Walls and Bridges

[Developereo]

Exactly & so the real question shouldn't be walls or bridges for that is irrelevant; the real questions should be inward looking :

(a) Who are We ?

(b) Where do We stand ?

(c) Why do We stand where We do ?

(d) Where do We want to end up ?

(e) How do We get there ?

Make it about us in a classical Jeffersonian approach to foreign policy instead of the quasi Wilsonian approach that most of the world adopts.

Make it about us...first, second & last ! Those are the only questions worth asking the rest is just emergent strategy.

Broadly speaking, Pakistani intellectuals agree on the problems and the road-map. After all, we are genetically the same as Indians; we are not any dumber by nature.

The problem in Pakistan is that the ruling elite has neither the will nor the desire to progress Pakistan because a rising middle class would erode their power. Our greatest enemies are sitting, not in New Delhi, but in the feudal mansions and ethnic lords' palaces.

 

[muse]

Muse, while I want to stress that I do not disagree with some of his conclusions, I see some flaws in Mr. Hilaly's article.
.

Mr. Hilaly is making a very simple point - that Pakistan's position is untenable, that discretion is the better part of valor -- Now he has to make this point and actually sell it to his readers - now who are his readers and how do they take bitter pills?

Mr. Hilaly and a whole host of others know that Pakistan, have failed the Kashmiri and themselves - and the notion in Pakistan that Pakistan remains incomplete without Kashmir, is no longer a challenge, that because it cannot be achieved and resonates in the national psyche, it has become a millstone -- and therefore discretion is the better part of valor

 

[Dillinger]

Exactly & so the real question shouldn't be walls or bridges for that is irrelevant; the real questions should be inward looking :

(a) Who are We ?

(b) Where do We stand ?

(c) Why do We stand where We do ?

(d) Where do We want to end up ?

(e) How do We get there ?

Make it about us in a classical Jeffersonian approach to foreign policy instead of the quasi Wilsonian approach that most of the world adopts.

Make it about us...first, second & last ! Those are the only questions worth asking the rest is just emergent strategy.

Sir,

With all due respect, such a course of action is not feasible in absolute terms. Every country has to shape its policies, at least its foreign policy and defense planning, while taking the actions and posturing of surrounding nations or nations of interest into consideration. It is not possible to divorce policy framing in the aforementioned areas from events on the ground and the geopolitical atmosphere prevalent at least in the immediate neighborhood. This applies to both India and Pakistan. An apt example would be the situation India went through in the late 80s up till 93-94, our economy had tanked, the USSR with which we shared certain interests had collapsed, the sole super power of the world was decidedly pro Pakistan and was adamant about hyphenating us with Pakistan in any and all forums, the Kashmir insurgency had begun and had reached its height, down south the LTTE had just turned its eyes towards the Indian government if not towards the nation as a whole. Despite herculean tasks awaiting India at every turn India did not simply retreat into a shell- our capabilities were reduced and yet we kept our eye on all the players in global and regional terms. The idea of revisiting the relationship with India would only be applicable if it were possible for any stakeholder in Pakistan to endorse a back-burner move with regard to Kashmir and still survive in the political arena. The realities of the region and external factors will always impinge upon Pakistan's policy making, this is something that no country can obviate albeit countries can ensure that they deal with such factors in a manner more favorable to their interests.

 

[EyelessInGaza]

Mr. Hilaly is making a very simple point - that Pakistan's position is untenable, that discretion is the better part of valor -- Now he has to make this point and actually sell it to his readers - now who are his readers and how do they take bitter pills?

Mr. Hilaly and a whole host of others know that Pakistan, have failed the Kashmiri and themselves - and the notion in Pakistan that Pakistan remains incomplete without Kashmir, is no longer a challenge, that because it cannot be achieved and resonates in the national psyche, it has become a millstone -- and therefore discretion is the better part of valor

Well, he's going in the right direction them. In my opinion.

 

[Developereo]

From what I read in history, during partition, the best brains and the upper class and affluent Muslims of our undivided country went over to make Pakistan. This is not to belittle our own Muslims, but it is a historical fact. Even here we see so many highly educated Muslims from Pakistan making such insightful comments. Why are these elite educated of Pakistan on the losing side today within their own country? Forget about us. We have many more faiths, brains, land, resources, and other things. That should not be either what Pakistan should grudge or try to subvert.

When Hilaly speaks of walls, I like to think of them more as mental walls rather than the physical ones. There is a stream of antipathy towards where India is and what India stands for amongst certain quarters of Pakistan. Bridges exist between such elements and those they foster amongst us. Build walls against the continuity of such thought processes. Tear down the bridges that spread such. Break that link first. Hilaly is an intelligent man. It is up to us and Pakistanis to understand what he says.

While I appreciate your sentiments, the antipathy is mutual and dominates the political elite on both sides.

That's why the best policy is to go our separate ways -- a cooling off period -- before we revisit the relationship.

Of course, no one can live in an isolated shell, but the concept is one of degree, not absolute.

