Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 21, 2010

[CRamS]

Vir Sanghvi: Current events have a tiresome predictability these days

PM says he is optimistic about peace with Pakistan; government hands fifth dossier to Islamabad about 26/11 attacks; Islamabad laughs at dossier; government sends sixth dossier; Islamabad says that dossier is fiction; government sends seventh dossier; Islamabad buys new shredder to handle tons of paper being sent by Delhi; PM says he is optimistic that Pakistan will take action against terrorists.

Funny reading were it not so tragic.

[Rudradev]

Afghanistan’s National Security Adviser Dafdar Rangin Spanta:

Afghanistan urges Pakistan to target terror groups

By Lynne O'Donnell (AFP) – 8 hours ago ...............................

Spanta told AFP on Monday that Afghanistan had "tremendous evidence" that Pakistani authorities allowed Al-Qaeda and other terror organisations to operate on the country's soil and had presented it to Islamabad "many times".


"We have evidence that the terrorists from Pakistan are involved in daily attacks against our people and international 'jihadi' groups are active here. They have their base and sanctuaries behind our border and this is a serious problem.

"It is not a particular secret that the terrorists have sanctuaries in Pakistan, that they have training centres, that they have the possibility to come to Afghanistan, attack us and go back," said Spanta.

Read it all:

AFP via Google

Is Spanta going to to go the way of Amrullah Saleh and Hanif Atmar in an NA-purge by a Karzai administration trying to appease the Pukis? I hope not, and that his words signal a change in the winds.

[darshhan]

Has Vir Sanghvi turned the corner?It seems that he has started believing in nationalism.

[Prem]

Another confused Poaki wondring wheather Poaks are grown or take birth?

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 2010_pg3_2

Nationalism: inclusive versus exclusive — II —I shit aq Ahmek

Stanley Wolpert, who is considered a sympathetic biographer of Jinnah, has noted that when Jinnah was delivering his address even his immediate disciples were visibly confused and shaken. What Jinnah was doing was repudiating the basis of nationhood on which he had demanded Pakistan: that Muslims were a separate nation from other communities of India. Now, he seemed to champion inclusive nationalism. Mir Mohammad Ali Talpur mentioned (‘Whose progeny? — I’, Daily Times, June 20, 2010) the 1928 Nehru Report as having made the same pledge. In fact, this was explicitly stated in the Nehru Report: “There shall be no state religion; men and women shall have equal rights as citizens.”
So, then, why first divide India on the basis of an exclusive nationalism based on religious criteria and then adopt an inclusive formula based on territorial criteria? Jinnah never explained. He simply employed a strategy that would deliver the objective: the creation of a separate Muslim state. Moreover, both before and after the creation of Pakistan he did refer to Islam playing a role in the polity. The letter to Pir Manki Sharif is testimony to that. Therefore, all sections of Pakistani society could pick and choose a statement of his or pledge given by him that suited their sensibilities.
His followers were less charismatic. They were products of the Aligarh Muslim University. They had been fed on the Romantic School of eclectic historical narrative associated with Syed Ameer Ali, Shibli Nomani and others. Iqbal greatly augmented such thinking with his poetic recital of the glory of Islam, especially that of its military exploits. Thus bringing Islam in the centre of Pakistani national identity was imperative for them to justify the creation of Pakistan.

[pgbhat]

Has Vir Sanghvi turned the corner?It seems that he has started believing in nationalism.

It has little to do with nationalism, just common sense. A sign of exasperation to GOIs reaction to successive terror attacks engineered by Bakis.

[arun]

X Posted from the "Oppression of Minorities In Pakistan" thread.

Some statistics regarding the persecution of Muslims of the Ahmadi / Ahmadiyya sect by their Muslim co-religionists in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

While the the Ahmadi / Ahmadiyya sect of Islam undoubtedly faces the systematic and institutionalized discrimination of the Pakistani State, the degree of violence directed against them is quite low from the standpoint of violence unleashed against the minority Shia Muslim sect in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

The wealth and influence of Ahmadi / Ahmadiyya sect of Islam appears to insulate them from being impacted by more of the egregious violence ostensibly motivated by the Muslim faith that is evident in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan:

The Agony of Pakistan's Ahmadiyya

Written by Aftab Alexander Mughal

Tuesday, 06 July 2010

Fundamentalist terrorism shows its ugly face at a pacifist sect ..............................

