What's new

Tribals Regions Should be Constitutionalized

Interesting thoughts Salim, but you're all over the place.

The army is not a democracy. You need to make a case that its non-Punjabi leadership, that essentially exercised absolute power, was somehow forced into kowtowing to Punjabi demands.

It is a hypothesis that seems a stretch. You would have to show that the supporting cast of each was composed of Punjabi nationalists, who put up puppets. I doubt anyone would argue that most of those mentioned were puppets.

In the second part of your argument you veer of into "Zia pandering the fundamentalist", so now we have gone from the "Punjabi's running the show" to the "fundamentalists running the show".

To use your own example of "the Dam", the fact that it has not been constructed so far, indicates to me the lack of a "ground swell" as you put it, that is inherently pro-Punjab. Why all this bickering over it still? The Punjabi's should have had this built long ago, were your hypothesis true.

I did not take the time to 'compose' the post since it is an axiomatic issue and well documented and realising that you were well read, I took the liberty in taking it that you would be conversant with the issue.

I wrote as I thought.

You may like to read the following:

The State of Martial Rule - Ayesha Jala (Cambridge)
Punjab and the Making of Pakistan - Tan Tai Yong (South Asia Vol xviii, 1995)

The fact of the Dam and the Balochi problems is that the people of these areas are now much more aware of the way things have been happening so far, and will no longer be taken for a ride.

That is why, you would have read in the Pakistani newspapers during the Balochi problem that there were politicians who were opining that if things don't get equitable, provinces will "go the Bangladesh way".

Such a thought would be blasphemous a few years earlier!
 
Agnostic

Here is a balanced article:
Federation confronts a dilemma

Thursday December 15, 2005 (1623 PST)

Riaz Missen
riazmissen@yahoo.com



Related Links
’Diamer-Bhasha Dam to mark new era of progress in NAs’
MMA can be briefed about Mega dams if Parliament approves: Jatoi
Jatoi for early completion of mega water and power projects
NAs admn floats demands in connection of Bhasha dam construction
Jatoi for speedy process on Kurram Tangi, Munda dams


• Question: "Should Kalabagh Dam be constructed?"

The political parties originating in smaller province of Pakistan are against Kala Bagh Dam (KBD); even PPP-P can`t risk confronting the ire of Sindhi nationalists � it has announced to lead campaign against the dam. Balochistan, though with a remote interest in the issue, is opposing it simply because Sindh and NWFP assemblies have passed resolutions against the big reservoir. Punjab has been the main proponent of the dam but its support has always backfired with a result that KBD remains a controversial issue.

KBD has become a zero-sum game between Punjab and the smaller province � the centre has so far preferred status quo to ensure its neutrality. When the president or the premier say the dam is vital for Pakistan, the apprehensions of smaller provinces get stronger that the reservoir could be built even though they oppose it. Such misperceptions have persisted since the idea of constructing dam was conceived; no serious effort has proved successful to undo these misperceptions.

There are four nationalities because there are four federating units in Pakistan and sub-nationalism has proved the greatest hurdle in the construction of the dam that the centre insists is desirable and feasible. The entities calling themselves as Sindhis, Pushtoons and Balochs have stood against the reservoir; Punjab has become its greatest supporter. These so-called nationalities claim certain territory, language, culture and set of inalienable rights as they make part of Pakistan.

The nationalists of smaller provinces often raise the question as to why their leadership faces the charges of treason so often. Why Bhutto was hanged while Nawaz Sharif was allowed to leave the country after a military take over? Why Bengalis could not remain loyal to Pakistan despite being a majority? Why the federation accedes to Punjab `s demand that national resources should be distributed among provinces on population basis?

While Punjabis dominate army and federal bureaucracy, nationalists of smaller provinces argue, democracy does not suit the interest of Punjab; defence budget of the country remains unnecessarily higher; the people of smaller provinces remain without basic necessities of life even in the 21 st century. To them, none but Punjab is responsible for the woes of the country as well as its people. Then, why federation should always follow Punjab?

Punjab has no credible means to undo misperceptions against it. Federation bears no responsibility to do this job for the sole reason that it has to stick to the principle of neutrality. Similarly, the smaller provinces of the country can`t change their ways, for they are bound to tread on the trodden path. Would KBD become a reality only through the support of Punjab? Should federation construct the dam when majority of its units are deadly opposed to it?

The status-quo does not favour the federation at all. It needs to remove misperceptions against it to confront the global age boldly. It simply can`t afford ill feelings among a considerable part of its population. The federation can`t do away sub-nationalism; the people will not cease to think about themselves as Punjabis, Sindhis, Balochs and Pushtoons � about fifty-eight languages are spoken in Pakistan.

Granting more autonomy to provinces will not necessarily prove advantageous to the federation. It has provinces larger enough, even larger than many countries of Europe in terms of size and population, to accommodate the interests of all the people that constitute them. Lahore, Karachi, Peshawar and Quetta are inaccessible to majority of the areas within a respective province. The whole of central Pakistan, an area suitable for agriculture and livestock, has the least say in the decision-making process of the country provinces.

Granting autonomy to provinces will promote parochial tendencies necessarily harming the national interest � the newly introduced devolution of power plan will fall prey to this initiative. There is no guarantee that more autonomy to provinces will bring consensus on issues concerning economic development and national security. Besides, the disparities among different regions of these provinces will become wider; every province has more than one linguistic/cultural group in its fold; a permanent dominance of the one on the other(s) will ultimately harm the interest of federation.

