Dr. Ali Ettefagh serves as a director of Highmore Global Corporation, an investment company in emerging markets of Eastern Europe, CIS, and the Middle East. He is the co-author of several books on trade conflict, resolution of international trade disputes, conflicts in letters of credit, trade-related banking transactions, sovereign debt, arbitration and dispute resolutions and publications specific to the oil and gas, communication, aviation and finance sectors. Dr. Ettefagh is a member of the executive committee and the board of directors of The Development Foundation, an advisor to the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, and an advisor to a number of European companies. Dr. Ettefagh speaks Persian (Farsi), English, German, French, Spanish, Italian, Arabic and Turkish.
Close.
Ali Ettefagh
Tehran, Iran
Dr. Ali Ettefagh serves as a director of Highmore Global Corporation, an investment company in emerging markets of Eastern Europe, CIS, and the Middle East.
more »
Handle u r right that india gt 14 major langs lol..bt thats y jinnah said "india is nt a country or a nation" it involves many types of ppl bt wat the thing lacks is that there is no same NATION!there is nothing same.bt in pakistan urdu is major lang which is spoken everywhere and all r equal n our religion is same, lang is same etc other things r same too...i would like 2 tell u if u honestly think of pakistan's problems u wont need any1 to explain ull realise everything!b honest realise its problems PPL b aware of its problems dun think its nt ur country bt think that wats the best thing u can do for it! .thats the truth pakistan is greatest n see this quote"Every Great person gt alot of problems bt that person solves it thats y he is called GREAT"
Salam and hi,
y u want pakistan to b destroyed?wat has pakistan done to u??N when the terrorism is held whole world blame pakistan y?this is offensive.
AND u non pakistanis no one can destroy pakistan its nt afghanistan or iraq that its easy to destroy it... Its a NECLUER COUNTRY so keep ur fingers out of this. ALLAH is with us.. One more thing that some pakistanis dont have faith in Allah PLZZZZ have faith ... pakistan will never destroy n the ppl of pakistan r brave enough .
So never ever try to harm pakistan!!AND i want government of pakistan to b good cuz..the government dont relises any thing about pakistanis like the amounts of oil r increasing day by day..the poor r being more poor.REALIZE!!the broken heart of poor pakistanis..they dont gt anything to eat.V R PAKISTANIS N V CAN DEAL WITH EVERY CHICK... Allah is pakistan ki halat achi kr de or aik din pakistan bohot powerful aur bohat rich hojae.(AMEEN)
This article of dr Ettifagh i read of dissoluting Pakistan as is an artifical state boundaries with multiple issues.This would be annoying most Pakistanis like me which country doesn't have problem like India in our neighbourhood facing ethanical issues Iran on western border has political stratageic controversies and all around world. Thou we are in our bad hard run crisis but we maintain our FEDERATION despite conspiracies and west intervention because we had leaders like Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Benazir and millions of patriotic Pakistani who will give their lives but not surrunder our great nation to the millitants. And we will make it times are changing civil, political and judicial awareness is smoothly and gradually coming and heralding a social revolution.
It is really very nice to know that soo many people out here care soo much for the ordinary citizens of Pakistan that they are sitting right there in the protection of their little dumb houses, enjoying the luxury of the internet and plotting the new world order around it.
Talk sense. Talk humanity. Talk about building instead of tearing Pakistan apart and gluing it to India.
The only reason why Pakistan stands where it stands today is because of the US interference in our personal problems and constant supply of aid and instruction to encourage training of militants that they needed in their 'cause of Afghanistan' - We stood there with the US in their war against terror sending our troops to Afghanistan along with their army, letting the US use our land and bases to launch attacks in their pseudo hunt of bin Ladin. What do we get in return? The title of terrorists?
Absolutely reasonable., and sensible. The 2-Nation Theory was fraudulent, and based on a poor reading of history. Lets accept that first. Agreed, there were problems among Hindus and Muslims (the 2 major communities of undivided india), but partition was NOT the solution. Exlusivity led to alienation and Andulasian Syndrome. That was about the past.
Now what ? Pakistan will go down in a very bloody way (unlike the Soviet union). At Pakistan's birth, millions died. At Pakistan's demise millions will die again (in civil war).
It will be very very bloody. Then it will disintegrate into 4 peices - Sindhudesh, Balochistan, and land-locked states of Pakhtoon`khwaa and Punjabistan. This is the natural state of their being. Eventually, to realise economies of scale, one by one., these states would join the Indian Union.
Bangladesh too would realise their folly and join India.
United India (indo-pak-bangla) is the destiny of the subcontinent. 1947, 1971, are mere footnotes. They will be washed away. India will be a super-power when united... based on respect for its 2 major communities Hindu and Muslim.
Both will thrive and both will progress. (This is what Maulana Azad said... but no one listened to him. Even Gandhi ji.. ditched Maulana Azad and Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan [Frontier Gandhi], and accepted Pakistan, after calling it a sin first !). Anyways... this is 2008... so lets be forward looking.
Cheers for a United India. Only this will root out terrorists and criminals of humanity (both hindu and muslim). These safforn and green fascists deserve to be marginalised. United India would do JUST that.
Dr Ali you are absolutly wrong and unaware of Pakistan
The people of all the provences are having very good relations and they are not against each other ,only its maliter and cevil buracices are creating problems for the commen people but now awarness is being created and in very near future Pakistan will be emerge a strong and stable country.No country in world consistr of a single nation or ethnicity rather consist of multy ethnic multilangual and multi religen entities.Look at U.S.A it has a very diversified population havind different colors ,religeons,races and languages.
Iran too is not a single nation it has Baloch,kurd and arab but it is a nation.
I am very sorry to say but this is a really pathetic approach . Pakistan is an independent Nuclear state which have a common religion culture and traditon the people of Pakistan are one and united when somebody attacks its soverigntity which we had already proven in the War of 1965.I agree that there are riots voilence and coups in this very short history of 60 years but then again doesnt that happen in India , indians had Muslim,Hindu riots several times they had Sikh Hindu riots which were all very voilent leaving thousands dead.So why dont you dissolve india as well. whatever happens in a country is the countries own responsiblity nobody has the right to interfere .
The author mentioned about Opium sumgling let me correct him if you analyse in the Taliban era the opium sumgling was almost stopped and they destroyed many harvest of Millions of Dollar, but as Amercians doesnt want that to happen and from the time Amercian based Govt have been enforce in afghanistan opium sumgling has increased so who is too blame now?
Pakistan is a soverign state and its not iraq or afghanistan that Western power can destroy it so easily. So please stop thinking of such fantasies which will never happen and thing something more productive.
Pakistan is only a breeding ground for terrorists and a nuisnace for India and the whole world. Its people will never come to terms with the fact that their country, such as it is, was created out of hatred towards India.
We do not want such a dangerous country in our neighbourhood.If the world wants peace it has to look squarely and solve the Pakistan problem. It is not going to go away.
Dissolving Pakistan does not mean dissolving its citizens. It means helping them build an alternate arrangement to live in peace.
Pakistanis could have made a different future, but the time is lost. Dissolving Pakistan is not just an idea it is the ONLY option.
Hi,
I agree you are right about diverse thoughts and traditions people have in Pakistan. But isn't it better to find similarities and unite people instead of dividing them. A process of 'new boundries' will end in hundreds of innocent people death.
I know people are different but very few want a new country. Multiple relations with America, Alqaeda or 'extremists!' can be used to communicate and resolve the problems....not just increase.
...then also dissolve Iran too because if Pakistan is dissolved there should be Greater Baluchistan. Then some of the parts of Iran belong to Kurds, the tribe of Sultan Salahudiin Ayubi, who have no land.Then why to forget Azaris they also need a piece of land to make Azaristan. Then what Iran is left with....?
Mr. Ettifagh, please don't throw stones on others while sitting in a glass-room.
Do it, and do it quickly. Before the Egypt-Saudi-Pakistan axis of evil sunnis try to wipe out the very young roots of democracy in the region.
Pakistan is indeed a failed project while the bigger piece of the carve-up, India, has a bright future ahead. Cannot help but think that it is due to the hateful version of Islam that is practiced in Pakistan.
Very clear thinking and a good idea.
Pakistan is about to implode and we must get ahead of the curve and not watch the Tsunami from a distance. And it is going to be a big problem either way. Can we afford a mass export of terrorists from Pakistan?
Wow!! excellent piece, great analysis and hope the US think tanks are taking note of your recommendations apart from hoping to build Pakistan to counter India & China. Pakistan has its history of training terrorists,grooming Taliban, Alqaeda, harbouring criminals, Lawless land and Army/ISI/Dictators are rulers of the nation. Pakistan is the origin of world Terror planning and training. One cannot be an expert terrorist until they get trained by Pakistani Army. This is known to rest of the world except Americans, after 911 Musharaf was doing lip service for the $10Billions and protecting his Taliban thugs, Alqeda,ISI,QA khan and modernizing Army to fight with India for Kargil war mis-adventure. Mush realized the double sword Taliban only after sucide bomb attempts on his life for playing double game with them. Before 911, Army thugs were training Alqaeda & Taliban and ISI was busy planning terror activities against non-Islamic countries except China, as China was providing technology and building their Military might with US Aid Money.
All the terror network is still intact in Pakistan, Osama is still enjoying freedom in this country & so are the Madrasas which spit out venom against non-islamists.
What you sow is what you get, this is exactly true in their case.
Before going in the details i think we should really consider the ground facts and realities.
Dear Mr Ettifgah,
You are just another ordinary human being, your opinion is just another opinion.
if you are from iran then you should better know the besides the smuggling you are ignoring the ground fact that THE ATOM you have on basis of which you show eyes to AMERICA, given to you from WHOM? can u exactly state WHOM?
NO because nobody is here to take the responsibility of showing GOOD side,
But you know what
PAKISTAN is forever, and will be. besides the 60 bad yrs we still have much more than some other countries.
INSHALLAH ALLAH is with us HE'll let pakistan through all this and you will be the witness.
Resources will also be divide among different provinces. Which includes Nuclear arsenals, that will also be divided among the provinces.
Anyway guess.... from which province that extremists would have taken over, where the first nuclear arsenal will go to.....
Just a thought.....
Anyway practically Unity and stability (economic and social etc.) is very important in Pakistan, not only for Pakistanis, but for the rest of the world also. Furthermore Islam is part of Pakistan, will remain part of Pakistan and will keeps Pakistan united (ENSHALLAH). If anyone wants Islam taken away from Pakistan, I encourage them to go and study Islam before you make any judgments.
Furthermore about the Indians commenting on Pakistani politics....
Look at your country India before commenting on Pakistani situation.
There are 16 (sixteen) insurgencies going on right now in India.
4000 Muslims were burned alive and killed by Hindu extremists, just few years back.
Siks had an uprising against the government and many massacred.
Approx. 700,000 Indian troops are in Indian held Kashmir, denying peoples rights and freedom. No media personal is allowed there. (Look at the contrast to about 200,000 American troops in Iraq).
No private NGO is allowed in India.
Furthermore if India does not have a very huge army it would probably break apart.
Benezir Partially lives in UK (PPP). Altaf Hussain lives in UK(MQM). Nawaz Sharif partially lives in UK(PML-N). Imran Khan partially lives in UK(PTI). And many other top Pakistani politicians are in one way or the other are connected to UK. If Pakistan breaks up then definitely UK will soon become Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Even if Pakistan doesn't break up, UK will soon become Islamic Republic of Pakistan, as none in UK politics can compete with Pakistani Politicians. People of UK don't even know the people they are harboring and protecting.
Anyway EnshALLAH Pakistan will grow boundaries based on One Way of Life i.e. Islam. And EnshALLAH it will never break up.
Well If the witer of the column may read it I think there r certain things he didn't knew himself and certain things are clearly baseless in his own mind.
First there is a much strongly understandable and commonlanguage in Pakistan rather than English , which is URDU . I know its a bit badluck that its not the official language.
The views about lawlessness, smuggling and terror are basically not directly from Pakistan.
AS you said Afganistan is producing 90% of opium , Y not to stop them. Smuggling is taking between IRAN and Pak , Y dont we go on to stop cross boader mutually. Extremism , well I believe that only the media is highlighting the extremism in Pakistan, and not showing the complete picture of what is happening in Indian Held Khashmir, Afghanistan and IRAQ .
Then As per the Kashmir Issue, I think UN has passed the rasolution in favour of Pakistan.
I believe Pakistan is a Nation with a short 60 years history but it has seen alot of goods and bads, and I think its the greatness of this country that it is serviving all these things and its our Solid Believe that it will Servive this tough political time too.
I disagree with the ideas presented by Mr. Ali Ettefagh. There may be political difficulties and constitutional crises but thats not because of four provinces with different cultures.
I disagree with the ideas presented by Mr. Ali Ettefagh. There may be political difficulties and constitutional crises but thats not because of four provinces with different cultures.
Ali Ettefagh
I think you are out of your mind. We have a emergency its our problem not yours.You shiya always have a problem with the wahabisim.Why don't you understand all Pakistani's(97% muslims,3% minorities) all have the same problem.But we donot want your help, we want moral support from the countries who new what the freedom is not your hypothetical Islamic Shiya state.
The thing i remember is that we are not the one who's border you want to dissolve its your country that western countries want to tear apart, so why don't you see the matters of your country and leave us alone because we take good care of ourself INSHALLAH.
I don't get what are you trying prove through this article. Racism exists in every part of world so does in Pakistan, drugs story was true but its not the case anymore, as Americans have occupied Afghanistan and there are many independent reports about Opium free pakistan, even if there is any such thing then i think its better to blame USA rather than blaming Pakistan, and by the way I confess Whatever is going on in here is not right, and we pakistani are all sick of it, but can someone bother to address the root cause of all this mess? reigns of all the politicians{elected by paki people} in pakistan's history were demolished by pakistan's army, and this is the only reason why pakistan has such a bad political history unlike india may be. But Question is "WHO" always supports Pakistani Armys action, its not paki ppl but USA itself. Even now whatever is happening in pakistan USA is watching all this mess with zipped mouth, as USA can't afford to loose a supporting unit against taliban, but all it takes sacrifices of the rights of paki ppl who've been deprived of all the basics rights by Army Generals, over and over again. I'm just 23 years old and I believe its the only time If we as a nation doesn't take some serious steps then we'll never do anything regarding this mess and you can call this a Nation's failure or whatever.but its Now or Never i guess.
I don't get what are you trying prove through this article. Racism exists in every part of world so does in Pakistan, drugs story was true but its not the case anymore, as Americans have occupied Afghanistan and there are many independent reports about Opium free pakistan, even if there is any such thing then i think its better to blame USA rather than blaming Pakistan, and by the way I confess Whatever is going on in here is not right, and we pakistani are all sick of it, but can someone bother to address the root cause of all this mess? reigns of all the politicians{elected by paki people} in pakistan's history were demolished by pakistan's army, and this is the only reason why pakistan has such a bad political history unlike india may be. But Question is "WHO" always supports Pakistani Armys action, its not paki ppl but USA itself. Even now whatever is happening in pakistan USA is watching all this mess with zipped mouth, as USA can't afford to loose a supporting unit against taliban, but all it takes sacrifices of the rights of paki ppl who've been deprived of all the basics rights by Army Generals, over and over again. I'm just 23 years old and I believe its the only time If we as a nation doesn't take some serious steps then we'll never do anything regarding this mess and you can call this a Nation's failure or whatever.but its Now or Never i guess.
I don't get what are you trying prove through this article. Racism exists in every part of world so does in Pakistan, drugs story was true but its not the case anymore, as Americans have occupied Afghanistan and there are many independent reports about Opium free pakistan, even if there is any such thing then i think its better to blame USA rather than blaming Pakistan, and by the way I confess Whatever is going on in here is not right, and we pakistani are all sick of it, but can someone bother to address the root cause of all this mess? reigns of all the politicians{elected by paki people} in pakistan's history were demolished by pakistan's army, and this is the only reason why pakistan has such a bad political history unlike india may be. But Question is "WHO" always supports Pakistani Armys action, its not paki ppl but USA itself. Even now whatever is happening in pakistan USA is watching all this mess with zipped mouth, as USA can't afford to loose a supporting unit against taliban, but all it takes sacrifices of the rights of paki ppl who've been deprived of all the basics rights by Army Generals, over and over again. I'm just 23 years old and I believe its the only time If we as a nation doesn't take some serious steps then we'll never do anything regarding this mess and you can call this a Nation's failure or whatever.but its Now or Never i guess.
Et tu Brutus! Well done Mr. Etibagh What a great way to respond to the feelings of love and warmth people in Pakistan harbour for their brothers in Iran just because they share the same faith.
I guess it is more to do with the Iranian charachter of backstabbing anyone capable of standing up on its feet because the schezophrenic Iranian mind sees any freedom as a threat to its existence.
Anyway thank you for your comment, for I as a muslim cannot wish a brotherly muslim collection of about 70 million people ill.
I guess it is something to do with the basics of our faith- atleast the version practiced on our side of the border.
I totally disagree with Mr. Ali. Who is he to comment on Pakistan. All due respect but with all its flaws Pakistan has survived 60 years when it was claimed that it wont even survive 48 hrs.
There is a joke among intellectuals regarding Pakistan. When a writer comes to Pakistan he says i'll write a book on Pakistan. After staying for 6 months he says I think i'll write an article on Pakistan and after staying for a year he says I better try and understand the dynamics of the country first before doing any writing.
So Mr. Ali, from our very friendly neighbouring country Iran, I should first Thank you for such a thoruogh analysis of my country. But you dont have your facts straight at all. Pakistan has experienced much more development than Iran has in the recent years, its economic development matching that of India and China. And the border you talk about so ravaged by smugglers, is not just Pakistan's fault. People on your side have their share too. There is a deep rooted sectarianism in your country where sunni Muslims suffer the most, living below poverty line in some places.
By the way our nuclear Arsenals aren't under inspection by IAEA but Iran's are. I wonder why?
Every country has their share of problems. Where there are individuals, there is always a difference of opinion and where there is just dictatorship and religious fanaticism, like Iran, individuality fails to rise up to national levels.
Our country can boast of atleast some form of freedom of expression......but can your country do that?
I never thought an 'Idiot' like Ali Ettefagh would be given editorial space on a respected forum like this. Mr Ettefagh should look at his country Iran and It's problems before raising issues in other countries. Theocracies like Iran are the major problem facing the world right now not Pakistan. Mr Ettefagh would laugh at me by saying that he belongs to a country which has one of the oldest civilizations(Persians) in the world but he should recall history how they were formed and how they have survived. Many historians have shown that this civilization was at one time full of barbarians, bastards and prostitutes sent from all over the world. Evidence of that is Mehmood Ahmedinjad.
I never thought an 'Idiot' like Ali Ettefagh would be given editorial space on a respected forum like this. Mr Ettefagh should look at his country Iran and It's problems before raising issues in other countries. Theocracies like Iran are the major problem facing the world right now not Pakistan. Mr Ettefagh would laugh at me by saying that he belongs to a country which has one of the oldest civilizations(Persians) in the world but he should recall history how they were formed and how they have survived. Many historians have shown that this civilization was at one time full of barbarians, bastards and prostitutes sent from all over the world. Evidence of that is Mehmood Ahmedinjad.
I never thought an 'Idiot' like Ali Ettefagh would be given editorial space on a respected forum like this. Mr Ettefagh should look at his country Iran and It's problems before raising issues in other countries. Theocracies like Iran are the major problem facing the world right now not Pakistan. Mr Ettefagh would laugh at me by saying that he belongs to a country which has one of the oldest civilizations(Persians) in the world but he should recall history how they were formed and how they have survived. Many historians have shown that this civilization was at one time full of barbarians, bastards and prostitutes sent from all over the world. Evidence of that is Mehmood Ahmedinjad.
Please give a serious thought to the situation currently existing in the country. Why did it come to this stage?
Whenever things are getting better for Pakistan and whenever it is on the road to achieving greater economic development and progress something happens which not only stops all this but takes the country back many many years. This has happened before and is happening now!
All those people blaming General Musharraf for the prevailing situations have to stop and think why did this happen?
What would have happened if the 11 member Judicial Panel had, let say, given the decision in favour of the President letting the Notification be issued and the President taking the oath as planned. He would have removed his uniform as promised and the elections would have been held in January 2008 as per the schedule already announced. The Country would have had a civilian setup and democracy would have prevailed.
The path of progress and development which was matching China and India would not only have continued but, the way things were going, would have reached the height which other developing countries could only dream of. The number of foreign investors queuing up to enter the Pakistan market would have increased many-a-fold.
In case the Supreme Court had given a decision against General Musharraf becoming a President then what would have happened?
General Musharraf would have left his appointment as President and COAS. The assemblies would have been dissolved between November and December 2007. An interim arrangement would have come up to hold the general elections. The war against terrorism and extremism would have been left directionless as no Army Chief would take the responsibility of being involved in any Military adventure or campaign without the legal coverage of the government. The confidence the foreign and domestic investors and entrepreneurs had in the present arrangements in the country would have been shattered. The Stock Exchange would have collapsed affecting each and every segment of our society. Knowing the ‘love and affection’ our political parties have for each other, they would have gone all-out attacking their opponents and creating a state of anarchy through out the country. As a united front would not have been there, the Talibization Forces would have had an open field to propagate and expand their ‘interpretation’ of Islam, initially to the areas adjoining Tribal Areas and then to other parts of the country. The part of the general public opposing them would have to come out in force, if they wanted to have a winning chance in countering them. Result: Civil War? The enemy of the State would not miss a golden opportunity like this! Number of suicide and terrorist attacks would have increased many-a-fold.
Why did the Judiciary create conditions forcing the government in chair to take such an extreme step of declaring an Emergency? Why did they not let President Musharraf take the country towards elections, the civilian rule and the democracy in its true sense?
Are they working for anti Pakistan forces which want to let down Pakistan but in the garb of providing justice and fair-play? Or do they have a personal vendetta against General Musharraf for which they are willing to put the Country at stake?
Why is Imran Khan, supported by certain other political parties, trying to create anarchy in the Country by forcing the students to leave their studies and to come out on the street? Does he not understand the implications of what he is trying to do? Who is he helping? The people of Pakistan or its enemies? The ‘cover’ he is using for motivating them to agitate is restoration of Constitution! He is also willing to put the integrity of Country at risk to hurt General Musharraf! Should the students play in his hand? Do we want him and his “friends” to create a situation which encourages people to write anti Pakistan articles such as (Cut and paste):
If the Judiciary had not got their personal egos involved and had thought of the welfare and betterment of the country all of this could have been avoided. For the first time the transaction to the civilian government would have taken place peacefully setting a very good precedence for all to follow. This in the long run would have strengthened the political institutions and Judiciary, bringing in stability, unprecedented progress and development to the country ensuring end to any future military take over.
We as good Pakistanis have to answer this question:
“Do we love our country more than we hate our opponent? Or do we hate our opponent more that we love out Country?”
This question means that if we love our country more than we hate our opponent then there would be a cut off point where we stop letting our opponent down because if we don’t, the country would suffer. On the other hand if we hate our opponent more than we love our country then we couldn’t care less what happens to Pakistan as long as we can hurt our opponent.
I sincerely hope all Pakistanis especially our Politicians and Judiciary can understand and answer this question positively proving that their love for the country is greater than any other issue they may have.
Writer is correct that the creation of Pakistan was a huge mistake, though his solution may be equally improbable. Indian leaders (Gandhi/Nehru/Patel) were against a religion based separation, but had to cave in to jinnah/muslim league. Britain stoked the partition demand in the garb of trying to be just to muslims, a united India was not in it's interest. What happened was a blunder where a nation was born just with the idea of muslim fundamentalism. Need one say more.
The world will have to bear the consequence as well as find solutions...
Pakistan's story of independence is full of sad episodes.It wasn't treated fairly, in the first place by the then British Rulers and many muslim majority areas were annexed to India. Then too many problems, like unsufficient funds to run the country, foreign intervention esp. from India which resulted in its further division, Army's role in politics and Western support for dictators, then nuclear race initiated by India, failed foreign policy and blind support for US which gave birth to radical fighters(mujahideen), and now corrupt leaders vs corrupt generals,,,,All these factors all responsible for the prevailing circumstances but one thing is sure that Pakistani People has shown strong stand in all these challenging circumstances and will stay united , no matter how hard are the problems and dissolution ?? ,,, NO QUESTION SIR !
Pakistan is not alone in its historical reason for its establishment. There were simply too many countries formed when the colonial era by western countries started to fade or retreat. The instability and false democracy in Pakistan to a large degree is not the Pakistanis' own doing. There are simply too many external factors, coupled with the blind ambition of the current dictator, who along the way made a mess of the country as we are seeing today. As a person who does not have high remarks on lawyers in our socity in the States, I would like to pay my highest respect to those lawyers in Pakistan now who are taking the lead to defend the country's democracy. Just for that, Pakistan desires to be an independent country because democracy and freedom should be the dream of any humanbeing in this world. We enjoy it in the States. We certainly support the same right for any freedom loving people in any country: in Pakistan, as well as in Iran.
Pakistan ranks as one of the countries with the lowest support for suicide bombings and terrorism, according to the most recent polls. Polling on the basis of Al Qaeda is not enough, since most people distrust the US to the extent that they think AQ is just a scapegoat for US ambitions to conquer the Muslim world. The important questions are about support for killing civilians and violence to achieve ones political goals, and in that Pakistan ranks lower than Iran. Heck a poll in the US showed more Americans willing to nuke Muslim countries (thereby killing millions of innocent civilians)than any Muslims willing to do the same.
The rest of you, including Ettefagh, can continue daydreaming about Pakistan breaking up. Pakistani identity is strong -from Pastun to Sindhi, and we ain't going anywhere, and there is nothing you can do about it other than rant.
The Indians with their silly "Akhand Bharat" ideas can keep day dreaming too.
Mr. Bhutto is now Aung San Suu Kyi in her own country! So, the only differences between Burmah and Pakistan are:
1. Nukes
2. Pakistan is not a NPT signatory....dangerous!
3. The Burmese generals have no claims to democracy or tricks about elections up their sleeve.
4. The Burmese always wear their uniforms and they do not think of themselves as civilians.
5. The burmese religious schools and monks are peaceful and simple people. The Pakistanis preach hate and promote terrorism.
Tahnk you for a good idea.
All posters above that want to divert attention to other countries and get ready to split other countries must first realise that the issue and the problem is Pakistan, not Azerbaijan, Iran, Kurds, etc. Why, you ask?
Iran, Kurds, Azerbaijan, Europe, etc. do not approve of hate-teaching and madrassas on their soil to "educate" or develop terrorists and then send them to New York to hijack planes and slam them into buildings and kill people at random, or blow up the underground in London. None of these countries have a 505% approval rating of Al Qaeda!
Dear Ali Ettefagh,
PAKISTAN was initially the brainchild of CHOUDHARY REHMAT ALI OF Punjab(undivided) who lived in London in 1920s. Jinnah was not in its favour, initially. REHMAT ALI is supposed to have done at the behest of some of his mischjevious BRITISH FRIENDS who wanted to scuttle the CONGRESS LED freedom movement in India. Rehmat Ali had coined this term with three MUSLIM DOMINATED states of pre-indepemdence i.e Punjab, Assam(not Afghania) and Kashmir. Jinnah had remarked," A drunkards's silly day-dreaming". It was inner politics of GANDHI's CONGRESS that pushed JINNAH into it and religion-based UP elections in 1937 converted him fully. It was the BRITISH idea of reserving constituencies for the MUSLIMS and the RIFT started--which consumed great NATIONALISTS like JINNAH and Dr sir IQBAL MOHAMMED--who was a famous URDU POET. HINDU-MUSLIM divide by BRITAIN was deliberate to ensure its HOLD over JEWEL IN THE CROWN.
If history is any evidence then BRITAIN of 1947 and its leaders of the times stand accused for creating the KASHMIR problem. One should know that the biggest LOSER of SECOND WORLD WAR was not GERMANY or JAPAN or even ITALY but BRITAIIN--which lost its empire as an aftermath of it. When HISTORY of AFRO-ASIAN Nations is rewritten, HITLER will emerge as their greatest BENEFACTOR for initiating the collapse of GREAT BRITISH EMPIRE --Where supposedly SUN NEVER SET prior to the WAR.
Pakistan is the HISTORICAL NECESSITY of TORRID TIMES of 1947. Let us not assume otherwise. By 1947, SOCIAL divide had been complete and BRITAIN had suceeded by religion- based elections to tear away the INDIAN society. But BRITAIN was looking for herself a future role in the sub continent by creating KASHMIR PROBLEM.this would have given him some say in the POST WAR WORLD. Mountbatten and BRITISH ARMY OFFICERS on both sides of INDO-PAK borders had played a key role in this. Mountbatten played up NEHRU, JINNAH and MAHARAJA HARISINGH--advising all three ---three different things to create a stalemate. And stalemate it remains even after 60 years.
Pakistan has been unfortunate since its inception because of self-motivated ambitions of their leaders of post Jinnah and Liaqat--who had banished in the early period when PAKISTAN was still in its cradle. Scheming BUREAUCRATS and MILITARY Generals collaborated to create a role for themselves. And they have consolidated their positions over the 60 years.
If you have to dissolve and dismantle anything in PAKISTAN then train your guns and thoughts on its military and its brain child ISI--who operates AL Queda and its TERROR MACHINE. PAK MILITARY IS THE MOTHER OF GLOBAL TERRORISM. Pakistan in itself is a nation of god fearing emotional people--who have been exploited by scheming GENERALS. I SUPPOSE THE SURVIVABILITY OF PAKISTAN IS A MUST FOR THE EXISTENCE OF INDIA. It is ironical but true that against the 'HATE INDIA PHILOSOPHY' OF PAKISTAN's ADMINISTRATION and MILITARY since its inception---India ought to now adopt 'LOVE PAKISTAN' TO ENSURE ITS OWN SECURITY AND SAFETY. Rajee Kushwaha
It is beyond doubt that US administration has supported Pakistan in every manner possible. US needed, and still needs, such a government in Islamabad that can counter the threats from the terrorist network in the country. US wants a man in seat in Pakistan who can act even going against the will of the locals. General Musharraf fits in the role.
this is all anti islamic propoganda n all nonsence.bloody christians are after muslims n how come the Pope is silent.look your own affairs and for GOD sake don,t interfere in others religion or u the christians will vanish from this world.all the humanity r against the bloody chirstians.
Ali E. lives in a provincial world. Pakistan has not been allowed to build its nation but everything-almost the pseudo-expert Ali has said applies to Iraq, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Israel,India, Scotland etc. As a matter of fact to reach his ideal borders we must immediately take Kurd territories from Iran, syria, Iraq and Turkey to create a logical nation. Has Mr. Ali the guts to apply his principles to Israel? Present human experience could reach the maturity that once existed in the recent US itself where people of diverse background could live without the petty divisions of humanity- to some extent we still live in the US under that doctrine. Others can learn. Borders should not be important for coexistence. Recent integration of Europe is a good improvement unlike Ali doctrine.As Qur'an said God created different nations so they can compete (sabaqat) with each other in doing good for all humanity. Nobel Prizes emphasize the principle. Mr. Ali needs to reach out to ultimate civility than to divide people and reorganize earth.(Dr. Zubairi)
Have Gun, Will Rule
Musharraf is bent upon ruling Pakistan because he has a gun in his hand and Bush & Chenye are backing him. The people of Pakistan be damned.
One the one hand US Administration tries to justify Iraqi occupation by saying it is bringing democracy to Iraq and on the other, it supports a military dictator who decimates democratic institutions, independent judiciary and rule of law.
