Claiming Jinnah’s mantle: Musharraf joins the queue

October 2, 2010

jinnah flagThe minute I entered the elegant book-lined club in central London where Pervez Musharraf was about to launch his political career, it was clear who was to dominate the proceedings – Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Quaid-e-Azam, Founder of the Nation, Father of Pakistan. In his trademark peaked Jinnah cap, it was his photo alone which was hanging prominently on the platform where the former military ruler was to speak; and his photo on the little entrance ticket they gave you to get past security.

It was his spirit which was invoked even in the name of Musharraf’s political party — his All Pakistan Muslim League (APML) was a deliberate echo of the pre-independence All India Muslim League, through which Jinnah created the state of Pakistan in 1947.

 It was Jinnah’s speech of August 11, 1947 that Musharraf cited as one of the guiding principles of the APML, with its most famous lines: ”You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State.”

Musharraf quoted a verse too from Allama Muhammad Iqbal, the poet-philosopher who imagined Pakistan as a place where what he saw as the true spirit of Islam – equality, peace and justice — would flourish. And it was to that idealistic vision that Musharraf appealed when he promised to fight poverty and corruption, end the domination of the feudal elite, and bring true freedom and economic well-being to the poor masses of Pakistan.

Appealing stuff. The problem is that every politician does it. Everyone invokes the spirit of Jinnah; everyone promises to improve the lot of the poor; everyone says he or she is the true democrat. Musharraf — who says he will go back to Pakistan before the next election due by 2013 come what may (and that includes possible arrest and assassination) is just the latest in a long line of politicians queuing up for Jinnah’s mantle. The problem is who are we – or more to the point – who are Pakistan’s voters – to believe?

It is a problem that cuts to the heart of Pakistan’s current political turmoil. Who are the true democrats? The progressives? The representatives of the poor? The inheritors of the poetic idealism of Iqbal, and the more pragmatic constitutionalism of Jinnah who used his background as a lawyer to create a country?

Start at the crudest caricature of Pakistani politics today. On one side, you have the “forces of democracy” in the two main parties – the ruling Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) of the late Benazir Bhutto and the main opposition Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) (PML-N) of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif.  On the other, you have the military which have dominated Pakistan for much of its life and which has grown ever more powerful after taking the lead in providing emergency relief following Pakistan’s devastating floods.

At its simplest level, you should be able to divide them into two camps – pro-democracy and anti-democracy.

But it does not work as simply as that. The main democratic parties are dominated by feudal elites which are accused of protecting  the interests of the rich over the poor regardless of their political platforms.  They are dominated by families who inherit rather than win political power - the PPP was founded by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto; and since Benazir Bhutto’s death her husband, Asif Ali Zardari has become co-party leader with their son Bilawal.  

The military tend to be more meritocratic – the current army chief, General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, rose through the ranks from a lower middle class Punjabi family. The army sees itself as closer to the people than many political leaders with their alleged corruption and pursuit of personal gain, and therefore the true defenders of the nation created by Jinnah. In some ways more democratic.  Yet never elected.

It was to this latter view that Musharraf was appealing when he launched his political programme promising to improve the lot of the poor.  The west, he said, was only interested in elections.  Instead it should look at how a leader performed for his people.

“A military man can be democratic, which I think I was,” he said, “a feudal man can be the biggest dictator.”

There is no easy answer to that argument. But having been forced to think about the nature of democracy after being hit by the full force of the political debate in  Pakistan when I went there to cover the floods last month, I would hazard two suggestions.

Democracy is not just about good governance, although good governance is important. It is about putting up with decisions you don’t like — and sometimes  incompetent performance — and deciding you will try to vote the government out of office in the next election. 

The current political debate in Pakistan about the perceived failures of the PPP-led government is focusing only on governance.  What would happen, theoretically, if the government suddenly discovered good governance but made decisions the army did not like?

You can make a similar argument in Afghanistan. U.S. criticisms of the administration of President Hamid Karzaifocus entirely on governance and corruption. If, theoretically, Karzai ended corruption and implemented good governance but then forged ahead with policies the United States and its allies did not like (eg on Iran, Taliban peace talks) would Washington be happy?

More importantly in the context of democracy, what do most Pakistanis actually think – and especially the rural poor in whose name so much of Pakistan’s political debate is framed?  Listening to Musharraf in that elegant central London club, while his expensively suited supporters chanted “Pervez Musharraf! Zindabad!”, it occurred to me to wish we could have flown over a few of the victims of Pakistan’s floods and asked them what they wanted and what they thought about everyting that was being said.

And I’d like to have known what Jinnah thought too.

