I shall just take two quotes from the TOI report.
Chetan Bhagat:
“After all, peace isn’t touchy-feely organic farming. What do Pakistanis feel about Ajmal Kasab? Do Pakistanis want him prosecuted too?’’
I can understand a management type who wrote about three idiots not being really upto nuff where real Pakistanis are concerned. But I am curious about how organic farming has become touchy-feely and what does it have to do with peace/'unpeace'. Is regular farming like peace? And does the Pakistani attitude towards Kasab a yardstick for what they think about peace? What about before November 2008? Did they not exist? Aren’t those valid areas to explore?
Mohammed Hanif:
“I have yet to meet any Pakistani in his right mind who does not want Kasab prosecuted. As for the Mumbai terror attacks, we were scared out of our wits as we watched TV. Because we knew that if this was happening in Mumbai, it could just as easily take place in Pakistan. And that’s exactly what’s happening. How could anyone who saw the Mumbai terror attacks feel good about the incident?’’
How does Hanif define a right mind? This guy was with the Pakistani airforce; later he worked for the BBC’s Urdu radio service in London. He moved to Karachi last year. It shows, Is he saying that because something like 26/11 took place in India, it could happen in Pakistan?
There is no question about anyone feeling good, and even mentioning it is rather strange. It only buffers the image certain Indians have about Pakistan.
If this is what bringing about peace is, then let’s not leave it to people who cannot go beyond pangas.
FV,
ReplyDeleteI browsed your blog after a gap of around 10 days , in all this time whenever i saw a news item , I was wondering how this was being covered in your blog , any way let me start with what I really wanted to say, I will come to Chetan Bhagat and Punjabis first. While Bhagat might understand urban upper middle class life in India, he is yet to build awareness around religious and political issues; I didn’t find his comment with any depth. I have one word for him "Tukka" in Punjabi means fluke ...he is a fluke on all aspects, one too many from JEE to CAT to Goldman Sachs and to five point someone, the guy is a pure "tukka"
Now on Mumbai, the "lunatics" of Mumbai are at it again and as always we are debating whether they are right in abusing Badshah or not ...Point Blank , I am ashamed we bear such characters in our country's politics and which politician will have the balls to arrest them , I can only think of Mayawati
Third on Chotte Nawab, I have a mentor/friend/guide in ISKCON Vrindavan, we have often have discussions on the Bhagwad Geeta and its teachings. I have always quoted him numerous examples of where "Karma " is defeated by "Janam" (contrary to Geeta's key message)and he has asked me to look at the long term prespective and not short term...I took again the example of Chotte Nawab , if are "Born" nawab , you will get padamshree faster than the "Karma" ...I will watch how anyone with better "karma" gets Padma award faster. One ad fits right on him from asian paints (he is thrir brand ambassador)…Sunil Babu ….Nayi gaadi, Nayi Missez and Naya ………
Fourth,. Despite the lunatics we bear , we have some huge neutralizing factors like Vishal Bhardwaj, Thank God I watched Ishqiya …….. ….seriously making Dil to Baccha hai in 2010 is like slap in the face for all Jing Bang Musicians ……
Thank God I am Indian, for I will keep watching this unprecedented range of intellect and emotional all in one town..From Gulzar to Thackeray ….they all live in one city
“I have yet to meet any Pakistani in his right mind who does not want Kasab prosecuted. As for the Mumbai terror attacks, we were scared out of our wits as we watched TV."
ReplyDeleteBeing quite the dissembler like the rest of liars in the Pakistani armed forces, there are a few sleights of hand by Mr. Hanif here.
If "everyone in their right mind" in Pakistan wants to see Kasaab prosecuted, perhaps Mr. Hanif can explain why the 26/11 trial in Pakistan has been a complete farce and makes a mockery of justice....Since 26/11, the Pakistani govt. has shifted around judges, adjourned the trial, changed the prosecutor, accused India of meddling in Balochistan as an excuse to stop the trial...I could go on.
So, Mr. Hanif, if Pakistanis wanted to see justice for 26/11, your government would be taking the repeated requests from the Indian govt. to provide justice seriously. But the reality is that Pakistanis have no intention of bringing anyone responsible for 26/11 to book. On the contrary, the average feeling among the type of crowd that admired Zaid Hamid is uniformly one of pride in 26/11 and how it killed the "evil jews and hindus" and not one atom of remorse or introspection.
