Archive for April, 2010

April 30, 2010

Indian Perception – South Asian Muslims are low-caste converts

Here are the major schools of thought on the spread of Islam in South Asia.

1. That the bulk of Muslims are descendants of migrants from the Iranian plateau or Arabs.[23]
2. That Muslims sought conversion through jihad or political violence[22]  (Indian’s main school of thought)
3. A related view is that conversions occurred for non-religious reasons of pragmatism and patronage such as social mobility among the Muslim ruling elite or for relief from taxes[22][23]
4. Conversion was a result of the actions of Sufi saints and involved a genuine change of heart[22]
5. Conversion came from Buddhists and the en masse conversions of lower castes for social liberation and as a rejection of oppressive existent Hindu caste strictures.[23]
6. Was a combination, initially made under duress followed by a genuine change of heart[22]
7. As a socio-cultural process of diffusion and integration over an extended period of time into the sphere of the dominant Muslim civilization and global polity at large.[23]

8. The area constituting Pakistan was mainly Buddhist.   Buddhists did not have caste system (I believe)

Indians mainly focus on #2.  Ofcourse this does not explain the spread of Islam in predominantly Hindu South East Asia, Animist New Guinea, Animist Africa, Zorastorian Persia, Buddhist Pakistan, Golden Horde Turkestan and Modern conversions in free western countries.  How do you explain all that?

I want to make one very important note:
To all “Dalits”, “Untouchable”, “Low castes” people.  You are beautiful.  If my ancestors were the lowest of the lowest on some artificial scale, I say so be it.  Islam welcomes all to the brotherhood of Muslims without superficial, man-made stratas irrespective of race, skin-tone.   You are an equal.  You were born without shackles and you should live without them.  This post is no way is meant to denigrate “low caste” people.   I have no idea what this even means as we have no such thing in Pakistan.

April 24, 2010

Conspiracy Watch | Ben Gurion’s evil designs on Pakistan

Here was a quote making the rounds in Pakistan.  Problem: It’s  a fabrication.

“The world Zionist movement should not be neglectful of the dangers of Pakistan to it. And Pakistan now should be its first target, for this ideological State is a threat to our existence. And Pakistan, the whole of it, hates the Jews and loves the Arabs. “This lover of the Arabs is more dangerous to us than the Arabs themselves. For that matter, it is most essential for the world Zionism that it should now take immediate steps against Pakistan. “Whereas the inhabitants of the Indian peninsula are Hindus whose hearts have been full of hatred towards Muslims, therefore, India is the most important base for us to work there from against Pakistan. “It is essential that we exploit this base and strike and crush Pakistanis, enemies of Jews and Zionism, by all disguised and secret plans.”
- David Ben Gurion, the first Israeli Prime Minister.His words, as printed in the Jewish Chronicle,9 August 1967

Could this quote be true and accurate? I decided to investigate. I discovered that the London Jewish Chronicle (now called “The JC”), the only possible candidate for the “Jewish Chronicle” mentioned in the “quote”, wasn’t even published on the given date – it is published weekly – and an internet search of their archive for 1967-1974 using the search term “Pakistan” fails to reveal the “quote”.

I notified LJC of the “quote” and continued my investigation. I discovered these words apparently first appeared on the internet for six years ago, in this article at Rense citing a now-defunct link at the “Baluchistan Post” as its source.

We make this stuff and then get all hyped about it.

April 23, 2010

Indian Perception – Remember 1971 but not the previous 1000 years

Pakistani Perspective

Indians are often humored by Pakistan’s assertions that Pakistan has “won many” wars against India.  This is understandable as some of our hyper-patriots claim even Kargil was not a loss.

1948 First Kashmiri War (Win) – Pakistan captured 85,793 km² of “Indian” territory of Kashmir i.e. “Integral” part of India.  The goal may have been to capture all of Kashmir but capturing 1/3rd of Kashmir supposedly an “integral” part of a much stronger India cannot be dismissed as a loss.

1965 Rann of Kutch Battle (Win) – It is generally understood by all neutral parties that Pakistan won this battle.

1965 Second Kashmiri War (Draw) – Pakistan captured more enemy territory in terms of area.  India captured more fertile/valuable territory. Pakistan had more kills enemy & enemy craft.  Pakistan had some tactical victories.  However, India denied Pakistan its ultimate objective.  Both sides were exhausted and depleted by the end of the war.

1971 Bengali War of Independence (Loss to Bangladesh) – Outnumbered, outgunned & outplayed, after months of heroic resistance by Bengalis against a shamefully ruthless Pakistani army, India was able to walk into Dhaka within 13 days .  India swiftly entered Dhaka in two weeks and captured over 70,000 Pakistani soldiers.  Pakistan lost tremendous amount of territory, an entire province, prestige and confidence.  Most of credit should be given to the bloody & heroic struggle of the Bengalis as West Pakistani politicians and the army simply deserved to be humiliated for their immoral discrimination against Bengalis.  Pakistan lost prestige in the Islamic world and its link in Southeast Asia.  Its credibility as a “fortress” in the Islamic world was diminished until 1998.