Comments

Jinnah ended up splitting India in two pieces. Now looks like Musharraf will do the same to Pakistan. Both project secular faces to the outside world, while colluding with radicals to support their cause. Musharraf fathered Harkut Al Ansar, a terrorist group. Jinnah would not have hesitated to seek terrorism if it was available to him. Jinnah symbolized Pakistan at the time of independence. Musharraf definitely symbolizes what Pakistan today is – duplicitous, double dealing and projecting lies to manipulate others. Good luck to Pakistan.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive
 

Jinnah ended up splitting India in two pieces. Now looks like Musharraf will do the same to Pakistan. Both project secular faces to the outside world, while colluding with radicals to support their cause. Musharraf fathered Harkut Al Ansar, a terrorist group. Jinnah would not have hesitated to seek terrorism if it was available to him. Jinnah symbolized Pakistan at the time of independence. Musharraf definitely symbolizes what Pakistan today is – duplicitous, double dealing and projecting lies to manipulate others. Good luck to Pakistan.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive
 

When Musharraf & army were in charge, the Pakistanis yelled “democracy, democracy, democracy”. Now they have a democratically elected govt & they seem to be yelling “army, army army”. Musharraf is nothing but a two-faced, selfish & lying manipulator, who has shown in the past that he is capable of selling Pakistan in order to achieve his personal ambitions. And the funny thing is that he could very well become the next President/PM/Dictator of Pakistan.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

Mullah, Militant and Musharaff…Jinnah would have never imagined in his wildest of dreams for such a future of his Pakistan.

Posted by 777xxx777 | Report as abusive
 

@KPSingh01, well said.
A man of low calibre, not deserving to be an officer in the army, let alone a General. The guy has no self respect and today we have a number of them Tony blare is another one. He has joined the zionists camp long before he was booted out of Pakistan.
Pakistani generals are not known for their loylty towards retired fellow officer. I think at his age he has gone crackers, I mean loco, if he wants to present himself for impeachment and takes the risk to be blown up.
Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

Musharraf is the worst double dealer and back stabber. Do not even let him into Pakistan. Pakistan is burning today because of his double deals. Even AQ Khan hates him from the bottom of his heart. No one knows what Musharraf was trying to accomplish. He is good at turning people against each other and letting them choke each other to death. Be careful about this guy. He is better off staying in UK.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive
 

Musharraf had a combination of brain and balls, an intelligent guy and clever too.

Posted by Umairpk | Report as abusive
 

each successive leader seems to be sorse than the previous one. What hope then for Iqbal’s Pakistan.

Posted by rrdas | Report as abusive
 

Musharaff has already escaped several assasination attempts. It is interesting to see how he will manage a judiciary, that he sacks, that same judiciary, now probably wanting capital punishment charges and the militants, I also see them wanting to resume their work against him, since they failed many times before.

One wonders if the Army is going to protect Musharaff, in light of the judiciary’s and oppositions strong desire to see Musharaff hanged for dissolving the judiciary, staging the coup and invoking martial law.

If musharaff returns, it will embolden the militants to restrengthen to fight the army and civilian institutions and this will have a weakening affect on the internal politics and security of Pakistan and lead to further destabilization of Pakistan.

The only way that mushie can return is if he jails the judiciary, jails Sharif again, jails Zardari and re-implements Pak Army Mafia junta rule.

I have a feeling that Kayani and the pindi boyz have been talking about bringing Besharaff back to his original job, so that the Army can keep their own stooge and return to status quo pre-911, as they have entertained the U.S. long enough and entertained dabbling with democracy long enough.

If the lying double dealing Musharaff comes back, he will start another war with India and destroy any shred of democracy in Pakistan.

He is a marked man by many detractors in Pakistan and his personal safety would require a monumentally continual security effort.

Posted by G-W | Report as abusive
 

Umair, you said:

“Musharraf had a combination of brain and balls, an intelligent guy and clever too.
Posted by Umairpk ”

–>You forgot to include traits like: liar, gross mis-calculator of military tactics and WIMP. He rolled over like a lazy wimpy pig when the American cowboys showed up at his door step right after 911 and jduring Kargil.

There are numerous clips of Mushie caught lying, saying different things on the same topic to different people….

Posted by G-W | Report as abusive
 

OH..BTW Umair, note one of my Pakistani collegues like Mushie and they had nothing good to say. But one of them even said we would have been better making “Uncle Cricket” (Cricket ChaCha)our president.

Posted by G-W | Report as abusive
 

The first Pakistan dictator spent his last days in the UK, and the last one is safer having an ice cream loafing about on Edgware road , than in Pakistan Prisons. I reckon AQ Khan would recommend that Musharaf Din should be tried on high treason and then Mr Zardari should pardon him.
Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

Musharraf might have brain and balls. But he thought with the latter more than his brain. That is why Pakistan is burning today.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive
 

@KPSingh01
“Musharraf might have brain and balls.”

I doubt he has any brains. Had he really had any brains then he would have never pre-empted Kargil. He launched Kargil as an ambitious war to grab land from India and ended up as getting PA soldiers being f****d by Indian counterparts. And when Pakistan government at that time disowned PA actions on international stage then out of frustration he just imposed martial law and grabbed power and even then when he ambitiously tried to collide directly with judiciary he saw his own demise. I guess he had too much of balls and too little of brains.

