Jaswant Singh: The Death of Pakistan?

[makikirkiri]

when alot of "educated" lot in India can support terrorists like Modi and saffronis then why cant we have "few" nuts too.

oh well yeh Modi also has a beard, Shiv Sena chief too so well irony of circumstances. NO?

Diff is: We say modi is not responsible for the riots.
You say the murder is right and shud be lauded .

 

[FNFAL]

indian trolls ......... if it would be in hands of india , we would have been doomed since long. where are those resolutions passed by indian national congress in 1947-48 that PAKISTAN would die very soon. so it is better not to pay an heed to what others say and think, rather we would focus to to strengthen us internally. our basic aim should be to get economic stability and to provide people with stable life , only than we can achieve tolerance and harmony because poverty and inflation creates unstablity and frustration in community. hope we in coming future would focus on such basic necessities rather than other bloody stuff...........

NO one in their vicinity needs an unstable neighbour.
Death of pakistan physically is far fetched.What Death here implies is the deviation from the image pakistan wanted to reach back in 48 to now where it is heading.
The problem is you cited is correct. Unfortunately that issue is circular, and this vicious circle must be broken at one point. Tackling poverty ad ignorance is the first place.
May god give you the political will and strength to implement this change.

 

[REHAN NIAZI FALCON]

NO one in their vicinity needs an unstable neighbour.
Death of pakistan physically is far fetched.What Death here implies is the deviation from the image pakistan wanted to reach back in 48 to now where it is heading.
The problem is you cited is correct. Unfortunately that issue is circular, and this vicious circle must be broken at one point. Tackling poverty ad ignorance is the first place.
May god give you the political will and strength to implement this change.

my aim is stable and prosperous PAKISTAN and thats the aim of every patriot PAKISTANI. we don,t have any hate for indian people but we hate any act that is harmful for sovereignity of our BELOVED PAKISTAN in any sense that,s the crux.

 

[Windjammer]

Gandhi was killed but a lot of what he wanted lives on. Jinnah is killed daily in Pakistan, his ideas disregarded & many including some here are hellbent on tarnishing his image by bringing in his religious(or lack of) outlook. Gandhi was killed by a mad man who fired three bullets but the state that calls him the father of the nation remains constitionally secular & Gandhi would probably have been proud of the deep entrenchment of that value among the vast majority of his fellow citizens. Would Jinnah have been likewise proud of Pakistan as it has become today? In Pakistan, bullets are being pumped into Jinnah's idea everyday. So which assassination is worse? Maybe you should think about that!

Witnessing the treatment meted out to the minorities, Gandhi must be turning in his grave. The canopy of his ideas, and the so called secularism has been long torn to shreds and has exposed the real mentality of the masses for their hostility towards fellow minority citizens. Despite all our shortcomings, our history is certainly not full of such spectaculars as the Golden Temple, the Babri Mosque or the Gujarat genocide, and for a man of peace, that Gandhi preached, the Indian history certainly doesn't represent any feathers in his hat.

 

[Spring Onion]

Diff is: We say modi is not responsible for the riots.
You say the murder is right and shud be lauded .

First of all comparing murderer of thousands of Muslims with a murderer of one person is off the hook

secondly supporting and absolving a terrorists of his massacre of innocent people is the same there is NO difference.

rather its more criminal that your indians are voting for a terrorist and making him a CM

 

[makikirkiri]

First of all comparing murderer of thousands of Muslims with a murderer of one person is off the hook

secondly supporting and absolving a terrorists of his massacre of innocent people is the same there is NO difference.

rather its more criminal that your indians are voting for a terrorist and making him a CM

U gone nuts ? U don't understand anything of what is said other than the word MOdi?

 

[Peshwa]

First of all comparing murderer of thousands of Muslims with a murderer of one person is off the hook

secondly supporting and absolving a terrorists of his massacre of innocent people is the same there is NO difference.

rather its more criminal that your indians are voting for a terrorist and making him a CM

Modi has not been implicated in the Gujrat riot and has been cleared by an independent body....

Now its enough with the false accusations.....kinda sick of beating the same drum

And then please dont cry when Indians accuse Pakistani Govt and Army of aiding and abetting terrorism without proof as you state it...

 

[Trisonics]

Well how long did it take to bring India's secularism on topic that was related to Pakistan. An avg Pakistani would never ever understand that depth of secularism in India is measured by a beautiful social fabric that oozes secularism on a daily basis. How would you understand how Muslims and Hindus criss cross each other in every day life?