Pakistan can`t delay construction of water reservoirs and ports. It can`t afford controversies regarding its socio-economic development plans. Global age is just staring into its face while the country has got turbulent neighbourhood. Many a strategic mysteries will be ultimately resolved if Pakistan restructures itself to ensure good governance in the country; improving standards of life through developing domestic market and bringing transparency in the working of public institutions are necessary for its dignified survival in global age.

file:///L:/Pakistan/Punjabis%20dominate%20Pakistan/Federation%20confronts%20a%20dilemma.htm

This is from Pak Tribune - Federation confronts a dilemma Thursday December 15, 2005 (1623 PST)

Note: I did not say it. A Pakistani intellectual did!

One cannot shy away from the reality.

I appreciate the fact that people should think only of Pakistan, but then when domination is there of one province, the others surely feel left out!
 
Salim,

I am afraid that I am nowhere close to as well read as I would like, especially when it comes to South Asia, and the issue of Punjab's domination (good or bad) is one that I am attempting to logically and factually feel my way through.

I have presented my reasons for skepticism, and though I understood the argument you were trying to make, the previous post was an attempt to get you to elucidate on the rationale and observations behind it.

I'll go through the articles and books you mentioned, though I have a couple of exams and projects due this week, so I'll have to postpone the reading awhile.
 
The link at Post # 62 gives some details on the tribal situation.

http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/101607_pashtunistan.pdf

A very inappropriately titled report. Nowhere did I see any arguments in favor of what the title suggested, and I was actually looking forward to reading elucidations regarding that theory.

Interesting that even in Afghanistan, a little less than half of the Pashtun consider the Taliban a threat. Were the taliban eliminated, or their threat reduced, that would be even higher IMO.

By the way, the attitudes of Muslims to various terrorism related issues, referenced in that poll by Pew in the link, is quite reassuring. Substantiates the argument that most Pakistanis do not support such ideology, and also counters that ludicrous observation in the article you posted(the counterclaim).
 
Pakistan allows its tribal areas full liberty have you ever heard such thing in the world that there is no federal administration in a part of a country this shows that how much independence Pakistan offers to its people but Pashtoons must understand that what is Afghanistan? A destroyed country. If there is such thing like Pashtoonistan I think the best way for this is the Pashtoon areas of Afghanistan should join Pakistan we should have done this way before but now as Americans and Indian are operating in Afghanistan to me America should leave Afghanistan and should transfer the control of Pashtoon areas to Pakistan so that Pashtoons of both countries have no boundaries and the whole region must be constitutionalized so that that region should progress ith the other parts of Pakistan
 
Pakistan allows its tribal areas full liberty have you ever heard such thing in the world that there is no federal administration in a part of a country this shows that how much independence Pakistan offers to its people but Pashtoons must understand that what is Afghanistan? A destroyed country. If there is such thing like Pashtoonistan I think the best way for this is the Pashtoon areas of Afghanistan should join Pakistan we should have done this way before but now as Americans and Indian are operating in Afghanistan to me America should leave Afghanistan and should transfer the control of Pashtoon areas to Pakistan so that Pashtoons of both countries have no boundaries and the whole region must be constitutionalized so that that region should progress ith the other parts of Pakistan

Why not one should think the other way? Joining the Pashtoon area of Pakistan to Afghanistan and the Pashtoons don't have any boundary at all. Another option is merging the Pashtoon areas from both Pakistan and Afghanistan to make an independent Pashtoon country where they will enjoy their freedom. :enjoy:
 
Mods in my absence (as im hospitalized anf could not post on this issue) how on earth every thickhead got away with posting all off topic Dirt here about my Province.

@ Shivakumar you better look at your own back we in NWFP the Pashtuns have every freedom and there is no such rubish like going seprate from Pakistan.
 
Sorry for the off topic nonsense Jana.

I did request Neo to see if it would be possible to move the posts related to "Punjabi Dominance" and the "Dam", to a different thread. Probably haven't gotten around to it yet.

Agnostic

Here is a balanced article:

This is from Pak Tribune - Federation confronts a dilemma Thursday December 15, 2005 (1623 PST)

Note: I did not say it. A Pakistani intellectual did!

One cannot shy away from the reality.

I appreciate the fact that people should think only of Pakistan, but then when domination is there of one province, the others surely feel left out!

Salim,

That article simply refers to a "domination" - and a "perception" that the nationalists have that Punjab is responsible for their "ills". Nowhere does it refer to any sort of systematic discrimination against the smaller provinces.

Punjab has no credible means to undo misperceptions against it. Federation bears no responsibility to do this job for the sole reason that it has to stick to the principle of neutrality. Similarly, the smaller provinces of the country can`t change their ways, for they are bound to tread on the trodden path.

A cursory look at the statistics only provides a superficial picture of the gap between Punjab and the rest of the country. It doesn't look into the effects of the Sardari system in Baluchistan, the effects of the Aghan war and refugees in NWFP, the feudals in Sindh, the sheer size of Punjab. Even a slightly less literate, than the average, population would provide for a huge numerical advantage in trained manpower, thereby tilting the representative scales, in bureaucracy, in its favor.
 
Why not one should think the other way? Joining the Pashtoon area of Pakistan to Afghanistan and the Pashtoons don't have any boundary at all. Another option is merging the Pashtoon areas from both Pakistan and Afghanistan to make an independent Pashtoon country where they will enjoy their freedom. :enjoy:


Why not make Occupied Kashmir,Assam,East Punjab independent countries so that all of them will enjoy freedom?
 
Back
Top Bottom