In the period 1984-2009, 105 Ahmadis were killed, according to two authors writing in Viewpoint, a Pakistani online magazine. “During the same period, 22 Ahmadiyya mosques were demolished, 28 were sealed by authorities, 11 were set on fire, and 14 were occupied while construction of 41 was banned. In at least 47 cases, burials were denied in common grave yards while 28 bodies were exhumed,” the two wrote.

Since 2000, an estimated 400 Ahmadis have been formally charged in criminal cases, including blasphemy. According to one report, in 2009 at least 37 Ahmadis were charged under the general provisions of the blasphemy laws and more than 50 were charged under specific provisions of the law applying to Ahmadis. Many remain imprisoned.

Both printed and electronic Pakistani media have played a scandalous role in spreading hatred against the community. Recently, the Muslim Canadian Congress (MCC) blamed major media outlets in Pakistan for inflaming rhetoric against Ahmadiyya, Ismaili and Shia Muslims. In particular, the MCC pointed out that GEO Television has become the voice of al-Qaeda and the Taliban and spreads hate against these communities as well as against non-Muslims.

According to one report, “After the attacks some newspapers ran op-ed articles creating an impression as if these attacks were a violent consequence of the ongoing polemic between certain Muslim sects and the Ahmadiyyas.” ................................

Asia Sentinel

[lakshmikanth]

^^^

Written by Aftab Alexander Mughal

OT....but what kind of a name is that? Can't help but notice that both people the name alludes to, waged barbaric violence on Bharat

[Sanjay M]

CIA-vs-ISI Spying Wars

[Airavat]

Madrassa statistics

According to the ministry of religious affairs, Pakistan has at least 14,061 religious institutions, teaching about 1,191,430 students. Unofficial estimates are much higher. Dr Manzoor Ali Azhari, head of the Institute of Religious Education in Taxila, says that according to some rough estimates, at least 24,000 madrassas are functional across the country in which about 2.7 million students are enrolled.

A lot of madrassas charge a nominal fee of Rs50 to 80 that parents in low-income neighbourhoods can often afford. This helps finance the seminaries to a certain extent. “Sometimes when students can’t pay the fees we ask for chanda (donation) and are able to raise sufficient funds,” says Wali, a teacher at Iqra Islami Tajweedul Quran in Karachi. “Everyone points a finger at our fund-raising mechanism. How come no one questions the government about the money they get from the US?” asks Naeem, refusing to disclose the main source of funding for his madrassa.

Jamia Binnoria al Almiya is affiliated with Wafaqul Madaris al Arabia, the governing body of the majority Deobandi madrassas in Pakistan which controls about 8,000 seminaries. Apart from the Deobands, representatives of other seminary boards – Barelvi, Ahle Hadith, Shia and Jamaat-e-Islami – affiliated with the Ittehad Tanzimat Madaris-e-Deeniya – also refuse to comply when it comes to regulation of their syllabus.

[RamaY]

There are lots and lots of Indians who are ambivalent about Pakistan... sometimes they feel a thrill of cricketing rivalry, at other times they put Pakistan in the back of their minds and are lulled by "Aman-ki-Asha" type nonsense, and only when something like 26/11 happens are they confronted with the full reality of what Pakistan is about. But what happens after the atrocity? There are a few weeks of sorrowful rage, followed by a few months of festering resentment at the GOI's impotent response; and finally, as the great wash of other priorities compels them to get on with their lives, these people end up forgetting about Pakistan and paying attention to other things. Ultimately their anger heals and they are ripe for "Aman-ki-Asha" type propaganda again. Until the next 26/11.
...

A small amendment with your permission Rudradev-ji.

- The Yindootvavadis want to rebuild Bharat to its just glory.