Posted by 777xxx777 | Report as abusive
 

People talk highly of the back channel diplomacy set up by Musharraf to solve the Kashmir problem. I am glad it did not go through. Who knows what this back stabber had in his mind? I think he was laying a trap for India, after trying Kargil and failing in that attempt. I would never trust someone like him who has a known track record of cheating, lying openly in public, setting things on fire and pretending to be fire fighting. He is a confident liar. He can wriggle out of any difficult situation with his lies. I have seen his interviews and there is one and only one thing he is good at – lying with confidence and covering it up.

If he returns to Pakistan, he will shamelessly court the radicals this time. He knows they are the ones angry with him. And using them he can have a bargaining chip. He is good at dancing around pretending to solve a problem and then sneaking out at the right time. He is trying to capitalize on the public anger at the existing democratic parties in Pakistan.

A military man in civil uniform – that sounds very much like a wolf in a sheep skin.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive
 

Singh,

Most of my indian family calls mushie “chootah”, or “pakah chootah”.

He is incapable of speaking truth, guided by supremicist ideals, warped interpretation of his role in all matter.

Lying, conniving, backstabbing and BACKPEDDLNG is what mushie does best. He is neither a leader, nor tactician, nor a strategist, nor is he courageous, other than that he is a great soldier and a great human being.

Posted by G-W | Report as abusive
 

@”Musharraf had a combination of brain and balls, an intelligent guy and clever too” Posted by Umairpk

He was so darn intelligent that he planned & executed the Kargil offensive, which is considered as one of the biggest strategic, millitary & political blunders in history. And he had so much balls that when Richard Armitage threatened him to “bomb Pakistan back to the stone age”, he wet his pants & switched sides immediately.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

Mushie was the only one to have the guts to play a double game with the yanks. I don’t admire him that much despite the fact I met him first back in 1999 just before Kargil war when he visited our school as Army chief. Born in Delhi he is still a ‘Hindustura’ and much of his traits of wheeling and dealing tells us how generally Indians are.
On AQ Khan issue he did not back off, on many other things most of the time he showed a finger to the west.

Posted by Umairpk | Report as abusive
 

@Umair,

Its funny you think Besharaff had the guts to double deal the west, you call it guts, most people would call it a gamble and Richard Armitage called his bluff and handed his pork head back to him on a dish, when he was allegedly threatened to put Pakistan back to the stone age.

It is really amusing that you equate lying with having guts and that was a very unIslamic thing for you say.

I always thought it took courage to speak the truth.

Not to insult Jackals, but Jackals always act tough when they are in a pack, but when you separate them and put an elephant or a lion in front of them, they put their tail between their legs and move on to the next easy prey, until they re-gather.

Posted by G-W | Report as abusive
 

Umairpk: “Born in Delhi he is still a ‘Hindustura’ and much of his traits of wheeling and dealing tells us how generally Indians are.
On AQ Khan issue he did not back off, on many other things most of the time he showed a finger to the west.”

Hee, Hee.. AQ Khan is also from India. So was Zia Ul Haq. Looks like they are Indian agents sent into screw Pakistan up. Read the book, “Nuclear Deception” by Adrian Levy and Catherine Clark. It spells out how Musharraf pissed AQ Khan off by rounding up all scientists from his inner circle. Then Musharraf clandestinely tried to reach AQ Khan out for a compromise. He would have him arrested and the offer him a Presidential pardon. AQ Khan prepared a ledger filled with all secrets that showed Pak military’s heavy involvement in nuclear proliferation to rogue nations. He sent it off with his daughter when Musharraf put him under house arrest. Having been double crossed by Mushy, AQ Khan literally told Musharraf’ messenger to go lick his b&lls. It is all there in the book.

Musharraf also founded the Harkut Al Ansar and supported another terrorist organization with an aim to take on Kashmir. But he projected a secular image at the same time.

I am not making any of it up. Read the book I have recommended. It spills out everything about Pakistan’s games.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive
 

Umairpk
“Born in Delhi he is still a ‘Hindustura’ and much of his traits of wheeling and dealing tells us how generally Indians are.”

***Umair, are you really serious about this comment? What’s up with this mentality. Is it buried in your unconscious mind and shows its head once in while or is it a permanent feature? In addition to KP Singh’s examples, there are so many Indian born ordinary Muslims who moved to Pakistan. I am wondering how you treat such Pakistanis in your neighborhood, who were born in India and unfortunately moved to Pakistan.

There is another poster here who calls Musharraf Indian born fifth columnist to insult him.

