Pakistan: "Nightmare on the subcontinent"

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

India wasnt created for religious reasons while for it was for pakistan.

What does that have to do with splitting Pakistan into four nations and not splitting India into a dozen or more nations?

 

[Goodperson]

India recognizes Ahmadiyyas as Muslims while Pakistan doesn't so those 14% Muslims in India also includes Ahmadiyyas.

Ahmadiyyas have come from within Muslims, which make you more uncomfortable calling them non-Muslims are they Kafirs ?

 

[Omar1984]

Ahmadiyyas have come from within Muslims, which make you more uncomfortable calling them non-Muslims are they Kafirs ?

Do a research on Ahmadiyyas.

To be Muslim you must believe there is only one God, Allah, and Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is His messenger and FINAL prophet.

India is predominently Hindu so they wouldn't know what makes a person Muslim so India recognized Ahmadiyyas as Muslims. If Ahmadiyyas were in large population in any other Muslim country they would agree with Pakistani law of not recognizing Ahmadiyyas as Muslims. I've met many Indians who are Ahmadiyyas so I dont know of the 150 million Muslims living in India, how many are actually Muslims and how many are actually Ahmadiyyas.

 

[jeypore]

Do a research on Ahmadiyyas.

To be Muslim you must believe there is only one God, Allah, and Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is His messenger and FINAL prophet.

India is predominently Hindu so they wouldn't know what makes a person Muslim so India recognized Ahmadiyyas as Muslims. If Ahmadiyyas were in large population in any other Muslim country they would agree with Pakistani law of not recognizing Ahmadiyyas as Muslims. I've met many Indians who are Ahmadiyyas so I dont know of the 150 million Muslims living in India, how many are actually Muslims and how many are actually Ahmadiyyas.

Mr. Omar, the second highest population of Ahmadiyyas are in Pakistan, the highest are in Ghana. India has roughly only 1 million.

Thanks.

 

[Neo]

...the worst nightmare on the subcontinent is Pakistan, whose dysfunction is directly the result of its utter lack of geographic logic. The Indus should be a border of sorts, but Pakistan sits astride both its banks, just as the fertile and teeming Punjab plain is bisected by the India-Pakistan border. Only the Thar Desert and the swamps to its south act as natural frontiers between Pakistan and India. And though these are formidable barriers, they are insufficient to frame a state composed of disparate, geographically based, ethnic groups—Punjabis, Sindhis, Baluchis, and Pashtuns—for whom Islam has provided insufficient glue to hold them together. All the other groups in Pakistan hate the Punjabis and the army they control, just as the groups in the former Yugoslavia hated the Serbs and the army they controlled. Pakistan’s raison d’être is that it supposedly provides a homeland for subcontinental Muslims, but 154 million of them, almost the same number as the entire population of Pakistan, live over the border in India.

To the west, the crags and canyons of Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province, bordering Afghanistan, are utterly porous. Of all the times I crossed the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, I never did so legally. In reality, the two countries are inseparable. On both sides live the Pashtuns. The wide belt of territory between the Hindu Kush mountains and the Indus River is really Pashtunistan, an entity that threatens to emerge were Pakistan to fall apart. That would, in turn, lead to the dissolution of Afghanistan.

The Taliban constitute merely the latest incarnation of Pashtun nationalism...

Load of crap, the autor obviously has no clue about geo-politics.

So what is the preferred solution? Greater India with a looser federal structure? The break-up of Pakistan into additional independent states? Anarchy? Does anybody think Pakistan will be the same state five years from now that it was a decade ago?

The preferred solution is that India and other hostile forces leave us alone and let us deal with our own problems. Though we're responsilble for most the political mess, foreign eliments have always created more hurdles and its time we deal with them properly.

Accession of FATA to Pakistan was a joke, we should have done what India did in Hyderabad and annexed it in the first place. No state within a state, all Pakistan or nothing...thats the idea. Annex FATA and bring it directly to central governance, deport foreigners including Afghanis who live there. Stop drone attacks immidiately since its creating more sympathy for talibans and feeding anti-american sentiment.
Any attack on Pakistani soil would have to be launched from our own forces in close cooperation with Nato.

Finally close all madrassa's and replace them with modern schools.

Draw a Colombo or Martial Plan for the development and FATA and other area's hit by fall out of Sovjet/American rape of Afghanistan. Control local media and ask western governments to do the same and play a contructive role in defeating the Taliban.

