That is a different issue, and I would argue is not linked to what the government does or does not promote, but how people interpret religion and how it is shaping their view of the world.
People's interpretation of Islam(and other beliefs) would be reflected in the workings of a (an Islamic) country (where the followers are a majority or a source of power or the govt has popular support)
Currently, due to various factors, the narrative of "Muslim brotherhood" is quite popular, and exhorted by many, without due consideration of very many issues that negate the entire argument - but this is for a different discussion. I just want to state that I do not consider "Muslim brotherhood" to be something the State promotes, it has everything to do with the evolution of Muslim thought under the influence of regional and international dynamics.
I was talking about Islam's emphasis on Brotherhood /Fraternity/ Peace/ Morality rather than a debate on Ummah...
Well of course - its a territorial dispute between Pakistan (most Pakistanis believe in Jinnah) and India (Most Indians probably don't Indians don't like him).
Whether Jinnah is liked or not or whether you believe in him or not is not important ... what has been done has been done.. what use is of crying over spilt milk?
Though on the other hand inspite of having a different ideology Bhagat Singh is almost as respected as Gandhi in India..
But the lack of belief in Jinnah is also an indirect insult and slap in the face for Pakistanis (and Bangladeshis) - because by refusing to acknowledge his argument, that the overwhelming majority of the residents of both current Pakistan and Bangladesh strongly agreed with, you insult our right to choose our destiny and you insult our decision to do so and you implicitly argue that the our Independence was flawed.
Lack of belief in Jinnah's ideology is not an insult to him..
(for eg Atheists don't have belief in ideologies of (other organised) religions, this I believe doesn't tantamount to insult) Pakistan's present ideology of being a neo-theocratic state with lesser rights for non muslims implies that they feel non muslims (all over) to be beneath them?
The issue here is not whether I believe in your ideology but you to have faith in your ideology.. instead of deriding others I would rather strengthen my own beliefs..
Another thing I would like to add is that Jinnah didn't want to create enmity/hostility b/w India and Pak as I understand.. His ideology is much maligned and abused by not only Indians but also Pakistanis... and which to some extent is understandable because of the nature and history..
That is why I have a hard time believing some Indians who say that they have accepted Pakistan - they haven't.
China-Taiwan is a classic example of non-acceptance.. not India-Pak..
(If I am not wrong most people on either side would like to believe they have no common origins, or ethnic links etc... is that good or bad I can't really fathom...)
Funnily enough, the only individual whose sincerity I do not doubt towards Pakistan's sovereignty and prosperity, is Salim, a retired Indian Army Officer (and one very close Tamil Indian friend).
The acriminous relationship b/w India and Pak will not allow a majority of Indians and Pakistanis to view each other in a very friendly light.. but to suggest that Indians believe in nuking Pak, or taking over their lands etc. is false and to also suggest that Indians would cheer on(or not feel envious of) a richer and stronger than India Pak is again IMO false...
Having said all of the above, I am confident that at the academic, mass media, govt, military and other upper echleon levels of India, many at least now would like to see a stable, prosperous Pakistan.. I don't see them operating in any other way.. unless they are sadists/masochists..
and somehow I still don't see the Pakistani top establishment (pre-democracy days, I am still cautious abt the present govt) thinking along the lines of seeing a prosperous and stable India..
I also believe when Pak was doing well (better than India) in the decades 50s, 60s and 70s where was this India who was trying to destabilize Pakistan even at the height of cold war such religious fervour over Kashmir, or the notion that India is trying to destabilize Pak was non-existent.. now that India is doing well why would they try to destabilize Pak which would cause further problems for India??
Sure - Pakistanis have strong doubts over whether India has ever accepted our right to exist, and has always worked to weaken and destroy us. One could argue that sentiment is simply the flip side to the "Pakistan is obsessed with Kashmir and promoting terrorism in India" views in India.
I can also argue that these statements are circulated by Pakistan to strengthen belief in Jinnah's 2 nation theory (the part which says Hindus and Muslims can't coexist together in one nation)..
Only continued dialog and interaction, without hankering for "unified cricket teams" (you have no idea how much it irritates me when Indians bring that up - what a great team we would have!"), will reduce distrust and suspicion.
AM p2p is good but to me is futile till both Govts don't actually pursue and desire normalization.. and I don't see any of the govt at the moment to act as the bigger man..
It does play a part in how the government deals with India, thats pretty much it. Overall, in the absence of a resolution and move towards comprehensive peace with India, one could argue that Kashmir influences both nations military programs. Thats pretty much it.
Kashmir is a contentious issue, The past 60 years both nations have developed enough firepower to thwart any misadventures and both are powerful enough to not yield to superpowers and neither is anyone willing to give the other, the land it controls...
GoI would like to see nothing more other than accepting LOC as international borders..( If I am not mistaken Vajyapayee was even willing to give some land to Pak but was rebuffed by the then COAS.. I am not sure what would happen in Pak if LOC is made intl. Border? or if a tract of land is gifted?)...
But harping over Kashmir to me is detrimental to both..
Thats why we are petitioning Webby to have a second "location flag" option, or a second location.
Doing my undergrad at University in the US, and I really shouldn't be on here since I have exams...
Great.. you sound much older than you are (but wise nonetheless)..
Again - the injection of Islam is not something the state has control over. That is how a lot of people view the issue, and it fits in with the "persecution of Muslims" narrative that is in vogue nowadays. Look at the amount of support that Palestine has in nations (like Pakistan) that have nothing to do with the Palestinians and the Israelis. Why are we picking sides?
In such situations the state ought to butt in, the shortsighted govt may actually encourage such beliefs to persist but later they always come to haunt. Snowball effect is always underestimated.
Like it or not, religion is part of the dynamic, but it would not be were it not for the fact that the territory is disputed in the first place.
Pre-1990's If I am correct religion was not much of a issue in Kashmir as it is now
I will agree with you that my opinions expressed above are pessimistic, they are the majority of what I see when perusing the media and commentators and posters online, and I hope that you are correct about the nature of change taking place in India.
AM I don't believe a majority of Indians nor the GoI was ""ever" in favour of disintegrating Pakistan..
Could you give me any reason as to why India would pursue such a course of action?
Let me assure you that the same change is taking place in Pakistan as well, where people would like to believe that India is not harboring secret plans to first destroy and then integrate Pakistan -
ex-ISI chiefs incl Gul and Nasir have explicitly declared the proxy war to bleed India as I have said before to me it is unfathomable as to why India pursue a similar ideology as ISI or would purposely stoke separatist movements in Pakistan at the moment?(Stoke because they are not created by India and have real causes)...
One positive development of this proxy war that can be harnessed by India is to use it to foster unity within the country..
but to really cross the threshold the governments of the two nations have to start taking steps towards normalization.
absolutely..