- The common Indian is enraged by Paki perfidy, but busy with his/her life.

- The ignorant Indian has assured life style, but gets enraged by Pakis only when 11/26 type attacks happen. These guys talk about it a while, raises Indian flag when a Kargil happens and falls back to normalcy.

- The informed Indian has assured life style, but thinks 11/26 type attacks are part of life. They think Pakistan-abdul is his spoiled brother. He is ok to give a jhappad once in a while but thinks TSP is family.

- The closet Dhimmi a.k.a liberals thinks not only 11/26 is justified but also are genuine responses to [sic] Gujrat pogram. They also think Kargil could be avoided by solving the core issue of Cashmere to Paki's content. Our Vir Sanghvis and Burkha Dutts fall into this category.

- The WKK believes that Pakistan has a right to Indian wealth, and advise peace and accommodation in the midst of 11/26 type attacks and Kargil incursions.

We have a handful of WKKs and bunch of Dhimmis in our midst. In some elders' perspective, it is illegal to question and put-down these Dhimmis and WKKs in India.

[RamaY]

Has Vir Sanghvi turned the corner?It seems that he has started believing in nationalism.

I doubt that Darshan-ji. He is just looking at the corner. He is yet to move towards it before turning the corner.

[SSridhar]

The next on the process of exclusion were understandably the Ahmedis whose beliefs were irreconcilable with the Sunni and Shia doctrine of Khatm-e-Nabuwat or the Finality of the Prophethood of Mohammad (PBUH).

Another confused Poaki wondring wheather Poaks are grown or take birth?
Nationalism: inclusive versus exclusive — II —I

Ishtiaq Ahmed has written about the exclusion of Ahmedis and the attempted exclusion of Shi'a from the mainstream of Pakistani Islam. But, the whole process of creation of Pakistan was based on exclusion. I am not referring to Muslims Vs. Hindus here. I am referring to Muslims excluding Muslims while going about the task of creating Pakistan. I am referring to the muddled thinking of the triumvirate that created Pakistan, Sir Sayyed Ahmed of Aligarh, Allama Iqbal of the Punjab and Jinnah of Gujarat.

In late nineteenth and early Twentieth century, when Sayyed Ahmed and Allama Iqbal solidified and enunciated their thoughts, they probably felt that it was well nigh impossible to create a separate nation. The dismantling of the Ottoman Empire despaired Allama Iqbal even more. As in the case of most people, Sir Sayyed, Allama and Jinnah had two distinct phases of their political or politico-religious lives.

Sir Sayyed's early politico-religious life was dominated by his identification with the ruling British. The demise of even the vestiges if the Mughal empire in 1857 despaired the likes of Sir Sayyed Ahmed. He was reconciled to the futility of fighting the British and hence sought to make amends with the Christians who were after all 'Ahl-al-Kitab' (People of the Book) which served his innate hatred for the Hindus. As a person with with immense pride in his Syed and perceived Mughal ancestry, he felt he was part of the elite ruling class. His concern was that power should not pass into the hands of the majority Hindus leading elite Muslims to live under their yoke. He said “No Mohammedan can say that the English are not ‘people of the Book’. No Mohammedan can deny this: that God has said that no people of other religions can be friends of Mohammedans except the Christians. . . . Now God has made them rulers over us. Therefore we should cultivate friendship with them, and should adopt that method by which their rule may remain permanent and firm in India, and may not pass into the hands of the Bengalis. This is our true friendship with our Christian rulers . . . for we do not want to become subjects of the Hindus instead of the subjects of the people of the Book."

Sir Sayyed, a proud progeny of the Mughal ruling class, therefore was torn between his admiration for the British (and hence unwilling to demand a separate State) and his fear of the Hindu majority. In the second part of his life, he therefore staked the claim for a 'State within the State' and this comprised of the muslim-majority areas of the Central and United provinces and some of Muslim Princely States. His vision did not include any Muslims beyond Delhi in the North or Muslims of Bengal or Muslims of the South or the West.