Muslims who moved to Pakistan or lived in India are both having hard time. In India sometimes they are called Pakistanis and in Pakistan, Indian born Muslims are called Indian to insult them.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

Myra

“Democracy is not just about good governance, although good governance is important. It is about putting up with decisions you don’t like…”
***Golden words Myra. Very well said. if you add secular feature to the democracy such as Indian, this becomes even more complex. Ayodhya Verdict is a recent example of masses putting up with the decisions in secular (at least on paper) Indian democracy.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

@”Mushie was the only one to have the guts to play a double game with the yanks” Posted by Umairpk

People with guts & integrity don’t play double games, scumbags do. I’m no admirer of Pashtuns but they at least had the guts to say “NO” when the US threatened to bomb them if they did not hand over Bin Laden, after 9/11. You guys suppported the Taliban & then stabbed them in the back and then after switching sides, you stabbed US/Nato in the back. These are not the traits of lions & tigers but of hyenas & jackals. This dupicity is a part of your heritage since centuries.

@”Born in Delhi he is still a ‘Hindustura’ and much of his traits of wheeling and dealing tells us how generally Indians are”

This comment says a lot more about your Pakistani mentality than anything else. I guess, after eliminating the Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Ahmadiyas, Shias etc from Pakistan, you’ll whole-heartedly support the elimination of “Hindustura” Muhajirs in your country. Of course, publicly you’ll “condemn” it.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

Umairpk: “Born in Delhi he is still a ‘Hindustura’ and much of his traits of wheeling and dealing tells us how generally Indians are.
On AQ Khan issue he did not back off, on many other things most of the time he showed a finger to the west.”

KP Singh said:
Hee, Hee.. AQ Khan is also from India. So was Zia Ul Haq.

So, if I may add, was MA Jinnah. Jinnah House is in Mumbai, not Lahore.

Can’t trust these Hindusturas ;-). (Thanks, I learnt a new word today.)

Regards,
Ganesh Prasad

Posted by prasadgc | Report as abusive
 

Pakistan’s first finance minister Malik Ghulam Mohammad was an Indian immigrant. The reason why I mention his name is because he ran a company in partnership with a Hindu before partition. It used to be called as Mahindra and Mohammad. After he moved to Pakistan, the company became Mahindra and Mahindra, which is a huge Indian conglomerate now. Here is a link about him:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malik_Ghula m_Muhammad

Zia Ul Haq was a student of St Steven’s college in Delhi.

AQ Khan emigrated from Bhopal.

Musharraf’s family emigrated to Pakistan from Delhi as well.

Former cricketer Asif Iqbal was from Hyderabad, Deccan. He played in Madras for sometime before moving to Pakistan.

Former Pakistani military general Aslam Beg is a Muhajir as well.

Here is a list of prominent immigrants from India to Pakistan:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mu hajir_people

I remember reading an article by an ex-army commander in Pakistan where he calls Muhajirs as Indian spies. I do not have the link to it unfortunately.

If Pakistan falls apart for any reason, I wonder where these Muhajirs will go. They left India to fulfill their dreams in Pakistan. Seeing Umair’s attitude, I wonder if that feeling is prevalent in Pakistan. Poor Indian Muslims. Many abandoned their wealth in India and ran to Pakistan. Now they will be looked at with suspicion on their loyalty to Pakistan.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive
 

Ganesh

Jinnah was born in Karachi so he is not an Indian that way!

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

Myra,

We do not find anything new in that any new politician in India/Pakistan puts up posters of founding fathers and boasts of making their dreams come true. But the end result is always same old.

For example Congress party in India boasts of being the force of freedom in India but the current CWG corruption has exposed Soniya and family’s greediness beyond any doubt. Congress has ruined the economy and in every industry they have created so much complexity so as to extract bribes from prevailing confusions, current hosh-posh of telecom equipment security in India is big example.

Same goes for Pakistan. Week response from government to floods, rumours of regime change, tensions with NATO, no direction whatsoever on what to do with terrorists, age old rhetoric of “Kashmir banega pakistan” (Musharaff in his several speeches claimed that Kashmir runs in his blood), rampant corruption by parliamentarians, and icing on cake is Pak cricketers getting caught in match fixing scandals AGAIN. I dont think “Musharaff Claiming Jinnah’s Mantle” is even the correct heading to this article. No big deals should be made out of Mushie’s Jinnah proclamations.

Posted by 777xxx777 | Report as abusive
 

Rehmat:
“Umair, are you really serious about this comment? What’s up with this mentality. Is it buried in your unconscious mind and shows its head once in while or is it a permanent feature? In addition to KP Singh’s examples, there are so many Indian born ordinary Muslims who moved to Pakistan. I am wondering how you treat such Pakistanis in your neighborhood, who were born in India and unfortunately moved to Pakistan.
There is another poster here who calls Musharraf Indian born fifth columnist to insult him.
Muslims who moved to Pakistan or lived in India are both having hard time. In India sometimes they are called Pakistanis and in Pakistan, Indian born Muslims are called Indian to insult them.”

-Rehmat, I have had the opprtunity to live and work abroad for two years, one of my roommate and colleague was from Mumbai and belong to family of a prominent Indian Muslim Scholar from Palanpur.
You have no need to overreact, current Indian PM Manmohan Singh was also born in Chakwal now in Pakistan and migrated to Amritsar after partition. So was former Indian PM I.K Gujral was I think from Jhelum, the hometown of current Pak Army chief Gen. Ashfaq Kayani.

