Opinion: Pakistan Has Become a Jurassic Park: Katju | PKKH.tv
PKKH Exclusive| by*by Sarmad Gilani
As the dust is slowly settling on Markandey Katju's comments about Pakistan, the typical responses have come out from the usual channels. However, this incident is not just another typical cross-border tantrum from India. The fact that Katju is a former Supreme Court justice speaks volumes about the mindset of people who are bestowed with the prestige and trust of apolitical and trusted posts. India is deserving of many sympathies after this outburst, because it exposes the fragility and insecurity of its patriots.
The content of diatribes from Katju, Shashi Tharoor, and other Indian "intellectuals" is a re-hash of the same narrative that depicts Pakistan as a failed state deserving of being put out of its misery. And, of course, the notion that India is a proud secular state and an emerging power player. Anyone familiar with the corporate world knows that for someone to be given a promotion, they must demonstrate that they are now working at the level of the higher position. Just as Turkey's bid to enter the European Union is heavily scrutinized, India too must be thoroughly vetted before it can be seen as the UN Security Council-worthy Asian power that it claims to be.
Katju and his like-minded compatriots preach from the pulpit to their neighbor from a perceived position of superiority. In the spirit of Aman ki Asha and friendship, we offer this examination to him free of cost. Mr. Katju, this one is on the house.
Mr. Katju, as you are a distinguished former justice of the Supreme Court, we shall first compare you to your counterparts in the club of established world powers. Ruth Bader Ginsburg has served on the U.S. Supreme Court since 1993. She recently traveled to Egypt to witness that country's transformation after Hosni Mubarak's fall. She was asked if that country should look at the American constitution as a guide. America is, after all, the all-powerful champion (and enforcer) of democracy. Had an Indian like yourself been in her position, the references to Gandhi would have started flowing, and the self-praise of diversity and secularism would be oozing from ear to ear.
What did Ginsburg do? With sincerity and humility, she offered South Africa as a model, because its modern constitution was predicated on freedom and equality. She said that the American constitution was written without the input of women, and paved the way for slavery and discrimination to continue, and was not a suitable example. Despite the many hurdles Egypt faces, Ginsburg said she was inspired by Egypt and its efforts towards a better society.
She didn't dwell upon the ills in Egyptian society, or the extremists seeking to turn Copts against Muslims, because Egypt is in a transitionary phase. She instead very humbly recalled her own country's growing pains and offered encouragement to the Egyptian people.
The most you could muster, Mr. Katju, is to demean and belittle the existence of a sovereign state and arrogantly offer a scenario where India would absorb its 'Jurassic Park' neighbor. Pakistan is well aware of its troubles, and is on the painful but necessary path of tackling them--a journey that India has yet to commence, thanks to ideologues like yourself. Rather than obsessing over your westerly neighbor, you should be concerned with the epidemics of violence against women, HIV/AIDS, human rights abuses in Kashmir, and countless insurgencies, all of which the Indian media hide behind a facade of glamour and harmony.
You continued on about India's own problems, as "old values are collapsing" amidst impending turmoil, and the curse of caste and religious-based politics. How is this possible in the legendarily secular and diverse Republic of India? Quite ironic for you to admit this about your own country and still see it as a beacon of hope, yet paint Pakistan as a failure for its troubles as it evolves, just as all states do.
Respectfully, your reasoning for Pakistan being dead-on-arrival is illogical. Putting aside your utter disrespect for Pakistan's existence by referring to it as merely part of India, the claim that the region's diversity necessitates pure secularism is a non sequitur. While all major religions preach peace, Islam has proven its practicality as a political system. Unlike the intolerance shown by the Catholic monarchs of Spain, the Moors and Ottomans gave protection and freedom to minorities. Jews in both Muslim Spain and the Ottoman Empire thrived and kept their cultural identity alive while living in relative peace.