Allama Iqbal also had the same muddled thinking. His life can also be looked at into two parts. The 'Sare jahan se achcha' phase and the subsequent Islamist phase. In the latter phase, he also demanded an autonomous Muslim region comprising of areas of today's Pakistan. He thus excluded a very large number of Muslims from the entire rest of India. Like Shah Waliullah of the 18th century, he also demanded ridding the Islam of corrupting Hindu influences. Hence he floated the false notion of "Islam being in danger'.

The demands of Sir Sayyed and Allama Iqbal were thus based on regions rather than on ummah which at least the latter so passionately talked about otherwise.

Jinnah muddied the waters even more by coalescing the demands of Sir Sayyed and Allama Iqbal and adding Bengal to it.

Thus, the land of Pakistan was not based on inclusion. It has been based only on exclusion, exclusion of even Muslims. And that too, not of muslim sects on the periphery like the Ahmedis etc, but mainstream Sunni Muslims because the visions of Sir Sayyed or Allama Iqbal or Jinnah did not cover the entire Hindustan.

[shiv]

My thoughts about a Pakistan FAQ. The statements marked with ** need to be corroborated with references - I have written some of them off the top of my head

Name: Islamic Republic of Pakistan
Population in 1947 - 31 million
Population in 1997 - 140 million
Estimated population today: 170 million
Projected Population in 2035: 260 million

State religion: Islam

Percentage of non Muslims in 1947 : 15% (estimated) **
Percentage of non Muslims in 2010: 4%

Percentage of absolutely poor Pakistanis: 33% **
Percentage of marginally poor Pakistanis: 33% **
Total poor in Pakistan 66% **

Main industries of Pakistan: textiles, leather goods (like footballs), agricultural products, guns and weapons **

Main imports of Pakistan: Oil, arms, motor vehicles, chemicals, electronic goods **

Percentage of Pakistanis less than 15 years old: 41% (70 million children)
Percentage of children who finish primary schooling (upto 5th standard) : Only 33% **
Percentage of educated girls/women in Pakistan: 20% **

Provinces of Pakistan (under complete army control)= 40% area of Pakistan ** Punjab, Sindh, Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) (minus the area gifted to China)
Provinces of Pakistan that are not fully under Pakistani army control= 60% ** Balochistan and NWFP

Kashmir issue: British India in 1947 consisted of areas under direct British rule and about 600 odd states ruled by princes (princely states). At the time of independence each ruler of a princely state had the option of joining ("acceding to") Pakistan, joining India (accession to India) or remaining independent.

Kashmir was one such Princely state ruled by a Maharaja Hari Singh. Hari Singh was undecided about accession and called for a "holding treaty" with the newly formed India and Pakistan while he took a decision. But in this period Pakistani forces attacked and occupied parts of Kashmir and were on the verge of taking Srinagar.

Hari Singh called for help from India and acceded to India in exchange for help. Indian forces then pushed back the invading forces from Kashmir up to the current LOC (Line of Control). Th whole of Kashmir could have been freed but for the intervention of Nehru who went to the UN and accepted a UN mandated cease fire than made the current LOC a de facto border, leaviing a huge chunk of Kashmir occupied by Pakistan.

Pakistani Army - approx 650,000 men (1 soldier for every 260 Pakistanis)
(Compare with Indian army - 1 soldier for every 1000 Indians)

[svinayak]

ALso add

History as told in Pakistan
http://www.india-forum.com/forums/index ... -pakistan/

muslim rule india and hindus.

[shiv]

Thanks acharya

[Pratyush]

Guys, Probally OT,

I have been watching the debate from the sidelines for some time regarding the WKK and mango Indian and his opinions of Pakistan. I can tell you from my own interactions in my own social circle. A lot of people exist who regard TSP as S H I T. They are not BR types and are not net savvy. But they hate TSP with gusto. The toilets in their homes is called Pakistan.

If you talk to them they will at their most benign say, leave TSP alone and focus on solving Indian problems first. Most virulent will say, nuke em.