 

[liontk]

Liontk: Religion is what it's adherents practice - always -- otherwise the religion cannot claim to have adherents

How would you now measure your statement about Islam being progressive and Modern -- and yet Muslims are regressive and the original malcontents when it comes to modernity????? If true, does Islam have any adherents??

Please do not allow yourself to go into defensive shell mode

Mon ami Muse, you are correct and when discussing faith shell mode thinking is what we should all avoid and had you not written that very statement, i may have pondered that very zelous thought out of personal reason to defend the faith i adhere to. However as it comes to most faith, this is one of the criteria that I leave for Lord to judge us upon though as far as simplicity to our world, islam can very well have adherents that have no even heard the name of the faith and could very well be practising the ethos and virtues that the religion spreads and one can clearly make the tangent that this is religion of peace, which ironically has now become a below the belt shot at this faith. One does not need to have a beard, while the original adherents may carry the label of islam, who is to say my mother nation, canada does not represent that. We have a sytem atleast working not perfect though it does provides justice, security and liberty to all citizens. The state is responsible for our wellbeing from the very first day we are born , from child subsidies, to daycares to even up to college. We are given all the necessary tools and opportunity to contribute and full fill our desires in a reasonable manner. We are taken care when ill by a nationally pooled health care system, while this sytem may lag behind the capitalist americanne system, it provides the same for the wealth and poor. Education is provided to every citizen and infact private school in canada surprisingly are more terrible than government to tell you the truth. While this country may not present perfect islam, as perfection is something impossible but rather something we aspire to achieve as muslim or humans for that matter. Is it not safe to conclude that may be Canada represents virtues of islam that our prophet once preached and the qualities that could be observed under the social welfare state of the second caliphate(omar).

Sorry to digress, God is the one to judge all humanity as far as discussing this in context to faith though as far as from humanistic perspective to sum up, I think Western european nations may very represent some though may be not all of what islam's adherents once used to represent towards the east. Remember this faith was made to unite humanity not divide it and may be after the west declines like all civilizations as part of cycle, another progressive(not politically) or continuity aspire civilization will prop up as it always does, will it adhere to islam or not, that I am not sure about but from my observation of todays world, i truly believe that we can make the world or atleast our countries but lets see where this trend of globalization takes us and who would've thought the invention of the aircrafts would have such a massive impact on humanity.

 

[muse]

From what I read in history, during partition, the best brains and the upper class and affluent Muslims of our undivided country went over to make Pakistan. This is not to belittle our own Muslims, but it is a historical fact. Even here we see so many highly educated Muslims from Pakistan making such insightful comments. Why are these elite educated of Pakistan on the losing side today within their own country? Forget about us. We have many more faiths, brains, land, resources, and other things.

Are Armed forces the kinds of institutions that attract the kinds of people you are referring to? but lets keep our focus

 

[Contrarian]

Thank you for a very mature post.

I totally agree with you that Islam is NOT the problem. For Pakistan to progress in the modern world, there is no need to abandon, or be ashamed of, Islam.

The problem Pakistan faces is because of misuse and misinterpretation of Islam by certain leaders. We need to have a more nuanced view of Islam -- neither rejecting it outright, nor enforcing it on everybody.

At the end of the day, like you mentioned, Islam is fully compatible with modernity.

Islam is no more or no less compatible with modern ideas and values than Christianity or Hinduism or any other religion on the planet.

The entire point is that when you bring religion or give religion a role in politics, invariably it leads to bad decisions and the misuse of religion and consequently what you state - misinterpretation of religion. This is the entire reason that Western nations removed any and all role of Church from State and made religion a private affair between man and his god. Otherwise Christianity is also not the problem or as you mention - Christianity is also fully compatible with modernity.

And as far as Pakistan goes - no one asks for asking people to leave Islam. All that modern nations and modern people ask is for Pakistan to separate Islam from Government and Governance.

Let the people be as religious or as atheist they want to be - its their own private affair - not the government's.

 

[Armstrong]

Sir,

With all due respect, such a course of action is not feasible in absolute terms. Every country has to shape its policies, at least its foreign policy and defense planning, while taking the actions and posturing of surrounding nations or nations of interest into consideration. It is not possible to divorce policy framing in the aforementioned areas from events on the ground and the geopolitical atmosphere prevalent at least in the immediate neighborhood. This applies to both India and Pakistan. An apt example would be the situation India went through in the late 80s up till 93-94, our economy had tanked, the USSR with which we shared certain interests had collapsed, the sole super power of the world was decidedly pro Pakistan and was adamant about hyphenating us with Pakistan in any and all forums, the Kashmir insurgency had begun and had reached its height, down south the LTTE had just turned its eyes towards the Indian government if not towards the nation as a whole. Despite herculean tasks awaiting India at every turn India did not simply retreat into a shell- our capabilities were reduced and yet we kept our eye on all the players in global and regional terms. The idea of revisiting the relationship with India would only be applicable if it were possible for any stakeholder in Pakistan to endorse a back-burner move with regard to Kashmir and still survive in the political arena. The realities of the region and external factors will always impinge upon Pakistan's policy making, this is something that no country can obviate albeit countries can ensure that they deal with such factors in a manner more favorable to their interests.

