Folks - I made a statement above that I need to explain - some new aha moments I had. I said that Pakistan is failing but may not collapse. The idea of making such a differentiation between failure and collapse came from some articles I was reading about Somalia on the BBC website. Much as I dislike the BBC's views the articles were lucid and informative. Please pardon me for digressing a bit about Somalia. I intend to talk about Pakistan eventually.
The article speaks of Somalia's northern 1/3rd which has a coastline oriented east-west in the gulf of Aden (and not Indian Ocean). That area has declared independence and calls itself "Somaliland". It apparently used to be a British colony that was given independence and stayed independent for 5 days before opting to join the rest of Somalia, but has now split away again. Somaliland is the leaast dysfunctional of all the areas of Somalia. Actually I think the UN should recognize it as a separate state and aid it to become a separate country - I haev no idea why no one is bothered about doing that.
The rest of Somalia is the "failed state". The Southern parts - the region that has a coastline on the Indian ocean includes Mogadishu which for some inexplicable reason is still called the "Capital of Somalia". Those Southern areas are currently in the midst of a famine and are dominated by an Islamist group called the Al Shabab who apparently tell Somali women "Marry or be beheadead". What tickled me no end was the BBC article description that says, in the same breath, that Somalia is a "failed state" but its economy is doing well. wtf?
The article goes on to explain that although Somalia is failed businesses have thrived. Somali businessmen have taken risks to set up a Telecom network and are reaping rich rewards fro taking that risk. Therefore the economy is doing well. In addition Somalia gets $2 billion as remittances from no resident Somalis abroad and that forms about 60% of Somalia's income.
The point I am making here is that you can have a country that is failing on all counts. A country where one part has split away and has already declared independence. A country that is spreading Islamist terror and mayhem to areas around it - including piracy on the ocean. And still it is considered to be one country. But a failed country. But an economically successful country. A country of famines and poverty and violence. Just look at the contradictions in the descriptions of Somalia:
Somalia is supposed to be
- "One country"
- A failed country
- An economically successful country supported by some businesses and foreign remittances
- A country with famine and Islamist terrorism. Islamic radical groups at war with others.
See the parallels with Pakistan? Despite differences the similarities are striking
Pakistan is not one country. It is 3 or 4. Some of those countries are failed countries. Others are doing well economically and are well supported by foreign remittances. Some areas have great poverty and even malnutrition.
Basically the world has "given up" on Somalia and as long as it is no skin off their balls the world will "give up" on Pakistan. Maybe that would be a good thing - especially of the US "gave up".
But in the case of Somalia I think the problem could be reduced by international recognition of Somaliland as a separate country with the UN seat that goes with it. Pakistan too should be dealt with similarly. Reduce the size of the problem by recognizing first a Pashtunistan and help that nation survive. Let the economically prosperous Islamist factions of Pakjab and Sindh be a separate country that is not allowed to exert hegemony over weaker people. Not an easy solution to implement given that Pashtunistan will be land locked - but why not get Baluchistan into the picture?
Pakistan needs to be split.n The simple act of recognizing the aspiratiosn of the Pasthun people on both sides of the Durand line would be a step forward.