Pakistan and India...Why can't we be friends?

[Vinod2070]

Perhaps my post did come across as blaming India entirely, the leadership on both sides has fed the rot.

All I am saying is that there are people with unjustifiable reasons for hatred on both sides, and this hatred or animosity has been inculcated (or attempted to) in various ways by both governments.

I think that raising the curriculum bogey every time is unhelpful - one only has to look at the bonhomie that was starting to bloom on both sides of the border through the end of Musharraf's tenure.

What that showed us was that as the countries moved towards dispute resolution and shared interests, and cut down the rhetoric, the people reacted positively and embraced concepts of peace and friendship.

That is why I believe that despite all his faults, Zardari has by far been the better statesman in South Asia recently. I do not think it would be partisan of me to suggest that we need someone to match him from the Indian side.

Zardari showed initial promise. No two ways about it. I think he did not shine in the 11/26 episode as far as India is concerned. It became clear who is running the show in Pakistan. Mr. Zardari lost a chance to take leadership and give a good account of himself here.

See for India it is always a dilemma in terms of who to deal with in Pakistan. The civilians have no real power as far as policy towards India is concerned. The military establishment and the ISI are difficult if not impossible to trust.

I disagree that curriculum issue is a bogey. That effects the entire generation deeply. What you are studying in the 4th grade, you imbibe unquestioningly and that can almost never change. It was obviously designed to make anti-Indians out of the coming generations. The result was the growing ranks of the JEMs and the LETs.

People may develop hatreds without the curriculum too. But the curriculum is a surefire way to create a whole generation of people with a particular kind of thinking.

 

[rubyjackass]

The stubbornness is in you where you recognize that what I stated was true, that there is no evidence indicating the accusations made are valid, yet you try and distort the issue with pointless rhetoric about 'south of paranoia' to try and make the same point.

I think that evidence showing a 'widespread hatred and intolerance towards India in Pakistanis', not matched by similar sentiments amongst Indians, and a causal relationship between that and the curriculum is what needs to be provided by people making your argument.

People tend to believe that when something is in printed form, it must be true, especially easy with kids.
So the existence of such material quite plausibly implies the effect.



As for the rhetoric, I have been trying to write. Thanks for your notice.

 

[m15t3r7]

Seems like you have been watching plenty of Indian movies lately ?

The list of differences is huge my friend.

I don't watch Indian movies but what I am tryin to say is that we can be friends because look at U.S and U.K they used to be enemy's and look at them now

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Zardari showed initial promise. No two ways about it. I think he did not shine in the 11/26 episode as far as India is concerned. It became clear who is running the show in Pakistan. Mr. Zardari lost a chance to take leadership and give a good account of himself here.

See for India it is always a dilemma in terms of who to deal with in Pakistan. The civilians have no real power as far as policy towards India is concerned. The military establishment and the ISI are difficult if not impossible to trust.

This 'who to deal with in Pakistan' is also a bogey raised in India to avoid engagement in my opinion. Its simple really - India deals with the government of Pakistan - civilian or military. If the military is all pervasive and influential in ensuring only its views and policies get implemented, then a civilian GoP will not offer India any compromises or solutions that the military does not support. If it does, and the military is all pervasive as you suggest, then the government will be overthrown or forced to back down, but how does that stop India from engaging? Its not like India is goign to move the relationship forward if it doesn't engage, regardless of who she thinks has real control. And I remind you that the issue of distrust exists just as deeply in Pakistan, yet Zardari managed to get beyond it, as did Musharraf to a lesser extent.

The problem isn't of who to engage with the problem is in compromising on issues central to the tensions between India and Pakistan - India does not want to tread that road, and prefers the status quo.

I disagree, obviously, on your opinion on Pakistan's approach after the Mumbai attacks. I thought it was an extremely reasonable position. The proposal to send the DG ISI to India for what is apparent now would have been nothing more than a public dressing down for PR by India was a bad idea, and one that shoudl not have been made public until the merits and demerits had been analyzed, and the usefulness of the exercise determined.

Beyond that Pakistan has made entirely reasonable demands of cooperation and joint investigations and respecting Pakistan's laws and sovereignty. There is nothing 'jingoistic' or confrontational in the GoP's positions on this issue.