WKK regardless of them being the drivers of the English language media have limited traction for majority of the Indian masses. Who get their daily news from local language media. And they are really well informed about what is happening. This lack of understanding of what TSP is only for the minority of rich indian patriots running arrpound doing nothing.

The last thing they want is to re-refrigerate TSP back with Hinduatan. To then India is Hindustan. They don't have a concept of Bharat.

[putnanja]

My thoughts about a Pakistan FAQ. The statements marked with ** need to be corroborated with references - I have written some of them off the top of my head

Name: Islamic Republic of Pakistan
Population in 1947 - 31 million
Population in 1997 - 140 million
Estimated population today: 170 million
Projected Population in 2035: 260 million

State religion: Islam

Percentage of non Muslims in 1947 : 15% (estimated) **
Percentage of non Muslims in 2010: 4%

Shiv, do you have similar numbers of Bangladesh, especially around 1971 when it was formed? The reason I am asking is that, long time back on a different forum, some pakis when confronted with these figures, started saying that the majority of the hindus were in E Pakistan and it broke away in 1971, and hence the low minority numbers. I remember looking around for these numbers but couldn't find a good source.

[Satya_anveshi]

PM says he is optimistic about peace with Pakistan; government hands fifth dossier to Islamabad about 26/11 attacks; Islamabad laughs at dossier; government sends sixth dossier; Islamabad says that dossier is fiction; government sends seventh dossier; Islamabad buys new shredder to handle tons of paper being sent by Delhi; PM says he is optimistic that Pakistan will take action against terrorists.

Can it be more clearer than this? Dossiers after dossiers clearly saying "we hope that you will take action against these terrorists" is a sure shot way of Paki inaction against those terrorists. Meanwhile terrorists are raging Pak to ground. Who in the right mind wants to that disturb status quo? Some people whine even if they won a lottery saying they should have won a bigger amount.

[abhishek_sharma]

Hizbul chief holds 'anti-India' rally in Islamabad

http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/hizbu ... abad-36030

Aman ki Asha !

[shravan]

At least six killed in Karachi shootings

KARACHI: At least six persons were killed and several others were wounded in different incidents of firing in Karachi late Tuesday

[bart]

Guys, Probally OT,

WKK regardless of them being the drivers of the English language media have limited traction for majority of the Indian masses. Who get their daily news from local language media. And they are really well informed about what is happening. This lack of understanding of what TSP is only for the minority of rich indian patriots running arrpound doing nothing.

Its not that simple. It is these elites that control virtually 80% of India and take it's policy decisions. The masses will rise up only if the accommodation of Pakistan crosses a certain threshold, till then they are busy searching for their next meal. These guys smartly stay beneath the threshold while constantly trying to push it. So they can do a lot of damage as things stand, and they cannot be simply dismissed as airheads. Neither are the elite stupid, most of them became elite by corruption and unethical behavior, so the fact that they are ready to be WKKs or take anything less than a tough stance on Pakistan is worrying in itself as it indicates that there is a deeper rot and they have been paid off in some way.

[KLNMurthy]

Has Vir Sanghvi turned the corner?It seems that he has started believing in nationalism.

The little I have seen of DDM-types' musings (via their twitter postings etc.) suggests that they are quite cynical about Pakistan; however in their formal writings and broadcasts they tend to bend over backwards to avoid identifying with Hindu nationalism, most of whose supporters they regard as an embarrassment, not so much due to the latter's tendency to intellectual incoherence (think Advani, Jaswant Singh et al), but more due to social class--the hair oil and thickly accented english if you will.

The DDM's problem is (to my mind) one of regarding Paki scum as PLUs (People Like Us).

[Anindya]

do you have similar numbers of Bangladesh, especially around 1971 when it was formed? The reason I am asking is that, long time back on a different forum, some pakis when confronted with these figures, started saying that the majority of the hindus were in E Pakistan and it broke away in 1971, and hence the low minority numbers. I remember looking around for these numbers but couldn't find a good source.