1982 Siachen War (Loss to India) – Indian invasion of Pakistani territory, Pakistan unable to dislodge Indian Army from strategic higher ground.

2002 Kargil War (Loss to India) – 30,000 Indians inflicted more damage to the 5000 mostly “irregular” Pakistanis soldiers.  India was able to successfully remove Pakistanis from Indian territory.

It is important to note the aftermath of the 1971 war.
Following the victory, India and Bangladesh signed a 25 year friendship treaty.  It was not renewed upon expiry.

Bangladesh declined to renegotiate or renew the treaty when it was for expiry in 1997.[4]  Although initially received enthusiastically by both nations, the treaty with India became subject of resentment and controversy in Bangladesh, which saw it as unequal and an imposition of excessive Indian influence.[5]  Issues such as the dispute over water resources of the Farakka Barrage and India’s perceived delayed withdrawal of troops began to diminish the spirit of friendship.[6]  Sheikh Mujib’s pro-India policies antagonised many in politics and the military.[7]  Assassination of Mujib  in 1975 led to the establishment of military regimes that sought to distance the country from India.[8]

Mujib’s death led to the establishment of diplomatic relations with Pakistan and other nations that had opposed the creation of Bangladesh, such as Saudi Arabia and the People’s Republic of China.[9] Bangladesh was criticised for allowing bases on its territory for anti-India secessionist groups such as the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA), and Bangladeshi intelligence agencies were suspected of maintaining links with Pakistan’s intelligence agencies.[10][11][12] Bangladesh in turn alleged that India was supporting the Shanti Bahini insurgency in the Chittagong Hill Tracts.  Today, Bangladesh is closer to Pakistan than India.  We Pakistani People reject the behavior of our politicians and generals in the mistreatment of our brothers in Bangladesh.  We condemn Yahya Khan and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto for their behavior towards our brother country.  God bless Bangladesh.

Historical Wars

From a historical perspective, Pakistanis consider themselves to be the descendants of the Ghauris, Mughals, Durranis, Suris, Lodhis, Ghazni  who ruled the current Pakistani territory for close to a thousand years.  The Pakistani population consists of mostly Indo-Aryans.  A significant chunk of the population is Afghan/Pashtun and Irani/Baluchistanis.   The Pashtun are an integral part of Pakistan’s establishment.  It can be said there are two Pashtun countries in the world, Afghanistan and Pakistan.  This ethnic group has contributed many of Pakistan’s presidents & prime ministers(Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, Zafarullah Khan, Liaqat Ali Khan, Feroz Khan).  Their are more Pashtuns in Karachi than Kabul.  Hamid Karzai, though critical of Pakistan, referred to Pakistan and Afghanistan as conjoined twins.  This group also inflicted defeat after defeat on what is now republic of india.  People of Iranian ancestry have that have taken leadership positions include Benazir Bhutto and the current prime minister Gilani who visited his ancestral homes on a trip to Iran.  Arabs settled along the Indus and Omanis settled in the enclave of Gwadar.  Still other Pakistanis are descendants of Mongols, Mughals and Turks in addition to Persians, Sakas, Parthians, Hephthalites and Greeks. The great Mughal emperor Akbar was born in Sind.  Sher Shah Suri was born in Multan.  Ayub Khan emir of Afghanistan and destroyer of Anglo/Indian army is buried in Peshawar a hero to both countries.  His grandson fought for Pakistan leading a division in 1965.

Although Pakistanis are proud of ancient civilizations such as the Indus and their South Asian heritage, Pakistanis the people consider Pakistan the state as a natural extension of the Southwest Asian Muslim experience of the last 1000 years.  Hence, we believe our ancestors defeated the ancestors of Indians.

Ghaznavid Empire        963–1187    Islam
Mamluk dynasty        1206-1290    Islam
Khilji dynasty            1290-1320    Islam
Tughlaq dynasty       1320-1413    Islam
Sayyid dynasty         1414-1451    Islam
Lodhi dynasty           1451-1526    Islam

Mughal Empire          1526–1858    Islam

Durrani Empire          1747–1823    Islam
Dominion of Pakistan  1947-1956    Islam
Republic of Pakistan  1956-present Islam