I disagree that curriculum issue is a bogey. That effects the entire generation deeply. What you are studying in the 4th grade, you imbibe unquestioningly and that can almost never change. It was obviously designed to make anti-Indians out of the coming generations. The result was the growing ranks of the JEMs and the LETs.

People may develop hatreds without the curriculum too. But the curriculum is a surefire way to create a whole generation of people with a particular kind of thinking.

As I said, while the curriculum in Pakistan is flawed, it has by no measurable standards done anything to opinions and attitudes in Pakistan worse than what you see reflected in Indian attitudes an opinions.

If it had, then there would have been no reciprocal movement towards peace and friendship that we saw happening through the end of Musharraf's tenure. The 'growing ranks' of the JuD and Let are borne out of political causes, and these 'growing ranks' still number only in the hundreds, despite the claims of 'thousands' by the organizations themselves, a far cry from substantiating the argument that the curriculum has poisoned the minds of entire generations of Pakistanis.

There just isn't any evidence to indicate that what you say has happened, hence my argument that it is a bogey.

 

[Beskar]

I don't watch Indian movies but what I am tryin to say is that we can be friends because look at U.S and U.K they used to be enemy's and look at them now

Is that your supporting example to your case? Two CHRISTIAN dominant countries with a COMPLETELY different past which has NOTHING in common with our situation?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

So the existence of such material quite plausibly implies the effect.

The effect, to any degree greater than that found in India, is non-existent, therefore I would argue that the existence of this 'written material' cannot plausibly imply that which does not exist.

 

[m15t3r7]

Are you kidding me? If India and Pakistan become good friends:
- both India and Pakistan would need to look for someone else to blame for their respective problems
- cricket matches would not be as exciting
- media folks in both countries would starve
- the global military industry would collapse
- religions all over the world will unite and there will be no religious conflict at all
- the whole world will be a better place

And best of all....
- forums like this one would not be as popular

Now who in the world would want all the above terrible things to happen?

lol very funny

 

[m15t3r7]

I just have one thing to say if Pakistan and India work together as friend we can be the most powerful nations on earth with that we can bring the poverty and injustice low and can move toward progressive nations and we can be most dominant nations on earth

if anybody agree or disagree with me plez share you views

 

[Imran Khan]

Originally Posted by RedBaron
Are you kidding me? If India and Pakistan become good friends:
- both India and Pakistan would need to look for someone else to blame for their respective problems
- cricket matches would not be as exciting
- media folks in both countries would starve
- the global military industry would collapse
- religions all over the world will unite and there will be no religious conflict at all
- the whole world will be a better place

And best of all....
- forums like this one would not be as popular

Now who in the world would want all the above terrible things to happen?

its true first line he say brolims and blame others its true. agree with all post

 

[Vinod2070]

This 'who to deal with in Pakistan' is also a bogey raised in India to avoid engagement in my opinion. Its simple really - India deals with the government of Pakistan - civilian or military. If the military is all pervasive and influential in ensuring only its views and policies get implemented, then a civilian GoP will not offer India any compromises or solutions that the military does not support. If it does, and the military is all pervasive as you suggest, then the government will be overthrown or forced to back down, but how does that stop India from engaging? Its not like India is goign to move the relationship forward if it doesn't engage, regardless of who she thinks has real control. And I remind you that the issue of distrust exists just as deeply in Pakistan, yet Zardari managed to get beyond it, as did Musharraf to a lesser extent.

The problem isn't of who to engage with the problem is in compromising on issues central to the tensions between India and Pakistan - India does not want to tread that road, and prefers the status quo.

I disagree, obviously, on your opinion on Pakistan's approach after the Mumbai attacks. I thought it was an extremely reasonable position. The proposal to send the DG ISI to India for what is apparent now would have been nothing more than a public dressing down for PR by India was a bad idea, and one that shoudl not have been made public until the merits and demerits had been analyzed, and the usefulness of the exercise determined.

Beyond that Pakistan has made entirely reasonable demands of cooperation and joint investigations and respecting Pakistan's laws and sovereignty. There is nothing 'jingoistic' or confrontational in the GoP's positions on this issue.

As I said, while the curriculum in Pakistan is flawed, it has by no measurable standards done anything to opinions and attitudes in Pakistan worse than what you see reflected in Indian attitudes an opinions.