The fact that a Delhi born General can rise thorugh the ranks and lead Pakistan Army is a testament that it is a merit based institution. Despite, Punjabi-Mohajir rivalry during 1999 coup all Punjabi commanders supported Musharraf because he was the COAS, despite being a Mohajir. Suffice it to say that we have great respect for Mohajirs, I even admire the MQM in Karachi which has stood up against feudalism.

Just as Muslims in India are sometimes called traitors, sometimes there is a reaction against Mohajirs in Pakistan as well. All you need to accept is the partition in 1947 was an event that had far reaching consequences for long term.

Posted by Umairpk | Report as abusive
 

Rehmat:
“Ayodhya Verdict is a recent example of masses putting up with the decisions in secular (at least on paper) Indian democracy.”

-Rehmat, as an Indian Muslim what do you think of people who state that Idea of Pakistan has failed. In 1947 the division of India was inevitable, India had to be divided into two parts one for Muslims and other for Hindus.
The 2010 Allahabad Highcourt verdict of dividing the Babri Masjid land also indicates that anything between Muslims and Hindus can only be divided into two parts. They cannot share it. In short Hindus and Muslims cannot co-exist? Is it true. Though my experience is otherwise, when overseas in our locality we had three Mosques as well as Mandirs. Hindus and Muslims co-existed but i think back in the subcontinent they cannot co-exist since a multicultural tolerant environment is absent both in India and Pakistan.

Posted by Umairpk | Report as abusive
 

Umair
“Suffice it to say that we have great respect for Mohajirs, I even admire the MQM in Karachi which has stood up against feudalism.”
***Come on now. I am not overeacting at all. What you said in this post is inconsistent with what you said earlier “Born in Delhi he is still a ‘Hindustura’ and much of his traits of wheeling and dealing tells us how generally Indians are”. I do not care about Musharraf or any other one person, “Hindustra” comment tell me that you have convinced yourself that anyone born in India will be like that.

“Just as Muslims in India are sometimes called traitors, sometimes there is a reaction against Mohajirs in Pakistan as well. All you need to accept is the partition in 1947 was an event that had far reaching consequences for long term.”
***True there are SOME people in India who do that. But I see that in Pakistan, you belong to those who do the same. So it was interesting to ask you why you do that. But you are covering it up that defending your original position.

If you look at it it is even more sad. Because, Muslims are a minority in India and are receiving this treatment. However, in Pakistan, muhajirs are Muslims and belong to the majority community.

The real equivalent of Muhajir in Pakistan is not Indian Muslims situtation. That would be comparing Hindus who migrated from Pakistan to India with Hindus left in Pakistan. In India, I have not seen or heard any Hindu who migrated from Pakistan being discriminated while that in Pakistan, Hindus are discriminated against.

Will respond to 2nd post later.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

@Umair
“The 2010 Allahabad Highcourt verdict of dividing the Babri Masjid land also indicates that anything between Muslims and Hindus can only be divided into two parts. They cannot share it. In short Hindus and Muslims cannot co-exist?”

I agree this situation existed in 1990s in India. But 20 years down the line things have changed a hell lot. The Gen Y of this nation doesn’t care about mandir or masjid, its our fools in New Delhi who want these to matter. The babri masjid was a non-functional and may be possibly not even a mosque at that time and hence a very very clear pointer that it was made a political issue by hindu leaders to fulfil their selfish means and may I say they succeeded to some extent as well. This would compare to “Kashmir banega Pakistan” rhetoric by Pakistani leaders. But the huge huge difference between India and Pakistan is that PEOPLE in India today want peace and progress and its the Gen Y that is slowly getting in command here in India. Today every other leader talks of progress for young and vibrant India. Unprecedented calm on streets on day of verdict, no curfew in a single city in whole of India is a big achievement on part of Indians who want to move on and ayodhya has probably lost its political value. What has happened has happened and cannot be changed and was indeed shameful. I being a minority among hindus feel ashamed of it when i think. But we have to look forward as history cannot be changed, however shameful it may be, but future has to be shaped, as brightly as possible. And today’s India represents its forward looking attitude. But yes I agree that those responsible for breaking the mosque in ayodhya should be punished severely (another court case is in progress for that). But tell me making a mosque or a temple will help any community have a better life OR will putting land to some good use like hospital, school, power generation facility, etc improve lives. I m not saying break all places of worship and do this but since the ayodhya incident has happened and we want to move forward in a progressive way. And yes most of Indians think that ayodhya land be put to some constructive use. So to your question above my answer is NO a big NO. Hindus and muslims CAN and ARE coexisting by and large happily in India. There were problems and there will remain problems because life’s second name is problem but any problem can be solved by joining hands and living peacefully. Although I know my opinion won’t change ur attitude towards India as u have been kind of a flip flop.

