What's new

The first wife syndrome!

Individual cases here and there do not prove anything or should I sum up rape cases in India here and conclude India for being a rapist nation? :D

Thanks that you drew comparison between rapes and blasphemy law since both are crime towards humanity. But what you missed is that rapes are illegal in India unlike state sponsored blasphemy law. I hope you get the point and don't engage in needless arguing , just for the sake of doing that.
 
.
834039-YaqoobKhanBangashNewagain-1423241654-576-640x480.JPG

The writer teaches History at Forman Christian College Lahore and tweets at @BangashYK.

When I was a kid and the invasion of satellite and cable television had yet to happen, the only sources of television entertainment were either the state-run Pakistan Television(PTV) or beginning in the early 1990s, a private channel called NTM. Being near the border, our antenna could also catch the Indian state-run channel Doordarshan (DD). Therefore, every weekend our mainstay entertainment was watching films on either PTV orDD. A number of these films were based on social issues and I grew up acutely aware of the adverse effects of societal problems. One oft-repeated social issue was the question of a man marrying more than one wife. While in Islam, a man can marry up to four wives at any one time, in Pakistan this practice was, and is, considered culturally taboo. The public scandal caused by former prime minister Bogra’s second marriage obliquely led to the stipulation that the husband must get the written consent of the first wife before contracting a second marriage, yet the complications of the ‘second wife’— ‘doosri biwi’ — continued. Film after film showcased how the first wife felt neglected, dejected, and even abused after the coming in of the second. Usually, the first wife was shown to be older, old-fashioned and not as good looking as the second one to present an even starker difference. The point was, of course, that the husband was, in fact, a cruel man because he had left the faithful first wife forlorn and gone after the charms of the second one, which were at best fleeting.

The best simple explanation of the relationship between Pakistan and the US is the analogy of the first wife and the husband. Pakistan is the faithful first wife, who is always ready to do her master’s bidding, but now the evil husband — the US — has been charmed by the shining India of Modi, the wicked second wife, and does not care about the first one. Anyone watching Pakistani news channels — and they are numerous — during the visit of the US president to India would be convinced of this reality. Programme after programme discussed how shameful it was for Pakistan that the American president was visiting India, but not Pakistan. Several pundits, including the ex-governor of Punjab Chaudhry Mohammad Sarwar, opined that the fact that Obama did not visit Pakistan was a foreign policy “failure”. Many TV shows trashed the Nawaz Sharif government for this debacle and demanded its resignation. Even the terminology we use to explain our relationship with the US gives a dejected first wife feeling. We feel ‘betrayed’ by America time and again despite having done its bidding, but it has not been ‘faithful’ to us. Quite simply, it just sounds like a bad marriage.

Now imagine another scenario: that of President Obama visiting France but not Germany. Imagine German Chancellor Angela Merkel being blasted on all TV channels for not making a US president’s visit possible. Sounds ridiculous? It does indeed to me.

Simply put: Pakistan will not develop as a country and become a stable member of the world comity unless it sheds its India-centric foreign (and even domestic) policy. None of India’s neighbours do it to the extent we do it, and unless we stop obsessing about India all the time, we will never move on. Obsession with India over everything has less to do with our real and imagined threat from India, and more to do with the fact that we have yet to move on from the ‘Partition moment’ and develop an independent identity, which is not tied to India behaving in a particular manner. If a lot of our actions are just reactions to India, and not our independent decisions, we will always be beholden to India and its behaviour. For a country so concerned about its ‘sovereignty’ and ‘integrity’, I am surprised that we are not ashamed of this attitude of ours. The news from India is also not encouraging from our perspective on this count. Since the coming in of the Modi Sarkar, the government has practically decided to ignore Pakistan, and wants little to do with us. Secondly, as evident during Obama’s visit, India is no longer ‘trying’ to become a regional power. Modi’s mannerism and approach to the visit clearly showed that India now assumes that it is a regional power, and that it is now vying for world power and influence. This ‘ignore Pakistan’ policy and ‘moving on’ from regional power games will also have implications for Pakistan and in fact make Pakistan’s stance even more sad and, dare I say, pathetic.

