I Feel Like Orphan After Musharraf
By Gul Raiz • Aug 18th, 2008 • Category: Politics • 23 CommentsThe man who resurrected the country from the ashes after 1999, the man who pulled the country out of despair, exasperation, frustration and agony and showed the light at the end of the tunnel has gone with grim face bidding farewell to the well being of the country. The man has gone and now the rats are dancing.
Even now when he could break this assembly of clowns in a moment and when he could take back the NRO from Zardari and when he could do any thing to sustain his rule and power, the man Musharraf thought high of the post of President and sacrifice his personality over the the prospect of the clashes between the pillars of the state.
Can Zardari and Nawaz Sharif or any other politician for that matter could show that selflessness and sagacity? Their history gives us the answer when they fought with each other bitterly and savagely throughout the nineties and now as their mutual target has gone, they are all set to skin each other alive.
Even after the looters came on the scene after 18th February, I felt not much apprehension as the savior was there at the top, but now he has gone too.
I am orphan.
Trackback URL
|
|
|
Thanks Gul. Wonderful words for a man of courage.
We can only thank him like that. Wish he has read your words.
Well said Gul.
Look below what stupid and incompetent people he left behind to run country affairs. For this, we should not blame him but our people
PM’s performance leaves much to be desired
Friday, August 01, 2008
By Azim M Mian
WASHINGTON: Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani’s address to the Council on Foreign Relations was a historic event in so many ways. It was his first-ever interaction with a US think tank as Prime Minister.
No doubt the prime minister read out his well-written speech without any major flaws in which Pakistan’s viewpoint was advocated nicely. But during the Question-Answer session, his performance as a leader, as an advocate of Pakistan and as prime minister was disappointing for the select audience of about 300 people.
The audience included former US ambassadors, diplomats, think tank directors, fellows and associates, South Asia experts, about 30 Pakistani-Americans, senior journalists from Pakistan, American and the Indian media and some diplomats from other countries.
Among the audience were some distinguished personalities including US Ambassador to Pakistan, Ann Paterson, former ambassador Wendy Chamberlain, former assistant secretary of state for South Asia Karl Inderfurth, Director of CSIS and former ambassador Terestia Schaffer, former ambassador Howard Schaffer, Prof. Emeritus and former Dean of Columbia University, Ainslie Embree, Director Asia Programme of Woodrow Wilson Centre Robert Hathway and many other distinguished Americans who have interest and expertise on South Asia.
They wanted to know where the American leadership needed to correct its action plan to combat terrorism and what is Pakistani view on the current complex situation in the region. But they were disappointed when Prime Minister Gilani told them that the Americans know Pakistan better than him and that “America can do any thing it wants.”
The Question-Answer session began with a question by the CFR President Richard Haas about the current challenges and Pakistan’s willingness and ability to face it.
Reacting to the Prime Minister’s detached response, Richard Haas said, “Let me then come back to the question somewhat differently. Pakistan obviously faces tremendous problems in terms of internal security, which you spoke of in your speech. The fact that the problem has grown to the extent it has, that it’s become as bad as it has, is this because of the weakness of the state of Pakistan? Is this because historically the state has been unwilling to take on these challenges? Why has Pakistan, in a sense, gotten into the security challenge that it faces?
What the Prime Minister told the highly knowledgeable select audience, in response to the question is the following:
GILANI: “That we have inherited. This is not the problem of only these three to four months, because you are also fighting the war in Afghanistan for the last five years, and you can also see — realise the difficulties you are facing. And this is not a war which is a normal war. It is a guerrilla war. And nobody is trained for a guerrilla war. But certainly now we have a challenge and with God Almighty’s blessing, we will be able to overcome the problems.”
HAASS: Again, it seems to me that to attribute so much of the domestic political history of Pakistan to the United States, we could argue the history, but it also seems to me potentially dangerous, simply because I think you exaggerate our influence. And I would think that there need to be questions the Pakistanis raise for themselves about political culture in Pakistan, about the role of the army.
It’s as much a statement as a question. You don’t have to answer that. But since you alluded to it, let me take it one step further here, which is, you obviously inherited a situation where you have a former general, now President Musharraf, in power. Is this a situation that you believe is sustainable? Is this something that you believe can be continued in a way that is consistent with the growth of democracy, or do you see Mr. Musharraf staying in office as somehow inconsistent with the future of Pakistani democracy?