Secularism aside, you guys claim you are not a secular nation but an Islamic one, Do you think Pakistan is a shining example of Islam? On the contrary, ask yourself the same question of how Islam shines in India... India has given Indian Muslims more than anything Pakistan of today can even dream to offer..

 

[justanobserver]

Well how long did it take to bring India's secularism on topic that was related to Pakistan. An avg Pakistani would never ever understand that depth of secularism in India is measured by a beautiful social fabric that oozes secularism on a daily basis. How would you understand how Muslims and Hindus criss cross each other in every day life?

Secularism aside, you guys claim you are not a secular nation but an Islamic one, Do you think Pakistan is a shining example of Islam? On the contrary, ask yourself the same question of how Islam shines in India... India has given Indian Muslims more than anything Pakistan of today can even dream to offer..

Well it's wrong to call it secularism, which is just a political word (at-least the western defination).

The correct term would be tolerance and syncretism

 

[RescueRanger]

Please change the title, i expected better from a respected senior Indian member.

As for the article... Same SHIET, Different Day!!!

After all, Pakistan is a nuclear-armed, terrorist-spawning regional power.

Facedesk!

 

[Alternative]

The Death of Pakistan?

Author: Jaswant Singh

NEW DELHI – This is a tipping point for Pakistan. Will it survive the current maelstrom of challenges – exemplified by the recent assassination of Governor Salmaan Taseer of Punjab by one of his bodyguards, an Islamic zealot – or will it capsize? For the world, Pakistan’s fate is an urgent, perhaps even an existential, question.

After all, Pakistan is a nuclear-armed, terrorist-spawning regional power. The roots of Pakistan’s instability run deep. Following World Wars I and II, the European powers and the United States sat around distant tables and fabricated frontiers, giving birth to Iraq, Israel, Kuwait, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia – and thus to most of the of the Middle East’s current ills. The region’s new map was based on the assumption that the fundamentals of “Muslim Asia” could be transformed by introducing the Western nation-state system. Instead, what formed was a region of entities that have largely failed to cohere as nations.

In 1947, the Indian sub-continent, too, was vivisected in much the same way, with a religion-based entity carved out of it: Pakistan. Of course, it is pointless at this stage to re-examine that tragic folly. The consequences of partition, however, remain: Pakistan has not yet been able to evolve an administratively credible government. Indeed, if Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Pakistan’s founding father, had been right that Muslims are a separate nation, Bangladesh would not have broken away from it, and the country’s relations with its neighbor Afghanistan would be free of intrigue and violence.


Jaswant Singh, a former Indian finance minister, foreign minister, and defense minister, is the author of Jinnah: India – Partition – Independence.

The Death of Pakistan? - New Europe

This is an amazingly confused article. one sweeping statement after the other. Tipping point, nuclear power, terrorists, history lessons, fate, salman tasser, murder, two nation theory, muslim asia, vivisection of British India, tragic folly, and what not,....... mixing context and jumping from one thing to other with out elaborating any thing.

What to discuss? every thing is jumbled, but I will try to elaborate few things

Indeed, if Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Pakistan’s founding father, had been right that Muslims are a separate nation, Bangladesh would not have broken away from it, and the country’s relations with its neighbor Afghanistan would be free of intrigue and violence.

So Pakistan should have joined with other Islamic countries in 1947(or should have tried), two muslim countries would never fight or have dispute, ................
From where Mr. Singh has drawn his yardstick to judge the behavior of a separate muslim nation??? ..................
What is the difference between a separate nation and a separate muslim nation?... Nations do have civil wars, internal conflicts, issues and wars with neighbors etc.
Bangladesh broken away, and writer deduces that muslims are not a separate nation, and so we can deduce that bengalis are a separate nation in Bangladesh or/and in india?
Truth of the matter is that nations came into being in different times and different places due to different reasons and circumstances prevailing, for example, Ideology, (Pakistan, Israel, USSR, East Taimor, South Sudan, North South Koreas, East West Germany (Old) etc etc.) ethnicity, racism, capitalism etc etc.

This brings us to the heart of the matter: the question of Islam and statehood. In his book Islam and the Destiny of Man, Gai Eaton put the matter with elegant precision: “Islamic society is theocentric…not theocratic.” This is an important distinction, for it calls into question the “validity of (the) concept of (an) Islamic state as distinct from a Muslim state.” The first, Eaton writes, is an “ideological proposition” that has “never materialized in Muslim history because no Muslim state has even been theocratic.”

