COMMENT By Sreeram Chaulia
A new study entitled "World at Risk" by a bipartisan American Congressional commission reveals that if one were to map terrorism and weapons of mass destruction (WMD) today, then "all roads would intersect in Pakistan". It warns that the next attacks on America might originate from Pakistan and urges the US president to take steps on a priority basis "securing" Islamabad's biological and nuclear weapons. Paraphrasing the report, the New Yorker magazine commented that Pakistan as a "nation itself is a kind of WMD".
Coming on the heels of the Mumbai terrorist attacks, which were planned and organized by Pakistani fundamentalists, the American warnings reflect a major dilemma facing international
policymakers - how to make the world safe from Pakistan? The nature and extent of this challenge has been summed up by former US secretary of state Madeleine Albright, "Pakistan has everything that gives you an international migraine. It has nuclear weapons, it has terrorism, extremists, corruption [and is] very poor ... "
What options does the world have to counter the multiple threats to international security and peace being posed by a dysfunctional and dangerously adrift country? Should a country that is itself a WMD be allowed to possess actual WMDs, which are not only liable to fall into the "wrong" hands but also be used by the "right" hands for emotional blackmail?
Irfan Hussain, a leading Pakistani newspaper columnist, recently bemoaned that "Pakistan was the only country in the world that negotiates with a gun to its own head. Our argument goes something like this: If you don't give us what we need, the government will collapse and this might result in anarchy, and a takeover by Islamic militants. Left unstated here is the global risk these elements would pose as they would have access to Pakistan's nuclear arsenal." A state which threatens to explode and destroy everyone else on the planet unless it is pampered is akin to a suicide bomber whose message to his enemies is to change their policies "or else".
The issue to ponder for world leaders is whether an "international migraine" and "suicidal" state should be allowed to possess WMDs or, for that matter, be self-governing? Sovereignty, as an organizing principle of world affairs, is not merely a bestower of rights but also comes with certain responsibilities towards one's own people and to other sovereign countries. Pakistan's track record is one of waving the red flag and screaming SOS to assert its rights as a sovereign country, without fulfilling the corollary obligations.
While many developing countries may have failed to live up to the expectations of their populations to improve living standards and governance, Pakistan has the extra cachet of exporting terrorism and extremist religious values to other countries. The controversial call for "international humanitarian intervention" over the failure of a state to protect its own people from grave human rights abuses is premised on what is happening within a country. To be fair, Pakistan has not fared worse than many other developing countries on domestic human development indices. Albright's mention of corruption and poverty as causes for concern about Pakistan is not relevant as these are not unique failings.
What stands Pakistan apart, though, is its ability to breed terrorism, extremist ideology and nuclear fecklessness and project these outwards at the rest of the world. The correct international response to this should not a "humanitarian intervention" but one based on global collective will, represented by the United Nations. Given the sui generis mixture of threats presented by Pakistan, an equally novel response is warranted. Since Pakistani sovereignty has been misused to impair the sovereignty of its neighbors - Afghanistan to the west and India on the east - the first strategy of an international collective will should be to circumscribe the country's sovereignty and place it under custodianship.
After World War I, when a transfer of colonies occurred between the losing German and Turkish empires to the victorious European ones, a mechanism called "mandate" was introduced at the League of Nations. Mandated territories were deemed unfit for self-rule by the victors of the war and taken over as de facto colonies "until such time as they are able to stand alone". After World War II, successors of the League mandates were rechristened "Trust Territories" and passed on to the UN to be "prepared for independence and majority rule".
Although mandates were thinly disguised veneers for colonial aggrandizement, they contain the germs of an idea for application to the now universally acknowledged "Pakistan problem". Both mandates and trusts were believed by practitioners at the time to be temporary waiting phases before a land could earn the spurs of a fully sovereign state. Although the judgement of whether these wards had the attributes of sovereign states was left to imperialist calculations, the notion that an international legal agreement could decide when and whether a country should be allowed to be sovereign is informative.
For Pakistan to be rid of its WMDs, hate preachers, terrorists and their infrastructure, only a handover of its sovereignty to a UN-designated custodian authority will be effective. Since sovereignty is closely associated with nationalism, such a grand experiment will undoubtedly meet fierce resistance within the Pakistani establishment and society. But there is no other way for the country's Augean Stables to be cleaned. Washington's pressure and protestations from Kabul or New Delhi have come and gone in vain for years without any concrete change in Pakistan's behavior.
A spell of international custodianship over Pakistan is the only feasible means for long-term transformation of the sub-continent's problem child. Those representatives of the Pakistani state who wish to strengthen moderation will benefit from a handover of sovereignty to the UN because the move promises to enhance civilian power and demilitarize policymaking. For Pakistani civil society, which has been struggling to counter what Harvard University professor Jessica Stern called the "jihad culture", a decade or so of international custodianship would open the space needed to rebuild the country with the cement of civic consciousness and religious tolerance. Pakistani activists should welcome coming under a UN trust and ally with like-minded forces pressing for this solution.
Besides Pakistani nationalism, an international campaign to bring the country under UN custodianship is bound to run into two stumbling blocks. The 57-member Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) is likely to vote as a bloc in the UN General Assembly to stymie efforts to constrict the foreign and domestic powers of one of its members. Pakistan is no ordinary member of the OIC because of its possession of the so-called "Islamic bomb" and losing a nuclear-armed Muslim power will rankle with the OIC.
The other hurdle is China, for which the temporary loss of Pakistan's sovereignty will be a big blow to its strategic vision of dominating Asia by tying down India. The Chinese veto has been used sparingly in the UN Security Council, but it will definitely come down with a thump on the table if Pakistan is proposed to be delivered to international custodianship.
Can the OIC and China be convinced by a determined international movement to vest Pakistan's sovereignty in the UN's trust? Can Pakistan as a nation come around to accepting this bitter medicine as a necessary prelude to renaissance? These questions need to be answered soon for the sake of world peace. The longer the delay in legal takeover of Pakistan, the greater the chances are that the "WMD nation" will explode.
Sreeram Chaulia is a researcher on international affairs at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs in Syracuse, New York.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Taleban: we will launch attack on America that will amaze world
From The Times
April 1, 2009
Zahid Hussain in Islamabad and Jeremy Page, South Asia Correspondent
Baitullah Mehsud, the leader of the Pakistani Taleban, threatened yesterday to launch an attack on Washington that would “amaze everyone in the world” as he claimed responsibility for the raid on a police academy in Lahore and boasted of a new regional militant alliance.
Mr Mehsud, for whom the United States offered a $5 million reward last week, said that Monday's raid, which killed seven police officers, was retaliation for US drone attacks on Pakistan's northern tribal areas, now the main hub of Taleban and al-Qaeda activity.
The 35-year-old leader of Tehrik-e-Taleban Pakistan (Movement of Taleban Pakistan), made the claims after taking the highly unusual step of telephoning Western news organisations from an undisclosed location.
“We wholeheartedly take responsibility for this attack and will carry out more such attacks in future,” he said.
Related Links
“Soon we will launch an attack in Washington that will amaze everyone in the world ... The maximum they can do is martyr me. But we will exact our revenge on them from inside America.”
Mr Mehsud's threat illustrates his growing confidence in the Pakistani Taleban's strength and reach. He recently agreed to shelve differences with fellow commanders and join forces with the Afghan Taleban.
The alliance appears to be a deliberate response to President Obama's “Afpak” strategy, unveiled on Friday, to send 21,000 more troops to Afghanistan, pour $7.5 billion into Pakistan, and to treat the two countries as a single military theatre.
Mr Mehsud's power also appears to have been enhanced after the Pakistani Government reached a controversial peace deal with the Taleban in the northwestern Swat Valley, which borders the tribal areas. He has been blamed for several attacks in Pakistan, including the assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December 2007, but most have been in the north west, and Monday's was thought to be his first on the eastern province of Punjab.
The US Rewards for Justice website describes him as a “key al-Qaeda facilitator” who has conducted cross-border attacks against American forces in Afghanistan and poses a clear threat to American people and interests in the region.
The militant leader boasted that he had recently set up a “Council of Mujahidin” uniting different groups “to step up attacks on US and Nato forces in Afghanistan”. That tallies with other reports that the Afghan and Pakistani Taleban have joined forces, and are also working with outlawed Pakistani militant groups with links to Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency.
The Pakistani Taleban is led by Mr Mehsud and two rival commanders - Hafiz Gul Bahadur and Maulavi Nazir - who are all based in the tribal regions of North and South Waziristan and have long feuded with each other.
Mullah Omar, the Afghan Taleban leader, is reported to have sent a six-member team to Waziristan in late December and early January to forge a new alliance with the three men against the planned increase of American forces in Afghanistan.
The Pakistani Taleban leaders agreed, and in February they formed the Council of Mujahidin and issued a printed statement vowing to resolve their differences and focus on fighting US-led forces in Afghanistan.
However, they also appear to have enlisted elements of Pakistani militant groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), blamed for the attack on Mumbai last year, and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, blamed for last month's attack on the Sri Lanka cricket team in Lahore.
They, along with elements of Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), another banned militant group, give the alliance a presence in Punjab, which may explain the two recent attacks there, security officials and analysts say.
“Many former fighters of LeT and JeM, and from southern Punjab, have been fighting with the Pakistani Taleban,” one Pakistani security official told The Times.
Most experts agree that the militant alliance is fragile, especially since Mullah Omar wants to focus on Afghanistan, while Mr Mehsud and others have ambitions in Pakistan, but it still represents a major challenge to Mr Obama's new strategy.
Michael Semple, an Irish expert on the region who was the former deputy head of the European Union mission in Kabul, predicts that some militants can be split from the group's core if governance and security are improved.
“It can be done, and we do have a few demonstrated examples that prove that it is possible,” he said. “But a lot of things are going to have to be done right if it is going to deliver enough people to be able to make a difference to the conflict.”
April 1, 2009
Zahid Hussain in Islamabad and Jeremy Page, South Asia Correspondent
Baitullah Mehsud, the leader of the Pakistani Taleban, threatened yesterday to launch an attack on Washington that would “amaze everyone in the world” as he claimed responsibility for the raid on a police academy in Lahore and boasted of a new regional militant alliance.
Mr Mehsud, for whom the United States offered a $5 million reward last week, said that Monday's raid, which killed seven police officers, was retaliation for US drone attacks on Pakistan's northern tribal areas, now the main hub of Taleban and al-Qaeda activity.
The 35-year-old leader of Tehrik-e-Taleban Pakistan (Movement of Taleban Pakistan), made the claims after taking the highly unusual step of telephoning Western news organisations from an undisclosed location.
“We wholeheartedly take responsibility for this attack and will carry out more such attacks in future,” he said.
Related Links
“Soon we will launch an attack in Washington that will amaze everyone in the world ... The maximum they can do is martyr me. But we will exact our revenge on them from inside America.”
Mr Mehsud's threat illustrates his growing confidence in the Pakistani Taleban's strength and reach. He recently agreed to shelve differences with fellow commanders and join forces with the Afghan Taleban.
The alliance appears to be a deliberate response to President Obama's “Afpak” strategy, unveiled on Friday, to send 21,000 more troops to Afghanistan, pour $7.5 billion into Pakistan, and to treat the two countries as a single military theatre.
Mr Mehsud's power also appears to have been enhanced after the Pakistani Government reached a controversial peace deal with the Taleban in the northwestern Swat Valley, which borders the tribal areas. He has been blamed for several attacks in Pakistan, including the assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December 2007, but most have been in the north west, and Monday's was thought to be his first on the eastern province of Punjab.
The US Rewards for Justice website describes him as a “key al-Qaeda facilitator” who has conducted cross-border attacks against American forces in Afghanistan and poses a clear threat to American people and interests in the region.
The militant leader boasted that he had recently set up a “Council of Mujahidin” uniting different groups “to step up attacks on US and Nato forces in Afghanistan”. That tallies with other reports that the Afghan and Pakistani Taleban have joined forces, and are also working with outlawed Pakistani militant groups with links to Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency.
The Pakistani Taleban is led by Mr Mehsud and two rival commanders - Hafiz Gul Bahadur and Maulavi Nazir - who are all based in the tribal regions of North and South Waziristan and have long feuded with each other.
Mullah Omar, the Afghan Taleban leader, is reported to have sent a six-member team to Waziristan in late December and early January to forge a new alliance with the three men against the planned increase of American forces in Afghanistan.
The Pakistani Taleban leaders agreed, and in February they formed the Council of Mujahidin and issued a printed statement vowing to resolve their differences and focus on fighting US-led forces in Afghanistan.
However, they also appear to have enlisted elements of Pakistani militant groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), blamed for the attack on Mumbai last year, and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, blamed for last month's attack on the Sri Lanka cricket team in Lahore.
They, along with elements of Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), another banned militant group, give the alliance a presence in Punjab, which may explain the two recent attacks there, security officials and analysts say.
“Many former fighters of LeT and JeM, and from southern Punjab, have been fighting with the Pakistani Taleban,” one Pakistani security official told The Times.
Most experts agree that the militant alliance is fragile, especially since Mullah Omar wants to focus on Afghanistan, while Mr Mehsud and others have ambitions in Pakistan, but it still represents a major challenge to Mr Obama's new strategy.
Michael Semple, an Irish expert on the region who was the former deputy head of the European Union mission in Kabul, predicts that some militants can be split from the group's core if governance and security are improved.
“It can be done, and we do have a few demonstrated examples that prove that it is possible,” he said. “But a lot of things are going to have to be done right if it is going to deliver enough people to be able to make a difference to the conflict.”
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Why Nehru, Indira, Rajiv, Sonia everywhere?......Public Views
A Surya Prakash
IN a systematic effort to gain an unfair advantage over others, the Congress party has named all major government programmes, projects and institutions in the country after three members of the Nehru-Gandhi family — Rajiv Gandhi, Indira Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru — who are its icons, and disturbed the level playing field in the electoral arena.
Over the last 18 years, on a rough estimate about 450 central and state government programmes, projects and national and state level institutions involving public expenditure of hundreds of thousands of crores of rupees have been named after these three individuals.
While it is the prerogative of a government to name an institution after a person whom it considers to be a national or state leader, government programmes initiated to ameliorate the lives of millions of citizens (drinking water, housing and employment guarantee schemes and old age pensions) fall into an entirely different category.
If the nomenclature of these programmes is not politically neutral, the sanctity of the democratic system would be in jeopardy.
Among the big ticket programmes named after members of this family by the Union government to extract unjust electoral mileage is the Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana (rural electrification programme), which involves an outgo of Rs 28,000 crore during the Eleventh Plan period (Rs 5,500 crore in fiscal 2008-09). The drinking water mission, with an allocation of Rs 21,000 crore over three years (Rs 7,300 crore in 2008-09 and Rs 7,400 crore in 2009-10) is called the Rajiv Gandhi Drinking Water Mission. Other schemes that bear his name are the Rajiv Gandhi National Crèche Scheme for Children of Working Mothers; Rajiv Gandhi Shramik Kalyan Yojana and the Rajiv Gandhi Shilpi Swasthya Bima Yojana (both insurance schemes).
Likewise, many mega programmes are named after Indira Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. The budgetary allocation for the Indira Awas Yojana to house the poor is Rs 7,919 crore in 2008-09 and Rs 7,914.70 crore in 2009-10. Also named after her is the Indira Gandhi National Old Age Pension Scheme (Rs 3,443 cr in 2008- 09). Programmes named after Jawaharlal Nehru over the last two decades are the Jahawarlal Nehru Rojgar Yojana and the Jawaharlal Nehru Urban Renewal Mission.
The Union government proposes to spend Rs 50,000 crore over seven years on the latter mission.
This trend is even more apparent in the states, which have vied with each other to name programmes after these three members of the family whenever the Congress was in power. Here is a sample: Rajiv Gandhi Breakfast Scheme, Puducherry; Rajiv Ratna Awas Yojana, Delhi; Rajiv Arogyasri Health Insurance scheme, Andhra Pradesh; Rajiv Gandhi Computer Literacy Mission, Assam; Rajiv Gandhi Bridges and Roads Infrastructure Development Programme, Haryana; Rajiv Gandhi Vidyarthi Suraksha Yojana, Maharastra; Rajiv Gandhi Tourism Development Mission, Rajasthan; Indira Gandhi Niradhar Yojana and Indira Gandhi Landless Agriculture Labour Scheme, Maharashtra; Indira Gandhi Priyadarshini Vivah Shagun Yojana, Haryana; Indira Gandhi Calf-Rearing Scheme, Andhra Pradesh.
Obviously, the plan is to ensure maximum recall of Brand Congress among voters at every stage in life. Indira Gandhi comes in when the poor want a house subsidised and you think of Nehru when urban renewal comes into play. The Congress has taken its obsession with this family to such an extent that even calf-rearing schemes are named after them.
The list of 450 government programmes, schemes, institutions, etc, named after these three members of the family broadly fall into the following categories: Central government (12), state government (52), universities and educational institutions (98), ports and airports (6), awards, scholarships and fellowships (66), sports tournaments, trophies and stadia (47), national parks and sanctuaries (15), hospitals and medical institutions (39), national scientific and research institutions, chairs and festivals (37), roads, buildings and places (74).
Apart from violating the electoral law, the naming spree has crossed all limits of decency. Every major sports tournament has been named after the Nehru-Gandhis, as if nobody else matters, not even the greats in Indian sports. Such is the obsession of Congress governments with this family that they name India’s biggest open university after Indira Gandhi and name fellowships granted there after Rajiv Gandhi. For long years we have been familiar with the Fullbright scholarships. Now it is known as the Fullbright-Jawaharlal Nehru Scholarship.
We are unlikely to see anything so gross even in dictatorships such as North Korea.
This blatant attempt to package and market government programmes run on public money as munificent offerings from a single family to the people has made a mockery of the Model Code of Conduct drawn up by the Election Commission for observance by all political parties.
I have therefore petitioned the chief election commissioner and requested him to immediately issue directions to the Union government and to all the governments in the states and direct them to remove the names of individuals, who are seen by the people as icons of specific political parties, from all government programmes and schemes funded by the exchequer and to immediately give these programmes politically neutral names. Such a direction from the Election Commission will ensure enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct in letter and spirit and will also be in consonance with the various directions and instructions issued by the Commission from time to time.
Gandhi, Nehru, Indira, Rajiv were the national assets of Congress Party? Like Terrorists are the National Assets of Pakistan.
By Dinesh
3/26/2009 6:57:00 PM
This is surprising why other political parties dont APPROACH THE SUPREME COURT TO BAN SUCH COLLOSAL MISUSE OF PUBLIC FUNDS FOR THE ADVANTAGE OF VESTED INTEREST OF GAINING POLITICAL ADVANTAGE BY THE CONGRSS PARTY
By gvs rao
3/26/2009 6:16:00 PM
Mixing up Gandhi's name with Nehru family tree is an insult to Mahatma. Congress has become family business platform which is a shame for democracy and our hypothetical political leaders, who are simply tail-lickers of the Nehru family to improve their own position in political power share are in insult to Indian society. Biggest democracy on earth should learn to come out of this and lead to demonstrate the real leaders can come from any section of the society.
By Sathya
3/26/2009 4:02:00 PM
Politics in India is a business. Some get into it to do business, some get into it save their backside (criminals). In politics number criminals are more than good common citizen, hence, criminals are more aware of political affairs in the country and they actively participate and get their "right" candidate in place. Hence, by hook or by crook criminals succeed more than the honest hard working citizens. Common people who are too good or too honest does not find it worthy of exercising their right - same with educated mass who, unfortunately out of their "educated ignorance" or "ignorant education" don't bother to exercise their right to vote the right candidate. Of course, whether their is any right candidate or not, this is another a question. In the interim India might make voting compulsory with an option to make first, second and third preference in the voting instead of ending in circus when after voting the voter does not know with him the concerned party will be aligning with
By Anil
3/26/2009 2:34:00 PM
If we rank all the countries in the subcontinent (although previously one), all must have got some sort of independence (at least trying) except India. India still in its infancy of political development and can't yet find a worthy leader out of one BILLION people. If you can't find a leader to rule, of course you are worthy of getting kicked around and that is what is happening.
By Anil
3/26/2009 2:18:00 PM
Some time ago an International magazine is reported to have stated " It is unfortunate that a nation with a billion people should lean over one family for leadership" . Sure, insensitivity, scycophancy and dishonesty are key elements required to grow in Indian Politics. Eg Congress
By Raman Rian
3/26/2009 12:10:00 PM
India my beloved country and one of the greatest nations on earth is being raped by not only the Gandhi family for decades but by all political parties. There has been many great leaders who have sacrificed their lives for Independence but wherever you go around India today it seems like only the Gandhi family has been doing everything for the people. This branding needs to be stopped and many of the so called institutions names must be changed and credit should be given to other leaders, poets, scientists, artists, professors etc. who have done value addition to the nation. Moreover if Bombay can be changed to Mumbai, Cochin to Kochi, Madras to Chennai then we should be doing the same by changing the names of these institutions too. There is a urgent need to put into effect a law which permits only one institution to be named after a leader and this must me made mandatory. Also all leaders who are responsible for creating hate crimes must be put behind bars and stringent action tak
By Cecil Joseph
3/26/2009 11:00:00 AM
Now only some journalists are waking up and realising they have some brains too.Indian media is a disgrace highlighting small small incidents and remaining silent when genocide like crimes have been going on for so many decades against hindus and sikhs. Has any one seen any report in indian media when more than 50000 minority hindus,sikhs and buddhists have been ruthlessly butchred and eliminated by muslim jehadi majority with help from muslim parties and with generous help from muslim appeasing crooked congress party?Have you seen even one media report when so many thousands of minority hindus and sikhs and buddhists have been butchered by christian fanatic thugs in north eastern states? None so far. The crimes of media and psuedo-intellectuals are too many to be cited. BJP must go for aggressive hinduvta now and majority hindus must vote in large numbers for BJP and allies to save the hindus from miserty and terror to eliminate crroked corrupt Nehru dynasty.We need more Vaun Gandhis
By V.Mehta
3/26/2009 9:38:00 AM
Congress party has no current leaders whose portraits could attract the attention of people. Hence they are playing the same old game of ALL IN THE FAMILY. Sonia has made sure that Indian leaders in the Cpngress party will never be united to elect their own Prime Minister. She will keep Singh for some more time till she gets another obedient puppet.
By Vaidya
3/26/2009 9:13:00 AM
someday someone will put "some" gandhi AIDS yogdan upakram
By sunil
3/25/2009 6:04:00 PM
It is not surprising that it is the practice all over india in all states that when they come to power with some intention and to retain they would always carry with their agenda of keeping the same name for all its projects, districts, towns, municipalities, panchayats, streets, buildings and except their family members.
By r.venkatesan
3/25/2009 12:10:00 PM
dear on line editor, Hero worship sycophancy are two recognised ways to be accepted in political society hence every state government run by congress name every scheme by these leaders but Comminists are also not behind look at LDF kerala schemes under EMS or AKG etc all are heroworshippers only dated 25th March 2009 Time 1145hrs Ist AM
By P.M.g.Pillai
3/25/2009 11:46:00 AM
When will India named as 'Rajiv Gandhi Desh'?