Historic Wars

Ghaznavid Capital: Lahore

1761 Panipat III – Combined forces of Pushtuns & Balochis defeat Maratha army Northern India falls
The Second Battle of Tarain – Muhammad Ghori defeats Prithviraj Chauhan.
1001: Mahmud Ghazni defeats the Hindu Shahi king Jayapala (A Janjua Rajput) near Peshawar
1021: Mahmud Ghazni defeats Tarnochalpal and annexes Punjab
Mahmud conquers Gujarat
Mahmud conquers Nagarkot
Mahmud conquers Thanesar
Mahmud conquers Gwalior
Mahmud conquers Ujjain
Mahmud defeats Chandellas of Khujarah
Mahmud defeats the Pratiharas of Kanauj
1527 Battle of Khanwa Babar defeats Rana Sanga Rajput confederates and takes Northern India

Jehangir

Shah Jehan

Auragnzeb

Indians prefer to dismiss these losses as victories of a shameless progeny of subjugated, lower-caste Indian/Hindus nation converted at the point of the sword.  If this relieves the Indian psyche than fine.  The only problem is this is really not historically accurate.  Let’s look at the people that settled in the region.

* 1700 BC – 0600 BC: Start of the Aryan civilization in Sapta Sindhu, Punjab and of Indus culture
* 500 BC: Gandhara Buddhist civilization (500 BC to 500 AD)
* 516 BC: North Pakistan becomes easternmost province of Achaemenid Empire of Persia. Gandharais semi-independent kingdom
* 600 BC: Beginning of historic period under Achaemenians; Sindh & Punjab as provinces of the empire of Darius I of Persia
* 327 BC – 325 BC: Alexander of Macedonia invades Pakistan and captures Taxila
* 300 BC: Mauryan empire, Ashoka promotes Buddhism
* 185 BC: Bactrian Greeks conquer North-West Pakistan
* 75 BC: Arrival of Scythians (Sakas) from central Asia
* 20: Parthians conquer Northern Pakistan
* 60: Kushans from central Asia overthrow Parthians
* 3rd Century: Kushans decline and are dominated by Sassanian empire of Persia
* 4th Century: Kidar (little) Kushans come to power
* 450: White Huns (Hephthalites) attacked Gandhara, sacked its cities and burnt down its many monasteries and centres of learning
* 565: Sassanians and Turks overthrow Huns
* Late 6th –7th Century: Turki Shahi control area West of Indus, including Gandhara
* 711 – 712: Muhammad bin Qasim conquers Sindh and Southern Punjab
Coastal trade and the presence of a colony in Sindh permitted significant cultural exchange and the introduction of Muslim teachers into the subcontinent. Considerable conversions took place, especially amongst the Buddhist majority.

* 870 – 1026: Hindu Shahi ruled from Multan to Kabul
* 1001: Mahmud Ghazni defeats the Hindu Shahi king Jayapala (A Janjua Rajput) near Peshawar
* 1021: Mahmud Ghazni defeats Tarnochalpal and annexes Punjab
* 1058: Sumra Dynasty (1058–1351) ends the Arab domination and establishes its own rule over Sindh.
* 1148 – 1206: Ghaurids Period
* 1221: Mongol Genghis Khan invades Punjab
* 1351: Samma Dynasty assumed rule over Sindh
* 1398: Tamerlane plunders Lahore
* 1472: Sher Shah Suri (original name Farid Khan] born in Multan
* 1526 – 1857: Mughal ascendancy (1526–1707), nominal rule by Mughals (1707–1857)
* 1541 – 1543: Sher Shah Suri built the Rohtas Fort
* 1586: Yusufzais defeat Akbar in the Karakar pass
* 1701: Kalhoro Dynasty establishes its rule over Sindh
* 1739: Nadir Shah of Persia invades subcontinent
* 1751-52: Ahmed Shah Abdali annexes Punjab to his kingdom
* 1782: The Baloch tribe of Talpur defeats the last Kalhora ruler Mian Abdul Nabi in the battle of Halani

These diverse ancestral groups of races & religions above are proudly represented by their descendants in modern day Pakistan.  I believe this historical baggage  is also the reason for Republic of India’s hostility and stubbornness towards modern-day Pakistan.  Let us hope we can learn from our bloody past.

April 22, 2010

Pakistan wishes best luck to Chinese Cricket team

From Dawn:

Chinese cricketers are training hard in Pakistan ahead of this year’s Asian Games, where they hope to raise the profile of the sport in their home country, their coach said Tuesday.

Cricket will make its first appearance at the Asian Games in November in the southern Chinese city of Guangzhou, and the home side has been preparing with help from Pakistan’s former captain and batting master Javed Miandad.

“Because of the excellent relationship between the two countries, Chinese players were given a chance by Pakistan and six of the players have got some valuable tips from batting legend Javed Miandad,” China’s Pakistani coach Rashid Khan told AFP.

President Asif Ali Zardari, who is patron-in-chief of the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB), appointed Miandad as cricket ambassador to China last year.

“It’s a lifetime opportunity for the Chinese players… The Chinese players are very disciplined, they follow strict timings and are excellent ambassadors of their country,” Rashid said.

One player, 22-year-old Jiang Shu Yao, said he was thrilled to meet Miandad and paceman Shoaib Akhtar.

“It is a lifetime experience,” said Yao. “I heard a lot about Miandad and today I met him and was all ears when he was giving me tips how to bat. It will help me in the Asian Games.

April 20, 2010

The trouble with Tariq Ali

Tariq Ali, educated in Pakistan and Oxford and based in London is a straight-talking, left-wing intellect type.  He is a professional protester, a brilliant man with a stellar career as a journalist, editor, director, fiction and non-fiction writer.  Apparently, John Lennon even wrote a song about Ali’s during his protesting days.  His books are an enjoyable read but there was always something that bothered me about this guy.  Reading the book “clash of fundamentalism” a word-play on Samuel Huntingtons landmark essay, I could never quite put my finger on it.  It takes a couple of books authored by Tariq to finally recognize the source of my irritation with this man.  Ali is bitter about his communist family’s failure in Pakistani politics.  He is bitter about his precious ideology of communism ultimately proving itself to be a complete failure.  (yes, yes, I know.  “True” or “Real” communism has never been applied. I am sure there is a flavor of communism better than Zeus’ palace.)

That’s not my main gripe though.  It’s hard to like a man who does not sympathize with his own country or someone that criticizes the birth of his nation or ridicules the religion of his countrymen or downplay his compatriot’s struggle for freedom.  While most influential members of  various disaporas do their best to assist, promote and support their country, Tariq Ali comes off as a bratty, privileged transplant with a bone to pick.  He has a tendency to not support Pakistan even in the few instances where Pakistan merits support.  For example, he dismisses Mountbatten/Nehru unfair treatment in dividing the Indo/Pak territory or regarding Kashmir.   He stands for no one except for himself.  He is a dedicated communist but opts for London rather than Havana, Pyong Yang or Soviet Moscow.  He has all but abandoned his Pakistani nationality but never backs off from profiting with his expert analysis on the country.  Only when Pakistan is in the news and Ali is need of book-sales, does he become a spokesman with a surplus of Pakistani street-cred.  Otherwise, he is a brown Englishman (though dissatisfied with its capitalistic system).   From the safety of his London home, he pretends to understand the difficulties and challenges of ordinary Pakistanis.  He is the ultimate contradiction.  Most orietnalists have an excuse but Ali is an Orientalist from the Orient.  He is a communist but criticizes Pakistan’s ally China for their authoritarian regime.  He is an athiest who abandoned his religion a long time ago but never fails to profit from his  Muslim background  when the latest book on the Ottoman empire needs marketing.  He is a die-hard Marxist but lives for  royalty checks deposited in his bourgeoisie bank account.  He sympathizes with the peasants of Pakistan but unlike other expatriates, is hardly involved in charity events to actually help people.  He dismisses the 150 million+ Pakistanis who retain their loyalty to their nation, to the children that plaster pakistani flags on every august 14th no matter the circumstances.  Ali would much rather gloss about his 1969 prediction regarding Pakistan’s dismemberment.  (Tariq and about a thousand others).  When it actually happens, he seems to be in ecstasy.  What kind of man enjoys the dismemberment of his country because it boosts his career?  In his recent book, “Duel: Pakistan & US” is basically regurgitated content from his previous history tabloids.   Pakistan was in the news.  Money was to be made and Ali delivered with a perfect copy and paste job from his previous non-fiction books.

In short, as far as British Pakistanis go, Tariq Ali is no Amir khan (the boxing world champ).   Amir Khan proudly boxes for England, proudly wears Pakistan-themed wear and proudly offers prayers before battle, proudly lives a conservative lifestyle of his culture.

As far as critical nationals go, Tariq Ali is no Arundhati Roy.  Deeply and often rightly critical, she is still a proud and dedicated Indian.

The trouble with Tariq Ali is that he is owes allegiance to no one but himself.  Pity.  He was a Pakistani talent.

April 18, 2010

Indian Perceptions – Pakistani Perspectives (A series)

This is probably one of the best examples of Indian Perceptions exemplified by the Indian interviewer and the Pakistan Perspective as explained beautifully by Mohsin Hamid.  It’s an interview from 2006 but still relevant.

What’s your personal map of Pakistan?
Similar to what makes up anyone’s map. The city one lives in, friends, attachment to things like sounds, food, sights… A sense of belonging and emotional investment in the place — those are the things that link me to Pakistan.

Does its conception of itself as an Islamic state bother you?

I’m not sure what you mean. Pakistan is a very diverse country. I’m not sure how much it does define itself as a religious state. Official speak might seem to say it is a religious state, but for me that’s just one facet of the place.

What idea of India do you and people from your world hold?

Well, it’s mixed. Certainly, there are a lot of positive things. We all have Indian friends; people who’ve married across the border, who travel across borders. There are television shows, films, music we all like. At the same time, there’s a fairly pervasive feeling that India is a rather arrogant, uncompromising neighbour. There’s also a sense that India is a country that is a lot about hype. All this talk of India Shining and what not — a lot of mainstream Indian media will portray India as this flourishing super power doing wonderfully well, when the truth is most Indians are desperately poor. Pakistanis seem to be much less jingoistic and nationalistic about themselves. I think as a smaller and more cynical country, Pakistanis find this nationalistic aspect of India pretty off-putting.

What would the self-criticisms of your generation of Pakistanis be?

There are many. We’ve failed to evolve a lasting democratic set-up. Failed to find a peaceful resolution with India, failed to educate a majority of our people.

Are there versions of Pakistan that make you blanch?

Your question is more interesting than the answer. Let me turn this around. How would you respond to a Pakistani periodical calling you up and saying, what are things about your country that make you blanch? It’s like a neighbour you don’t have nice relations with saying, what about your mother don’t you like? Certainly, there are things about Pakistan I don’t like, but to make that a topic of enquiry is problematic. Just look at headlines related to Pakistan in the mainstream Indian press and you’ll find a very jingoistic, distorted view of Pakistan. Even in Tehelka, which might be a very liberal paper otherwise, the tone is very hawkish. As a Pakistani, I find Indian media prone to exaggerating the threat posed by Pakistan, and the differences between the two countries, as opposed to highlighting similarities. In some ways, I think the biggest threat Pakistan poses to India is the threat to the Indian ego, as opposed to anything more substantive. So in that context, this is a very odd question. With that caveat in place, I’d say, I have enormous love for Pakistan, though I’m frequently frustrated by it.

The media war is equal. Here the focus is on the ISI, Dawood Ibrahim, terror camps. After the recent blasts …

I find it all very amusing, I have to say. Let me give you a simple example. Why in the 30-day Congressional notification period for the sale of F 16s to Pakistan — pending for almost two decades — why in this 30-day period would Pakistan choose to bomb India, when that can only look bad for Pakistan? It’s the one time in our history when we are most likely to be restrained; we want the deal to go through.

It’s not just about this blast. The talk is of jehadi groups within Pakistan —

I think India is terrified of looking inside itself because if a homegrown Indian Muslim group has done this in Bombay, you’d have massacres. India is a tinderbox so it’s forced to look outside. Who’s backing the Naxalites? People out of Nepal? Who’s backing the Muslim groups? Pakistan and Bangladesh? There are a billion Indians, many of whom are very upset with the government and could certainly be involved. In Pakistan, we have sectarian bombings all the time. Certainly one could say these are the work of Indian intelligence agencies. Perhaps they are. But I think it’s a mistake to look at these problems in this way and ignore what is often a very strong domestic component. I think Pakistan is right now desperate for a peace deal on Kashmir. Musharraf — like him or not — is bending over to find some compromise. But India is completely uncompromising. It prefers the status quo so any time there’s a bomb in India, it can be blamed on Pakistan.

Indians would throw Kargil and terror camps and infiltration at you…

They would, but Kargil was at one time. At one time Musharraf wanted to have this tactical invasion of India. Now he doesn’t. People change. I think the Kargil war is really more an issue of Indian ego — which I think is a very fragile thing and the biggest barrier to normalising relations with Pakistan.

If the Indian press demonises (sic) Pakistan, isn’t it the same in the Pakistani press?

Absolutely, particularly in the Urdu language press. But, you know, I think the demonisation (sic) of Pakistan in India is more than here because Pakistan has no substantial Hindu community. So the average Pakistani deals with India only as a concept. There is not much entrenched actual bigotry. India, on the other hand, has over 100 million Muslims. This is a very real issue, sometimes a very real problem for many Indians. Pakistan gets lumped along with that, so the resentment towards it in India is much more.

How’s Pakistan negotiated modernity?

In remarkably complex ways. You have everything in Pakistan — mini zones of talibanisation, fashion shows with girls wearing next to nothing in Lahore, parties in Karachi where people are doing cocaine and Ecstasy, villages where people don’t have education or electricity. It’s a huge collage. The thing people often forget about Pakistan is that it’s enormous. It’s the sixth biggest country in the world. China, India, US, Indonesia, Brazil, then Pakistan. It’s only when you compare it with something even more galactically vast like India that it seems anything but huge. So there’s a huge diversity in the way people are dealing with modernity — from complete hedonistic embrace to religious reactionism. The result is a bit of a muddle.

Despite themselves, people across the globe are becoming wary of the dominant face of Islam.

I don’t think there is any homogeneous Islam. As a novelist, I negotiate these things by breaking them down to the personal. Even if some basic principles are the same, there are huge variations in outlook. And religion is only one facet of what makes us human. There are cultural identities, gender, race… For me, Islam is a word that includes an incredible multiplicity. The notion of a strong, politicised, unitary Islam which is either a threat or a transformative force is for me an artificial construct. Analogous to the movement trying to make Hinduism a monolithic identity. That said, within the world of Islam, certainly there are many who are deeply reactionary, who are moving towards some frightening utopia which for someone like me is terrifying. But I don’t characterise those people as typical of Islam. Look at Pakistan, Islamic parties never get more than 10-15 percent of the vote. They are significant, but the vast majority would rather vote for schools, jobs, food than some utopia.

What do you think of Musharraf?

I am deeply ambiguous. First, on the negative count, how can the political system he’s building be sustainable? Second, there’s his willingness to use force to settle disputes within Pakistan. Third, one just doesn’t know what Pakistan foreign policy is! Are we really anti-Taliban and fully pushing for peace with India? It’s unclear. There is no transparency. We seem broadly positive, but there’s no way of knowing what the intelligence agencies or army or state actors are doing. On the positive side, there’s been dramatic economic growth in Pakistan — almost as fast as India since 2001. There’s freedom in the media, an explosion of TV channels, kids doing things I couldn’t dream of. Lahore, Karachi — the cities have a new vibe. There also appears to be a relative desire to disengage from the affairs of our neighbours, and a relative check on the non-state violent actors within Pakistan. I’d put a question mark on that last one though. But the trouble is there are enough sycophants in the Pakistani government to warp your sense of how right you might be. That warping process which eventually leads to monomaniacal figures has begun with Musharraf. Yet, I also think he is also sincere, not corrupt, and trying to do the best he can..

April 17, 2010

Indian Perception: Evil Pakistanis killing Minorities

Pakistani Perspective:  It’s bad but not THAT bad.  Undoubtedly, we need to improve.

The occasion is a Diwali celebration at the Islamabad Headquarters of the Pakistan Muslim League, standing (and clapping) extreme left is Syed Mushahid Hussain, Secretary General of the Pakistan Muslim League, next to him is Ijaz ul Haq (Minister of Religious Affairs, and son of Gen. Zia ul Haq), fourth from left is Tariq Azim, State Minister for Information.

Our Kick-ass bowler Danish Kaneria

http://hindutemplespakistan.blogspot.com/

April 17, 2010

Reformistani Book List – The First Scientist

As Muslims, we are subject of taunts for our ‘backwardness’ and lack of secular, scientific achievements.  I encourage readers to read a book on the “first scientist” about a Muslim scientist in Islam’s golden age.  It is a nicely written biography by a westerner, Bradley Steffens.  He has written about a neglected subject that needs to be read by all.  This book of self-knowledge is available on amazon.com

Here is the link to his website:  http://www.ibnalhaytham.net/

Reform does not always mean change to something new but change to something better.   This book is a perfect illustration of our rich history admired by western intellectuals.

Critical Praise for Ibn al Haytham – First Scientist

Midwest Book Review, March 6, 2007: An unusual survey of a scientific pioneer who lived from 950 to 1040 and whose work fostered several scientific and mathematical fields from physics to astronomy and geometry. Chapters consider his life, achievements, and experimental processes in this fine blend of history and science biography.

The Fountain, May-June, 2008: I congratulate Bradley Steffens for his beautiful work about Ibn al-Haytham and his advancement of experimental science. The book includes many colorful illustrations from the pages of history relevant to understanding Ibn al-Haytham’s life and his contributions to science. The timeline at the end is very informative. Finally, it has sources, a bibliography, and web pages, which direct the interested reader to further information.—Dr. Ertan Salik Read the complete review here.

Kirkus Reviews, December 1, 2006: In this clearly written, carefully reasoned profile, Steffens not only traces the scantly documented life of one of early modern science’s giants (better known in Europe as Alhazen), but also places him both within the broader contexts of early Muslim society, and of the whole history of science. A prolific writer who spent most of his life in Basra and Cairo, Ibn al Haytham is chiefly remembered today for his work in optics, and as an exponent of enquiry through direct, repeatable experimentation rather than inductive reasoning alone. Along with easy-to-understand discussions of his achievements, readers will find a speculative but credible character study of a devout, brilliant polymath who was rather conveniently subject to mysterious bouts of mental illness that twice rescued him from onerous government jobs. The many color pictures enhance this illuminating narrative with maps, diagrams, prints, and images of illustrated manuscript pages.

April 17, 2010

Indian Perception: India much more successful and better governed than Pakistan

Pakistani Perspective:

We agree with Indians 100%.  We hate our politicians more than you do!

April 17, 2010

Indian Perception: Typical Indian Muslim Profile SRK/Kalam/Premji

Pakistani Perspective:

It’s hard to tell if Indians are intentionally trying to be deceitful or just delusional when they say Muslims are perfectly integrated in India.  Most  neutral and some Indian sources disagree.  As always, the truth often in the middle.  We Pakistanis need to improve the state of our minorities but we don’t think India is well positioned as a model of Muslim integration.  The SRK’s are an statistical outlier worthy of praise but not representative of Indian Muslim reality.

By Ather Farouqui

With the spectre of communalism raising its ugly head all across the country, Muslim ghettoization is emerging as a grave and complex problem that requires urgently to be addressed. It has a decisive bearing on communalism. Unfortunately, it has not drawn any serious attention.

It is common knowledge that during the last two decades, Muslim families have faced enormous difficulties in renting houses and flats in developed residential areas, which are obviously Hindu-dominated areas, as Hindu landlords tend to shun Muslim tenants even if they belong to the same social class and enjoy equal or better footing in society. In Bombay, for instance, a large majority of housing societies openly refuse membership to Muslims. In other cities, too, it is difficult for a Muslim to get an apartment in a housing society. Landlords and housing societies generally may not openly say no to Muslims but adopt various subterfuges. If a well-known Muslim cine artist in Bombay finds it difficult to rent a house from a Hindu landlord, the plight of the common Muslim as well as the gravity of the situation can be estimated.[1]

Muslim ghettoization began after partition but gathered pace with slow but steady migration of Muslims from rural to urban areas. Amongst other factors, the abolition of zamindari was a major factor for Muslim migration to urban areas as Muslims were the community most affected by the zamindari abolition. The second most important factor was the emerging insecurity as with the partition mass migration changed the sociology of demography. In the seventies and eighties it became a worrying phenomenon. Rural India is almost entirely bereft of Muslims except in Assam, Kerala and West Bengal. The villages of north India particularly, where Muslim presence was once 5-10 per cent, are now inhabited only by Hindus. The Muslim population has gradually been forced to migrate to Muslim localities in nearby towns. In all of north India, barring Jammu & Kashmir—which is itself a ghettoised Muslim society—it is difficult to find even a single Muslim family in Hindu-dominated areas even in towns and cities.

In general, Muslims are forced to settle in Muslim-majority areas with poor infrastructure and civic facilities, for which the government alone is to blame.

Until the early nineties, one could find Muslim government servants occupying government housing in areas where the majority of the population was not Muslim. But even here, a change has been visible since 1992. To take just one example: a large number of Muslim teachers of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) in New Delhi, reputedly an enlightened institution with liberal outlook and social sensitivity, prefer to live in Muslim-dominated colonies or ghettos rather than on university campus after 1992.

The result of this phenomenon is that all over the country Muslim families are to be seen only in areas that can be termed as ‘Muslim clusters’. Muslim staff members as well as the old generation of teachers at JNU, have mostly returned to Muslim-dominated areas after retirement. An employee of the World Bank or a foreign mission, owing to fear psychosis, is often forced to live in places like the Jama Masjid area of Old Delhi, though his social profile certainly does not match that of the average inhabitant of the walled city. It has become common for families that moved from the walled city to New Delhi some fifty years ago to move back to their old family homes simply because they do not feel secure in Hindu-dominated areas.

Jamia Nagar, near New Friends Colony in south Delhi, boasts huge Muslim elite which shifted there after 1992. Land costs here have gone through the roof owing to limited space and tremendous demand as each new day brings more families, even NRIs, needless to say Muslim NRIs, seeking a safe foothold in Delhi further straining the already poor infrastructure. Such is the state of infrastructure here that Jamia Nagar, which adjoins the campus of theJamia Millia Islamia, a central university, does not even have a government dispensary or a branch of a public sector bank (though there is one on the university campus). Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit admitted the lack of these bare minimum facilities in the area in a TV interview after the Batla House shootout. The disturbing thing was that she had been unaware of the situation despite having been ten years at the helm of affairs in Delhi.

Jamia Nagar conjoins many Muslim colonies such as Batla House, Zakir Nagar, Abul Fazal Enclave, Ghaffar Manzil, Johri Farm, Noor Nagar, and Okhla Vihar. This whole area, with a population of about 10 lakh, is a victim of official apathy. The situation is not unique to Delhi but prevails in all state capitals and district towns.

No multinational bank provides the inhabitants of Muslim colonies with credit cards and MNC pizza and burger outlets, based in nearby posh areas refuse to deliver in these areas. The capital city of India, New Delhi, is no exception. Even housing loans are not extended by most nationalized banks in Muslim areas in Delhi and New Delhi, Jamia Nagar being just one example.

