaders called for strong measures to fight terrorism and warn Pakistan in no uncertain term that New Delhi [Images] would not tolerate terrorists planning attacks on India from its soil.
On their part, they pledged to continue to lobby with lawmakers to keep a steady pressure on Pakistan to take urgent steps to fight terrorists on its territory and linking aid to its successes in reining in terrorists.
Stressing the need for the United States to put more pressure on Pakistan, Pallone said it is essentially a failed state as the central government does not control most of the territory.
It is clear that even when it outlaws an organisation, it continues to work through agitations, madrassas (religious schools) and social activities, Pallone underlined.
He said if they (terror group) continue to exist by providing educational opportunities and social services, the Pakistan government has to go there and provide those services and not let these groups do the job.
Beskar
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2008
- Messages
- 4,176
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
Macintosh:
These articles have been posted here before. Your beliefs revolve around believing articles? If that's the case, then are you willing to believe this article as well?
----------------------------------------------------
India: A Failed State
by Ravi Shanker Kapoor
10 June 2005
India: A Failed State
Political commentators in India are fond of calling Pakistan a “failed state,” but few Indians are willing to admit that their own country is hurtling towards anarchy.
Political commentators in India are fond of calling Pakistan a “failed state,” given the havoc wrought by uncontrollable jihadis in our neighboring country. Few Indians, however, are willing to admit that their own country is hurtling towards anarchy. While Leftwing extremist violence and Islamic terror are rising at an alarming pace, the Indian state and the intellectual class refuse to even recognize the existence of any serious threat.
Military help was sought on May 18 against Naxals, the Leftwing extremists, to rescue senior police officials in the central Indian state of Chhatisgarh. Quoting Union Home Ministry officials, The Indian Express (May 20, 2005) reported that “Naxals carried out a series of coordinated attacks on two police outposts adjoining the Abujmarh Hills...They had also laid land mines along the exit and entry points,” trapping the senior officials who had rushed to the spot. “Ministry officials said that the Naxals wanted to loot arms and ammunition from the police. Ten policemen were injured in the attack.” That Leftwing extremism has assumed alarming proportions becomes evident from the fact that it was the first time that a military helicopter was used in anti-Naxal operations.
Hardly a day passes when the media does not inform us about killings by the various Naxalite groups. According to expert estimates, Naxal influence has spread from 55 districts in nine states in October 2003 to more than 150 in 13 states (in India, there are 602 districts).
Peace talks with the Naxalites in Andhra Pradesh -- the southern coastal state where Leftwing extremism is six decades old and is very strong -- ended unsuccessfully on April 4. Right from the beginning -- that is, October 2004, when the talks began -- there were doubts about any meaningful outcome.
State police chiefs met on November 4 last year. A news report in The Indian Express quoted the police chief of Chattisgarh, a state in central India, OP Rathore as saying, “Actually, there is nothing to talk. These people are ruthless. They are killing poor and innocent people and indulging in extortion.”
According to Rathore, “The country has never witnessed internal insurgency of this extent, spread over such a large geographical area. And what we see is only the tip of the iceberg. Tough measures are required to tackle it.” Another senior police official was quoted: “It is alarming the way Naxalites are spreading their activities, right from the Nepal border down to parts of Kerala now. New mergers are happening… Foreign elements are supporting them.” The police chief of Uttaranchal, a northern state, Kanchan Chaudhary, wanted her state to be included in the list of Naxal-infested states.
Naxal violence is not the only threat India faces; there is also demographic invasion from Bangladesh, which is linked with Islamic terror.
On April 16, 2005, an assistant commandant of India’s Border Security Force (BSF), Jeevan Kumar, along with a BSF soldier, went to the Akhaura Border checkpost in the Indian State of Tripura to seek a meeting with Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) officials, following a report that an Indian national had been abducted by Bangladeshi miscreants. But it was a trap to ensnare Kumar, who had proved effective in checking smuggling and illegal immigration of Bangladesh nationals. He was tortured and murdered in cold blood. His subordinate was also tortured and left for dead, but he survived to tell the tale.
Exactly four years earlier, on April 16, 2001, as many as 16 BSF personnel were similarly murdered in the Boroibari area of the Mankachar sector bordering the Indian state of Meghalaya. The bodies of some BSF men were tied onto bamboo poles, in the fashion that killed beasts of prey are tied, and paraded through the villages. Photographs of slain soldiers appeared prominently in all newspapers.