@Rehmat
“What you said in this post is inconsistent with what you said earlier”

Umair had been like that all the time like a flip flop. He changes positions as soon as he finds himself in a fix, instead of apologising. Only worthwhile thing he ever said was his dream of Pakistan becoming next Japan.

Posted by 777xxx777 | Report as abusive
 

@”The 2010 Allahabad Highcourt verdict of dividing the Babri Masjid land also indicates that anything between Muslims and Hindus can only be divided into two parts. They cannot share it. In short Hindus and Muslims cannot co-exist?” Posted by Umairpk

It’s your typical devisive & polarizing Pakistani mentality, which makes you look at things negatively. The High court verdict has actually spelled out that the site in Ayodhya be SHARED by Hindus & Muslims and you look at it, as being devided between the two.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

@Umair

Elaborating on my comment above, people like you can not live with anyone. First you’ll call out the minorities (hindus, chriatians etc), then you start calling out muslims who are not muslim enough for you (ahmadiyas, shias etc), then you’ll call out the non-punjabi sunnis (sindhis, pashtuns, balochs etc) & then you’ll start deviding amongst the punjabi sunnis as well. This kind of thinking is exactly the reason why your country is heading towards a civil war.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

@Umairpk
I like reading your comments, and I would urge you to stay course. For me you are not a stereo type intelectual. Keep it up, with time we all mature our judgements.
For me the leaders without any character have no credibility are not an asset for the people. I know that musharaf was not afraid of the threat he received from the USA, but his instant decision to play along and I purposely say play along with the yanks, gave the impression to George W that the man has blinked. As a leader you do not blink!! The former leaders of Pakistan would have kept the yank who brought the ultimatum, and not allowed him to see the daylight again. He did not act in this manner since he was playing the Indian rope trick. His performance in the AQ khan affair was equally shabby and this got him into the axis of Zionists, who all knew that he was putting up a very ordinary and cheap trick.Every Govt. in the world knew that Pakistan previous Govts had stated openly, not secretly, to develope the Islamic Bomb to protect all muslim States. The yanks are not that idiots, George W knew that the guy was lying but accepted his theatrical act to appease the American congress.
You have different view of the man and this should be accepted.
With regard to the transfer of refugees between India and Pakistan, let us say that due to the absence of indigenous urdu speaking community in Pakistan the migrants had difficulty in integrating whereas, the non muslims migrants to India were very adequately integrated. This is the explanation one reads and appears to be plausible. In Germany the integration of east with the west has been equaly arduous but was facilitated with the common German language.
Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

“@”The 2010 Allahabad Highcourt verdict of dividing the Babri Masjid land also indicates that anything between Muslims and Hindus can only be divided into two parts. They cannot share it. In short Hindus and Muslims cannot co-exist?” Posted by Umairpk

It’s your typical devisive & polarizing Pakistani mentality, which makes you look at things negatively. The High court verdict has actually spelled out that the site in Ayodhya be SHARED by Hindus & Muslims and you look at it, as being devided between the two.

Posted by Mortal1″

–>Thanks, Mortal, as a Hindu, even though Hindus were the predominant religion before India was invaded by Muslims and occupied, I still think it is a good and fair thing that Hindus and muslims share these sites. The historic reason for some of these sites even being muslim, is that Mosques were built on many Hindu sites that were torn down, hundreds of years ago. Those sites still had many hindus who held their sacredness in their hearts, despite some of them being madeover into mosques, despite that, as a Hindu, I still think sharing is the best policy.

I hope muslims here feel that way too.

Posted by G-W | Report as abusive
 

Mortal you said:

“@Umair

Elaborating on my comment above, people like you can not live with anyone. First you’ll call out the minorities (hindus, chriatians etc), then you start calling out muslims who are not muslim enough for you (ahmadiyas, shias etc), then you’ll call out the non-punjabi sunnis (sindhis, pashtuns, balochs etc) & then you’ll start deviding amongst the punjabi sunnis as well. This kind of thinking is exactly the reason why your country is heading towards a civil war.

Posted by Mortal1″

–>Mortal, Pakistan is a Sunni muslim nation. Most Sunni’s do not want to allow any minority to thrive and be any sort of political challenging force against the majority Sunni’s. Bangladesh and Kashmir are just recent escapades of Islamic Sunni Empire expansion, in the South Indian subcontinent. I don’t think the Sunni’s, on the greater whole of the group can live peacefully, as most have a blind rage against non-muslims and those other muslim sects that they feel they are in policitical competition with.

I am not saying that all Sunni’s are militants or extremists, but most extremists, if not all are Sunni and they are militant. Most Pakistani’s are Sunni and they are not extremist or militant in their views, but i think most are quietly apathetic with regards to extreme Sunni’s expanding empire through militantism and terrorism and often view them as mujahideen.

That is the problem, even guys like Umair, are staunch supporters of Sunni Empire expansion through any means, Kashmir agitation, Bengal and in general politically favor and backup anyone that inflicts violence upon non-muslims and Indians, especially.