The Pakistan Supreme Court was about to rule whether Musharraf could be a candidate for President for another term. According to the constitution Government employees are not allowed to contest elections within two years of retiring and Musharraf has not even retired yet. It was a forgone conclusion that Supreme Court will find Musharraf ineligible. Instead of stepping down quietly and handing over power to Senate Chairman, Musharraf has resorted to extreme and ultra constitutional steps.
How many people in the U.S. would stand for it if George Bush did this to the U.S. Supreme Court and its judges? No civilised society should stand for subversion of the highest courts, shredding of constitution and detention of judges, lawyers and politicians.
People of Pakistan have always complained that various U.S. Administrations develop friendships with their rulers & dictators and not with people of Pakistan. This has led to resentment and strong anti-American sentiment in the country. It is time that the ordinary citizens of United States impress upon their Administration to stand up against the rule of gun and express solidarity with people of Pakistan as they need and support to defeat a dictator.
Musharraf is not the only person in Pakistan who can help fight terror. The people of Pakistan are fed up with extremists and want to ensure that terrorism is brought to an end. This is better achieved through democratically elected leaders rather than through a military dictator.
The only way Musharraf will listen is if US Administartion insists that he immediately restore constitution, allow the Supreme Court to function with all its judges as before, withdraw emergency rule and release all lawyers, judges, politicians and other citizens.
Taking your anti-sunni frustrations out on Pakistan Mr. Ettefagh?
lets not forget that there was no one country in existence before the British colonized South Asia and created a colony called British India. What existed before then were sometimes great empires and civilizations, never over the entire region, and several princely states and kingdoms. If we accept your argument, then India should be split into hundreds of independent nations as well, since it too is comprised of states with different cultures, languages, religion and even races.
And what about the Kurds and Baluch in Iran? I take it that under your plan Iran would be divided up to give the Kurds their autonomous state and the Baluch merged with their brethren in Pakistan? And can we start dividing the Hispanic majority areas in the US into independent states after a few years too?
You have no idea of the ground realities in Pakistan. Pakistan is as much a nation as is India, since neither existed before 1947, and are both comprised of different ethnicities.
Mr. Ettefagh has done a knee-jerk and a hasty analysis, not supported by any historic fact or content. US, although a country of great hard working people also consists of 52 states. Try comparing North with the South and East with the West Coast of US and you will get an answer.
True that Pakistan consists of diverse cultures, but nearly all the people with little education can speak and communicate in Urdu. So the binding force is not only and only religion, but similarity of cultural origins. Same is true about India. In India, there is only one language that effectively binds 100 different kinds of people and that is English. If you talk to a Malayalam or a Tamil speaking Southern Indian person in Hindi, you will invariably get an answer in English. Look at Uttarakhand and the mountaneous regions of India and compare them with Bombay or New Delhi, they are all poles apart. The areas bordering China are similar to Chinese and do not talk or lead their lives like average North Indian people.
Having said all that, there is only one aspect that binds people together and that is good governance, justice and equality, something that Pakistan could never get, but the reasons as given by Mr. Ettefagh are totally untrue. Actually, the reasons have not much to do with religion, but have a lot to do with Feudal system and its total control of governance. Religion has just recently started to play a role in national politics of Pakistan and that too after Pakistan fought a US proxy war against Soviet Union in Afghanistan.
I would advise Mr. Ettefagh to read and understand the political dynamics of the region, before attempting to embark upon the adventure of churning out worthless articles like this one. I can understand the typical Iranian jealousy of the military might of Pakistan, in terms of nuclear technology and the backwardness of the Iranian technology and the political leadership but fail to understand how a news medium of prestige like Washington Post, publish articles based upon personal hatred, that have unsubstantiated and totally wrong assertions.
A country based on a flawed premise cannot survive. Hindus and Muslims of the subcontinent were not two nations. Consider that there are more Muslims in India than in Pakistan today. The reason why India survives (it is also an artificial construct) is because it is secular. On the other hand had India been a Hindu nation - it would be in the same state as Pakistan is today.
Ridiculous article indeed.On same principle, almost all countries in the world should be divided into smaller groups starting with Iran where presians form only 50 percent of the total population.Try to be more realistic in your thoughts Mr, Ettefagh.
Buggs Bunny @November 7, 2007 8:18 AM: "Americans do not blow up bombs when a rival politician and they do not deport politicians from their own country, no matter the politics and differences between them. And Americans do not suspend the constitution or make a deal with Taliban. There is a slight difference between USA and Pak."
You are right. But, unlike Pakistan, we invade countries for no reason and cause hundreds of thousands of deaths. We also feel free and unrestricted to poke our noses into other countries' affairs, and then we run like heck when all hell breaks loose. That is what makes us particularly dangerous.
Buggs Bunny! Perhaps you forgot about the assassination of past U.S. presidents. Violence has always been part of U.S. history. However, events need to be put in their context.
Americans do not blow up bombs when a rival politician and they do not deport politicians from their own country, no matter the politics and differences between them.
And Americans do not suspend the constitution or make a deal with Taliban. There is a slight difference between USA and Pak.
How nice, we have some of the same crowd that brought the Iraq War now calling for its disolution. Now we have a new call for the breakup of Pakistan. On the logic expressed in this essay, one could have also argued that the United States was an artificial construction made up of two peoples in 1860. What the writer does not deal with, nor Senator Biden in his quixotic call for Iraq to be divided, is the minor detail- the majority in both countries might actually be proud of their country and rather than seeing it divided wish to see it emerge even more united and stronger. It is the political terms of unification and goverance that are at issue- not whether they should remain united.
It is hard, if not impossible, to deny that Pakistan is a failed state. Failed states are always dangerous. Time to go back to the drawing board. Pakistan is not like China, India, Russia, Persia or Egypt that are ancient settlements and civilisations and the blind "nationalism" of Pakistanis above seems to be short-sighted.
Those that are attacking the writer and his country should also take note that the Iranian National Youth football (soccer) team defeated Pakistan yesterday in Tehran....14 to zip!
Deconstruction makes its entrance in geopolitics. If generalized around the world, it will be a big program for the United Nations. Starting in Europe, I suppose?
Very interesting article. Yes Pakistan is a failed state because It is an artificial state created by England as a parting kick to India. but the solution is not breaking Pakistan into small tribal states. A reunited Indian subcontinent where all the different entities are respected and given full democratic rights is the solution. If the present multi ethnic and multi religious India can survive successfully the united states of India will also survive and prosper
Very interesting article. Yes Pakistan is a failed state because It is an artificial state created by England as a parting kick to India. but the solution is not breaking Pakistan into small tribal states. A reunited Indian subcontinent where all the different entities are respected and given full democratic rights is the solution. If the present multi ethnic and multi religious India can survive successfully the united states of India will also survive and prosper
Aamir Ali - There is no change in tune. Things are not as simplistic as you suggest. "Let the Indian army leave and Kashmiris will tear out the Indian flag", you stated simplistically. I might suggest that let the Indian army leave and the let the Pakthuns invade Kashmir again. I am sure Kashmiri women cannot wait. It has been 60 years and Pakthun men are salivating already. Only, my analysis is based on reality!
You are changing your tune now, earlier you were blaming everything in Kashmir on "Islamofascism" now you admit Kashmiris also support Pakistan alongwith Independence.
What else are you willing to admit? Wont be a stretch to also admit how many thousands of Kashmiris have been killed by the Indian Army.
Aamir Ali - you presume too much. I know families in Kashmir that are torn between Pakistan, India and independence. I am talking where one spouse prefers India and another Pakistan.
Abbas from Peshawar - How come the first thing that is pointed out to a Muhajir is either the color of skin or how sub-muslim they are? Why do you think there is a guy in London controlling Muhajirs in Karachi.
The Indian Army has been in Kashmir, with strong presence since 1947. Today there are 500,000 Indian troops in Occupied Kashmir, who have been killing Kashmiris for last 60 years. They are the only reason the Indian flag flies in Kashmir.
Withdraw the Indian Army from Kashmir and you will see how quickly the Kashmiris tear down the Indian flag.
And talk nonsense about "terrorism". The biggest killer in Kashmir is the Indian Army.
Did you know Musharraf is a Muhajir and that the political party that controls Karachi and lower Sindh is also a Muhajir party? Sounds like Muhajirs are doing fine in Pakistan.
You didnt know anything about Muhajir's just like you didnt know anything about the Kashmiris.
To the Afghan posters on this page: You Afghans willingly took money and guns from foreigners and destroyed your own country. Accept it.
Thousands of Kashmiris were killed by the Indian Army in the 1980's, why do you think the insurgency started in 1989 ?? Kashmiris hate India and wish to be rid of it.
5454:
Pakistani life is more valuable that your garbage opinion.
Abed - Muhajir - just see how you are being treated in Pakistan. You would have been slightly better off in India with its huge Hindu population. Just see that 10 people, all Hindus, jailed for the Gujrat riots. Any Muslims ever jailed for picking on minorities in your chosen land? No wonder it is self destructing!
There was a Persian civilization creating culture, engineering and military innovation, recognizing the rights of all humans and respect for religions, when the British lands were nothing more than barbaric inhabited lands, only to be tamed much later by the Romans.
Britian didn't create Persia. They did however play a significant role in diminishing it. Whereas Britian and the French created what today is the middle east and other asian countries.
To Abed, you say that Iran is also a "British carve out"?
What have you been smoking?
Once again to you, M. Saeed Chaudhary, and others who talk about the kurds and Baluchis in Iran and those provinces being carved out, I ask that you read your history.
In the middle east, the only 2 countries to have, for the most part, territorial integrity and continuous cultural and geographic presence over the last 2,500 years are Egypt and Persia.
To say something so idiotic as what M. Saeed Chaudhary says "Kurdistan was never a part of Iran" just really stinks up this joint.
Lets debate, but lets not be stupid either. The Kurds are of the same race as the persians, which is why Saddam slaughtered them the way he did. They are non-arabs. Based on your logic, Persians can lay historical claim to most of middle east, including pakistan and central asia. But obviously this argument wouldn't make much sense to reasonable people. At various times and after various declines of empires, Persia was in fact carved out and left to what it is now, basically its core. Similar to the Ottoman empire being scaled down to what is now modern turkey.
Mr. Ettefagh: Iran (apparently your home country) and Iraq are pretty much British carve outs as well. Let's just extend your hypothetical then. We'd certainly be free from asking Shia and Sunni to live together.
Pakistan's Muhajirs I would probably disagree with your characterization of their country as a "relic set up as a counterweight to India". They would probably mention that it was a shelter from Hindu discrimination against Indian Muslims.
Mr Ettefagh,
You seem to be a spokesman of Pakistan's rival country, India which never accepted Pakistan as an independent country and has always been attempting to dismember it. You also may be eyeing the province of Baluchistan which is close and has some similarities to Iran. Your argument that it was formed from four different provinces and thus should be dismembered is also quite flimsy as several countries in the world have quite dissimilar ethnic components in their formations. It were the people of those eprovinces who voted to be a part of the new country, called Pakistan. Moreover, Iran itself consists of differing ethnic groups. Does that mean it should also be dismembered into those ethnic groups just for that reason? Besides, Pakistan is a country that has not gobbled up any other country or region. Whereas Iran has done so during recent past. Kurdistan was never a part of Iran. Why shouldn't it give it up to the Kurds to form their own country? I would like to go on and on, but I would only say that let people decide where and how they want to live and not wizards like Ali whose ulterior motives will only exacerbate problems than solve them.
That's right. Blame the British for everything! *yawn*
As anyone with any knowledge of history is well aware, the fault was Jinnah's. Before Partition Nehru offered him the leadership of the undivided subcontinent. He refused, and the rest is history, the horrors of Partition in 1947, and the continued misery and hardship of millions of people.
I remember the "good life" in Kashmir before Muslim militants turned this multicultural community into a misery, either killing or scaring away the Buddhists and Hindus whose ancestors had long been part of its fabric. Remember that a millenium ago Kashmir was indeed a paradise, with great Buddhist teachers who attracted followers from far away. What have Muslim fanatics done? Destroyed Bamiyan, occupied the sacred land of Swat where the great teacher Padmasamhava was born, and swept away the tolerant way of life that these peoples had enjoyed for so long.
Kashmir? It's worth recalling its history. When Ghulab Singh and his brothers joined Kashmir with Jammu and Ladakh in the middle of the nineteenth century, life became better for the average Kashmiri. Don't believe me? Read Moorcroft's account of the time he spent in the Vale of Kashmir in the 1820s, while it was still under the thumb of the Sikhs based in Lahore. He saw Sikh soldiers supervising the rice harvesting, taking away nine-tenths of the grain and leaving only one-tenth for the villagers! And even this was an improvement over their previous overlords, the Pathan, whose favourite sport was to tie two Kashmiris together, throw them into Dal Lake, and watch them drown! The Pathan called the Kashmiris "Zul parast" ("lovers of slavery")! Under Ghulab Singh and his successors, Kashmir was, from the 1850s on, a good place to live for the average citizen.
I'm tired of Ali Ettefagh's ignorant formulaic diatribe. This sort of thing gets old really quickly. He may be clever at making money, but that, it seems, is the extent of his talents!
Zahid Raja, go get a life. Kashmiris were doing fine till the Islamofacists brought terrorism to the valley. You should have checked it out in 1984. It was serene and beautiful. And, then came the Islamofacists/terrorists from across the border!
All of you putting down the author of this brilliant article, stop shooting the messenger. Pakistan is on its way to self descruction, ready to implode or explode or whatever. Pakistan's founder's grandson lives and thrives in India. That should tell you something about the stink in Pakistan.
I think Mr.Ettefagh has a luxury to write whatever he wishes,however, it is very much apparent from his writting that he does't know much about Pakistan.His prejudice about Pakistan is very much evident from his comments regarding Pakistan's position on kashmir.I like to tell Mr. Ettefagh that the Kashmiris who are living under repression know a lot about opression than Mr. Ettefagh.I regret very much that such a reputable paper allows such a rubish to be printed from a hate monger.
Extremism in Afghanistan and Pakistan is the direct result of cold war as well as desire by the west to control the middle east oil which is likely to continue to haunt us. The U.S. and its western allies are not innocent in what is going on in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Unfortunately most Pakistani commentators on this forum have verbally attacked the author and the publisher (Dr. Ettefagh and Washingtonpost&Newsweek). The attackers are educated Pakistanis with Ph.Ds from Islamabad Universities, also known as Jihad Universities.
I wonder what is the difference between general Busharaf and the Pakistani crowd here?
Neither of them like freedom of speech and want the people to shut up and publish what the Pakis like.
This is a good way to share clear thoughts and I congratulate the writer on being bold enough to share his thoughts.
Although the article is written before the recent coup, it has predicted the nature of the Pakistani sham. Musharraf is not convincing enough and his recent speech after the coup that he is doing it for Pakistan shows the stranded state of mind in that country. He rounded up diplomats that he is doing this for Pakistan but said very little about how he will handle terrorists. Pakistan has arrested human rights activists, judges and lawyers that want rule of law, instead of rounding up terrorists, smugglers and shady operators. By itself, it is a telling story!
Mr. Ettefagh:
I know we all have freedom of speech, no matter how irresponsible. By the same token we torrelate all sorts of not so intelligent views. I did not realize Washington Post will give space to your views. This brings down the calibre of the Newspaper.
It is like going to a movie house and shouting "Fire". The person has a right to free speech but how irresponsible is that.
hi,
yes there are few facts in that article if not all. But havin said this, i think there is nother side of it aswell...i mean what diffrent in 2007 is that people have sort of consensus that , we as a nation need democracy, so that we have defeat the threats Pakistan have.
i think first time in history agenda is Pakistan for those who are fighting the army rule, the extremism. people here are not politically organize, they dont learn to participate in it. so its hard to fight, but as i said first time , there is a sense which need few years to deliver great results...just wait for few years....we are normal people and normal nation, yes not as mature, not as organize, not as united, but like any other nation, we have potential , infact more then few other nations,,,so bee careful, we will dissolve or emerge as great nation in few years time...before 2015.
Pull the plug on Pakistan, disarm it and make it subject heavy sanctions like Iraq and Saddam. Every thing must be shutdown: financial channels, flights, shipping and certainly an ams embargo.
Powerful logic that is not going to happen.The British division of former colonies seems to be the basis of many of the problems in todays society.Lest we forget it was the British who drew the lines for the middle east.Unfortunately power likes to accumulate not divide.So alas a wonderfully logical column but in the real world to no avail.
I think Pakistan is a Bastard Nation born out of lust of Jinnah. There is no third party intervention required to dissolve this unholy mess, Pakis will do themselves with their inner contradictions and external heat because of their love for Bin Laden and Taliban.
Pakistan is a saza to the world(Yeh to phirron ke garror ke saza hai).
now here is a fascinating theory? somehow out of the colonial shipwreck of britains failed expansionist ventures, we are supposed to create light brigade type charge into pakistan to remake central asia to the detriment of balance and peace, and to the bi-polaristic visions of iran and india. quite a concept, but who is to lead the charge?
WHAT ETTEFAG HAS WRITTEN IS NOT SCHOLARSHIP. THIS IS JUST WITCHCRAFT, PURE AND SIMPLE.I AM WONDERING HOW ONE ANSWERS WITCHCRAFT.
LISTEN MR.ETTEFAG PAKISTAN IS NOT SOME CONCOCTED REALITY THAT SICK MINDS LIKE YOU CAN WISH AWAY.WE CREATED PAKISTAN BECAUSE WE WANTED TO LIVE BY OUR OWN RULES.
I was shocked to see the biased,derogatotry comments of Dr.Ali about Pakistan in your newspaper.It is very surprising and shocking for me and every Pakistani that one of the leading newspaper of the world has published such criminal,very biased,derogatory and discriminatory comments about a sovereign state.
These comments are prejudice and show the hidden agenda and enemosity of dr Ali towards our motherland.Pakistani nation is giving alot of sacrifices since Afghan war.We have suffered alot since that war.Klashinkov and heroin are the gifts of that war.After 9/11 once again we are the frontline ally of the war aginst terrorism.Our armed forces and civilians have given and giving very great sacrifice.The sacrifices of our armed forces and civilians are much more than the combined losses and sacrifices of allied nations.
Dr.Ali is leaving in paradise of fools when he says that we are not one nation.No doubt we have different tribes but we are one nation.He has misperception about our oneness and unity.Who is he who decide the fate of our motherland.
We believe in Non violence but its not our weakness but strength.
We believe that non violence brings Peace and Love whereas violence brings hatred and destruction to the world.
Through this letter i request the leaders of USA,UK,France,China,Germany,Russian,European Union to please immediately convene an Imternational Peace conference. Bt war no force can eliminate the growing violence and hatred.
Its my firm belief that non-violence is the key which give guarantee for Peace and Love.Let us join hands to defeat violence and hatred with non-violence,peace and Love and make the world peaceful and beautiful place.
Media is one of the most effective tool in promoting Peace and Love.
Zubair Aslam Marwat
Ph.D Scholar Muhammad Ali Jinnah University, Islamabd,Pakistan
Email; peace.lover1@yahoo.com
One thing that is so common, and it is on full display here as well from the Pakistani and in general other muslims around the world is that they immediately want to shoot the messenger when they don't like the message.
In this particular case, Mr. Ettefagh wrote an opinion for an organization that he is a panelist on. This opinion was surely intended to be provocative and thought provoking, not just focussing on Pakistan, but for that matter all of Middle East (less Iran and Egypt).
Yet what you have here is ill-wishes and prayers, insults and perhaps a few subtle threats as well. You have insults hurled at his country of birth, when perhaps many of his countrymen do not share his viewpoints.
The funniest of all is that these insults and ill-wishes and prayers are preceded by "enshallah" or god-willing. I guess these people see themselves as devout muslims and very holy. They invoke god at every turn and pray to him to harm other human beings. Perhaps that is why the world views muslims as less than civilized and very radical.
My guess is that this behavior, in particular in Pakistan and Arab states are symptoms of insecurity and a sense of inferiority. One looks to India and feels small and the other looks to the rich history and culture of the persians and feels insignificant without their western puppetmasters.
Dr. Ali Ettefagh's Why Not Dissolve Pakistan, Too?
It is an interesting insight into the making of the country Pakistan. During the 50th Anniversary of the 'Independence Day' I remember Nawaz Sharif going round Jinnah's Mausoleum. Pity there was not a single other freedom fighter Pakistan could even remember let alone celebrate. Independence from whom? It is a misnomer. They could celebrate 14th August as an 'extortion day' certainly not as an Independence Day. When East Pakistan was dismembered there was agony for the shame of the Pakistani soldiers surrendering en masse but never felt about losing the Bangladeshis as such. I found the same shocking treatment when Nawaz Shariff was deported from his own country. None felt bad about it. But one thing I am positive about Pakistanis - No, they would not allow others to dissolve their country they would do it themseleves!
The author's post is less about dissolving Pakistan or redrawing the boundaries as everyone knows that it is neither possible nor desirable. It is designed to draw attention to the fact that Pakistan is in chaos and has been in chaos since it came into existence in 1947. The democratic impulses have not taken roots. The leadership of the country is game of musical chair to see which corrupt leaders would take the seat. There have been a series of coups. There does not seem to be anything that unifies the country. It has becoming a breeding ground for extremism. I would like to see people who care about Pakistan to confront this state of affairs.
So you are saying that the three wise men were from Kashmir? You really need to do some reading.
I'm not sure if the whole story or the three wise men is true or not, but the experts are pretty much in agreement that they were probably persian Magi of zoroasterian faith.
But lets take your word. The guy who says the events proved correctly that India was not a place for Muslims. This in a country that still has over 150M Muslims?
Also this from a guy whose name here implies a direct descent from the prophet Mohammad? Tell me, do you put Syed as your first name because you and your family claim descendency from the muslim prophet?
Also, believe it or not, Pakistan is not all Muslim. It does have a small minority of other faiths, which accordingly puts it neck-and-neck with India for the second and third largest muslim populous country.
To CHRIS THOMAS, really I'm not that "young" or "inexperienced". I would say quite the opposite.
Why I call you and your kind "idiots" is because of statements such as the last sentence in your last post: "May God and Allah bless the Pakistani people in this time of uncertainity."
Again, Idiots like you don't understand that God and Allah are one an the same. Allah, Khoda, Yahweh, Gott, Dieu, and God are all the same in different languages. They all refer to the God of Abraham.
Pakistan must be immediately taken under full and complete control of UNSC and full set of sanctions must be set up against it and be forced to join NPT and disarm from its nukes.
This article is brightly thought and clear written. Thank you Dr. Ettefagh
Sir
With all due respect to you it is not for a foreigner to decide wether we ought to dissolve or not, it is for the 160 million proud Pakistanis to decide their fate. Your comments will bring alot of hurt to a generation which vividly remembers the blood, toil and tears that went into its creation. No one can take our freedom from us and neither our NUKES!! You talk about deportation of Nawaz Sharif, I think your memory has failed to serve you in what happened to Shah Reza Pehalvi Last Ruler of Iran(and a citizen like Nawaz Sharif) and his family, last I remember they were not to be seen munching on Chelo Kebabs in Iran atleast.You owe an apology to each and every Pakistani for posting such an article. One last thing PAKISTAN ZINDABAD......as every Pakistani knows the meaning of this I think we are here to stay!!!!!!I think with looming attacks on I RAN I suggest U RAN!!!!
Sir
With all due respect to you it is not for a foreigner to decide wether we ought to dissolve or not, it is for the 160 million proud Pakistanis to decide their fate. Your comments will bring alot of hurt to a generation which vividly remembers the blood, toil and tears that went into its creation. No one can take our freedom from us and neither our NUKES!! You talk about deportation of Nawaz Sharif, I think your memory has failed to serve you in what happened to Shah Reza Pehalvi Last Ruler of Iran(and a citizen like Nawaz Sharif) and his family, last I remember they were not to be seen munching on Chelo Kebabs in Iran atleast.You owe an apology to each and every Pakistani for posting such an article. One last thing PAKISTAN ZINDABAD......as every Pakistani knows the meaning of this I think we are here to stay!!!!!!I think with looming attacks on I RAN I suggest U RAN!!!!
several of us have been advocating this perspective for some time. pakistan should cease to exist. it's actually a dead nation, whose corpse is kept alive by the yanks, in bizarre imitation of Lenin's corpse being kept embalmed in Moscow.
Pakistan is now a real challenge for UN and the world.
The so-called West is completely unprepared. It is time to get the UN in high gear, set up a plan of sanctions on Pakistan, disarm it, and set up an orderly system of breaking up the country in two or three sensible pieces. This will isolate the terrorists and terror friendly minds and will also isolate the problem to a smaller region.
It is also beneficial for Russia and China to help along to stop terrorism as neither want this wild fire of terror expand into Central Asia.
Robert Fox explains why the risk of civil war in Pakistan threatens worldwide repercussions:
In his broadcast announcing Pakistan's emergency, Pervez Musharraf quoted Abraham Lincoln's famous letter of March 1864 about the need to preserve nation and government before the constitution. "Was it possible to lose the Nation and yet preserve the Constitution?" Lincoln wrote.
Musharraf, and many other Pakistanis beside, now believe his country is on the cusp of civil war.
This is the terrible point that the messages of mild condemnation from the likes of Condoleezza Rice and David Miliband have failed to convey. The prospects for the 175m Pakistanis are dreadful. And there is a deadly message too for closely associated communities and nations like Britain.
For Musharraf it is a last desperate throw. Now he has to rely on the army, which is badly split between reformers, Islamists and active supporters of the Taliban.
With pro-Taliban and pro-al-Qaeda organisations now mushrooming in the frontier provinces of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, the troubles in Pakistan will help the Taliban now fighting the British and their Nato allies across southern Afghanistan. The Taliban are making huge gains outside the traditional Pashtun areas, and deep into Punjab. Furthermore Pakistan and Iran both face a major insurrection in Baluchistan.
For Britain, the fanning of violence and tension in Pakistan is sure to have an effect among extreme Islamist sympathisers in the UK itself - the leaders of both the July 7 and 21 London bomb plots appear to have received support and training from Pakistan.
Finally, the potential implosion of Pakistan throws into strange light the obsession of Dick Cheney and supporters like Elliott Cohen for bombing Iran. Iran may get a nuclear device inside ten years - possibly. Implosion in Pakistan could lead to a Taliban regime with a nuclear arsenal up and running now. For this Bush, Brown and Sarkozy seem totally unprepared.
when was review of national structures and redrawing of borders option available. OR is this a nightmare vision of the future?
Pakistan may have been fabricated on a map by the british, but it certainly is a nation today and not an assembly of waring tribes. In 2007 most of these tribes have evolved into complex communities trying to live lives as others do on the planet. Unlike the author claims there is a well known and documented common language in the country called "Urdu". Linguistically its on far more common grounds then say multilingual and bilingual countries like Belgium and Morocco. Also I believe Irans border with Iraq must have been far more troubling than that with Pakistan.
The problem with Pakistan is not about tribes being strange bedfellows, it is persistent military intervention ever since its existence.
The silver bullet that the author is offering fails to take into account the fact that people from the north west frontier province do not want to be part of afghanistan anymore as that country has been gutted out of its soul through the years through foreign intervention.
what exactly will happen to the nuclear program after the suggested disolution is also worth pondering! will it be a quick operation like Iraq? or Afhghanistan?
I think portraying Pakistan as a bunch of waring tribes (speaking english) and sitting on nuclear bombs is way off the reality and complexties of the country.
Good and clear article. Now is the time. Start with sanctions and disarm Pakistan from its nukes.
It worked with Saddam and he in fact gave up his nukes.
to EJAZ ASI
We re now in the 21st Century, not the Dark Ages. It appears that Pakistan IS STILL in the Dark Ages, given than 50% of its population think bin Laden & Co. did a good!!! thing on 9-11.
You decide whether this kind of people, 80+ million have a place in a modern world.
We agree fully with what Ali Ettefagh has written in the columns of your esteemed paper..The provinces forming part of Pakistan have ethenically nothing in common except religion which Pakistan has been using skilfully in teaching and promoting terrorism and fundamentalism. Because of these policies hundreds of innocent lives have been lost and people stand immensely perturbed. Around two lac Kashmiri Pandits have had to leave their ancestral homes and live as paupers in distant parts of India. Armed hordes are moving around in N.W.F. province and it now seems difficult to control them. It is indeed high time to think of suggestions made by Dr. Ali and to act thereon
I think a lot of Pakistanis are just being nationalistic and not confronting the problems in their own countries. Gen. Musharraf came to power in 1999 by overthrowing the government in a military coup. Just he was supposed to step down, he has declared a state of emergency, suspending judiciary, arresting hundreds of people and literally placing the country under a police state. I am surprised that not only there is no condemnation of this from the Pakistani people here but they are actually defending this state of affairs. Pakistan has a lot of serious problems and they need to be addressed before its too late. What I see here is simply a lot of jingoistic talk and utter reluctance to face up to the facts.
Sorry for pointing this minor error by one of the commenters:
Wrong: "India has 14 major languages ..."
Correct:
India has 22+-2 Major languages (recognized by govt), 415/425 living languages are listed in Ethanologue for India. And each of them consists of many dialects.
Sorry for pointing this minor error by one of the commenters:
Wrong: "India has 14 major languages ..."
Correct:
India has 21 Major languages (recognized by govt), 425 living languages are listed in Ethanologue for India. And each of them consists of many dialects.
I believe India should capitalize on the weakened Pakistan situation and break it up. We can witness another Bangladesh kind of situation here. I believe broken up Pakistan is good for India as the individual provinces will not be anti-India. I believe Pakistan and India can never have peace. Hence it is better to break up Pakistan.
I believe if you have smaller states then the radical Islamic idealogy will not propagate. The local cultures of the people will create more stable states rather than integrating them through Islam.
There is one more important issue about Pakistan totally missed in the article. When Pakistan was created some Indian Muslims from the state of Uttar Pradesh (UP) migrated to Pakistan. These people are called Mujahirs in Pakistan and they only speak Urdu language. They actually don't belong to the any of the provinces of Pakistan but these people control Pakistan today. They constitute 8% of Pakistani population. Even the idea of independence for Indian Muslims came from UP Muslims not from the five provinces of present day Pakistan.
Today Pakistan's national language is Urdu (spoken by 6% to 8% of the population at the time of independence) and these Mujahirs propagate Islamic nation agenda as it provides them control over the tribal provinces. Even Musharaff is a Mujahir he was born in UP, India. Adding to this Pakistan's main commercial capital Karachi is completely controlled by Muhajirs. This minority population from India are effectively controlling Pakistan today.
Indian state of UP has a tendency to produce both good and bad leaders. Most of the India's prime ministers are from UP. An example of a bad leader is Iran's Khomeni was also born in UP.
The Big Powers formed and dismembered nations. Of course, they were immune from this barbarism. How would the USA or the UK like it if the Congo decided that it should cut the USA into smaller segments with each one being a state. Europe and Africa consist of smaller nations so why isn't that OK for the USA?
The USA was the force that gave rise to ISrael. The Jews came from Europe, where they had lived for centuries, to claim their right to the Holy Land. This meant that the Arabs and Palestinians were dispossessed. IN other words, the West felt entitled to create Israel at the expense of others whose wishes were ignored. That was cruel.
Wherever and whenever new nations have been formed, Africa, South and Central America, Asia, Europe etc it was done in rooms in Paris. The West carved up the world. The selfish consequence has been festering turmoil.
The Big Powers formed and dismembered nations. Of course, they were immune from this barbarism. How would the USA or the UK like it if the Congo decided that it should cut the USA into smaller segments with each one being a state. Europe and Africa consist of smaller nations so why isn't that OK for the USA?
The USA was the force that gave rise to ISrael. The Jews came from Europe, where they had lived for centuries, to claim their right to the Holy Land. This meant that the Arabs and Palestinians were dispossessed. IN other words, the West felt entitled to create Israel at the expense of others whose wishes were ignored. That was cruel.