If it had, then there would have been no reciprocal movement towards peace and friendship that we saw happening through the end of Musharraf's tenure. The 'growing ranks' of the JuD and Let are borne out of political causes, and these 'growing ranks' still number only in the hundreds, despite the claims of 'thousands' by the organizations themselves, a far cry from substantiating the argument that the curriculum has poisoned the minds of entire generations of Pakistanis.

There just isn't any evidence to indicate that what you say has happened, hence my argument that it is a bogey.

I am not sure you can call the dilemma a bogey after Kargil! We have burnt our finger once and are in no mood to repeat that in a hurry.

Regarding the curricula part I think there are any number of reports by independent sources and by Pakistani sources that also corroborate what I mentioned. It may not have been measured and the leadership of the time may even be able to create an opinion that it wants but it does not mean that the explosive material is not there, just waiting for a spark to light up.

I think I posted this earlier but worth repeating:

Curriculum of hate
Sunday, June 08, 2008
Dr Farrukh Saleem

Afghanistan, Algeria, Chad, Egypt, Guinea, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sudan, Somalia, Tunisia, Turkey, Yemen, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, Syria, UAE, Sierra Leone, Bangladesh, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Uganda, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Comoros, Iraq, Maldives, Djibouti, Benin, Brunei, Nigeria, Azerbaijan, Albania, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Mozambique, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Suriname, Togo, Guyana and Côte d'Ivoire are all Muslim-majority states. Can you name the one -- and the only -- Muslim-majority state where Muslims blew up the Danish embassy killing at least eight other Muslims?

Why, why Pakistan? I don't have all the answers, and I am sure no one does. But, please have a look at what the Punjab Textbook Board is teaching eleven-year old Pakistanis. Here is a paragraph from the Social Studies textbook for Class 7, page 43 (written by Professor Dr M H Bokhari and Syed Hassan Tahir):

"European nations have been working during the past three centuries, through conspiracies on naked aggression to subjugate the countries of the Muslim world."

Here is a paragraph that was not part of the previous year's Pakistan Studies but has been inserted in the textbook for the current academic year. This text was written by Muhammad Hussain Chaudhry, Ali Iqtadar Mirza, Sheikh Anees, Rai Faiz Ahmad Kharal, Syed Abbas Haidar and Dr Qais. This is for students of Class 9 and appears on page 3:

"The economic system of (the) west was creating unsolvable problems and had failed to do justice with the people."

Thirteen- and fourteen-year-old students of Pakistan Studies are being taught that "one of the reasons of the downfall of the Muslims in the sub-continent was the lack of the spirit of jihad (Class 9-10; Pakistan Studies, page 7)."

Imagine; thirteen-year-old Pakistanis are being taught that "In Islam jihad is very important…..The person who offers his life never dies….All the prayers nurture one's passion of jihad (Class 9-10; Pakistan Studies, page 10)."

Look at what Dr Sultan Khan, Muhammad Farooq Malik, Rai Faiz Ahmad Kharal, Muhammad Hussain Chaudhry and Khadim Ali Khan are teaching sixteen-year-old Pakistanis: "Always keep oneself ready to sacrifice one's life and property is jihad…..The basic purpose of all submissions and jihad is to keep oneself follower of the good will of Allah Almighty (Class 12; Pakistan Studies, page 4)."

At the tender age of 10, Pakistani students are discovering what the British had done to them. "The British sent rare books from these libraries to England. Thus the British ruined the Muslim schools. They did not want that Islam should spread (Class 6; Social Studies, page 99)." This text was scripted and translated by Professor Mian Muhammed Aslam, Professor Muhammed Farooq Malik and Qazi Sajjad Ahmed.

Look at the remarkable breakthrough achieved by of our learned Professor Dr M H Bokhari and Syed Hassan Tahir. In a total of 36 words, the duo has managed to capture the cause of the crusades: "History has no parallel to the extremely kind treatment of the Christians by the Muslims. Still the Christian kingdoms of Europe were constantly trying to gain control of Jerusalem. This was the cause of the crusades (Class 7; Social Studies, page 25)."

It seems as if our ministry of education is grooming our children for death rather than for life. The examples quoted above are all out of our federal ministry of education's curriculum designed by the curriculum wing. I agree that nine-, ten- and eleven-year-old students after reading these textbooks are not going to go and blow themselves up but the federal ministry of education is certainly creating a thoroughly militarized society. In that sense, our curriculum appears to have been deliberately designed to facilitate the usurpation of genuine educational space by forces of hate, violence and that of extremism. What we have is a primary and secondary school environment consciously manufactured to nurture terror, promote prejudice and breed extremism.