What really makes me roll my eyes is when some people sanitize their sense of morality and religion and call these guys holy warriors, as these holy ones inflict murder and terrorism on innocent human beings.

Posted by G-W | Report as abusive
 

Umair says:

“The 2010 Allahabad Highcourt verdict of dividing the Babri Masjid land also indicates that anything between Muslims and Hindus can only be divided into two parts. They cannot share it. In short Hindus and Muslims cannot co-exist? Is it true. Though my experience is otherwise, when overseas in our locality we had three Mosques as well as Mandirs. Hindus and Muslims co-existed but i think back in the subcontinent they cannot co-exist since a multicultural tolerant environment is absent both in India and Pakistan.

–>You are wrong Umair, India IS multicultural, many levels more than Pakistan will ever be. India has Hindus, Jews, Muslims, Christians, Jain, Sikhs and many others, India is a testament that people of different faiths can get along. It is not perfect all the time, but for the most part, it is functioning, despsite outdated norms like the caste system.

While there has some hindu on muslim and muslim on hindu violence, these incidents were initiated by mobs, not by the state, nor are there any state laws that protect one religion over the other, such as blasphemy laws where any muslim can bring a frivolous claim against a Kaffir in Pakistan and get him beheaded…

India and Pakistan, culturally, still have lots of things in common that need fixing, there are too many to list here, but those issues with both are culturally based.

But when it comes to multiculturalism, you are out to lunch and on crack. The fact that Pakistan has chosen the path of religous exclusivity, this has brought much death on minorities in Pakistan.

All of the laws and cultural mindset of Pakistan has managed to phase Hinduism out of existence, almost from 15% at partition, to now barely 2%. I am sure through conversions, murder, attrition by agitation, you guys will destroy any trace of hindus and have the pure country you really want. Eventually, all of the Shiites will be destroyed too and then you will erase the history books and deny that they ever even existed.

You seem to forget the recent violence against the Ahmadiyas and other Shiites is the largest testament to lack of secularism in pakistan. These people and hindus are still sovereign as human beings.

As I said before, Pakistan has done a great job defining what a muslim is, Pakistan has just not put enough constitution effort into defining what a human being is…but that is all religiously justified in the quest of Sunni purity.

Posted by G-W | Report as abusive
 

@G-W
“as a Hindu, even though Hindus were the predominant religion before India was invaded by Muslims and occupied, I still think it is a good and fair thing that Hindus and muslims share these sites. The historic reason for some of these sites even being muslim, is that Mosques were built on many Hindu sites that were torn down, hundreds of years ago. Those sites still had many hindus who held their sacredness in their hearts, despite some of them being madeover into mosques, despite that, as a Hindu, I still think sharing is the best policy.”

If u are saying above words for disputed site in Ayodhya then u may be hindu but definitely not an Indian. I say this because if we are Indians then we have to respect and uphold the law of land. And before 1950 there was no constitution and before 1947 there was no India. So before 1947 even if some temple was broken or not, it just SHOULD NOT matter after 1947. I say this despite being a member of HUF (Hindu Undivided Family, as defined in Hindu civil LAW). After 1950 there was a muslim building in Ayodhya, functional or not is a different thing, but there was a muslim building for sure. And hindu leaders for their personal gains got it broken down. And high court has added insult to injury with its recent verdict where the judges got influenced by emotions rather than facts. I believe the muslims are doing right thing by taking it to SC. Now SC should take another 50 years to resolve it and hopefully the better sense will prevail and justice will be delivered. But yes it should not take less than 50 years to arrive at a decision simply for the sake of peace in country. Another 50 years and mandir-masjid generation will be on back seat and ipod ipad generation will completely take over and then probably mandi-masjid won’t be such a big issue. I know justice delayed is injustice and muslims in India are already facing a lot of injustices but in this case i hope muslims in India would agree with the delayed justice for the overall sake of peace in country and for assurance that future is bright for all.

Posted by 777xxx777 | Report as abusive
 

The 777 latest commentry is not related directly to the subject, but is more human than that from others including mine. This is a message of peace, the Solomans judgement andthough of little influence in real life, we should all apprecite it. I personally would say that he is a believer though he claims to be a hindu who according to my knowledge worship idols. But then I have already been told that I am ignorant of India the land of very rich and very poor, several languages and multiculture and a film industry bigger than holywood.
I salute these ideals and this even reminds me of the forgotten Gandhi.
Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

@Rex
“I personally would say that he is a believer though he claims to be a hindu who according to my knowledge worship idols. But then I have already been told that I am ignorant of India the land of very rich and very poor, several languages and multiculture and a film industry bigger than holywood”

U ASSUME that someone who worships idols CANNOT be good because he is not muslim and no non-muslim can be good and as per your language used above it seems u r SURPRISED that a hindu is talking to uphold the law of the nation and it is muslim community that happens to be the beneficiary. But had it been just opposite. Lets say muslims might have broken a temple and HC verdict after 60 years would have said to divide land between both communities, even then I would have said UPHOLD the LAW and give whole land to hindus. Becoz for me it is the nation and its laws and not the religion that has to be upheld. But I am extremely doubtful that u wud have liked it then also. For a lot of Indian muslims I am sure they would have thought like me but for you I am seriously doubtful.