Wherever and whenever new nations have been formed, Africa, South and Central America, Asia, Europe etc it was done in rooms in Paris. The West carved up the world. The selfish consequence has been festering turmoil.
Pakistan is a failed state - no doubt about that. It has become the center of international jihadi terror network and Al-Qaeda has finally found a safe-haven in Pakistan. The only way to counter al-qaeda, taleban and other jihadi networks is to dissolve pakistan. With that the Pakistan army will dissolve and so will the international islamic terror networks.
The proclamation of Emergency (under Article 232) has not been issued by the President but by the COAS Mr.Musharraf this very act tantamounts to treason under Articel 6 of the Constitution . This is Sixth martial law since independence of Pakistan , a state under virtual hostage of Millitary , attained a uniqye reputation for criminal Millitary - Mullah nexus with impeccable record of Nuke peaddling and threatening global peace and stability . Pakistan is a byproduct of Great Game I to contain Russian Southern march and If one recollect Tariq Aziz words -- Pakistan is a condom State. Yes it all happened because Millitary which sold the soul of the nation to enrich themselves . Pakistan is an illusion and it will meltdown and regional powers and International powers should quarantine all it's nuclear assets , INCLUDING NUCLEAR SCIENTISTS .
I commend Dr.Ettefagh for suggesting a bold solution to the quagmire that is modern day Pakistan.
Even if the Military State masquerading as a Nation is not entirely dismembered, assigning to Afghanistan only the Pashtun dominant areas, which range from Chitral in the Northern Areas to Quetta [Balochistan] in the south will go a long way in ensuring, not only the survival of Pakistan but also a more prosperous Afghanistan.
I would echo same opinion as Saeed Mehr. Mr Ali Ettefagh should rather keep his tongue shut b/w the canines. He should perhaps be more worried about his native Tehran whose policies keep on ringing alarm bells in all world capitals!
Answer to your question at 8:03 a.m. -- every idiot thinks that he is King Solomon. There is a dispute about whose baby it really is. Chop the baby in two!
Except that idiots can't have the wisdom of King Solomon. When the real mother said "better give the baby to the other woman", King Solomon understood.
Not so, Mr. Ettefagh! There are many, many Pakistanis out there (and I hope that a post-crackdown, chastened Musharraf are among them, togeher with Benazir and Ashfaq Kiani and Maulana Fazlur Rahman as well as other well-reasoned opinion-leaders) who will be willing to make the necessary sacrifices to marginalise and neutralise extremists, to encourage the army to be a little more confined to the barracks and make room for dynamic entrepreneurs to engage in land-holding and business, to set the example for a vigorous anti-corruption drive (*starting with Asif ali Zardari!), to carry forward the education and other godd reforms that Musharraf has started. Maybe the Musharraf/Benazir coalition may still hold and maybe a wisened (but then REALLY wisened and less muscle-flexing) Musharraf can be given a year as President to collaborate with Beanazir and Kiani to crack down on extremsists, it being understood, after those 12 months, that Musharraf will bow out, the PM Benazir (if she hasmeanwhile proven her mettle) will have considerable executive powers, but with adequate checks-and-balances powers given to the judiciary and legislative-and-administrative branches of government.
The agenda is still doable, but the military-rule move has made it harder.
Completely agree with this author. Well said.
Paks brought us the taliban, nukes, and a sham. There is no democracy, no human rights and no future for that mess. carve it up!
dear mr ettefagh,
please worry about the impending doom about iran's nuclear fantasy.we had respect for reasonable Iranians and would but the problem is post global gave space to a man who has missed his daily dose of lithium.Psychosis mixed with mania is beyond home care.God bless Iran.
Another solution is to create a United States of India (U.S.I.), with a federal system of governance in line with the United States of America, of course, with minor adjustments to local character, social and political invoironment. Punjab and Sindh can then join the U.S.I. South Asia can be stabilised if India gets a fresh, healthy, new, progressive, strong and democratic constitution and eliminates corruption in all its forms.
India could become a very stabilising force in Asia and the world, provided it fights, controls and prevent religious extremism in all its manifistations and expressions, particularly Hindu nationalism and extremism, which has been and is the biggest enemy of India and has led to its disintegration and colonisation many times in the history of that nation. It has prevented India from becoming a strong nation state compared to China, the Indians have performed relatively very short.
Muslims of Indian subcontinent (half of it in today's Pakistan) should be very greatful to the Afghans who saved them from Hindu slavery many times in the past. Everytime Afghanistan invaded India (12 times), it was mostly to defend Muslim minorities in India against the Hindu extremists. It was also the AFGHANS that defeated the Soviet Russia, British Colonialists and slave owners, not to mentions the Arabs, the Turks and the Moguls, who could never subjugate or control Afghan territories.
The Hindus should be greatful to the Afghan people and great Kings, such as King Amanullah Khan, who supported the independence of India and the freedom of its people. Remember that Afghanistan is (1747) one of the first nation states in the world after the French Revolution, when the concept of nation states was introduced into the political dictionary of the world. It has played a leading role against colonisation, imperialism and communism, for which it has also payed and sacrificed very heavily. Afghanistan has never been colonised and defeated all foreign invaders and colonisers through the history of the region.
India's biggest, historical, strategic and political mistake in regards to Afghanistan was when it chose to keep quite about the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the U.N.G.A. in 1979, ignoring the illegal occupation of its historical neighbor which had wholeheartedly supported it against the British colonisers. India later supported a totalitarian puppet communist murderous regime in Afghanistan and continues to side with the most criminal forces in Afghanistan, such as the Northern Alliance, who were raping Hindu and Sihk women in Kabul (1992--1996) and who were destroying Afghanistan from the ground and that India knew it, but prefered to shut its mouth, eyes and ears.
The Cold War balancing act of India is not pleasant or briliant, but to a great extent very destructive for Afghanistan and the subcontinent.
The mistakes of India was a big shock and disappointment for the majority Pashtuns of Afghanistan, to some extent for the West, who now felt allienated from India. This mistake of India provided the Paki Punjabi Terrorist Army with the biggest opportunity to defeat the nationalist and progressive forces among the Pashtuns, Balochs and other supressed and opressed nationalities in the colonial entity of Pakistan. As a result, the NWFP and Balochistan are virtually in the hands of Punjabi, Pashtun and a few Baloch extremists.
It radicalised the politics of Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Inter Service Intelligence (ISI) and the bloodsucking generals of Paki Army, who are dreaming of a Punjabi Impire, are all the products of Indian mistakes, which unfortunately can not play the role of a wise Mother India.
Reintegration at all levels of the society is the key for peace in South Asia. It could be ethnic, religious, cultural, political, geographical, economic etc.
I wish the Pakistani commentators on this forum behave a bit constructive and not jumping to the gun, which has become the culutre of the Pakistanis. When the Gun is not enough, I'm sure, you will jump to your nukes, which freightens me very much.
Momand
The British creation of Pakistan resembles verbatim the "new Middle East" envisioned by the most ignorant, and retarded of American presidentes. Fortunately, his administration will come to an end, unfortunately...not soon enough. The best part is that the new president WILL NOT BE a Repo.
The history of Pakistan contained in this article does not go back far enough. To consider Pakistan a product of British imperialism doesn't describe the area well enough; it could be just as easily described as a set of tribes that go as far back as Mongol and Islamic imperialism. The British attempt to create a nation-state from seventy or eighty tribal enclaves did not take into account the need for a semi-totalitarian central authority that is needed to begin a transition to any form of democratic justice in a region. Many of these tribal enclaves work with the Taliban types because the clans themselves do not want a government they individually can’t control through some from of totalitarian minority (the traditional form of power). What might be more in the interest of the Pakistani tribes IS a form of totalitarian authority that exists for at least two generations that does not permit the tribal aggression accentuated by primitive religious ideas to endanger the ‘normal’ citizens of Pakistan.
It is true that Pakistan's location next to Afghanistan is problematic. The fact that the border between these countries cuts through historically unified cultural areas doesn't help. And the fact that the areas thus cut-though are inhabited by relatively wild and well-armed mountain tribes is also a problem.
The diversity of traditions and languages in Pakistan, however, is not a characteristic of Pakistan alone. It is mirrored by the same diversity within the many states which constitute India itself.
There was, indeed, a strong indigenous desire and political movement among the religious-nationalist intellectual Muslims of British India to establish a Muslim state.
Jinnah, Iqbal and Maududi (born between 1876 and 1903) were the great leaders of this movement.
And please bear in mind that Gandhi was killed by a (misguided) Muslim nationalist.
So it was not just an arbitrary or ill-considered afterthought for Britain to establish a separate Muslim state.
One could imagine that even within a unified greater India, the majority Muslim states, which today constitute Pakistan, would have presented this unified greater India with the same problems.
I really agree with this writer. Well researched piece and facts. Most of the British fantasies have failed in any case around the world. Something should be done with this terror sate called Pakistan before it blows the world.
I find Dr. Ettefagh's short version of Pakistan's origin to be highly revised. Any reading of late Raj history indicates that the British were absolutely opposed to the concept of partitioning India (the notion of providing any part of India any bit of independence was controversial). Dr. Ettefagh is certainly correct that having a majority population was a major factor in allocating East Bengal to Pakistan once partition was inevitable, but an attempt to provide some amount of economic parity between India and Pakistan was another. And the notion that Pakistan was established as a pro-Western counter to India's pro-Soviet leanings is pure fiction- the desire and concept of Pakistan predates cold war politics by two decades.
The birth of Pakistan was far from British fantasy- it was a British nightmare born of oppressive colonialism and a desire of Muslims for self-rule. Pakistan has a myriad of problems, and to revise its history places those problems in a false context and hampers efforts to fix them.
In this moment, the paradigm democratic of the west go been contest in the many countries. The instituitions europeans was carried for many countries by imperialists and colonialists reasons. I think that very good if all countries of the worl become nations where the peace and democracy were the maxim law. But its do they like. This is fact and Condolize Rice and USA have not legitimate for change this reality.
Interesting piece, but some of the history is missing, e.g., Ali Jinnah and the All India Muslim League.
Although many ills in the world today are laid at the feet of former European Colonialists—justifiably—they could not have acted thusly without the aid of the many self-serving indigenous people (PLO, are you listening?).
Pakistan is an independent nation-state today for many reasons; chief among them though is the hardheaded sponsorship of such a state by Ali Jinnah and the All India Muslim League (much to Gandhi’s consternation).
And, finally, could we all please stop with “should not have been in the first place” of many policy apologists and deal with the “what we’ve got now” reality of the various international imbroglios around the world. I am not suggesting we ignore history, rather I am suggesting we incorporate it to new solutions and new pathways that are radically different from the status quo and fit better with the tapistry of people and customs that exist today.
Let’s end the constant abuse of historical context (aka hysterical context) in order to prop up newly burnished forms of the old. A shift in our thinking might actually aide in progress rather than the constant one step forward, three steps backward that exist in the multitude of global hotspots that exist in our post Cold War era.
Pakistan is proven to be a rip-off. Time to bust it up and create a more transparent system. If that means dissolution, there is nothing wrong with that. Are Czechs and Slovaks better off than 20 years ago? Are the Yugoslavs in a better shape for the most part?
The fact is Pakistan is dangerous. It has become the hub of terrorists that hijack planes and run it into buildings. The $10 billion in U.S. aid over the last 7 years has been wasted. They have no true intentions to have democracy and now have martial law. Time for sanctions, restrictions, disarming of nukes and setting up a UN protectorate and break up! Game over boys!!
Totally agree with the writer. There are many similar cases though. In fact, the colonial powers in the ME established several Arab countries. Jordan and Iraq and Saudi Arabia were established by Britain, Syria and Lebanon by France.
Oh my, this essay spawned an interesting debate, and made me recollect a lot of history. After some contemplation, I decided to agree with the commentators who ask "What about Iran?". Which in term, reminds me of an old saying: If you live in a house made of glass, do not throw with rocks....
Sorry Ettefagh, let's form a comission to carve up Iran as well.
Dissolve hatred mongers all over the world;no matter who and how stronger they are.Pakistan is again run over by military.Tell USA to outrighly oppose it.Or,think of dissolving all those countries which create disturbances in other countries;overtly and covertly.
THE ARTICLE IS A CHEAP SHOT AND WISHFUL THINKING OF DR ALI ETTEFAGH. HE BETTER BE ADVISED TO WRITE ON INVESTMENT SUBJECT IN WHICH AREA HE IS SUPPOSED TO THRIVE.
We can settle the nature vs nurture debate to a great extent by following the birth, growth and development of India & Pakistan.
One nation was divided into two parts.In the beginning their problems were alomost similar. The framework each adopted to solve their problems were different. One was formed on religious identity and other even after divison decided to be secular and inclusive.
There was a recognization in the beginnig by Nehru that religion as a national identity cannot hold a country together. Growth and equality could.
India invested in its institutions, the framework for Governance, sometimes those frameowrk were so fragile that it looked a strong wind would just blow it away but it survived.
Pakistan's political leadership (Jinnah included) was myopic at its best. The idea that a country can be held together by religious identity. They never invested in any frameworks of Governance. Even after 60 years. We don't realize that they have lost all these years. What happens after Musharraf is gone ? There isn't any national institutions which exists there today. We cannot say same about India. They have a vibrant democracy, number of political parties and some brilliant leadership at top.
To sum it up, they were almost nurtured in same set of variables but it was in their nature that they ended up where they are today.
Pakistan a failed state, India a hope.
We can settle the nature vs nurture debate to a great extent by following the birth, growth and development of India & Pakistan.
One nation was divided into two parts.In the beginning their problems were alomost similar. The framework each adopted to solve their problems were different. One was formed on religious identity and other even after divison decided to be secular and inclusive.
There was a recognization in the beginnig by Nehru that religion as a national identity cannot hold a country together. Growth and equality could.
India invested in its institutions, the framework for Governance, sometimes those frameowrk were so fragile that it looked a strong wind would just blow it away but it survived.
Pakistan's political leadership (Jinnah included) was myopic at its best. The idea that a country can be held together by religious identity. They never invested in any frameworks of Governance. Even after 60 years. We don't realize that they have lost all these years. What happens after Musharraf is gone ? There isn't any national institutions which exists there today. We cannot say same about India. They have a vibrant democracy, number of political parties and some brilliant leadership at top.
To sum it up, they were almost nurtured in same set of variables but it was in their nature that they ended up where they are today.
Pakistan a failed state, India a hope.
We can settle the nature vs nurture debate to a great extent by following the birth, growth and development of India & Pakistan.
One nation was divided into two parts.In the beginning their problems were alomost similar. The framework each adopted to solve their problems were different. One was formed on religious identity and other even after divison decided to be secular and inclusive.
There was a recognization in the beginnig by Nehru that religion as a national identity cannot hold a country together. Growth and equality could.
India invested in its institutions, the framework for Governance, sometimes those frameowrk were so fragile that it looked a strong wind would just blow it away but it survived.
Pakistan's political leadership (Jinnah included) was myopic at its best. The idea that a country can be held together by religious identity. They never invested in any frameworks of Governance. Even after 60 years. We don't realize that they have lost all these years. What happens after Musharraf is gone ? There isn't any national institutions which exists there today. We cannot say same about India. They have a vibrant democracy, number of political parties and some brilliant leadership at top.
To sum it up, they were almost nurtured in same set of variables but it was in their nature that they ended up where they are today.
Pakistan a failed state, India a hope.
Why all of Pakistani posters above continue to deflect answering the question and jump on Iran, USA, the author, religion, etc.?
Why not consider alternative ways. If the entire "nation" of Pakistan was really in harmony and unity, why have all these bombings, coups, deportation of previous politicians and Al Qaeda and Madrasa hate-teaching centres?
It is matter of great shame that this Article is from a muslim if that would have been from some Indian then v would have said that It is prejuidice but shame
shame
shame
shame
shame for hurting feelings of all Pakistan
why not dissolve India where people are fighting for Independence against tyrant Indian regime
why not dissolve Afghanistan which is home for terrorists
Shame on you
"Pakistani Military & civil bureaucrats" who are denying power to the people, are the grand-sons of those muslims,who were boot-polishers, sepoy, peon and clerks of British Raj in India. They became Mohajers in Pakistan and are ruling the land.
The greed of power has created racism among different ethnic groups. Mohajers hate Panjabis and Sindhis, Panjabis hate Balochs and Pashtun hate Mohajirs and etc. etc.
Pakistan is a fail State and it is divided among
different "ethnic groups". It`s broken on moral basis. It needs a kick to break the country ......before the confiscation of her WMD and destroy her nuclear facilities as it poses a great threat to the people of Pakistan, South Asian Countries and the whole world.
some factors are true about pakistan , and some are false any way what else we are pakistani and we only need God blessing from all muslim to upgrade us in good way. God bless us always and get rid from those elements who damaging our religion, culture and our country. ameen
"Pakistani Military & civil bureaucrats" who are denying power to the people, are the grand-sons of those muslims,who were boot-polishers, sepoy, peon and clerks of British Raj in India. They became Mohajers in Pakistan and are ruling the land.
The greed of power has created racism among different ethnic groups. Mohajers hate Panjabis and Sindhis, Panjabis hate Balochs and Pashtun hate Mohajirs and etc. etc.
Pakistan is a fail State and it is divided among
different "ethnic groups". It`s broken on moral basis. It needs a kick to break the country ......before the confiscation of her WMD and destroy her nuclear facilities as it poses a great threat to the people of Pakistan, South Asian Countries and the whole world.
Very interesting article, very interesting concept that deserves praise. You should watch "Kabul Express" to understand what is going on in the region. Maybe it will all make sense then.
I am sure after reading the responses from Pakistani’s now this should open your eyes that Pakistani’s are a proud nation regardless of ethnicity.
READER IN EUROPE: there are conflicts in Europe isn’t it time for ya’ll give basq’s etc independence. WHY in perfect democratic Europe you got conflict such as Basq’s??
Pakistan got stable economy. US had given only military aid to Pakistan. With all our differences we the PAKISTANI’S are ONE PROUD NATION.
I just got out of Pakistan. It is hell on earth since yesterday's de facto coup. Very strict controls on communication with outside, most TV and radio stations are shut, foreigners under strict control.
Sorry President Bush, but you just got stabbed in the back by some one that fooled you as a friend.
I don't know why Pakistan has become a night mare for all the evil countries of the world.People like the one who wrote this article are making their livelihood by writing against Pakistan.World should be grateful to Pkistan for ending the cold war otherwisw their would have been more blood shed around the world.Pakistani people and soldiers along with their Afghan brothers fought and sacrificed their lives to end the bloody era of cold war.Now world needs Pakistan again.You can not tackle 1 country Pakistan then how can you deal with 4 Pakistans if provinces are independent.We are 1 nation with 1 language URDU and rich cultural and social diversities.There are more than 40 languages in Pakistan.You should think to save your ass first before writing a word agianst anybody else.Its Pakistan who has supported you in nuclear field and now Iran is showing eyes to America.You believe it or not whole world knows about it and you got no right to write such articles when your own people dying of hunger torture and sanctions.
Hey Mr. Rationalist first learn to READ and WRITE proper English. Then learn some manners and then return in about 10 years when you have lost your zits and gained some maturity!!!!!
Please do not use personal attacks and offensive comments in a civilized forum like this or any other. Take it easy. It is just a debate however dearly you feel about it. It's not like your the President of Pakistan about to be able to do somehting about it.
Leave everything aside. The basis on which the country was founded and the tribal and other divisions and the many other factors that are a feature of not only this but also of all other nations. Nations will either evolve over time into being something better or dissolve and destroy themselves.
If for now, a group of Pakistanis irrespective of their tribal and racial affiliations can come togther here on this forum (at least one from each province) and convince the readers that Pakistan can and will be, we should see some hope for the future.
And I do apologize for the multiple postings of my previous comment.
Dr. Ali Ettefagh has written very well about Pakistan. Redrawing the boundaries would aggravate the problem rather than solving it.. No body would have taken cognizance of developments bit for the 9/11 and the nuclear weapons they possess.
Since 9-11, the United States has given more than $10 billion to Pakistan to fight terrorists. We want a complete report on what has happened to our money, where is the promised democracy in Pakistan, where is bin Laden and why is it that PAkistan is not letting NATO forces to operate from its territory?
No doubt what the author says is true and can be agreed on about Pakistian. But his solutuon to dissolve the Pakistani State into independent provinces is no solution at all. It will only mean that many times as problems as there are now faced by this one single failed state. I think that there is still hope for the Pakistanis to get their act together. Look on the positive side of things. When they want to they can all come together and develop something as advanced as nuclear technology. Now all they need to do is to apply that thinking to social engineering, eradication of poverty and other benefical programs rather than be on an un-ending warpath with one another.
It amazes me that how much vitriolic Verbiage and verbigeration of same message of pure hatred is being salvosed to Dr.Ettefagh. That it self proves that He is right and talking on the premise of truth. He struck a serious blow to the heart of Pakistanis Prides. Though their pride systems based on false identity and false nation hood - because they have no real National identity. Pakistan is an aberration of History, and has no solid foundation. In this perspective this nation is bound to fall and to disintegrate.
There are also a concerted serious effort to Drag India in to their own created hell hole? But such attempts have failed miserably.
So called Pakistanis, should know that, The Baluchis, and Sindhi's are not keen at all to join Your Band Wagon of so called Pakistan- Nation Hood. Rather they will prefer to create their own Identity of Nation- Hoods, I men- they wants their own home lands -Baluchistan and Sindhistan. They are heading [ Marching] on that direction, and You fellas can not stop it.
The question of India? India doesn't want the existence of Terrorist and Fundamentalist Islamic nation called-**Pakistan**, at her door step. Better She prefers that this abominable monster should die as quickly as possible.
You may think that Your borrowed Nuke -missiles and A-Bomb will deter your enemy to harm you or attack you? But in civil war situation as is now exists in your country will not be affected by your **Fear Weapons**. If that is so , then why Soviet was broken down even She had more Nuke war Heads than USA??
I tell you what India will do- Hindus will support Baluchis and Sindhi's with all logistic and hard ware supports, so that these fellows will succeed. By chance if you contemplate of striking preemptivly on India? With your will- gotten N-Devices? then make sure that India has Antimissile defence system, installed already and with which She will safe gourd Hes self, we call it self reliance.
Then what role Uncle Sam will play? In my View He had enough in dealing with you Terrorist Entity, and this time SAM will not save you from the gutter -where you are stuck now.
The Question- what Uncle Sam's Position in this respect today?? Sam doesn't feel comfortable with You fellas, and you failed delver what he wanted and you fellas again back bitten Him, betrayed Him. So you guys have lost all credibility. A bigger game is brewing up in the Horizon, I mean rise of China and her influence on SEA, which Sam feels threat, and that is why America going to make Nuke Dill with India, In that respect you Pakistani fellas have lost credibility platform, and you can't bargain any more.
This article is about Pakistan, not about personal attacks on the author or Iran.
The writer is correct to say that the original plan/design did not work and there is no democracy or a continuing political process in Pakistan. If the interests of several tribal groups create a conflict rather harmony, then it is time to separate them and let them have their own system and as the last sentence indicates, a more clear political agenda will be the result.
Mr. Ali Ettefagh
You appear to be tolerant about the purchases made by Iran from Dr A Q Khan, May be it for some toy making. You got Clergy in power and we are resisting it.
What a standard of democracy you have. Candidate has to pass through religious cults test.
Why don't you see inside your country.
It is an old stinking curry of Ralph Peters which Mr Ali is trying to put on boil again. Some time ago, Ralph Peters in persuasion of Greater Middle East Plan of United States, suggested to redraw the borders of Middle and south East Asia in the name of uniting the ‘Blood Brothers’; i.e. when British left Middle East, very deceitfully they divided Kurd lands into four parts and handed over to Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran. He suggested that Kurds be united and new country be carved. He suggested the same ----in regards to areas of Greater Baluchistan and Afghanistan.
Although in the wake of US Global War on Terror, Pakistan being a front state is passing through some very testing times and is in untenable situation; but by Grace of Allah, peoples of Pakistan are steadfast, strong and united to face such challenges. Mr Ali should not worry much about Pakistan rather he should spend his energies to put his own house…Iran in order.
I shall try to be brief. Pakistan is imploding because of the negative mindset and instilling hatred into heads and hearts - for the “other”. Hatred is bad in all shades. There is a lesson to learn from this. Fascist R.S.S would do to India what the Mullah did to Pakistan. HATE SPEECH must invite capital punishment. Perpetrators of MOB VIOLENCE (Riots / Genocide / Holocaust) must be hanged. A clear message has to be sent. You cant have Law and Hatred together. Babu Bajrangi and Narendra Modi are criminals of Humanity. One cant be selective on this. A society can live without religion, but not without justice.
Hatred / Hate Speech / Mob Violence / Genocide / Holaust AND the concept of Law / Civilised society cannot go hand in hand. The history of R.S.S acts since 1925.. its role in the riots are fully documented and needs to be exposed. For how long can one close his / her eyes to this Factory of Hatred ?
Mr Robert: Before rattling on please note that a million people scarfised their lives back in '47 to leave hindu dominated areas of India for Pakistan. Even now in this so called secular India, thousands of Muslims, and Sikhs have lost their lives at the hand of hindu mobs.
By Mr Ettefagh logic most most authoritarian countries should be disbanded because they haven't been able to become democracies. And who should actually redraw these boundaries ??
Giving these remote tribal areas Independence would allow the extremist to overcome some of them. That is asking for more trouble. Pakistan needs to modernize economically and democratize. That is the only solution.
A factual error in the article is that there is no common language. There is more in common between the provinces of Pakistan than the provinces of India. Urdu is the national language of Pakistan. Most Pakistanis speak Urdu in addition to their local language. English is the official language of India.
According to the article Opium is produced in Afganistan and some how it is Pakistan's fault that Opium is transited through it... Bye the way, it is said that a lot of Opium is transited through Iran as well.
I am highly surprised that you would have such a critical viewpoint of Pakistan when in the global scheme of things Pakistan has played a positive role whereas other countries have dropped the ball. Yes, Pakistan suffers from many problems, however do not blame the people of Pakistan for the mistakes of one individual who has, well, we all know what he's done. Pay attention, fortune favors the bold and there will be permanent changes in the land of the pure soon.
I find Mr. Ettefagh's article quite amusing, he appears to have a superficial knowledge of pakistan. 14 insurgencies are going on in india and 160 districts according to its prime minister are out of control. There is serious trouble in my other countries. That does not mean the country should be broken up. It is the Usa which has caused division and destruction in iraq and begangstan and is poised to create trouble o iran. Much of the troubled conditions in pakistan are due to american intervention and coercive tactics. Pakistan intrinsically is a stout country which can look after its self he only the americans do not support a dictatorial regime. Inayatullah
Columnist, Pakistan
Mr Ettefagh needs to do homework before writing such rubbish. First the tribal system in Pakistan only exist in border areas of Afghanistan and Iran, and that accounts to less than 1% of Pakistan's land area. Secondly, Pakistan was never a British "Fantasy" in fact the British did everything possible to prevent its creation, case in point the unresolved issue of Kashmir. More than a million people scarified their lives to achieve the dream of this independent Muslim state.
In fact it is Iran and it’s Mullahs that are the real source of instability in the region. They have actively supported extremist shia groups in Pakistan since the '70s creating instability and hatred. Even now they're openly funding the Taliban and other extremist and nationalist groups in Pakistan and Afghanistan not to mention Iraq!
I am highly surprised that you would have such a critical viewpoint of Pakistan when in the global scheme of things Pakistan has played a positive role whearas other countries have dropped the ball. Yes, Pakistan suffers from many problems, however do not blame the people of Pakistan for the mistakes of one individual who has well, we all know what he's done. Pay attention, fortune favors the bold and there will be permanent changes in the land of the pure soon.
As a Pakistani I am extremely surprised and disappointed that the Washington post actually published such a load of trash.
"Dissolve Pakistan" ?!?!, there are a million problems with my country, as their are with many other countries. Most of the problems have actually been created due to a one-sided alliance with the US, which has used Pakistan for short term gains, leaving our country in the state it is now. but dissolving a country isn't really a solution. Mr. Ettefagh seems have a over simplified view of our history and overly simplified solution.
I little thought before you go on rambling about other peoples HOMELAND would be appreciated. An editor might be a good idea too!
General Musharraf on, 12th October 1999, has usurped power in a coup against the civil government. The aforementioned action was extra-constitutional, which was though not appreciated but reluctantly accepted by people of Pakistan for time being with this hope that Gen. Musharraf would hold free and fair election and reinstate democracy within the time frame of 3 years as given by the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Following his predecessors military rulers, he extended his rule by holding infamous referendum and proclaiming himself as the elected president. In elections 2002, his political stooges and sycophants could not get a simple majority to form a government even after rigging the elections, so he threatened and offered political inducements to the elected parliamentarians of other political parties in order to form the government of his choice. These ugly politics worked well and he eventually succeeded in forming a tamed government. The motive of all these extra-constitutional actions and politically maneuvering were to serve his vested interests and to keep the highest political post of President and military post of chief of the army staff, simultaneously. In 2002, he did not call the first session of the national assemble till the time he was assured that the notorious 17th amendment would be passed by the parliament. In order to achieve his self-serving mission, he played an ugly game not only with political alliance MMA but also with the whole nation by making a false pledge that he would shed his uniform on 31 December, 2004, which he had not fulfilled till today. Once again on the 3rd of November 2007, when he felt that power might go away from him, he has made a second coup and imposed Martial Law without any genuine grounds under the shadow of emergency. To keep the highest political office of president, he once again with the help of army generals derailed the process of democracy, which should not be despised but must be condemned, strongly.
This time, he committed a despicable crime by attacking the supremacy, integrity and independence of judiciary, which they were showing first time in the history of Pakistan. He tried to undermine their independence and integrity by accusing them that they were taking decisions in the favor of terrorist. Like 9th March 2007, once again he openly attacked on the independence of judiciary by changing the Chief Justice and removing senior judges who refused to accept his new Provision Constitutional Order. In his speech, he charged them for interfering in the matters of the executives and encouraging terrorist, which is completely absurd accusation.
The fact is that his poor leadership, ugly political tactics and poor policies have increased number of bomb blasts, enhanced frustration and alienation among people, and weaken integration of the federation - not the judicial decisions. Undoubtedly, he attacked on the judiciary because, in the hindsight, he got scared that the Supreme Court of Pakistan might declare recent presidential elections null and void and not allow him to contest presidential election for the next two years. Hence, he imposed emergency or martial law before the announcement of the decision of the Supreme Court. It is a fact that if the Supreme Court had barred him from contesting presidential election, it would have been accordance with the country’s constitution in which it is clearly stated that public servants during service cannot participate in politics. It is evident from his midnight speech on 4th November, 2004 that he is perturbed on the Supreme Court decisions that have gone or will go against him and his corrupt acolytes, therefore, he has now initiated media trial against the judiciary.
The recent proclamation of Martial Law and suspension of 1973 constitution shows that he is power hungry and can go up to any extent to keep it. He does not have any respect for any institution that takes a stand against his rule. Musharraf is a self proclaimed hero who has never won any war - neither as a solider nor as a president. As a solider he miserably failed in Kargil and as a political leader he failed in integrating the nation.
For the sake of country existence, provincial integration, democracy, independence of the judiciary and other institutions, we must strongly demand that Gen. Musharraf must step down as President and Chief of the Army Staff forthwith and immediately announce interim government that holds free and fair elections within three months.
Please sign this petition to support that we all want genuine (not controlled) democracy in Pakistan and disallow any army role in the national politics.