So shall we stop being the miserable first wife of the US and a country obsessed with India, and grow up and develop our country on a sounder, more pragmatic basis?

Published in The Express Tribune, February 7th, 2015.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
The first wife syndrome – The Express Tribune

An excellent masterpiece on why Pakistan's foreign policy has been such a disaster all along!

@Etilla @SpArK @Srinivas @desert warrior @DRAY @pumkinduke @wolfpack @pursuit of happiness @danish_vij @rubyjackass @Star Wars @Ammyy @bloo @Marxist @karan.1970 @Not Sure @Arav_Rana @Avik274 @SamantK @Major Shaitan Singh @Omega007 @farhan_9909 @haviZsultan @Sidak @ranjeet @Yogijaat @ravi Nair @WAR-rior @halupridol @he-man @Indrani @Mike_Brando @SarthakGanguly @sreekumar @OrionHunter @lightoftruth @Water Car Engineer @indiatester @Ind4Ever @13 komaun @anant_s @itachiii @SwAggeR @Brahmos_2 @jaiind @Blue_Eyes @bhangi bava @SAMEET @naveen mishra @Bagha @utraash @Chanakya's_Chant @Krate M @gslv mk3 @r1_vns @blood @noksss @kurup @PARIKRAMA @thesolar65 @Rohit Patel @wolfschanzze @levina @vostok @rahi2357
Copyright infringement!!!
This triangular love story was my idea!!! :pissed:
levina said:
Yes, Pakistan has become highly insecure nation after Obama's visit to India.
It looks like triangular love story to me where Pak loves America...America loves India and India loves... well no one. Lol
Pakistan must accept the fact that America has finally ditched 'em, their "teenage affair" with America is over. Though Pakistan still seems besotted by US, and is being mellifluous to get America's attention again. Now alll this is very funny, because India and America 're "just friends", and Pakistan is going green with envy. :bounce:
Pakistan’s elusive quest for parity

levina said:
Get over it Pakistan!!!
Find a new motive to lead your country, clinging on to Kashmir issue is not going to help any more.
Today if I were to define Pakistan then I would define it as something that's "not India". For your own good, Pakistan you must find a new identity.
:) :) :)
 
. . . .
Yashraj came up with Jaya- Amitabh- Rekha story and I imagined Pak -Us - India in their place.
So the idea is mine :coffee:
Well couldn't agree more. India Pakistan won't talk to each other and US (See gentleman in middle) doesn't know what to do with them :D.
1950493.jpg



By the way as person holding rights to story, did u ever try to ask for your share of royalty. Considering the moolah Yahsraj films rake, you could be one really rich person 8-)
 
Last edited:
.
Times have changed. There are no marriages in international relations. Its all about flirtings and those who are looking for long term commitments will eventually be dissappointed.
 
.
Pakistan had no interest in Hindu-majority states of India, or it would have attacked Junagadh, when it was acceded to Pakistan in 15 Sep 1947 and occupied by India on 9 Nov 1947.

Not being able to take India on militarily is not the same as not wanting it, you must read about Jinnah's offer to the Maharaja of Jodhpur where he offered pretty much a blank page telling the Maharaja that he(Jinnah) would sign & the Maharaja could fill in the conditions. Jinnah even tried through the Maharaja of Jodhpur to get the princely states of Jaisalmer & Bikaner (all of them with massive Hindu majorities) to join Pakistan. They refused and eventually that put off the Maharaja of Jodhpur from immediately joining, Sardar Patel & V.P. Menon did the rest. Not as simple a narrative as is commonly believed to be.
 
.
Developing countries of south Asia should stop being a Bit*h of U.S or other 'powers' and disputes should be resolved to make this subcontinent a powerful and prosper block like E.U


BTW what are these movies any name??
 