The two instances are part of a pattern: Bangladesh’s espousal of lebensraum policy to push its nationals to India and its promotion of the Islamist cause. In an interview with rediff.com, Lt Gen SK Sinha (Retd), former governor of the Indian state of Assam bordering Bangladesh, said in July 2000, “Even a friend of India like Sheikh Mujibur Rehman [father of Bangladesh, erstwhile known as East Pakistan] wrote in his book that East Pakistan should be given more space and the mineral wealth of Assam for his people to improve their lot. And in the 1990s, intellectuals in Dhaka began talking about lebensraum, which in German means living space, and they have been targeting Assam and the northeast. They have even been saying that with globalization, you have free movement of goods across international boundaries. There should also be free movement of labor, which means movement of population.”
Dhaka also believes in another kind of globalization: spreading Islamic terror in the entire region. In an article in South Asia Intelligence Review, Ajai Sahni and Bibhu Prasad Routray wrote, “Bangladesh has long supported terrorist organizations operating in India’s Northeast; Dhaka has been complicit in the massive demographic invasion and destabilization of India’s East and Northeast; BDR personnel have disrupted every Indian effort to construct a fence along the border by firing on the workers and BSF personnel engaged in this task; Bangladesh has emerged as the primary source of illegal arms and explosives for virtually every insurgent and criminal operation all along India’s East and Northeast; and the BDR supports a wide range of smuggling and criminal operations along the border.”
The response of the political class to growing Naxalite violence and Islamic terror has been, to put it mildly, pusillanimous. After observing the ritual of lodging a “strong protest” with Dhaka over the killing of Kumar, India’s national security adviser MK Narayanan directed the BSF to “exercise restraint.” Similarly, the federal government, which depends on the crucial support of the Left Front from outside, continues to oscillate between tough talk and reconciliatory posturing in its response to the Naxalites.
However, it is not only the incumbent United Progressive Alliance government that has behaved in an abject manner in its dealing with the threats to the nation. Even the earlier regime of the National Democratic Alliance (1998-2004), which was accused of being jingoistic and anti-Muslim, ended up appeasing Bangladesh by refusing to bring the culprits to justice. The real factor behind the NDA’s, and now the UPA’s, capitulation was the fear of losing Muslim votes. Besides, there was the fear of getting targeted as anti-Muslim by the intellectual class. Not surprisingly, in the words of Sahni and Routray, “the then Union Home Secretary [during the NDA regime] went so far as to inform the media that it was ‘a unilateral action by the BDR troops and Government of Bangladesh was not aware of it.’ The fact that Dhaka chose to take no action against the guilty -- and that it has till now taken no such action -- has not deterred the pronouncements of Delhi’s political and bureaucratic illusionists.”
The illusionists are not confined to the political and bureaucratic circles; the intellectual class is not far behind. Some of the issues which engage our experts, scholars, and media brahmins are: when would India become a developed country, how to build an Indian century, when would we achieve the superpower status. When Prime Minister Singh was chosen to speak for Asia at the recently concluded Bandung conference of Asian and African countries, intellectuals started celebrating. The choice of Singh to speak for Asia was called “yet more evidence of India’s rising eminence on the global stage” by The Times Of India. The rest of the media was no less ecstatic.
This is not to suggest that there are no grounds for optimism. India registered 6.9 percent growth in 2004-05; this fiscal year, the GDP growth is projected to be in the region of 7.5 percent. Industry grew by 8 percent in the last fiscal year, and the high growth rate is expected to continue in 2005-06. Similarly, many other indicators -- exports, foreign exchange reserves, etc. -- are also encouraging. A major concern, however, is spiraling government expenditure; this is mainly a legacy of socialism, which molded economic policy till 1991. On the face of it, the economy appears to be sufficiently resilient; but such resilience is because of private enterprise and robust values of Indian society; as the Indian state retreated from the economic arena after the economic reforms of 1991, the creative forces of Indian society filled in the gaps, giving rise to a veritable feel-good factor in the economy.
But politics is different from economy: if the state does not deliver in the economic arena, it can just withdraw; but it cannot give up its primary duties of maintaining law and order and protecting the nation. The Indian state has failed not in just its peripheral functions -- like running government-owned businesses -- but also in its primary duties.
But the political and intellectual illusionists refuse to see such failures of the Indian state; instead they keep pontificating about the need to make India a permanent member of the UN Security Council, given its “rising eminence on the global stage.” It is another matter that the aspiring superpower meekly watches the slaughter of its soldiers.
Ravi Shanker Kapoor is the editor of IndiaRight.org : India's first website to promote Rightwing Ideology, India's first conservative website. Before that he spend more than ten years with The Financial Express. His most recent book is Failing the Promise: Irrelevance of the Vajpayee Government (2003).
Email Ravi Kapoor
These articles have been posted here before. Your beliefs revolve around believing articles? If that's the case, then are you willing to believe this article as well?