GILANI: Actually, you are considering Mr. Musharraf as a president of the United States. This is not the case, because there is a parliamentary form of government; here is a presidential form of government. And you can compare me with Gordon Brown, the prime minister of U.K., or –
HAASS: I hope your political numbers are higher. (Laughter.)
GILANI: — no, no — and Manmohan Singh, who is the prime minister of India. Therefore, we have inherited the Westminster system, a parliamentary form of government where the chief executive is the prime minister and not the president.
HAASS: I understand.
Let me ask the question a different way, then — (laughter) — beyond President Musharraf, which is whether you think now in the army there is a broader acceptance of a more limited role for the army. Do you think now the coming generation of army officers accepts the notion that their proper role is in the barracks rather than in politics?
GILANI: Certainly, yes. Because of the February 18 election of this year, we have a mandate to the moderate forces, to the democratic forces in Pakistan. And the moderate forces and the democratic forces, they have formed the government. And therefore the people have voted against dictatorship and for democracy — the chief of the army staff is highly professional and is fully supporting the democracy.
HAASS: One of our senior fellows at the Council on Foreign Relations, Dan Markey, has recently produced a study called Securing Pakistan’s Tribal Belt, and it is a study about FATA and what needs to be done there. And one of the questions I would have is whether it is possible to imagine a different relationship between the central government and the FATA, and essentially to end the unique status of the FATA and to integrate it more into Pakistan like other parts of the country.
GILANI: Exactly, you really don’t know the exact position of FATA. FATA is already under the federal government. And there are two governments. There’s a provincial government and the federal government. And the FATA is under the federal government. Therefore it is controlled by the governor, who is the nominee of the federal government. Therefore it is under the federal government.
HAASS: I understand that it is under the federal government. But it also enjoys, shall we say, a slightly different status or reality than other parts of the country.
GILANI: They have — (inaudible) — and they have senators. And interestingly all — (inaudible) — and the senators are supporting me.
HAASS: Okay.
Well, we wish you well with that. (Laughter.)
GILANI: In fact, the ISI is quite established in Pakistan. And it is — it has good relations with the United States; our ISI, and they have worked together. (Laughter, applause.)
And at the same time, it is under the prime minister. Therefore they will do only what I want them to do.
(Cross talk.)
Again short answer; you can ask me another question.
HAASS: So if we have differences or problems with ISI, we now know who to go to.
GILANI: If there are differences -
HAASS: — or problems. So you actually feel now that ISI -
GILANI: ISI or the army or — (inaudible) — is under the civilian government. And that is under the chief executive.
HAASS: Is there any question or issue that you wish you had been asked, that you’re dying to talk about? Because we’ve covered a lot of ground. Obviously we could go on with -
GILANI: I’ll tell you one thing.
HAASS: Sure. Yes, sir.
GILANI: Basically I’m a journalist. (Laughter.) And therefore it hardly matters whether — anybody can ask me any questions.
HAASS: Yes. We can ask questions. (Laughter.) It’s your responses though which are interesting
GILANI: This is my ninth appointment. And I still have one more.
HAASS: Well, in that case, you need to save your energy, sir, and pace yourself. It’s going to be hard to sustain this rate then for too many more years.
At the conclusion of the programme, many distinguished Americans like Karl Inderfurth, Robert Hathway, Teresita Schaffer, Howard Schaffer, Ainslie Ember and others looked disappointed. Some said that they know much more about Pakistan and its challenges and solutions than Prime Minister Gilani of Pakistan. A handful of Pakistani-Americans who were at the gathering looked even more frustrated.
The people of Pakistan can make their own conclusions after reading the 8,800-word official transcript released by the CFR.
Thanks to Emaan
Wow!!!
Thats our ELECTED PM…..
That interview is so utterly humiliating.
very well written Gul. Thanks. I totally agree. one of the best leaders we’ve had. and most of the remaining ones are just clowns! and even the current ones. he has the personality and he had the courage. i wish he hadn’t gone and stayed for the betterment of the nation!!
AOM
Please let me know, atleast one positive news comming out of Pakikstan, if there is any ?
The best news I learned so far is, bald is growing hair.