Our 'Curriculum of hate' is, hopefully, not producing suicide bombers but it is definitely breeding closet bombers who wholeheartedly support the ideals of suicide bombers being produced elsewhere. In essence, the two -- suicide bombers and closet bombers -- have a strange symbiotic relationship whereby the parasite cannot survive without a receptive host. And, the receptive host is all around us -- courtesy the ministry of education, government of Pakistan. Why is our ministry of education so bent upon preparing our kids for death and not for life?



The writer is an Islamabad-based freelance columnist. Email: farrukh15@hotmail.com

Curriculum of hate

If you say that such a curriculum for the mainstream students (not Madressa mind you) does not leave a lasting impact, I have a hard time believing that.

This article also explains why the likes of AQ, Taliban and the other various kinds of suicide bombers and terrorists are so popular in Pakistan. People may not be suicide bombers, many of them are closet bombers (to quote Dr Farrukh Saleem) who support such kind whole heartedly.

 

[rubyjackass]

I just have one thing to say if Pakistan and India work together as friend we can be the most powerful nations on earth with that we can bring the poverty and injustice low and can move toward progressive nations and we can be most dominant nations on earth

if anybody agree or disagree with me plez share you views

Yes very much.
As I have suggested an EU like union would be best.

 

[Imran Khan]

but if India stop blame every problem and chilling after every incident .i thing now terrorist win Bombay action because they want destroy peace process and the done it.

 

[Jihad]

Being friends is one thing, being lovers another.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I am not sure you can call the dilemma a bogey after Kargil! We have burnt our finger once and are in no mood to repeat that in a hurry.

IN the meant time, from the Pakistani perspective, the continued refusal to even consider J&K disputed, despite the obvious staring us in the face, is a continual reminder of a lack of sincerity from India's part.

Regarding the curricula part I think there are any number of reports by independent sources and by Pakistani sources that also corroborate what I mentioned. It may not have been measured and the leadership of the time may even be able to create an opinion that it wants but it does not mean that the explosive material is not there, just waiting for a spark to light up.

I think I posted this earlier but worth repeating:

Curriculum of hate

If you say that such a curriculum for the mainstream students (not Madressa mind you) does not leave a lasting impact, I have a hard time believing that.

This article also explains why the likes of AQ, Taliban and the other various kinds of suicide bombers and terrorists are so popular in Pakistan. People may not be suicide bombers, many of them are closet bombers (to quote Dr Farrukh Saleem) who support such kind whole heartedly.

I disagree with the 'closet bomber' argument, Farrukh Saleem is indulging in some gratuitous self flagellation here. And you dissemble when you suggest that the likes of AQ and the Taliban are 'so popular' in Pakistan.

Most opinion polls show that support to be quite low, and where it does exist, it is not because people support their tactics, but because they do not believe that they engage in the crimes attributed to them and support their political message of fighting 'occupation and American injustice'. This argument is borne out by the results from several polls carried out by reputable Western organizations in Pakistan. The latest one being:

Pakistanis Support Tougher Stance on Terrorism

Therefore I woudl humbly argue that Farrukh Saleem does not know what he is talking about on this issue, since the evidence is so diametrically opposed to his conclusions, though his self-flagellation probably appeals to some already looking to castigate Pakistan.

My strongest argument against this alleged 'brainwashing' remains the actual opinions and attitudes of Pakistanis, that are by far moderate and in favor of peace, economic development, engagement - not war and destruction.

You can scream about the curriculum all you want, but you cannot make a case for your argument when the opinions and attitudes of Pakistanis remain largely moderate.

 

[jeypore]

I just have one thing to say if Pakistan and India work together as friend we can be the most powerful nations on earth with that we can bring the poverty and injustice low and can move toward progressive nations and we can be most dominant nations on earth

if anybody agree or disagree with me plez share you views

I do not agree with this senario at current situation. Being friends or working together does not necessarily bring down poverty or injustice. And the Idea of Progressive nations, i am completly against the idelogy of Progressiveness. Progressive is just a fancy word for liberalism, where the gov't is envolved in industries to personal lives.