After reading Mr.Ettefagh's post, it seems he is way off the mark and his senses. as a pakistani who has lived and prospered in this country all my life of 60 years. I can say that maybe we had our share of misfortunes but certainly there is no dearth of national spirit in the masses. it is the military that has played the part of the mercenary of the US and destroyed this proud nation of 160 million souls.
About Iran,the less said the better. remember when Zahedi was leading the coup to reinstall a puppet monarch at the instigation of a world power. Read CIA.Iranian morale and its currency was penny a million.
General Musharraf on, 12th October 1999, has usurped power in a coup against the civil government. The aforementioned action was extra-constitutional, which was though not appreciated but reluctantly accepted by people of Pakistan for time being with this hope that Gen. Musharraf would hold free and fair election and reinstate democracy within the time frame of 3 years as given by the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Following his predecessors military rulers, he extended his rule by holding infamous referendum and proclaiming himself as the elected president. In elections 2002, his political stooges and sycophants could not get a simple majority to form a government even after rigging the elections, so he threatened and offered political inducements to the elected parliamentarians of other political parties in order to form the government of his choice. These ugly politics worked well and he eventually succeeded in forming a tamed government. The motive of all these extra-constitutional actions and politically maneuvering were to serve his vested interests and to keep the highest political post of President and military post of chief of the army staff, simultaneously. In 2002, he did not call the first session of the national assemble till the time he was assured that the notorious 17th amendment would be passed by the parliament. In order to achieve his self-serving mission, he played an ugly game not only with political alliance MMA but also with the whole nation by making a false pledge that he would shed his uniform on 31 December, 2004, which he had not fulfilled till today. Once again on the 3rd of November 2007, when he felt that power might go away from him, he has made a second coup and imposed Martial Law without any genuine grounds under the shadow of emergency. To keep the highest political office of president, he once again with the help of army generals derailed the process of democracy, which should not be despised but must be condemned, strongly.
This time, he committed a despicable crime by attacking the supremacy, integrity and independence of judiciary, which they were showing first time in the history of Pakistan. He tried to undermine their independence and integrity by accusing them that they were taking decisions in the favor of terrorist. Like 9th March 2007, once again he openly attacked on the independence of judiciary by changing the Chief Justice and removing senior judges who refused to accept his new Provision Constitutional Order. In his speech, he charged them for interfering in the matters of the executives and encouraging terrorist, which is completely absurd accusation.
The fact is that his poor leadership, ugly political tactics and poor policies have increased number of bomb blasts, enhanced frustration and alienation among people, and weaken integration of the federation - not the judicial decisions. Undoubtedly, he attacked on the judiciary because, in the hindsight, he got scared that the Supreme Court of Pakistan might declare recent presidential elections null and void and not allow him to contest presidential election for the next two years. Hence, he imposed emergency or martial law before the announcement of the decision of the Supreme Court. It is a fact that if the Supreme Court had barred him from contesting presidential election, it would have been accordance with the country’s constitution in which it is clearly stated that public servants during service cannot participate in politics. It is evident from his midnight speech on 4th November, 2004 that he is perturbed on the Supreme Court decisions that have gone or will go against him and his corrupt acolytes, therefore, he has now initiated media trial against the judiciary.
The recent proclamation of Martial Law and suspension of 1973 constitution shows that he is power hungry and can go up to any extent to keep it. He does not have any respect for any institution that takes a stand against his rule. Musharraf is a self proclaimed hero who has never won any war - neither as a solider nor as a president. As a solider he miserably failed in Kargil and as a political leader he failed in integrating the nation.
For the sake of country existence, provincial integration, democracy, independence of the judiciary and other institutions, we must strongly demand that Gen. Musharraf must step down as President and Chief of the Army Staff forthwith and immediately announce interim government that holds free and fair elections within three months.
Please sign this petition to support that we all want genuine (not controlled) democracy in Pakistan and disallow any army role in the national politics.
Being a Pakistani, myself sick of our idiotic and selfish generals and politicians, I would like to see and read comments from other Iranis. We, Pakistanis, feel something grow bigger in our throats when we hear someone from the west calling Iran a threat to world's peace. I invite other Irani's to express their views on the comments (article of Mr. Ettefagh). I know Mr. Ettefagh's hatred for Pakistan is due to its Sunni Muslim majority; but rest assured Pakistani Shias are as patriotic as their sunni brothers.
What a load of crap!!! This person either does not know a dime about Pakistan or is doing some other's bidding by ignoring all positives about Pakistan. He is conveniently forgetting about the 16o million people living in Pakistan and their will (which is not at all represented by what he has mentioned in his absurd article). I can understand that he wants to divert the attention from the overall perspective of Iran and its foiled attempts to become a nuclear nation and he wants to depict Pakistan as some entity like Afghanistan or Iraq but I am a citizen of Pakistan since birth and have never experienced one thing mentioned in this article. The remaining four provinces do not act as tribes and there is a common language that we Pakistani speak and it is known as URDU!!! (if Mr Ali Ettefagh doesnt already know). He should better talk about Iranians and their sponsorship of world wide terrorism. Yes Afghanistan is the biggest producer of opium so he should talk about US and its false war on terror which has increased the production by hundred folds. Why talk about the transit way (if there is one) and not talk about the basic problem of production. No production, no transit way. In the end I would like to suggest Mr Ali should come to Pakistan and look at the ground realities on his own rather than making claims from faraway places. The most preposterous thing to say is to divide the country into tribes as if Pakistan is a piece of pie on a kitchen shelf. Pakistan is a country with a thriving economy and wealth and not a US colony or an American spy state like Iran. It would be run by the will of Pakistani people!!!!
I think the author has failed to grasp the true meaning behind the identity and creation of Pakistan. I think this article is a futile attempt to view world events with a lens of the past and not the future. While 60 years might not appear as a long period in terms of the global history, a true examination of Pakistan would show how far this nation has come in the last 60 years. To run an economy of 160 million people with the amount of resources that Pakistan has is nothing short of a testament to the ability of the people to strive and thrive in today's world and a willingness to live together and cherish one another's cultures.
I have been long frustrated by the political instability of my neighbor.
I know there is great diversity across their provinces, India has greater diversity. I do not believe cultural diversity or different languages can be attributed to political failure.
Nothing will help till basic civil liberties in Pakistan aren’t restored. If it takes a democracy to achieve it, so be it. In the current state, breaking down geographic boundaries will only add to the mayhem.
Ali; I am guessing you are not iranian but you are persian!! Your father is a persian but your mother is swedish. Ali you are from persia; which is next to denmark. Ali unfortunately iran will be in pieces before pakistan everwill. Iran and araps have the same curse!! the oil, and the west wants to get them for free. Ali is not an indian agent he is a poor personality and lost soul.
There was a good article titled "Blood Borders" in the June 2006 issue of the Armed Forces Journal, which proposed a similar solution to Pakistan and other such frankenstates of the region. It sent many Pakistanis into panic. Here's a version: http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899
Pakistan and its states have been in existence for 60 years.
The fact is Pakistan exists.
One must reconcile with this fact and move forward giving way to the youthful leaders of tomorrow whose faculties are not fettered with feelings ill and old.
We must be wise neither to entertain, propagate nor to pursue such nineteen century notions of divide and conquer in a century where countries shed their nationalism to form communities for economic and social prosperity
In your post you state that "... a massive joint strike by the US and India (and possibly Israel) is in order to take out the N-weapons which Pakistan holds."
This is crazy and dangerous talk. Implications of any such foolishness are immense.
There is wisdom in your words. But, the older I get the less I believe in the goodness of man and change. Too many large players have their fingers in too many pies.
i am wondering if mr ettefagh made a grave typographical error. I think instead of the word 'Pakistan' he meant and should've had 'Iran' throughout his article !!
Pakistan's Biggest folly is that we never made a system for Governance except ''Rhetorics''No one followed any rule other then Loot & Plunder, Rule & Perpetuate it,From Facts to Fiction the likes of Religious Zealots. We never gave to the Nation what was enshrined to us by the Founders that though Islam shall be our Religion But our Governance shall be Secular.
The Agencies were deputed to play foul on one another and they do till the day,Judges became a commodity where Justice was never dispenced, Army became Rulers under the garb of saviours and our Politicians grabbed moni like wild dogs.
I still belive Pakistan will Survive But that responsibility lies on our Politicians to all sit in one Boat and sail the people to safety thru acceptance of Provincial Autonomy, Follow the Rules of Fair Play within thier Parties and when in Govt or in Shadow.I am sure they will have to adopt these rules of the Game to bring Respectability,Sustainability,System.Thank you.
Who are you to suggest your dirty idea of dissolving Pakistan?
Why not dissolve IRAN ? Iran has seen more militancy then Pakistan, The fall of Shah Iran, in whose time IRAN was prospering and then the so called Islamic revolution - by Ayat Ullah Khumeni Hindi.
Pakistan, has never posed a threat to any country, India walked into our borders and got kicked out in 1965, we surrendered in 1971 (East Pakistan) Just when were about to Capture Kargil, America Intervened and yet another time we pulled our troops back.
Iran is a threat to the world then, as Iran's president clearly said 'that he wants to wipe off ISRAEL from the map' I am not a supporter of ISRAEL but you are trying to give a suggestion or had no other thing to write , thus you came up with this idea of dissolving Pakistan !!!!!
We don't grow opium, Afghani's does, Pakistan fought for the Afghans in Soviet war and they were smuggling in our country, you call urself a muslim state ? and yet suggesting to dissolve Pakistan.
The organisation you work for (United Nations) is as useless and baseless as Your article !
What have the UNO Done in Africa ? Jonathon Dimblebee of Britain did a documentary in 2004 and he said he can't believe that the sanitary system was totally unacceptable as it was flowing where the poor african people were sleeping. Where do all that money goes ? UNO is good for nothing, I think UNO should be re-structured.
One More thing, Britishers are best colonizers not Americans.
Who gave permission to this joker Ali Ettefagh to write this rubbish? I find it too amusing to even give a slightest response to this piece of nonsense.
But would not hesitate to say that Iran has to be divided into at least six independent states and of course Iranian Balouchistan should be part of Pakistan.
Where to start? First Pakistan should never have been created. However, here it is. The best thing that can happen is for the West, i.e the US, to stay the out. Sixty years of meddling from the cold war to the war on terror have only made a bad situation worse. Can the Pakistanis get their act together. Of course they can, but many of the players with their fingers in Pakistan need to get their act together first. I guess that means no foreseeable change in the near future.
Dr. Ali your views are uglier than the politics in your native Iran. I think You do not have to worry about Pakistan, it will exist just fine, however that country of your called Iran is actually the most dangerous country of the world.
Iran is a leader in global terrorism, its leadership is corrupt beyond belief, religious mullah's in Iran are the most reppresive in muslim world. After Shah woman were raped and killed on the name of Islam, many of you took refuge in Paksitan. In Education to trade you have benifit from Pak. have no doubt Pak has pressure to use its land to attack your nation, none of your niegbors like Iran.
Iranians in US are disliked and just to let you know every Iranian in USA is in debt of Pakistan every time you want to go to motherland you got Embassy of Pakistan's so called Special interest section of Iran to get visa. I am going to be honest to you, after reeading your comments I think Pak should not help your terrorist country and help the world to get rid of menace. Turkey can take Tabriz and Azerbaijan belongs to Azerbaijan.
The problem with rhetorical questions is that they tend to hoist one with one's own petard, as it were. Why not dissolve Pakistan, indeed? And why stop there? How about India? Good Lord, what a hodgepodge! And Iran - didn't I see some kind of thinktank groupthink exercise on "the many Irans"? And weren't the British involved there too? Let there be many Irans!
Before we start on universal dissolution, treating countries as some kind of monstrous sugar cubes that we can somehow dunk in an universal solvent, we ought to ask, that is, if we have any vestige of intellectual responsibility in our inner stuffings, where does this process stop? And how about the US? Shouldn't that country also be dissolved? But wait, wasn't that tried before?
THIS IS THE HIGHT OF IRONY. AN IRANIAN TALKING ABOUT A FAILED STATE AND DEMOCRACY. MAY BE HE SHOULD BE LECTURING HIS PEOPLE. WITH MILLIONS OF BARRELS OF OIL, ALL THEY HAVE ACHIEVED IS A 45% UNEMPLOYMENT RATE AND A RULE OF MULLAHS.
This is a disgusting article written by an Israeli/Indian agent. Pakistan was achieved through hugh sacrifices by the Muslims of South Asia. Enemies of Islam want to dissolve it. They will not suceed.
I am sure you are probably one of those young inexperienced "kids" who has not had an opportunity to become worldly, seasoned or experienced. You have probably never met someone from another country or had professional discussions with anyone outside of your "little world". You strike me as someone with a very shallow ego who feels the need to strike out at others by calling them "idiots". Before you type any other comments attacking the persons who are commenting on the articles take a deep breath and grow up before you embarrass yourself further.
To those of you that have provided these thought provoking comments I thank you.
May God and Allah bless the Pakistani people in this time of uncertainity.
Excellent piece! Finally, a common sense discussion of these sham nation-states. While we are at it, how about a free Kurdistand that includes part of Turkey?
Pakistan is not a failed state, you should have a courage to blame and criticize selfish british system whose shortsightedness gave birth to premature country. Pakistan should learn that religion should not be mixed with politics and people of Pakistan should realize that Indian are their biggest wellwishers.
Ali Ettefagh doesn't seem to know the facts! He even does not know the right names of Pakistan provinces! If Pakistan needs to be 'dissolved' into 4 pieces then I think terroist Iran need to go 1st. Mr. Ettefah idea will further destablize the world and innoncent blood will shed.
This is one of the very few times I have seen a Muslim (the author of this article) make sense.
But are not you afraid of Paki Muslims declaring a death fatwa against you like they did against the Somalian (Hirsi) author (PBUH)?
Who gave this idiot a Ph.D. That university should ask him to return the diploma. Or if he has any commonsense, he should return all his diplomas and write on his forehead "you are looking at a complete insane person."
If Pakistan is split then i do not think that it will bode will for Iran as per your state Balochistan will be a country and we all know very well that Balochistan-o-Sistan province in Iran would very much like to join this new state. And based on your analysis that would make perfect sense because they have more in common with Balochis in Balochistan than people living in Tehran.
This is the single most stupid article that I have ever read.
Yo dude Robert or Laloo Indophile,
a) One of the three wise men was from Kashmir and not Persia. You r knowledge of Christians is suspect.
b) If you are going to quote Churchill to prove your ridiculous point about Eastern Bloc in 1947 then you must concede he also had prescient powers towards a robust prowestern democratic Pakistan. ... Only Mr Churchill asks you to hold your longotee(Sarang) until his full prophecy about Pakistan comes true.
It may take sometime for you to understand it.
c) Pakistan has 165 million muslim, India may have 150 or more. What does that prove El Roberto?
On the other hand I was talking about the truism of lives of my family members and real people I know who have benefitted from Pakistan and enjoyed the fruits of freedom and education and availed opportunities to better our lives because we live in Pakistan and NOT India. I have compared myself with others like me from Delhi and find myself in a much better position. So this BOB! is no falsity. And the "events" I quote are the massacres of Muslims in Bombay, Mumbai, Baroda and Mosques being razed elswhere which to us real people in Pakistan are an affirmation of our choice to be in Pakistan rather than India. If given the choice we non-Sunni non-Punjabis would pick Pakistan over India every time.
I do not expect you to understand. I mean who are you to tell us what we should choose? And I will propagate this as much as I desire.
In the present circumstances, Pakistan needs a new charter, constitution. If Musharraf is able to do this then Churchill will be proven right again vis-a-vis "half-naked faqir".
It is obvious the man made creation of country, state and nation state is still not understood by many who do not know that they do not know.
Start from the source - the evolution of humans.
Families into communities and communities forming countries.
It is too bad not too many many people in the Middle East read Darwin, Marx and Adam Smith.
The human named Dr. Ali is obviously a member of the Planetary Federation from Earth. Naturally the members of the Klingon spiecies will see the reality differently.
After reading a few of the responses given here about the article above I have to admit that there are a lot of interesting people out there. First of all the political and economic world is changing. A change on the balance of economic power is happening but that was inevitable, regardless of USA foreing policy, the world must continue its course. I firmly believe that economics in the end dictate the political outcomes, I prefer not to give any examples because there are always exceptions to the rules and people will be quick to point them out. However, the USA was extremely successful in using the IMF and the World Bank to promote its political ideals, either right or wrong, the end result was exporting economic and political models to other countries, and those countries greedily took the monetary reward that came with the American idealism and attempted to implement ideas that had not root within them. The end of the European imperalism gave birth to the US and the USSR, then the cold war left the USA as the only superpower. Now is time for a cycle to start again, now the USA will decline slowly because it is convinient to the rest of the world that it happens slowly. As the US loses political clout in the world other countries will step up to fill the gap. There are too many factors to predict how and when the chinese will begin to involve militarily on the international arena, but they will have to gain more military muscle to be able to do that. In my opinion all countries will rather use soft-power, however, you need to have a bigger military power in case that soft-power fails. From here on the world will be more divided economically and politically speaking, and I don't see any major changes from the current trends of politics and economics.
The border between Afghanistan and British India assumed by Pakistan is a questionable hold over from another British machination, the Durand Line. Afghanistan has failed to recognize the Durand Line's continued international border status.
I note that Pashtunistan fails to have been a conceptual unit. Like the Kurds, the Pashtuns continue to take themselves seriously in spite of the continued efforts by "greater" powers to dismiss their nation state self concept.
The UN Charter prohibits the changing of national borders through aggression.
It is not clear whether the author has the Checzoslovakian or Balkan or Biden model for Iraq in mind and what process acceptable for the rest of time to implement it does the author have in mind...or is he just ventilating out of justifiable frustration.
Wonderful bias-free analysis & perspective from the country´s beginnings to current day. Would love to know if Dr. Ettefagh has written any books on this topic, and if so, what are the titles. Thank you.
It is now 1-30 am now- where I live and I came to know that Mush had declared Emergency. He doesn't want relinquish his power?
In this turmoil situation, where are my Baluch- Brethren? Why you are so silent? The time has come for you to take action against Mush who is now in quite vulnerable and weak. Your fighting for your freedom- I do respect. Your attempted strive for emancipation always be remembered. God bless good hearted Baluchis, and I pray to our almighty for their success. Again freedom is the essence of Life.
I was keen to read what Pakistanis had to say was the way forward. Unfortunately the forum has now been hijacked by the "shoot the messenger" crowd. I too don't agree with most of what Dr. Ali has to say. That said, Pakistan is definitely a failed state, with large parts out of the control of the central governments, particularly the NWFP area.
The solution is to inject a lot of money into the education system from primary education onwards and hope in 20 years a civil society with respect for the rule of law will be established. As things stand now, Pakistan has nothing other than a few nuclear bombs to its credit and is introducing instability to all the neighbouring countries. The generals have learnt how to squeeze the western governments for money and the generals in turn need to keep the fundamentalist bogey alive and time to time hand over a few to the west to keep the checks coming. The Pakistani politicians too have not served Pakistan well and have only drained the national coffers.
Hopefully the next democratic government will pull the plug and stop tax payer funds from being squandared. Let the Pakistanis sort out their own problems. We should not be judging them nor interfering in their internal affairs.
Iran is shite majority and Pakistan is a sunni majority and the twain shall never meet.
Pakistan has Tribal issue, like many other countries in the world. I don't think it is as serious as Dr. Ettefagh described. I think he is very much off the mark. I belief Pakistan suffering from little bit of ego, and duel personality. It has yet to define, itself as a Islamic country or a democratic one. People of Pakistan thinks themselves as a defender of Islam, but cannot define Pakistan as a truly Islamic state. Because a country based on Islamic law just does not work. On the other hand, Pakistan cannot define herself as a true democratic state, because of the lack of courage. Before 1971, it could not operate as a democratic state, because they were not willing to share power with Bangladeshis. This is because Pakistanies think Bangladeshis are not as good of a Muslim( at least that's what people in Pakistan think), of course generally speaking.
What Pakistan need to do, be either a Islamic state or a democratic one. If it adopts Islamic law, then be courageous enough to talk about the pros and cons of the Islamic laws, and should have willingness to modify or change it, if needed. The country just should not follow the sharia law blindly. If the country does not have the courage to analyze and change sharia law, then it should go for democratic system in full force.
Writer seems to live in a fantasy world and does not even have facts correct. Fist of all there has never been a UN peace keeping force in kashmir and Pakistan always had a coherent policy on kashmir it has always demanded the implementation of un resolution demanding write of self determination of kashmiris.
Pakistan has some troubles with regards to its regional harmony than which country don't have these problem, if we take example of india, it is also marred by troubles in its different provinces based on cast, cultural and even religious grounds so based this writers suggestions india should also be redemarcated. The fact of matter is Pakistan is surrounded by unstable and hostile neighbours like india, iran and Afghanistan and there problems spillover in Pakistan too and we do have problems and have done mistakes but are trying to improve. As for opium trade, writer has perhaps forgotten that Afghanistan has borders with iran and other central asian states too and majority of opium finds its way there.
Sir, not to worry. Soon, the extremists will soon have their hands on Pakistan's nuclear missiles. They, of course, will launch missiles on India and Israel, and thereafter they will be destroyed by the response. Situation solved. This situation will be repeated in all muslim countries that have their dirty little hands on nuclear missiles.
so how come India is a working democracy? it is also a synthetic product of colonialism, without a common religion, language or ethnicity. surely there is more to Pakistan's collapse than British fantasy.
What a complete nonsense article. First of all URDU is the common language and is spoken by all the Pakistanis. Official language is English not because of the lack of common language but lack of true leadership which in turns comes from the US interference's in the political system of the country backing dictators which are imposed by themselves. If west supports free and fare elections things might change for good.
Mr Ali Ettefagh,
I don't want to be rude and unligical as you expressed in you socalled thesis...I request you to please study the history carefully don't forget your own history.TM
Ali Ettefagh is abs right in pointing out that an anarchist state such as Pakistan should be dissolved. The so called rulers of Pakistan are nothing but selfish zealots, desperate in clinging to their chairs, and milching the rich states just to promote their self interests.
Well-coming from an economic view point your view makes some sense, Your recipe is another example of changing countries to fit some idealized image of the world-ie-Iraq.
No no no. India does not need Pakistan. Not its chaos. Not its poverty. Not its fundamentalists. Not its terrorists. Not its authoritarian politicians. Not its thoroughly corrupt Army.
Whatever positive Pakistan can contribute to India is always available to it from its 150M muslims.
I have a nasty feeling that Dr Ettefagh is reading these comments and laughing at all the people who took the bait without realizing that he's actually making fun of Senator Biden's plan to partition Iraq. But I'll react nonetheless, just in case it's a serious proposition.
You don't cure a trauma by creating a new one. I think that separating Pakistan from India was folly and that the wars between the two divorcees had more to do with unhealed wounds (especially on the Pakistani side) than with the perpetual excuse, Kashmir. And now you want to go further and separate Punjab from Sind, NWFP from Baluchistan?
If Pakistan's split-off from India taught us anything, it's that breaking up countries does not bring peace. Quite on the contrary, it brings war and a perpetuation of the tensions it was meant to solve.
And if Europe's recent history has taught us something, it is that centrifugal forces within a country are appeased when that country merges into a larger entity.
Maybe Pakistan will find peace when the Indian subcontinent is reunited, if not in a single nation then in an EU-style community. Just as Iraq would undoubtedly benefit from a similar mechanism within the Arab world.
That is true. Pakistan should be desolved. NWFP should join back with Afghanistan as it was before part of Afghanistan. And the rest of it should belong to India.
Ali Ettefagh's proposal to remake practically the whole of the Middle East in order to correct the mistakes of the British who were largely responsible for the present composition of the Middle East comes rather late in the day.
In the abstract his proposal may appear to be logical and rational. But logic and rationality cannot undo the serious mistakes committed by an imperial power rather hurriedly in the dying days of its imperium.
Those mistakes have jelled or hardened in what we now know as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Jordan, Palestine, Bangladesh and a few other nations. There is no practical or possible way to "unjel" those mistakes along more realistic and viable lines.
This part of the world, now in virtually a state of tension in parts, in crisis in others and in anarchy and chaos in still other parts, will have to continue to submit to a geopolitical dynamic of conflict and adjustment as their final arbiter.
I have participated year after year or months after months in your Talk Center many years ago on Caliphate and it became true as you went back to 1914 when west first invaded Iraq and Middle East and killed in thousands.
So I append same solution which is only Caliphate and Caliphate. Don't pay any one for further division of Muslim land or Asian and African land and be satisfied with other stolen 4 Continents besides Europe by Europeans or Anglo Saxons.
If India can remain as one country with one billion people and around 20 major languages without any martial law since it’s independence in 1947 Pakistan could survive and can survive if it’s Rulers accepted Islam in heart and implemented Islam in all sphere of life.
During 800 years of Muslim rule when Afghanistan, Pakistan present day India, Bangladesh including part of Burma and Central Muslim countries was one country.
Problem started after Muslims left Islam and followed anti-Muslim system of ruling and law in their own land and it started under Chairmanship of Britain when few Muslims wanted money, power and fame.
Muslims have no courage to write the truth as their writing will not be published or accepted by media and they write for only personal gain and not for the sake of Allah/God or Islam and that are the only problem.
Iran and Pakistan was part of Caliphate for around 6 hundred years as one country when there was no problem and Muslims were only one big power in whole World for around 1200 years and not for only 200 years like present Western power, military power.
Muslims started suffering after they left Caliphate and real Islam.
Please read wrings of a great Judge; a judge in the Calcutta High Court, he became the first Indian to sit as a Law Lord of the Privy Council, In 1910. His ancestors came from Iran to India during time Nadir Shah and he is a Syed.
Or Google for The Election of Caliph/Khalifah and World Peace
Again Muslims left Islam and few of them even dare to write more division like divide Iraq and divide Pakistan and so on to be able to act as writers and to earn a little money in this temporary world.
Pakistan was not set up as counterweight to India.
It was set up as an attempt to separate the warring Hindus and Muslims -- and the predictable and impending clash that would occur when the British withdrew from South Asia.
Nor was Pakistan set up as a counterweight to India's tendency to tilt towards the Eastern Bloc.
At the time Pakistan was established (simultaneously with independence for India), India had not had the time or opportunity to tilt in any direction.
Ali Ettefagh is clearly ignorant about both India and Pakistan.
I would agree(Ettefaq ) with Mr Ettefaq had he also visited the idea of Pakistan in some detail.
It seems he was in a bit of hurry to lecture at an investment forum where his interest lies deep.
More so later---
I would agree(Ittefaq ) with Mr Ittefaq had he also visited the idea of Pakistan in some detail.
It seems he was in a bit of hurry to lecture at an investment forum where his interest lies deep.
More so later
You mean my college paper about Jinnah in 1958 (when everyone else wrote about Gandhi) was chopped liver? Well ... at least were the country to be divided along the old provincial lines (how old ... would Bahawalpur qualify?), the linguistic tinkering that India has done to Bihar and Assam might be avoided ... for a while!
Brother ... what an example to India, China and Russia! On the other hand...!
Get your facts before u declare yourself an expert on Pakistan.
Do u know what the urban/rural split is in pakistan and which way the trend is?
Do u know that tribal areas comprise only a minisicule part of the total territory of Pakistan.
Most importantly for all the problems Pakistan may be facing all the provinces believe in the sanctity of Pakistan and u will be surprised to know all the ethnicities u are so concerned about are not little islands amongst each other but people who are friends, relatives and proud compatriots.
And for the people in the forum that are sounding virtues of India, this same idiotic argument can apply more succinctly to it.
For the record with all the missteps Pakistan's per capita income/purchasing power parity/social development indicators are all higher than India's which had a head start at partition economically and unfair distribution of assets by the British (again facts not self serving analysis).
I would also request WP to give space in its valued publication to analysts who actually know what they are talking about and not armchair analysts like Ali with half baked analysis and self serving interests.
You probably are right -- i don't have the evidence, but on the face of it you could well be 100% right.
HOWEVER, the evidence we have on George Bush, Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld etc. is far, far more damning than anything we have on Musharraf.
So, if you don't understand what you say you don't understand, what I, PERSONALLy don't understand is why YOU, PERSONALLY have not yet planted a bomb up those of the George Bush, Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld etc.
Please be honest for once and give me a reply that readers might feel comfortable about and that might elicit their respect for you.
-MUCH WHAT THE WRITERS SAYS ABOUT PAKISTAN MILITARY RULERS IS TRUE-BUT WEST HAS TO CHANGE ITS PERSECTIVE FROM SHORT TERM POLITICAL EXPEDIENCY AND MISGUIDED PRECOLONIAL MINDSETS TO MORE MODERN ACCOUNTABLE OVERT POLITICAL THINKING AND SUPPORT FOR WORLDS EMERGING BUT STRUGGLING SECULAR DEMOCRACIES. BUT THEN WHO IS TO COUNSEL THE WESTERN LEADERS MIRED IN THEIR OWN PERSONAL POWER GAMES AND SELF INTERESTS AND MUCK RAKING AGAINST EACH OTHER. THE STARK EXAMPLE OF RELIGION BASED POLITICAL DEVASTATION AND STRIFE IS UK N IRELAND WHERE MINDS BLINDED BY RELIGIOUS HATREDS STILL DESTROYS LIFE IN N IRELAND YET FUNNILY N IRELAND HAS WORST RECORD OF RACIAL COLOUR RELIGIOUS DEMOGOGUE!!
It is USA which needs be dissolved and not Pakistan. Actually it is USA which is leading this havoc in the world at the moment, so after dissolving USA Pakistan may not need dissolution, who knows.
It seems to have has become trendy to not only imagine but advocate as well the partition of any country, be it Palestine, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkey, etc.
Is this a new epidemic?
Or is it rather, more simply, the same person (an unemployed "diplomat"?) projecting repeatedly his/her obsessions around indiscriminately, only under different names?
While you make a compelling case, it's not practical and will lead to more bloodshed. It may be that they follow a medieval religion or their most enlightened moderates are those that shave and feel non-muslims shouldn't be killed but just given second-class status until they covert - but given how India is surviving as a secular (if barely) entity even with a subsection of their own polity wanting it to become a Hindu version of Pakistan, maybe there will evolve a movement in Pakitsan that, with Gillette's help will eventually modernise Pakistan and civilize it
While I can understand the anger this post has generated among Pakistanis, what I don't understand is the support expressed for Gen. Musharraf. He is a first rate thug and should be ostracized by the international community.
Robert:
From your comments to me and a few of these blog writers, you seem to be a highly opinionated loud mouth who does not know what he is talking about. As they say it: a fool who remains quite can pretend to be wise. I recommend it to you particularly when your knowledge about the topic is suspect. Your accusation about me is not only wrong but also frivolous. My stand against Ali Ettefagh and his ilks stand.
i do agree with your last paragragh that pakistan is a relic and a failed one at that.even its economy is due to the handouts from usa and saudi treasury.in the last 60 years the sum of its contribution to its people and to the world at large is religious radicalism and spread of jihadist terrorism globally,not to talk of nuclear clandestine proliferation again with a religious slant.however the total blame for the unfortunate failed state status of pakistan has to be borne by only two nations UK and USA.we all are aware of the old adage "WE REAP WHAT WE SOW".if drastic and urgent measures are not taken thru UN the unraveling of this rapidly deteriorating condition will prophetically end up as "THE CLASH OF CIVILISATION".
It is a teerible and poorly thoughtout analysis.
The same kind of thinking is now being cinsidered in usa, where it is being recommended that Iran Should be bombed to stone age.
May be the author will agree with that too.
Re: India which cannot provide food to its teeming poor has to maintain a large army just ot keep the Pak trained and funded terrorists out
unquote
But those same teeming and poor millions can spend billions of rupees every year on filthy hindi movies, biris/cigarettes, drugs, alcohol, cricket, you name it.