By Rahul Kumar
3/25/2009 11:44:00 AM
It is a wonderful suggestion SURYAPRAKASH. Keep up the good work.
By nimitha
3/25/2009 11:20:00 AM
How can Chief Election Commissioner of the day give directions to the Union Govt. & State Govts. to undo the mistakes committed in the past ? He can only check things, after the Elections are notified.
By PUTTAVEERARAJ URS HV
3/25/2009 10:10:00 AM
Were there no other Leaders in Congress other than the Nehru-Gandhi family ? Congress leaders cannot look beyond this family. Their next leader is Priyanka's son.
By Krish
3/25/2009 10:03:00 AM
IN a systematic effort to gain an unfair advantage over others, the Congress party has named all major government programmes, projects and institutions in the country after three members of the Nehru-Gandhi family — Rajiv Gandhi, Indira Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru — who are its icons, and disturbed the level playing field in the electoral arena.
Over the last 18 years, on a rough estimate about 450 central and state government programmes, projects and national and state level institutions involving public expenditure of hundreds of thousands of crores of rupees have been named after these three individuals.
While it is the prerogative of a government to name an institution after a person whom it considers to be a national or state leader, government programmes initiated to ameliorate the lives of millions of citizens (drinking water, housing and employment guarantee schemes and old age pensions) fall into an entirely different category.
If the nomenclature of these programmes is not politically neutral, the sanctity of the democratic system would be in jeopardy.
Among the big ticket programmes named after members of this family by the Union government to extract unjust electoral mileage is the Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana (rural electrification programme), which involves an outgo of Rs 28,000 crore during the Eleventh Plan period (Rs 5,500 crore in fiscal 2008-09). The drinking water mission, with an allocation of Rs 21,000 crore over three years (Rs 7,300 crore in 2008-09 and Rs 7,400 crore in 2009-10) is called the Rajiv Gandhi Drinking Water Mission. Other schemes that bear his name are the Rajiv Gandhi National Crèche Scheme for Children of Working Mothers; Rajiv Gandhi Shramik Kalyan Yojana and the Rajiv Gandhi Shilpi Swasthya Bima Yojana (both insurance schemes).
Likewise, many mega programmes are named after Indira Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. The budgetary allocation for the Indira Awas Yojana to house the poor is Rs 7,919 crore in 2008-09 and Rs 7,914.70 crore in 2009-10. Also named after her is the Indira Gandhi National Old Age Pension Scheme (Rs 3,443 cr in 2008- 09). Programmes named after Jawaharlal Nehru over the last two decades are the Jahawarlal Nehru Rojgar Yojana and the Jawaharlal Nehru Urban Renewal Mission.
The Union government proposes to spend Rs 50,000 crore over seven years on the latter mission.
This trend is even more apparent in the states, which have vied with each other to name programmes after these three members of the family whenever the Congress was in power. Here is a sample: Rajiv Gandhi Breakfast Scheme, Puducherry; Rajiv Ratna Awas Yojana, Delhi; Rajiv Arogyasri Health Insurance scheme, Andhra Pradesh; Rajiv Gandhi Computer Literacy Mission, Assam; Rajiv Gandhi Bridges and Roads Infrastructure Development Programme, Haryana; Rajiv Gandhi Vidyarthi Suraksha Yojana, Maharastra; Rajiv Gandhi Tourism Development Mission, Rajasthan; Indira Gandhi Niradhar Yojana and Indira Gandhi Landless Agriculture Labour Scheme, Maharashtra; Indira Gandhi Priyadarshini Vivah Shagun Yojana, Haryana; Indira Gandhi Calf-Rearing Scheme, Andhra Pradesh.
Obviously, the plan is to ensure maximum recall of Brand Congress among voters at every stage in life. Indira Gandhi comes in when the poor want a house subsidised and you think of Nehru when urban renewal comes into play. The Congress has taken its obsession with this family to such an extent that even calf-rearing schemes are named after them.
The list of 450 government programmes, schemes, institutions, etc, named after these three members of the family broadly fall into the following categories: Central government (12), state government (52), universities and educational institutions (98), ports and airports (6), awards, scholarships and fellowships (66), sports tournaments, trophies and stadia (47), national parks and sanctuaries (15), hospitals and medical institutions (39), national scientific and research institutions, chairs and festivals (37), roads, buildings and places (74).
Apart from violating the electoral law, the naming spree has crossed all limits of decency. Every major sports tournament has been named after the Nehru-Gandhis, as if nobody else matters, not even the greats in Indian sports. Such is the obsession of Congress governments with this family that they name India’s biggest open university after Indira Gandhi and name fellowships granted there after Rajiv Gandhi. For long years we have been familiar with the Fullbright scholarships. Now it is known as the Fullbright-Jawaharlal Nehru Scholarship.
We are unlikely to see anything so gross even in dictatorships such as North Korea.
This blatant attempt to package and market government programmes run on public money as munificent offerings from a single family to the people has made a mockery of the Model Code of Conduct drawn up by the Election Commission for observance by all political parties.
I have therefore petitioned the chief election commissioner and requested him to immediately issue directions to the Union government and to all the governments in the states and direct them to remove the names of individuals, who are seen by the people as icons of specific political parties, from all government programmes and schemes funded by the exchequer and to immediately give these programmes politically neutral names. Such a direction from the Election Commission will ensure enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct in letter and spirit and will also be in consonance with the various directions and instructions issued by the Commission from time to time.
Gandhi, Nehru, Indira, Rajiv were the national assets of Congress Party? Like Terrorists are the National Assets of Pakistan.
By Dinesh
3/26/2009 6:57:00 PM
This is surprising why other political parties dont APPROACH THE SUPREME COURT TO BAN SUCH COLLOSAL MISUSE OF PUBLIC FUNDS FOR THE ADVANTAGE OF VESTED INTEREST OF GAINING POLITICAL ADVANTAGE BY THE CONGRSS PARTY
By gvs rao
3/26/2009 6:16:00 PM
Mixing up Gandhi's name with Nehru family tree is an insult to Mahatma. Congress has become family business platform which is a shame for democracy and our hypothetical political leaders, who are simply tail-lickers of the Nehru family to improve their own position in political power share are in insult to Indian society. Biggest democracy on earth should learn to come out of this and lead to demonstrate the real leaders can come from any section of the society.
By Sathya
3/26/2009 4:02:00 PM
Politics in India is a business. Some get into it to do business, some get into it save their backside (criminals). In politics number criminals are more than good common citizen, hence, criminals are more aware of political affairs in the country and they actively participate and get their "right" candidate in place. Hence, by hook or by crook criminals succeed more than the honest hard working citizens. Common people who are too good or too honest does not find it worthy of exercising their right - same with educated mass who, unfortunately out of their "educated ignorance" or "ignorant education" don't bother to exercise their right to vote the right candidate. Of course, whether their is any right candidate or not, this is another a question. In the interim India might make voting compulsory with an option to make first, second and third preference in the voting instead of ending in circus when after voting the voter does not know with him the concerned party will be aligning with
By Anil
3/26/2009 2:34:00 PM
If we rank all the countries in the subcontinent (although previously one), all must have got some sort of independence (at least trying) except India. India still in its infancy of political development and can't yet find a worthy leader out of one BILLION people. If you can't find a leader to rule, of course you are worthy of getting kicked around and that is what is happening.
By Anil
3/26/2009 2:18:00 PM
Some time ago an International magazine is reported to have stated " It is unfortunate that a nation with a billion people should lean over one family for leadership" . Sure, insensitivity, scycophancy and dishonesty are key elements required to grow in Indian Politics. Eg Congress
By Raman Rian
3/26/2009 12:10:00 PM
India my beloved country and one of the greatest nations on earth is being raped by not only the Gandhi family for decades but by all political parties. There has been many great leaders who have sacrificed their lives for Independence but wherever you go around India today it seems like only the Gandhi family has been doing everything for the people. This branding needs to be stopped and many of the so called institutions names must be changed and credit should be given to other leaders, poets, scientists, artists, professors etc. who have done value addition to the nation. Moreover if Bombay can be changed to Mumbai, Cochin to Kochi, Madras to Chennai then we should be doing the same by changing the names of these institutions too. There is a urgent need to put into effect a law which permits only one institution to be named after a leader and this must me made mandatory. Also all leaders who are responsible for creating hate crimes must be put behind bars and stringent action tak
By Cecil Joseph
3/26/2009 11:00:00 AM
Now only some journalists are waking up and realising they have some brains too.Indian media is a disgrace highlighting small small incidents and remaining silent when genocide like crimes have been going on for so many decades against hindus and sikhs. Has any one seen any report in indian media when more than 50000 minority hindus,sikhs and buddhists have been ruthlessly butchred and eliminated by muslim jehadi majority with help from muslim parties and with generous help from muslim appeasing crooked congress party?Have you seen even one media report when so many thousands of minority hindus and sikhs and buddhists have been butchered by christian fanatic thugs in north eastern states? None so far. The crimes of media and psuedo-intellectuals are too many to be cited. BJP must go for aggressive hinduvta now and majority hindus must vote in large numbers for BJP and allies to save the hindus from miserty and terror to eliminate crroked corrupt Nehru dynasty.We need more Vaun Gandhis
By V.Mehta
3/26/2009 9:38:00 AM
Congress party has no current leaders whose portraits could attract the attention of people. Hence they are playing the same old game of ALL IN THE FAMILY. Sonia has made sure that Indian leaders in the Cpngress party will never be united to elect their own Prime Minister. She will keep Singh for some more time till she gets another obedient puppet.
By Vaidya
3/26/2009 9:13:00 AM
someday someone will put "some" gandhi AIDS yogdan upakram
By sunil
3/25/2009 6:04:00 PM
It is not surprising that it is the practice all over india in all states that when they come to power with some intention and to retain they would always carry with their agenda of keeping the same name for all its projects, districts, towns, municipalities, panchayats, streets, buildings and except their family members.
By r.venkatesan
3/25/2009 12:10:00 PM
dear on line editor, Hero worship sycophancy are two recognised ways to be accepted in political society hence every state government run by congress name every scheme by these leaders but Comminists are also not behind look at LDF kerala schemes under EMS or AKG etc all are heroworshippers only dated 25th March 2009 Time 1145hrs Ist AM
By P.M.g.Pillai
3/25/2009 11:46:00 AM
When will India named as 'Rajiv Gandhi Desh'?
By Rahul Kumar
3/25/2009 11:44:00 AM
It is a wonderful suggestion SURYAPRAKASH. Keep up the good work.
By nimitha
3/25/2009 11:20:00 AM
How can Chief Election Commissioner of the day give directions to the Union Govt. & State Govts. to undo the mistakes committed in the past ? He can only check things, after the Elections are notified.
By PUTTAVEERARAJ URS HV
3/25/2009 10:10:00 AM
Were there no other Leaders in Congress other than the Nehru-Gandhi family ? Congress leaders cannot look beyond this family. Their next leader is Priyanka's son.
By Krish
3/25/2009 10:03:00 AM
Thursday, March 19, 2009
SEXERCISE ! Sex, the best workout : Sex-exercises to keep you fit
MONIKA RAWAL
While it may seem hard to take out time to hit the gym for a workout session, very few people know that indulging in a sweat-inducing sex
Its official: Sex is the best exercise (Getty Images)
session is equally beneficial.
It not only helps burning extra calories, but also allows couples to perform routine exercises and also enjoy sexual pleasure. What else can couples ask for!
Dr. Basheer Ahmad Roy, a Bangalore-based sex specialist states, “Almost all muscles
including the legs, thighs, arms, shoulders and lower abdomen are worked upon during a sexual interaction. Anything that is done for the body should be done for at least 15 minutes and a sex session may not stretch for this long. So couples need to pay extra attention that if they wish to derive additional health benefits from sexual positions, they need to prolong sexual activity right from foreplay to the climax state.”
Apart from the fact that sex brings relief from headaches, reduces depression
and tranquilises the mind, leads to glowing hair and skin etc, it’s also true that many sexual positions double up as easy workouts.
Dr. Shivi Jaggi, a Delhi-based sexologist asserts, “Sex helps burning a lot of calories. Different positions in which partners participate as per their comfort level lead to a fit body. A few complex positions that require more of physical strength and involve more work lead to weight-loss and exercising of muscles. Intensity of movements and duration of sex make a lot of difference.
Here are some lovemaking positions, which will let you stretch the most important muscle groups in your body...
Missionary position (Man on top)
In the Indian context, more than 90 per cent of couples indulge in the missionary position in bed, which seems to be quite gratifying for them. As the act involves weight balancing, it obviously has a number of physical benefits. The missionary position is all about stretching, arching and tightening. While the male partner is on top, the female laying on her back can also help to stretch her back, arch and tighten the abs. In addition, she can also try tightening the kegel muscles right during the act.
Dr. Jaggi elucidates, “The partner on top gets more involved in the physical activity. With a male partner on top, a lot of pressure is borne by his arms and shoulders. Besides, elbows and knees are used to the maximum while balancing in such a position; hence it stretches the muscles in both these body parts. In addition, thigh muscles are also worked upon during the missionary position, as you are almost on your knees during the act.”
Woman on top
It is said that women can orgasm quickly while on top. Yet there is an evident reluctance among Indian women to try this position in bed. But having a female partner taking the lead is a very good exercise. It allows both partners to enjoy an equal participation, where the woman uses her hands and arms to prop up and down, and the male partner is holding the woman thus balancing her body weight.
Dr. Jaggi shares, “With the woman on the top, the weight would normally be born by the male partner. Women being the physically weaker counterpart during sex, you cannot expect them to hold on to their body mass completely. So again it’s more of exercise for the men, where they use their biceps’ muscles to hold their female partner. For a female too, just to maintain the position for a longer duration, she is stretching her biceps, triceps, forearms and chest muscles to the fullest.”
Sitting missionary (Face to face)
Yet another creative sexual position, it involves couples facing each either on a sofa, bed or the
Sex, the best workout
Its official: Sex is the best exercise (Getty Images)
floor. The position also lets you flex your toes forward, which is a good way to stretch your calf muscles. Since both partners are sitting throughout the act, certain muscles, which are worked upon heavily, have to be stable and strong to ensure a gratifying act.
Dr. Pushkar Gupta, a Chandigarh-based sex therapist explains, “Sitting missionary involves more physical work as compared to the missionary position where a couple is lying down. As the position requires both partners sitting straight facing each other, with the female partner wrapping her legs around a man’s hips, her back muscles are highly involved. Also to get the right posture, you end up putting a lot of strain on your spinal muscles, thigh muscles and lower back, which in a way is a good stretching exercise. Retaining the same position and trying different moves and lifts, your lower abdomen is also worked upon. Be cautious if you have a weak back, as excessive stretching may give you cramps and hurt you.”
Against the wall
Having sex against a wall – either in the washroom or a store room can be fun at times. Not only the standing posture would bring enhanced pleasure, but it would also allow you enjoy a workout session while you indulge in a sex romp. During this position, the quads (front top leg) and lower back are exercised. Also, as the male leans slightly forward, the female can arch her back thus indulging in a perfect exercise.
Dr. Gupta asserts, “Having sex standing against a wall is usually meant for couples who are physically stable. Since you are doing the act standing throughout, it needs that physical stamina to carry on for a longer time period. Then height also plays an important role in this stance, as in accordance to that only, you will decide the angle in which you need to bend and stretch your thighs and legs. In such a sexual position, another very good exercise could be lifting your female partner and nothing can be better than enjoying the pleasure and burning some calories alongside.”
Legs on shoulders
Such an act is not only a sex position but also a great form of foreplay. As it requites the female partner to be physically charged up and creative in bed, let’s not forget how beneficial this act is for the body muscles. Having a female raising her legs to reach a man’s shoulder is a perfect way to arouse him and at the same time it allows the female to stretch er leg muscles and tone her abs in the process.
Dr. Jaggi agrees, “It’s a very wonderful aerobic exercise, especially done by females using her flexible body. Though it may look like yet another foreplay act trying to turn on your partner, but it turns out to be a great workout where you can fully stretch your leg muscles. Whatever you get out of a 30 minute long cycling session while gymming, this sex posture can bring you almost equal, if not better, results.”
Crouching and bending
Try a prolonged foreplay with acts like sitting, bending and crouching, in addition to regular sex positions. This will surely be more advantageous when it comes to a physical workout.
Dr. Gupta says, “Very common but lesser tried sex position, bending and crouching demands a lot of bends and curves, so the spinal muscles are exercised here. Also, the inner thigh muscles get a lot of exercise as you bend. While sitting or bending, you end up putting pressure on your abdominal area as well, which can help you get into shape. In case of a lower back ache, avoid this position, as it may worsen the pain further.”
monika.rawal@indiatimes.co.in
While it may seem hard to take out time to hit the gym for a workout session, very few people know that indulging in a sweat-inducing sex
Its official: Sex is the best exercise (Getty Images)
session is equally beneficial.
It not only helps burning extra calories, but also allows couples to perform routine exercises and also enjoy sexual pleasure. What else can couples ask for!
Dr. Basheer Ahmad Roy, a Bangalore-based sex specialist states, “Almost all muscles
including the legs, thighs, arms, shoulders and lower abdomen are worked upon during a sexual interaction. Anything that is done for the body should be done for at least 15 minutes and a sex session may not stretch for this long. So couples need to pay extra attention that if they wish to derive additional health benefits from sexual positions, they need to prolong sexual activity right from foreplay to the climax state.”
Apart from the fact that sex brings relief from headaches, reduces depression
and tranquilises the mind, leads to glowing hair and skin etc, it’s also true that many sexual positions double up as easy workouts.
Dr. Shivi Jaggi, a Delhi-based sexologist asserts, “Sex helps burning a lot of calories. Different positions in which partners participate as per their comfort level lead to a fit body. A few complex positions that require more of physical strength and involve more work lead to weight-loss and exercising of muscles. Intensity of movements and duration of sex make a lot of difference.
Here are some lovemaking positions, which will let you stretch the most important muscle groups in your body...
Missionary position (Man on top)
In the Indian context, more than 90 per cent of couples indulge in the missionary position in bed, which seems to be quite gratifying for them. As the act involves weight balancing, it obviously has a number of physical benefits. The missionary position is all about stretching, arching and tightening. While the male partner is on top, the female laying on her back can also help to stretch her back, arch and tighten the abs. In addition, she can also try tightening the kegel muscles right during the act.
Dr. Jaggi elucidates, “The partner on top gets more involved in the physical activity. With a male partner on top, a lot of pressure is borne by his arms and shoulders. Besides, elbows and knees are used to the maximum while balancing in such a position; hence it stretches the muscles in both these body parts. In addition, thigh muscles are also worked upon during the missionary position, as you are almost on your knees during the act.”
Woman on top
It is said that women can orgasm quickly while on top. Yet there is an evident reluctance among Indian women to try this position in bed. But having a female partner taking the lead is a very good exercise. It allows both partners to enjoy an equal participation, where the woman uses her hands and arms to prop up and down, and the male partner is holding the woman thus balancing her body weight.
Dr. Jaggi shares, “With the woman on the top, the weight would normally be born by the male partner. Women being the physically weaker counterpart during sex, you cannot expect them to hold on to their body mass completely. So again it’s more of exercise for the men, where they use their biceps’ muscles to hold their female partner. For a female too, just to maintain the position for a longer duration, she is stretching her biceps, triceps, forearms and chest muscles to the fullest.”
Sitting missionary (Face to face)
Yet another creative sexual position, it involves couples facing each either on a sofa, bed or the
Sex, the best workout
Its official: Sex is the best exercise (Getty Images)
floor. The position also lets you flex your toes forward, which is a good way to stretch your calf muscles. Since both partners are sitting throughout the act, certain muscles, which are worked upon heavily, have to be stable and strong to ensure a gratifying act.
Dr. Pushkar Gupta, a Chandigarh-based sex therapist explains, “Sitting missionary involves more physical work as compared to the missionary position where a couple is lying down. As the position requires both partners sitting straight facing each other, with the female partner wrapping her legs around a man’s hips, her back muscles are highly involved. Also to get the right posture, you end up putting a lot of strain on your spinal muscles, thigh muscles and lower back, which in a way is a good stretching exercise. Retaining the same position and trying different moves and lifts, your lower abdomen is also worked upon. Be cautious if you have a weak back, as excessive stretching may give you cramps and hurt you.”
Against the wall
Having sex against a wall – either in the washroom or a store room can be fun at times. Not only the standing posture would bring enhanced pleasure, but it would also allow you enjoy a workout session while you indulge in a sex romp. During this position, the quads (front top leg) and lower back are exercised. Also, as the male leans slightly forward, the female can arch her back thus indulging in a perfect exercise.
Dr. Gupta asserts, “Having sex standing against a wall is usually meant for couples who are physically stable. Since you are doing the act standing throughout, it needs that physical stamina to carry on for a longer time period. Then height also plays an important role in this stance, as in accordance to that only, you will decide the angle in which you need to bend and stretch your thighs and legs. In such a sexual position, another very good exercise could be lifting your female partner and nothing can be better than enjoying the pleasure and burning some calories alongside.”
Legs on shoulders
Such an act is not only a sex position but also a great form of foreplay. As it requites the female partner to be physically charged up and creative in bed, let’s not forget how beneficial this act is for the body muscles. Having a female raising her legs to reach a man’s shoulder is a perfect way to arouse him and at the same time it allows the female to stretch er leg muscles and tone her abs in the process.
Dr. Jaggi agrees, “It’s a very wonderful aerobic exercise, especially done by females using her flexible body. Though it may look like yet another foreplay act trying to turn on your partner, but it turns out to be a great workout where you can fully stretch your leg muscles. Whatever you get out of a 30 minute long cycling session while gymming, this sex posture can bring you almost equal, if not better, results.”
Crouching and bending
Try a prolonged foreplay with acts like sitting, bending and crouching, in addition to regular sex positions. This will surely be more advantageous when it comes to a physical workout.
Dr. Gupta says, “Very common but lesser tried sex position, bending and crouching demands a lot of bends and curves, so the spinal muscles are exercised here. Also, the inner thigh muscles get a lot of exercise as you bend. While sitting or bending, you end up putting pressure on your abdominal area as well, which can help you get into shape. In case of a lower back ache, avoid this position, as it may worsen the pain further.”
monika.rawal@indiatimes.co.in
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
I am a Gandhi, a Hindu and an Indian, says Varun....Public views at the end !
New Delhi Under fire from BJP and others for his reported anti-Muslim speeches, an unapologetic Varun Gandhi on Wednesday asserted he was proud of being a Hindu and an Indian and claimed he had not made any communal statement.
Giving no signs of tendering an apology sought by his party, Varun, the 29-year-old BJP Lok Sabha candidate from Pilibhit, said the video footage of his speeches was ‘doctored’ and saw a ‘political conspiracy’ hatched to malign him.
"I am proud of my faith and not apologetic about it. I am a Gandhi, a Hindu and an Indian in the equal measure," he said.
Acting swiftly, the Election Commission had on Tuesday ordered filing of a criminal case against Varun for his alleged inflammatory speech with communal overtones and served notice to the party seeking its explanation.
"I have been a victim of a political conspiracy. Those are not my words and that is not my voice. I have not made any communal statement," Varun, a scion of the estranged Gandhi family, said.
Varun, son of Maneka Gandhi, said the tape has been doctored and it was a ‘malicious attempt’ to brand him communal.
Senior BJP leader Shanawaz Hussain termed Varun's remarks ‘shocking’ and demanded an unconditional apology from him.
Another BJP leader Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi also assailed Varun's remarks saying they are a manifestation of his family's past Congress culture.
Rattled by the controversy, the BJP asked its party candidates to observe caution and restraint in their speeches.
"We do not subscribe to such views," party spokesperson Siddarth Nath Singh said.
In no mood to relent, Varun said, "I am pro India and not anti-anybody. I want to ask the nation to stand by me."
He went on to add ‘my attempt has been to restore confidence in a community that has been under siege in its own country.’
He said the video footage has been ‘doctored’. It has been a malicious attempt to brand me as communal. There is no question of my having any ill feeling towards any community," he said.
At a recent election meeting in Pilibhit from where he is making his electoral debut, Varun had reportedly said, "this is not a 'Hand' (Congress symbol), it is the power of the 'Lotus' (BJP symbol). It will cut the head of ....... Jai Shri Ram."
He had also said if anyone raises a hand against Hindus and if they thought Hindus were weak and leaderless, he would cut his hand. Gandhi, however, claimed that the video footage of his speeches was tampered with.
Varun also wondered why the CD was made public after a gap of 12 days on March 16 whereas he made the speech on March 5.
In Patna, Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar termed Varun's Pilibhit speech as condemnable.
"I have not seen the TV footage (of Varun's speech), but from what I have come to know, his statement hurt the sensibilities of a section of the society. Anything that is said during an election or otherwise that hurts the sentiments of any community is condemnable," Kumar said when his comments was sought on the matter.
Terming BJP Varun's speech as contrary to secular democracy, Congress said BJP will be seen as a co-conspirator if it does not take action against him.
Union Minister Kapil Sibal said when cognisance has been taken by the Election Commission that a prima facie offence has been committed, whether Varun denies it or not is not relevant.
"The leadership of BJP will take action because if they don't, then it will be seen that they are the co-conspirators in this," he said in Delhi.
Alleging the speech was aimed at polarising votes, Sibal said, "I am not concerned with the nature and quality of the speech. It is abhorrent; it is contrary to the basic foundations of our secular democracy".
VARUN'S SPEECH
by piyush trivedi on 18 Mar 2009
NON SHOULD MAKE SPEECHS MADE BY MR.V.GANDHI AN ISSUE.INDIANS ARE INTELLIGENT AND WILL WEIGH EACH CANDIDATE IN ELECTIONS.--LET THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS FOR FREEDOM TO EXPRESS BE NOT SNETCHED AWAY FROM ANY INDIAN MEDIA MUST BE MORE RESPONSIBLE IN REPORTING SINCE IT IS THEN THAT PERSONS OTHER THEN THOSE TO WHOME HE AADRESSED KNOW ON THIS MATTER AND THEN EVERYONE TRIES TO POLITISIZE THE ISSUE JUST LEAVE TO LISTENERS TO EVALUATE THE SPEECH AND ACT WHILE VOTING IN THE INTEREST OF NATION IF WHAT IS REPORTED IS A FACT.SPEECH OF ONE DOES NOT REFLECT THE VIEWS OF ENTIRE PARTY.
Reply | Forward
VARUN SHOULD FIGHT BACK; BJP SHOULD STAND BEHIND HIM
by young indian on 18 Mar 2009
Varun has been framed by RIVAL PARTIES only with the eye on votes and to finish him politically. FAIR AND FREE investigation will bring the truth out. Varun is a gentleman and he knows what to say and what not to say. He is a true NATIONALIST unlike RAHUL who is a shadow dealer. VARUN CARRY ON THE FIGHT.....HINDUS ARE WITH YOU..
Reply | Forward
Varun Gandhi Speaks
by Vijay Dewan on 18 Mar 2009
'My attempt has been to restore confidence in a community that has been inder seige in its own country". These words of Varun Gandhi reflects the great hypocracy of this country. True words indeed and spoken by a brave man of a brave father;who if he had been alive would have changed the complexion of the country. But he became victim of thgose very psuedo-secular forces which are now attacking Varun. BJP is the most unworthy party to take any stand worth its salt. It surrenders its judgement to others at the slightest controversy. The man is explaining that the footage is not original and he did not want to hurt the feelings of anybody but is trying to make the depressed people of his constituency to shed fear and show that the Hindu iis not weak and leaderless. Let all those who call such statements communal touch there hearts and say that is not the Hindu majority at the receiving end for the last so many years,whether it is Punjab, Kashmir or the Northeast. Truth must come out.
Reply | Forward
Destroying Varun's future
by Sreenivas on 18 Mar 2009
Congress knows that Varun can overshadow Rahul. So it is in their interest to destroy his future.
Reply | Forward
YES WE ARE HINDU IN HINDUSTAN AND EVERYONE IS HINDUSTANI
by dv.sharma on 18 Mar 2009
Varun is clearly framed. All Opponents we see that Varun is a Brave personality.
Reply | Forward
truth is
by beljamine on 18 Mar 2009
Varun is right. it will be interesting to see why a hindu cannot express his sentiments without being harassed. none of the indian govts has ever done anything about curbing the muslim population what with their many wives and many children. breeding like rabbits seems to be what life is all about for them everywhere they go. look at the uk and europe, where millions of muslims now abuse the majorities openly and with impunity. the white majorities live in fear and they've been betrayed by their own govts. well said Varun for telling the truth as it is.
Reply | Forward
Nothing wrong
by Sunil on 18 Mar 2009
Nothing wrong in whatever he has said. At least few leaders like him and Modi have the courage to speak up for Hindus. One more time UPA and so called secular congress comes to power, India will be sold to Pakistan. It is time for us to vote for NDA and throw out the corrupt congress and regional caste based parties which have ruined our country
Reply | Forward
I AM A HINDU
by PANJU on 18 Mar 2009
VARUN U R THE SECAND GANDHI, I RESPACT FOR TELLING THE TRUTH.
Reply | Forward
Varun said the truth what several other leaders are scared to say
by rakesh m on 18 Mar 2009
Dear Varun, nothing to worry, millions are with you. YOu said what several other senior BJP and or Hindu leaders are scared to say. People like you should come out and speak openly against the appeasement of certain communities and their anti-national activities and terrorism. Nobody can hurt you for talking in favour of Hindus. You are in Hindustan!
Reply | Forward
MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS...YOU ARE A VIRUS!
by Wide Awake on 18 Mar 2009
The statement given by Varun Gandhi and now defending himself stating that it has been altered ad doctored shows nothing but how he and other 99% of our politicians try to fool the public with their sick mentallity .this is because they knows that the public are stupid and can only play with thier emotions,which is usually seen through their words and actions.well 99% of our politicians are criminals...WAKE UP PUBLIC..WAKE UP!
Reply | Forward
Varun
by Rajesh on 18 Mar 2009
Varun may go out but he helped BJP a lot. He talked like a true son of India. CongI will be a wash out. But whether Varun is a Gandhi, or Gandhi a Hindu difficult to answer.
Reply | Forward
Long Live Pakistan
by Ali on 18 Mar 2009
Long Live Pakistan.Thanks god we are safe from these Varun type of peopleAnd U indian forget the dream about attacking us after we got nuclear bombs.We will keep supporting kashmirirs
Reply | Forward
Varun Speech
by Baldev Singh Gill on 18 Mar 2009
I partly agree with Varun, We are Indians first then we are either Hindus , Sikhs ,Christians or Muslims. I am an NRI and lived abroad since 1963 and always felt proud to be an Indian and belong to the land of Gurus and Veda's peace and harmony and of course bravery.Long live India and God bless India
Reply | Forward
Teach a good lesson to this kid.
by Abu Hudaifah on 18 Mar 2009
He wants to come into flash news, he is a Gandhian, doesn't remember who the Great Gandhi was, he is an Indian, doesn't know anything about Indian Constitution, he is a Hindu, doesn't know Hindu Religion,in fact he is nothing, India as a whole must teach a lesson to this kid once for all.
Reply | Forward
secular Hindus
by Abdul on 18 Mar 2009
Hail secular hindus .put down anyone who try to care for you because you never get rid of this slave mentallity and minourity pleasing mentallity .Remember one day these minourity will rule you and India and terrorism will be legalised.Who will be responsible ? Its not these minourities ,its you secular hindus.
Reply | Forward
Yes Varun you are Gandhi
by Patel on 18 Mar 2009
What is great in his speech which was all indications of poor values what he conceives from his guardians is that great? Well, like you people will only stand near to Varun's legs other ordinary people can estimate what is Varun. One more advice to Varun please doesn't use the Gandhi name you don't know the definitions of Gandhi's name. We Indian can say Soniya is the really from Gandhi family who has saves my country's history by refusing the Prim ministerial position of India. Learn the sacrifices first then stand before the public, if we find more people like you for India than we are not far away to becoming Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Reply | Forward
WHAT IS THIS COURAGE ALL ABOUT
by K Sundar on 18 Mar 2009
What is this courage, these Hindutvawadis are talking about ? If Varun atleast had stood by his statement, then one could have atleast buy the argument of courage. But, he has started crying like a child that the tape has been doctored, that it was a Political conspiracy to frame him and that he has been misquoted. So, what is the courage all about ?? As a true follower of BJP, he is following the Party's footsteps in deceiving and hiding everything under the carpet. When the Ram Janmabhoomi was demolished, the cowardly Sangh Parivar which was in the forfront of demolition washed away its hands and passed on the blame to the Shiv Sena. Recently when the communal CD controversy surfaced during the UP Assembly elections, a similar blame game started all over again. One can only fault the ineffectual Election Commission for the sorry state of affairs and not taking suo moto action against such offenders by derecognization.
Reply | Forward
sundars correct
by harun on 18 Mar 2009
well done sundar if this guy had the balls he should have stood by what he did say instead off crying that the tapes were doctered.what bravoo are these so called pseudonationalist talking off.varun was playing cheap politics he has no agenda and our own chauvanists support him call him a hero what about those who lost their lives defending mumbai.its blasempheny against true nationals.
Reply | Forward
Thank you Harun
by R Sundar on 18 Mar 2009
Thank you. Nevertheless to put to rest such ugly incidents the Election Commission should atleast henceforth take strong action against such parties/person who spread hatred to harvest political gains. Better late than never.
Reply | Forward
Varun
by rohit on 18 Mar 2009
varun has not said any thing wrong,the present danger to this country is the islamic terrorism and its supportors either ideologically (which we have in plenty) and Vote grabers (mulayam,amar,laloo,congraess.leftists).The poverty in this country the disparity in this country shall persist like it is persisting even in the USA .The disparity can narrow down but the demon of terrorism of fundamentalist islam has to be dealt for it consumes our time,money and progress.So varun said nothing wrong,he has started a debate
Reply | Forward
Coward
by Sourabh on 18 Mar 2009
Varun is claiming to have said nothing. why do you support him on what he himself does not want to adhere to?
Reply | Forward
Philibit is in Siege
by Shankar on 18 Mar 2009
The situation in philibit is one which should be taken in to context. The Hindus are living in a siege mentality .Young Hindu girls have been raped. There has been frequent attacks on Hindu community. The administration is pandering to vote bank politics. The Philibit constituncy has a new demography.Muslim vote has increased by 1.5 lakhs and they number close to 4 lacs.SP has been expecting this entire vote bank and a little of other communities. On the otherhand if a Hindu candiate has to elected from Philibit at least all Majority community should vote. They find in Varun some one who can fight for them. So this CD has been doctored to give a communal color to take him off completely since the SP can then win easily.BJP should now send Varun for campaigning in whole of UP to bring new hope to Hindu communities who are in a siege in border areas of UP
Reply | Forward
This is shocking!
by Rajratnam Pillai on 18 Mar 2009
I am thoroughly shocked at what Shankar has informed us.If it is true, I stand by every word which Varun has said, if he has said it.
Reply | Forward
We have to follow hinduism
by Murali on 18 Mar 2009
While the couple of words used by Varun is regrettable, the moral behind the issue has to be understood. India for long has been ruled by Muslims and then by the British. As a result, we have lost our self pride and have since then mastered the art of betrayal to either stay in power or to amass wealth. That is the mind that is governing the people on Congress who use secularisim as a tool to stay in power and misgovern india. After close to 50 year of ruling India continueously what is the state at which the country is when compared to the neigbhouring China. Look at he level of corruption and terrorisim the two issues that plague the country and its growth. Today they have set a new standard in froming alliance whereby public issues are not the central issues of politics. I think to regain our lost pride and get back our identity we should go back to our roots and establish ourself as a hindu state. A lesson that we all have to learn from the Muslim world.
Reply | Forward
above
by janney on 18 Mar 2009
Hand should be used for only good things, if not this is what happens
Reply | Forward
Religious fanatics
by SVeri on 18 Mar 2009
He seems to have inherited the thuggish ways of his father.That fits in well with an extremist organization like the BJP.His only claim to fame is that he belongs to the Ghandi family, other than that i wonder what has he done for any of the poor hindus living in villages let alone muslims. These are the people who spew venom in thier talk to reinforce their ideology that India belongs to only those who profess the Hindu religion. They are not unlike the Taliban or Al Queda who call for pure religious states. You only have to look at Afghanistan, Pakistan or Saudi Arabia to see the end result of this ideology.
Reply | Forward
Go Varun Go.
by Kabir on 18 Mar 2009
Not sure why there is so much of fuss. Hindus were persecuted, terrorised by Islamic invaders for centuries and its still happening in Kashmir and in rest of the part of India. Have we forgotten 11/26? We Hindus, we have lost the nerve, we are a coward .. and when someone takes some stand, we pull him down. There is nothing wrong in Varun's speech. We need someone educated who can help raise confidence in Hindus. Why don't election commission look into Mulla Mulayam, Abu Azmi, Mayawati and few congress ppl speeches? Why Hindus have to be blamed? Go Varun Go. I'm admirer of your father and always wanted a person like Sanjay Gandhi to be a PM. A strong - willed man who can steer India from the terrorism emitting from within and outside country. I'm with you. And I want you to achieve greater heights. I like your statement I'm a Gandhi, A Hindu and an Indian. And I'm prod of that - that a leader is saying that he is HINDU when even BJP leaders are trying to hide their own identity.
Reply | Forward
Brave as his grandmother
by hera on 18 Mar 2009
bravo to this guy...................bravoo.........in thie ready to be turned islamic state of india ............this is only guy who stands for hindus..................bravo.....
Reply | Forward
Varun
by Dr R C Dikshit on 18 Mar 2009
I agree with Varun. It is political fashion to brand any talk on protacting hindus in country with majority hindus.
Varun is the new hero
by Rajeshq on 18 Mar 2009
VArun is the new hero. It is time for old Modi and very old Advani to retire to an old age home. Jai Hind. Here is a new hero for the mentally troubled rss babies.
Reply | Forward
A TRUE HINDU
by Shiva Shankar on 18 Mar 2009
Hats off Varun, u have real guts man continue.
Reply | Forward
Varun is a man of conviction
by Anand on 18 Mar 2009
I fully endorse Mr.Varun and appreciate his conviction to tell the truth.Being a Hindu is not a crime and definitely he is having his point and we should understand the context in which he seems to have made the speeach.Hindus in India re becoming victims of concerted asualt by terrorists and missionaries bent upon balkanising the country .I salute Mr.Varun for asserting his faith when even the so called Hindu nationalists and spiritual leaders are shying away for pleasing the minority community.Millions of Hindus will be morally supporting the young Varun and GOD bless him in his endeavour.i
Reply | Forward
Varun Proud son of India
by Madhavan Kutty on 18 Mar 2009
So many political leaders in India do not have the courage to say that 'I am a Hindu and an Indian'. Varun you're definitely right. one saying 'Hindu' doesn't mean he's anti Muslim or anti Christian.
Reply | Forward
Shit on Gandhi's pious name, please change your surname
by Bharat Mata on 18 Mar 2009
This is digusting to have Gandhi as suffix in your name. Gandhi is known to unite but your shitty attitude is totally on the reverse direction. Let India be free from terrorists like Varun Gandhi.
Reply | Forward
I SUPPORT
by AN INDIAN on 18 Mar 2009
I SUPPORT U VARUN JAI HIND
Reply | Forward
ISI link of politicians who divide Indian society
by Raj on 18 Mar 2009
Police should investigate if ISI is paying these guys for dividing the Indian society. They seem to have lot of money to even take cocaine with roles of Rs.1000 notes and all.
Reply | Forward
Ulta hai
by Vinay on 18 Mar 2009
Yeh ulta hai "I am a Gandhi, a Hindu and an Indian, says Varun"Every citizen should first be an Indian
Reply | Forward
Well done Varun
by Manav on 18 Mar 2009
Varun, you have said what many BJP leaders would never be able to say in their lifetime. All these BJP leaders are power-hungry people. You should be the new mascot of Hindus. Congress and other parties can rot in hell.
Reply | Forward
New Generation = Peace Lover
by Dr.Aslam Khan on 18 Mar 2009
Varun, fate of India is behind educated youngsters like you. So you must try to unite all the community and go together. Our intenstion only the security of our citizen and prosperity of our country. So pls do not follow Advani or Modi. Pls dont spoil your ability to hating or make hate between communities. You must have good future. Shall we go together for develpment of our country. See, bad people in every community wheather it hindu , muslim or christian. But its numbers are minor. Majority of the people of every society love peace . For politics and their benifit some politician like Advani and Modi creating trouble. New generation youth as you and me are looking for decent life and peace. Jai Youth and Jai Hindustand.
Reply | Forward
I'm pro-India
by sdp on 18 Mar 2009
It seems a new fashion now. Hindu is not allowed to talk. not allowed to gather. If do so, the "value based" politicians described it as communal. Why they are targetting this community?Yes the know that this community is devided in the name of caste. They want to see us as divided socitey, so that they can rule the country for long. The Indians shall seriously look in to it before going to polling stations.Please value based politicians and "Secular" media, please do not try to measure our patience. Please do not try. Who is communal? look at the small state "Kerala", how all "secular" parties making the tie-ups with terrorist organizations. None of the media highlighting the issues there.Please do not try to check our patience..........
Reply | Forward
Varun Gandhi - a Hindu
by Sreenivasan E.C. on 18 Mar 2009
Mother should not lavish all love and care on animals, birds and vegetables. A mother should also love her child even after he grows up. Her care is necessary for protecting him from bad company.
Reply | Forward
plain oppurtunism
by harun on 18 Mar 2009
i had always believed that the educated and tech savy are those who incite innocent indians who are as such trying a way to make a decent living,and that has been proved correct time and again.Whats alarming is even after seeing and hearing what a INSANE guy who spews venom on a whole community with the sole intention of winning a election,these so called pro democratic elite incite intemperate lunatics with sole intention of using democracy as a way to enforce there divisive agenda.How different are these guys from the TALIBANS and jehaadis.These guys go to town calling themselves gaurdians off human rights and support those who threaten violence in public for cheap electoral gains.In fact i wont be surprised if this paranoid boke is deemed fit to be a prime minister in waiting.Is this so called protector of the nation doing when mumbai was under seige.,hatching eggs and planning to use the tragedy in mumbai to have himself crowned as the sole protector of the helpless majority.
Reply | Forward
More than meets the eye
by Anurag on 18 Mar 2009
Why Amar Singh's comments after Batla House Shootout not seen as communal!!! and in fact the ruling allaince has inducted amar singh as saviour of the government??? isn't that communal??? y Azharuddin is inducted in Congress evn when it is proved that he has played and betrayed with the faith of indians("with all faith"). The biggest cause of the division amongst the electoral is the way news is structured, fabricated and presented...i don't approve of what Varun has said if it is true? or there might be a context to it as he has clarified....but then y only selected wrongs are reported????y not all with equal rhetoric????isn't that d duty of the media towards d nation....the reader should be clever n keep in mind that, there more than what meets d eye
Reply | Forward
Varun and hinduism
by chandrakant Marathe on 18 Mar 2009
I can see a point in Varun Gandhi's thought. It is the congress and it's so called allies who fear hindutwa because their vote bank is created by double standards and dividing votes on the communal differentiation. Indian ethos, culture and plurality does not mean hindu bashing/ignoring but accommodating others as we majority practice our faith as hindus.
Reply | Forward
Varun and his philosophy of hatred
by A.kader on 18 Mar 2009
This man, Varun, will never succeed in India in the long run with his message of hatred; his utterances solely with the intention to split Muslims and Hindus and to collect the Hindu votes are the words of a man of the lowest level.There are a great class of good Hindus and good Muslims in India and they want to live with friendly relations, a peaceful co-existence which would benefit both the communities and lead India to progress.Varun's anti-Indian philosophy of hatred would be rejected by good Hindus themselves as Hinduism itself teaches goodness,justice and peace.This Ravana of Hinduism would fall, the history of Hinduism has shown it before.A liar has no integrity; who would trust a liar?Good Hindus would never want him to be their leader.I still believe in the real India, this is the land of the Mahatma Gandhi who said:"Hindus and Muslims are my two eyes." India or any nation would progress only with a constructive philosophy.Varun preaches only cruelty and destruction.
Reply | Forward
Hi
by dhananjay on 18 Mar 2009
Yes Varun we will stand by you. Great
Reply | Forward
VICTIM VARUN
by SV Sivasubrahmaniam on 18 Mar 2009
This is another classic example of BJP Hindutva ideology. It is not AT ALL understood by the BJP cadre right from the Rajnath Singh level and bellow, what the elders have meant it. It has definitely spread the venomous feeling among the cadre, the anti Muslimism. No body can deny this. Poor Varun has orchestrated more in the election rally to woo the Hindu votes and come closer to BJP high command and to become future Modi of BJP. Advaani sahib, realise the venomous Hindu card at least now and spread the message of Bharateeyata which very pluralistic ideology AND will save the society and the country. Not only Varun many more Varuns will grow and damage the basic fabric of India. Pl. think over and save the country. GOD BELESS INDIA.
Reply | Forward
Varun thanks for not becoming anti-hindu
by Shallabh on 18 Mar 2009
Varun first all it takes a lot of courage to speak for hindus in this country and thank you very much.Please help hindu community in this hour of crisis.
Reply | Forward
MAHARHARATA
by pk on 18 Mar 2009
we Got the "FACE" of UP.Varun its a dharma yudh and u r the Abhimanyu surrounded by your own relative the congress to maligh you and stop your political journey by fraudulent method
Reply | Forward
pseudo hindutwa
by abhijit tamhane on 18 Mar 2009
obviously, it is a fake, deceptive, pseudo hinduittwa that Varun and company is evoking.
Reply | Forward
Great Somersault
by maran on 18 Mar 2009
Has all the qualities to be a politician.
Reply | Forward
Right on Varun
by Akhand on 18 Mar 2009
Varun, you are absolutely right. Millions of frightened Hindus and anti-terrorist Muslims support you. Clearly, the Congress is scared of you and has tried to malign you. You have my vote!