.
You know about the law of possession.....not like Pakistan was going to or interested in convincing the Hindu populations in those states mentioned.

Nobody in Pakistan talks about the precipitous decline in the minority population
over the decades while they are shedding tears for Kashmiris

. As I said, a bunch of hypocrite

Where are the Minorities of Pakistan

DO you know the percentage of Minorities in Pakistan in 1947
 
.
Pakistan screwed up the relationship---she had the americans by the ballz---. Only thru the fcuk up of the Pakistanis the problems came up.
 
.
Pakistan had no interest in Hindu-majority states of India, or it would have attacked Junagadh, when it was acceded to Pakistan in 15 Sep 1947 and occupied by India on 9 Nov 1947

There is no way Pak could have attacked Junagadh as it was landlocked and surrounded by Indian territory,

Pakistan didn't lose anything apart from a part of Kashmir. East Pakistan was sure a lost case, but this was because of our military's wrongdoing and nothing to do with India :D

I am happy to see this positive attitude, losing what is called a Jugular vein & later half the nation is not seen as loss , thats a +ve way of looking at things .
 
.
Well couldn't agree more. India Pakistan won't talk to each other and US (See gentleman in middle) doesn't know what to do with them :D.
View attachment 191212


By the way as person holding rights to story, did u ever try to ask for your share of royalty. Considering the moolah Yahsraj films rake, you could one really rich person 8-)
I hold rights to the story of Indo- US -Pak luv triangle and not Amitach Bachchan's story. :lol:
Seriously I dont think US and India can ever be besties, they can merely act as one. Both the countries 've 2 things in common, that we both 're democratic countries and that both the countries 're notorious for their habits of reneging on promises. Pak's issue with US is its own creation.67 years after independence, it still clings on to India for some limelight.
 
. .
Indian Muslims could never get their demands met by an overwhelmingly Hindu majority
What do you expect after calling for Direct Action?

By you I don't mean you personally, of course. :D

Stop your BS! Nizam Hyderabad was ruled by a Muslim princely family for hundreds of years. Your government had NO right to invade, annex and expel its rightful owner as much as Pakistani government had no right to invade princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. Your terrorist government did the same with Goa decades later.
Incorrect and Incorrect. We had every right to incorporate Hyderabad in the Union. Same with Goa.

These princely states were given freedom to remain independent or join either India or Pakistan.
Wrong. Hyderabad was not independent. The State had a standstill agreement. That is not the same as being a sovereign. Hyderabad was as much independent as Balochistan is today. Far less actually.

You can never get rid of your minorities though
Let's not be PC here. The minorities in our country are Parsis, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains and Christians. Muslims and especially Sunnis are not minorities.

Sikkim and Goa remained independent for decades after partition.
Again wrong. Goa was a colony of the state of Portugal.
Sikkim was a Protectorate of India.

Sikkim and Goa remained independent for decades after partition.
Again wrong. Goa was a colony of the state of Portugal.
Sikkim was a Protectorate of India.

Both princely states were forced to annex in India. When Pakistan tried the same with Muslim majority Kashmir, Indian forces intervened. Hypocrites!
It's not the same.
Both were Princely states. Hence they had no right to remain independent permanently.

After Pakistan attacked Jammu and Kashmir in 1947, India correctly decided to hurry things up in Hyderabad. It was a mistake to not purge the entire Razakar population of the state. But anyway, Pakistan showed the way by attacking first. India only followed with more success.

When India invaded Junagadh, Pakistan didn't send its forces to intervene.
They tried. They could not because her forces were tied down in Kashmir by then. What did you expect us to do? Treat you with garlands? Had it been not for Nehru, there would have been a real integration and the Razakars and Islamists would have been purged then and there. But they were granted an amnesty and let alone to preach their hatred.

Now they are being burnt and persecuted by their Buddhist countrymen!
Awwww. They launched the movement for the separate Islamic State. Just like in India. However the Buddhists were a different lot when compared to cowardly and docile Hindus in India. The conflict more or less ended only in the 70s.
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom