Asfand thanks PPP for renaming NWFP province

[mujahideen]

our foolish PM Liaquat called them off.

I am sorry but I am deeply disappointed by your statement here. Shaheed-I-Millat Laiquat Ali Khan was no fool. Now we dont know under what circumstances he told them to withdraw but whatever he did was in the best interest of Pakistan. I have know why we were forced to withdraw and believe me we had no choice, now I dont know from personal experience, but from what I have read we had no choice. As far as Laiquat Ali goes, please I beg of you dont call him foolish. He doesn't get the credit he deserves. He is probably the most honest leader we have ever had. I mean when he died in his bank account he had about 100 rupees, and his last words were "Oh Allah save Pakistan." We need sincere leaders like him. My grandfather tells me how this man was founding wearing the same old ripped cloths, why because the Quaid-I-Azam, told him his pay was one rupee per month, and it is my personal opinion that had he lived we would be better off. I think he was the only man who could of saved Pakistan and our enemies killed him because of that. Do you know his assassination was not as simple as we have been told. This was part of a bigger conspiriacy against Pakistan. Please please respect him atleast, he is a Shaheed. And if it will help even Bhutto said he his death was the biggest lost we as a nation have had to suffer.

 

[Interceptor]

^
Hon Muj, these are not the words that come from me, but from history, he stopped the war on the basis that his new Ally America will assist Pakistan, this was the greatest mistake, we were given a invitation by Russia to join there block and in this way get support from China but dear Liaquat made a terrible mistake which Pakistan has paid for, it was only due to Bhutto that we retained the friendship of China that has been a test of time, during this relationship which could have used during the early stages of the Kashmir conflict but lets leave that as the past, Chu in lei Bhutto's friend and the secretary or should say prime minister of China said i quote "If India dares to look towards Pakistan we will make sure that we take measure of measure." This is history honorable Muj, you should read Mr Jinnah's political history he said that in a gathering that his "Muslim leagues are loose change" which is a coin that is edged off for its silver or gold but it does not look like coin anymore its worthless in other words.

 

[mujahideen]

^^^^My brpther at the time we needed money and the U.S. was the only one willing to give us money. At that time Pakistan had nothing. My grandparents tell me when Pakistan was created and they would go to work they would not even have a pen or a desk to sit, it was after this aid that we got to stand on our feet. At that time if anyone offered us money we would of done anything. He only looked after the people, not like the leaders after him who filled their pockets.

 

[Interceptor]

^^

You say money, look at the industrialization of Russia it has touched every country in Asia, look at the Pakistan Steel Mill, I assure it was not due to money, that would have been given by Russia too, it was mere a wise choice and taking decisive decision which Liaquat at the time laked with respect.

In fact as I recall I just forgot the invitation was given to Jinnah's sahib and it was rejected by Liaquat Ali, as might know Jinnah and Iqbal were both found of Socialism, as I recall reading Iqbal's poetry "burn those crops that don't feed my hunger..."

Jinnah Sahib received the invitation before Pakistan was created the Russians were happy to assist Pakistan in its initial state and were willing enough that they traveled to India to give this invitation, we lost our chance.

 

[mujahideen]

^^^^Well all I know Laiquait Ali could not of sold the country whatever he did was in our best interest. If their are two leaders in whom I have blind faith in they are Quaid-I-Azam and Laiquat Ali.

 

[roadrunner]

Not really, I dont sit in dark rooms unlike you and type jiber jaber. I actually am important person in society unlike you, I live in the world outside. Unlike you I have friends, and that is why I am might be tad more better in reacting about the feeling of the people.

What you are is, if I read any of your posts, they are made from speculation and Musharraf, that is the only objective of your post. Musharraf.

an important member of society delusional indeed, just like zardari's initial claims on rockwood estate

 

[genmirajborgza786]

^^

You say money, look at the industrialization of Russia it has touched every country in Asia, look at the Pakistan Steel Mill, I assure it was not due to money, that would have been given by Russia too, it was mere a wise choice and taking decisive decision which Liaquat at the time laked with respect.

In fact as I recall I just forgot the invitation was given to Jinnah's sahib and it was rejected by Liaquat Ali, as might know Jinnah and Iqbal were both found of Socialism, as I recall reading Iqbal's poetry "burn those crops that don't feed my hunger..."

Jinnah Sahib received the invitation before Pakistan was created the Russians were happy to assist Pakistan in its initial state and were willing enough that they traveled to India to give this invitation, we lost our chance.

well said yeah even i was really down when i came to know of it sometimes back the former USSR with all its plus & minus points has time out & time again proven to be a much more reliable strategic partner then (our F-sola imported CAR'S , obsessive nature) the U.S the bracket mentioned is our weakness with which the U.S successfully played the bargain mind games to court us right where it wanted & when it wanted & that is give them a toy but not the book to make the toy for if they do who will buy from us and how shall we then hold our spot & this is exactly what corporate capitalism is all about. trust me its high time for a look east policy

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Why not Pakhtunkhwa?​

By Dr Tariq Rahman

A NUMBER of letters in the press and statements from the Awami National Party leaders make it clear that the Pashto-speaking people of the NWFP, or at least the supporters of ANP, want that the province be renamed Pakhtunkhwa.