Reply | Forward
Candid Varun
by Mayank on 18 Mar 2009
Well I did not see my comment that I had said in favor of Varun Gandhi. I congratulate Mr. Gandhi for being able to speak a candid truth and clarifying the air on his speech. Please get the answers on where was the tape for 11 days? Who was Mr. Gandhi refering to in his tape as a sister? He categorically denied for once and for all that He did not spread any hatred, for whatever communal is there in the tape is completely doctored with.Now the bigger question is how many Indians sitting in their home across the country are silently thanking Mr. Gandhi's guts to speak that 'he is a proud Hindu and Indian'.I am proud of being Hindu. I'm not ashamed. If this sentence is communal then thank god I am not in India to listen to rhetoric of biased media.
Reply | Forward
Varun for PM
by Raj on 18 Mar 2009
Jai Varun ji, Advani and Modi seem to have got tired and retired should retire and make way for Varun ji. Silly people, silly ideology, killing neighbors in the name of gods and religion.
Giving no signs of tendering an apology sought by his party, Varun, the 29-year-old BJP Lok Sabha candidate from Pilibhit, said the video footage of his speeches was ‘doctored’ and saw a ‘political conspiracy’ hatched to malign him.
"I am proud of my faith and not apologetic about it. I am a Gandhi, a Hindu and an Indian in the equal measure," he said.
Acting swiftly, the Election Commission had on Tuesday ordered filing of a criminal case against Varun for his alleged inflammatory speech with communal overtones and served notice to the party seeking its explanation.
"I have been a victim of a political conspiracy. Those are not my words and that is not my voice. I have not made any communal statement," Varun, a scion of the estranged Gandhi family, said.
Varun, son of Maneka Gandhi, said the tape has been doctored and it was a ‘malicious attempt’ to brand him communal.
Senior BJP leader Shanawaz Hussain termed Varun's remarks ‘shocking’ and demanded an unconditional apology from him.
Another BJP leader Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi also assailed Varun's remarks saying they are a manifestation of his family's past Congress culture.
Rattled by the controversy, the BJP asked its party candidates to observe caution and restraint in their speeches.
"We do not subscribe to such views," party spokesperson Siddarth Nath Singh said.
In no mood to relent, Varun said, "I am pro India and not anti-anybody. I want to ask the nation to stand by me."
He went on to add ‘my attempt has been to restore confidence in a community that has been under siege in its own country.’
He said the video footage has been ‘doctored’. It has been a malicious attempt to brand me as communal. There is no question of my having any ill feeling towards any community," he said.
At a recent election meeting in Pilibhit from where he is making his electoral debut, Varun had reportedly said, "this is not a 'Hand' (Congress symbol), it is the power of the 'Lotus' (BJP symbol). It will cut the head of ....... Jai Shri Ram."
He had also said if anyone raises a hand against Hindus and if they thought Hindus were weak and leaderless, he would cut his hand. Gandhi, however, claimed that the video footage of his speeches was tampered with.
Varun also wondered why the CD was made public after a gap of 12 days on March 16 whereas he made the speech on March 5.
In Patna, Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar termed Varun's Pilibhit speech as condemnable.
"I have not seen the TV footage (of Varun's speech), but from what I have come to know, his statement hurt the sensibilities of a section of the society. Anything that is said during an election or otherwise that hurts the sentiments of any community is condemnable," Kumar said when his comments was sought on the matter.
Terming BJP Varun's speech as contrary to secular democracy, Congress said BJP will be seen as a co-conspirator if it does not take action against him.
Union Minister Kapil Sibal said when cognisance has been taken by the Election Commission that a prima facie offence has been committed, whether Varun denies it or not is not relevant.
"The leadership of BJP will take action because if they don't, then it will be seen that they are the co-conspirators in this," he said in Delhi.
Alleging the speech was aimed at polarising votes, Sibal said, "I am not concerned with the nature and quality of the speech. It is abhorrent; it is contrary to the basic foundations of our secular democracy".
VARUN'S SPEECH
by piyush trivedi on 18 Mar 2009
NON SHOULD MAKE SPEECHS MADE BY MR.V.GANDHI AN ISSUE.INDIANS ARE INTELLIGENT AND WILL WEIGH EACH CANDIDATE IN ELECTIONS.--LET THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS FOR FREEDOM TO EXPRESS BE NOT SNETCHED AWAY FROM ANY INDIAN MEDIA MUST BE MORE RESPONSIBLE IN REPORTING SINCE IT IS THEN THAT PERSONS OTHER THEN THOSE TO WHOME HE AADRESSED KNOW ON THIS MATTER AND THEN EVERYONE TRIES TO POLITISIZE THE ISSUE JUST LEAVE TO LISTENERS TO EVALUATE THE SPEECH AND ACT WHILE VOTING IN THE INTEREST OF NATION IF WHAT IS REPORTED IS A FACT.SPEECH OF ONE DOES NOT REFLECT THE VIEWS OF ENTIRE PARTY.
Reply | Forward
VARUN SHOULD FIGHT BACK; BJP SHOULD STAND BEHIND HIM
by young indian on 18 Mar 2009
Varun has been framed by RIVAL PARTIES only with the eye on votes and to finish him politically. FAIR AND FREE investigation will bring the truth out. Varun is a gentleman and he knows what to say and what not to say. He is a true NATIONALIST unlike RAHUL who is a shadow dealer. VARUN CARRY ON THE FIGHT.....HINDUS ARE WITH YOU..
Reply | Forward
Varun Gandhi Speaks
by Vijay Dewan on 18 Mar 2009
'My attempt has been to restore confidence in a community that has been inder seige in its own country". These words of Varun Gandhi reflects the great hypocracy of this country. True words indeed and spoken by a brave man of a brave father;who if he had been alive would have changed the complexion of the country. But he became victim of thgose very psuedo-secular forces which are now attacking Varun. BJP is the most unworthy party to take any stand worth its salt. It surrenders its judgement to others at the slightest controversy. The man is explaining that the footage is not original and he did not want to hurt the feelings of anybody but is trying to make the depressed people of his constituency to shed fear and show that the Hindu iis not weak and leaderless. Let all those who call such statements communal touch there hearts and say that is not the Hindu majority at the receiving end for the last so many years,whether it is Punjab, Kashmir or the Northeast. Truth must come out.
Reply | Forward
Destroying Varun's future
by Sreenivas on 18 Mar 2009
Congress knows that Varun can overshadow Rahul. So it is in their interest to destroy his future.
Reply | Forward
YES WE ARE HINDU IN HINDUSTAN AND EVERYONE IS HINDUSTANI
by dv.sharma on 18 Mar 2009
Varun is clearly framed. All Opponents we see that Varun is a Brave personality.
Reply | Forward
truth is
by beljamine on 18 Mar 2009
Varun is right. it will be interesting to see why a hindu cannot express his sentiments without being harassed. none of the indian govts has ever done anything about curbing the muslim population what with their many wives and many children. breeding like rabbits seems to be what life is all about for them everywhere they go. look at the uk and europe, where millions of muslims now abuse the majorities openly and with impunity. the white majorities live in fear and they've been betrayed by their own govts. well said Varun for telling the truth as it is.
Reply | Forward
Nothing wrong
by Sunil on 18 Mar 2009
Nothing wrong in whatever he has said. At least few leaders like him and Modi have the courage to speak up for Hindus. One more time UPA and so called secular congress comes to power, India will be sold to Pakistan. It is time for us to vote for NDA and throw out the corrupt congress and regional caste based parties which have ruined our country
Reply | Forward
I AM A HINDU
by PANJU on 18 Mar 2009
VARUN U R THE SECAND GANDHI, I RESPACT FOR TELLING THE TRUTH.
Reply | Forward
Varun said the truth what several other leaders are scared to say
by rakesh m on 18 Mar 2009
Dear Varun, nothing to worry, millions are with you. YOu said what several other senior BJP and or Hindu leaders are scared to say. People like you should come out and speak openly against the appeasement of certain communities and their anti-national activities and terrorism. Nobody can hurt you for talking in favour of Hindus. You are in Hindustan!
Reply | Forward
MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS...YOU ARE A VIRUS!
by Wide Awake on 18 Mar 2009
The statement given by Varun Gandhi and now defending himself stating that it has been altered ad doctored shows nothing but how he and other 99% of our politicians try to fool the public with their sick mentallity .this is because they knows that the public are stupid and can only play with thier emotions,which is usually seen through their words and actions.well 99% of our politicians are criminals...WAKE UP PUBLIC..WAKE UP!
Reply | Forward
Varun
by Rajesh on 18 Mar 2009
Varun may go out but he helped BJP a lot. He talked like a true son of India. CongI will be a wash out. But whether Varun is a Gandhi, or Gandhi a Hindu difficult to answer.
Reply | Forward
Long Live Pakistan
by Ali on 18 Mar 2009
Long Live Pakistan.Thanks god we are safe from these Varun type of peopleAnd U indian forget the dream about attacking us after we got nuclear bombs.We will keep supporting kashmirirs
Reply | Forward
Varun Speech
by Baldev Singh Gill on 18 Mar 2009
I partly agree with Varun, We are Indians first then we are either Hindus , Sikhs ,Christians or Muslims. I am an NRI and lived abroad since 1963 and always felt proud to be an Indian and belong to the land of Gurus and Veda's peace and harmony and of course bravery.Long live India and God bless India
Reply | Forward
Teach a good lesson to this kid.
by Abu Hudaifah on 18 Mar 2009
He wants to come into flash news, he is a Gandhian, doesn't remember who the Great Gandhi was, he is an Indian, doesn't know anything about Indian Constitution, he is a Hindu, doesn't know Hindu Religion,in fact he is nothing, India as a whole must teach a lesson to this kid once for all.
Reply | Forward
secular Hindus
by Abdul on 18 Mar 2009
Hail secular hindus .put down anyone who try to care for you because you never get rid of this slave mentallity and minourity pleasing mentallity .Remember one day these minourity will rule you and India and terrorism will be legalised.Who will be responsible ? Its not these minourities ,its you secular hindus.
Reply | Forward
Yes Varun you are Gandhi
by Patel on 18 Mar 2009
What is great in his speech which was all indications of poor values what he conceives from his guardians is that great? Well, like you people will only stand near to Varun's legs other ordinary people can estimate what is Varun. One more advice to Varun please doesn't use the Gandhi name you don't know the definitions of Gandhi's name. We Indian can say Soniya is the really from Gandhi family who has saves my country's history by refusing the Prim ministerial position of India. Learn the sacrifices first then stand before the public, if we find more people like you for India than we are not far away to becoming Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Reply | Forward
WHAT IS THIS COURAGE ALL ABOUT
by K Sundar on 18 Mar 2009
What is this courage, these Hindutvawadis are talking about ? If Varun atleast had stood by his statement, then one could have atleast buy the argument of courage. But, he has started crying like a child that the tape has been doctored, that it was a Political conspiracy to frame him and that he has been misquoted. So, what is the courage all about ?? As a true follower of BJP, he is following the Party's footsteps in deceiving and hiding everything under the carpet. When the Ram Janmabhoomi was demolished, the cowardly Sangh Parivar which was in the forfront of demolition washed away its hands and passed on the blame to the Shiv Sena. Recently when the communal CD controversy surfaced during the UP Assembly elections, a similar blame game started all over again. One can only fault the ineffectual Election Commission for the sorry state of affairs and not taking suo moto action against such offenders by derecognization.
Reply | Forward
sundars correct
by harun on 18 Mar 2009
well done sundar if this guy had the balls he should have stood by what he did say instead off crying that the tapes were doctered.what bravoo are these so called pseudonationalist talking off.varun was playing cheap politics he has no agenda and our own chauvanists support him call him a hero what about those who lost their lives defending mumbai.its blasempheny against true nationals.
Reply | Forward
Thank you Harun
by R Sundar on 18 Mar 2009
Thank you. Nevertheless to put to rest such ugly incidents the Election Commission should atleast henceforth take strong action against such parties/person who spread hatred to harvest political gains. Better late than never.
Reply | Forward
Varun
by rohit on 18 Mar 2009
varun has not said any thing wrong,the present danger to this country is the islamic terrorism and its supportors either ideologically (which we have in plenty) and Vote grabers (mulayam,amar,laloo,congraess.leftists).The poverty in this country the disparity in this country shall persist like it is persisting even in the USA .The disparity can narrow down but the demon of terrorism of fundamentalist islam has to be dealt for it consumes our time,money and progress.So varun said nothing wrong,he has started a debate
Reply | Forward
Coward
by Sourabh on 18 Mar 2009
Varun is claiming to have said nothing. why do you support him on what he himself does not want to adhere to?
Reply | Forward
Philibit is in Siege
by Shankar on 18 Mar 2009
The situation in philibit is one which should be taken in to context. The Hindus are living in a siege mentality .Young Hindu girls have been raped. There has been frequent attacks on Hindu community. The administration is pandering to vote bank politics. The Philibit constituncy has a new demography.Muslim vote has increased by 1.5 lakhs and they number close to 4 lacs.SP has been expecting this entire vote bank and a little of other communities. On the otherhand if a Hindu candiate has to elected from Philibit at least all Majority community should vote. They find in Varun some one who can fight for them. So this CD has been doctored to give a communal color to take him off completely since the SP can then win easily.BJP should now send Varun for campaigning in whole of UP to bring new hope to Hindu communities who are in a siege in border areas of UP
Reply | Forward
This is shocking!
by Rajratnam Pillai on 18 Mar 2009
I am thoroughly shocked at what Shankar has informed us.If it is true, I stand by every word which Varun has said, if he has said it.
Reply | Forward
We have to follow hinduism
by Murali on 18 Mar 2009
While the couple of words used by Varun is regrettable, the moral behind the issue has to be understood. India for long has been ruled by Muslims and then by the British. As a result, we have lost our self pride and have since then mastered the art of betrayal to either stay in power or to amass wealth. That is the mind that is governing the people on Congress who use secularisim as a tool to stay in power and misgovern india. After close to 50 year of ruling India continueously what is the state at which the country is when compared to the neigbhouring China. Look at he level of corruption and terrorisim the two issues that plague the country and its growth. Today they have set a new standard in froming alliance whereby public issues are not the central issues of politics. I think to regain our lost pride and get back our identity we should go back to our roots and establish ourself as a hindu state. A lesson that we all have to learn from the Muslim world.
Reply | Forward
above
by janney on 18 Mar 2009
Hand should be used for only good things, if not this is what happens
Reply | Forward
Religious fanatics
by SVeri on 18 Mar 2009
He seems to have inherited the thuggish ways of his father.That fits in well with an extremist organization like the BJP.His only claim to fame is that he belongs to the Ghandi family, other than that i wonder what has he done for any of the poor hindus living in villages let alone muslims. These are the people who spew venom in thier talk to reinforce their ideology that India belongs to only those who profess the Hindu religion. They are not unlike the Taliban or Al Queda who call for pure religious states. You only have to look at Afghanistan, Pakistan or Saudi Arabia to see the end result of this ideology.
Reply | Forward
Go Varun Go.
by Kabir on 18 Mar 2009
Not sure why there is so much of fuss. Hindus were persecuted, terrorised by Islamic invaders for centuries and its still happening in Kashmir and in rest of the part of India. Have we forgotten 11/26? We Hindus, we have lost the nerve, we are a coward .. and when someone takes some stand, we pull him down. There is nothing wrong in Varun's speech. We need someone educated who can help raise confidence in Hindus. Why don't election commission look into Mulla Mulayam, Abu Azmi, Mayawati and few congress ppl speeches? Why Hindus have to be blamed? Go Varun Go. I'm admirer of your father and always wanted a person like Sanjay Gandhi to be a PM. A strong - willed man who can steer India from the terrorism emitting from within and outside country. I'm with you. And I want you to achieve greater heights. I like your statement I'm a Gandhi, A Hindu and an Indian. And I'm prod of that - that a leader is saying that he is HINDU when even BJP leaders are trying to hide their own identity.
Reply | Forward
Brave as his grandmother
by hera on 18 Mar 2009
bravo to this guy...................bravoo.........in thie ready to be turned islamic state of india ............this is only guy who stands for hindus..................bravo.....
Reply | Forward
Varun
by Dr R C Dikshit on 18 Mar 2009
I agree with Varun. It is political fashion to brand any talk on protacting hindus in country with majority hindus.
Varun is the new hero
by Rajeshq on 18 Mar 2009
VArun is the new hero. It is time for old Modi and very old Advani to retire to an old age home. Jai Hind. Here is a new hero for the mentally troubled rss babies.
Reply | Forward
A TRUE HINDU
by Shiva Shankar on 18 Mar 2009
Hats off Varun, u have real guts man continue.
Reply | Forward
Varun is a man of conviction
by Anand on 18 Mar 2009
I fully endorse Mr.Varun and appreciate his conviction to tell the truth.Being a Hindu is not a crime and definitely he is having his point and we should understand the context in which he seems to have made the speeach.Hindus in India re becoming victims of concerted asualt by terrorists and missionaries bent upon balkanising the country .I salute Mr.Varun for asserting his faith when even the so called Hindu nationalists and spiritual leaders are shying away for pleasing the minority community.Millions of Hindus will be morally supporting the young Varun and GOD bless him in his endeavour.i
Reply | Forward
Varun Proud son of India
by Madhavan Kutty on 18 Mar 2009
So many political leaders in India do not have the courage to say that 'I am a Hindu and an Indian'. Varun you're definitely right. one saying 'Hindu' doesn't mean he's anti Muslim or anti Christian.
Reply | Forward
Shit on Gandhi's pious name, please change your surname
by Bharat Mata on 18 Mar 2009
This is digusting to have Gandhi as suffix in your name. Gandhi is known to unite but your shitty attitude is totally on the reverse direction. Let India be free from terrorists like Varun Gandhi.
Reply | Forward
I SUPPORT
by AN INDIAN on 18 Mar 2009
I SUPPORT U VARUN JAI HIND
Reply | Forward
ISI link of politicians who divide Indian society
by Raj on 18 Mar 2009
Police should investigate if ISI is paying these guys for dividing the Indian society. They seem to have lot of money to even take cocaine with roles of Rs.1000 notes and all.
Reply | Forward
Ulta hai
by Vinay on 18 Mar 2009
Yeh ulta hai "I am a Gandhi, a Hindu and an Indian, says Varun"Every citizen should first be an Indian
Reply | Forward
Well done Varun
by Manav on 18 Mar 2009
Varun, you have said what many BJP leaders would never be able to say in their lifetime. All these BJP leaders are power-hungry people. You should be the new mascot of Hindus. Congress and other parties can rot in hell.
Reply | Forward
New Generation = Peace Lover
by Dr.Aslam Khan on 18 Mar 2009
Varun, fate of India is behind educated youngsters like you. So you must try to unite all the community and go together. Our intenstion only the security of our citizen and prosperity of our country. So pls do not follow Advani or Modi. Pls dont spoil your ability to hating or make hate between communities. You must have good future. Shall we go together for develpment of our country. See, bad people in every community wheather it hindu , muslim or christian. But its numbers are minor. Majority of the people of every society love peace . For politics and their benifit some politician like Advani and Modi creating trouble. New generation youth as you and me are looking for decent life and peace. Jai Youth and Jai Hindustand.
Reply | Forward
I'm pro-India
by sdp on 18 Mar 2009
It seems a new fashion now. Hindu is not allowed to talk. not allowed to gather. If do so, the "value based" politicians described it as communal. Why they are targetting this community?Yes the know that this community is devided in the name of caste. They want to see us as divided socitey, so that they can rule the country for long. The Indians shall seriously look in to it before going to polling stations.Please value based politicians and "Secular" media, please do not try to measure our patience. Please do not try. Who is communal? look at the small state "Kerala", how all "secular" parties making the tie-ups with terrorist organizations. None of the media highlighting the issues there.Please do not try to check our patience..........
Reply | Forward
Varun Gandhi - a Hindu
by Sreenivasan E.C. on 18 Mar 2009
Mother should not lavish all love and care on animals, birds and vegetables. A mother should also love her child even after he grows up. Her care is necessary for protecting him from bad company.
Reply | Forward
plain oppurtunism
by harun on 18 Mar 2009
i had always believed that the educated and tech savy are those who incite innocent indians who are as such trying a way to make a decent living,and that has been proved correct time and again.Whats alarming is even after seeing and hearing what a INSANE guy who spews venom on a whole community with the sole intention of winning a election,these so called pro democratic elite incite intemperate lunatics with sole intention of using democracy as a way to enforce there divisive agenda.How different are these guys from the TALIBANS and jehaadis.These guys go to town calling themselves gaurdians off human rights and support those who threaten violence in public for cheap electoral gains.In fact i wont be surprised if this paranoid boke is deemed fit to be a prime minister in waiting.Is this so called protector of the nation doing when mumbai was under seige.,hatching eggs and planning to use the tragedy in mumbai to have himself crowned as the sole protector of the helpless majority.
Reply | Forward
More than meets the eye
by Anurag on 18 Mar 2009
Why Amar Singh's comments after Batla House Shootout not seen as communal!!! and in fact the ruling allaince has inducted amar singh as saviour of the government??? isn't that communal??? y Azharuddin is inducted in Congress evn when it is proved that he has played and betrayed with the faith of indians("with all faith"). The biggest cause of the division amongst the electoral is the way news is structured, fabricated and presented...i don't approve of what Varun has said if it is true? or there might be a context to it as he has clarified....but then y only selected wrongs are reported????y not all with equal rhetoric????isn't that d duty of the media towards d nation....the reader should be clever n keep in mind that, there more than what meets d eye
Reply | Forward
Varun and hinduism
by chandrakant Marathe on 18 Mar 2009
I can see a point in Varun Gandhi's thought. It is the congress and it's so called allies who fear hindutwa because their vote bank is created by double standards and dividing votes on the communal differentiation. Indian ethos, culture and plurality does not mean hindu bashing/ignoring but accommodating others as we majority practice our faith as hindus.
Reply | Forward
Varun and his philosophy of hatred
by A.kader on 18 Mar 2009
This man, Varun, will never succeed in India in the long run with his message of hatred; his utterances solely with the intention to split Muslims and Hindus and to collect the Hindu votes are the words of a man of the lowest level.There are a great class of good Hindus and good Muslims in India and they want to live with friendly relations, a peaceful co-existence which would benefit both the communities and lead India to progress.Varun's anti-Indian philosophy of hatred would be rejected by good Hindus themselves as Hinduism itself teaches goodness,justice and peace.This Ravana of Hinduism would fall, the history of Hinduism has shown it before.A liar has no integrity; who would trust a liar?Good Hindus would never want him to be their leader.I still believe in the real India, this is the land of the Mahatma Gandhi who said:"Hindus and Muslims are my two eyes." India or any nation would progress only with a constructive philosophy.Varun preaches only cruelty and destruction.
Reply | Forward
Hi
by dhananjay on 18 Mar 2009
Yes Varun we will stand by you. Great
Reply | Forward
VICTIM VARUN
by SV Sivasubrahmaniam on 18 Mar 2009
This is another classic example of BJP Hindutva ideology. It is not AT ALL understood by the BJP cadre right from the Rajnath Singh level and bellow, what the elders have meant it. It has definitely spread the venomous feeling among the cadre, the anti Muslimism. No body can deny this. Poor Varun has orchestrated more in the election rally to woo the Hindu votes and come closer to BJP high command and to become future Modi of BJP. Advaani sahib, realise the venomous Hindu card at least now and spread the message of Bharateeyata which very pluralistic ideology AND will save the society and the country. Not only Varun many more Varuns will grow and damage the basic fabric of India. Pl. think over and save the country. GOD BELESS INDIA.
