What is PAKISTAN?

[MST]

He said "Pakistan is a temporary tent, that won't survive more than a few years."

He was reassuring Nehru that the "Stow away" with die in a few years and come back to join the "mother".

This Quote in the article you posted reminded me of that.

Pakistan is a country whose imminent demise has been predicted every day since its birth and yet, it has managed to survive into its seventh decade. Going by Taleb’s analysis, Pakistan today, is far more likely to survive for another 70 years than when it first came into being.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/national-political-issues/241336-what-pakistan.html#ixzz2PGwi3e7f

This is how i look at it "After making Pakistan a nuclear power, its ALL OURS TO LOSE"
Bura,Bhala, with suicide bombings,extremists on both sides or whatever else, "This is the ONLY tent we have".

Sir, In the history of nations 70 years is a very very short period. Even if Pakistan falls in the next 100 (and I don't wish that since it will be a disaster for India's security) Radcliffe will still be vindicated.

 

[Kompromat]

Sir, In the history of nations 70 years is a very very short period. Even if Pakistan falls in the next 100 (and I don't wish that since it will be a disaster for India's security) Radcliffe will still be vindicated.

Since you had your go,now you can rest in peace. Pakistan is here to stay!

 

[Icewolf]

Pakistan zindabad.

 

[Zarvan]

@muse Do you remember what Redcliffe said about Pakistan in 1947?

Is it name of a magazine or a person ?

 

[Kompromat]

Is it name of a magazine or a person ?

Cyril Radcliffe, 1st Viscount Radcliffe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[INDIC]

Is it name of a magazine or a person ?

He drew India Pakistan border both in East and West.

 

[muse]

I though about including this article in the thread and decided that it had a place in the discussion, because we are generally preoccupied with what the article points to, while this issued would have been thought of as confined to the realm of the personal, in Pakistan, alas, this is not the case and so as it is in the public realm, we felt compelled to include this piece and hope you will find merit in it :



Our textual religiosity


Dr Husnul Amin
Tuesday, April 02, 2013



Whereas an ever-growing number of Islamic social forces in the Muslim world are looking towards Turkey and its Justice and Development Party to replicate its workable model of democratisation as well as to imitate Islamic social movements like the Fethullah Gulen.

Countries like Tunisia and Egypt and their respective Islamist movements have positively revised their strategies taking inspiration from the Turkish model of society and statecraft in which both modern trends and Islamic values can coexist in the context of a pluralist society. Yet, one should not be surprised that this wisdom is not found in Pakistan and its self-righteous Islamist movements.

On the contrary, Pakistan and its Islamic forces (both intellectual and social) have gradually become irrelevant in the larger context of the Islam-state-society relationship. The future scene of state and societal configuration in relation to Islamic values will be determined and shaped by the Turkish model and not by the ‘Islamic’ republic of Pakistan. Modern Turkey symbolises this new trend and the Islamic cosmopolitan culture in Istanbul presents the microcosm of this Turkish model.

Based on my recent visit to Istanbul, I feel that the most interesting part of the recent Turkish upsurge is not restricted to its economic development and the strengthening of democratisation but mainly relates to achieving a considerably beautiful balance between Islam and the needs of a pluralist and open society. A society that feels pride in its Ottoman heritage, projects its art and music, welcomes its guests from diverse cultures and backgrounds and tolerates the manifestations of leisure and pleasure in the streets of Istanbul. At least for now, and in the foreseeable future, Turkey has left us far behind in the context of Islam’s role and function in a modern society.

If, on the one hand, the Turkish society has pushed back its military and Kemalist elite, on the other, it could develop a Turkified Islam that better accommodates the needs and concerns of Turkish society. In contrast, Pakistan – this ‘laboratory of Islam’ – has miserably failed in developing an indigenous and pragmatic understanding of Islam. It seems then that the framework of a modern Muslim society will be set by no other Muslim nation than Turkey.

Caught in a historical process of either transforming and controlling state and society or resolving intellectual subtleties, Islam in Pakistan seems to have lost its creative energy. Every intellectual effort ultimately ends up one way or the other in constructing an empire of ideas that is more exclusive, authoritative and absolutist. The struggle for authenticity and claims to the final truth of everyone’s interpretation could not liberate us from despondency and we failed to appreciate the needs of a cosmopolitan culture. The quiet revolution in Turkey – achieved by social movements like the Hizmet movement of Fethullah Gulen – preaches tolerance, freedom, equality and service to humanity.