You have one rain storm in Bombay and the city is in ruins.
Re: The world is going back to fix mistakes: the Armenian genocide, the Holocaust, the crimes of Stalin against its people, Pol Pot and Cambodia, Idi Amin and Uganda.
unquote:
You either out of ignorance or deliberately have left out:
The millions of Asians killed by the Japanese during WWII, the 10 million Vietnamese killed during the Indo-China War, the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians killed by Jordan and Israel, and the millions of Bangladeshis killed by Kissenger's friends Yahya Khan and company in 1971.
Eh Lah.. Key Hoa hun ( Well See.. What happened,now!) Darn it don't blame this one also on that poor visionary Dr. Etterlagh!
Hey Paki Brotherens here he comes & brings,now---
Musharaf & his beloved EMERGENCY-- and suspension of any RIGHT if ever there was any for Paki Citiizens & whatever constitution and Justice was there! Please, please!PAKI BROTHERS, please GROW UP--if not now then when?
TELL US WHAT IN THE HECK YOU ALL PAKI SUPPORTERS --who have been throwing sharp barbs & stones on the Iranian Doctor who tried to open your eyes to DISOLVE this JIN-HAA"S dream to create a theatric land-- called PAKISTAN --ARE PROUD OF! Go ahead praise Jinah's CHUMCHA and enjoy the fruit-- EMERGENCY!
Hey Paki GUYS-- run to USA, INDIA, Afganistan, TURKEY, Bangladesy East or West EUORPE, RUSSIA and or where you can than have your beloveds rot in that rotten land.
Do it atleast for the sake of your children!
REMEMBER.. fanatic Religious Aspirations and Terrorism has NO PLACE IN THIS WORLD. Stop kidding yourselves!
Hail to the Humanity & Civilized WORLD!
Is that any way to run a railroad? Creating Musharaf's Umbrella of happiness for all Pakis!
It's about time this issue is resurfaced. More than half of Pakistan belongs to the Afghans. Here is the map of Afghanistan before a British General Durand, drew the Duran line and later on the land was called Pakistan: http://www.afghan-network.net/maps/afghan-map.jpg The British made forced the Afghan kings on 1885 to sign a 100 year deal to give this land to the British. The document exist on Londan. As the map illustrates, the land should be given bank to the Afghan and remainder of Pakistan divide into smaller stated. Please visit the map link, over half of Paki land should be given back to the Afghans and make is free Nuclear country. I hope this idea gains momentum..
Thank you Dr. Ettefagh for your oversimplified analysis of Pakistan. Using you rationale, it would make sense to break down more then half the worlds countries into their respective provinces. So, that when we are a world of 2000 separate nations universal peace and stability will be finally achieved!?! Pakistan is in crisis. The divide and conquer principle that you advocate would lead to only a further vacuum in the region; hence leading to different parties vying for the booty of nuclear weapons and power. Instead, Pakistan needs further support from the world community in establishing democracy through further backing of president Musharraf. If Pakistan is to ever escape from the post-colonial cycle and triumph over fundamentalism, it will require continued support of a strong figure who can hold all factions together. Musharraf may not be the dream leader that Americans desire, yet he thus far has done a satisfactory job in supporting the war against terrorism. True democracy will only arrive in Pakistan when an Attaturk type of figure will be given the support and patience of the world in order to pave the way for stability in the country.
Of the many blind hatemongers I find here, there is one that I recognise having been spreading his Islamophobic (not just anti-Pakistani) hatred all over the place for long months now : OASIS.
If this hatemonger is from India, his more intelligent compatriots (to which my family belongs) will tell him that the misfortunes of the object of this hatred do not automatically translate into good news for him. In case they don't convince him of this evident truth, events will soon force him to accommodate himself to this truth.
When India achieved independence, many people said that it was also an unworkable impoverished conglomeration of many races with different languages, cultures, and castes. It also included wild tribal areas in the East that had been loosely administered by the British and were also smuggling centers. It also had several language controversies that resulted in the use today of English as an official language. Yet here we are almost 60 years later and India is a thriving, united nation. I think the real reason that India has thrived and Pakistan has stagnated lies beyond sheer diversity. Except for a short dictatorial period under Indira Ganhdi, India has been a secular democracy that has tried to accommodate the needs of the lower castes, Muslims, Naga tribemen, and other minorities.
India is certainly far less than perfect, but it compares well with Pakistan. Pakistan has had very little true democracy, just a succession of military dictators and short-lived civilian regimes. While not an Islamic state, it certainly is not a secular one like India. In Pakistan, there has been very little improvement in the quality of life for the poor, the minorities, and the tribals - everything goes to the military or the aristocratic elite. Don't blame the people of Pakistan - blame the rulers.
This is a very interesting article. It shows how, by standing fast by the artificial creations of post-colonialism, we will always suffer from constant internal and regional conflicts.
I'm from Latin America, a place where colonialism ended (seemly) in the early 19th Century. Nevertheless, the artificiality of nations described by Dr. Ettefagh is the same. Countries with similar cultures, language, religion, and shared history stand separated by borders created for administrative purposes by an empire (the Spanish) that ceased to exist almost two hundred years ago.
I guess it will be easier for Pakistan to break apart than for Latin America to become united.
Do not be bothered about Pakistan. Let first resolve the Kurdish dilemma in Iranian Kurdistan. The destiny of 10 million underprivileged Kurds in that country.
Mr. Etterlagh, Pakistan is not just an artificial country it is an imaginery country, a nostalgic, wistful dream. Many of its earliest promoters conceived of it as the land of the pure (pak=pure; stan=land) unsullied by the presence of infidel hordes, a place where Islamic culture and piety would so suffuse the very air people breathed that disharmony would be impossible. Others, peering through equally rose-tinted lenses, saw Pakistan as a successor to the Mughal Empire – a country automatically blessed with the unity, glory and grandeur of its predecessor.
All this was, of course, a vast delusion. Religion brought violence and chaos to the country, rather than unity. The effort to inherit the mantle of the Mughals brought extreme centralization of power, the dominance of a feudal aristocracy over political life and the subjugation of the government to the will of the military establishment. These developoments, instead of unifying a diverse people, created conflict, alienation and turmoil.
Pakistan has become a chimera, a virtual state, quite ungovernable by normal institutions. Even the iron hand of the military is no longer sufficient and Musharraf’s latest gambit, declaring emergency, will not do the trick. There is no substance to the country anymore, no substance that any authority can control, all has become fluid and formless. It's end lies in its beginnings.
If India can remain as one country with one billion people and around 20 major languages without any martial law since it’s independence in 1947 Pakistan could survive and can survive if it’s Rulers accepted Islam in heart and implemented Islam in all sphere of life.
During 800 years of Muslim rule when Afghanistan, Pakistan present day India, Bangladesh including part of Burma and Central Muslim countries was one country.
Problem started after Muslims left Islam and followed anti-Muslim system of ruling and law in their own land and it started under Chairmanship of Britain when few Muslims wanted money, power and fame.
Muslims have no courage to write the truth as their writing will not be published or accepted by media and they write for only personal gain and not for the sake of Allah/God or Islam and that are the only problem.
Iran and Pakistan was part of Caliphate for around 6 hundred years as one country when there was no problem and Muslims were only one big power in whole World for around 1200 years and not for only 200 years like present Western power, military power.
Muslims started suffering after they left Caliphate and real Islam.
Please read wrings of a great Judge; a judge in the Calcutta High Court, he became the first Indian to sit as a Law Lord of the Privy Council, In 1910. His ancestors came from Iran to India during time Nadir Shah and he is a Syed.
Or Google for The Election of Caliph/Khalifah and World Peace
Again Muslims left Islam and few of them even dare to write more division like divide Iraq and divide Pakistan and so on
To able acted as writers and to earn a little money in this temporary world.
If India can remain as one country with one billion people and around 20 major languages without any martial law since it’s independence in 1947 Pakistan could survive and can survive if it’s Rulers accepted Islam in heart and implemented Islam in all sphere of life.
During 800 years of Muslim rule when Afghanistan, Pakistan present day India, Bangladesh including part of Burma and Central Muslim countries was one country.
Problem started after Muslims left Islam and followed anti-Muslim system of ruling and law in their own land and it started under Chairmanship of Britain when few Muslims wanted money, power and fame.
Muslims have no courage to write the truth as their writing will not be published or accepted by media and they write for only personal gain and not for the sake of Allah/God or Islam and that are the only problem.
Iran and Pakistan was part of Caliphate for around 6 hundred years as one country when there was no problem and Muslims were only one big power in whole World for around 1200 years and not for only 200 years like present Western power, military power.
Muslims started suffering after they left Caliphate and real Islam.
Please read wrings of a great Judge; a judge in the Calcutta High Court, he became the first Indian to sit as a Law Lord of the Privy Council, In 1910. His ancestors came from Iran to India during time Nadir Shah and he is a Syed.
Or Google for The Election of Caliph/Khalifah and World Peace
Again Muslims left Islam and few of them even dare to write more division like divide Iraq and divide Pakistan and so on
To able acted as writers and to earn a little money in this temporary world.
Berry:
"The article itself is a clear scholarly work. But Mr. Ettefagh should have chosen a better headline, something that doesn't get misunderstood by Pakistanis in general, and doesn't lead radical Pakistanis to ask for his head." end of quote.
this is exactly what the baloch and sindhi nationalists have been saying. Would like to point out one error in this piece which is Baluchistan was never part of Pakistan. It remained independent for 9 months after which it got amalgamated by Pakistan by force.
You put it in a very straightforward words. Many readers may not like your idea but its a fact and sooner the world realize the better it is for Pakistan. Unfortunately, there is a section in this world who mass up the things for nothing so that they can stay in top 1%, Pakistan is a product of it. If the foundation is based on claver,short-sighted and are not well established, the county is bound to fail. It was created to counter weight India and now it seems its its not working. Sixty year of time is good enough to realize, unfortunately it appears the word need more time to wake up. The west should take a closer look at the society of Pakistan, the military rule and their policies and UN should interfere to make a better place.
Pakistan has been a source of serious trouble not only for Iran, it is constant source of serious trouble for all its neighbors, India and Afghanistan as well. It created the Taliban, which now controls large parts of Pakistan with its 7th century style barbarianism. One day the Pakistan's nuclear arsenal will surely
be controlled by Taliban. Than What. India which cannot provide food to its teeming poor has to maintain a large army just ot keep the Pak trained and funded terrorists out. Ditto in the case of Afghanistan.
I agree 100% with you sir.It is brilliant. If the five Provinces go their separate ways, that will bring much needed peace and prosperity in the region. That will also solve the al Quaida problem.
What a good and reasonable solution Dr. Ettefagh has suggested for such a failed state. The existance of Pakistan has become a great threat for the whole wolrd's peace.
The good doctor calls it as is it, straight to the point. Pakistan is indeed the most dangerous state or failing state on the planet. Apart from its nuclear weapons, there is the specter of rising religious extremism, religious intolerance, tribalism, and a venomous hatred for India. These realities undermine any meaningful cohesiveness, and places the country on a dangerous path not only to self destruction, but also to being a conduit and instigator of regional instability.
There is not much to be gained by dwelling in the past and debating if Pakistan deserves to be a separate nation or not. The fact is that we do have the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in our midst that is armed with nuclear weapons and the nation is in a state of crisis today.
The jihadi's who were fostered by Pakistan's military and its ISI to torment India and Afghanistan among others have come home to roost and have turned against their own masters. Now the ordinary citizens of Pakistan are burdened by both their military rulers as well as these Jihadis who have no plan for the future other than to blow themselves up and take as many bystanders as possible as victims.
It is in the long term interest of India, Afghanistan, Iran and other nations such as China, Russia, USA, EU and others to help calm the situation down in Pakistan. Eventually the people of Pakistan will prevail and the military will return to its barracks. The militants will be eliminated from their hideouts. Pakistan will return to nation building and democracy will take root and economic development can begin in earnest.
In this, Pakistan will find a willing ally in India and the two nations will be reconciled. This is my hope and the hope of millions of people across the subcontinent.
I posted shortly after this piece first appeared - my comments had little to do with the idea of dissolving Pakistan, but rather with the glaring factual inaccuracies and complete ignorance displayed by the author. For example, as I pointed out and many others have, "Pakistan" was not an acronym - yes, some "clever" fellow at one time suggested it and people like Ettefagh bought it hook, line and sinker. Afghanistan - land (stan) of the Afghani or Afghans, and Pakistan, land (stan) of the Pure (Paak or Paaki). As someone said, the term was suggested by the famous poet Iqbal who, incidentally wrote in Urdu and, I believe also Farsi.
I am not a Pakistani, but I have taken the time to try to learn about the country.
Now, taking Ettefagh's comments, I thought it might be fun to apply them to my country, the United States of America.
Ettefagh, with all his ignorance fanned out like a peacock's tail (ah yes, Iran was the land of Peacock's no? - at least in poetry and on carpet motifs) might say.
America is not a country. It is a failed anti-British fantasy about the fabrication of a nation state. It has failed and has other failing peers in the western world.
The "United States" was a phrase coined for an idealistic confederation of 13 Christian provinces within the old British-controlled American colonies. Later, there were added territories by conquest, purchase and assimilation. These are distinct lands and have very little in common.
These states were all knocked together on presumption of a common religion, and a "federal" system was fabricated.
America's short 235-year or so history is full of war, violence against an indigent population, even a civil war among its own people, and major wars in Europe and the pacific in the early part of the last century as well as wars in Korea, Vietnam, Granada, Panama, alliance in a war with the former colonial rulers in the Falklands, and most recently, in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Today, even the commonly accepted language of America is under attack as it becomes bilingual and almost 50% Spanish speaking. And the Christianity dominated land is now said to be under control of the Israeli lobby representing another fabricated country.
For as long as I can remember, America's southern border has been a hub of instability, illegal immigration, drug smuggling, and the main transit route for cocaine and marijuana from Latin America. "In turn, that cash flow encourages money laundering, armed banditry, murder, violence and corruption."
There are other issues to ponder, namely a formidable nuclear arsenal, missiles, a brisk small-arms export business (billions of dollars a year) and the schizophrenic dual-tracked “friendship” with the Saudis and Middle East Emirates. America’s aimless Iraq and Iran policies are perfect examples of circular political indecision. U.S. troops have remained stationed in Iraq for more than four years and in Korea and Germany for decades.
I think it is high time to revisit the old composite structure of fifty states combined into one artificial country. A redrawing of borders might serve useful and to cut through the farce. Let each state mature and declare independence. Some will eventually join their long-time regional allies, leaving two or three independent lands and a more transparent political agenda.
__
Mr. Ettefagh, if you read this, you might get a glimmer of how truly stupid what you have written is. At a minimum, you will know you have been exposed as ignorant of the facts and perhaps you will study before you write more.
As many have pointed out, it is truly shocking and disheartening that a paper like the Washington Post does not have an editorial staff capable of weeding out the ignorant and inaccurate rubbish that is oft offered on these pages.
Let's see if you and they have the guts to let this comment stand.
The splitting of British India into separate tribal entities didn't create peace. It created two separate nations that have been at each others throats for more that fifty years and have fought several major wars over Kashmir.
In the highly improbable event of Pakistan splitting-up into its ethnicities the likely outcome is constant strife around the ethnic interface and widespread ethnic-cleansing (most of Pakistan is ethnically mixed). Wars radicalize populations, and the only other certainty is that the area would become progressivly radicalized and unstable with a breakdown of centrally-directed authority and security. Add nuclear-weapons to this witches brew and you would have a security nightmare for the US and India. As I have previously said, this breakup scenario is improbable.
Hwever, the alternative is not much better. The US has hitched its wagon to the tyannical Musharrif who is now in the twilight of his malignant career. Two possible scenarios will follow Musharrif. The first is rule by the deeply-flawed and corrupt Benazir Bhutto who would rule subject to the same understandings and compromises with the Islamists as did her predecessor. The alternative is an Islamic democracy along the lines of Iran (but Shi-ite). Islam (besides Pakistani nationalism) being the glue holding Pakistan together.
Whatever happens, the US doesn't have the military power to alter the future course of this distant nation of 160 million people - other than in the negative sense that it might well by its intervention further unite the population in its antipathy to the US and its policies towards the Islamic world.
Dr. Ettefagh is more than right when it comes to the epicenter of Islamic terrorism and extremism called Pakistan, which has a state ideology of terrorism that builds on hatered of Hindus, Christians and Jews. That is the foundation of this dark colonial entity and legacy with disputed borders from the first day of its bloody creation during the hotest days of the Cold War in 1948. From the first day of its creation, the Pakistani military has been busy destabilising Afghanistan and India, which won three wars against it. Destabilisin India and Afghanistan is the only way for the military to keep Pakistan together.
Then there is the question of Balochs and Pashtuns, who never wanted to join this imposed British artificial creation. Neither they want to be part of it today.
It is now clear as the sun that Paki generals have sold nuclear technology to Iran, North Korea and EVEN al-Qaeda. Most terrorists rounded up around the world have Pakistani Punjabi background. Most of the bombers in Europe and Americas have been Pakistanis. Most of the suicide bombers in Afghanistan are Pakistanis. The Pakistani generals gave refuge to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda after the Tora Bora operation in 2001.
It is also known that the Pakistanimilitary is very heavily invoved in drug trade. It is the Pakistani generals who make the most from the drugs and without their involvement it would be impossible to get the opium out of Afghanistan. There are hundreds of advanced opium labratories and thousands of terrorist factories called Madrassas.
Pakistan is a place where the Military Inc owns almost everything.
Pakistan is a stumbling block in the way of peace, stability and properity in South and Central Asia. Pakistan is blocking India's access to Central Asia, it is destabilising Kashmir, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Afghanistan. Its army is killing innocent Balochis and Pashtuns. The Paki generals have sold Baloch territories to the Chinese, who will soon have military bases in Gwadar, which is threatening the security of India, Afghanistan and Iran, not to mention Western interests in the region.
Pakistan must be dissolved, preferably in a peaceful manner, because Afghanistan has never recognised (and never will) the imposed and shameful borders between the two countries. Pakistan can not be hold together by dividing Pashtuns. NWFP is a natural and inseparable part and terrortories of Afghanistan with 100% Pashtun population, which had never seen Punjabi soldiers on its soil but after the War in Terror which provided the Paki Army to, for the first time in its 60 years "history", invade and occupy sovereign and independent Pashtun lands.
The only way Pakistan can survive is through creation of instability in Afghanistan and India, therefore it should be disolved as soon as possible for the good of all nationalities in that entity, for peace, stability and prosperity of the inhabitants of Pakistan, South and Central Asia.
This is the best way to do it:
1. Reintegrate NWFP into the Motherland, Afghanistan, the rightful and historic owner of these territories since thousands of years.
2. Reintegrate Punjab and Sindh provinces into India.
3. Create independent nations of Kashmir and Balochistan.
That way we will stabilise South and Central Asia, promote democracy and prosperity instead of proping up a military regime which does nothing good for its oppressed population or the world.
That is all for now.
Momand
Good Option. More than 500 million muslims of South Asia Could bcomes World's Greatest Power.Persians will be cornered,So will the hindus in another great struggle...Inshallah.
I think that this article makes absolutely no sense. Dissolution is hardly an answer to Pakistan's internal problems. As someone rightly wrote, there is nothing wrong with Pakistan, but it is the bad leadership that is the cause of such havoc. Year in year out, for decades, Pakistan has been unfortunate enough to terrible leaders who are in it just for personal financial gain. They all grow giddy with power the moment they are voted in. And lets not even get into how each and everyone of them bend over backwards to appease the West.
The solution to Pakistan's problems is strong, honest leadership, serving the people with the utmost dedication. And also, leadership that is subserviant to no one but the Lord.
Respectfully Mr.Ali Ettefagh, Sir you have a right to your opinion. I wish we could think of having an arrangement of co-existing the "European Union" way. Countries are man made. Geographical Boundaries keep changing. Why can't the inhabitants living on different continents co-exist together. The continents and countries were not demarked as we see them to-day.
We wish well for all the oppressed people of the world.
I wonder if a "Balkanization" of what now consitutes Pakistan will (a) be practicable, and (b) actually achieve what Mr. Ettefagh envisions.
The calculus of this process is hard to figure out. But his idea is certainly worth examining. I do not see the break-up of Pakistan happening anytime soon, and most likely not with the results portrayed in the article.
Definitely, smaller units are likely to be less of a threat, but radical Islamism is not so easily contained within such boundaries.
I, myself, am not quite happy with the political developments in Pakistan. But the gentleman appears to be not very well versed in history of nation-making or state formation. I will suggest him to have a cursory look on the process of state formation in Europe (the birthplace of nation State-Westphalia 1648).
It may be too much for an investment banker to understand the political developments. Mr./Dr. Ettefagh please do not fanaticize what you do not know. Just keep your eyes on market ups and downs. History of nations does not fluctuate with interest rate cuts or Fed meetings, it is a historical process. GOT IT?
I think the respected writer knows very little or almost none at all about history of Pakistan. He seems to be speaking the same language as majority of Indians speak. I feel pity on his lack of knowledge and would like to challenge his knowledge about his own country also. I would also request him to keep his ill thought views to himself and instead of becoming a pseudo intellectual be practical and rationale. Hot tempers and non sense gossip is likely to place his repute in a dangerous position. Through him I would also request Washington post to prevent any further posts by him which greviously hurt the feelings of its readers.
it is too painful for me to be a pakistani and more than it in these times when ,no doubt, we are a cumbersome crowd and not a nation state at all. why? -becuse of a Army whome we fed 60 long years out of our meager resources. Is it not a tragedy which cannot be translated into words-at least not possible for me. Hence i believe Dissolve Pakistan, Too.
ASGHAR KHAN MAYO
lahore
Mr. Ettefagh cites english as Pakistan's official language as measure of her failure to form a cohesive state. But english is also India's official langguage, which is an established democracy. The ultimate recipe to dissolve Pakistan along provincial borders would perpetuate the solution sought by the British in 1947 that the author criticizes.
Pakistan's provinces have ethnic majorities but also significant ethnic minorities. The bloodshed caused by such reckless and radical dissolution would be epic.
Pakistan needs to find a transitional path to democracy. While the recent events are a serious set back, in recent years Pakistan has taken huge steps in rebuilding its civil and private institutions. For example, creation of local governments, banks in financial sectors, tremendous increase in tax collection to finance public infrastructure etc. Not the least is unprecendented freedom of the press and private media outlets.
A radical change would not usher in western style democracy in Pakistan but only more chaos. International community should help Pakistan find the transitional route to stable democracy. Pakistan has taken a step back but not as deep as bringing back failed, corrupt and incompetent political leaders of the 90s. She will find a way forward.
The Turks occupied what is today is Afghanistan in 12th century and mongolian-mughals spread to today's Pakistan and parts of India till the end of 17th century. In essence all the land originally belonged to India and most of the people in pakistan are either forced converted hindus or occupiers from middle east. Pakistan is just a part of India and will be attached to India in 10 years or less. It was created by mistake. Pakistan soon will be divided in three parts. Baloch, Sindh and Punjab. Most of it will be attached to India again. Some of it will go to Russia and some rightfully to India's friend Afghanistan. Take it easy.
I agree with you sir. Paksitan should never have been a state. As you said, there are many nations within this failed state. This is true not only in Pakistan but other countries affected by colonial rule, but Pakistan is more unique than any other failed state. Its people have no true pride of their state, no identity they could call their own, and everything is for sale including their honor.
This Iranian should know that there are many many lanugages in Iran also. Pakistan like India uses English as a language of science and technology
Languages of Iran
[See also SIL publications on the languages of Iran.]
Islamic Republic of Iran, Jomhouri-e-Eslami-e-Irân. 67,503,205. National or official language: Western Farsi. Literacy rate: 70% to 75% among those 6 years old and over (1995–1996 Iran Statistical Center). Also includes Eastern Farsi (1,000,000), Hulaulá (300), Tajiki, Turkish (2,570), people from Afghanistan (3,000,000), Kurds from Iraq (120,000), Shi'a Arabs from Iraq. Information mainly from E. Drower 1939; R. Macuch 1965; I. Garbell 1965; T. Sebeok 1969, 1970; G. Doerfer et al. 1971; R. Oberling 1974; D. L. Stilo 1981; R. D. Hoberman 1988a, b. Blind population: 200,000 (1982 WCE). Deaf population: 3,978,055. Deaf institutions: 50. The number of languages listed for Iran is 77. Of those, 75 are living languages and 2 are extinct.
Living languages
Aimaq [aiq] 170,000 in Iran (1993 Johnstone). Mazanderan Province. Dialects: Teimuri (Teimurtash). Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Persian
More information.
Alviri-Vidari [avd] Near Saveh, Markazi Province. Dialects: Alvir (Alviri), Vidar (Vidari). Related to Gozarkhâni and Vafsi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Arabic, Gulf Spoken [afb] 200,000 in Iran (1993). Southern coast; Khamseh nomads live in eastern Fars Province; other Arab nomadic groups in several southcentral provinces of Iran. Alternate names: Khaliji, Gulf Arabic. Dialects: Al-Hasâ, Khamseh. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, South, Arabic
More information.
Arabic, Mesopotamian Spoken [acm] 1,200,000 in Iran. Khuzestan Province, southwest side of Zagros Mountains, along the bank of the Shatt al Arab. Alternate names: Mesopotamian Gelet Arabic, `Arabi, Arabi. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, South, Arabic
More information.
Armenian [hye] 170,800 in Iran (1993). Northern Iran, Azerbaijan Provinces around Khoi, Shahpur, Ahar, Tabriz, Tehran, Esfahan, Shiraz. Alternate names: Haieren, Somekhuri, Ermenice, Armjanski, Armani, Erâmani. Dialects: Eastern Armenian, Agulis, Astrakhân, Jolfâ (Dzhulfa), Karabagh Shamakhi, Khoi-Salmst (Khvoy), Urmia-Maragheh. Classification: Indo-European, Armenian
More information.
Ashtiani [atn] 21,099 (2000 WCD). Ashtiyan and Tafresh, Markazi Province. Alternate names: Astiani, Ashtiyani. Dialects: Ashtiani, Tafresh. Transitional between central Iranian dialects and Talysh. Dialects may be separate languages. Very close to Vafsi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Assyrian Neo-Aramaic [aii] 10,000 to 20,000 in Iran (1994). Ethnic population: 80,000 (1994). Reza'iyeh (Rizaiye, Urmia, Urmi). Most in TehranTehran. Dialects: Iranian Koine (General Urmi). Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, Aramaic, Eastern, Central, Northeastern
More information.
Azerbaijani, South [azb] 23,500,000 in Iran (1997). Population includes 290,000 Afshar, 5,000 Aynallu, 7,500 Baharlu, 1,000 Moqaddam, 3,500 Nafar 1,000 Pishagchi, 3,000 Qajar, 2,000 Qaragozlu, 130,000 Shahsavani (1993). Population total all countries: 24,364,000. East and West Azerbaijan, Ardebil, Zanjan, and part of Markazi provinces. Many in a few districts of TehranTehran. Some Azerbaijani-speaking groups are in Fars Province and other parts of Iran. Also spoken in Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Jordan, Syria, Turkey (Asia), USA. Alternate names: Azeri, Torki. Dialects: Aynallu (Inallu, Inanlu), Karapapakh, Tabriz, Afshari (Afshar, Afsar), Shahsavani (Shahseven), Moqaddam, Baharlu (Kamesh), Nafar, Qaragozlu, Pishagchi, Bayat, Qajar. Distinctive linguistic differences between the Azerbaijani of the former USSR (North) and Iranian Azerbaijani (South) in phonology, lexicon, morphology, syntax, and loanwords. Teimurtash (7,000 in Mazanderan; possibly the same as Teimuri, Timuri, Taimouri) and Salchug (in Kerman Province) may be dialects. Qashqa'i may be a dialect. Part of the Qizilbash merchant group speak the Afshari dialect, which is strongly influenced by Persian. The dialect spoken in Syria is different from Kirkuk of Iraq, and may be closer to Turkish (Osmanli) than to Azerbaijani. There is a gradual transition of dialects from Turkish to Azerbaijani from central to western Turkey. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Azerbaijani
More information.
Bakhtiari [bqi] 1,000,000 (2001). 350,000 monolinguals. Ethnic population: 1,000,000 (2001). Southwestern Iran: western Chahar-Mahal va Bakhtiari, eastern Khuzestan, eastern Lorestan, and western Esfahan. Masjed-e Soleiman, Shahr-e Kord, Dorud. Alternate names: Lori-ye Khaveri, Luri, Lori. Dialects: Haft-Lang, Charlang, Chelgerd, Kuhrang (Kohrang). Bakhtiari is on a dialect continuum between Northern Luri and Southern Luri. Farsi dialects in Chaharmahal va Bakhtiari Province are mutually intelligible with Bakhtiari. Close to Kumzari. Lexical similarity 75% with Southern Luri (Mamasani), 86% with Southern Luri (Boyerahmadi), 73% with Northern Luri (rural), 78% with Northern Luri (Khorramabadi), 76% with Western Farsi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Luri
More information.
Balochi, Southern [bcc] 405,000 in Iran. Southern Sistan va Baluchistan Province. Alternate names: Baluchi, Baluci, Baloci. Dialects: Makrani (Lotuni). Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Balochi
More information.
Balochi, Western [bgn] 451,000 in Iran (1986). Northern Sistan va Baluchistan Province. Half are settled in cities and villages, half are nomadic. Alternate names: Baluchi, Baluci, Baloci. Dialects: Rakhshani (Raxshani), Sarawani. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Balochi
More information.
Brahui [brh] 10,000 in Iran (1983). Central Sistan and Baluchistan provinces, including Zahedan. Alternate names: Brahudi, Birahui, Kur Galli. Dialects: Jharawan, Kalat, Sarawan. Classification: Dravidian, Northern
More information.
Dari, Zoroastrian [gbz] 8,000 to 15,000 (1999). Yezd and Kerman areas. Alternate names: Dari, "Gabri", "Gabar", "Yazdi". Dialects: Related to Parsi-Dari and Nâyini. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Domari [rmt] 1,338,271 in Iran (2000 WCD). Population total all countries: 1,876,116. Kurbat and Luli are in western Iran. Mehtar is in Fars and Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad Province. Karachi is in northern Iran. Also spoken in Afghanistan, Egypt, India, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Libya, Palestinian West Bank and Gaza, Russia (Europe), Sudan, Syria, Turkey (Europe), Uzbekistan. Alternate names: Middle Eastern Romani, Tsigene, Gypsy, Luti, Mehtar. Dialects: Kurbati (Ghorbati), Qinati, Yürük, Koli, Karachi, Luli, Maznoug, Nawar. A number of the dialects in Iran may be highly divergent from one another. Not intelligible to Romani speakers. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Indo-Aryan, Central zone, Dom
More information.
Dzhidi [jpr] Alternate names: Judeo-Persian, Djudi, Judi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Persian
More information.
Eshtehardi [esh] Eshtehard and environs, Karaj District, Markazi Province. Dialects: Close to Takestani. Eshtehardi may be the same language as some other dialects spoken to the southwest of Qazvin. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Fars, Northwestern [faz] Scattered in isolated pockets of Fars Province. Dialects: Close to Sivandi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Fars, Southwestern [fay] Central Fars Province: Somghun, Papun, Masarm, Buringun, Kondazi, Davâni, others. Alternate names: "Tajik". Dialects: Related to Lari. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Fars
More information.