Reply | Forward
Varun thanks for not becoming anti-hindu
by Shallabh on 18 Mar 2009
Varun first all it takes a lot of courage to speak for hindus in this country and thank you very much.Please help hindu community in this hour of crisis.
Reply | Forward
MAHARHARATA
by pk on 18 Mar 2009
we Got the "FACE" of UP.Varun its a dharma yudh and u r the Abhimanyu surrounded by your own relative the congress to maligh you and stop your political journey by fraudulent method
Reply | Forward
pseudo hindutwa
by abhijit tamhane on 18 Mar 2009
obviously, it is a fake, deceptive, pseudo hinduittwa that Varun and company is evoking.
Reply | Forward
Great Somersault
by maran on 18 Mar 2009
Has all the qualities to be a politician.
Reply | Forward
Right on Varun
by Akhand on 18 Mar 2009
Varun, you are absolutely right. Millions of frightened Hindus and anti-terrorist Muslims support you. Clearly, the Congress is scared of you and has tried to malign you. You have my vote!
Reply | Forward
Candid Varun
by Mayank on 18 Mar 2009
Well I did not see my comment that I had said in favor of Varun Gandhi. I congratulate Mr. Gandhi for being able to speak a candid truth and clarifying the air on his speech. Please get the answers on where was the tape for 11 days? Who was Mr. Gandhi refering to in his tape as a sister? He categorically denied for once and for all that He did not spread any hatred, for whatever communal is there in the tape is completely doctored with.Now the bigger question is how many Indians sitting in their home across the country are silently thanking Mr. Gandhi's guts to speak that 'he is a proud Hindu and Indian'.I am proud of being Hindu. I'm not ashamed. If this sentence is communal then thank god I am not in India to listen to rhetoric of biased media.
Reply | Forward
Varun for PM
by Raj on 18 Mar 2009
Jai Varun ji, Advani and Modi seem to have got tired and retired should retire and make way for Varun ji. Silly people, silly ideology, killing neighbors in the name of gods and religion.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Obesity Takes Years Off Your Life
It's similar to smoking when it comes to effect on longevity, researchers note
TUESDAY, March 17 (HealthDay News) -- Being obese can shorten your life, a new study shows.
"Moderate obesity typically shortens life span by about three years," said researcher Gary Whitlock, from the Clinical Trial Service Unit at the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom. "By moderate obesity, I mean weighing about a third more than is ideal, which for most people would mean being about 50 or 60 pounds overweight."
More than one in three middle-aged Americans are now in this category, Whitlock said. "By contrast, weighing twice your ideal weight -- say, an extra 150 pounds -- shortens life span by about 10 years," he added.
This obesity level is still not common, but it equals the known 10-year reduction in life span caused by smoking. "So, smoking is about as dangerous as being severely obese, and about three times as dangerous as being moderately obese," he said.
The report is published in the March 18 online edition of The Lancet.
For the study, Whitlock and other members of the Prospective Studies Collaboration collected data on 894,576 men and women who participated in 57 studies. The people in these studies came primarily from western Europe and North America. Their average body-mass index (BMI) was 25.
BMI is a calculation that expresses a relationship between height and weight. People are considered underweight if their BMI is less than 18.5, normal weight when the BMI is between 18.5 and 24.9, overweight when BMI is between 25 and 29.9, and obese when BMI is 30 or more, according to the U.S. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.
The researchers found that men and women whose BMI was between 22.5 and 25 lived the longest. For a person 5 feet 7 inches tall, his or her optimum weight would be about 154 pounds, they noted.
For those with a BMI over 25, every 10 to 12 pound increase translated to about a 30 percent increased risk of dying. In addition, there was a 40 percent increase in the risk for heart disease, stroke and other vascular disease, a 60 percent to 120 percent increased risk of diabetes, liver disease or kidney disease, a 10 percent increased risk of cancer, and a 20 percent increased risk for lung disease, the researchers reported.
"Obesity causes kidney disease, liver disease and several types of cancer, but the most common way it kills is by causing stroke and, most importantly, heart disease. Obesity causes heart disease by pushing up blood pressure, by interfering with blood cholesterol levels, and by bringing on diabetes," Whitlock said.
People who are moderately obese with a BMI in the 30 to 35 range reduced their life span by two and four years. For those who are severely obese with BMIs between 40 and 45, their life span was reduced by eight to 10 years. That's comparable to the effects of smoking, Whitlock said.
In fact, people whose weight was below normal also died earlier, due mainly to smoking-related diseases, the researchers noted.
"If you are obese and smoke, then, above all else, quit smoking," Whitlock said. "If you are obese and don't smoke, then don't start, and do what you can to avoid further weight gain. By avoiding further weight gain, you may well live a few years longer than you otherwise would do. By quitting smoking, a smoker can expect to gain several extra years of life -- about as many as a severely obese person might gain by shedding half of his or her body weight."
Dr. David L. Katz, director of the Prevention Research Center at Yale University School of Medicine, said this study confirms that the obesity epidemic is "the clear and present danger many of us knew it to be."
The association between BMI and mortality has been challenged in the scientific community, due in part to uncertainty about weight estimates and debate about measurement methods. "Here we have an emphatic reaffirmation of the fundamental issue: Overweight and obesity take years from life," Katz said.
"We know that, in many ways, BMI is a crude measure of the health risks associated with obesity, since not all excess body fat is created equal," he said. "Weight gained around the middle tends to be most dangerous, so for those subject to this pattern, risks may indeed be higher than this study suggests. For those with lower body weight gain, risks may be lower."
A study published in the Nov. 13 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine also found that where weight is centered is a risk factor. Men with the largest waist circumference had more than double the risk of death, and women with the largest waist circumference increased their risk of death by 78 percent.
TUESDAY, March 17 (HealthDay News) -- Being obese can shorten your life, a new study shows.
"Moderate obesity typically shortens life span by about three years," said researcher Gary Whitlock, from the Clinical Trial Service Unit at the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom. "By moderate obesity, I mean weighing about a third more than is ideal, which for most people would mean being about 50 or 60 pounds overweight."
More than one in three middle-aged Americans are now in this category, Whitlock said. "By contrast, weighing twice your ideal weight -- say, an extra 150 pounds -- shortens life span by about 10 years," he added.
This obesity level is still not common, but it equals the known 10-year reduction in life span caused by smoking. "So, smoking is about as dangerous as being severely obese, and about three times as dangerous as being moderately obese," he said.
The report is published in the March 18 online edition of The Lancet.
For the study, Whitlock and other members of the Prospective Studies Collaboration collected data on 894,576 men and women who participated in 57 studies. The people in these studies came primarily from western Europe and North America. Their average body-mass index (BMI) was 25.
BMI is a calculation that expresses a relationship between height and weight. People are considered underweight if their BMI is less than 18.5, normal weight when the BMI is between 18.5 and 24.9, overweight when BMI is between 25 and 29.9, and obese when BMI is 30 or more, according to the U.S. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.
The researchers found that men and women whose BMI was between 22.5 and 25 lived the longest. For a person 5 feet 7 inches tall, his or her optimum weight would be about 154 pounds, they noted.
For those with a BMI over 25, every 10 to 12 pound increase translated to about a 30 percent increased risk of dying. In addition, there was a 40 percent increase in the risk for heart disease, stroke and other vascular disease, a 60 percent to 120 percent increased risk of diabetes, liver disease or kidney disease, a 10 percent increased risk of cancer, and a 20 percent increased risk for lung disease, the researchers reported.
"Obesity causes kidney disease, liver disease and several types of cancer, but the most common way it kills is by causing stroke and, most importantly, heart disease. Obesity causes heart disease by pushing up blood pressure, by interfering with blood cholesterol levels, and by bringing on diabetes," Whitlock said.
People who are moderately obese with a BMI in the 30 to 35 range reduced their life span by two and four years. For those who are severely obese with BMIs between 40 and 45, their life span was reduced by eight to 10 years. That's comparable to the effects of smoking, Whitlock said.
In fact, people whose weight was below normal also died earlier, due mainly to smoking-related diseases, the researchers noted.
"If you are obese and smoke, then, above all else, quit smoking," Whitlock said. "If you are obese and don't smoke, then don't start, and do what you can to avoid further weight gain. By avoiding further weight gain, you may well live a few years longer than you otherwise would do. By quitting smoking, a smoker can expect to gain several extra years of life -- about as many as a severely obese person might gain by shedding half of his or her body weight."
Dr. David L. Katz, director of the Prevention Research Center at Yale University School of Medicine, said this study confirms that the obesity epidemic is "the clear and present danger many of us knew it to be."
The association between BMI and mortality has been challenged in the scientific community, due in part to uncertainty about weight estimates and debate about measurement methods. "Here we have an emphatic reaffirmation of the fundamental issue: Overweight and obesity take years from life," Katz said.
"We know that, in many ways, BMI is a crude measure of the health risks associated with obesity, since not all excess body fat is created equal," he said. "Weight gained around the middle tends to be most dangerous, so for those subject to this pattern, risks may indeed be higher than this study suggests. For those with lower body weight gain, risks may be lower."
A study published in the Nov. 13 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine also found that where weight is centered is a risk factor. Men with the largest waist circumference had more than double the risk of death, and women with the largest waist circumference increased their risk of death by 78 percent.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Our skewed world view won't let us see the real Pakistan
The west can no longer afford to impose its values and notions of democracy on countries that neither want nor need them : * Jason Burke, The Observer, Sunday 15 March 2009
First for the good news: Pakistan is not about to explode. The Islamic militants are not going to take power tomorrow; the nuclear weapons are not about to be trafficked to al-Qaida; the army is not about to send the Afghan Taliban to invade India; a civil war is unlikely.
The bad news is that Pakistan poses us questions that are much more profound than those we would face if this nation of 170 Millions, the world's second biggest Muslim state, were simply a failed state. If Pakistan collapsed, we would be faced by a serious security challenge. But the resilience of Pakistan and the nation's continuing collective refusal to do what the west would like it to together pose questions with implications far beyond simple security concerns. They are about our ability to influence events in far-off places, our capacity to analyse and understand the behaviour and perceived interests of other nations and cultures, about our ability to deal with difference, about how we see the world.
Pakistan has very grave problems. In the last two years, I have reported on bloody ethnic and political riots, on violent demonstrations, from the front line of a vicious war against radical Islamic insurgents. I spent a day with Benazir Bhutto a week before she was assassinated and covered the series of murderous attacks committed at home and abroad by militant groups based in Pakistan with shadowy connections to its security services. There is an economic crisis and social problems - illiteracy, domestic violence, drug addiction - of grotesque proportions. Osama bin Laden is probably on Pakistani soil.
For many developing nations, all this would signal the state's total disintegration. This partly explains why Pakistan's collapse is so often predicted. The nation's meltdown was forecast when its eastern half seceded to become Bangladesh in 1971, during the violence that preceded General Zia ul-Haq's coup in 1977, when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, when Zia was killed in 1988, during the horrific sectarian violence of the early Nineties, through sundry ethnic insurgencies, after 9/11, after the 2007 death of Bhutto and now after yet another political crisis. These predictions have been consistently proved wrong. The most recent will be too. Yesterday, tempers were already calming.
Some of the perpetual international hysteria is stoked by the Pakistanis themselves. Successive governments have perfected the art of negotiating by pointing a gun to their own heads. They know that their nation's strategic importance guarantees the financial life support they need from the international community. More broadly, our understanding of Pakistan is skewed. This is in part due to centuries of historical baggage. Though few would quote Emile Zola on contemporary France, Winston Churchill, who as a young man fought on the North-West Frontier, is regularly cited to explain today's insurgency. This legacy also includes stereotypes of "Mad Mullahs" running amok, an image fuelled by television footage that highlights ranting demonstrators from Pakistan's Islamist parties though they have never won more than 14% in an election.
For many Britons, Pakistan represents "the other" - chaotic, distant, exotic, dirty, hot, fanatical and threatening. Yet at the same time, Pakistan seems very familiar. There is the English language, cricket, kebabs and curries and figures such as Imran Khan. There are a million-odd Britons of Pakistani-descent who over four decades have largely integrated far better in the UK than often suggested.
It is the tension between these two largely imaginary Pakistans that leads to such strong reactions in Britain. We see the country as plunged in a struggle between the frighteningly foreign and the familiar, between fanaticism and western democracy, values, our vision of the world and how it should be ordered. Yet while we are fretting about Pakistan's imminent disintegration, we are blind to the really important change.
Recent years have seen the consolidation of a new Pakistani identity between these two extremes. It is nationalist, conservative in religious and social terms and much more aggressive in asserting what are seen, rightly or wrongly, as local "Pakistani" interests. It is a mix of patriotic chauvinism and moderate Islamism that is currently heavily informed by a distorted view of the world sadly all too familiar across the entire Muslim world. This means that for many Pakistanis, the west is rapacious and hostile. Admiration for the British and desire for holidays in London have been replaced by a view of the UK as "America's poodle" and dreams of Dubai or Malaysia. The 9/11 attacks are seen, even by senior army officers, as a put-up job by Mossad, the CIA or both. The Indians, the old enemy, are seen as running riot in Afghanistan where the Taliban are "freedom fighters". AQ Khan, the nuclear scientist seen as a bomb-selling criminal by the West, is a hero. Democracy is seen as the best system, but only if democracy results in governments that take decisions that reflect the sentiments of most Pakistanis, not just those of the Anglophone, westernised elite among whom western policy-makers, politicians and journalists tend to chose their interlocutors.
This view of the world is most common among the new, urban middle classes in Pakistan, much larger after a decade of fast and uneven economic growth. It is this class that provides the bulk of the country's military officers and bureaucrats. This in part explains the Pakistani security establishment's dogged support for elements within the Taliban. The infamous ISI spy agency is largely staffed by soldiers and the army is a reflection of society. For the ISI, as for many Pakistanis, supporting certain insurgent factions in Afghanistan is seen as the rational choice. If this trend continues, it poses us problems rather different from those posed by a failed state. Instead, you have a nuclear armed nation with a large population that is increasingly vocal and which sees the world very differently from us.
We face a related problem in Afghanistan where we are still hoping to build the state we want the Afghans to want, rather than the state that they actually want. Ask many Afghans which state they hope their own will resemble in a few decades and the answer is "Iran". Dozens of interviews with senior western generals, diplomats and officials in Kabul last week have shown me how deeply the years of conflict and "nation-building" have dented confidence in our ability to transplant western values. Our interest in Afghanistan has been reduced to preventing it from becoming a platform for threats to the west. In Afghanistan, as in Iraq, the west has glimpsed the limits to its power and to the supposedly universal attraction of its values.
The west's dreams of a comfortable post-Cold War era have been rudely shaken. We have been forced reluctantly to accept the independence and influence of China and Russia. These are countries that we recognise as difficult international actors pursuing agendas popular with substantial proportions of their citizens. Other countries, particularly those less troubled than Pakistan or Afghanistan, are likely soon to join that list.
This poses a critical challenge in foreign policy. Worrying about the imminent collapse of Pakistan is not going to help us find answers to the really difficult questions that Pakistan poses.
* Print thisPrintable version
* Send to a friendSend to a friend
* Share thisShare
* Clip thisClip
* Contact usContact us
* larger | smaller
Email
Close
Recipient's email address
Your first name
Your surname
Add a note (optional)
Your IP address will be logged
Burke has it right on the money, although authors such as Mohammad Hanif have also commented on this bifurcation of media and bifurcation of values in Pakistan.
If you want to know what Pakistanis are thinking, find someone who can read Urdu and ask them to read Jang's or Express's or Ausaf's editorial page, or the talk shows on GEO. Sober Dawn and Daily Times editorials aren't going to get you anywhere.
What? A balanced, rational article on Pakistan? Jason, Jason, Jason, you left out the hysteria and the paranoia that is absolutely obligatory when writing on this topic.
I would have agreed entirely with you until Pakistan was forced to join the "war on terror" at bomb-point, against the wishes of both the government and the people of Pakistan. It didn't help that, after throwing out the Taleban, the US washed its hands of the place and left Pakistan to try and cope with the mess. The result can be seen in Swat. Are those who fled the fighting in the area rushing back to raise their families under fundamentalist rule?
There is also the problem of the role the army and the ISI play in running the country.
A very strange and basic piece of commentary, that simply reinforces the stereotypes widely held in western discourse of Pakistan.
"It is a mix of patriotic chauvinism and moderate Islamism that is currently heavily informed by a distorted view of the world sadly all too familiar across the entire Muslim world. This means that for many Pakistanis, the west is rapacious and hostile."
Absurd generalization in a country of 160 million, where every other person wants to run off to the west to seek better opportunities. I am not being defensive (I am not averse to critically analyzing anyone), but I just simply don't hear that view at all. What is many? I am Pakistani, middle class and all my friends are middle class. I don't EVER hear anyone say the west is "rapacious". I hear a lot of people cursing britain and the usa for what it did in Iraq, afghanistan, pakistan's tribal areas and palestine. There is a lot of revulsion for that....but RAPACIOUS??? Have you never tuned into MTV Pakistan, Indus Music etc? The sad little kids on those channels are so busy emulating 80s west, I doubt they have time to hate the west.
There are definitely conservatives who dislike western values. But they are by far few. Don't take my word for it, just look at how successful conservative parties are in elections (i.e. for those who don't know they hardly won ANY seats).
I could respond to a lot of the article (and actually it does make sense in places). It seems to imply that Pakistan is going to be dangerous because it's view of the world is going to be different from the west's. Are you arrogant enough to imply that west's view of the world is automatically the best one?
One sees the thoughts and influences of Imran Khan in this article, who now a days is carrying himself as one of the authorities on the current Pakistan's Islamic phenomenon. The fact is that Pakistan is a complete mess with a powerful Punjab that is trying to run the state in an imperial manner and using fundamentalism/militant Islam to control peripheral nationalism of Pashtuns and grabbing territory in the west (Afghanistan) and the east (Kashmir).
It is a very dangerous country and its links with fundamentalis Islam are so strong and unbreakable, that if not dealt with effectively would keep sending destablizing currents into South Asia, Central Asia, Middle East, and the world over.
The author's knowledge of Pakistan nationalism is also superficial. There is no strong feelings of nationhood in the citzens of Pakistan. They are either Punjabis, Sindhis, Baluchis, Pashtuns, Siraikis, etc. This especially true of the smaller ationalisties who live under the oppressive rule of Punjab's military elite.
Really majnoon sahib?
I have no doubt most Pakistanis are truly moderate, peace-loving people interested in making a living. The problem lies in the way the Pakistan ideology has been implemented by the state, the conspiracy theories that have been allowed to flourish, the atmosphere of a lot of Urdu media and out-of-control security services.
If what the author said is false, explain to me why when I go to Karachi and pick up a newspaper or watch TV I am treated to headlines like one in the back sports page of Jang "Jewish institutions may be responsible for Bob Woolmer's death" or I turn on Geo and get to see an animation in terrible taste of the Twin Towers coming down implying Jews or the US was behind it, or people on talk shows saying with a straight face that India was responsible for the Swat Taliban, and them blowing up all schools is OK just because the army based themselves in some schools and made them all targets.
Explain what was done to the Qadianis legally in 1974 and 1985 by some means other than a emotional expression of Pakistani religious nationalism and insecurity of precisely the sort the author is talking about. Fine, they're a somewhat batty cultish group of people with weird ideas (and I should know, I had the misfortune to be born as one) who can't read Quran correctly and don't kill anyone. Why on earth did Pakistan government and Pakistani people stand complicit in what was done to them and what is being done to them for any other reason then what was described above.
Where Jason goes wrong is in judging what the Afghans want. Let the Afghans speak for themselves. See "Afghan Envoy Assails Western Allies as Halfhearted, Defeatist" at
To daimanMujnoon
"Are you arrogant enough to imply that wests view of the world is automatically the best one"?
Well,I can,t speak for Jason Burke,but personally,if one breaks the chains of Liberal-fascist cultural relatavism and moral equivalence and speaking as a westerner, I would answer "yes".
And the more westerners that take that "arrogant"view the easier it will be to defeat home grown Islamic terrorism.
Of course there are those (mostly in the west for some strange reason),who would,as they do,insist that no opinion,view,culture,system or religion is superior to any other.
Thereby undermining western democracy,human rights,and unwittingly validating the very ideology that stands in direct opposition to it.
Old Arabian proverb"a falling camel attracks many knifes".
Actually Pakistan was supposed to collapse the day after its creation because the British did not release the funds/foreign reserves. But thankfully the Prince Agha Khan and Nizam of Hyderabad extended currency.
As for Pakistan being hot of fundamentalism; I had to call my relatives in Pakistan and tell them not to send me clothes are sleeveless and pants riding up my calves.
The west can no longer afford to impose its values and notions of democracy on countries that neither want nor need them
I don't like this strapline, because it seems to imply that if the west could afford to then it might have a case. I would say that the west should not impose its values and notions of democracy on countries.
Thereby undermining western democracy,human rights,and unwittingly validating the very ideology that stands in direct opposition to it.
Jason, I think you have eaten one too many kebabs. This piece is nothing but a confused, incoherent defence of the indefensible. Pakistan needs to become literate, democratic and secular in order to survive. You can deride them as
"The west can no longer afford to impose its values and notions of democracy on countries that neither want nor need them"
but you would not be doing any service to Pakistan by this.
When political scholars, pundits and observers bought into Francis Fukuyama's 'end of history' tripe, it was largely based on blindly accepting the notion of the so-called universality of American and British democracy.
The rude awakening, and only a small minority are actually showing signs of waking up, is not only that democratic values are tenuous, breakable and conditional, but that an abrupt return to communal political ideologies is definitely a possibility.
In the face of the contemporary economic boondoggle capitalism has parked at front door of far too many ordinary people, the ever triumphant free market is very likely facing the biggest reality check it has ever dealt with.
How it plays out in the Islamic, second and third world is going to be very interesting; and large, marginalized and Islamic societies like Pakistan will be worth watching because they will serve as the canary in the mine.
Winston Churchill, who as a young man fought on the North-West Frontier, is regularly cited to explain today's insurgency.
Really? Regularly? Where?
My understanding of the NWF, unassisted by WSC, is that it was, is, and will continue to be a turbulent and barely governable place.
Pakistan, as a whole, is a deeply corrupt, unstable, and economically backward country which unfortunately possesses nuclear weapons.
I only hope that someone will fix up the mess there before something worse happens.
Pakichick,
You are fighting a losing battle against stereotypes, just laugh at it, as I do about depictions of India as this monolithic Hindu country. I find it particularly amusing since I am not Hindu despite being very Indian.
I don't know much on Pakistan, but I would point out that, whilst Emile Zola was but a novelist who dabbled in political journalism, Winston Churchill was a politician for nearly half a century, holding various cabinet positions, was Prime Minister twice and died a Nobel Prize-winning historian. So it is possible that, only forty years after his death, some of his views might still be of interest to someone considering international politics.