I am so glad for Musharaff that he resigned respectfully, The poor guy may rest and spend some quality time with his family.
Good News for orphans ” Dad will be back in Politics “
I am also waiting for some good news from Pakistan and I am also like you a non-resident Pakistani but last month I visited Pakistan and went to Lahore, Islamabad and Karachi and was amazed that how much the local govts. (Thanks to Musharraf) have changed/improved the infrastructures of these cities and how much have these cities being beautified and developed.
I think that this is the best news for any NRP
And the bad news is I have been barred on this blog with the name of Aashique of Musharraf and now compelled to use new version of my name as AOM.
I think because honourable Musharraf is no more here so the concept of free media also gone with him. This is so sad in this perspective as well.
Saeed Khan, Assalumu Alaikum,
I read your comments yesterday on the other article. My apology for not responding. You did very well to put the issue of the Ahmadiyya cult very well and it is greatly appreciated. I also read your comments on the Sheik Aziz murder in Kashmir. I do agree with you and and maybe we can discuss this another time. Now I need to get some rest. First it was watching the speech by President Musharraf at 3 AM our time and then making sure we were ready for the Hurricane Fay which is upon us here in Florida.
Take care and keep on expressing your views. They are greatly appreciated.
Regards
Just for a Change
But let there be spaces in your togetherness and let the winds of the heavens dance between you. Love one another but make not a bond of love: let it rather be a moving sea between the shores of your souls.
I have learned silence from the talkative, toleration from the intolerant, and kindness from the unkind; yet, strange, I am ungrateful to those teachers.
If the other person injures you, you may forget the injury; but if you injure him you will always remember.
When you are joyous, look deep into your heart and you shall find it is only that which has given you sorrow that is giving you joy. When you are sorrowful look again in your heart, and you shall see that in truth you are weeping for that which has been your delight.
Khalil Gibran
Dr . alshaer, WS
So nice of you, rest well. Allah keep you under his protection.
It will be a long debate to talk on Musharraf and his 9 years again. Every body gave his view and reserves rights for it. I have nothing to bother with it.
But Mr. Author, so you became oprhan when one dictator was compelled to resign. Don’t ever think or show us that he did in the best interest of Pakistan. It was pressure from Army and USA that now you have to say Good Bye. If not believes then just answer me why in the history of Pakistan, COAS General Kiyani went to PMA Kakool for celebrating the function. It was just to avoid President Office Function…nothing else. It was a clear message from Army/Navy/PAF that please go now and let just to live in civilians respectfully. Regardless of all, Musharraf gave severe damage to Army Institution in these 9 years. Now thanks Allah, Army is trying to ger back their good status to fight against terrorism.
Don’t worry, our Economy is not gona down in any way. Things are not as tough as it was portrayed by Musharraf in his speech. Try to sit with any fair economist and he will tell you in detail. I can’t because you will say that I’m against Musharraf. I ain’t but I’m against dictatorship. It is very clear and I will stand on point forever.
So Mr. Orphan, try to search new Father…people like you always waits for imported fathers. Dictators are always imported and have to leave one day. As a writer, try to use gentleman language instead of using words like dancing like rats etc etc.
After reading your second last paragraph…. Simply give me answer of one Question:
Who bring them back???? You, I, Public or Mr Musharraf. If he then how you can give credit that he not cancelled NRO, not restored Justice…. Mr Oprhan… he did insane with public in last moments also by not restoring Judges or cancelling NRO. He not did any kind of favour with us by not cancelling his actions.
I’m supporter of democracy but why he let them to come back??? Can any body answer. Can any body tell me why he not cancelled his previous actions and restored Judiciary, even he could do it. It means he saved culprits… What we call a man who saved culprits from last 9 years and still saved them.
Who were Aftab Sherpao, Faisal Saleh Hayat, Sher Afghan, Ishrat Ul Ibbad, Ch Shujaat, Sh. Rasheed, Humayun Akhtar, Ijaz Ul Haq, Mushahid Hussain and many more… HIS MINISTERS or ALL THOSE WHO WERE ON THE HOT LIST OF NAB???? Please any body answer. There are lot things to show you about him and his real slogan PAKISTAN FIRST….But don’t give him any credit that he was PAAK and rest are culprits.