----------------------------------------------------
India: A Failed State
by Ravi Shanker Kapoor
10 June 2005
India: A Failed State
Political commentators in India are fond of calling Pakistan a “failed state,” but few Indians are willing to admit that their own country is hurtling towards anarchy.
Political commentators in India are fond of calling Pakistan a “failed state,” given the havoc wrought by uncontrollable jihadis in our neighboring country. Few Indians, however, are willing to admit that their own country is hurtling towards anarchy. While Leftwing extremist violence and Islamic terror are rising at an alarming pace, the Indian state and the intellectual class refuse to even recognize the existence of any serious threat.
Military help was sought on May 18 against Naxals, the Leftwing extremists, to rescue senior police officials in the central Indian state of Chhatisgarh. Quoting Union Home Ministry officials, The Indian Express (May 20, 2005) reported that “Naxals carried out a series of coordinated attacks on two police outposts adjoining the Abujmarh Hills...They had also laid land mines along the exit and entry points,” trapping the senior officials who had rushed to the spot. “Ministry officials said that the Naxals wanted to loot arms and ammunition from the police. Ten policemen were injured in the attack.” That Leftwing extremism has assumed alarming proportions becomes evident from the fact that it was the first time that a military helicopter was used in anti-Naxal operations.
Hardly a day passes when the media does not inform us about killings by the various Naxalite groups. According to expert estimates, Naxal influence has spread from 55 districts in nine states in October 2003 to more than 150 in 13 states (in India, there are 602 districts).
Peace talks with the Naxalites in Andhra Pradesh -- the southern coastal state where Leftwing extremism is six decades old and is very strong -- ended unsuccessfully on April 4. Right from the beginning -- that is, October 2004, when the talks began -- there were doubts about any meaningful outcome.
State police chiefs met on November 4 last year. A news report in The Indian Express quoted the police chief of Chattisgarh, a state in central India, OP Rathore as saying, “Actually, there is nothing to talk. These people are ruthless. They are killing poor and innocent people and indulging in extortion.”
According to Rathore, “The country has never witnessed internal insurgency of this extent, spread over such a large geographical area. And what we see is only the tip of the iceberg. Tough measures are required to tackle it.” Another senior police official was quoted: “It is alarming the way Naxalites are spreading their activities, right from the Nepal border down to parts of Kerala now. New mergers are happening… Foreign elements are supporting them.” The police chief of Uttaranchal, a northern state, Kanchan Chaudhary, wanted her state to be included in the list of Naxal-infested states.
Naxal violence is not the only threat India faces; there is also demographic invasion from Bangladesh, which is linked with Islamic terror.
On April 16, 2005, an assistant commandant of India’s Border Security Force (BSF), Jeevan Kumar, along with a BSF soldier, went to the Akhaura Border checkpost in the Indian State of Tripura to seek a meeting with Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) officials, following a report that an Indian national had been abducted by Bangladeshi miscreants. But it was a trap to ensnare Kumar, who had proved effective in checking smuggling and illegal immigration of Bangladesh nationals. He was tortured and murdered in cold blood. His subordinate was also tortured and left for dead, but he survived to tell the tale.
Exactly four years earlier, on April 16, 2001, as many as 16 BSF personnel were similarly murdered in the Boroibari area of the Mankachar sector bordering the Indian state of Meghalaya. The bodies of some BSF men were tied onto bamboo poles, in the fashion that killed beasts of prey are tied, and paraded through the villages. Photographs of slain soldiers appeared prominently in all newspapers.
The two instances are part of a pattern: Bangladesh’s espousal of lebensraum policy to push its nationals to India and its promotion of the Islamist cause. In an interview with rediff.com, Lt Gen SK Sinha (Retd), former governor of the Indian state of Assam bordering Bangladesh, said in July 2000, “Even a friend of India like Sheikh Mujibur Rehman [father of Bangladesh, erstwhile known as East Pakistan] wrote in his book that East Pakistan should be given more space and the mineral wealth of Assam for his people to improve their lot. And in the 1990s, intellectuals in Dhaka began talking about lebensraum, which in German means living space, and they have been targeting Assam and the northeast. They have even been saying that with globalization, you have free movement of goods across international boundaries. There should also be free movement of labor, which means movement of population.”
Dhaka also believes in another kind of globalization: spreading Islamic terror in the entire region. In an article in South Asia Intelligence Review, Ajai Sahni and Bibhu Prasad Routray wrote, “Bangladesh has long supported terrorist organizations operating in India’s Northeast; Dhaka has been complicit in the massive demographic invasion and destabilization of India’s East and Northeast; BDR personnel have disrupted every Indian effort to construct a fence along the border by firing on the workers and BSF personnel engaged in this task; Bangladesh has emerged as the primary source of illegal arms and explosives for virtually every insurgent and criminal operation all along India’s East and Northeast; and the BDR supports a wide range of smuggling and criminal operations along the border.”