Of course he was a racist, and his history may still judge that he presided over various war crimes, but he did manage to squeeze an awful lot of academic writing in when he wasn't signing off on the levelling of entire cities...
I don't EVER hear anyone say the west is "rapacious". I hear a lot of people cursing britain and the usa for what it did in Iraq, afghanistan, pakistan's tribal areas and palestine. There is a lot of revulsion for that....but RAPACIOUS???
You made some good points, but "rapacious" means "greedy", or "given to taking by force".
I heard UK ethnic Pakistanis use language that would suggest they think the UK is rapacious. I have used lanaguage that would suggest it (though I've never used the term). I certainly believe it.
And, given your own statement about Pakistani revulsion to the UK in Iraq and Afghanistan, I think the term is quite fair.
Perhaps you think it means something else. But calling the UK and the US rapacious is quite fair, and shared by very many people in the world, including millions of Britons and Americans.
This partly explains why Pakistan's collapse is so often predicted.
Actually the entire subcontinent was supposed to collapse a long time ago. Predictions that India would collapse abounded in the western media until India experienced her economic boom.
@SelimTheGrim
If you want to know what Pakistanis are thinking, find someone who can read Urdu and ask them to read Jang's or Express's or Ausaf's editorial page, or the talk shows on GEO.
Are there any english translations of these pages available??
--------------------------------
As for Pakistan I don't expect it to collapse, especially the eastern half. I would not rule out a complete loss of control of the western half though. In fact that process is seemingly already occuring.
First for the good news: Pakistan is not about to explode. The Islamic militants are not going to take power tomorrow; the nuclear weapons are not about to be trafficked to al-Qaida; the army is not about to send the Afghan Taliban to invade India; a civil war is unlikely.
So claims \Mr. Burke with all of 1.23 years of international relations, and experience of Islamic extremism to back his assessment, so we should all rest easy;
If Pakistan collapsed, we would be faced by a serious security challenge. But the resilience of Pakistan and the nation's continuing collective refusal to do what the west would like it to together pose questions with implications far beyond simple security concerns. They are about our ability to influence events in far-off places, our capacity to analyse and understand the behaviour and perceived interests of other nations and cultures, about our ability to deal with difference, about how we see the world.
it is in my view more a question of "when" Pakistan's collaps will come about rather than if.
However Mr. Burke need not worry about;
The west can no longer afford to impose its values and notions of democracy on countries that neither want nor need them
seeing that Pakistan will do a lot better on their own, in my view it would only be fair to afford this country what Mr.Burke is advocating. *leave them alone to kill each other).
Let's see how long (in terms of days) it will take before an all out Indian invasion of Pakistan will commence once we withdraw our involvement.
I wonder if Mr. Burke will want to go back and report (perhaps begging the international community to intervene).
There you go with that ( liberal knee-jerk ) reaction again.
Thats the "moral equivalence and cultural relatavism " I reffered to.
In WW2,we said, "the Germans" and "the Japanese".yet nobody stood up and said "hey,you can,t demonize all Germans or Japanese like that ",because it was understood that not every single one was not a facist.
Guantanamo or not,there is such a thing as a "collective consciousness",and I prefer the Left-wing,Liberal "collective consciousness,"that claims to support universal human rights and stand against totalitarian,6th century desert bedouin,rantings,and yet much to my dismay...fails to do so.
People are at last,now begining to write entire books to expose and analyis this strange phenomena of liberal-fascism which is specifically evolved to prevent dissent and creatre a moral vacuum.White,post-colonial guilt and cultural suicide.
... in Great Britain's previous Carry On Up the Khyber.
Pakistan, as a whole, is a deeply corrupt, unstable, and economically backward country which unfortunately possesses nuclear weapons. I only hope that someone will fix up the mess there before something worse happens.
Substitute "Great Britain" for "Pakistan" and you express my sentiments exactly. Both countries are mired in a Parliamentary system that breeds an endless supply of deeply corrupt politicians, both are in military trouble because said corrupt politicians embraced Uncle Sam & Uncle's cynical "war on terror".
Both countries have found out that the embrace of Uncle is the kiss of death. Unless these two economically backward countries manage te rid themselves of nuclear arms & corrupt politicians, I see no alternative to WW3, because Great Britain's current invasions of Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, plus Great Britain's reckless support for similar rapacious excursions by Uncle in Africa, and Great Britain's complicity with Israel in invading Palestine & Lebanon as well as threatening Iran, plus Great Britain's diatribes against Russia & China - all these actions of Great Britain are stirring a global instability that will trigger WW3 just as surely as Winston's carry-on up the Khyber (and similar Imperialist carry-ons) triggered WW1, which bred WW2.
Pakistan is not ready for true democracy. The people in charge of Pakistan today and the opposition squabbling to get in have all been caught with their fingers in the till in the past. When General Musharaff came in to power, he went after the corrupt and the tax dodgers and was on the way to establishing a technocratic government with a new grass roots political system by banishing the criminals and uneducated from holding office. The most able of the corrupt and tax dodgers fled from Pakistan at the time in their droves. What went wrong for Musharaff (and Pakistan) was 9/11 and the War On Terror where Pakistan, its forces and resources were forced into battle on its north western border whilst an agressor was making threatening noises on its eastern border trying to somehow rope in Paksitan into the 9/11 blame game. In the years following 9/11, Islamic fundamaentalism has grown in Pakistan fueled by a Pakistan public that have grown fustrated by the role of Pakistan in the war on terror and the effects on its muslim neighbours and border areas. The corrupt and the tax dodgers added to fuel (and finance) to the fustration from their foreign safe havens and manipulated thier way back into power by stoking up internal strife and cosying up to the West by offering to bring democrarcy back into Pakistan. No sooner as they are in power they have got sidetracked by their usual squabbles on who get thier hands on what and normal democratic chaos ensues. Only now Pakistan is a nation in trouble, with problems on each border as well as internally and the corrupt leaders in charge have no clue on how to deal with this. Pakistan now needs its military to take control of the nation. Bring back Musharaff, stop the war on terror and suspend democracy whilst Musharaff is given a free hand to sort the country out once and for all.
Good piece
But has anyone asked the question, just what the hell are indians doing in Afghanistan? , they have no culture or language common.
Which leaves only one reason to harm Pakistan
Sorry but it is a fact!
Perhaps the UK Government can explain why National Insurance Fund contributors who retire in Israel receive annual upratings on 6 April each year, whilst those who retire to Pakistan don't. It sounds like those in Pakistan could do with the extra funds. It sounds as if the UK Government are guilty of discrimination. This could easily be fixed if the UK Government had the will.
At least your article shows you have spent some time THINKING. i really must congratulate you on this.
As a middle class Pakistani, I would tend to agree with you that we are becoming some of the most anti-Western countries in the world. And I am actually proud of that. It shows that the sycophantic attitude of some of our leadership is not echoed across the board and that many of us have enough self-respect and knowledge and taste to judge that history is not a linear progression where we must all end up like the US of A. There are many other ways of living in the world and thank God for that. This rampant anti-Westernism is born of a number of factors: a) relative to many parts of the world and especially Muslim countries, we have had relative freedom of information for a long long time now. We are exposed to points of view from across the world, through the academia and the media and through interaction with our sizeable diaspora in the West and the Middle East. So when we are exposed to works of Said and Chomsky and Finkelstein, why will we think that the West is purer than milk in its great effort to 'democratize' the world. b) sometimes with our permission and often against our will, our politicians have prostituted us in doing the West's bidding in return for money and perks. by allowing ourselves to be used that way, we have developed a prostitute's hatred for the trade and for the customers who pay to use her body like that. if our rulers had had more self-respect and stood up to the West more, we wouldn't hate the West so much. if many of our people are in love with western cultures and appear westernised themselves, it is because they are attracted to western popular culture and technology and NOT western politics and foriegn policy. c) we were the VERY FIRST decolonized nation of the world (if you discount Ireland). that just hints at the level of independence and pride we have. what's more, before we were colonized, we formed one of the greatest and richest empires in history, with an incredibly cosmopolitan civilization which continues to be renowned for its literary, physical and architectural wonders. and this was very very recent too. THATS where we are coming from. that is what India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are. We very jealously guard our culture and links with the past. (to a different extent, this also included Afghanistan) Take dress, for example. South Asia probably has more English speakers than any other region of the world. (So there is your example of Western culture). But behold, on important occasions and in everyday life on a consistent basis, you will see us wearing indigenous dress. and celebrating indigenous music and dance on a HUGE HUGE scale. while the rest of the world is increasingly favouring trousers and shirts and you will be hard put to find indigenous costumes being worn in modern cities. and we see little paradox in that.
this is why we are a mixture of the familiar and foreign and will be terribly hard to tame, so don't try too hard. learn to coexist. you don't have to be terribly good friends with everyone. keep us at arm's distance if you want, watch us warily, but stop trying to FORCE us.
Mr. Jason Burke, while i find your article very insightful indeed, I get a very disturbing vibe from it. It is as if the West is this solid unchanging object, which is disliked by some "difficult" international actor and we must watch those people carefully. And the word - difficult - what does that mean? We use it for people who are either badly behaved children or semi-senile elderly people who it is very hard to reason with as well as those people who simply have personality issues. The tone of your article seems to hold the implication that the energies of the West are only to be turned to changing how those actors behave but not towards changing how they themselves behave. You know, it is not because of their colour or race that we don't like 'the West'. (Personally, I like to avoid the word 'hate' just for my own mental health if nothing else). Race or colour is not something that the 'West' could change. We dislike them for something they can change: the way they treat us. That an intelligent writer like you seems to miss that sort of change as an option in trying to figure out Pakistan's future makes this a grim grim situation.
The bad news is that Pakistan poses us questions that are much more profound than those we would face if this nation of 170m, the world's second biggest Muslim state, were simply a failed state. If Pakistan collapsed, we would be faced by a serious security challenge.
I wonder if that would still be true if the West simply disengaged, stopped giving Pakistan any aid whatsoever, and made it a great deal more difficult for Pakistani nationals to flit back and forth. Obviously Pakistan has nukes but the West is out of range and MAD ought to ensure that Pakistan never becomes quite so foolish as to deploy them aggressively.
I keep reading about Pakistan's supposed "strategic importance" but once you drop the idea of "saving Afghanistan for democracy" I don't really see how it's of very much importance at all to the West. To India, sure, but to the West?
States don't fail in a day or a year. It is a decades long process.
Pakistan is a failing state. The trajectory of Pakistan is clear to any objective observer.
*The original Pakistan has been split into Bangladesh and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
*The idea of a secular state has degenerated into an officially Islamic nation with a constitution that specifically promotes Islam and Sharia law.
*The tribal areas are not under the central governments control.
*The Swat valley and other non-tribal areas are less under the governments control.
*The government itself is out of control. Dictatorship vs democracy. Military vs. civilian. Punjabi vs. Sindhi. Sharif vs. Zardari. Sunni vs. Shia.
*The ISI/military complex is out of control.
*The Taliban is out of control of the central government.
*The sanctioned terrorist groups like the Kashmiri groups (LeT)) are out of control.
*The economy is out of control and on the brink of bankruptcy.
*The educational system is out of control.
*The nuclear technology is out of control. (ask Libya, Iran, North Korea)
Mr. Burke writes, "They know that their nation's strategic importance guarantees the financial life support they need from the international community." Really?
Jason Burkes article is simply a headline but no substance, facts, data, or logic.
One of the problems when trying to discuss Pakistan in a rational way is that people have no idea of the uneven demographics of the area. To take one recent example: The government has allowed some form of Sharia law to be used in Swat. Now I agree with teacup that this is bad for the women of Swat, but the total population there is only about one and an half million, while there are 80 million in the Punjab and about 50 million in Sind. What happens in Swat does not give any indications about the future of Pakistan as a whole. The same is true for the tribal areas in general.
While there may be a few attacks in the heartland of Pakistan, these are not part of the every day life of the vast majority of Pakistanis.
Let us not forget that abortion continued to be banned in Northern Ireland while it was legal in Britain. I don't want to push the analogy too far, but the presence of large Catholic minority and strongly Protestant majority made it necessary for the British government to acknowledge that this province was special. Could the same not be true in Pakistan?
Just as London was hit by IRA bombs occasionally, so Islamibad is hit by suicide bombers occasionally, but nobody referred to the UK as a failed state, or argued that compromises with the UDA or IRA would give terrorists access to nuclear weapons.
Pakistan is in a difficult transition moment from a military dictatorship, which people like Mr Burke supported, to a democracy. There will be many crises along the way, but to argue that events in a small rural province are harbingers for a change in Pakistan itself are nonsense.
Mr. Burke, Virulent anti-UK, anti-west sentiments are surprisingly extremely common in the so called moderate, well integrated, eucated British citizens of Pakistani origin - when they think they are among their own discussing such issues. Pakistan is a corrupt nation with an ego and it has learnt to extract huge sums of money from the international community to maintain this. If USA and UK stopped paying for this "strategic" advantage, Pakistan will see there is no money in terroris and correct itsef and become a normal nation. There is no need for a "strategic importance" in there except for UK & USA wanting to grandstand. even then there are other less egotistical nations there to provide that presence that the West seeks for strategic importance. Take off the pink glasses.
Perhaps the author should wake up. The swat valley, NWPF is all taken over by the Taliban. These places are providing sanctuary for al qaida and afghan taliban.
There are reports of massive arms storage in safe houses in Karachi. The ISI have been formenting trouble for Neighbour India. The economy is in shatters. The AQ Khan have been goind around selling Nuclear arms in the past, who is to say his network sanctioned by ISI isn't doing so now.
The reality is Pakistan in the past never had a strong opposition force to the entire system as it does now. When people are improvished, angry and disillusioned, they turn to religion. If the religious forces are the opposition then the end of the system is close. Iran in 1978 is a classical example, of a country, with however strong army, was taken over by extreme forces.
What we are seeing is a gardual take over. When gunman shoots visiting digintaries and with impunity walks away, when the writ of the nation state shrinks, when assasination and intimidation is wide spread, and when politicians squabble for power to enrich themselves alarm bells should be ringing.
But in the end when the alarm bells stop, Pakistan removed from the front pages of news, it may just be that we have got tired of worrying and allow what is inevitable, ie Mullah Omar and Osma's new defacto sanctuary. And if we are lucky there won't be another 9/11 or worse.
Obviously Pakistan has nukes but the West is out of range and MAD ought to ensure that Pakistan never becomes quite so foolish as to deploy them aggressively.
When you are factoring in religious extremists, you cannot imagine the irrational decisions that they can come to. (Take Hamas's continually bombarding southern Israel with rockets and mortars. Where is there any logic in this).
By all means dis-engage. But Pakistan MUST be de-fanged of her nuclear devices and potential.
As a Muslim and Arab i value much the precious analysis of integrating the social and political factors for a better understanding of a major Muslim country; yet, what i am alarmed of Mr. Jason is that the next step is always an attempt to impose the "western" culture and values on the Muslim society in which foreign powers have interest in, which in fact lead to even more extremism.
The major dilemma here is for Britons to make Pakistanis avoid seeing "the world very differently from us" they have to insert some hands in the education systems, religious institutions, and cultural facilities. It happened in Egypt, and i assure you people are not pleased with it. It can be easily detected by common citizens; and if it is, you would be bumping in some fire in the commonly spread "conspiracy theory" leading to some rising violent reactions; same factors that created Al-Qaeda in 1998.
It is not "us" versus "them" Mr. Jason; it is respecting the other with his culture, religious beliefs, values, and political will. Congratulations for the sociopolitical analysis, but you need to do the same in political Islamic movements and extract the original factors that gave birth to them, which by the way are not love of hate.
@martynineurope;
I would say that the west should not impose its values and notions of democracy on countries.
And which 'values and notions of democracy' specifically do you believe are good enough for the west but are not deserved by others?
Equality for women? A right to have a say in how they are governed? A right not to be hanged for being gay? Need I go on?
The problem with your view, when one digs beyond the racial/cultural relativism, is that you are actually arguing that any western notion of 'human rights', i.e. rights which one possesses simply because one is human, is wrong. You are also arguing that it is acceptable for other countries to fail to abide by their own prior decision to sign up to those rights for their citizens.
Is that really your position? That a woman in Pakistan or gay in Iran does not have the same human rights as a woman or gay in Britain or Spain? If it is acceptable for a Pakistani woman in Pakistan to be forced into a marriage against her will, why does a Spanish or Pakistani woman in Spain have greater rights? Can you justify that view of yours?
Do you really think that an Iranian Bahai living in Iran should have a lesser right to practice their religion than a Spanish Bahai living in Spain? Why?
No one is suggesting that Western values should automatically be imposed on others, but it is suggested that others have equal rights to westerners, for example, under the UDHR because those values are exactly that, universal, and rationally they have proved superior to other values.
Your position is, IMO, a classic example of 'feel-good' politics which ignores the crucial issues of fundamental principle underlying the whole debate. It is a position which says abuses of human rights in other countries are justifiable because 'that's just the way they do things there'. That seems perilously close to a soft racism.
The article is a confused and garbled collection of out-dated concepts and inadequate analysis - along with a minimal understanding of the historical backdrop.
The problem with the author, like many British commentators, is that they assume the mantle of the Whitehall permanent establishment (yes, there is such a coterie or cabal) when it comes to discussing Pakistan.
The intellectual foundations of this balderdash go back to Olaf Caroe, one of the last British mandarins in pre-independent India's Foreign Office, who thought of the imperative of having a buffer state to contain the Soviet thrust to the Indian Ocean (the old Russian Bear syndrome). The future state of Pakistan (still on the drawing-board) was the perfect model to discharge this function.
Sir Olaf's ideas were picked up enthusiastically by the U.S. State Department (John Foster Dulles and company) and Pakistan was well on its way to 5 decades of free-loading and sponging in the American kitchens. At its birth itself, the country was a flawed concept, an illegitimate offspring of the dying British Empire.
Its internal contradictions were so glaring that it was at best a patchwork affair. The only thing that kept it going was its pathological hatred of India and all aspects of Indic culture, an area where the Pakistanis were in a constant state of denial. This basic structural deficiency was later compounded by numerous other viruses like military dictatorship, alliances between the landowning mafia and the drug-lords etc.
The current scenario, of course, is there for the entire world to see, except for hacks like Burke. The man is out to lunch. Otherwise, how can one account for his outlandish statements that fly against facts and reality ? If the description of a problem is gobbledygook, the prescriptions are bound to be preposterous.
Time , one again, to pass the port around in the Guardian's editorial watering holes.
Recent years have seen the consolidation of a new Pakistani identity.
Really? And how do the Baluchistanis, and Pakistan's other indigenous ethnic groups see this - or don't they count, anymore than the Welsh, Irish, Scots or English counted when the British STATE and its ruling elites were asserting their domination . . ?
Just to add, there seems a lot been mentioned about womens right and sharia. None of these are major issues, it is Pakistanis internal issues. What is important with SWAT valley is that the army must ask permission from the miltants or their representive for patrolling schedules and route. Two soldiers killed because they didn't have authorised permission. That's what we talking about loosing ground. Worst is the army can been seen colluding with militants. Afghan insurgency grew because they have sanctuary in Pakistan. Mumbai attacks planned and carried out by Pakistanis from punjab province.
We could go on example after example.
What is a failed state other then a state whose writ doesn't extend across a country, where there are large training camps for miltary training.
Each year Pakistan gets worse, the blame is placed on US,UK,India and Jews.
More pakistanis in UK get radicalised. In private the hatered of the west is strong, in public it is different. And the west uses kid goves which is slowly being removed with the Predator strikes. Finally the Americans are learning if you want to kill your enemy you got to do it your self and don't tell Pak Army.
Although the liberal press seems to point these actions are counter productive and show that one will loose Pakistan. There can be another simple arguement, since the they hatred is saturated you can't ask for love and peace.
One needs to broker peace by pointing to rising cost to the enemy leadership for every attrocity more of their blood will flow. If a Nuclear attack happens in New York or London and Pak finger prints are on it, then whole of Pakistan will be wiped out. China will not involve itself when the US roar. That is the only way, show some guts and forget worrying about failed states. As Roosevelt said, talk gently but carry a big stick.
I fully support the right of the majority in any country to determine the values of its own citizens, and the UK Government ought to apply to its dealing with Pakistan and its own citizens equally.
I don't want to impose anything on Pakistan, beyond requiring them to respect and as far as possible enforce my desire not to be blown up.
They spend 60% of GDP (surely a monstrous waste?) on an army which is incapable of closing down madrassahs openly teaching Britons how to make bombs to blow up other Britons.
Common respect for humanity requires them to stop, with any force necessary, the Talibanisation of their own country. Currently, one would almost think that quite a lot of senior figures in the army, ISI etc seek just such an outcome. After all, it would make the people much easier to control, and do away with the pesky inconvenience of running elections occasionally.
It may well suit them to blame India, "the West", Jews or any other brand of non-Muslims, but Pakistan's problems are home-grown.
Your eastern neighbour was making noise because your country sponsored an attack on its Parliament in Dec 2001 lest you forget. As to Pakistani involvment in 9/11 that is a well known fact : Khalid Sheikh Mohammed says it all and with ISI fingerprints all over.
Raffy:
India is helping Afghanistan to the tune of 1.25 Billion USD in rebuilding its infrastructure. As to cultural ties, they go a long way back before Islam ever took a foothold in that part of the world. Think of Bamiyan Buddhas, Kandahar (Gandahar in olden times) and read up on the history of the region to understand the cultural linkage between India and Afghanistan
Harming Pakistan is the added bonus and making sure it pays a heavy price for fomenting terrorism in India.
It is not "us" versus "them" Mr. Jason; it is respecting the other with his culture, religious beliefs, values, and political will.
I find your thinking somewhat confused.
Why should one respect the other with his culture, religious beliefs, values, and political will?
If you are arguing that one should show respect and tolerance for other cultures, religions and political beliefs then it can only be because you consider respect and tolerance superior ethically and morally to disrespect and intolerance.
But if that is the case, then you must also argue that any culture or religion which espouses disrespect and intolerance of others to be ethically and morally inferior to any religion or culture which does espouse respect and tolerance.
But that in turn would inevitably lead you to the conclusion that Muslim and Arab cultures, in the one case theologically wrt non-Muslims and in the other historically wrt Israel, are morally and ethically inferior to those same western notions of respect and tolerance which you are asserting as the basis for your claim of respect and tolerance. Islam by its inherent concept of 'struggle' against other religions and advocacy of dissimilar treatment for Muslims and non-Muslims and Arab cultures in their rejection of equal rights for Jews in Israel.
So the logical consequence of your own claim for respect and tolerance is that you run up against the oldest conundrum in the book; what respect and tolerance is due to those who are disrespectful and intolerant?
I would be fascinated to see how you can simultaneously justify both your demand for respect and tolerance from others with a professed belief in a religion inherently intolerant of other religions, without recourse to an inherently supremacist doctrine.
Unfortunately the whole life of this country is riddled with one or other crises. While the democracy in its neighbour was flourishing the country was being trampled by jackboots. They played havoc with the institutions and left the country into tatters when they left for a brief respite. The judicial murder of Pakistan's charismatic but with autocratic tendencies and defacing of 1973 constitution is responsibe for the present mess.