Farsi, Western [pes] 22,000,000 in Iran (1997). Population includes 800,000 Eastern Farsi in Khorasan, Gilan, Tat, Bakhtiari, Lur. Population total all countries: 24,316,121. Throughout Iran. Most heavily concentrated in central, south central, and northeastern Iran. Also spoken in Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, India, Iraq, Israel, Netherlands, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Sweden, Tajikistan, Turkey (Asia), Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, USA, Uzbekistan. Alternate names: Persian, New Persian, Parsi, Irani. Dialects: Ketabi, Tehrani, Shirazi, Old Shirazi, Qazvini, Mahalhamadani, Kashani, Esfahani, Sedehi, Kermani, Araki, Shirazjahromi, Shahrudi Kazeruni, Mashadi (Meshed), Basseri, Yazdi, Bandari. The literary language is virtually identical in Iran and Afghanistan, with very minor lexical differences. Zargari may be a dialect used by goldsmiths (also see Balkan Romani in Iran). Dialect shading into Dari in Afghanistan and Tajiki in Tajikistan. Many of the dialects may be separate languages. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Persian
More information.
Gazi [gzi] 7,033 (2000). Gaz. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Georgian [kat] 50,000 in Iran. Fereydan and Fereydunshahr provinces, Esfahan, Najaf Abad, Shahin Shahr, Yazdanshahr. Alternate names: Kartuli, Gruzin. Dialects: Fereydan (Ferejdan). Classification: Kartvelian, Georgian
More information.
Gilaki [glk] 3,265,000 (1993). Population includes 2,000 Galeshi. Gilan Region, coastal plain, south of Talish. Galeshi is a mountain dialect. Alternate names: Gelaki, Gilani, Guilaki, Guilani. Dialects: Galeshi, Rashti. Close to Mâzanderâni. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Caspian
More information.
Gozarkhani [goz] Gozarkhan (northwest of Qazvin); Tajrish, north of Tehran; Alamut area. Dialects: Close to Maraghei, as well as Semnani languages. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Harzani [hrz] 28,132 (2000 WCD). West Azerbaijan Province: Qalingie, between Marand and Jolfa, northwest of Tabriz; related varieties in Galin Qaya, Babra, and Dizmar. Dialects: Close to Karingani and Talysh. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Hawrami [hac] 22,948 in Iran (2000 WCD). For all speakers of Gurani group, several million; Hawrami dialect: 20,000 (Blau 1989). Western part of Kordestan province, near Iraqi border, in Hewraman, east of Sanandaj, also north of Kermanshah. Alternate names: Hewrami, Howrami, Hawramani, Awromani, Gurani, Gorani. Dialects: Kakai (Macho), Hawraman-I Luhon, Hawraman-I Taxt, Kandula, Gawhara, Gurani (Gorani). Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Zaza-Gorani
More information.
Hazaragi [haz] 283,000 in Iran (1993). Population has increased significantly due to the influx of Hazaragi-speaking refugees from Afghanistan. Throughout Iran, especially urban centers. Alternate names: Hazara, Hezareh, Hezare'i. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Persian
More information.
Kabatei [xkp] Rudbar District, Gilan Province. Dialects: Kalas, Kabate. Close to Upper Taromi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Kajali [xkj] Khalkhal District in Eastern Azerbaijan Province, Kaqazkonan District, Kajal. Dialects: Close to Shahrudi and Koresh-e Rostam. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Karingani [kgn] 17,583 (2000 WCD). East Azerbaijan Province, Dizmar District, Keringan village, and Hasanu District, northeast of Tabriz. Alternate names: Keringani. Dialects: Various dialects. Very close to Harzani. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Kazakh [kaz] 3,000 in Iran (1982). Gorgan City, Mazanderan Province. Alternate names: Kazak, Kazakhi, Gazaqi. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Western, Aralo-Caspian
More information.
Khalaj [kjf] 42,107 in Iran (2000 WCD). Also spoken in Azerbaijan. Dialects: Related to Kurdish and Talysh. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern
More information.
Khalaj, Turkic [klj] 42,107 (2000 WCD). Northeast of Arak in Central Province. Alternate names: Khalaj. Dialects: Not a dialect of Azerbaijani, as previously supposed. An independent language distinct from other extant Turkish languages (Doerfer 1971). Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Azerbaijani
More information.
Kho'ini [xkc] Kho'in District, Zanjan Province. Dialects: Various dialects. Related to Kabatei and Takestani. Closely related varieties spoken in the nearby villages of Balbavin, Sefidkamar, Halab, Sa`dabad, and other villages. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Khorasani Turkish [kmz] 400,000 (1977 Doerfer). Northeast Iran, in the northern part of Khorasan Province, especially northwest of Mashhad. West dialect in Bojnurd Region; north dialect in Quchan Region (probably the largest), south dialect around Soltanabad near Sabzevar. Alternate names: Quchani. Dialects: West Quchani (Northwest Quchani), North Quchani (Northeast Quchani), South Quchani. Midway linguistically between Azerbaijani and Turkmen, but not a dialect of either. Oghuz-Uzbek in Uzbekistan is reported to be a dialect. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Turkish
More information.
Khunsari [kfm] 21,099 (2000 WCD). Esfahan Province, Kashan and Esfahan areas. Dialects: Khunsari may be only one of a large complex of dialects in Esfahan Province. Other Northwestern dialects that have been described in the same area and which may be very closely related include those of Vonishun, Qohrud, Keshe, Zefre, Sedeh, Gaz, Kafran, Mahallat, So, Mejme, and Djaushaqan. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Koresh-e Rostam [okh] Eastern Azerbaijan Province, Koresh-e Rostam District. Dialects: Related to Shahrudi and Kajali. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Koroshi [ktl] 160 to 200 (1992 Mohamedi). 40 to 50 families. Fars Province. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Balochi
More information.
Kurdish, Central [ckb] 3,250,000 in Iran. Northwest Iran, primarily Kordestan, West Azerbaijan provinces, areas north of Kermanshah. Mukri is spoken around Mahabad, and Sineyi (Sine'i) is spoken around Sanandaj (Sine). Alternate names: Kordi, Korkora, Kurdi, Kurdy, Sorani, Mukri, Mokri, Sine'i, Wawa. Dialects: Mukri, Sanandaji (Sine'i, Sina'i, Sineyi), Southern Jafi, Pijdari. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Kurdish
More information.
Kurdish, Northern [kmr] 350,000 in Iran (1988 Stanzer). North and west of Lake Urmia, extending to border with Azerbaijan. Some small communities live in the Caspian region (Mazandaran, Kalardasht [Fattah 2000]). Khorasani Kurmanji speakers live east of the Caspian Sea, in northern Khorasan Province, bordering Turkmenistan. Centers include Quchan and Bojnurd. Alternate names: Kurmanji, Kurmancî, Eastern Kurmanji, Kordi, Kurdi. Dialects: Khorasani Kurmanji. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Kurdish
More information.
Kurdish, Southern [sdh] 3,000,000 in Iran (2000 Fattah). Western Iran, Kermanshah, Ilam provinces; Eastern Iraq bordering these provinces including Xanaqin. Also spoken in Iraq. Dialects: Kolyai, Kermanshahi (Kermanshani), Kalhori, Garrusi (Bijari) Sanjabi, Malekshahi (Maleksh ay), Bayray, Kordali, Feyli, Luri. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Kurdish
More information.
Laki [lki] 1,000,000 (2002 Fattah). 150,000 monolinguals. Population includes 10,000 Nahavand Lurs. Western Iran, Ilam, Lorestan provinces, cities of Aleshtar, Kuhdesht, Nurabad-e Dolfan, Khorramabad. Alternate names: Leki, Alaki. Dialects: Lexical similarity 70% with Western Farsi, 78% with Luristani (Khorramabadi), 69% with Northern Luri (central rural dialects). Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Kurdish
More information.
Lari [lrl] 80,000. Ethnic population: 100,000. Throughout Lar District, South Fars Province; Shiraz; United Arab Emirates. Alternate names: Larestani, Achomi. Dialects: Lari. Verbal system is quite distinct from Western Farsi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Fars
More information.
Lasgerdi [lsa] In Lasjerd, Semnan Province (40 km southwest of Semnan). Dialects: Related to Sorkhei. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Semnani
More information.
Luri, Northern [lrc] 1,500,000 (2001). Ethnic population: 1,700,000 (2001). Western Iran: Central and Southern Lorestan, Northern Khuzestan, Southern Hamadan Province, the southern edge of Markazi Province, some regions of Ilam, and possibly a small population in eastern Iraq. Populations also in Khorramabad, Borujerd, Andimeshk. Alternate names: Lori, Luri. Dialects: Khorramabadi, Borujerdi, Nahavandi, Andimeshki, Bala-Gariva'i, Mahali (Rural), Cagani. The major Northern Luri dialects (Khorramabadi, Borujerdi, etc.) are found in Lorestan and Khuzestan. Some local regions in Ilam Province (Posht-e Kuh) are said to speak Northern Luri dialects. Mainly south Kurdish dialects are spoken in Ilam Province (Fattah 2000). Also, according to Fattah, there are a small number of villages in Iraq, where a dialect of Northern Luri may be spoken. Close to Kumzari. Lexical similarity of Mahali dialect 80% with Western Farsi, 69% with Laki, and 73% with Bakhtiari (Haflang); Khorramabadi dialect 85% with Western Farsi, 78% with Laki, and 75% with Bakhtiari (Haflang). Similarity to Western Farsi is due to language shift, but also to lexical borrowing. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Luri
More information.
Luri, Southern [luz] 875,000 (1999). 300,000 monolinguals. Ethnic population: 900,000. Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad Province (Yasuj is center of Boyerahmadi, Dehdasht is center of Kohgiluyeh), eastern Khuzestan Province (Kohgiluyeh), Northwestern Fars Province (Nurabad is center of Mamasani, Shul is center of Shuli), Shiraz. Alternate names: Ruliy, Lori-ye Jonubi, Luri, Lur, Lor, Lori. Dialects: Boyerahmadi, Yasuji (Yasichi), Kohgiluyeh, Mamasani, Shuli. Southern Luri is on a continuum between Bakhtiari and Western Farsi "dialects" such as Bushehri and Fars Province varieties. There is a non-Lur tribe in Fars Province called Kurdshuli, which is reported to speak a Southern Luri dialect. Their winter quarters are at Qasr-e Dasht near Sivand, which is 70 km from Sharaz on the Shiraz-Esfahan road (Ivanow 1959, unpublished). Close to Kumzari. Lexical similarity 75% with Western Farsi, 80% with Bushehri dialect of Western Farsi; Mamasani dialect 75% with Bakhtiari, Boyerahmadi dialect 86% with Bakhtiari. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Luri
More information.
Mandaic [mid] 500 (2001). Ethnic population: 23,000. Hoveiseh and other towns, Khuzestan. Alternate names: Mandaean, Neo-Mandaic, Modern Mandaic, Manda:yi, Mandi, Subbi, Sabean, Sabe'in. Dialects: Ahwaz (Ahvaz), Shushtar, Iraqi Neo-Mandaic. Little dialect variation. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, Aramaic, Eastern, Mandaic
More information.
Maraghei [vmh] Upper Rudbar area (Rudbar-e Alamut). Dialects: Dikini. Various dialects. Close to Gozarkhani. Dialect in Kuhpayeh may be the same language. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Mazanderani [mzn] 3,265,000 (1993). Northern Iran near Caspian Sea, southern half of Mazanderan Province. Alternate names: Tabri, Mazandarani. Dialects: Mazanderani, Gorgani. Related to Gilaki. Qadikolahi (Ghadikolahi) and Palani may be dialects. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Caspian
More information.
Natanzi [ntz] 7,033 (2000 WCD). Esfahan Province: Natanz, on the Esfahan-Kashan Road. Dialects: Natanzi may be part of a larger complex of Esfahan Province dialects including Yarani (Yarandi) and Farizandi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Nayini [nyq] 7,033 (2000 WCD). Esfahan Province: Nayin and Anarak, 100 km east of Esfahan; Khuri is spoken in Khur (Khvor) and Mehrjan, 250 km northeast of Esfahan. Alternate names: Biyabanak. Dialects: Nayini, Anarak, Khuri. Dialects listed may be separate languages. Khuri is distinct from other dialects. Related to Zoroastrian Dari. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Parsi-Dari [prd] 350,000 in Iran. Population total all countries: 700,000. Also spoken in Afghanistan. Alternate names: Parsee-Dari. Dialects: Parsi-Dari is reported to not be inherently intelligible with Parsi of India, Pakistan, and other countries, but linguistically and ethnically related. They diverged 600 to 700 years ago or more. It is related to Dari. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Pashto, Southern [pbt] 113,000 in Iran (1993). Population does not include refugees. Khorasan on Afghanistan border east of Qa'en. Alternate names: Pashtu, Paktu, "Afghani". Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Eastern, Southeastern, Pashto
More information.
Persian Sign Language [psc] Classification: Deaf sign language
More information.
Qashqa'i [qxq] 1,500,000 (1997). Southwestern Iran, Fars Province and Southern Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad Province. Shiraz, Gachsaran, and Firuzabad are centers. Alternate names: Qashqay, Qashqai, Kashkai. Dialects: Very close to Azerbaijani. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Azerbaijani
More information.
Razajerdi [rat] Qazvin and Kuhpayeh area, Razajerd. Dialects: Various dialects. Related to Takestani. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Romani, Balkan [rmn] Dialects: Zargari. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Indo-Aryan, Central zone, Romani, Balkan
More information.
Rudbari [rdb] Sefid Rud Valley. Dialects: Various dialects. Transitional to Caspian languages and related to Vafsi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Salchuq [slq] Dialects: Probably a dialect of Azerbaijani. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Azerbaijani
More information.
Senaya [syn] 60 in Iran (1997 H. Mutzafi). Population total all countries: 460. Tehran and Qazvin. Originally in Sanandaj, Kordestan Province. Some in western Europe. Also spoken in Australia, USA. Alternate names: Sena:ya, Christian Neo-Aramaic, Shan Sray, Lshan Sray, Soray, Sray, Shan Gyanan. Dialects: The variety in Qazvin is slightly different from that spoken by Sanandaj-born people. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, Aramaic, Eastern, Central, Northeastern
More information.
Shahmirzadi [srz] Shahmirzad, Semnan Province. Dialects: Close to Mazanderani and Gilaki. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Caspian
More information.
Shahrudi [shm] Khalkhal District in Eastern Azerbaijan Province, Shahrud District, Shal, Kolur, Lerd. Dialects: Close to Kajali and Koresh-e Rostam. Different from Sharudi, a Western Farsi dialect. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Sivandi [siy] 7,033 (2000 WCD). Sivand, Fars Province (70 km northwest of Shiraz on the Shiraz-Esfahan Road). Dialects: Related to Northwestern Fars varieties. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Soi [soj] 7,033 (2000 WCD). Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Sorkhei [sqo] Semnan Province: Sorkheh, 19 km southwest of Semnan. Dialects: Related to Lasgerdi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Semnani
More information.
Takestani [tks] 220,000. Zanjan, Qazvin and Markazi provinces: various towns and villages in the mainly Azerbaijani-speaking region from Khalkhal to Saveh, especially in Takestan and villages to the south and southeast. Alternate names: Takistani. Dialects: Khalkhal, Tarom, Zanjan, Kharaqan, Ramand (Takestan). Close to Talysh, especially Khalkhal dialect. Transitional between Talysh and Semnani languages. Close to Eshtehardi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Talysh [tly] 112,000 in Iran (1993). Northwest Gilan Province along Caspian coastal plain and adjacent mountainous areas from Masuleh, Masal, and Kapur-Chal (Kepri-Chal) (each about 50 km east of Rasht) to the Azerbaijan border. Northern Talyshi is centered around Astara and the Caspian littoral in Azerbaijan; Central Talyshi is centered in the Asalem-Hashtpar area along the Caspian littoral in Gilan Province; Southern Talyshi is centered around Shandermen, Masal, Masuleh, and surrounding mountainous areas in Gilan Province. Alternate names: Talyshi, Talish, Talishi, Talesh, Taleshi. Dialects: Northern Talyshi, Central Talyshi, Southern Talyshi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Taromi, Upper [tov] Upper Tarom of Zanjan Province, Hazarrud, Siavarud. Dialects: Various dialects. Close to Kabatei. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Tat, Muslim [ttt] 8,000 in Iran. Alternate names: Mussulman Tati. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Tat
More information.
Turkmen [tuk] 2,000,000 in Iran (1997). Northeast, mainly in Mazanderan Province, along the Turkmenistan border; important centers are Gonbad-e Kavus and Pahlavi Dezh. Alternate names: Torkomani. Dialects: Anauli, Khasarli, Nerezim, Nokhurli (Nohur), Chavdur, Esari (Esary), Goklen (Goklan), Salyr, Saryq, Teke (Tekke), Yomud (Yomut), Trukmen. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Turkmenian
More information.
Vafsi [vaf] 18,000 (2003). Markazi Province, Arak District, Vafs, near Tafresh. Dialects: Various dialects. Transitional between central Iranian dialects and Talysh; very close to Ashtiani. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Extinct languages
Avestan [ave] Extinct. Alternate names: Pazend, Avesta. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Eastern, Northeastern
More information.
Mandaic, Classical [myz] Extinct. Also used in Iraq (Basrah) and small communities in the USA (New York) and Australia (300 Mandaeans in Sydney in 1995). Alternate names: Classical Mandaean. Dialects: Appears to be the direct ancestor of Modern Mandaic. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, Aramaic, Eastern, Mandaic
More information.
Robert,
Obviously you don't understand what you read. My Vegas reference was a left-handed "compliment" about celebrating Pakistan as a "great culture". How can a country of 60 years old be considered as a great civilisation, especially with Taliban, Al Qaeda, etc.
Fascinating concept, this, but seemingly one more geopolitical self indulgence. It seems unlikely that the power structure of Pakistan will voluntarily offer to deconstruct. I would prefer commentary which is both thoughtful (this is) AND practical (this most definitely is not).
Well as an Indian I don't agree Pakistan will/should be broken into smaller countries.
I understand the writer is not American. But there is a tendency in American media to pile it on. Pakistan was never as worthy as you thought it was (I guess 'normal' might be the word- just foreign policywise even given FP is mostly self-interest), and I don't believe it's as dangerous it is being made out to be.
I think current Pakistani problems can be brought under control. But my Pakistani friends have to look for answers within, not just attack others.
It doesn't take genius to figure out where this was headed even 5 years ago. I think Pakistanis are sensible people, but if collectively they keep going down this path (militancy/stretegic depth/ 3rd column/taliban whetever u want to call it), world should be ready for the conversation by Mr. Ettefagh
On November 3, early morning my time, Musharraf had declared a state of emergency (at Condi's behest, believe me, though I don't have proof! and Benazir had been gone to Dubai and tipped that she should fly back to Karachi in case Musharraf is pressured out of office by popular dissent and she could take over as a more pliant pupeet in US hands).
Your wish (and that of several Indian Hindus like Jay who are posting comments on this blog) is come true -- Pakistan is about to embark on a process of slow-motion breaking down into several
separate provinces. Happy? You'd be mad to be happy at the prospect of the total chaos that will unleash in your region.
But, like Bush you are blinded by crazy resentments and reach for destructive power to solve problems.
The Tajiks in northern Afghanistan and the Punjabi in southern Pakistan are not the troublemakers, yet they would suffer enormously if this idea were carried out to create a "Pashtustan". While this may have worked 30 years ago, today a Pashtustan would very quickly fall into the hands of Al Qaeda and the Wahhabis. The best hope would be to partition Afghanistan and Pakistan between Uzbekistan, Tajikstan, Iran and India, rather than letting each country split into several independent entities. With the help of India and Iran, the area could be pacified, and that's probably the only thing that will put a stop to the problem. We should have let India go to war with Pakistan instead of stopping it- to take over the Pashtuns and the Punjabis. We should have encouraged Iran to take over the rest of Baluchistan- which would have had the added benefit of tying down Iran so that it would not threaten the Gulf and Israel for a while. Unfortunately, this administration doesn't have enough sense to do these sorts of things.
this is perhaps one of the most naive and silly postings i've read. nevermind the false assertion that the british engineering the creation of pakistan. (it was the product of one of many internal separatist movements within india, some of which still smolder). of course, pakistan is an amalgam of disjointed ethnic groups, as is india, iran, turkey, syria, iraq. the punchline is, it would certainly be helpful were each ethnic group in their own country. unfortunately, with borders such as they are, it would only cause much misery and death to re-draw borders. if the baluchs and pashtun separate from pakistan, what about those people in iran? and the kurds in iran, turkey, iraq and syria? and, of course, india's maoist separatist movements would be sure to flare up. in some cases, it will indeed prove smart and just to encourage the formation of new nations. for the most part, however, the smart move is to support local cultures with autonomy, which managing a common security structure. unfortunately, the authority of baluch village elders are being displaced by foreign fanatics, overflowing with money and guns funded by the oil trade. it doesn't help that the u.s. has handled iraq with insufficient commitment, that iran attempts to set up new hezbollahs in every unstable country in the region, and that the west is so addicted to oil.
A one-world government ran by a democratic United Nations might be a good solution. Composed or two houses. The First with each country getting a porportional vote according to population. The Second with representatives awarded by GNP. All the worlds resources working for all the worlds people. Too pie-in-the-sky? Democracy is crazy that way. Democrazy?
Mo, you are the biggest idiot here. "how come
we don't have a mock Pakistan in Vegas?"
What the hell are you saying here, that we should have a mini-islamabad themed hotel in Vegas where people can play the slots and blackjack? And doing this would celebrate the greatness of a culture?
Having a hotel called Sahara celebrated the Saharan culture? What does it say when they blow it up to build a new hotel?
Building the Excalibur hotel demonstrates the great culture and nation of Camelot? Did this place even exist?
Or what about the Mirage Hotel or Pirates of the Carribean. I'm sure we can all agree how great a culture these Pirates in the Carribean had and what a great nation they formed.
A one-world government ran by a democratic United Nations might be a good solution. Composed or two houses. The First with each country getting a porportional vote according to population. The Second with representatives awarded by GNP. All the worlds resources working for all the worlds people. Too pie-in-the-sky? Democracy is crazy that way. Democrazy?
Good article. A step that we should have taken long ago....
By the way, all those posters above that talk about Pakistan as being great and all inclusive cultural, etc., how come:
(a) we don't have a mock Pakistan in Vegas, as America's way of celebrating great cultures such as France, Italy or China; and
(b) what made you people of Pakistan think that supporting the uncivilised Taliban and Al Qaeda is a good idea?
To Syed Bokhari, you are way off. I have no horse in this race, and really don't know or care about Mr. Ettefagh. But he isn't an "exiled" money manager. If I'm not mistaken, he still lives and works from his native Pars.
Most ridiculous of your statements is when you say the "British but conceded to after an intense campaign by people who felt they had no place in an Hindu dominated India as the events later have proved that to be correct."
What a ridiculous statement. To all the readers here, do you know what country is the second most populous Muslim country (First in Indonesia) in the world? The answer is India. Not Pakistan.
So please don't go way overboard here by saying that these people had no place in India and that "events later have proved correct" this falsity that you are peddling here.
Additionally, to say that "Pakistan is not a counter weight to anyone and in 1947 there was no Eastern Bloc" shows your lack of education.
Winston Churchill in his famous 1946 speech in Missouri talked about the descendence of an iron curtain in Europe and really the beginning of another war immediately after World War II. THis of course being the COLD WAR.
My Dear Bushy Chief!!
You had chosen two of your trusted lieutenants at the beginning of of your personalized war against Terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq.
One of your trusted lieutenant- Mr. Tony Blair, who stabbed your back at the end as Brutus did on Caesar in Roman senate, and later fled away in to oblivion. Tony's whole political ethos was based on total mother of all lies.
Now Your trusted Second Lieutenant "General Musharraf of PakiLand, who is still there in battle ground, but failing in every front of ensuing battle, against Taliban and Al-qaeda in Nor then Pakistan and afghan border. Most unfortunately he telling lies to confuse you, just like Cassius played trickery against Rome.
Your loss of insight on what Pakistan's condition is now, that made more vulnerable, and if you don't take any corrective measure, then whole your ball game will fall into disrepute, and Russia and China will have last lough.
There is now a state of emergency imposed in Pakistan.
Immediate Sanctions are necessary, especially against a country of drug runners, a hub of money laundry and nukes.....that is a bad cocktail, before adding the Islamist extremists and Wahhabi yahoos....
Those Pakistanis above that are engaged in self-congratulations and prayers ought to take note.
With all respect ... your views have put me in major confusion. What is your subject? A country with 5 states having different cultures dont deserve a country called pakistan? Are there no achievements? one shud compare it with Iran first.
Economics gives basic rule of demand n supply .... Opium supply is from afghanistan and demand according to yourself isnt pakistan. Yet blame pakistan to be a route to supply? i am pretty sure drugs mafia is about individuals that you will find in Iran, The states or any country around the globe. Any drug supply has many routes and it circulates around the globe.
It is a proud muslim nation that feels sorrow for any islamic country around the globe suffering unfairness. Its unfortunate that true leaders dont last long and rules got corrupt. but the argument will be ... Pakistan is surely not the most corrupt country in this world?
You called pakistan dangerious? yet The whole news around the world says Iran is a threat to the world and pakistan still supports iranian ... How strange is that.
A country name is like a father name that stick to you for life and i am sure none wud want to lose it.
I think its fair to say that calling for the dissolution of a country into smaller, weaker, more pathetic, more amicable to foreign manipulation, parts is generally an amoral tactic to advance a selfish strategy of global imperialism with evil sentiments. People need to start using rhetorically accurate langauge.
If you want to conquer a people, split them into pathetic more manageable pieces. That's secular humanist capitalist, democratic logic.
Then you can piece them back together when it suits you, like the EU or ASEAN.
Nevermind the fallout, its not your backyard so no one will be throwing trash over the fence into your garden. Or so you think. Of course some disgruntled youth from the former Pakistan may find his way to blowing himself up and a few 100 more on your subway which is unconscionable and evil, but what America does is pure and Good, just because.
Mr.Ali Ettefagh has no idea and yours esteemed web site should discourage thes kind of views by columnist, it is hurting sentiments of Pakistani.
We are very proud nation with Unity, Faith and Discipline but admit that due to some unavoidable circumstances , we are having problem.
Gen. Musharraf and his men are very capable, they will tackle the present situation as it deem fit,as troublemaker and evildoer are there and they are no doubt are instrumental ,like a pinch of Salt in Bread make it Salty or a drop of lime in bucketful of milk , turn it sour.
ALHAMDOLILAH, I am a Muslim and I love you all, whatever you do or say. I am not better than anyone; I don't want to convince you with anything. I am just sharing love with you and that's what my religion taught me to do.
MAY THE AL MIGHTY ALLAH BLESS US ALL AND ALWAYS.AMEEN.
Mr Etefagh may be investing millions for his masters but his hubris is shocking. I believe his insight into Pakistan is extremely limited.
First who can dissolve Pakistan? Not the Ali Etefaghs of the world. It is upto the people of Pakistan to make decisions about their homeland and not some mediocre money managers exiled form their native Pars.
Pakistan was not coined by the British but conceded to after an intense campaign by people who felt they had no place in an Hindu dominated India as the events later have proved that to be correct.
His arrogance and ignorance merge as he calls Punjab, Kashmir and Sind as tribal lands.
Sistan is tribal Mr Ali, and the Baloch there do not accept Persian Hegemony and that is why there is unrest at that eastern border and US has caught Iranian AlQaeda operatives at Afghan-Iran border, gun running and drug smuggling. Perhaps Iran should be liquidated to make Middle East a better place. It seems persians do not get along with any of their neighbors.
The official language of Pakistan is Urdu and is well-understood throughout Pakistan.
He should manage money or write about his own homeland which he abandoned for greener pastures and not bother commenting on Pakistan which he clearly has no knowledge of.
Pakistan is not a counter weight to anyone and in 1947 there was no Eastern Bloc!!!!
This dude has no serious background info on Pakistan.
To Chris Thomas, I would say that you are an idiot. No, he is not Pakistani. He is from Iran. Under his name and next to his picture, it states Tehran, Iran.
You can disagree with him, which alot of us do. But he can't keep his comments to himself as he is a Panelist here in PostGlobal. Basically he is doing his job in conversing and opining about global issues. Coincidentally, Emergency rule was just put in effect in Pakistan. So this topic really is as current as current events can be.
The man is perhaps being a bit too provactive, but not as provactive as a military dictator declaring a state of emergency, deporting and jailing opposition, and arresting the Chief of Supreme Court.
The world is going back to fix mistakes: the Armenian genocide, the Holocaust, the crimes of Stalin against its people, Pol Pot and Cambodia, Idi Amin and Uganda.
Why not go after fixing all other disasters like creation of Pakistan, Jordan, Leganon, Iraq, Syria, and Israel.....why not? Attacking the writer will not fix any problems, looking at problems in the eyes will.
I think this is a very good article by Dr. Ettefagh.
I hate to see all these personal attacks upon you for pointing out what has come to be a commonly and increasingly accepted fact that Pakistan is fast becoming a dangerous country with a nuclear arsenal and breeding extremism. It appears that you offended the sensibilities of a lot of Pakistanis and I guess to some extent that is understandable as well. A lot of people are making a good counter argument but I wish it was not directed in a personal way.
Your history on Pakistan is quite interesting.
I do not disagree with your comments however I am curious as to whether or not you are Pakistani or not? Have you ever lived there and if so why did you leave? Did you leave in order to better the standard of living for you and your family? When the skilled or educated portion of a population departs a country the exodus deprives that country's leadership of a vital human resource that will continue to drive the downward spiral into chaos. If you are Pakistani than shame on you for not staying and attemtping to change its course. The world is full of critics who do nothing to help solve issues and then critique those that are in the arena attempting to fix the situation.
If you are not Pakistani than who are you to tell citizens of another country how to govern themselves or whether or not they should remain a country at all?
And as far as your comment about the nuclear issue, as long as Musharraf is in power with his military the nuclear issue will probably remain stable. If a coup by muslim radicals overthrows the militarys control(unlikely) over their nuclear arsenal then we have a serious problem on our hands. The Pakistani military is the one force that provides stability within Pakistan borders. In order to appreciate this factor we must not look through the prism of the western world, but we must look through the prism of the lesser of the two evils. If we desire democracy in Pakistan than we can expect a muslim radical state to emerge with access to nuclear weapons. If we understand that stability is important than we must support those that provide stability in the region such as Musharraf and his military. In contrast to what we in the western world read in the media, the Pakistani Military has conducted hundreds of counter terrorist missions against AQ and has proven extremely effective within the borders of Waziristan.
So in closing, I would highly recommend before you start lecturing another country on how it should govern itself either provide assistance by going there and help out or keep your comments to yourself. The old proverb is appropriate here...
"walk a mile in my shoes".
Pakistan was not really a figment of the British imagination but the result of a megalomania of Jinnah. In the end, the failure of this nation-state must be considered in-light of the ONLY outsider who has had a continuous presence in Pakistan, and that is the U.S.! Expediency of short-sighted goals have led to monumentally blunderous decisions at several stages leading ultimately to a completely chaotic nightmare that is about slip into a catastrophic abyss. All the U.S. can do now is to sit and watch helplessly as this nation becomes the fountainhead of all terroristic training for the globe. Unless democracy takes hold, there is no hope for the future and U.S. must do some soul searching to figure out why repeated destruction of fledgling steps towards democracy were necessary over the last 60 years. Even as we speak, Iran is the focus of the U.S. attention as a way to distract attention from the failures in Iraq while Pakistan continues its drop into nothing but mayhem.
Ed must either be a pro-Bush supporter, who is clamoring for another war under false pretences.
Or he is a persian-hating Arab, in which case, what can you say and where would you start.