Islam and society in Turkey, particularly in Istanbul, seem to have achieved a considerably attractive balance. In a number of problematic issues in the context of Islam-state and Islam-society relationships, we are all now bound to ultimately depend on the Turkish experience of an Islamic secularism. The Pakistani experience of top-down Islamisation and social control has nothing to contribute to the development of an emerging Islamic cosmopolitan culture across the Middle East. Despite our claims to authenticity and purity of Islam, as practiced in Pakistani society and manipulated by the state since its inception, the final scene is to be set and shaped by the everyday Islam/lived Islam more in the manner of the Turkish elites and the Turkish bazaar.

Here again the Pakistani religious scholarship engaged day and night in theological discourses and textual intricacies seems to have lost ground in terms of contributing to the emerging Muslim cosmopolitan culture. In the current religious landscape, even one of the few sane and rational voices, Ghamidi seems to have lost his original direction and has thus finally ventured into re-Islamisation of society.

The problem with Pakistani religious scholarship is that it tries to make sense and develop an understanding of Pakistan’s culture and society using a social theory mostly derived from doctrinal texts and not from everyday practice of common Muslims. Such efforts in our religious articulations to define, judge and explain society in the light of doctrinal sources have further complicated a set of otherwise simple and intelligible issues.

While walking in the streets and bazaars of Istanbul, my Turkish friend Osman, a volunteer of the Hizmet movement, had more clarity of the issues and problems confronted by the contemporary Muslim world than most of our religiously trained scholars. I found Osman, a clean-shaven young Turk, to be a devout Muslim. At prayer time, he would stop walking and offer his regular prayers. Then he would spend a considerable time in optional prayers and dhikr. But he did not give me the impression that I was bound to offer prayers with him. Apart from his inward religiosity and spirituality, Osman had the ability and openness of mind to accommodate the religious and cultural diversity all around him.

Hundreds of thousands of tourists from diverse cultures travel to Istanbul. A number of critical observations can be made on their dress codes and leisure practices in the streets of Istanbul. I constantly kept my gaze fixed on Osman’s response to these ‘immodesties’ as we in Pakistan would label them. Osman told me that this was the domain of personal freedoms and that any use of force by vigilante groups is counter-productive.

Upon my suggestion that most Pakistani religious circles consider ‘immodesty’ and ‘vulgarity’ to be the most daunting challenge to the Muslim world, my Turkish friend added that such things can be normally categorised as sins and it may not be a very good idea to attack them. He added that there are three major problems of the Muslim countries: iftiraq (internal divisions), faqr (poverty) and jahala (illiteracy). He declined to accept ‘immodesty’ as a concrete problem for the Muslim Ummah.

Nearly all Muslim societies are facing burgeoning new middle classes, migration, urbanisation and globalisation. These trajectories and processes have their own challenges and opportunities. We cannot stop the development of cities and the introduction of modern lifestyles associated with an urban environment. Cultural and economic globalisation come with their own challenges and opportunities.

The question is: how would you reconcile inward religiosity with the public manifestations of leisure, music, art and dress code? A textual treatment of these issues – approved by most Pakistani clergy – may never be open to the opportunity of a cosmopolitan culture. The Turkish experience of creating an intricate balance between Islam as a value system and the state and society seems to be the only logical response – at least in the near future.

To conclude, [COLOR="#0000CD"[COLOR="#B22222"]]too much engagement with intellectual rigour and doctrinal intricacies – as pursued in subcontinental Islamic scholarship – and top-down Islamisation campaigns including Zia’s Islamisation project, the Afghan jihad and vigilante activism of Islamist groups have distorted the intricate balance between Islam, local culture and society[/COLOR]. This ill-conceived and illogical struggle of social control and increasing share in the social power has resulted into a social reconfiguration characterised by intolerance and superficial religiosity.

Our intellectual and political elite fail to understand and define this distorted social configuration. Our religious clergy and extreme right-wing intelligentsia insist on accepting and explaining this situation. Despite our louder claims to project Pakistan as the leader of Islamic countries, our textual religiosity has finally dragged us to a point where we are only at the receiving end. I hope our Islamic social forces learn from the Turkish model[/COLOR].