Ms Bhutto was a seasoned politician and was a visionary. She managed to pacify Mr Sharif , despite his role in giving tough time to her when he was PM, and signed a charter of Democracy (CoD).
Mr Asif Ali Zardari is a different character. He managed to reach the Presidential palace and then decided to keep all the executive powers which he should have returned to the PM of the country. Then his reneging on the promise he solemnly made before the nation antagonised Mr Sharif. Unforutnatey this has created a situation which is threatening the whole democratic set up and military is just waiting for a green signal from the US to step in. Mr Zardari has sidelined almost all the leaders who were very close to Ms Bhutto until her last days. He has brought a team of opportunists and sycophants. Mr Zardari's closed political ally at present is Mr Altaf Hussain who is himself a wanted terrorist and criminal in the country. That day is not far when Altaf will ditch him. Just wait a little while. Imagine this man is under full protection of the British government and it makes me sick to see high British and US official visit him in his International HQ in Edgware London. 12th May carnage in Karachi was produced and directed by this fascist man sitting from London.
May I remind you that Pakistan didn't stop at making threatening noises at its eastern neighbour in 1999, it actually invaded Kargil! Why Pakistan can't accept the actual line of control passes my understanding.
Raffy,
Further to Yddgrasil's excellent reply to you, India has deployed medical teams to Afghanistan. Don't you think a country that hasn't seen peace in over three decades has some need for this. The "Jaipur foot" is a cheap prosthetic device that is a boon to those who have lost limbs. How does helping Afghans translate as threatening Pakistan? If India has a large embassy in the US, is it implicitly threatening Canada or Mexico.
I grant you that even paranoics can have enemies, but this is crazy!
Apologies for not using question marks at appropriate points in the previous post.
A really excellent piece Jason Burke,you have demonstrated more understanding of the situation in Pakistan and of the broader view,of how the west approaches those systems and cultures,that don't fit in with their interests,or ideologies,than all the various" experts ",either in the foreign office,or their equivalents, getting it all wrong in America and the world is all the more dangerous because of it.
This insistence that any country in the world must always conduct it's internal affairs,according to western values and standards,even as these values and standards are now seen to be as bankrupt as their failed economies.
How western governments can condemn countries like Pakistan for indemic corruption,while we have situations like Madof,...where we have just about the whole of the house of commons fiddling their expenses every which way they can;...where,in Britain corruption in the police,in government,in the arms industry,is always glossed over,by having enquiries into the various wrong doings,that turn out to be complete whitewashes,under the "old boy network ",...is beyond me.
The claims of the west to possess the high moral ground in human standards of decency and fairness,lie with the ruins of Gaza,along with the broken and burnt bodies of the women,children and babies,which did not illicit one word in condemnation,from that perfect specimen of a " democratically "elected western leader, Brown.
Surely before the west tries to foist it's way of life on others living on this planet,they should put their own house in order ?,people being neither blind nor stupid.
Is it not quite strange and amusing to believe that the West does really desire to live in a peaceful and comfortable world around in the post-cold war era (?) ? Since when and why the West has arrogated to itself the prerogative of promoting democracy and human rights in the non-Western developing societies without bothering for a moment to introspect about its own record to that effect ? Did the developing non-Western countries ever volunteer to seek Western assistance for their own nation building and social reconstruction, without caring for an indigenous and native effort of their own ? Has the West got rid of its colonial hang over of having to bear the "White man's burden" to civilise the "savage societies" (?) of the non-Western world ? Did the Western analysts ever care to read the real motives of Western powers behind their involvement and interventions in countries of Asia, Middle East, Latin America and Africa ? Is it not the West Asia's oil, the untapped oil and natural gas deposits of the Caspian region, the mineral and natural resources of Africa or the geo-political interests in Asia and the Middle East that is in fact driving the US-led Western powers for such an involvement ? The predicament Afghanistan and Pakistan or Iraq do find themselves in today, it is the the US and its Western allies for the anti-terror war that are responsible for. Not only Pakistan but Afghanistan and Iraq too seem to be headed for civil war and political collapse, thanks to the West's irresistible desire for hegemony over the world.
JB ... did you write the silly, lazy and all too predictable strap line about the West imposing its values ?? Or was it the silly, lazy and all too predictable CiF sub-editing ?? Either way it undermines your attempt at real analysis.
I fear there is a lot of wishful thinking in the article. The pressure to introduce Sharia law (and the frequent compromises with those pressures) is not the result of an irrelevant minority but a significant minority.
We hope that Burke is right not just for geo-political reasons, but for domestic ones. If Sharia is truly popular among ordinary Pakistanis, then might it not be popular among the perfectly ordinary Pakistanis living in Britain, and those still migrating to Britain. Whether it be the attacks (successful and unsuccessful), demonstrations in Luton etc, we really have to hope that Burke is right for all our sakes - and this applies most of all to the more westernised Pakistanis and British Pakistanis.
First for the good news: Pakistan is not about to explode. The Islamic militants are not going to take power tomorrow; the nuclear weapons are not about to be trafficked to al-Qaida; the army is not about to send the Afghan Taliban to invade India; a civil war is unlikely.
The bad news is that Pakistan poses us questions that are much more profound than those we would face if this nation of 170 Millions, the world's second biggest Muslim state, were simply a failed state. If Pakistan collapsed, we would be faced by a serious security challenge. But the resilience of Pakistan and the nation's continuing collective refusal to do what the west would like it to together pose questions with implications far beyond simple security concerns. They are about our ability to influence events in far-off places, our capacity to analyse and understand the behaviour and perceived interests of other nations and cultures, about our ability to deal with difference, about how we see the world.
Pakistan has very grave problems. In the last two years, I have reported on bloody ethnic and political riots, on violent demonstrations, from the front line of a vicious war against radical Islamic insurgents. I spent a day with Benazir Bhutto a week before she was assassinated and covered the series of murderous attacks committed at home and abroad by militant groups based in Pakistan with shadowy connections to its security services. There is an economic crisis and social problems - illiteracy, domestic violence, drug addiction - of grotesque proportions. Osama bin Laden is probably on Pakistani soil.
For many developing nations, all this would signal the state's total disintegration. This partly explains why Pakistan's collapse is so often predicted. The nation's meltdown was forecast when its eastern half seceded to become Bangladesh in 1971, during the violence that preceded General Zia ul-Haq's coup in 1977, when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, when Zia was killed in 1988, during the horrific sectarian violence of the early Nineties, through sundry ethnic insurgencies, after 9/11, after the 2007 death of Bhutto and now after yet another political crisis. These predictions have been consistently proved wrong. The most recent will be too. Yesterday, tempers were already calming.
Some of the perpetual international hysteria is stoked by the Pakistanis themselves. Successive governments have perfected the art of negotiating by pointing a gun to their own heads. They know that their nation's strategic importance guarantees the financial life support they need from the international community. More broadly, our understanding of Pakistan is skewed. This is in part due to centuries of historical baggage. Though few would quote Emile Zola on contemporary France, Winston Churchill, who as a young man fought on the North-West Frontier, is regularly cited to explain today's insurgency. This legacy also includes stereotypes of "Mad Mullahs" running amok, an image fuelled by television footage that highlights ranting demonstrators from Pakistan's Islamist parties though they have never won more than 14% in an election.
For many Britons, Pakistan represents "the other" - chaotic, distant, exotic, dirty, hot, fanatical and threatening. Yet at the same time, Pakistan seems very familiar. There is the English language, cricket, kebabs and curries and figures such as Imran Khan. There are a million-odd Britons of Pakistani-descent who over four decades have largely integrated far better in the UK than often suggested.
It is the tension between these two largely imaginary Pakistans that leads to such strong reactions in Britain. We see the country as plunged in a struggle between the frighteningly foreign and the familiar, between fanaticism and western democracy, values, our vision of the world and how it should be ordered. Yet while we are fretting about Pakistan's imminent disintegration, we are blind to the really important change.
Recent years have seen the consolidation of a new Pakistani identity between these two extremes. It is nationalist, conservative in religious and social terms and much more aggressive in asserting what are seen, rightly or wrongly, as local "Pakistani" interests. It is a mix of patriotic chauvinism and moderate Islamism that is currently heavily informed by a distorted view of the world sadly all too familiar across the entire Muslim world. This means that for many Pakistanis, the west is rapacious and hostile. Admiration for the British and desire for holidays in London have been replaced by a view of the UK as "America's poodle" and dreams of Dubai or Malaysia. The 9/11 attacks are seen, even by senior army officers, as a put-up job by Mossad, the CIA or both. The Indians, the old enemy, are seen as running riot in Afghanistan where the Taliban are "freedom fighters". AQ Khan, the nuclear scientist seen as a bomb-selling criminal by the West, is a hero. Democracy is seen as the best system, but only if democracy results in governments that take decisions that reflect the sentiments of most Pakistanis, not just those of the Anglophone, westernised elite among whom western policy-makers, politicians and journalists tend to chose their interlocutors.
This view of the world is most common among the new, urban middle classes in Pakistan, much larger after a decade of fast and uneven economic growth. It is this class that provides the bulk of the country's military officers and bureaucrats. This in part explains the Pakistani security establishment's dogged support for elements within the Taliban. The infamous ISI spy agency is largely staffed by soldiers and the army is a reflection of society. For the ISI, as for many Pakistanis, supporting certain insurgent factions in Afghanistan is seen as the rational choice. If this trend continues, it poses us problems rather different from those posed by a failed state. Instead, you have a nuclear armed nation with a large population that is increasingly vocal and which sees the world very differently from us.
We face a related problem in Afghanistan where we are still hoping to build the state we want the Afghans to want, rather than the state that they actually want. Ask many Afghans which state they hope their own will resemble in a few decades and the answer is "Iran". Dozens of interviews with senior western generals, diplomats and officials in Kabul last week have shown me how deeply the years of conflict and "nation-building" have dented confidence in our ability to transplant western values. Our interest in Afghanistan has been reduced to preventing it from becoming a platform for threats to the west. In Afghanistan, as in Iraq, the west has glimpsed the limits to its power and to the supposedly universal attraction of its values.
The west's dreams of a comfortable post-Cold War era have been rudely shaken. We have been forced reluctantly to accept the independence and influence of China and Russia. These are countries that we recognise as difficult international actors pursuing agendas popular with substantial proportions of their citizens. Other countries, particularly those less troubled than Pakistan or Afghanistan, are likely soon to join that list.
This poses a critical challenge in foreign policy. Worrying about the imminent collapse of Pakistan is not going to help us find answers to the really difficult questions that Pakistan poses.
* Print thisPrintable version
* Send to a friendSend to a friend
* Share thisShare
* Clip thisClip
* Contact usContact us
* larger | smaller
Close
Recipient's email address
Your first name
Your surname
Add a note (optional)
Your IP address will be logged
Burke has it right on the money, although authors such as Mohammad Hanif have also commented on this bifurcation of media and bifurcation of values in Pakistan.
If you want to know what Pakistanis are thinking, find someone who can read Urdu and ask them to read Jang's or Express's or Ausaf's editorial page, or the talk shows on GEO. Sober Dawn and Daily Times editorials aren't going to get you anywhere.
What? A balanced, rational article on Pakistan? Jason, Jason, Jason, you left out the hysteria and the paranoia that is absolutely obligatory when writing on this topic.
I would have agreed entirely with you until Pakistan was forced to join the "war on terror" at bomb-point, against the wishes of both the government and the people of Pakistan. It didn't help that, after throwing out the Taleban, the US washed its hands of the place and left Pakistan to try and cope with the mess. The result can be seen in Swat. Are those who fled the fighting in the area rushing back to raise their families under fundamentalist rule?
There is also the problem of the role the army and the ISI play in running the country.
A very strange and basic piece of commentary, that simply reinforces the stereotypes widely held in western discourse of Pakistan.
"It is a mix of patriotic chauvinism and moderate Islamism that is currently heavily informed by a distorted view of the world sadly all too familiar across the entire Muslim world. This means that for many Pakistanis, the west is rapacious and hostile."
Absurd generalization in a country of 160 million, where every other person wants to run off to the west to seek better opportunities. I am not being defensive (I am not averse to critically analyzing anyone), but I just simply don't hear that view at all. What is many? I am Pakistani, middle class and all my friends are middle class. I don't EVER hear anyone say the west is "rapacious". I hear a lot of people cursing britain and the usa for what it did in Iraq, afghanistan, pakistan's tribal areas and palestine. There is a lot of revulsion for that....but RAPACIOUS??? Have you never tuned into MTV Pakistan, Indus Music etc? The sad little kids on those channels are so busy emulating 80s west, I doubt they have time to hate the west.
There are definitely conservatives who dislike western values. But they are by far few. Don't take my word for it, just look at how successful conservative parties are in elections (i.e. for those who don't know they hardly won ANY seats).
I could respond to a lot of the article (and actually it does make sense in places). It seems to imply that Pakistan is going to be dangerous because it's view of the world is going to be different from the west's. Are you arrogant enough to imply that west's view of the world is automatically the best one?
One sees the thoughts and influences of Imran Khan in this article, who now a days is carrying himself as one of the authorities on the current Pakistan's Islamic phenomenon. The fact is that Pakistan is a complete mess with a powerful Punjab that is trying to run the state in an imperial manner and using fundamentalism/militant Islam to control peripheral nationalism of Pashtuns and grabbing territory in the west (Afghanistan) and the east (Kashmir).
It is a very dangerous country and its links with fundamentalis Islam are so strong and unbreakable, that if not dealt with effectively would keep sending destablizing currents into South Asia, Central Asia, Middle East, and the world over.
The author's knowledge of Pakistan nationalism is also superficial. There is no strong feelings of nationhood in the citzens of Pakistan. They are either Punjabis, Sindhis, Baluchis, Pashtuns, Siraikis, etc. This especially true of the smaller ationalisties who live under the oppressive rule of Punjab's military elite.
Really majnoon sahib?
I have no doubt most Pakistanis are truly moderate, peace-loving people interested in making a living. The problem lies in the way the Pakistan ideology has been implemented by the state, the conspiracy theories that have been allowed to flourish, the atmosphere of a lot of Urdu media and out-of-control security services.
If what the author said is false, explain to me why when I go to Karachi and pick up a newspaper or watch TV I am treated to headlines like one in the back sports page of Jang "Jewish institutions may be responsible for Bob Woolmer's death" or I turn on Geo and get to see an animation in terrible taste of the Twin Towers coming down implying Jews or the US was behind it, or people on talk shows saying with a straight face that India was responsible for the Swat Taliban, and them blowing up all schools is OK just because the army based themselves in some schools and made them all targets.
Explain what was done to the Qadianis legally in 1974 and 1985 by some means other than a emotional expression of Pakistani religious nationalism and insecurity of precisely the sort the author is talking about. Fine, they're a somewhat batty cultish group of people with weird ideas (and I should know, I had the misfortune to be born as one) who can't read Quran correctly and don't kill anyone. Why on earth did Pakistan government and Pakistani people stand complicit in what was done to them and what is being done to them for any other reason then what was described above.
Where Jason goes wrong is in judging what the Afghans want. Let the Afghans speak for themselves. See "Afghan Envoy Assails Western Allies as Halfhearted, Defeatist" at
To daimanMujnoon
"Are you arrogant enough to imply that wests view of the world is automatically the best one"?
Well,I can,t speak for Jason Burke,but personally,if one breaks the chains of Liberal-fascist cultural relatavism and moral equivalence and speaking as a westerner, I would answer "yes".
And the more westerners that take that "arrogant"view the easier it will be to defeat home grown Islamic terrorism.
Of course there are those (mostly in the west for some strange reason),who would,as they do,insist that no opinion,view,culture,system or religion is superior to any other.
Thereby undermining western democracy,human rights,and unwittingly validating the very ideology that stands in direct opposition to it.
Old Arabian proverb"a falling camel attracks many knifes".
Actually Pakistan was supposed to collapse the day after its creation because the British did not release the funds/foreign reserves. But thankfully the Prince Agha Khan and Nizam of Hyderabad extended currency.
As for Pakistan being hot of fundamentalism; I had to call my relatives in Pakistan and tell them not to send me clothes are sleeveless and pants riding up my calves.
The west can no longer afford to impose its values and notions of democracy on countries that neither want nor need them
I don't like this strapline, because it seems to imply that if the west could afford to then it might have a case. I would say that the west should not impose its values and notions of democracy on countries.
Thereby undermining western democracy,human rights,and unwittingly validating the very ideology that stands in direct opposition to it.
Jason, I think you have eaten one too many kebabs. This piece is nothing but a confused, incoherent defence of the indefensible. Pakistan needs to become literate, democratic and secular in order to survive. You can deride them as
"The west can no longer afford to impose its values and notions of democracy on countries that neither want nor need them"
but you would not be doing any service to Pakistan by this.
When political scholars, pundits and observers bought into Francis Fukuyama's 'end of history' tripe, it was largely based on blindly accepting the notion of the so-called universality of American and British democracy.
The rude awakening, and only a small minority are actually showing signs of waking up, is not only that democratic values are tenuous, breakable and conditional, but that an abrupt return to communal political ideologies is definitely a possibility.
In the face of the contemporary economic boondoggle capitalism has parked at front door of far too many ordinary people, the ever triumphant free market is very likely facing the biggest reality check it has ever dealt with.
How it plays out in the Islamic, second and third world is going to be very interesting; and large, marginalized and Islamic societies like Pakistan will be worth watching because they will serve as the canary in the mine.
Winston Churchill, who as a young man fought on the North-West Frontier, is regularly cited to explain today's insurgency.
Really? Regularly? Where?
My understanding of the NWF, unassisted by WSC, is that it was, is, and will continue to be a turbulent and barely governable place.
Pakistan, as a whole, is a deeply corrupt, unstable, and economically backward country which unfortunately possesses nuclear weapons.
I only hope that someone will fix up the mess there before something worse happens.
Pakichick,
You are fighting a losing battle against stereotypes, just laugh at it, as I do about depictions of India as this monolithic Hindu country. I find it particularly amusing since I am not Hindu despite being very Indian.
I don't know much on Pakistan, but I would point out that, whilst Emile Zola was but a novelist who dabbled in political journalism, Winston Churchill was a politician for nearly half a century, holding various cabinet positions, was Prime Minister twice and died a Nobel Prize-winning historian. So it is possible that, only forty years after his death, some of his views might still be of interest to someone considering international politics.
Of course he was a racist, and his history may still judge that he presided over various war crimes, but he did manage to squeeze an awful lot of academic writing in when he wasn't signing off on the levelling of entire cities...
I don't EVER hear anyone say the west is "rapacious". I hear a lot of people cursing britain and the usa for what it did in Iraq, afghanistan, pakistan's tribal areas and palestine. There is a lot of revulsion for that....but RAPACIOUS???
You made some good points, but "rapacious" means "greedy", or "given to taking by force".
I heard UK ethnic Pakistanis use language that would suggest they think the UK is rapacious. I have used lanaguage that would suggest it (though I've never used the term). I certainly believe it.
And, given your own statement about Pakistani revulsion to the UK in Iraq and Afghanistan, I think the term is quite fair.
Perhaps you think it means something else. But calling the UK and the US rapacious is quite fair, and shared by very many people in the world, including millions of Britons and Americans.
This partly explains why Pakistan's collapse is so often predicted.
Actually the entire subcontinent was supposed to collapse a long time ago. Predictions that India would collapse abounded in the western media until India experienced her economic boom.
@SelimTheGrim
If you want to know what Pakistanis are thinking, find someone who can read Urdu and ask them to read Jang's or Express's or Ausaf's editorial page, or the talk shows on GEO.
Are there any english translations of these pages available??
--------------------------------
As for Pakistan I don't expect it to collapse, especially the eastern half. I would not rule out a complete loss of control of the western half though. In fact that process is seemingly already occuring.
First for the good news: Pakistan is not about to explode. The Islamic militants are not going to take power tomorrow; the nuclear weapons are not about to be trafficked to al-Qaida; the army is not about to send the Afghan Taliban to invade India; a civil war is unlikely.
So claims \Mr. Burke with all of 1.23 years of international relations, and experience of Islamic extremism to back his assessment, so we should all rest easy;
If Pakistan collapsed, we would be faced by a serious security challenge. But the resilience of Pakistan and the nation's continuing collective refusal to do what the west would like it to together pose questions with implications far beyond simple security concerns. They are about our ability to influence events in far-off places, our capacity to analyse and understand the behaviour and perceived interests of other nations and cultures, about our ability to deal with difference, about how we see the world.
it is in my view more a question of "when" Pakistan's collaps will come about rather than if.
However Mr. Burke need not worry about;
The west can no longer afford to impose its values and notions of democracy on countries that neither want nor need them
seeing that Pakistan will do a lot better on their own, in my view it would only be fair to afford this country what Mr.Burke is advocating. *leave them alone to kill each other).
Let's see how long (in terms of days) it will take before an all out Indian invasion of Pakistan will commence once we withdraw our involvement.
I wonder if Mr. Burke will want to go back and report (perhaps begging the international community to intervene).
There you go with that ( liberal knee-jerk ) reaction again.
Thats the "moral equivalence and cultural relatavism " I reffered to.
In WW2,we said, "the Germans" and "the Japanese".yet nobody stood up and said "hey,you can,t demonize all Germans or Japanese like that ",because it was understood that not every single one was not a facist.
Guantanamo or not,there is such a thing as a "collective consciousness",and I prefer the Left-wing,Liberal "collective consciousness,"that claims to support universal human rights and stand against totalitarian,6th century desert bedouin,rantings,and yet much to my dismay...fails to do so.
People are at last,now begining to write entire books to expose and analyis this strange phenomena of liberal-fascism which is specifically evolved to prevent dissent and creatre a moral vacuum.White,post-colonial guilt and cultural suicide.
... in Great Britain's previous Carry On Up the Khyber.
Pakistan, as a whole, is a deeply corrupt, unstable, and economically backward country which unfortunately possesses nuclear weapons. I only hope that someone will fix up the mess there before something worse happens.
Substitute "Great Britain" for "Pakistan" and you express my sentiments exactly. Both countries are mired in a Parliamentary system that breeds an endless supply of deeply corrupt politicians, both are in military trouble because said corrupt politicians embraced Uncle Sam & Uncle's cynical "war on terror".
Both countries have found out that the embrace of Uncle is the kiss of death. Unless these two economically backward countries manage te rid themselves of nuclear arms & corrupt politicians, I see no alternative to WW3, because Great Britain's current invasions of Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, plus Great Britain's reckless support for similar rapacious excursions by Uncle in Africa, and Great Britain's complicity with Israel in invading Palestine & Lebanon as well as threatening Iran, plus Great Britain's diatribes against Russia & China - all these actions of Great Britain are stirring a global instability that will trigger WW3 just as surely as Winston's carry-on up the Khyber (and similar Imperialist carry-ons) triggered WW1, which bred WW2.