It is important to note that Islam has proven itself, yet Muslims do not always represent it--otherwise any Islamic state would lend itself to be a citadel of scholarship and tolerance for all. This is what Shamshad Ahmad hinted at--a governance problem, not a statehood problem. It is disingenuous to ridicule a vehicle for stuttering when pilot error is to blame. The same holds true for Pakistan and its current ruling crop.
Indeed, disingenuous describes much of what you have said. Blaming all of the subcontinent's communal rifts on the British is a prime example. For the sake of argument, let us assume that the historical Hindu persecution of Muslims is nothing more than a by-product of British mischief. If the modern Indian state truly is secular and progressive, then why do Hindu terrorist groups such as RSS, VHP, and Bajrang Dal continue to enjoy free reign? Surely the British are no longer pulling the strings.
Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde was lambasted for having the audacity to admit that saffron terror was responsible for anti-Muslim violence, and he has paid the price as his exit from politics seems all but certain. If these groups and their ideology are nothing more than post-colonial baggage, then India needs to sort out its own problems in its "secular" society rather than lecturing to others.
The notion that having a state religion cuts off industrial access to raw materials is puzzling. Perhaps you could lend your economic wisdom to religious studies departments in universities around the world so that we can all benefit from a better understanding of these theories. While on the topic of industries, however, it is important to remember that India benefited from inheriting much of the British bureaucracy and industry, while Pakistan was left to fend for itself. Yet, the perseverance and tenacity of the Pakistani nation--one which you do not recognize--has always pulled the country through all obstacles and on the way to success. One would hope that India's continuous disrespect and arrogance is not rooted in insecurity, as this does not befit a nation seeking greatness and stature.
If you want to be respected and see your country as a global player, at least, try to learn from those who had made it before you. History is full of arrogant nations that did not respect the sanctity of its neighbors, so do not think that India is the first. For a lesson of what can happen to such nations, refresh your memory about the regime that believed the Sudetenland and neighboring German speaking lands should be absorbed into their grand state.
They borrowed the swastika from your culture, in case you need a hint.
Source
PKKH Exclusive| by*by Sarmad Gilani
As the dust is slowly settling on Markandey Katju's comments about Pakistan, the typical responses have come out from the usual channels. However, this incident is not just another typical cross-border tantrum from India. The fact that Katju is a former Supreme Court justice speaks volumes about the mindset of people who are bestowed with the prestige and trust of apolitical and trusted posts. India is deserving of many sympathies after this outburst, because it exposes the fragility and insecurity of its patriots.
The content of diatribes from Katju, Shashi Tharoor, and other Indian "intellectuals" is a re-hash of the same narrative that depicts Pakistan as a failed state deserving of being put out of its misery. And, of course, the notion that India is a proud secular state and an emerging power player. Anyone familiar with the corporate world knows that for someone to be given a promotion, they must demonstrate that they are now working at the level of the higher position. Just as Turkey's bid to enter the European Union is heavily scrutinized, India too must be thoroughly vetted before it can be seen as the UN Security Council-worthy Asian power that it claims to be.
Katju and his like-minded compatriots preach from the pulpit to their neighbor from a perceived position of superiority. In the spirit of Aman ki Asha and friendship, we offer this examination to him free of cost. Mr. Katju, this one is on the house.
Mr. Katju, as you are a distinguished former justice of the Supreme Court, we shall first compare you to your counterparts in the club of established world powers. Ruth Bader Ginsburg has served on the U.S. Supreme Court since 1993. She recently traveled to Egypt to witness that country's transformation after Hosni Mubarak's fall. She was asked if that country should look at the American constitution as a guide. America is, after all, the all-powerful champion (and enforcer) of democracy. Had an Indian like yourself been in her position, the references to Gandhi would have started flowing, and the self-praise of diversity and secularism would be oozing from ear to ear.
What did Ginsburg do? With sincerity and humility, she offered South Africa as a model, because its modern constitution was predicated on freedom and equality. She said that the American constitution was written without the input of women, and paved the way for slavery and discrimination to continue, and was not a suitable example. Despite the many hurdles Egypt faces, Ginsburg said she was inspired by Egypt and its efforts towards a better society.