People of Mr. Hanif's ilk need to understand that Indians have long stopped listening to all the lies the Pakistani establishment tells to the world at large (you know it is a lie when their lips move).
Indians are watching all the actions of the Pakistani government and it is very clear that the Pakistani Establishment is under pressure from the army to not proceed with 26/11. Does this look like India is the aggressor here as the Pakistanis repeatedly like to wail in public? Don't any of these people in the Pakistani establishment have a conscience or humanity in them?
Manish:
ReplyDeleteNice to be in your thoughts!
The Bhagat-Hanif dialogue was hardly expected to add depth, but even at the lightweight level it came across as rather juvenile. It is “tukka” stuff that people are interested in.
About Mumbai, as I said the Badshah will have the last laugh; it does not lessen the way the lunatics operate or think. No, Mayawati would not arrest them. Scratch the surface etc…
LOL @Saif comment. It is always janam-janam ka start hai in or society. Karma is a nice word. I’ll add ‘bharam’ (delusion) as well.
I have not watched Ishqiya, but I think ‘Dil To…’ could have been sung by an Indian. I am serious.
Thanks for the thumbs up for my city. Andher nagri hai, par meri hai…
- - -
Al:
Our issues with Hanif are different. Pakistan is not expected to help us. We need to understand that. Although they have got some blokes in their custody. We goofed up badly, and continue to do so. Our PM goofed up on Baluchistan, and this was not used as an excuse by tem. They have held this position for a while now.
I do not expect the general populace to feel remorse for any terrorist act; they can at best sympathise and in the case of Pakistanis empathise because they are dealing with it on a daily basis, which Hanif does not seem to see or talk about when he is busy with this ‘peace’.
I am more interested in how we are handling the case, and watch how we are making a mockery of it at every step.
Having said this, at a deep level the animosity between the two countries is there and we should not fool ourselves and each other. Is it because of the Zaid Hamids and Modis?
FV, ZH and Modi are recent phenomena -- the hatred is older than that, probably traces back to pre-independence times. However, I do not view that as anyone's fault, India was in darkness for centuries and people were not self-aware save a few leaders who we still adore today.
ReplyDeleteI think this is how it all fell out:
The partition happened and it was devastating on both sides. The loss of family members and property for people on either side was immense, so was the love of people on either side of the border.
However, a few groups on both sides refused to forgive the other side for what they saw as "intentional pogrom", and some of them are right too. In Pakistan, the Army was formed with the motto "Faith, Piety, and Jihad in the name of Allah" under the mistaken impression that the Pakistani army (of all people) was the protector of Islam.
I would like to know who told them Islam needed protection...it probably does, but only from people like those in the Pakistani Army.
The Pakistani Army and the Pakistani establishment is highly feudal, because unlike India, Pakistan never bothered to break down the feudal structure to empower the common pakistani.
Over the years, this feudal group ended up controlling the military and civilian aspects of Pakistani power, and the problem was they were/are a highly corrupt and incompetent bunch. The Pakistani Army and the feudals found India a nice distraction to offer the Pakistani public whenever they began to notice that their life in Pakistan sucked.
Then came the cold war, and Gen. Zia and Charlie Wilson and the CIA all started the heroin trade in Afghanisthan to fund a covert war against the soviets. this was the start of the really bad stuff we see in Pakistan today -- young children were brainwashed into becoming gun-toting jihadis who were to be killed mercilessly by the same people that brainwashed them. This brainwashing has a very fascist nature to it, and is exactly the kind of rhetoric we see from Zaid Hamid - the similarities between ZH's movement and the fascist movement pre-world-war II in Europe are many.
Cold war got over, USA declared victory and left these incompetent and corrupt feudals fuming, as they had to fend for themselves and they had no capabilities on that front, so they had to create a public distraction in Pakistan, and started the "Jihad for Kashmir" program in a big way in the early nineties.
Now, everyone knows that the Pakistani establishment has no skills to govern pakistan, but those in power would rather extend their hold by creating violent jihad motivations for the young people by feeding their paranoia that "islam is in danger" with lots of nonsense....but it all starts with the Pakistani army pretending that it a legitimate "guardian of Islam", and all muslims are getting a bad name because of their behaviour in the global stage.