61 years have gone… We are still finding Leader…. Leader never says that I’m a leader. He proves himself as a Leader. Just see example of Imam Khumaini, Nelson madella…. In worlds…. personalities do journey from PRISONER TO PRESIDENT. Here journey is from PRESIDENT TO PRISONER… Why. It is not because system is wrong. it is because there is some thing wrong with these personalities.
Allah! please duide us on right path. Path which is clear from our own interests and greediness. A Path which is for every body and that can lead to a pure bright Dawn. Please let us show the right direction. We are all Pakistanis and in pain. Please help us in this critical time. Pleaseeeeee!
The apex of President Pervez Musharraf’s nine-year stint in power was his visit to the United States in 2006.
By Isambard Wilkinson in Islamabad
Last Updated: 5:12PM BST 18 Aug 2008
He swaggered about Washington promoting his memoirs and revealed why he had forged an alliance with the US after the September 11 attacks: he said America had threatened to “bomb Pakistan back to the Stone Age”.
His regime was defined by his relationship to Washington: it made him, and, finally it undid him.
Last year the White House referred to Mr Musharraf as “an indispensable ally”. This week Condoleezza Rice described him in the past tense, saying that he “has been a good ally”. It was, as they say in Texas, adios.
In some ways, his exit is symptomatic of Western policy failure. A British and American-backed plan that envisaged his party sharing power with the Pakistan People’s Party was blown apart with the brutal realities of Pakistani politics: the leader, Benazir Bhutto was assassinated, and, the two parties loathed each other.
But in many ways the secular-minded general, who is devoted to his two Pekinese dogs and partial to a drink and the occasional cigarette, had served his purpose.
He had, ostensibly, reversed Pakistan’s pro-Taliban stance, handed over a handful of key al-Qa’eda leaders and espoused an acceptable liberalism that was dubbed “enlightened moderation”.
However, due to a series of bungles, and not without irony because he was perceived as a “Bush puppet”, he had also become unpopular at home at a time of rampant Anti-Americanism and when Washington needed a popular, democratic government in Islamabad to persuade Pakistanis of their own need to tackle extremism.
Washington, keen to burnish its credentials as a harbinger of global democracy, had set its key ally in the “war on terror” an almost impossible task last year: to step down as army chief, hold free and fair elections and to remain in power. In the end he had to go as he had failed to establish his own power-base with the military no longer at his disposal.
“Musharraf had been the first choice of the West, but now they had understood that Musharraf had to go,” said Tanvir Ahmad Khan, a former foreign minister of Pakistan. And as the resignation has proved, he was, unwillingly, part of the transition to democracy.
But his relationship with Washington had always been tricky. The general saw his job as striking a balance between placating the United States, which has bankrolled his regime and pledged $1.5 billion (£860 million) in military aid, and living amid Pakistan’s powerful pro-jihad Islamic groups, which had tried three times to kill him and only just failed.
The West continued to believe that he clandestinely allowed military intelligence to play a double game by pursuing Pakistan’s ambitions for “strategic depth” in Afghanistan through its jihadi proxies.
During his regime the North West Frontier Province, a sensitive area on the Afghan border, was “Talibanised”.
The reverses continued. He presided over economic growth but it ended in unemployment and increases in the prices of basic foodstuffs, sparking riots.
A large military operation to contain a low-level insurgency in Balochistan, where a tribal chief, Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti, was killed by the armed forces, also proved unpopular.
For Western ears, Mr Musharraf used to say, that being a military strongman he had “unity of command”.
But after he stepped down as army chief last November, the army had withdrawn its political support for Mr Musharraf in its bid to allow the government to prosper and to mend its own reputation that has been battered by years of military rule and the unpopular prosecution of “America’s war”.
The civilian government must step into the void to “taking ownership” of counter-terrorism operations and set aside partisan rivalry to provide the country with stability.
Most do not expect the two partners to hold the coalition government together for long.
In theory, the current, all-powerful chief of army staff, General Ashfaq Kiyani, retains that command and the confidence of Washington.
Pakistani forces have continued to conduct a bloody campaign against militants on the tribal areas.
However, the West continues to suspect elements of Pakistan’s military intelligence of aiding al-Qa’eda and Taliban militants. A civilian government may be even less successful than Mr Musharraf in reining in these religious, nationalist elements who regard jihadis as a “strategic asset”.