Question raised and itself answered in last line. what Mr. Singh wanted to infer???

For Muslims, all sovereignty vests in God; indeed, nothing whatever exists or can exist outside of Him. As Eaton puts it, the Koran’s insistence that “there is no god but God” can also be interpreted to mean that “there is no legislator but the Legislator.” That is why in Islamic jurisprudence, laws must be derived from the Koran and the Sunnah of the Prophet, not handed down from British or classical philosophy.

It is not elborated that why we must follow British or classical philosopy? which pillars of justice are upheld while following British or classical philosohy and fall when we follow the Koran??
Why a BJP leader is advocating British thoughts ??

Indeed, the issue that now lies at Pakistan’s core is whether it can become a theocratic state.

theocratice state ? or theocentric?. Writer simply forgot that "because no Muslim state has even been theocratic” as asserted by his foreign "source".

Which brings us back to the horror of Taseer’s assassination and the strange and divided reaction to it in Pakistani civil society. Taseer’s assassination, unlike that of Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi by her bodyguards in 1984, was not a retaliatory revenge attack. Instead, the roots of Taseer’s assassination lay in the dark delusions of fanatical belief, his killing supposedly undertaken to protect the faith. Worse, many citizens, if not most, have reacted by supporting the assassin (some showering him with flower petals), while hundreds of Ulemas (religious leaders) welcomed his killing and called participation in his funeral “un-Islamic.” According to the chief of the Ja*m*aat*-e-Islami movement, “the killed is himself responsible for his killing.”

Sorry, right example here will be of Nathuram Godse, killer of Mahaatma Ghandi (Taseer was an ordinary politician in comparison with Ghandi), follower/member of RSS (mother of BJP and numerous other outfits), whose idol was garlanded and showered with rose petals. current status is, revered by numerous hindus.
I am surprised that Mr. Singh quoted that example.
Even if I follow the quoted comparison then, revenge killing by sikh body guard for attack on Golden Temple (Holiest Sikh Site) is a lesser event than a fanatic killing to save his faith?? how so? what is the difference?

Remaining article is western bashing, typical BJP stuff, Islam bashing, typical BJP, blah blah blah....

 

[Asfand]

Mulla ko jo hai hind main sajde ki ijazat
Nadan yeh samajhta haike Islam hai Azad

 

[Moorkh]

Again the the strikes were not for qadri or mullahs they were for the blasphemy laws and there were a lot of labour organisations supporting the cause. Strikes were a success not for the mullahs but for the common pakistani who wanted to keep the law as it is for the moment.

but are the laws not overtly religious in nature? the very bread and butter of the mullah? the mullahs are after all the champions of those believing that the blasphemy laws shoud stay. how then can the protests in support of the blasphemy laws not strengthen the mullas?

 

[Moorkh]

Witnessing the treatment meted out to the minorities, Gandhi must be turning in his grave. The canopy of his ideas, and the so called secularism has been long torn to shreds and has exposed the real mentality of the masses for their hostility towards fellow minority citizens. Despite all our shortcomings, our history is certainly not full of such spectaculars as the Golden Temple, the Babri Mosque or the Gujarat genocide, and for a man of peace, that Gandhi preached, the Indian history certainly doesn't represent any feathers in his hat.

1) gandhiji was cremated so he doesnt have a grave to turn in

2) minorities are not doing as bad as you are making it out to be. Minorities like parsis and sikhs are doing much better than the rest of the country. the SC ST and OBC are given slightly preferencial treatment in govt jobs and educational institutes. frankly i dont know how you are defining minorities here because i can think of hardly any ethnic groups which are being discriminated against on an institutional basis

3) the idea of india being alive or dead really not relevant to this thread which i am pretty sure talks about pakistan.

4) gandhiji's idea of india is indeed truly dead. he envisioned a very very rural india dependent on cottage industries with villages being self sufficient in all regards. what we have today is mostly nehruji's idea of india

 

[logic]

Mr Jaswant Singh's please listen to a voice of sanity late Richard HBrook on his death bed saying "You got to stop the war".

India and Pakistan have suffered enough from these fascist people who have brought nothing but pain.

MR JASWANT SINGH INDIA AND PAKISTAN NEED MORE TRADE AND GOOD FRIENDLY RELATIONS.