I would start with the following article:
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/I ... idhar.html

[SSridhar]

Apologies if posted earlier. A good article from Praveen Swami

Praveen Swami also uses the word jihadist sometimes in this article. What does this neologism, as I have not formally read it thus far, mean?

http://thehindu.com/opinion/lead/articl ... epage=true

Anchal, the expression 'jihadist' is nothing new. It represents a particularly dangerous set of jihadis. These are jihadis who know their theory and practice like Qari Saifullah Akhtar. They set the course of jihad for the jihadi foot soldiers (like Kasab) to follow. That term is a combination of jihadi and Islamist. The jihadists also take part in operations unlike the Islamists who support jihad, are content with spewing out venom, inciting people, collecting funds, running jihadi institutions etc. The Islamists are like the higher echelons of the political wing and the jihadists are the higher echelons of the operational wing.

[Gagan]

It seems India is allowing Pakistan to stew in the fire that it created for others.
India's actions are to put Pakistan in an ego trap of inaction against its true jihadi enemies.

The phrase "The spirit was willing but the flash was weak" has always applied to pakistan throughout its existance. Pakistan has stumbled through wars and famines and crises after crises by half-hearted action. Even during wars with india, pakistan has only made half-hearted attempts at attacking, which were quickly brushed off by India.

Even now Pakistan is very reluctantly tackling, even pretending to be tackling the Jihadi menace. But the jihadis are unforgiving and ruthless in their goals. Pakistan has neither the will nor the stamina to fight it out. One can see their defeatist mentality by the fact that they have already started to identify with the taliban thought of Sharia etc, trying to convince themselves that things will be somehow alright.

What Pakistan is possibly headed for is an Iran like situation alebit with the sunni wahabi mullahs in spiritual command, the army playing second fiddle to them. Some enterprising mullah might even revive Nawaz Sharif's Khalifa plan and try to implement it.

Such a pakistan will be a night mare for its neighbours. It will cause immense trouble to Iran, Afghanistan, China and India, all of which border it.
With Afghanistan they have this historic, PAKS-Tan [A=Afghania].
With Iran they have the Shia - Sunni fight to the end.
With China there is the cause of liberation of the oppressed muslims of Xinjiang
And with India there are multiple grouses - kashmir [PAKs-tan: K=Kashmir], water, gazwa-e-hind, deccan, gujarat and so on.

Such a pakistan will export terror the way the mullahs of Iran do in the middle east. And India will have trouble tackling such a pakistan because of the nukes. It is a different matter to non pakistanis that pakistan will be an even bigger hell hole for its citizens than it is today.

I hope people do something to prevent this eventuality.

[Nihat]

India's one and only issue with Pakistan is to keep it at arms leangth while it stumbles from crisis to crisis. It can be done through a show of force, symbolic engagement . CBM's , talking to the army or aligning with Pak's traditional friends i.e. US , China and KSA so as to reduce their diplomatic influence.

We don't need a grand Pakistan Policy , we just need to keep them away !!

and speaking of talking to the army

Engaging the Generals

[Joseph]

Such a pakistan will export terror the way the mullahs of Iran do in the middle east. And India will have trouble tackling such a pakistan because of the nukes. It is a different matter to non pakistanis that pakistan will be an even bigger hell hole for its citizens than it is today.

I hope people do something to prevent this eventuality.

People meaning those within Pakistan or the leadership of other countries?

Until enough people in Pakistan decide that things are going the wrong way, their chosen path will continue to be the same.

Other countries are unable to help a country of 180 million until enough of those 180 million are receptive to help in changing the path of their country. Based on the current sentiments and trends, Pakistan is not close to admitting they need a Reformation, much less asking for outside help in doing it.

[satyam]

Can anyone of you tell me who is funding all these deficit of Pakiz ?

trade and service deficit annual: 15 billion $
Budget deficit annual: 17 billion $

Total deficit annual: 32 billion $

Remittance from Pakiz : 8 billion $

So who the hell is funding all these deficit of annual 24 billion $ considering that their forex reserve are loaned from IMF ?