Since the civilian government came to power hardline nationalists in the Pakistani establishment have rekindled hostilities with India along the de facto border of disputed Kashmir.
Without the restraining hand of Mr Musharraf, whose greatest achievement was perhaps advancing peace talks with India, relations between the two nuclear-armed neighbours could once again deteriorate.
Previous civilian governments have been undermined and removed by the military. With Mr Musharraf gone, once again the army and a civilian government will have to negotiate a balance of power.
And now lets us all push a campaign to nominate our beloved ex-Presidente for a NOBEL PRIZE
for his achievements.
Gul you are too late to feel it, when i was able to understand things and read some pieces of history and when i read speech of Sheed-e-millat Khan Liaqat Ali Khan in General Assembly, i felt like the nation has became orphan right after the death of Mohammad Ali Jinnah.
Pakistanis are some how proven to be thankless and very unfortunate people that they have always failed to recognise their true patriots and saviours. There was Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto that he was hanged; another able daughter of Pakistan Miss Benazir Bhutto was doomed before she could bloom and now when a real saviour came up; he came, nurtured this nation and against all the odds made it possible to infer a new life and enlightened democracy in the country; He was presenting it to the nation all on a plate. He had handed over and was trying to take a rear seat just to relish his achievements and see Pakistan flourishing.
The thankless that we are; we wanted to see him go down defunct and humiliated.Because we did not want to say him;thank you.
Here where I live; in our daily life, you simply board any bus and buy a ticket from the driver; you may hear the exchange of word thank you being said at least four times and it is repeated every time when ever some one boards a bus. Here, only the people love life and know how to conduct grace fully.
It is very Sad that he had to go like this!
[Woh andheyroon main ajab ik roshni ka khawab tha]
[ who ujaloun main chiragh e noor lehranay ka naam]
Yes, Thank you for using another sect to burn Lal Mosque people, Thank you for overthrowing judiciary in Pakistan, thank you for overriding constitution, thanks for economic reform that put pakistan under immense pressure, thank you for being volunteer in so called war on terror, thanks for giving support to USA to kill people in Northern areas, Thanks for sending home the elected president, thanks for selling pakistanis to FBI, Thanks for every thing you did Mr ex-President.
I think people are still sleeping in Pakistan, Wake up buddies, Time to defend Pakistan in person.
Brush aside the dirty Pakistani politics and look what’s happening in our neighbourhood, our selfish media (both print and electronics) is still involved in Musharraf bashing ( a malicious propaganda campaign) and it has closed eyes from any other news. This is completely unprofessional attitude.
I have just depicted three news (all from today’s paper) from a renowned Indian newspaper, which gives you an idea that the time has ripened for Pakistan to actively involved in Kashmir problem once again. If our stupid politicians wasted this opportunity like they did in 1962 and 1965, this opportunity will never come back.
Please look below:-
Kashmir needs freedom from India: Arundhati Roy
SRINAGAR: Activist and author Arundhati Roy, who was present at the massive Monday rally, said that the people of Kashmir have made themselves abundantly clear. ( Watch )
“And if no one is listening then it is because they don’t want to hear. Because this is a referendum. People don’t need anyone to represent them; they are representing themselves. As somebody who has followed people’s movements and who has been in rallies and at the heart or the edge of things, I don’t think you can dispute what you see here,” she told TOI .
Roy also said that “since the 1930s, there have been debates and disputes about who has the right to represent the Kashmiri people, whether it was Hari Singh or Sheikh Abdullah or someone else. And the debate continues till today whether it is the Hurriyat or some other party.”
Then she added, “But I think today the people have represented themselves.”
Roy concluded with words, “India needs azadi from Kashmir as much as Kashmir needs azadi from India.”
300 comments on this story. Read them and post your own.
Print EMail Discuss New Bookmark/Share
Save Write to Editor
We are Pakistanis, says Syed Geelani
SRINAGAR: Hardline separatist leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani on Monday demanded the merger of Jammu and Kashmir with Pakistan, as leaders of the moderate Hurriyat faction spoke about independence and a dialogue over the state.
Addressing a mammoth gathering at the tourist reception centre here, Gillani said there was “no solution to the Kashmir issue other than merger with Pakistan”.