I do not see any hope for change in the behaviour in the Pakistani army leadership or the civilian leadership -- they just want to retain power to protect their land and riches in Pakistan, but want to do that by begging other countries for aid, and we are where we are with them now.
Manish-ji, Mayawati is an ill-educated feudal who is lording over her fellow dalits by building big statues of herself. I will believe she is a Leader of the People when she places the interests of the people over her need for self-aggrandizement.
ReplyDeleteI was ashamed and shocked to hear that Mayawati wanted a few crores of rupees for..........special protection for her statues. She is just Lalu Prasad in drag (slang for female costume), if you ask me.
Al:
ReplyDeleteWow, that was a good encapsulation of history. I am pretty much with you regarding feudalism, the trade-off, history of animosity...
I do not view Pakistani democrats kindly, though. And I do not believe that the army had any jihadi motives (it is killing them).
There are too many aspects here, but thanks.
PS: Why 'Manish-ji' and not 'FV-ji'?:)Gee, jest wondering...
FV-ji, I made fun of Manish-ji initially, so did not want him to think I was being disrespectful, just being droll.
ReplyDeleteAl-ji :-)
FV-ji-ji, I am with you on your view of my earlier explanation of history :-)
ReplyDeleteI was being more kind to the Pakistani civil society/democrats than I normally would be, but I consider all of them part of the feudal elite that has just destroyed their civil society for furthering the interests of their own clan.
This is not to say the rest of the Pakistanis outside the feudal have any good thoughts about India --- the Feudal Elite has completely corrupted the mind of the aam-aadmi to use them as cannon fodder in their so-called "geopolitical strategy" and a mish-mash religious fascism and armed rebellion all rolled into one.
FV wrote:
ReplyDelete"And I do not believe that the army had any jihadi motives (it is killing them). "
Here is the problem I have with that view:
The Security Establishment is Janus-faced -- there is a "reasonable face" of the army that wants to help the world, feed starving children, etc., and there is this ISI, which comes under the purview of the Army, as the Army's intelligence wing.
What is "destroying the Army" in Pakistan is the "charity-groups" such a Lashkar-e-toiba, whose cadre pick up their guns after being brainwashed by the people in Jamaa-ud-dawa. The army just has to shut down its ISI cadre and start from a clean slate to stop the decline of the army.
The Army has more guns than the ISI does, so it defies belief that they cannot shut down the monster that is "destroying Pakistan".
The other part of the history that I did not touch up on in my earlier post is that Pakistan has been a rentier state for all of its post-independence times.
In the 1960s, there were pictures in Time and Newsweek (you can go look at them in their Archives) showing Pakistan as the shining city on the hill (never mind that all of it was on free money and loans from the ex-colonial powers and the USA) while India was full of dogs, cows, dirt, and sickness...which was true too.
The problem was that this also fed into the fantasy that caused Jinnah to start pushing the "Two-Nation Theory" --- in that Fantasy, a person just became superior just like that by switching to Islam, and the disparity in the image of India and Pakistan caused Pakistan to go on foolish adventures like the war they lost in 1965.
Then, this Pakistani Fantasy of being the "Fortress of Islam" made them treated the lives of their Bengali Brethren in then East-Pakistan with contempt, committing genocide with the help of their American masters.
Through all this, the Pakistani establishment was focussed on "improving its image" to look better than India, while forgetting to look at the basics, such as food security and water security and the basics of life for close to a billion people.
They focussed all their energies on "Taking back Kashmir"...Take back Kashmir to what, no one bothered to ask themselves, it appears.
Now we have the citizens of Gilgit and Baltistan, in Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir, voicing their hatred for the Pakistani military and ISI, which has thrown them out of their villages and allowed the Punjabi Taliban groups such as LeT and JuD to take over entire towns and villages in PoK.
Yes, I was a little mild on the Pakistanis in my earlier post and pruned my words unnecessarily.