[SSridhar]

. . .and speaking of talking to the army

Engaging the Generals

Along the same lines, An additional dish for the India-Pakistan Platter

[Philip]

Yes.We have our great leaders who strut the stage today,who are allowing pestilential Pak any amount of chicanery and terrorism committed against India ,as long as we achieve the holy grail of "economic growth" (in statistics only-as the rich only get richer and the poor poorer and fall into the Naxal trap).They have forgotten India's past when we were filthy rich,but militarily weak and succumbed to the hordes of Mongol/Central Asian invaders who sacked Delhi in such an orgy of bloodletting that saw the city deserted for a century!

It is also a sad commentary on the west/US,that they preach democracy,blah,blah,while supporting a failed terrorist state to the tune of billions,simply in order to be able to squat in S.Asia for their own interests and prevent an independent-thinking India from achieving its true potential on the global stage,wanting India to revert back to being a faithful lackey of neo-imperialist forces.

[satyam]

^^^^^

This is because of the service based economy that rich only get richer and the poor poorer. We need to have manufacturing soon.

[partha]

we just need to keep them away

hmm..just don't give too much importance to them and ignore them. No trading, track 2 diplomacy, cultural exchange yada yada. Seems like a good plan.

[partha]

Army, agencies ‘not cooperating in terror attacks probe’

The Punjab government has made a damning indictment of the Pakistan Army and intelligence agencies, holding them mainly responsible for court acquittals of those accused in suicide attacks on Lt-Gen Mushtaq Baig and on an Army bus, and said the Army “neither assisted nor showed any interest in the trial of the accused”.

[shiv]

we just need to keep them away

hmm..just don't give too much importance to them and ignore them. No trading, track 2 diplomacy, cultural exchange yada yada. Seems like a good plan.

No we must plan to meddle inside Pakistan - but more on that in the managing pak thread.

If we hold the border where it is - they will meddle in our side of the border. If we can meddle in their side - we will be in a better position to keep them there. This is not the time to chicken out of dealing with Pakis,

[neeraj]

PM decries lack of international help

ISLAMABAD: Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani has said the international community, including major friendly countries, have been found wanting in fulfilling commitments made at a conference held in Tokyo to help Pakistan resolve the problems of poverty, illiteracy and unemployment and rebuild schools, hospitals and infrastructure in militancy-hit areas.

Talking to the International Crisis Group’s chief Louise Arbour here on Tuesday, he said the government had been forced to divert its meagre development funds to rehabilitation and reconstruction of infrastructure in the effected areas.

The prime minister said Pakistan’s role as a frontline state in the war against terror had affected its economy badly.

He said militants were now attacking the urban centres, as a result of which foreign investment in the country had declined enormously.

Ms Arbour expressed the hope that despite the difficult situation, the government would fully implement the reforms introduced in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas in August last year. In short no aid.

AFGHAN SOLUTION
Talking to an Afghan trade delegation led by Finance and Trade Minister Hazrat Qamar Zakhilwal, the prime minister said Pakistan was part of the solution to the problems in Afghanistan and it sincerely wanted to work with the government in Kabul in this regard. they are the cause of the problems
He reiterated that trilateral links among Pakistan, Afghanistan and China could greatly benefit all of them and discussions of their leadership in this context had been encouraging.

[Nihat]

I was speaking freon a strictly perspective point of view, pak is an eternal security threat to India and will always be. Saying things like pak is vital to india's growth and more importantly believing in such crap is bad for us.

There is no need to run away from the issue but their is no need to be obsesssed with it either. Pak is a complex entity which stumbles from one crisis to another and it's important that we allow it to do that. We ought to broaden our foreign policy perspective which had previously been stuck in "south Asia". We form a bigger part of the world now and cannot be mired in the pak web forever.

Let's keep doing the chai biskoot sessions and engaging with pakistans allies which give them support , as we become bigger Pakistan will keep getting smaller because contrary to popular belief the indo-pak rivalry is a zero sum game, as long as pakistan continues to be obsessed by India. A foreign policy centered around pakistan will do us no good.