“We are Pakistanis and Pakistan is us because we are tied with the country through Islam,” he roared, as the crowd cheered him and chanted: “Hum Pakistani hain, Pakistan hamara hai” (We are Pakistanis, Pakistan is ours).
Taking a dig at the moderate Hurriyat leaders who shared the stage with him, Gillani said the leadership issue of the Kashmiri separatist movement was “solved today”.
“Do you have faith in my leadership? I will be faithful to you till my death and will carry everyone along,” he said, as the crowd applauded him shouting in unison “zaroor” (certainly).
Srinagar streets on Monday danced to the tune of ‘‘jeeve jeeve Pakistan” as frenzied youth chanted ‘‘teri jaan meri jaan, Pakistan, Pakistan” and the Polo Ground resonated to the rhythm of ‘‘teri mandi, meri mandi, Rawalpindi, Rawalpindi”.
Hardliner Syed Ali Shah Geelani has every reason to be mighty pleased with the turn of events which marked the success of his efforts to put himself and his mentors in Islamabad back in the J&K equation just as they appeared to have been pushed to the margins.
But then came the twist. Giddy by the success of bringing secession back on the agenda, Geelani committed the indiscretion of coronating himself as the leader of the ‘azadi’ flock.
Quite a bungle it was. The boast pricked the sensitive egos of the rest in the secessionist choir and the rift became visible within no time, perhaps creating an opening for the government to try and salvage its chestnuts out of the fire. Geelani’s unilateralism left the likes of Mirwaiz Umer Farooq, Yasin Malik and Shabbir Shah miffed and they left the scene without submitting the memorandum to the UN Military Observer’s office, for which the march was called in the first place.
The strong bid to appropriate the ‘sadarat’ of separatism, which has parties of myriad hues, was said to have sent others in quick meetings to hammer out their responses. ‘‘The chinks are there to see,” said an analyst. Geelani sensed the resentment as he addressed a press conference in the evening to dub his ‘I am the sole leader of the tehreek’ claim as a ‘‘slip of tongue”. He apologised, said the movement was bigger than the leaders and the struggle would continue, reposing faith in the coordination committee of Hurriyat factions.
If the octogenarian leader sought to make amends, it had already reduced the fourth show of strength since the Amarnath issue triggered a surge in sentiments in the form of march to UN office into a game in one-upmanship. Yasin Malik had walked out of the coordination panel’s meet on Sunday at Geelani’s residence by reportedly expressing reservations on the pro-Pakistan agenda being pushed by others.
The Hurriyat factions have been trying to put up a united face, having led campaigns like ‘Muzaffarabad chalo’, mourning at Idgah for Sheikh Abdul Aziz who died in police firing and ‘Pampore chalo’ on Saturday. Now, all eyes are on how the other components of the separatist camp take Geelani’s apology. The separatists have already announced that the agitation would continue, rebuffing speculation that the march to UN could end the demonstrations which have brought Srinagar to a halt for over a month. On display on Monday was the fact that the fresh surge in ‘azadi’ sentiment is driven by a religious rightwing tilt for across the border.
Related Stories
Amarnath row: Protesters agree to hold talks
J&K: 2 lakh people court arrest
Curfew relaxed in Jammu; Srinagar calm
We are Pakistanis, says Geelani
Kashmiris play to UN gallery
Secessionists’ plan hatched in Pak, says Home Secy
Hurriyat leaders ask UN to intervene in J&K issue
PM calls all political parties to resolve J&K issue
March plan to UN office has Srinagar on edge
Governor invites Amarnath Sangarsh Samiti for talks
After 20 days, valley opens for business
‘Local Muslims stood by Amarnath yatris’
Cong weighs options to end Amarnath impasse
Govt using excessive force in J&K: Omar Abdullah
Centre should involve Hurriyat in peace process: PDP
Comments to the Editor
Now we know whats the reason that terrorist are s | Read
19 Aug 2008, 2216 hrs IST, By Sonjay, India
Isn’t this the same “environmental activist” who | Read
19 Aug 2008, 2215 hrs IST, By Mathew, USA
“I think people of kashmir have represented thems | Read
19 Aug 2008, 2210 hrs IST, By Rajiv, New Delhi
View all comments >>
SWAMINOMICS
Independence Day for Kashmir
On August 15, India celebrated independence from the British Raj. But Kashmiris staged a bandh demanding independence from India. A day symbolising the end of colonialism in India became a day symbolising Indian colonialism in the Valley.