The writer is a post-doctoral research fellow at the Berlin Graduate School of Muslim Cultures and Societies, Berlin, Germany.Email: husnulamin@yahoo.com

 

[muse]

The quiet revolution in Turkey – achieved by social movements like the Hizmet movement of Fethullah Gulen – preaches tolerance, freedom, equality and service to humanity.

That can't be "islamic" - there's nothing in it about punishments and it speaks of humanity and worse still it speaks of freedom -- this is just a bit too suspicious, after all, if this was Islam, how come it's not in Saudi Arabia?

 

[qamar1990]

What then is the magic solution? In a nutshell, we need to take the “Federation” part of this country’s title more seriously and stop worrying so much about the “Islamic” part.

now what are you saying that we should be republic of pakistan? instead of islamic republic of pakistan?

what is wrong with the "islamic" part of pakistan?
was pakistan not created so muslims of south asia can have country where the laws they make can based on their religion?

im just not getting what your really trying to say by posting that article or what ever it was.

 

[muse]

now what are you saying that we should be republic of pakistan? instead of islamic republic of pakistan?

what is wrong with the "islamic" part of pakistan?
was pakistan not created so muslims of south asia can have country where the laws they make can based on their religion?

im just not getting what your really trying to say by posting that article or what ever it was.

Can we first agree that "My country, when right, to be kept right, when wrong, to be set right" ? If yes, then lets proceed:

What is right about the "Islamic" part? please no hysterics, just make the case about what's right with this "Islamic" part.

And now to your second point (high lighted) - Pakistan is what you make of it, don't you think? So what should we make of it and WHY?

 

[qamar1990]

Can we first agree that "My country, when right, to be kept right, when wrong, to be set right" ? If yes, then lets proceed:

ok i agree.

What is right about the "Islamic" part? please no hysterics, just make the case about what's right with this "Islamic" part.

well its our culture, our way of life, the reason our country was created.
i mean not like we cant have an islamic democracy we certainly can. there is nothing islamic about pakistan besides its population, even in an islamic republic there individual human rights , and every must be treated equal.

 

[qamar1990]

And now to your second point (high lighted) - Pakistan is what you make of it, don't you think? So what should we make of it and WHY?

yes it is and we made it an islamic republic because we are muslims.

i mean obviously we can turn it into a secular demoracy but why?
why lose our culture? our identity? im speaking from a secular point of view if i speak from a pakistani muslims point of view i could give many more reasons.

 

[illusion8]

Nice thread, and I hope @muse is able to find the answer. I do assume that he knows the answer and is trying to gauge it out of other members.


One thing that rankles me though is, if this is true.....which I think it is....

After World War II, colonial powers gave independence to many nations, including Pakistan, with a clear rationale or prime motive. At a very critical juncture in history, if states lose their rationale, they lose their right to survive

Two questions are important to answer the above-mentioned query. Who creates states and what is their rationale — i.e., the cause of their birth? The process of giving self-rule to new states was intentional and purposeful. British rulers, in congruence with the US, wanted to split India for their long-term interests in the region. In my opinion, Pakistan — the same way as the state of Israel — was created as an independent state to guard Western interests in the region. In both times of war and peace in history, Pakistan proved herself as the guardian of vested interests of Western powers. In return, Pakistan also got the liberty to do a number of things, including attaining nuclear capability. Throughout history, Pakistan changed herself with the changing demands of the West to fulfill her utility and her indispensability.

Thus, a militant, extremist, rigid and nuclear Pakistan was in the larger interests of Western powers, particularly to contain the Soviets and its allies, i.e., India. Now, the Western world has changed its policy towards the region where Pakistan is located and has demonetised its political currency by putting immense pressure on the country to change her course accordingly. But Pakistan seems reluctant.

Then, assuming that Pakistan has outlived it's purpose owing to the demise of the Soviet Union and India has remained true to her Non aligned goals - is it that the West is out to cut it back to size or make it powerless?

Because for all practical purposes the West has delineated itself from Pakistan and could it be that Pakistan's leaders are not aware of that fact or if they are aware are being pursuing it non the less?