Pakistan is not ready for true democracy. The people in charge of Pakistan today and the opposition squabbling to get in have all been caught with their fingers in the till in the past. When General Musharaff came in to power, he went after the corrupt and the tax dodgers and was on the way to establishing a technocratic government with a new grass roots political system by banishing the criminals and uneducated from holding office. The most able of the corrupt and tax dodgers fled from Pakistan at the time in their droves. What went wrong for Musharaff (and Pakistan) was 9/11 and the War On Terror where Pakistan, its forces and resources were forced into battle on its north western border whilst an agressor was making threatening noises on its eastern border trying to somehow rope in Paksitan into the 9/11 blame game. In the years following 9/11, Islamic fundamaentalism has grown in Pakistan fueled by a Pakistan public that have grown fustrated by the role of Pakistan in the war on terror and the effects on its muslim neighbours and border areas. The corrupt and the tax dodgers added to fuel (and finance) to the fustration from their foreign safe havens and manipulated thier way back into power by stoking up internal strife and cosying up to the West by offering to bring democrarcy back into Pakistan. No sooner as they are in power they have got sidetracked by their usual squabbles on who get thier hands on what and normal democratic chaos ensues. Only now Pakistan is a nation in trouble, with problems on each border as well as internally and the corrupt leaders in charge have no clue on how to deal with this. Pakistan now needs its military to take control of the nation. Bring back Musharaff, stop the war on terror and suspend democracy whilst Musharaff is given a free hand to sort the country out once and for all.
Good piece
But has anyone asked the question, just what the hell are indians doing in Afghanistan? , they have no culture or language common.
Which leaves only one reason to harm Pakistan
Sorry but it is a fact!
Perhaps the UK Government can explain why National Insurance Fund contributors who retire in Israel receive annual upratings on 6 April each year, whilst those who retire to Pakistan don't. It sounds like those in Pakistan could do with the extra funds. It sounds as if the UK Government are guilty of discrimination. This could easily be fixed if the UK Government had the will.
At least your article shows you have spent some time THINKING. i really must congratulate you on this.
As a middle class Pakistani, I would tend to agree with you that we are becoming some of the most anti-Western countries in the world. And I am actually proud of that. It shows that the sycophantic attitude of some of our leadership is not echoed across the board and that many of us have enough self-respect and knowledge and taste to judge that history is not a linear progression where we must all end up like the US of A. There are many other ways of living in the world and thank God for that. This rampant anti-Westernism is born of a number of factors: a) relative to many parts of the world and especially Muslim countries, we have had relative freedom of information for a long long time now. We are exposed to points of view from across the world, through the academia and the media and through interaction with our sizeable diaspora in the West and the Middle East. So when we are exposed to works of Said and Chomsky and Finkelstein, why will we think that the West is purer than milk in its great effort to 'democratize' the world. b) sometimes with our permission and often against our will, our politicians have prostituted us in doing the West's bidding in return for money and perks. by allowing ourselves to be used that way, we have developed a prostitute's hatred for the trade and for the customers who pay to use her body like that. if our rulers had had more self-respect and stood up to the West more, we wouldn't hate the West so much. if many of our people are in love with western cultures and appear westernised themselves, it is because they are attracted to western popular culture and technology and NOT western politics and foriegn policy. c) we were the VERY FIRST decolonized nation of the world (if you discount Ireland). that just hints at the level of independence and pride we have. what's more, before we were colonized, we formed one of the greatest and richest empires in history, with an incredibly cosmopolitan civilization which continues to be renowned for its literary, physical and architectural wonders. and this was very very recent too. THATS where we are coming from. that is what India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are. We very jealously guard our culture and links with the past. (to a different extent, this also included Afghanistan) Take dress, for example. South Asia probably has more English speakers than any other region of the world. (So there is your example of Western culture). But behold, on important occasions and in everyday life on a consistent basis, you will see us wearing indigenous dress. and celebrating indigenous music and dance on a HUGE HUGE scale. while the rest of the world is increasingly favouring trousers and shirts and you will be hard put to find indigenous costumes being worn in modern cities. and we see little paradox in that.
this is why we are a mixture of the familiar and foreign and will be terribly hard to tame, so don't try too hard. learn to coexist. you don't have to be terribly good friends with everyone. keep us at arm's distance if you want, watch us warily, but stop trying to FORCE us.
Mr. Jason Burke, while i find your article very insightful indeed, I get a very disturbing vibe from it. It is as if the West is this solid unchanging object, which is disliked by some "difficult" international actor and we must watch those people carefully. And the word - difficult - what does that mean? We use it for people who are either badly behaved children or semi-senile elderly people who it is very hard to reason with as well as those people who simply have personality issues. The tone of your article seems to hold the implication that the energies of the West are only to be turned to changing how those actors behave but not towards changing how they themselves behave. You know, it is not because of their colour or race that we don't like 'the West'. (Personally, I like to avoid the word 'hate' just for my own mental health if nothing else). Race or colour is not something that the 'West' could change. We dislike them for something they can change: the way they treat us. That an intelligent writer like you seems to miss that sort of change as an option in trying to figure out Pakistan's future makes this a grim grim situation.
The bad news is that Pakistan poses us questions that are much more profound than those we would face if this nation of 170m, the world's second biggest Muslim state, were simply a failed state. If Pakistan collapsed, we would be faced by a serious security challenge.
I wonder if that would still be true if the West simply disengaged, stopped giving Pakistan any aid whatsoever, and made it a great deal more difficult for Pakistani nationals to flit back and forth. Obviously Pakistan has nukes but the West is out of range and MAD ought to ensure that Pakistan never becomes quite so foolish as to deploy them aggressively.
I keep reading about Pakistan's supposed "strategic importance" but once you drop the idea of "saving Afghanistan for democracy" I don't really see how it's of very much importance at all to the West. To India, sure, but to the West?
States don't fail in a day or a year. It is a decades long process.
Pakistan is a failing state. The trajectory of Pakistan is clear to any objective observer.
*The original Pakistan has been split into Bangladesh and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
*The idea of a secular state has degenerated into an officially Islamic nation with a constitution that specifically promotes Islam and Sharia law.
*The tribal areas are not under the central governments control.
*The Swat valley and other non-tribal areas are less under the governments control.
*The government itself is out of control. Dictatorship vs democracy. Military vs. civilian. Punjabi vs. Sindhi. Sharif vs. Zardari. Sunni vs. Shia.
*The ISI/military complex is out of control.
*The Taliban is out of control of the central government.
*The sanctioned terrorist groups like the Kashmiri groups (LeT)) are out of control.
*The economy is out of control and on the brink of bankruptcy.
*The educational system is out of control.
*The nuclear technology is out of control. (ask Libya, Iran, North Korea)
Mr. Burke writes, "They know that their nation's strategic importance guarantees the financial life support they need from the international community." Really?
Jason Burkes article is simply a headline but no substance, facts, data, or logic.
One of the problems when trying to discuss Pakistan in a rational way is that people have no idea of the uneven demographics of the area. To take one recent example: The government has allowed some form of Sharia law to be used in Swat. Now I agree with teacup that this is bad for the women of Swat, but the total population there is only about one and an half million, while there are 80 million in the Punjab and about 50 million in Sind. What happens in Swat does not give any indications about the future of Pakistan as a whole. The same is true for the tribal areas in general.
While there may be a few attacks in the heartland of Pakistan, these are not part of the every day life of the vast majority of Pakistanis.
Let us not forget that abortion continued to be banned in Northern Ireland while it was legal in Britain. I don't want to push the analogy too far, but the presence of large Catholic minority and strongly Protestant majority made it necessary for the British government to acknowledge that this province was special. Could the same not be true in Pakistan?
Just as London was hit by IRA bombs occasionally, so Islamibad is hit by suicide bombers occasionally, but nobody referred to the UK as a failed state, or argued that compromises with the UDA or IRA would give terrorists access to nuclear weapons.
Pakistan is in a difficult transition moment from a military dictatorship, which people like Mr Burke supported, to a democracy. There will be many crises along the way, but to argue that events in a small rural province are harbingers for a change in Pakistan itself are nonsense.
Mr. Burke, Virulent anti-UK, anti-west sentiments are surprisingly extremely common in the so called moderate, well integrated, eucated British citizens of Pakistani origin - when they think they are among their own discussing such issues. Pakistan is a corrupt nation with an ego and it has learnt to extract huge sums of money from the international community to maintain this. If USA and UK stopped paying for this "strategic" advantage, Pakistan will see there is no money in terroris and correct itsef and become a normal nation. There is no need for a "strategic importance" in there except for UK & USA wanting to grandstand. even then there are other less egotistical nations there to provide that presence that the West seeks for strategic importance. Take off the pink glasses.
Perhaps the author should wake up. The swat valley, NWPF is all taken over by the Taliban. These places are providing sanctuary for al qaida and afghan taliban.
There are reports of massive arms storage in safe houses in Karachi. The ISI have been formenting trouble for Neighbour India. The economy is in shatters. The AQ Khan have been goind around selling Nuclear arms in the past, who is to say his network sanctioned by ISI isn't doing so now.
The reality is Pakistan in the past never had a strong opposition force to the entire system as it does now. When people are improvished, angry and disillusioned, they turn to religion. If the religious forces are the opposition then the end of the system is close. Iran in 1978 is a classical example, of a country, with however strong army, was taken over by extreme forces.
What we are seeing is a gardual take over. When gunman shoots visiting digintaries and with impunity walks away, when the writ of the nation state shrinks, when assasination and intimidation is wide spread, and when politicians squabble for power to enrich themselves alarm bells should be ringing.
But in the end when the alarm bells stop, Pakistan removed from the front pages of news, it may just be that we have got tired of worrying and allow what is inevitable, ie Mullah Omar and Osma's new defacto sanctuary. And if we are lucky there won't be another 9/11 or worse.
Obviously Pakistan has nukes but the West is out of range and MAD ought to ensure that Pakistan never becomes quite so foolish as to deploy them aggressively.
When you are factoring in religious extremists, you cannot imagine the irrational decisions that they can come to. (Take Hamas's continually bombarding southern Israel with rockets and mortars. Where is there any logic in this).
By all means dis-engage. But Pakistan MUST be de-fanged of her nuclear devices and potential.
As a Muslim and Arab i value much the precious analysis of integrating the social and political factors for a better understanding of a major Muslim country; yet, what i am alarmed of Mr. Jason is that the next step is always an attempt to impose the "western" culture and values on the Muslim society in which foreign powers have interest in, which in fact lead to even more extremism.
The major dilemma here is for Britons to make Pakistanis avoid seeing "the world very differently from us" they have to insert some hands in the education systems, religious institutions, and cultural facilities. It happened in Egypt, and i assure you people are not pleased with it. It can be easily detected by common citizens; and if it is, you would be bumping in some fire in the commonly spread "conspiracy theory" leading to some rising violent reactions; same factors that created Al-Qaeda in 1998.
It is not "us" versus "them" Mr. Jason; it is respecting the other with his culture, religious beliefs, values, and political will. Congratulations for the sociopolitical analysis, but you need to do the same in political Islamic movements and extract the original factors that gave birth to them, which by the way are not love of hate.
@martynineurope;
I would say that the west should not impose its values and notions of democracy on countries.
And which 'values and notions of democracy' specifically do you believe are good enough for the west but are not deserved by others?
Equality for women? A right to have a say in how they are governed? A right not to be hanged for being gay? Need I go on?
The problem with your view, when one digs beyond the racial/cultural relativism, is that you are actually arguing that any western notion of 'human rights', i.e. rights which one possesses simply because one is human, is wrong. You are also arguing that it is acceptable for other countries to fail to abide by their own prior decision to sign up to those rights for their citizens.
Is that really your position? That a woman in Pakistan or gay in Iran does not have the same human rights as a woman or gay in Britain or Spain? If it is acceptable for a Pakistani woman in Pakistan to be forced into a marriage against her will, why does a Spanish or Pakistani woman in Spain have greater rights? Can you justify that view of yours?
Do you really think that an Iranian Bahai living in Iran should have a lesser right to practice their religion than a Spanish Bahai living in Spain? Why?
No one is suggesting that Western values should automatically be imposed on others, but it is suggested that others have equal rights to westerners, for example, under the UDHR because those values are exactly that, universal, and rationally they have proved superior to other values.
Your position is, IMO, a classic example of 'feel-good' politics which ignores the crucial issues of fundamental principle underlying the whole debate. It is a position which says abuses of human rights in other countries are justifiable because 'that's just the way they do things there'. That seems perilously close to a soft racism.
The article is a confused and garbled collection of out-dated concepts and inadequate analysis - along with a minimal understanding of the historical backdrop.
The problem with the author, like many British commentators, is that they assume the mantle of the Whitehall permanent establishment (yes, there is such a coterie or cabal) when it comes to discussing Pakistan.
The intellectual foundations of this balderdash go back to Olaf Caroe, one of the last British mandarins in pre-independent India's Foreign Office, who thought of the imperative of having a buffer state to contain the Soviet thrust to the Indian Ocean (the old Russian Bear syndrome). The future state of Pakistan (still on the drawing-board) was the perfect model to discharge this function.
Sir Olaf's ideas were picked up enthusiastically by the U.S. State Department (John Foster Dulles and company) and Pakistan was well on its way to 5 decades of free-loading and sponging in the American kitchens. At its birth itself, the country was a flawed concept, an illegitimate offspring of the dying British Empire.
Its internal contradictions were so glaring that it was at best a patchwork affair. The only thing that kept it going was its pathological hatred of India and all aspects of Indic culture, an area where the Pakistanis were in a constant state of denial. This basic structural deficiency was later compounded by numerous other viruses like military dictatorship, alliances between the landowning mafia and the drug-lords etc.
The current scenario, of course, is there for the entire world to see, except for hacks like Burke. The man is out to lunch. Otherwise, how can one account for his outlandish statements that fly against facts and reality ? If the description of a problem is gobbledygook, the prescriptions are bound to be preposterous.
Time , one again, to pass the port around in the Guardian's editorial watering holes.
Recent years have seen the consolidation of a new Pakistani identity.
Really? And how do the Baluchistanis, and Pakistan's other indigenous ethnic groups see this - or don't they count, anymore than the Welsh, Irish, Scots or English counted when the British STATE and its ruling elites were asserting their domination . . ?
Just to add, there seems a lot been mentioned about womens right and sharia. None of these are major issues, it is Pakistanis internal issues. What is important with SWAT valley is that the army must ask permission from the miltants or their representive for patrolling schedules and route. Two soldiers killed because they didn't have authorised permission. That's what we talking about loosing ground. Worst is the army can been seen colluding with militants. Afghan insurgency grew because they have sanctuary in Pakistan. Mumbai attacks planned and carried out by Pakistanis from punjab province.
We could go on example after example.
What is a failed state other then a state whose writ doesn't extend across a country, where there are large training camps for miltary training.
Each year Pakistan gets worse, the blame is placed on US,UK,India and Jews.
More pakistanis in UK get radicalised. In private the hatered of the west is strong, in public it is different. And the west uses kid goves which is slowly being removed with the Predator strikes. Finally the Americans are learning if you want to kill your enemy you got to do it your self and don't tell Pak Army.
Although the liberal press seems to point these actions are counter productive and show that one will loose Pakistan. There can be another simple arguement, since the they hatred is saturated you can't ask for love and peace.
One needs to broker peace by pointing to rising cost to the enemy leadership for every attrocity more of their blood will flow. If a Nuclear attack happens in New York or London and Pak finger prints are on it, then whole of Pakistan will be wiped out. China will not involve itself when the US roar. That is the only way, show some guts and forget worrying about failed states. As Roosevelt said, talk gently but carry a big stick.
I fully support the right of the majority in any country to determine the values of its own citizens, and the UK Government ought to apply to its dealing with Pakistan and its own citizens equally.
I don't want to impose anything on Pakistan, beyond requiring them to respect and as far as possible enforce my desire not to be blown up.
They spend 60% of GDP (surely a monstrous waste?) on an army which is incapable of closing down madrassahs openly teaching Britons how to make bombs to blow up other Britons.
Common respect for humanity requires them to stop, with any force necessary, the Talibanisation of their own country. Currently, one would almost think that quite a lot of senior figures in the army, ISI etc seek just such an outcome. After all, it would make the people much easier to control, and do away with the pesky inconvenience of running elections occasionally.
It may well suit them to blame India, "the West", Jews or any other brand of non-Muslims, but Pakistan's problems are home-grown.
Your eastern neighbour was making noise because your country sponsored an attack on its Parliament in Dec 2001 lest you forget. As to Pakistani involvment in 9/11 that is a well known fact : Khalid Sheikh Mohammed says it all and with ISI fingerprints all over.
Raffy:
India is helping Afghanistan to the tune of 1.25 Billion USD in rebuilding its infrastructure. As to cultural ties, they go a long way back before Islam ever took a foothold in that part of the world. Think of Bamiyan Buddhas, Kandahar (Gandahar in olden times) and read up on the history of the region to understand the cultural linkage between India and Afghanistan
Harming Pakistan is the added bonus and making sure it pays a heavy price for fomenting terrorism in India.
It is not "us" versus "them" Mr. Jason; it is respecting the other with his culture, religious beliefs, values, and political will.
I find your thinking somewhat confused.
Why should one respect the other with his culture, religious beliefs, values, and political will?
If you are arguing that one should show respect and tolerance for other cultures, religions and political beliefs then it can only be because you consider respect and tolerance superior ethically and morally to disrespect and intolerance.
But if that is the case, then you must also argue that any culture or religion which espouses disrespect and intolerance of others to be ethically and morally inferior to any religion or culture which does espouse respect and tolerance.
But that in turn would inevitably lead you to the conclusion that Muslim and Arab cultures, in the one case theologically wrt non-Muslims and in the other historically wrt Israel, are morally and ethically inferior to those same western notions of respect and tolerance which you are asserting as the basis for your claim of respect and tolerance. Islam by its inherent concept of 'struggle' against other religions and advocacy of dissimilar treatment for Muslims and non-Muslims and Arab cultures in their rejection of equal rights for Jews in Israel.
So the logical consequence of your own claim for respect and tolerance is that you run up against the oldest conundrum in the book; what respect and tolerance is due to those who are disrespectful and intolerant?
I would be fascinated to see how you can simultaneously justify both your demand for respect and tolerance from others with a professed belief in a religion inherently intolerant of other religions, without recourse to an inherently supremacist doctrine.
Unfortunately the whole life of this country is riddled with one or other crises. While the democracy in its neighbour was flourishing the country was being trampled by jackboots. They played havoc with the institutions and left the country into tatters when they left for a brief respite. The judicial murder of Pakistan's charismatic but with autocratic tendencies and defacing of 1973 constitution is responsibe for the present mess.
Ms Bhutto was a seasoned politician and was a visionary. She managed to pacify Mr Sharif , despite his role in giving tough time to her when he was PM, and signed a charter of Democracy (CoD).
Mr Asif Ali Zardari is a different character. He managed to reach the Presidential palace and then decided to keep all the executive powers which he should have returned to the PM of the country. Then his reneging on the promise he solemnly made before the nation antagonised Mr Sharif. Unforutnatey this has created a situation which is threatening the whole democratic set up and military is just waiting for a green signal from the US to step in. Mr Zardari has sidelined almost all the leaders who were very close to Ms Bhutto until her last days. He has brought a team of opportunists and sycophants. Mr Zardari's closed political ally at present is Mr Altaf Hussain who is himself a wanted terrorist and criminal in the country. That day is not far when Altaf will ditch him. Just wait a little while. Imagine this man is under full protection of the British government and it makes me sick to see high British and US official visit him in his International HQ in Edgware London. 12th May carnage in Karachi was produced and directed by this fascist man sitting from London.
May I remind you that Pakistan didn't stop at making threatening noises at its eastern neighbour in 1999, it actually invaded Kargil! Why Pakistan can't accept the actual line of control passes my understanding.
Raffy,
Further to Yddgrasil's excellent reply to you, India has deployed medical teams to Afghanistan. Don't you think a country that hasn't seen peace in over three decades has some need for this. The "Jaipur foot" is a cheap prosthetic device that is a boon to those who have lost limbs. How does helping Afghans translate as threatening Pakistan? If India has a large embassy in the US, is it implicitly threatening Canada or Mexico.
I grant you that even paranoics can have enemies, but this is crazy!
Apologies for not using question marks at appropriate points in the previous post.
A really excellent piece Jason Burke,you have demonstrated more understanding of the situation in Pakistan and of the broader view,of how the west approaches those systems and cultures,that don't fit in with their interests,or ideologies,than all the various" experts ",either in the foreign office,or their equivalents, getting it all wrong in America and the world is all the more dangerous because of it.
This insistence that any country in the world must always conduct it's internal affairs,according to western values and standards,even as these values and standards are now seen to be as bankrupt as their failed economies.
How western governments can condemn countries like Pakistan for indemic corruption,while we have situations like Madof,...where we have just about the whole of the house of commons fiddling their expenses every which way they can;...where,in Britain corruption in the police,in government,in the arms industry,is always glossed over,by having enquiries into the various wrong doings,that turn out to be complete whitewashes,under the "old boy network ",...is beyond me.
The claims of the west to possess the high moral ground in human standards of decency and fairness,lie with the ruins of Gaza,along with the broken and burnt bodies of the women,children and babies,which did not illicit one word in condemnation,from that perfect specimen of a " democratically "elected western leader, Brown.
Surely before the west tries to foist it's way of life on others living on this planet,they should put their own house in order ?,people being neither blind nor stupid.
Is it not quite strange and amusing to believe that the West does really desire to live in a peaceful and comfortable world around in the post-cold war era (?) ? Since when and why the West has arrogated to itself the prerogative of promoting democracy and human rights in the non-Western developing societies without bothering for a moment to introspect about its own record to that effect ? Did the developing non-Western countries ever volunteer to seek Western assistance for their own nation building and social reconstruction, without caring for an indigenous and native effort of their own ? Has the West got rid of its colonial hang over of having to bear the "White man's burden" to civilise the "savage societies" (?) of the non-Western world ? Did the Western analysts ever care to read the real motives of Western powers behind their involvement and interventions in countries of Asia, Middle East, Latin America and Africa ? Is it not the West Asia's oil, the untapped oil and natural gas deposits of the Caspian region, the mineral and natural resources of Africa or the geo-political interests in Asia and the Middle East that is in fact driving the US-led Western powers for such an involvement ? The predicament Afghanistan and Pakistan or Iraq do find themselves in today, it is the the US and its Western allies for the anti-terror war that are responsible for. Not only Pakistan but Afghanistan and Iraq too seem to be headed for civil war and political collapse, thanks to the West's irresistible desire for hegemony over the world.
JB ... did you write the silly, lazy and all too predictable strap line about the West imposing its values ?? Or was it the silly, lazy and all too predictable CiF sub-editing ?? Either way it undermines your attempt at real analysis.
I fear there is a lot of wishful thinking in the article. The pressure to introduce Sharia law (and the frequent compromises with those pressures) is not the result of an irrelevant minority but a significant minority.
We hope that Burke is right not just for geo-political reasons, but for domestic ones. If Sharia is truly popular among ordinary Pakistanis, then might it not be popular among the perfectly ordinary Pakistanis living in Britain, and those still migrating to Britain. Whether it be the attacks (successful and unsuccessful), demonstrations in Luton etc, we really have to hope that Burke is right for all our sakes - and this applies most of all to the more westernised Pakistanis and British Pakistanis.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