Al,
ReplyDeleteMy perception from your posting is - your argument carries an unstated assumption about Pakistani Military and ISI being a monolithic entitiy following a well scripted strategy (anti India or otherwise). You may need to re-check your assumption. Both the Pakistani military establishment and ISI follow their own internal "power structural" dynamics. India hatred is a part (and just a part, mind you) of it. From a Pakistani perspective - the more worrisome part would be subjugation of Pakistani political class to various Power centres in Pakistani armed establishment. A praticularly complicating factor has been American twin interests in the region - Pakistan as a market for its Defence industry and a controlling stake in Afghanistan. Neverthless, from a Pakistani perspective, Military has been *the* problem. Another thing, a sense I am developing so far about post Musharraf period is - Musharraf at least had a good level of control on the military , under the current political ruling in the splintered Pakistani defence establishment is running amok. Perhaps, with too many "Ronins" demanding their share of flesh. While we are at it , you might also want to look at a different perspective on 26/11 Mumbai attacks put forth by George Friedman from stratfor here at : http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20081201_strategic_motivations_mumbai_attack. (Not something that I would completely agree with but a different perspective, neverthless).
Cheers,
Mahesh.
"My perception from your posting is - your argument carries an unstated assumption about Pakistani Military and ISI being a monolithic entitiy following a well scripted strategy (anti India or otherwise). "
ReplyDeleteIf all the entities have problems with India, it stops being relevant whether the Military is a monolithic entry or not. The Pakistani military makes pakistani foreign policy. Period. Let me know if you want a reference to such an article written by someone from the army itself.
"You may need to re-check your assumption. "
One of us needs to recheck our assumptions :-)
"Both the Pakistani military establishment and ISI follow their own internal "power structural" dynamics. India hatred is a part (and just a part, mind you) of it."
Fine. Let us assume that your assumption of "internal dynamics" allowing multiple groups does exist.
Let us say that there exist three classes of people in Pakistan: pro-India indifferent-India and anti-India.
Now, let us consider the external manifestation of Pakistan's view of India, namely terrorism, and consider which of these groups would be involved.
Clearly, it must be the indifferent-India and anti-India crowd involved, since the pro-India crowd would not (by your definition).
Let us accept that Pakistan's behaviour towards India is the sum-total of all such groups in Pakistan.
Given Pakistan's unremittingly hostile attitude towards India, which shows no signs of change, the pro-India groups in India have no influence when it comes to anti-India behaviour. From an analytical standpoint, these good Pakistanis are not relevant when it comes to Indo-Pakistani Dynamics.
Furthermore, I will repeat the same point I made earlier:
A "rogue faction of the ISI" is supposedly doing all these dastardly deeds while the Good Gen. Kiyani just sits around innocently rolling his cigarettes....okay, let us assume that such is the case.
If so, the so-called "Pakistani constitution" claims that the Pakistani Army exerts total control over the ISI, which means all that Kiyani has to do is shutdown ISI operations temporarily (he need not even announce it to the world) and clean up the ISI, and "voila", the ISI is under the Army control.
People can pretend all they want that it is a matter of Pakistani ability and not Pakistani will.
If there is Pakistani will to clean up the ISI, then the Pakistani constitution gives the army the ability to clean it up, and anyone who claims otherwise needs to either accept that
(1) Pakistan is no democracy and controlled by the army
and
(2) The Army has no intention of shutting down the ISI and jihadi groups because it finds them useful.
So, basically, your observation that "Pakistani army is not monolitic" is irrelevant to analyzing Indo-Pakistani dynamics.
"Musharraf at least had a good level of control on the military , under the current political ruling in the splintered Pakistani defence establishment is running amok."
ReplyDeleteMahesh, That is the bigger problem.
The Army has lost control of Pakistan, and so there is no point talking to the army....but if the army is the most powerful entity in Pakistan, where does that leave India?
Should we talk to some group in Pakistani with guns just because they call themselves the army, and not other groups that call themselves the Good Taliban? Once no side has total control of Pakistan, all of them become equally valuable in terms of influencing Pakistani behaviour.
The downside of that conclusion is that India can only pretend to talk to Pakistan, because there is no authoritative group on the other side to talk to.
At the same time, not talking to Pakistan allows Pakistan to claim that "the US war on terror is failing because of India's threat at Pakistan's eastern borders" allows them to proclaim that there is a "nuclear flashpoint in South Asia", which comes with another set of problems.
The Pakistani army's death-clock has started ticking -- they can do what is right for them even if it hurts in the short- and medium-term, accept friendship with India in the long term.