The response of the political class to growing Naxalite violence and Islamic terror has been, to put it mildly, pusillanimous. After observing the ritual of lodging a “strong protest” with Dhaka over the killing of Kumar, India’s national security adviser MK Narayanan directed the BSF to “exercise restraint.” Similarly, the federal government, which depends on the crucial support of the Left Front from outside, continues to oscillate between tough talk and reconciliatory posturing in its response to the Naxalites.
However, it is not only the incumbent United Progressive Alliance government that has behaved in an abject manner in its dealing with the threats to the nation. Even the earlier regime of the National Democratic Alliance (1998-2004), which was accused of being jingoistic and anti-Muslim, ended up appeasing Bangladesh by refusing to bring the culprits to justice. The real factor behind the NDA’s, and now the UPA’s, capitulation was the fear of losing Muslim votes. Besides, there was the fear of getting targeted as anti-Muslim by the intellectual class. Not surprisingly, in the words of Sahni and Routray, “the then Union Home Secretary [during the NDA regime] went so far as to inform the media that it was ‘a unilateral action by the BDR troops and Government of Bangladesh was not aware of it.’ The fact that Dhaka chose to take no action against the guilty -- and that it has till now taken no such action -- has not deterred the pronouncements of Delhi’s political and bureaucratic illusionists.”
The illusionists are not confined to the political and bureaucratic circles; the intellectual class is not far behind. Some of the issues which engage our experts, scholars, and media brahmins are: when would India become a developed country, how to build an Indian century, when would we achieve the superpower status. When Prime Minister Singh was chosen to speak for Asia at the recently concluded Bandung conference of Asian and African countries, intellectuals started celebrating. The choice of Singh to speak for Asia was called “yet more evidence of India’s rising eminence on the global stage” by The Times Of India. The rest of the media was no less ecstatic.
This is not to suggest that there are no grounds for optimism. India registered 6.9 percent growth in 2004-05; this fiscal year, the GDP growth is projected to be in the region of 7.5 percent. Industry grew by 8 percent in the last fiscal year, and the high growth rate is expected to continue in 2005-06. Similarly, many other indicators -- exports, foreign exchange reserves, etc. -- are also encouraging. A major concern, however, is spiraling government expenditure; this is mainly a legacy of socialism, which molded economic policy till 1991. On the face of it, the economy appears to be sufficiently resilient; but such resilience is because of private enterprise and robust values of Indian society; as the Indian state retreated from the economic arena after the economic reforms of 1991, the creative forces of Indian society filled in the gaps, giving rise to a veritable feel-good factor in the economy.
But politics is different from economy: if the state does not deliver in the economic arena, it can just withdraw; but it cannot give up its primary duties of maintaining law and order and protecting the nation. The Indian state has failed not in just its peripheral functions -- like running government-owned businesses -- but also in its primary duties.
But the political and intellectual illusionists refuse to see such failures of the Indian state; instead they keep pontificating about the need to make India a permanent member of the UN Security Council, given its “rising eminence on the global stage.” It is another matter that the aspiring superpower meekly watches the slaughter of its soldiers.
Ravi Shanker Kapoor is the editor of IndiaRight.org : India's first website to promote Rightwing Ideology, India's first conservative website. Before that he spend more than ten years with The Financial Express. His most recent book is Failing the Promise: Irrelevance of the Vajpayee Government (2003).
Email Ravi Kapoor
NSG_BlackCats
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2009
- Messages
- 852
- Reaction score
- 0
When did I say Pakistan is a failed state. Omar1984 is just showing some rosy pictures with a thread heading , Does this country looks like a failed state to you?
I have jsut posted some links showing some current development in pakistan.
Ok lets see how I see Pakistan.
1. 5/6 years ago Pakistan's economy was 1/5th of India's. Now your economy is 1/10th of India's. Your GDP is even less than that of maharastra. Now with all it's slums and poverty how India is growing?
2. You have more than one power center. Your Army Chief/Prime Minister/ President.
3. You have just averted a balance of payment crisis with the help of IMF.
4. You own people have no faith in judiciary(taking abt political class) not even on your Supreme court.
5. One of your former PM got Killed and your govt. ask the foreign agency to investigate. Why?
6. A foreign country is attacking your people with Dorens. What is your govt. doing?
But I am not anti-Pakistan. These are the questions i have in my mind. Bcoz in india even the President/Prime minister don't have the power to remove the chief justice of our Supreme Court. He/She can only be impeached by the parliament with a 2/3 majority.
GOD Bless Pakistan and people of Pakistan.
- Status
Similar threads