She didn't dwell upon the ills in Egyptian society, or the extremists seeking to turn Copts against Muslims, because Egypt is in a transitionary phase. She instead very humbly recalled her own country's growing pains and offered encouragement to the Egyptian people.
The most you could muster, Mr. Katju, is to demean and belittle the existence of a sovereign state and arrogantly offer a scenario where India would absorb its 'Jurassic Park' neighbor. Pakistan is well aware of its troubles, and is on the painful but necessary path of tackling them--a journey that India has yet to commence, thanks to ideologues like yourself. Rather than obsessing over your westerly neighbor, you should be concerned with the epidemics of violence against women, HIV/AIDS, human rights abuses in Kashmir, and countless insurgencies, all of which the Indian media hide behind a facade of glamour and harmony.
You continued on about India's own problems, as "old values are collapsing" amidst impending turmoil, and the curse of caste and religious-based politics. How is this possible in the legendarily secular and diverse Republic of India? Quite ironic for you to admit this about your own country and still see it as a beacon of hope, yet paint Pakistan as a failure for its troubles as it evolves, just as all states do.
Respectfully, your reasoning for Pakistan being dead-on-arrival is illogical. Putting aside your utter disrespect for Pakistan's existence by referring to it as merely part of India, the claim that the region's diversity necessitates pure secularism is a non sequitur. While all major religions preach peace, Islam has proven its practicality as a political system. Unlike the intolerance shown by the Catholic monarchs of Spain, the Moors and Ottomans gave protection and freedom to minorities. Jews in both Muslim Spain and the Ottoman Empire thrived and kept their cultural identity alive while living in relative peace.
It is important to note that Islam has proven itself, yet Muslims do not always represent it--otherwise any Islamic state would lend itself to be a citadel of scholarship and tolerance for all. This is what Shamshad Ahmad hinted at--a governance problem, not a statehood problem. It is disingenuous to ridicule a vehicle for stuttering when pilot error is to blame. The same holds true for Pakistan and its current ruling crop.
Indeed, disingenuous describes much of what you have said. Blaming all of the subcontinent's communal rifts on the British is a prime example. For the sake of argument, let us assume that the historical Hindu persecution of Muslims is nothing more than a by-product of British mischief. If the modern Indian state truly is secular and progressive, then why do Hindu terrorist groups such as RSS, VHP, and Bajrang Dal continue to enjoy free reign? Surely the British are no longer pulling the strings.
Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde was lambasted for having the audacity to admit that saffron terror was responsible for anti-Muslim violence, and he has paid the price as his exit from politics seems all but certain. If these groups and their ideology are nothing more than post-colonial baggage, then India needs to sort out its own problems in its "secular" society rather than lecturing to others.
The notion that having a state religion cuts off industrial access to raw materials is puzzling. Perhaps you could lend your economic wisdom to religious studies departments in universities around the world so that we can all benefit from a better understanding of these theories. While on the topic of industries, however, it is important to remember that India benefited from inheriting much of the British bureaucracy and industry, while Pakistan was left to fend for itself. Yet, the perseverance and tenacity of the Pakistani nation--one which you do not recognize--has always pulled the country through all obstacles and on the way to success. One would hope that India's continuous disrespect and arrogance is not rooted in insecurity, as this does not befit a nation seeking greatness and stature.
If you want to be respected and see your country as a global player, at least, try to learn from those who had made it before you. History is full of arrogant nations that did not respect the sanctity of its neighbors, so do not think that India is the first. For a lesson of what can happen to such nations, refresh your memory about the regime that believed the Sudetenland and neighboring German speaking lands should be absorbed into their grand state.
They borrowed the swastika from your culture, in case you need a hint.
Source
nah soumitra devi we are not bringing him down we just consider him part of the 90% Indians 
But thank God I'm part of the other 10%!! 