Who is responsible for this increasing ghettoisation of Muslims? Civil society is squarely to blame. Let me quote two instances which were widely reported at the time and still haunt the memory. The house of the famous Urdu poet Bashir Badr, who insisted on living in the Hindu-dominated colony of Shastri Nagar in Meerut because of his immense faith in secularism and popularity as poet amongst Hindus was lost to a communal blaze in the late 1987. Fortunately, the lives of his family members were saved as everyone was out at the time of the incident. Much worse was the assassination of Zaki Anwar, a college lecturer and Urdu writer, during the infamous Jamshedpur riots in 1979. Zaki had unshakeable faith in his Hindu neighbours, Hindu-Muslim unity, and Gandhian philosophy. He sat on a Gandhian-type long-drawn-out hunger strike in a Hindu-majority area to protest against communal tension. But all that his faith and his striving for togetherness and amity led to was his brutal killing. In both cases, it can be inferred that the Hindu neighbourhoods did not live up to the faith of the victims, whatever the reasons. Bashir Badr now lives in Bhopal and Zaki Anwar’s family in Jamshedpur, both in Muslim-dominated areas. One needs to study the case of Bashir Badr in perspective as he supported the BJP during NDA rule and is now a Muslim poster boy of the BJP in Madhya Pradesh. He made an all-India tour during the general elections of 2004 to convince Muslims to support the BJP and Atal Bihari Vajpayee as Prime Minster.

The poignant story of former Member of Parliament Ehsan Jafri, brutally murdered in a Hindu-dominated area in Ahmedabad in the 2002 Gujarat pogrom, is etched in the nation’s memory. No civil society can withstand repeated incidents of this kind.

The Bhagalpur riots of 1989 led to large-scale migration of rural Muslims in Bihar and the demolition of the Babri Masjid on 6 December 1992, and the resultant backlash drove the last nail in the coffin of Hindu-Muslim neighbourhoods all over the country. As per press reports on the Bhagalpur riots, in all the neighbouring villages of Bhagalpur, where Muslims constituted less than 10 per cent of the population, the majority were killed and only a few managed to flee. In Hashimpura locality of Meerut, 40 Muslim youths were taken away by the police in May 1987 and massacred in cold blood and their bodies thrown in the canal.

In sharp contrast, not a single incident has been reported of a non-Muslim, in particular a Hindu, family living in a Muslim-dominated area having faced a similar situation during communal tension or violence in India after independence.

All the same, post-1992 one can find hardly any Hindu family in a Muslim-majority locality, which was not the case earlier. Overall, the extremely surcharged atmosphere has forced non-Muslim families to shift out, turning their original abodes into Muslim ghettos by default. The phenomenon of a few Muslim families still living in Hindu dominated areas and vice versa needs serious sociological study.

The question is: does communal ghettoisation represent the death of our hitherto composite culture and liberal and tolerant outlook or can we still do something to save it? Do we have the option of remaining silent? The answer is decidedly no. The question then is: what can be done to set the clock back and foster communal harmony? It will take a lot of courage and determination to figure out the answers but that is the only way forward if secular democracy is to survive. And we have to do it before it is too late. A new and reformed politics shunning populism is a necessary step forward.

But we have to keep in mind that communal categorisation and communal identity perception can be resolved only through progressive mass movements dealing with issues pertaining to different facets of our shared life. Not for a moment does the term progressive refer to movement prescribed by different left wing political parties. The ideological confusion and resultant contradictions of these parties are more dangerous than the communalism. Movements for literacy, education, sports facilities, employment, health care, shelter, and community interaction can help develop a wider political and social consciousness, thereby lessening the communal identity perception of the common people.

This is also the only way forward if Indian democracy is to survive. And we have to do it before it is too late.

1. The shameful incident of Emran Hashmi, a noted film actor of Bombay, in July 2009 and a number of other incidents of the same nature in which high-profile Muslims were refused houses, highlight the problem. As per reports, Emran [Imran] Hashmi was ‘told by [the] Pali Hill’s Nibbana Cooperative Housing Society, [Bombay] to go and look elsewhere’. The actor, who is married to a Hindu girl, and interestingly whose mother is a Christian, ‘believes the housing society is discriminating against him because he is a Muslim’. He has further informed the media, ‘The seller, Survana, has now informed us that the society will not give us an NOC and it has blocked the sale. We have information that this has been done as they will not allow any Muslim in the society’.

It would be appropriate to remember that in the past, Bollywood actress Shabana Azmi, one-time Member of Parliament and her writer-activist husband Javed Akhtar, now a Member of Parliament, have faced problems getting a house in Juhu (Bombay). As per press reports appeared at the time of Emran Hashmi incident, we came to know that once actor Aamir Khan also filed a PIL after being refused a house in Lokhandwala, Maharashtra.

For a detailed report of the Emran Hashmi issue, see The Times of India, New Delhi, 31 July 2009 which published a news items entitled ‘ Emran Hashmi can’t get a house in Pali Hill’ on the front page with additional information entitled ‘Being a celeb does not mean you get everything’ on page 11.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.