I wasn't asking Pakistan to retreat back to its cocoon & be oblivious to all that is happening all around us ! I was simply saying that if the composite dialogues aren't achieving anything then keep the talks going but don't hold your breath over it; our first priority is to be internal health & then we can sort out Kashmir & the rest on a much more assertive footing instead of deciding things definitively in there here & the now from a position of weakness.

If a mutually beneficial development is achieved - Great ! If not...fine, our first, second & third priorities were domestic to begin with.

Thankfully India doesn't sell in Pakistan & thats pretty much the way we are progressing towards.

 

[doppelganger]

liontk sir, I very much want to read what you are saying since so many people are quoting and thanking you. But it is difficult mon ami since you do not break your big post into small paragraphs.

 

[muse]

We have a sytem atleast working not perfect though it does provides justice, security and liberty to all citizens. The state is responsible for our wellbeing from the very first day we are born , from child subsidies, to daycares to even up to college. We are given all the necessary tools and opportunity to contribute and full fill our desires in a reasonable manner. We are taken care when ill by a nationally pooled health care system, while this sytem may lag behind the capitalist americanne system, it provides the same for the wealth and poor. Education is provided to every citizen and infact private school in canada surprisingly are more terrible than government to tell you the truth. While this country may not present perfect islam, as perfection is something impossible but rather something we aspire to achieve as muslim or humans for that matter. Is it not safe to conclude that may be Canada represents virtues of islam that our prophet once preached and the qualities that could be observed under the social welfare state of the second caliphate(omar).

Sure, It practices the values preached - that's why religion is what is practiced by adherents, and not some pie in the sky books - and practice and values that guide it, are best apprehended in the spirit, and not the letter.

 

[EyelessInGaza]

....... Why are these elite educated of Pakistan on the losing side today within their own country? Forget about us. .......

This is a good question if you believe that the Pakistani elite is on the losing side.

In my opinion a nation state (a model not more than a few hundred years old out of our thousands of years of recorded history) is nothing more than a group of people who "buy-in" to the concept. The concept of a nation state faces challenges from and is competing with diverse other loyalties- religion, ethnicity, language- for a 'citizen's attention'.

It is the job of the elite to ensure that the 'other loyalties' in a country do not subvert or undermine the concept of a nation state from a citizen's perspective.

In my opinion, in Pakistan the elite has failed to do this, with the result that in the mind of its citizens, the concept of nation state has been thus far unable to dominate over the other concepts : linguistic, language and especially religious.

Edit: To add to the above, the elites must also broadly ensure that the 'nation state' provides basic services to its citizens, just like any corporation. Education, food, electricity, fair practices etc, etc. Any nation state that fails to do this well, will also find it difficult to convince its citizens of the core strength of the concept. See most African countries.

 

[Armstrong]

Broadly speaking, Pakistani intellectuals agree on the problems and the road-map. After all, we are genetically the same as Indians; we are not any dumber by nature.

The problem in Pakistan is that the ruling elite has neither the will nor the desire to progress Pakistan because a rising middle class would erode their power. Our greatest enemies are sitting, not in New Delhi, but in the feudal mansions and ethnic lords' palaces.

Broadly speaking even the ruling elites agree on the road map its the operational execution of it that is beyond irksome !

Khair I suppose what I was trying to get at is that we need to infuse more 'self-awareness' & 'self-appraisal' within ourselves instead of shunning it outright or decrying everything we are & embracing the romantic notions of modernity & progress that others have defined for themselves instead of understanding them for the are & coming up with your own unique blend & definition of it ! Unfortunately, I think, that we are polarized between these two extremes.

 

[Contrarian]

While I appreciate your sentiments, the antipathy is mutual and dominates the political elite on both sides.

That's why the best policy is to go our separate ways -- a cooling off period -- before we revisit the relationship.

Of course, no one can live in an isolated shell, but the concept is one of degree, not absolute.

@muse
My friend, the fact that India is building a literal wall with barbed wires should give you an indication of our desires with Pakistan.

India wants no part of Pakistan, not even Pak-Occupied-Kashmir. That is just said to keep up the pressure in negotiations. India wants less and less to do with Pakistan unless it is trade - which is always beneficial to all.

 

[muse]

I suppose what I was trying to get at is that we need to infuse more 'self-awareness' & 'self-appraisal' within ourselves instead of shunning it outright or decrying everything we are & embracing the romantic notions of modernity & progress that others have defined for themselves instead of understanding them for the are & coming up with your own unique blend & definition of it ! Unfortunately, I think, that we are polarized between these two extremes.

Really excellent --- why do you suppose we are polarized? what have we seen of the extremes at allows us to be polarized?