Read up on your history son, about the greatness and chivalry of the Achaemanids, Parthians, and Sassanids. Of Zoroaster (creator of perhaps the first monotheist religion), of Cyrus (the creator of Cyrus' Cylinder - the first published Bill of Rights), of Xerxes (Savior to Esther and the Jews), etc., etc.
If you are a Christian, think of it this way: Where were the 3 Wisemen from? Yes, that is correct, they were Persian Zoroasterians.
If you are an Arab, again, what to say and where to start?
Pakistan reminds me of Yugoslavia with their forced almalganation of separate peoples with their wildly different religeous identies into a violent war festering state. Let them divide into their constintuate parts and then, maybe, in their due time will develope into mature democracies. I fear the true reason for the U.S. schizophrenic behavior toward Pakistan stems from their knowledge of nuclear weapons which the U.S. respects more than democracy itself.
Here comes the heresy: If more countries of the world had nuclear knowledge there would be more mutual respect between nations ... a sort of "Mutually Assured Destruction" atmosphere that would prove to be peace producing and therefore more helpfull to the welfare of the peoples of the world. A prime example of this peace is the one that lasted between the Soviet Union and the U.S.
it was all part of india. its a shame that islamics, when given the chance cannot rule themselves, but i dont blame the british. they are not there forcing the paks into constant fighting. and its also true that iran would love to expand into the pak lands. so if there is a problem with their common border - lets look to iran, the spreader of hate and evil, for the cause.
It seems that mischief making by the British is coming to haunt us in the middle east and south asia. Can there be a reparation case made against the British?
Well well if this missive had come from a person other than an Iranian I would have taken it with a grain of salt even it is a lunatic idea at best. But a lie to a Persian/Iranian is as natural as blinking his eye. Get a life Ali Ettefagh what you propose for Pakistan can easily be rationlized to Iran too.
Musharraf just declared emergency rule in Pakistan. All private media outlets are shutdown. Troops are out on the streets.
Internet and mobile phone systems are about to be cut.
The supreme court chief justice of Pakistan is about to be expelled from Pakistan. Which other country expells its own citizens?
This is a desparate last ditch attempt of a failed state.
I think Mr. Ettefagh's comments were meant to be provocative and not more than that.
Technically, he is correct in that Pakistan, along with much of the middle east were creations of the imperial British. Perhaps Pakistan is less so than Iraq, Syria, TransJordan, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, etc.
Alot of you are correct that Iran is also made up of various ethnicities, religions, and cultures. Much like the India, Russia, China, and more recently the U.S. But that is precisely the point. Iran, by and large, has had national and a cultural integrity for over 2,500 years. Whereas these other countries simply don't and perhaps that is a big problem.
I don't believe Pakistan can be dissolved or split up, especially by the western powers, as that would be no different than the original mess the Brits and the French left us in after World Wars I and II.
However, it was a great and revered Egyptian writer who years ago penned what everyone knows: That in the middle east, there are only two states that matter: Iran and Egypt. The rest are arbitrary borders drawn by the pencil of the British and French.
Many thanks to dr.Ali Ettefagh, for his timely reminder of what actually is going on in Pakistan.
There is growing realization amongst our think tank that, Bush is chasing the mirage of making Pakistan a land of " Milk and Honey", the Utopian conception based on **Bushy brand of democracy? And His vision of pushing democratic propagation proved to be illusive and non achievable.
Dr. Ali Ettefagh has busted such bubble.
In reality Pakistan is failed state, irreparable, unreconcilable and unamended fissures are visible all over Pakistan.
Pakistan is made up with- Punjab, Sindhi, Baluchistan, North Western Frontier province and part of Kashmir illegally occupied. For last 60 years these five pakistani provinces and their subjects totally failed to integrate themselves to create and establish a nation hood conception. These above mentioned provinces, each has its own language, dress code, and each followed own cultural norms, and having own Identity and uniqueness. These diversified characteristics are not allowed to integrate to form a status of unified role model for a Nation hood building, which in turn could help to build an Identity of nation. So Pakistan has failed miserably to do that, and to day all pakistanis are suffering from **Identity Crisis**.
Fortunate enough for Indians, who did unify the nation, and It's subjects do not have any kind of Identity problems. They claimed as INDIANS, irrespective of their creed, casts, religions, language and cultural identities. Today India is in unity amongst all diversities, and they have established a vibrant democratic Republic, and processing.
There is an unhealthy domination of Punjabi over Sindhi and Blanches, NWFP has gone out of central control. literally Punjabi army ruthlessly subjugating Them and push them to slavery. Countless Arm clashes and skirmishes continued between Baluch/NWFP and Punjab Army- since Its gaining independence. Wanton Human right violations are continued in this God forsaken Islamic [?} Republic. I wander where our HR groups are going to do about it??
Our Bush Chief has put his feet into sticky muddy land of Islamabad, and now unable to free himself and his Deputy- Cheney?
So all accounts for total Foreign Policy to wards Pakistan is a magnum flop. Bush spent billion dollars of tax payers' moneys to prop up Gen. Musharraf and his army to stay in power. The consequence is as we see the apparent break down of PAK social structures, Law and Order break down and that created ungovernable Nation as we see- Pakistan to day.
I blogged several times in recent past about Pakistan, and I find my version of Pakistan's malice, is quite similar to what Dr, Ali Ettefagh is telling us.
Again His remedy to cure Pakistan incurable illness, appears to be same medicine I prescribed before.
Only solution for Pakistan is to divide it into Three Independent states like Republics of Baluchistan, Republic of Sindhi, and Republic of Punjab and NWFP should be tagged with Afghanistan. The illegally occupied so called "Azad Kashmir", must be be allowed to reunite with Indian controlled Kashmir as an integral part of Indian territory. The fundamental reason is that Kashmiris themselves no longer want to live under Punjabi domination and occupation. These Kashmiri tribal have suffered to much in the hand of Punjabi Army.
By doing this America will gain firm footing in Afghanistan, and she will get easy access to Afghanistan via Indian territory, without any hindrance [ which America is facing transit difficulties via terrorist infested Pakistan border]. As days passing by, American presence in Afghanistan appears to vital for future confrontation against China, whose Clout is growing menacing proportion, and that not good for Sam's maintaining Vital interest in Central Asia.
Recent improved good relation with India, is a vital trump card for America and that can be played as a deterrent to China's Expansionist design.
Unfortunately for Tehran it will prove too much? Because Iran may lose quit a big chunk her present territory to Afghanistan and to Baluchestan Republic.
Who are you to think about like that? Pakistan is a homeland of 160million muslims and they love their homeland. If you are westernize tout then remember Europe was fighting among themselves for having same religion till WW-II who are so called civilized.
A good analysis and very clear thinking.
It is amazing to see the personal attacks of Pakistani posters as a way to divert the issue. It shows the national mindset of Pakistan and that is why the do not recognise the problems they have. It is a country of drug runners and terrorist hosts.
Isn't the question here really what a nation should be to be effective (that is, a nation in control of its borders and people, acting in a coherent manner)?
If you strip away the partisan comments from those who support this article and those who hate the author (or Persians or Shia more generally), the arguments seem to center on why Pakistan is different from any other state made of various factions who nevertheless act as a nation.
The answer to that question will likely come in book form from analyzing the social, political and economic differences between Pakistan and other countries.
In the meantime, shouldn't we at least consider that a country's current existence should not be sufficient reason for its continual existence?
After all, every country on Earth has had its borders changed (sometimes by internal forces, sometimes by external), and no country remains forever in one state.
Given that nations do change over time, why would we attack the author as an idiot for suggesting that that action might relieve some of the pressures that exist in Pakistan now?
Wouldn't a better question (for those who disagree with the author) be in what way is this dissolution plan likely to increase the very factors that he plans to reduce (like rivalry for resources, nukes, etc), rather than simply calling him an idiot?
If we're honest, this set of questions will likely need to be asked for many of the countries in the midst of conflict (think Turkey, Kurdistan, Somalia, Ethiopia, Lebanon, Iraq, etc). Some or all of these countries have civil and political unrest because the national borders do not reflect the aspirations of the citizens there.
Merely asking the question does not require endorsing the solution, just a willingness to examine why some countries work well as nations and others don't.
It does not seem that the author's intention is to actually have his propositions implemented. How? By whom?
He is simply venting about the disaster that has befallen Iraq and threatening the whole region for the long term. There is no denying that Pakistan is one of the top seats for the Dysfunctional Nations Club. All the drivel about Islamic/National unity vaporizes when one looks at a day's worth of news coming out of Pakistan - not only these days; it has been coming a long time. Ettefagh's piece is more a sarcastic commentary on the state of affairs in Pakistan in particular and the region as a whole.
My comments from yesterday seem to have been removed by the WP censors. Or was it Iranian censors?
So much for freedom of speech.
So I'll try again.
Divide and Rule an old and discredited British trick is what the erudite Iranian is trying to make us buy.
Similar to 50 US states with no state powerful enough to go against the US administration and states bickering over water sharing like they are different countries not patriotic American states.
BTW it is the same old ploy Joe Biden supports for Iraq.
Nothing new here!
I guess as an investment banker it offers smaller in size, but more customers to rip off!
The whole existence of Pakistan is unfortunately is based on fundamentalism and hatred towards its big massive secular neighbour India. Pakistan's leadership and army sowed the seed of terrorism to hurt and de-stabilise India. The terrorism spread to Afghanistan, it prospered in Islamic non secular environment of Pakistan, and ultimately to West (911, 77). The same terrorism is now engulfing Pakistan. Even so called modern and educated Benazir Bhutto used tools of Pakistan army sponsored terrorism in Kashmir in 1980s. The leadership in Pakistan be it from army, democratic or dynastic can only appease the slightly moderate but mostly conservative population by bashing India in one way or another. The west in specific Britain, France and US has unfortunately irresponsibly supported Pakistan's mischief with democracy and 60 year old honeymoon with fundamentalists by aiding it more weapons and cash.
PAKISTAN is: same like its cricket team.
The most exciting and unpredictable team in cricket today.It has wonderful cricketers : remember the likes of Hanif,Majid Khan,Asif Iqbal,Imran Khan,Miandad,Wasim Akram,Waqar,and currently Asif and Shoieb Akhtar(the fastest in the world).
What Pakistan needs is a CAPTAIN may be someone like IMRAN KHAN(possibly the world's greatest cricketer ever).
There are 3 things about Pakistan which you foreigners will never understand.
1. The culture and concept of Pakistan
2. Urdu Ghazal
3. Cricket.
If a central government has no control over large sections of a country for long periods of time, that's a strong indication that de facto there is no nation. Since when has the central government of Pakistan had any control over the northwestern states of Pakistan? If it was a unified nation, would the central government have to engage in peace treaties with these states? It would seem obvious that there is no Pakistan nation. Just collections of semi-autonomous states that do whatever they wish, including allow groups declared to be terrorists by the central government to operate freely.
The reason we are talking about pakistan as a failed state is because of the international terrorism environment it has fostered for a long time. Why are we not talking about Bangladesh as a failed state? The author is an independent and original thinker and has a valid point but the counter points offered on this board are excellent and that is the reason this is a good discussion.
My solution to pakistan's problems are:
1) Strict adherence to rule of law no matter how bad that law is.
2) No military interference in political, civil and judicial affairs.
3) Create and foster higher learning educational institutions with rigorous academic standards, not religious schools.
If a central government has no control over large sections of a country for long periods of time, that's a strong indication that de facto there is no nation. Since when has the central government of Pakistan had any control over the northwestern states of Pakistan? If it was a unified nation, would the central government have to engage in peace treaties with these states? It would seem obvious that there is no Pakistan nation. Just collections of semi-autonomous states that do whatever they wish, including allow groups declared to be terrorists by the central government to operate freely.
For someone who uses the word "esencially" and "rouge state" (I'd say we were more of a magenta state) I'd be careful about attacking others' pronunciation. Moreover, if you took a quick break from howling at the moon you'd see that you and Ali are both on the same side (and equally out of your minds).
Perhaps Pakistanis who are up in arms over the proposed solution to the failure that is Pakistan should themselves come up with a plan to rid their country of the terrorist factories. It would also be nice to have a semblance of a real democratic government. It is not enough for them to engage in hysteria anytime someone points to some truths about their country.
Ali, where on earth did you get these stories from? For someone who clearly dislikes Pakistan you sure spend a lot of your time doing research about Pakistan. When was the last time you visited Pakistan? Have you ever even been to Pakistan? Pakistan is a great country, and millions of people call it home, those who criticize Pakistan can just go and join your dumb side of the world.
People in Pakistan live a great and happy life, honest businessmen and well educated people thrive in Pakistan. The standard of education, jobs and living in Pakistan is very high. Every home has all the necessary electrical appliances that every home is the USA has, yes even the sweeper who earn $200 a month cleaning streets has a TV, fridge, DVD player etc. I am an Aircraft Engineer with a US degree and I went back to my country to work there. Why don’t you go and live in Iran, why do you not live in your country, is it not as good as my Pakistan? Hundreds of Pakistanis I know go abroad for higher education and come back to invest their knowledge and skills back in Pakistan, can you say the same for yourself? Then shut up!
I am amazed by Mr.Ettefagh's logic (or lack of it). One would seriously think that if any need there might be to dissolve any country, that country would be Iran for the following reasons: 1- Iran (at its present shape) occupies part of Azerbaijan and the Arab region of Arabistan.
2- Iran threatens the stability of the most strategic region in the world i.e. the Gulf.
3- Iran was always ruled by foreign powers.
Wake up Mr. Ettefagh and check the news before you start to compose.
A thoughtful piece by Dr. Ettefagh. One niggle at the outset though: Pakistan is not an acronym coined by Rehmat Ali Choudhary or anyone else. This view has received prominence in recent years to 'dramatize' the missing 'K' but it is for media consumption. East Pakistan for example, never figured in the acronym.
Dr. Ettefagh's provocative thought has drawn the usual: "Why not India..?" responses. The difference plain and simple is democracy. All states have centrifugal forces including Belgium for example, which seems to want to head toward a split along linguistic lines. If you have democracy, no matter how marginalized you feel, you can whip up like minded people to create a stir to get redress without taking up arms. In India's case, democracy, the creation of linguistically aligned states and subordination of the armed forces to civilian rule, play a strong role in keeping everybody within the circle.
The problem (among many) with Pakistan is that it is really an army disguised as a state. The military dominates economics and politics and keeps manufacturing security threats to get its toys and benefits. On top of it all, it has cynically exploited Islam to create the 'glue' and to fight asymmetrical war against its neighbors. All of this is coming home to roost--there is no such thing as a free lunch.
The imposition of martial law today is an acknowledgment of that reality. Pakistan's rulers have had their chance to prove the viability of their state and its willingness and ability to exist without being a constant source of danger to everyone else.
It will be interesting to see if Ms. Rice and the EU leaders actually follow through with their threats to withhold aid.
I think the piece scratches the surface of a much more serious dilemma. Mainly that the state system itself has produced mass amounts of violence and thoughtless environmental denigration. As Charles Tilly argues, states can be viewed as the most "successful racket" within a given society. I believe a scant review of the previous century reveal that one unified political entity commanding the ability to extract resources from millions of people leads to repressive Leviathans more often than not. Should any one entity controlled by universally imperfect human beings be vested with the level of destructive force existing in many modern states. I am not advocating anarchism, but arguing that concentrating vast amounts of power and destructive capability in one unified state is dangerous to all human beings. The state system has only existed for a blip on the continuum of human political history. If it has failed us there is no requirment that it be maintained....
Yeah good thinking Ali. More partitioning is what we need in the Middle East. So whatever check the government of Pakistan had on the warlords would be completely eviscerated leaving entire regions subject to brutal totalitarianism a la, the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
Hey I have an idea, instead of bloviating on 60 year-old-mistakes that England made maybe you can turn some of your pontificating powers to actually helping people and solving problems that already exist, rather than suggesting ways to make things 10 times worse?
Fine article. Solution is flawed. How much time will be needed for maturity and independence? What will be the basis for econimic life of each territory? How will creating new rival states bring about stability?
Poor and naive analysis. diversity in a country does not mean dissoultion. unity in diversity! wether, sindhi, punjabi, pashtun, kashmiri or baloch...all identify themselves as pakistanis. sure there are some nationalistic elements, just like in EVERY country...spain, india, ireland an the list goes on....
the troubles pakistan faces are more due to lack of education and instability in neighboruing afghanistan. PAKISTAN ZINDABAD
Make no mistake, the United States is the most dangerous country in the world. We have, under this criminal administration, become militaristic, and aggressive to the point of invading other countries on mere suspisions. The worlds worst fears about american imperialism are comming true. This administration has even floated the idea of using nuclear weapons, and this from a man that cannot even pronounce the word. To make it worse, the state of our economy essencially makes us a wounded animal. With corporate america in desperate need of markets, and resources, and this rouge administration catering to their every wish, every country out there that has resources that the american corporatocracy wants should be very afraid. As far as dangerous, every other country in the world pales by comparison. This article just serves as more smoke and mirrors to distract us from the true danger, the one that lives on capital hill.
Pakistan, as one of the posters has correctly observed, means the land of the “pure” or clean. But there is nothing clean about this newly-formed country. Have you been there lately? People are filthy, crap covers the streets, people look like walking zombies, they rather kill 160 of their on citizens than allowing a former woman Prime Minster to return home and engage in politics-- just name it! One poster has suggested that Dr. Ettefagh should go to hell; well I say to him just go to Pakistan where the real hell is located. Bon Voyage!
I will agree that Pakistan is not a 'classic nation state based on Stalin's definition'. Neither is Mulla-ist Iran. Baluchistan-Siestan should become part of Baluch living in Pakistan and Afghanistan. All the Kurdish areas of Iran should join in with Kuridstan Region of Iraq and so on. The same is true in Afghanistan.
Given the holocaust of 1947 partition it is better to make the 'bangy-dangy lands' work. Also, hold the Persian arrogance.
Pakistan's problems (which are very real) do not stem from ethnic divisions. The situation is very different from Yugoslavia, where you had explicitly nationalist movements seeking independence in every region. Even if Punjab, NWFP, etc, were separate entities, they would still each suffer from the main problems.
The main reasons for instability in the country have to do with the concentration of wealth in a traditional elite and the concentration of political power in the military. (The latter is strongly tied to the threat -- real and perceived -- posed by India.)
Progress in Pakistan would be better serevd, I think, by (1) serious land reform and (2) reaching a fundamental security understanding with India, one that addresses the Kashmir issue.
Actually Inida was like that, Indian subcontinent is full of tribes lanugages, own customs, traditions, religons. There should have never in Pakistan, India or Bangla Desh. There should have been different countries based on customs, traditions and historical records. So the best solution to the problems in india and pakistan or that..............all the old provinces, states should restored and made into federal or confendral units.
Experiment of Pakistan is total failure.
I commend you to write and come out with the truth
Dear Dr. Ali, thank to The Great Architect Of The Universe there are people like you, who explicit the true among the vices, the evil and the immoral acts of the said to be democratic superpowers such as England, the USA and their eyeball country Israel. We know that all of the problems within the Middle East are caused by the disgraceful past administration of mother England and the intruder US. Iraq, Taiwan, Hong-Kong, Palestine, Syrian Golan Islands occupied by Israel,Malvinas Islands which is occupied by mother England,...you name it!There might be too many others which I cannot point them out! Pakistan is a model which Mr. Bush has as his partner because he has some interest as he had with Saddam Hussein and Iraq a couple of decades ago. But Mr. Musharraf mut be aware, for this same partner my arrange a gallow for him in the future if he turn out to be his enemy. Mr. Miguel - Campinas - Brazil.
Mr Ettefagh is partially right - Pakistan was never a nation. Comparisons to India and Iran are meaningless. India was a nation by the 3rd century BC, when Ashoka ruled an India that was as large as Aurungzeb's India. Persia was older than ancient Greece. Thus in spite of having many different languages and ethnic groups, in spite of having splintered into smaller entities over the years, the concept of a single nation was always there in both India and Iran.
Creation of Pakistan was driven by fear - perhaps even reasonable given the many Hindu-Muslim riots India continues to have - but that is still not a valid ideology. Clever politicians and military fascists use the same fear of India and Islam to continue their rule, whose simple goal is to let a relatively small number of oligarchs hold on to their power. Within ten years of independence India had its land ceiling act that gave land to the peasants, the countryside of Pakistan is still ruled by sardars and chaudhrys. This is the crux of the matter - the rest is all hoax. East Pakistan separated because 75% there were peasants, the rulers in Islamabad could not care less about their needs. If tomorrow India gives Kashmir to Pakistan, Pakistan will disintegrate.
The solution to Pakistan's problems is not splintering, but democracy. They need to get rid of the military-mulla kleptocracy. This is where Ettefagh is wrong, because by NOW there are generations of Pakistanis who love their country as much as the Iranians and Indians love their countries.
How dangerous is a country that needs dissolution is none of the business of intellectual cum businessman.Intellectualism leads to fair,safe and sound solutions.Business focuses on competition(cut throats ones).Combining both(for anything except total sincerity) can be lethal,as we can easily observe in this case.Furthermore,Ettefagh seems to be urning more than he should.That's why he is demonstrating mental imbalance.I advise him a good psychiatrist.
Oh for crying out loud! Does anyone from outside the US REALLY think that people from New York City, Texas border towns, central Alabama or the deep south and Detroit or Puerto Rico think the same or even think alike on most issues? The problem is not that British Colonies are a conglomeration of tribes, the problem is the attitudes of the tribes. No one who ever visited the US with any education would think that THIS former colony was a monolithic group. We know that our differences strengthen us. Pakistan's differences should strengthen them if they thought about it for one moment. The problem with the ultra-conservatives in Pakistan, Iran, etc is that they invent make-believe differences that aren't real (like Shiite vs Sunni) and then try to extract power through that in-fighting. Either Malcolm X lied and there is no Umma or the differences between tribes in Pakistan are make-believe pretend children's games. One has to be true and one has to be false: which is it? Tribes or Umma? you decide.
Mr. Ettefagh's provoctaive stance defies all common sense. Pakistan is not the only state which was created artificially, India too was created in the same fashion. The man who drew the border lines between India and Pakistan never visited the Indian subcontinent before partitioning the British colony. If disparate populations/ethnictities/tribes are basis of separate nationalism or statehood, then most of the currently existing nations and states must disappear.
The basic problem with Pakistan is not that its a conglomeration of population groups who lack a common language or ethnicity, its lack of rule of law. While India succeeded in establishing law and order--apparently through less-than-perfect democratic practices--Pakistan lacked democracy in toto from day one. The ruling cliques of Pakistan lack legitimacy, while India's ruling cliques somehow enjoy broad legitimacy. Dissolving Pakistan is not a solution, that cannot be. The Solution lies in making it truly democratic, getting rid of external enablers that help ruling cliques to cling to power autocratically or dictaorially, and establishing rule of law (as opposed to rule of man).
stupid insecure iranian. jealous fool. its your country that's about to be bombed into the stone age. you should be thinking more about that than about pakistan.
Live, From Islamabad....it is Saturday Night State of Emergency (formerly known as Martial Law). All private papers, TV stations and media outlets are shut down!
So much for that liberal democratic state with lots of free papers, as the poster above said.
Musharraf is about to declare emergency rule (read: martial law). Is Musharraf General the modern version of Poland's General Jaruzelski ca. 1980s? And if so, who is his handler? Saudi Arabia?
Good article. Time for Pakistan to grow up and face reality. Otherwise, all of their 150+ million people will be branded as a giant land of terrorist cells.
It is up to Pakistanis to decide what kind of a Government they want. I hate to see proposals to the extent of redrawing borders. It is a myopic view that does not take longer term consequences into account. To borrow a word from Ronald Reagan "Here we go again". I am from India but I respect sovereignty of people of Pakistan. I consider this author's views arrogant and counter productive to spreading peace in that region.
This is the most intelligent piece of writing on Pakistan that I've read for years. The creation of that country was a disaster that the British created and then walked away from, leaving it to sink or swim as best it could. Sinking and swimming has been Pakistan's story ever since. It has always lacked a coherent reason for existing. Its creation inflamed religious intolerance (again thanks to the British) where it had not existed before; led to mass murders on a horrifying scale; and an enmity between two countries that was never necessary but has been endlessly exacerbated by both. All this said, how unlikely it is that anything can now be changed. Readers interested in how this tragedy came about should turn to Alex von Tunzelmann's page-turning INDIAN SUMMER.
Excellent idea. Dividing Pakistan into Baluchistan, Sindh, Punjab, NWFP wold bring peace to the region, it's new nations and the world at large. None of these smaller nations would require nuclear weapons and can be easily pressured to give them up like Ukraine in exchange for freedom. The Kashmir problem would come to a logical end.
Punjab would be dependent on Sindh and India for supplies being landlocked and Sindh on Punjab for water. Same the dependency of NWFP on Punjab would be greater. Thus relations between the new states would have to be conducive. It would also be easy to isolate terrorist elements in either state and eliminate them.
The concept of a stable and united Pakistan will not work. Good article.
What has been done cannot be undone and the Pakistani people have evolved into hate and fear infested people just as the Indians have in most parts. Going back to the old days will set back the subcontinent back another hundred years. If the West in particular UK and US stop meddling, what the Subcontinent needs is a Federation of India, Pakistan, Napal, Burma, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Singapore and some others like Iran and Afghanistan to form the Federated States of Middle East. That is if any of these SOBs have any real vision to rid them selves of the constant war and conflicts, created by their corrupt leaders, often manipulated by the outsiders.
The oil resources of Iran, natural gas reserves of Bangladesh, fertile lands of Afghanistan, Punjab, the Indus valley and other rivers delta of Bangladesh, can be used for productivity and efficiency rather then the uncontrolled annual rains and flood. What is needed is the ingenuity of the Dutch to build a control system like they have in Holland.
Unfortunately they do not have a person like Gandhi, but they have India's Singh and some pretty good new smart business people that can mold a cohesive Union to establish equal justice for all, insure domestic tranquility for all, provide for a common defense for all, general welfare for all and secure the blessing of liberty and prosperity for all.
Provided, for a change all these people stop thinking as being different entities that divide them, but rather the common interests and needs that will unite them for a better more stable future, unbinding them from the hegemony of US and UK.
The Ettefagh is completely ignorant about the genesis of Pakistan. Pakistan was the brainchild of Muslims in what now India. They were afraid of being the ruled rather than the ruled after the British left. They were the ones who wanted a separate state. In what is now Pakistan, the Muslims were only a slim majority in the provinces of Sindh and Punjab but the Muslims had managed to retain power in the provincial elections and these Muslims had no initial desire for breaking away from India.
Kashmir did not factor in the Pakistani dreams until later. The rulers of the erstwhile states that were contiguous could choose to remain independent or join India or Pakistan. The ruler of kashmir decided to join India even though the population of Kashmir was about 55% Muslim at the time of independence.
Unfortunately after Independence the Muslims left behind in India were betrayed by both Pakistan and India when the two prime ministers signed a pact banning further immigration to Pakistan even though Muslims in what is now India had given up their lives to break up India and form their beloved country of Pakistan.
Breaking up Pakistan is not the solution.
The solution is to goad its people away from the cult known as Islam and urge them to return to their cultural heritage which is Hindu-Buddhist.
Islam is an evil cult that prevens democracy from taking hold.
The second part of the slution is to complete Partition by
1) allowing any Muslim in India to migrate to his/her beloved Pakistan at any time. Some 100 milliion talnted Muslims from India will benefit Pakistan immensely and they will not be left to the mercy of us evil Hindus.
2) by making Pakistan vacate the area in Jammu and Kashmir that is occupied by it. The rules of the Partition must be followed and all of Jammu and Kashmir should be returned to India.
The more I think about splitting up Pakistan, the crazier the idea seems. It is interesting to note that no one has thought of one possible consequence: the Northwest Territory could well end up being run by the Taliban and Al Qaida. They are trying to do that now, and have even tried to declare a Caliphate, with them in charge. What a nightmare that would be.
This will set an example for most of other countries to follow. What kind of world will emerge for the humanity to live. There is better solution than disintegration of countries on tribal lines. Let the armies of world be dissolved to save $ one trillion to address humanity needs. Writer is correct if just issues of nations like Palestine, Kashmir, Chachnia, Darfur are not addressed by the international and national government agencies people finally rise up to take control. World is reaping what it has sown over the decades of imposing hageomony, injustice, and corrupt leadership. All people are human seeking justice and tranquilty and resolution of their problems with soft power and not through guns. Armies are least equipped to solve civil problems. As for Pakistan it is conspiracy to dissolve the country by creating civil war and turning people against its own army.
This is bunch of bull. Turbulent time does not equal to splitting any country. Pakistani majority love their country and fiercely loyal to it.
Washington post while your bloggers and writers have every write to make their point of view, atleast make it on the intellectual level.
well said.a country that came into being on hatred cannot survive for long.the best example of that is the pshyce of every pakistani.they r in a constant state of anger, some times its india,U.S.A or even Isreal.oflately they have started hating U.K,france germany ...etc.they remind me of palestinians who r totally impotent so they curse the whole world for everything.i have a feeling pakistan will end up like palestine.everybody will want to keep them at a distance.that had already started after 9/11 but now that will be thrown out from every where.god bless pakistan.we must offer our sympathy for such a sorry state.
If you use the similar logic that the author has used, you will end up wiping out most of the countries off the world map including Iran, a country thats fueled by corruption and underground violence and thrives on Totalitarianism. Many third world countries are in the same position. Singling out Pakistan based on your personal opinion weakens your position as a journalist/writer who lacks the broader perspective. Instead of focusing on whats wrong with other nations lets look at ourselves and patch the giant holes in our foreign policies, provide the basic necessities to our public and see what we can do to help the struggling countries who have stood by us when we needed them the most. Pakistan is a crucial US ally and deserves to be treated as one.
I seriously doubt existence of such individual (Dr. Ali) in Iran. No one can harm Pakistan, it just the continuation of American policy of carrot & stick. History clearly shows what American establishment is capable of, i.e. make leaders like Saddam Hussian and Osama Bin Laden. Use them for its goals and then declare them terrorists. Without any doubt, its Musharraf's turn. It all started when Bush visited Pakistan last year. As far as I can understand, Musharraf already had plans of giving up and transfering power. But, Americans wanted to corrupt people like Benazir Bhutto to replace Musharraf, so that they can easily be bought thru money, when goals of American establishment are achieved. Ground realities clearly show that Benazir has lost vote bank, she still uses her fathers name for votes, even after being twice elected Prime Minister of Pakistan.
American establishment wants to destablise Pakistan, to make an excuse to enter Pakistan for greater target of attacking Iran.
Here I would like to mention what I mean by American establishment. It means Pro-Isreal groups and Jewish members of US government. Pakistan has been systematically pushed away from long time friend China, to pave way for attacking Pakistan.
Whatever the think tanks think about Pakistan, in reality Pakistan is a Nuclear armed state and intrusion by foreign forces might result in destruction of the region, which could include Israel and could also harm American interests in GCC countries.
Take Pakistan, Afghanistan, Russia, China, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egpyt, Jordan, Lebanon, Algeria, Morocco, Kuwait, Dubai, Libya, Gaza, West Bank (PA), Tunisia, Sudan, Yemen et al and nuke them. Let the chips fall where they may. We'll take a look at SE Asia next week.
I am astonish to read this full of hate article.I accept that Pakistan do have some problems, but how Dare the Author to propose to "Dissolve" Pakistan. Pakistan is for ever. The author even don't know the ground realities. He even don't know that the National language of Pakistan is Urdu, although the official language is English same like in India.
Author blamed that "Pakistan is the main transit route for opium and heroin from Afghanistan", may be correct, but where the "opium and heroin" is produced, in "Afghanistan". So why blame Pakistan? NATO and US should stop the production in Afghanistan.