As a liberal, i dislike ruling people against their will. True, nation-building is a difficult and complex exercise, and initial resistance can give way to the integration of regional aspirations into a larger national identity — the end of Tamil secessionism was a classical example of this.
I was once hopeful of Kashmir’s integration, but after six decades of effort, Kashmiri alienation looks greater than ever. India seeks to integrate with Kashmir, not rule it colonially. Yet, the parallels between British rule in India and Indian rule in Kashmir have become too close for my comfort.
Many Indians say that Kashmir legally became an integral part of India when the maharaja of the state signed the instrument of accession. Alas, such legalisms become irrelevant when ground realities change. Indian kings and princes, including the Mughals, acceded to the British Raj. The documents they signed became irrelevant when Indians launched an independence movement.
The British insisted for a long time that India was an integral part of their Empire, the jewel in its crown, and would never be given up. Imperialist Blimps remained in denial for decades. I fear we are in similar denial on Kashmir.
The politically correct story of the maharaja’s accession ignores a devastating parallel event. Just as Kashmir had a Hindu maharaja ruling over a Muslim majority, Junagadh had a Muslim nawab ruling over a Hindu majority. The Hindu maharaja acceded to India, and the Muslim nawab to Pakistan.
But while India claimed that the Kashmiri accession to India was sacred, it did not accept Junagadh’s accession to Pakistan. India sent troops into Junagadh, just as Pakistan sent troops into Kashmir. The difference was that Pakistan lacked the military means to intervene in Junagadh, while India was able to send troops into Srinagar. The Junagadh nawab fled to Pakistan, whereas the Kashmir maharaja sat tight. India’s double standard on Junagadh and Kashmir was breathtaking.
Do you think the people of Junagadh would have integrated with Pakistan after six decades of genuine Pakistani effort? No? Then can you really be confident that Kashmiris will stop demanding azaadi and integrate with India?
The British came to India uninvited. By contrast, Sheikh Abdullah, the most popular politician in Kashmir, supported accession to India subject to ratification by a plebiscite. But his heart lay in independence for Kashmir, and he soon began manoeuvering towards that end. He was jailed by Nehru, who then declared Kashmir’s accession was final and no longer required ratification by a plebiscite. The fact that Kashmir had a Muslim majority was held to be irrelevant, since India was a secular country empowering citizens through democracy
Dear Farid Masood,
We have lived and spent enough of our time in cuckoo’s land riding on the cavalry of our emotions that we are quite habitual of. Let us come down and try to land on the tarmac of… but which tarmac. Will any nation will accept us and offer us a landing with our flags of extremism and hatred that very carry.
Have we ever thought who is paying for these decoy flags of our hatred that we are hoisting in Northern FATA area? Try to look behind the foggy screens. It is all paid for by our enemies. The people who are carrying the flag staff seen wearing the religious garbs are heftily paid pursuing their rapacious greed and Norco traders. There is Satan preaching the Gospel and using the religion as his strong weapon.
By hoisting of the decoy flags in FATA by our stooges, serves US cause; It gives her the reason and the pretext to stay at our next door in the name of fighting Terrorism and to prolong its stay to advance her hegemonic ambitions. Our Pashtoon Maliks and other stooges are benefited with their perks and are free to run their Narcotic businesses. Please do not get eluded that some one is serving God here.
When these stooges carry out the assigned task; it marks their presence and thus are called the ‘terrorist are breeding terrorism in the safe havens’.
Musharraf received some 10 billions dollars to show that Pakistan is trying its best to quell the terrorism and now the new government has been sanctioned some 15 billions dollar to do the same job what all was being done by the security forces under Musharraf.
The show of terrorism is that it goes on. US find the reason to stay on; that one by one the countries are coming in US fold. Middle East gone in fold, Iraq, Afghanistan all occupied and now just be ready that soon we will find our self in the streets of Peshawar and Rawalpindi made to stand with our hands up facing wall and legs sprawled; Yankees searching our clothes.
And if against all the odds if Musharraf has done some thing good. We must thank him… for a change…at least.
Truely said…
But now is the time for us to carry on, the aim of Musharraf. He has shown us the path and now we have to take Pakistan on the road of prosperity..!!!!!!!!!