Another possible name would have been ‘Pakhtunistan’ – ‘tan’ being used for ‘the land of’ — but the Pakistani establishment has reservations about it since it was associated with an irredentist movement of that name in 1947. Both names are connected with ethnic identity, so let us refer to that in passing.

Pashto became the identity symbol of the Pakhtuns during the British period. Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan used this in his anti-British movement. He published a journal called the Pakhtun from 1928 onwards and in this he kept emphasising that a nation is recognised by its language. By calling the Pashto-speaking people a ‘nation’, Khan Ghaffar mobilised them as a group. They were supposed to transcend tribal, or local, loyalties, and language was a means of doing so. The ordinary Pakhtun, of course, was proud of being a Pakhtun — of Pakhtunwali — and the pride of language must have grown in this period.

Khan Ghaffar became associated in Pakistani eyes with Afghan irredentism — the Afghan claim to Pakistani territory. Khan Ghaffar had, indeed, demanded an autonomous Pakhtunistan earlier but on September 4, 1947, he said that he only wanted a loose confederation of the ‘six settled districts’ of the NWFP. Later on, the National Awami Party went even beyond that — all it wanted was more power, more autonomy but all within the federation of Pakistan.

Pakhtun ethnicity actually declined in intensity as Tahir Amin pointed out first in his pioneering study of the ethno-national movements of Pakistan. I, too, reached the same conclusion. As the Pakhtuns got jobs in the army and the bureaucracy and got into business, they did not want to separate from Pakistan. What they wanted was that they should be recognised as a nationality in their own right and for this they wanted their living place to be given their name — Pakhtunkhwa. It was not a small matter for them because pride, self-esteem, identity and related issues are never trivial. So why the opposition?

The reasons for the state’s opposition are given in many books. Briefly, the ruling elite of the centre believes that Pakistan can become stronger by denying the various ethnic identities (and so languages) of the people of this land. Among the symbols of integration which the state emphasises are Islam and Urdu. The idea is that the creation of a Pakistani identity involves the suppression of other identities. It is this thinking which sets alarm bells ringing as soon as an innocuous proposition like the renaming of the NWFP comes up.

But this alarmist thinking is gradually giving place to accommodation. The ANP is, after all, part of the ruling coalition and people seem to have understood that Pakistan’s imposition of Urdu on Bangladesh was a mistake. Now the major opposition seems to be from the people who speak Hindko, Khowar and so on. First, there are minorities in all other provinces of the country — Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan — which already carry the names of the language of the majority community, so this should not be made out to be an impediment in the case of the NWFP alone.

I am suggesting this because one argument against the name Pakhtunkwa is that it does not represent the other major languages of the NWFP which are Hindko and Khowar. Pakistan has 72 languages listed against its name in the Ethnologue. However, personally I believe the figure is 55. This means that the NWFP in common with the other provinces has more than one language.

Indeed, the fact is that there is hardly any country or province with only one language. France has over 30 languages (some that are spoken by a very small section) and not only French. For Germany, about 27 languages are listed (two being dead ones). Greece has 15 (two are extinct). In India, every linguistic state, including Tamil Nadu, Gujarat and Punjab, have many languages besides the ones which give these states their name.

In short, giving a name to a piece of land with reference to a language does not mean, nor has it ever meant, that that should be the only language spoken in it. The name is a reflection of the democratic will of the majority. Of course, the language rights of the minority should be protected by law as they are in French-speaking Quebec, the Catalan-speaking parts of Spain or the Romansch-speaking cantons of Switzerland.

However, I would like to go a step further and propose that, like India, we too should go for more states identified, as far as possible, by ethnic identity based upon language. If this happens the NWFP will lose the Hindko and Khowar-speaking provinces but will gain the Pashto-speaking part of Balochistan.

Punjab, too, will have to become smaller since a Seraiki province will be carved out of it. This would mean that Punjab will no longer dominate politics and this will reduce the friction between the federating units. The aim is to have justice and peace and it is with reference to these ends that this solution is proposed. But such solutions are subject to the will of the people. Referendums may be one way of finding out what their will is.

In the NWFP, however, there is another ironical twist — the oldest inhabitants of the cities are Hindko-speaking people. But this should be a minor problem considering that Karachi has a huge Pakhtun population. People will learn to live with each other but I see no reason for denying them the legitimate name of their province on the grounds that this will increase ethnic tension. On the contrary, if anything, it will defuse the existing tension.

DAWN - Opinion; June 10, 2008