You are one of those whose attitudes have pissed off everyone in world and people with such attitudes eventually lead to terrorism. (Your sacred german muslims are latest news in afghanistan and i won’t be surprised if one day u also do the same)

And yes u r extremely ignorant of India’s culture and laws because a lot of other ethnicities (Sikhs, Jains, Bhuddhs, etc) who do not worship idols but have wilfully agreed to follow hindu civil laws as they are one of the most humane and women empowering laws u can find on earth; so as per law all of them are more or less hindus only. Which of course u did not investigate deep…which again is laughable…thanks for laughter dose.. :)

And yes Thanks also for salutation although it has little meaning coming from you.

Posted by 777xxx777 | Report as abusive
 

“Born in Delhi he is still a ‘Hindustura’ and much of his traits of wheeling and dealing tells us how generally Indians are.-Umair

A disgusting comment which reveals an utterly racist attitude.

Called out, the scoundrel then tries to justify such racism by saying others are racist too and that some historical event over a half century ago justifies such racist attitudes today:

“Just as Muslims in India are sometimes called traitors, sometimes there is a reaction against Mohajirs in Pakistan as well. All you need to accept is the partition in 1947 was an event that had far reaching consequences for long term.” – Umair

=======

If the educated folks like Umair can think like this, is it any wonder minorities are getting butchered in Pakistan today? Striking parallels to the way that Nazis talked about Jews too. Their educated classes offered up similar justifications for the mistreatment of their minorities.

I wonder what Jinnah would say of Umair’s attitude today.

Posted by kEiThZ | Report as abusive
 

@777
We have a communication problem and I have posted my comments in my post to Dara. Perhaps we are from very different cultures. It is becoming difficult for me, you not only underestimate my knowledge,misunderstand my comments but now even misinterprets my praising words. To grant someone a status of a muslim is very seldom when you have declared yourself of Hindu faith.
I did not see the laws of India being reflected in your statement or some kind of a justice, but the words of pure wisdom the person whose vision is for peace and wisdom. I personaly could not care less for the laws of India or the attitude of Indian muslims in the country,but am only concerned with the suffering minorities and use of military against the civilians in any part of the world. If Indian justice can pass the buck over the next 50 years and the govt. some how manages to contain the problem, no one should squawk about it.
Your elevating me to the status of a potential terrorist has now qualified you for a post in the CIA establishment. Equally it proves that your note was for tactic reason and was not genuine proposal. Am I right?
Rex Minor
PS Pl. do not reply if the answer is yes.

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

To avoid the repeat of Musharaf disaster, the legislators in pakistan should obtain the consensus on the following legislation;
. the country’s President, Prime Minister and the Chief Justice and the Chief of Army must be the citizen of Pakistan, born in Pakistan.
. the terms of office of President and the Prime minister should be reduced to one term of three years.
. any more take of refugees from India or any other country must not be automatic. They should be considered as asylum seekers and treated in accordance with the international laws.
Rex minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

Musharraf can surely deliver what he wants. Most of the blames on him are not well founded. Lal Masjid—are Masjids a place to stock weapons?What Molvi did?he left Masjid in a Burqa leaving others to die. Black mailing by a few leaders. All facts must be seen before blaming someone.

Posted by marghoob | Report as abusive
 

Musharraf can surely deliver what he wants. Most of the blames on him are not well founded. Lal Masjid—are Masjids a place to stock weapons?What Molvi did?he left Masjid in a Burqa leaving others to die. Black mailing by a few leaders. All facts must be seen before blaming someone.

Posted by marghoob | Report as abusive
 

@”To avoid the repeat of Musharaf disaster, the legislators in pakistan should obtain the consensus on the following legislation;
. the country’s President, Prime Minister and the Chief Justice and the Chief of Army must be the citizen of Pakistan, born in Pakistan.
. the terms of office of President and the Prime minister should be reduced to one term of three years.
. any more take of refugees from India or any other country must not be automatic. They should be considered as asylum seekers and treated in accordance with the international laws.”
Rex minor Posted by pakistan

ROFLOL ROFLOL ROFLOL…..Yes Sir, anything else?

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

testing 123

Posted by 777xxx777 | Report as abusive
 

Mushie backstabs pakistan AGAIN by claiming Pakistan is carrying out illegal activities against India through its state agencies like ISI and PA.

Posted by 777xxx777 | Report as abusive
 

what the hell why is reuters not posting my comment

Posted by 777xxx777 | Report as abusive
 

this is really bad. reuters not allowing me to reply to Rex. Even reuters is taking sides :(

Posted by 777xxx777 | Report as abusive
 

Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
  •