We look at America from the pal prism , ditto for Afghanistan , Iran , china and eu. We cannot continue on this path forever.

Hard power is important and it's to make pakitan realize that India is not hostage to their proxies and will continue to gain importance in the world ranks with or without their corporation.tterror attacks will warrant a hard military response and will only toughen indias stance. It seems at times that we are too tied up on the Pakistan quagmire to look beyond.

Bottom line being that pak is a security threat to India and that is all the importance it should get. Even b.r. Tends to depict an unhealthy obsession with pak and until the people change their perspective ,the nation cannot.

[vijayk]

http://afpak.foreignpolicy.com/jihadistan
Jihadistan

[A_Gupta]

The area that was West Pakistan was 78% Muslim in 1941 and 97.1% Muslim in 1951.

From long ago:

Some limited info. is gathered below.

Some population data:

[ Note: this data has been compiled from a variety of sources, so it
probably is of variable quality. Moreover comments regarding accuracy
etc. have not been quoted.].

***
Undivided India
Percent of Total Population in Each Religion 1881-1941

Hindu Muslim

1881 78.09 19.97
1891 74.24 20.41
1901 72.87 21.88
1911 71.68 22.39
1921 70.73 23.23
1931 70.67 23.49
1941 69.46 24.28 [1]
"By far the majority of millions who leave the tribal religions do so
by drifting into Hinduism. .... [But] In the first place, though
Hinduism gains by accretion more in absolute numbers than any other
religion, it probably also loses more. .... In the second place Hindus
apparently have a low fertility compared to Animists, Sikhs, Christians
and Muslims. This low fertility is due, partly, to the high proportion
of widows in the Hindu population -- a proportion that is higher than
for any other religious group except the Jains. ....in any case it is
worth noting the the ratio of children [aged 0-4] per 1000 MARRIED
women among the Hindus is just as low, compared with other religions,
as the ratio per 1000 of ALL women. " [1] (italics converted to upper-case).
***

[2]
Millions (1988 est.) Hindu Muslim (1982)
India 796.60 78.8% 11.6%
Bangladesh 104.53 12.7 85.9
Pakistan 105.41 1.3 96.8

adding another line to the first table:

India + Bangladesh + Pakistan
Hindu Muslim
1980s 63.8 28.2

***

India:
(derived from [3] )

Hindu Muslim
1951 85 % 9.9%
1961 83.5 10.7
1971 82.7 11.2
from [2]
1982 78.8 11.6

***

Pakistan (West Pakistan)

Muslim Hindu Hindu Pop. [estimated] [thousands]
1941 78 ? [4] ?
1951 97.1 1.6 [5] 540 [5]
1961 97.2 [4] 1.45? [6] 622 ?[6]
1972 96.75 1.44 [7] 281 Caste Hindus + 618 Scheduled Caste [7]
1981 96.7 1.51 [7] 1272 (estimated using [7]

(as you can see, the data I have for Pakistan is rather poor).
(no doubt [1] has data for 1941, but i was running short of time)
(for 1951 the data given in [4] and [5] don't match; [5] quotes
directly from the census).
(it doesn't square with the Economist data, for example ).
Can someone quote directly from the census figures ?

***
Bangladesh (East Pakistan)

Muslim Hindu

1941 70.4 ? [4]
1951 76.8 22.0 [5]
1961 80.4[4] 18.5? [6]

1982 85.9 12.7 [2]

****
Help in completing the tables would be appreciated.
arun

*** ***
[1] : Davis Kingsley, The Population of India and Pakistan, ~1951.
[2] : Economist Book of Vital World Statistics, 1990
[3] : Hindustan Yearbooks
[4] : Wilber, David, Pakistan
[5] : A Survey of Pakistan Society, (Human Relations Area Files Inc.)
[6] : Stephens, Ian, Pakistan
[7] : Pakistan Official Handbooks

[A_Gupta]

On Pakistani intellectuals.
http://criticalppp.com/archives/18072

[shiv]

This thread will soon reach its 72. Posts made here for the FAQ thread will have to be cross posted to any appropriate thread when it is started.