Or they can just have their large intestine digest their small intestine with myriad quasi-military jihadi groups going out of control...as always, the choice has always been before the Pakistanis....but knowing the choice and making it are two different things.
Al,
ReplyDeleteYou said :
"If all the entities have problems with India, it stops being relevant whether the Military is a monolithic entry or not. The Pakistani military makes pakistani foreign policy. Period. Let me know if you want a reference to such an article written by someone from the army itself."
Forget completely authoring the foreign policy, the Pakistani military has been unable to do anything about the drone attacks on its own soil. About your point - "If all the entities have problems with India, it stops being relevant whether the Military is a monolithic entry or not" my responses below answer it.
You said :
"
Fine. Let us assume that your assumption of "internal dynamics" allowing multiple groups does exist.
Let us say that there exist three classes of people in Pakistan: pro-India indifferent-India and anti-India.
Now, let us consider the external manifestation of Pakistan's view of India, namely terrorism, and consider which of these groups would be involved."
Do you seriously think terrorism flourished in India only because of Pakistani aid ? And which flavour of terrorism ? Kashmir ? Punjab ? Assam ? Major Purohit ? Trishul weilding Sadhus ? Tripura ? Jihadi Nuts ? I don't deny Pakistani military / ISI involvement - but ascribing ISI supernatural powers and omnipotent/omnipresent identity is not just downright naive but (even more) dangerous as the larger problems get ignored. Speaking about external manifestation of Pakistan's View about India - Doesn't Pakistani and Indian troops reduction along the border qualify to become external manifestation as well ?
You said :
"Given Pakistan's unremittingly hostile attitude towards India, which shows no signs of change, the pro-India groups in India have no influence when it comes to anti-India behaviour. From an analytical standpoint, these good Pakistanis are not relevant when it comes to Indo-Pakistani Dynamics."
Yes, tragically true but somewhat incomplete picture. The peaceniks have been a rather inconsequential force on *both* sides of the border.
You said :
"Furthermore, I will repeat the same point I made earlier:
A "rogue faction of the ISI" is supposedly doing all these dastardly deeds while the Good Gen. Kiyani just sits around innocently rolling his cigarettes....okay, let us assume that such is the case.
If so, the so-called "Pakistani constitution" claims that the Pakistani Army exerts total control over the ISI, which means all that Kiyani has to do is shutdown ISI operations temporarily (he need not even announce it to the world) and clean up the ISI, and "voila", the ISI is under the Army control.
People can pretend all they want that it is a matter of Pakistani ability and not Pakistani will.
If there is Pakistani will to clean up the ISI, then the Pakistani constitution gives the army the ability to clean it up, and anyone who claims otherwise needs to either accept that
(1) Pakistan is no democracy and controlled by the army
and
(2) The Army has no intention of shutting down the ISI and jihadi groups because it finds them useful."
Don't you think it would be rather naive in expecting a country to disband and clean up its intelligence agencies ? Show me which country has ever been able to do it - unless , of course, we are talking about revolution. Speaking about constitution - my own Indian constitution guarantees me a plethora of rights , how many of these are really fulfilled ?
We can go on and on about how Pakistan is this and ISI is that, but that is hardly going to serve anything useful. Nothing other diplomacy and peace pursued with dogged patience will really achieve anything.
Cheers,
Mahesh.
Al,
ReplyDeleteYou said :
"The Army has lost control of Pakistan, and so there is no point talking to the army....but if the army is the most powerful entity in Pakistan, where does that leave India?
Should we talk to some group in Pakistani with guns just because they call themselves the army, and not other groups that call themselves the Good Taliban? Once no side has total control of Pakistan, all of them become equally valuable in terms of influencing Pakistani behaviour."
Why should we legitimise Pakistani Military's extra constitutional aspirations and role talking to them ? What are foreign secretaries for ? At the moment our best bet is to adapt a calm and patient approach agressively pursuing Multi Track Diplomacy. Actually, the hostile climate between two countries has been a great loss for the Trade relations. IMHO, China has played the anti India card subtly and in the process bagged several large Infrastructure development contracts in Pakistan. With a reasonably better relationship between two countries we could had been bidding for some of those contracts.
Cheers,
Mahesh.