Change political structure of Pakistan, introduce a ferderal system with powers given to local governments.

Kill poverty and promote free education for all.

 

[Solomon2]

Load of crap, the autor obviously has no clue about geo-politics.

Robert D. Kaplan is very highly regarded. You're the first person I've met who claims he has "no clue about geo-politics." So if you want your views to prevail over his, you'll have to be much more specific and convincing in your criticism.

The preferred solution is that India and other hostile forces leave us alone and let us deal with our own problems.

How can they do that in good conscience, when Pakistan's nukes threaten them with obliteration?

Accession of FATA to Pakistan was a joke, we should have done what India did in Hyderabad and annexed it in the first place...close all madrassa's and replace them with modern schools. Draw a Colombo or Martial Plan for the development and FATA and other area's hit by fall out of Sovjet/American rape of Afghanistan.

That would involve Pakistan actually spending money, and not just receiving foreign funds to be pocketed by corrupt officials but raising taxes, too. For sixty years it has been considered cheaper to give the people in FATA a bribe to remain relatively peaceful, in exchange for a gratuity to the relevant government official. What would it take to change that?

 

[Patriot]

That would involve Pakistan actually spending money, and not just receiving foreign funds to be pocketed by corrupt officials but raising taxes, too. For sixty years it has been considered cheaper to give the people in FATA a bribe to remain relatively peaceful, in exchange for a gratuity to the relevant government official. What would it take to change that?

Break US Pakistan Military Relations and have a strong democratic system.

 

[Zob]

@ SOLOMON

see i don't understand one thing when THE WORLD says PAKISTAN SHOULD DO MORE....i say people we spent $34BILLION and you guys give us petty loads of $11billion....so instead of complaing THE WORLD should do more and help PAKISTAN...!!!!

as for splitting PAKISTAN my friend see i wish someone was far sighted.... do you realise the CHAOS that would follow....the US tried to split IRAQ...what happened a bigger chaos and an unstable region...but then again PAKISTAN is not IRAQ our people are very diffrent you try dividing us 170 million you create a chaos that no one can handle....so instead of trying to "divide pakistan" try making it stronger and THE WORLD SHOULD DO MORE....FINANCIAL AND MILITARILY.....if only pakistan didn't have those sanctinos in the 90s we could have been upto par and could have taken on the enemies in a better way even now our F16s come with strings attached i mean when will the US show PAKISTANIS that US is sincere...!!!

 

[Solomon2]

as for splitting PAKISTAN my friend see i wish someone was far sighted.... do you realise the CHAOS that would follow...

Far-sighted leaders may be able to avoid chaos, if they wish: The Velvet Divorce

 

[Zob]

well then people guess why PAKISTANIS are being "PARANOID" about foreign hand in breaking pakistan....no one seems to be talking about stregthening pakistan except for pakistanis...

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Six pages of comments, and I have yet to read an argument that coherently argues why splitting Pakistan is a better scenario than the current situation.

 

[Rabbit.Rabbit]

Six pages of comments, and I have yet to read an argument that coherently argues why splitting Pakistan is a better scenario than the current situation.

I'd be shocked if you did acknowledge that splitting Pakistan made sense, even if there was a good argument for the same. So your assertion is of no value.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I'd be shocked if you did acknowledge that splitting Pakistan made sense, even if there was a good argument for the same. So your assertion is of no value.

Try and figure out how fallacious your statement above is.

In any case, I see you admit that no coherent argument has been presented in support of the contention I pointed out.

 

[Rabbit.Rabbit]

Try and figure out how fallacious your statement above is.

In any case, I see you admit that no coherent argument has been presented in support of the contention I pointed out.

You're a nationalist, and therefore predisposed towards finding reasons for the existence of your country, even if there aren't any.

Regarding the second para, I'll reserve my comments. I'd not like to speculate on such highly unpleasant matters.

 

[Zob]

You're a nationalist, and therefore predisposed towards finding reasons for the existence of your country, even if there aren't any.

Regarding the second para, I'll reserve my comments. I'd not like to speculate on such highly unpleasant matters.

hmmm i don't know the audacity or naivety of your statement....but if i may ask why would breaking up my country benefit anyone...and why keeping India,UNITED KINGDOM,US together not be such a great idea....