Pakistan is not a relic set up, Pakistan is a country of 160 million people and we all Love Pakistan. We will over come all the problems of terrorism and extremist. 95% Pakistani are peace loving, remaining 5% are misguided by Iran, India , Afghanistan and Mullahs.
pakistan why safer because we follow policy of white house i have example in the 80s wat happen gernal zia time fight aginst rasia wat we gat result AK-47 culture but know dayz fight teror wat happen increase exstreems . iam a ordinary pakistani we love our nation
pakistan zaindabad.................
If we hold the theory that cultural ties are more important than religion, then we can start abandoning the whole concept of nationhood. How is United Kingdom then be legitimate when Scotland, England and Ireland are so different. How is Belgium a country when three languages and culture flourish? One has to be very imaginative to deny that United Kingdom or Belgium are not successful nations. Do we next dismember India and China because they too have different languages, cultures, appearance and religion within their borders. Iran also hosts a variety of people within its borders - the Kurds, the Baluchis, and numerous other tribes.
If culture and language defined the cement that bonds a country together then Central America, all of north Africa should emerge as united countries.
Nations are established for a host of reasons. It is not always the coming together of willing partners. The American civil war was fought to keep a unwilling confederate states within a nation. Nations are often forged together by conquest or by a small group of people who deem that they will be better off being independent.
Pskistan is not unique in having 'revolving door' politicians. Turkey has alternated between politicans, so have India and Italy.
Pakistan's problems are many - chief among them is the army who makes mockery of democracy, suppresses its own people, abets terrorism in the neighborhood, flouts the rule of law and is mired in corruption. These are traits that Pakistan shares with many poor nations.
I will leave it to people wiser than me to propose how Pakistan can extricate itself. The solutions offered by Dr. Ali Ettefagh, to me, seems like a recipe for disaster.
As a Pakistani i have three words for the writer" go to hell". News of our demise have been circulating among some circles since 1947. We are still alive and will remain so.
After reading your views there are certain things that came in our mind and that also speaks your fear.
1.In case of pakistan ,Iran cannot be a dominant power in that region.
2 with a pakistan ,Iran cannot overpowered with Arab who has an strategic alliance with the arab sunni countries.
3 you suggestion to dissolve the pakistan into tribal identity is nothing but a dream of enemy of pakistan to loose the wolves to fight with each other and creat problem of security.
4 The strenghth of pakistan is not nationalism but the bond of islam.The more the islam will reighn the pakistani life the more the bond of brotherhood will be and so the unity of tribal people in pakistan.which you want to destroy with the idea of nationalism.
5 with coming of the european union the slogan of nationalism lost the ground.if the father land of nationalism in 16th century can turn down the idea of nationalism in favour of unity then why not tribal pakistna can unite in the name of islam.
6.The creation of pakistan was a final solution of future cancer of indian people and pakistani people.if there would be no pakistan there would be not any tribal provices in that region and we all face more than five kashmir problem at the same time.while in reality we are unable to solve one kashmir alone.
7The idea of pakistna led by chaudhry rahmat a western educated was not a fancy but dream to creat an area of islamic identity in the south east asia.
8 The support of british for two nation theory was the outcome of the failed settlement led by the indian national congress and Mr.jinnah.British goverment cannot trasfer the power to any indian faction without a unity in them and being a just ruler the british goverment didnot commit this historical blunder mistake.
9 The question of palestine and israel issue shows that if both indian leader and pro pakistani leaders would lost this opportunities then both would face the same situation like this.what we are seeing after more than fifty years no solution to this problem.
In the last i can say can u present a better solution than this if religion is there?
British Imperilalism was a symptom of colonial competition between several countries in Europe at the turn of the 16th century. After America repelled the British ownership of the new land. Britian became smitten with the pleasure of power that they were able to impose over a civilation and culture. In other words "the American colonialists destroyed our love and control of people and disuaded our ability to be demigods over them".
The rest of the world ie India, Pakistan, Iraq etc. were unable to mount any type of organizational resistence to the Imperialilism. It would seem that the puritanical nature of their religions and lack of a moral base of human living created a true anarchal structure, which is a basis for order and sadistic behavior. The Americans won in the fight against their masters where Asia lost.
The only way America was able to win this battle against evil was the creation of a lawful Consitituion that proscribed unalienable rights for ALL men. Respect for all forms of worship and equality of men and women, separation of extreme religions and state function. A fellowship of mankind.
Until Asia imbarks on these premises, a re-drawing of borders I think will be somewhat fruitless. The people of Asia must acquiesce to moral structure of a political nature and not rule by the sword and power. Culturals must be able to give up their self-love and form a cultural of humanity.
The west is full of ill conceived ideas bordering on illusion. The latest such examples are Kosovo and Bosnia. Bosnia will be this great multi-ethnic nation where Muslims and Christians will exchange flowers and walk hand-in-hand. That worked well, didn't it? Bosnia has been a hub for Islamic extremism. Similarly, Kosovo is a humanitarian solution. Reading the recent history since 1999 demonstrates the opposite, a land of extreme intollerance and ethnic cleansing, and then there was For Dix. So much for the Wests's fantasy ideal states...
I wonder how ethnically (or tribally) homogeneous the five Muslim provinces you cite are. If each is fairly homogeneous, then perhaps the people of Pakistan would be wise to choose this plan.
But if each province has large minorities that theoretically "belong" to a different province from the one in which they are now living, then this plan seems like a prescription for further conflict. Look at what happened to Yugoslavia. I don't think the people of Pakistan will be happier if rounds of ethnic cleansing are added to their troubles.
The real solution is for people to learn to live together in peace. We must not give up so easily.
Frankly, there is w whole lots of truth in Dr.Ettifagh's analysis of Pakistan.
It's sad that lots of Pakistani responders to his article are writing in the light of emotional outburst----------- Why don't Pakistani people accept his warning and work towards fixing the loose bricks in the structure called "Pakistan" than lashing out and making rude, unethical and violant comments. JUST think fellows--- TO THIS DATE ALL ROADS OF VIOLANCE ARE LEADING TO AND EMERGING OUT OF this pakstand.
Hey Paki brotherens...Rather than getting all upset and out of wack amend the problems which are failing Pakistan--- Work towards Democracy; Stop creating terrorism around the world; Stop refusing the citizens comming back to their country ( eg: Shariff); Stop selling weapons of terrorism (eg:Selling Nuclar shit to the world); Stop protecting rouges like Dr.Khan; Stop supporting & protecting terrorists creating troubles in Indian Kashmir; Ask why all that money the WORLD donated to Pakistan after the earthquakes has not left BIG-WIGS, bank accounts to where it was maent to go----------- ABOVE ALL dear PAKIS-- learn and act civilized & stop that religious laden shitty terrorism ... This world belongs to Jews, Chirstian,Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims and every body---- You pakstandi muslims don't have any preference in God's place.
Yes! Jinah was the the Culprit to create Pakistan;Yes! It should never been created--- Frankly Dr. Ettifagh's artcle and analysis should be respected by all good pakistanis to build their country .......... Hail to the Civilized World!
Well, maybe it shouldn't have been a country, but by golly it is now and has nuclear weapons and a huge military establishment. Like it or not, plans to redraw its borders or reorganize it will meet some pretty stiff resistance. I don't know what planet the writer comes from to advocate its dismemberment.
I have worked there, and while I found my colleagues absolutely wonderful, there is no doubt that it is almost, though not quite, a failed state. It is corrupt, its roads are falling apart, and unbelievably violent. Perhaps there is no solution, but to accept that its fate will affect us all. We must live with the uncertainty.
I can not agree any more on Pakistan than that it should be dissolved. It is an artificial, unnatural country. It was not there, it was not supposed to be their. Only two countries in the world have been artifically created one is Pakistan and the other is Israel. But what a contrast they are one is a Jewish democratic state. THe ither is a Muslim Dictatorship. In Israel atlest religion unites but in Pakistan religion has failed to unite people with common religious beliefs and diverse languages. Pakistan was not required in the first place and now its for every one to see what a disistaer can happen when he go against the nature. Pakistan was not a natural country but sn artifical man (mullah) made country. Pakistani dissident leader Altaf Hussain says that the biggest that the creation of Pakistan has been the greatest tragedy for the Muslims of Indian sub-continent. It is also claimed that the founder of Pakistan MOhammed Ali Jinnah is his last days also regretted the creation of Pakistan. Pakistan should be dissolved.
Consider a quilt analogy. When the whole quilt is in bad, bad shape, one solution that arises to any logical thinker is dissolving the quilt to see if the patches will do better framed on their own or as part of some other quilt.
I am absolutely not qualified to critique the idea of the dissolution of Pakistan except to say that it is a logical thought (with precedent - other non-working quilts were the USSR and Yugoslavia) and hence deserves discussion and in using this process, the idea can be dismissed logically by those who find no value in it. I have read all the posts so far and I see a lot of people who outrightly dismiss the idea - please explain why and enlighten the rest of us. Also, I do not find any one who has posted their solution to Pakistan's problems. There has to be some thought about a solution, however complex the problem is, otherwise there will be no improvement in the lives of millions and millions of people who live in that country now and who are yet to be born.
Pakistan is acountry of highly educated capable and hardworking people.The evidence is success of oveseas pakistanis in field of science financial services and business.There is no denying Pakistan has develomental and geopolitical challenges.
The author,s vitriolic is rflection of his prjudices for which he is using platform
How about we dissolve Mr Ettefagh and his Highmore Global Corporation? "Investment" under the hard sell suggested by the Cheneys, Challabis and Ettefaghs of the world have become synonymous with Mechanized Slaughter and Thievery.
Afterall, as Mr Ettefagh wrote: "It is time to seriously review all of these structures and redraw the borderlines." I would suggest it begins with the "dissolution" of these aggressive, BORDERLESS Corporate States run by tyrants MoreHigh on Greed than anything - or anyone - else in the world.
In brief- Pound sand, Mr Ettefagh. Think of it as a mutual favor. That way you won't have to come back whining to the American People later on to bail you out by airlifting your sorry ass back to the latest corporate-thief safe haven protected by gunboat diplomacy... And the American Public won't have to pay both in money and blood to finance your personal Fortune Seeking. Think of it as "Win/Win".
In a parallel story, the Post has done fine reporting on Blackwater. Essentially, via ripping off the US Government , the avoidance of payroll taxes on its myriad of "subcontractors", and access to privileged personel info within the Defense Department - Blackwater has been able to use the American Public as venture capital for a private enterprise to induce, cherrypick and gut key US Defense Personel, all to Blackwaters benefit.
What a joke, the "CEO" "Wartime" Presidency that fails to use non-compete agreements for key personel such as Special Forces, Intelligence spooks, and critical communications specialists....So very many flies are breeding now, like the Princes of Blackwater, the Ettefaghs of HigherPieMoreCapital and the like...All of them breeding on the stink, the necrotic stench that is The Era of Cheney, Bush and the Vichy Democrats. In more Enlightened times, they'd have all been summarily hung for High Treason along with their lawyers quibling over unneccesary words for things the open eye can see in plain sight...
Jeff Scott you are absolutely correct when you say that pakistan is nuke nude. There is growing evidence to this effect.
This Arif character seems like a typical hardline pakistani youth, the masala that terror groups feed on. His statements and thought process is but a window into the line of thinking that pakistan and pakistanis have.
Yes, some times one must dismantle something to save it, in this case it might serve a lot of good to dismantle Pakistan. Certainly not all of its people are dangerous, but a large enough group seem to profit from terrorists, drug runners and Wahabi extremists and their Madrassas that do not teach science, math and humanities.
Well, it is totally understandable that this world is full of this kind of self claimed or some interest sponsored mentally unstable scholars but it is absolutely mind blowing that a prestigious paper such as Washington Post has a place on its columns for this kind of crape.
I, sincerely, hope that my comments won’t hurt the intellectual feelings of the in charge of the editorial page of this paper.
That Pakistan today is a nuclear armed state is suspect. There have been numerous suggestions to this effect by powerful people(Remember Condelissa Rice during the senate hearing let it slip that pakistan's nuclear weapon problem has been "secured"). The biggest threat that pakistan origin nuclear weapons pose is to the united states, pakistan's principle ally in the war against terror. The US is unlikely to have sat around and let this threat develop.
So I say again, I seriously doubt that Pakistan today has access to nuclear weapons
The comments of ARIF KHAN (presumably a Pakistani reader) posted above make the case for the author. Dangerous people must be allowed to have dangerous weapons.
As others have noted, and as the original question to this panel and Newsweek has mentioned, Pakistan is a very dangerous place and the centre for terrorism, islamic extremism and drugs. Each of these is enough to make the case.
Nations are sustained by shared values, common history, ethnicity and sustainable (as opposed to parasitical) inter dependence. Pakistan's failures are primarily in the areas of shared values and inter dependence of its peoples. The biggest fallacy was to equate shared values with Islam. Common religion has never been a unifier in any country as the history of Pakistan bears out.
Despite far greater diversity, India is one nation not because it is 82% Hindu, but due to the strong institutions it built since independence in 1947. Democracy, a strong independent judiciary, election commission, an apolitical army under total civilian control, clearly demarcated responsibilities for States and the Central Government and full protection to diverse cultural, religious, regional and linguistic traditions have made India strong and growing. In critical issues there is an unstated consensus among all political parties.
If Pakistan builds these very same institutions it will remain united and grow strong. It is in India's interest to see a prosperous Pakistan at peace with itself. Not even the most idealistic (or stupid) Indian would want Pakistan to reunite with India. Indian has its hands full trying to integrate its own 140 million Muslims into the national mainstream.
Maybe this heading should lead the dissolving of the U.S. it is far more dangerous to the world ecologically, politically, militarily, and terrorism wise than Pakistan will ever be. Then we can continue with Ethnic dividing of Europe and then Iran..
I have some sympathy with the sentiments expressed in this piece. Pakistan has not worked as a country, though I do think that Pakistanis have developed an outward sense of national identity (even if regionalism is the norm in practice within the country).
Pakistan is more than just one of many failed experiments in nation building. The magnitude of the failure has profoundly affected international politics. Pakistan is the center of international terrorism and provides shelter and training for jihadist groups of all sorts. For Pakistan, support of terrorist groups is fundamental to its foreign policy, as it is the only way it can keep India bogged down in Kashmir, keep the Kashmiri separatist/independence movement alive, and prevent Afghanistan from falling into India or Iran's sphere of influence.
Terroist groups that are based in Pakistan are responsible for attacks on a global scale. Without Pakistan's support, the Taliban would not exist as a political force in Afghanistan, and consequently, Bin Laden would have never had the freedom and flexibility to develop Al-Qaeda and expand the jihadist agenda.
Something clearly must be done about Pakistan if the problem of militant Islamic fundamentalism is to be addressed. Rather than redraw the map to break Pakistan into 4 countries, the best way is to insist on compliance with democratic norms and alliances with progressive political parties who can usher in an era of modern progressive thinking into a country that has been essentially dysfunctional and backward.
When someone is caught in extraordinary situation(problems) then the "sympathiser" is not supposed to suggest a "solution" from the worst available possibility no matter how many Ph.Ds elevate him,Ettifagh has only one.The basic principle is, 'do to others what you would like to be done to you in response'.I feel offended on such'intellectual analysis'.Should I reply in the same style(negative)?What would that mean if I do.I fear something is seriously wrong with our education or orientation.No one can have the liberty to go to such extremes without compromising one's claim to decency.
Sir.Why pick on Pakistan?What about,Iraq,Israel?Afghanistan?Half of the Latin American Countries?Lands inherited by the USA after the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo of 1848?and literally half of the Known World?What about your Beautiful Iran which is the biggest Trouble maker in the Universe?Let me tell you with Pakistans Nuclear Arsenal if we are FORCED by any Power to Disintegrate we will Take a LOT OF YOU WITH US WHEN WE GO?India knows what we are capable OF>So Keep your ideas to yourself and Believe me the Pakistan Armed Forces can take care of any Eventuality?? Rgds Arif Khan
Correct view. Let us take a step back and take a look at all fabricated countries during the 20th century: Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Israel, USSR plus Pakistan..... what is wrong with this picture, eh?
They are all in the news every day about one problem or another. Some dissolved and went about their own business, some with success (Czechoslovakia, USSR, some bits of Yugoslavia) and others with a hand bag of day dreams about vague interpretations of history (Yugoslavia's Serbia, Iraq and Israel).
So, we have to be objective about past mistakes and correct them, especially when we are talking about creatures of the last 60 years or so.
Those that are attacking the writer and his country are misunderstood. The topic is Pakistan and its absurd structure. One politician was deported from his own country (Nawaz Sharrif), another was scared off by a bomb that killed morethan 160 people (Benazir Bhutto) and Mrs. Bhutto was prevented from filing a complaint with the Pakistani police! And the writer is correct: where are the younger politicians in this supposedly free and open "democracy" ?! Where is Pakistan's Obama or Sarkozy or Merckel?
From abroad, it looks like it is Halloween is an every day event in Pakistan!
the author has spoken his personel venom against the established country with indepedent political structure and soverienty.the country which the author wishes to finish has by all records been a close ally to united states as thread monitor to south asia as then percieved by united states.however; the later period proved it that united states is most believed timely friend instead having the permanet basis to float such friendship.i wonder how author has assumed maturity to declare at international media that due to his personel like and dislike how the nations should stay and break up in the world.it is quite fortunate for united states that the learned author was not alive/born during 16trh' century when in the then state of "salem" of united states teen aged/women were ruthleesly hanged on the perception of being witchcraft.the author could go through the history atleast to make comment that how united states flourshed having such bitter past.the episodes as mentioned by the author for braking up pakistan would one lead to understand that no such events ever took place in any country including iran.Most ironically; if the people of pakistan as per author are exrememists; how would they change by redrawing of their borders/breaking up their states.i wish learned author a relaxed intellect to understand the existence of golbe in conflict and reconcillation. there appears more personel pungentof the learned author on the geographical name of pakistan than tendering some reasonable argument to its solution.the author may enjoy to read that in great country like india the father of nation MATMA GANDHI was ruthlessly killed and many ethinic voilences did subsist;still no reasonable person can say that it should have redrawing of borders etc.this is the ever casual thought i have gone through of the post.thanks.
Absolutely on target analysis of poor Pakistan's problem in the wake of British de-colonialization in South Asia, the middle-east and Africa. Now, after over a half-century, the difficulties are even more insoluable than they were in 1947.
i have had the same idea about pakistan for some time. unfortunate but true, they like eritrea, are not a legitimate state. they are renegade provinces torn from their motherlands by outside forces. but if pakistan is to be disbanded cant the same case be made for many other nations? what about the arab ahwaz region of iran itself? they seem to agitate for seperation. wont a disintegration of pakistan invite a similar case to be made for many other nations? i think partition always opens a pandoras box. pakistan is a mistake we must accept, lest a worse circumstance comes out of it's demise.
A couple of historical corrections (and present): Pakistan's official language is Urdu and not English. Partition of India was a result of a referendum, where the Muslim majority provinces decided to form a separate nation. It is called democracy. Besides, who will dissolve Pakistan? The fanatics in Iran who want to obliterate the Jews from the face of earth? Give me a break, man. Why don't you spend your energies convincing your president to stop making WMDs and the dirty bombs so that the world be a better and safer place. Oh,While you are at it, please also ask your government in Iran to stop financing the radical shia groups in Pakistan who are some of the most notorious terrorists.
The title of Mr. Ettefagh's article 'Why not dissolve Pakistan, too?' suggests that Mr. Ettefagh is arguing for dissolution of other countries in that region TOO. Which countries is he referring to?
One may not have to waste time to read Washington post anymore if irrational and poorly informed comments of an INVESTMENT BANKER are presented as an expert analysis on Pakistan or the region.
Unless current situation of Pakistan is analysed from the perspective of recent history, as to the causes of current problem one may not reach a solution and would perpetuate the misery of the people who will be LIVING in that region whichever name is given to their country.
The relevent context is Soviet occupation of Afghanistan with war against the occupation resulting in destruction of Afghanistan, loss of more than a million lives and refugee problem with 1.5 million refugees who have lived in Pakistan for over two decades with problems of arms and drugs coming to Pakistan associated with war and refugees. Thousands of Afghan children were trained to fight the soviets with religious fervour and probably an entire generation grew up not seeing anything but war and may not actually know what a civil life is or what education is. To keep up the support for Afghan war effort and refugees an entire Pakistani generation was taught lessons in favour of militancy and religous fervour for war.
For a solution and to improve the condition of the PEOPLE, now is the time to reverse that.
Mr. Ali Ettefagh should support proper modern education, economic development and a democratic rule for the people of Pakistan and Afghanistan so that militancy and extremism can be curbed.
Suggeted reading:
1. 'Jinnah of Pakistan' by Stanley Wolpert for intro to creation of Pakistan
2. 'Three cups of Tea' by Greg Mortenson for an idea about the people LIVING in Pakistan and Afghanistan and what education can do for them.
For an INVESTMENT BANKER some of the humane issues may be difficult to grasp.
On a different note, Mr. Ali Ettefagh mentions Pakistan at eastern border of Iran as a transit route for drugs from Afghanistan. But is Iran or any other country able to stop further transit of drugs? In that case there would be no drug smuggling issue.
On the lighter side, as an alternate solution Mr. Ettefagh may consider the following: Iranian province of Baluchistan merge with Pakistan's Baluchistan so that Pakistan becomes more stable with resultant stability on eastern border of Iran.
am not at all surprised to read about the story about Pakistan. actually, it is a continuation of larger propaganda cycle being unleashed in the West from where the Writer like Ali get impressed. the story is misleading and based on faulty and inept knowledge of so-called writer. the present predicament is most attributed to the US and her allies, particularly UK. The US has been a regular actor in the region and used these called millitants these days in her pursuits to disintegrate erstwhile USSR while UK is a party to the problem by leaving behind Kashmir as an unfinished agenda of partition. Pakistan has the capabilty to survive and prgress,provided its people are allowed to rule themselves according to thier aspirations and wishes. If there is no foreign involement in the internal affairs of the Country, most of the problems will be amiably resolved. Pakistan is a land of hardworking 160 Millions people, who are blessed with the strength and resilience to take their Country on the path of progress and well-being. and the fact also needs to be kept in mind that 60 years is not a very long period in the history of any Nation to make her glory manifested.Afterall, these were the same Muslims who have been ruling the Subcontinet for about 900 years, before The Brithishers came. So lets not be get carried away with such a misleading. confused and self assumed fabrication and twisting of facts.
I think Ali Ettefagh has come up with a real gem of a piece, that hits hard at the root of the problem AND suggests a viable solution to this entire pan islamic jihad.
Pakistan was a vague idea to begin with, which nations of the west used to their end to defeat communism and as counterbalance against its socialist, pro-USSR neighbour, India. Pakistan today is a nation deeply fractured along ethnic and religious lines, the Punjabis rule the roost, occupy most of the higher government jobs, occupy the most important positions in the military, and over the years have ensured that maximum development takes place in punjab - to the detriment of the other states. Punjabis account for the political and military elite within pakistan which the other ethnicities detest.
Sindh, composed of mostly the highly educated masses who migrated from India during partition is an impoverished province with massive unemployment, despite a higher level of education within the nation. The migrants "The Mohajirs" as they are called within Pakistan, are resentful of the fact that despite them being at the forefront of the Pakistan movement, and losing the most during migration, were shortcharged by the punjabi elite, pushed into refugee camps, and were designated "Mohajirs". Their political representaiton has thus come from the militant Mohajir (Now Muttahida) Quami Movement. Incidentally General Musharraf is a mohajir, in a sea of punjabis (Thus his relatively weak position with pakistan).
The balochis who border iran have always strived for nationhood incorporating part of balochi areas in Iran into a Greater Balochistan nation. The pakistanis have repeatedly crushed armed rebellion in this region all the way back from the 60s to this day. Incidentally balochistan accounts for whatever little gas reserves that pakistan has.
The NWFP was a region dominated by the pakhtoon tribes, until the british created an artificial boundary "The Durand Line", bang through its middle. Pakhtoons don't respect this line and have always freely corssed to meet family on both sides in afghanistan and in pakistan's NWFP. During independance from India, the pakhtoons were eager to join the indian nation, because their charismatic leaders, Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan (AKA Frontier Gandhi) saw union with india as a natural analogy to their past associations in the freedom movement against the british. The rest of the areas under pakistan's control are a part of the Jammu and Kashmir state, where pakistan's never held elections (The Northern Areas), part where they have had a "Prime Minister" who was always a Punjabi, and always nominated from Islamabad. A large tract of this area has been handed over to china (So much for pakistan's claim over kashmir)
Pakistan today is a nation organized along feudal and ethinic identities, where the elite have their 'thumbs in the pie', and the rest, well...
Then there is the nuclear programme. This nation has only produced a couple of dozon Phd's during its entire existance, and has clandestine acquired nuclear weapons from china. I say so because, the success of their own nuclear efforts are suspect, because of the reason I mention above-sheer lack of any scientific environment within the nation. That their nuclear scientists have shared technology illicitly with Libya, Iran, North Korea is well known, the little secret is that they are now equiping the saudis with nuclear weapons made in pakistan of chinese design, on chinese supplied missiles to saudi arabia. The uranium enrichment facility in syria destroyed by israel in a bombing raid this year, was of pakistnai origin, routed through North Korea. Pakistan's nuclear scientists have in the past met with Osama Bin Laden himself, no less! and discussed ways in which Al Quida's needs may be met.
And finally there is the ISI, pakistan's secretive intelligence agency, accused of running a state within the state, feared by all within pakistan. This agency is the one which ran the mujaheedeen operation against the soviets, the taliban when they wrested control of afghanistan, and runs seperatist operations in various parts of india, in line with its policy of "bleeding india through a Thousand cuts". It includes former military officers who were in the past handlers of osama bin laden, and the numerous others (for example Omar Sheikh, Daniel Pearl's killer- who the indians had to release in the aftermath of the Kandhar Hijacking of an Indian Airlines Flight), and who are now reluctant to severe ties with their former wards.
Finally there is the pakistan military, whose reason d'etre for existance is tensions with neighbour, India. It has run the country for the majority of its existance, never allowed any elected government to complete its term, and lords over the nations riches like a private entity.
I think that the religious fanaticism created to somehow artificially hold the nation together is now becoming its undoing. Indeed the nations states created as a result of pakistan's splitting will be more at peace with themselves and with the world. Pan-Islamic Jihad which originates from the swamp we know as pakistan will be crushed only if its individual actors are isolted and seperated.
well,
dissolution of a state is not that simple,even if we fully agree with authors point of view.What he suggests for the future of 160 million people just in case, if there is no Pakistan.
If Jinnah had lived for 10 years or more, Pakistan would have been the envy of the world. Partition was political and Jinnah wanted Pakistan to do better than India as it was his quest and vendetta against Nehru. Unfortunately he died, then at that moment Pakistan literally got dissolved. From then on it is being abused, wealth stolen, by most politicians and Military. This situation is maintained even today by indoctrination that is India is the only Enemy. Just look at freedom Muslims of India Enjoy in India. Partition made Pakistan to be whore ( cheap) to the west. It is the epicenter of terrorism. If chance is given to moderate Pakistanis, Pakistan still can bounce back. For that, it has to swallow the indoctrinated false ant-India pride and make peace with only per-condition that Kashmir will be resolved through dialogue only.
This is one of the most ignorant piece of writing on Pakistan that I have ever come across. It is written by someone whose knowledge of the country is almost laughable. First of all, he claims that Pakistan is a country of infighting tribal clans. If anything, it is still basically a feudal country, where the main power lies in the hands of large Punjabi and Sindhi landowners and their military enablers. The tribal clans are principally in the NW Province and Baluchistan - their share of political power has always been minimal, even though the Wahabbi fundamentalists and jihadists among them are now clamoring for more say in the body politic. In Pakistan, the business class is still moribund, having mostly originated from a handful of business-savvy immigrants who arrived from India after partition. Today, many businesses and industries are owned by a rising class of wealthy Punjabis.
This is the true face of Pakistan - it is still mired in the feudalism of the middle ages. It has not undergone a demographic transition to a more Western style free market economy. Nor will it anytime soon, since those in power today are reluctant to change the status quo.
Dear Author
I beilieve u are really prejuicice in making ur non sense views, whatever inferences u have tried to draw for Pakistan pl put in the same parameters on ur beloved country Iran being led by sychophant clergy. i assure you u would find better options to draw boundries in illogical Iran, if you dont find hint let me give u some hints, Sistan o Balchistan, Khosistan, Armenia, Urumea, Azerbizan Shaki wa Gharbi. Mind you Iran had the most shameless no of quo ever, please see the mirror before making any exuberated, sponsored comments.
Pakistan is a proud nation who knows how to handle situations, not like Iran which makes hypocratic gestures on media and beg behind curtains for mercy.
Remember, Pakistan is to stay, if you have doubts try us, Insha Allah ur coming generations would remeber us.
Another piece written for shock value. I'm disappointed that a publication like The Washington Post would print it.
Hey Ali.... As pointed out by other people... Almost all countries are a collection of different types of tribes, races, and people of different ethnic background... Duh!
I understand why so many of our Pakistani friends are indignant at Mr. Ettefagh. But since I am not a Pakistani, I have the luxury of being dispassionate about what he has written.
Most of the comments heap vitriol at him or his ancestral country, Iran. But that does not answer the comments he has made, and one can discuss Iran some other time. This column is about Pakistan and the issues he raises is on everyone's mind. Are we seeing the beginning of something horrific happening in Pakistan leading to its dissolution or dismemberment, or are we merely witnessing a tough period in its history that it will overcome. I invite Pakistani readers to provide cogent well reasoned arguments for the latter possibility.
The creation of Pakistan came about for many reasons like:-
-british phobia of having to deal with a frankenstein state called India which was larger than that ever ruled by any Indian prince.
-fear of bosnia-type ethnic cleansing among muslims (read converts).
-uneven distribution of wealth i.e. hindus/sikhs were rich and muslims were v poor, and they wished they could free themselves of the vice-like grip of feudal lords (zamindari system).
The state never got itself up and running, but american phobia of India pairing up with USSR gave another fillip to the continuance of the state.
These concerns may not hold water now and it is probably in the interest of the starving lot to bring about a unification and let them enjoy the fruits of India's march to progress.
What a phenomenally insipid argument. The same can be said for your Iran. Let's give the Arabs, Azeris, Kurds, and Baloch their own state. After all, the Balochis you want to 'free' from Pakistan would have territorial claims to the sister province in Iran. Why not unify your Azeri north with Azerbaijan? Why not unite your Kurdish territory with areas of Syria, Turkey, and Iraq to make a Kurdistan?
And when Pakistan's Pathans join Afghanistan, do you think Afghanistan will stay whole? The Pathans will outnumber others even more. The country will further split into a Pakhtunistan and then the Tajiks, Uzbeks and others will want to join Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. But even these countries and the other Central Asian states have their own ethnic discrepancies. Remember Stalin messed with those borders big time.
In short, your silly argument presents a dangerous slippery slope -- it can be applied to virtually any state in region, the wider Muslim world, and in fact, beyond.
The challenge of our time is not map making. It's figuring out how to make the states that exist work. Call us in Islamabad when you figure that out in Tehran.
One could direct the same arguments at any nation in the world, which has its own internal regional diversity. To people sitting in the West, the culture, religion and ethnicity of the Pakistanis appears pretty darn similar.
Furthermore, India was a non-aligned nation, with better relations with the USSR and the Eastern Block than with the capitalist West.
Finally, the author provides no vision of what would arise if the Pakistani federal structure were dissolved. There is no evidence that smaller states would provide more stability, on the contrary, the author's own narrative proves the importance of the Pakistani state, because at least now the regions are not warring with each other.
Therefore, the author has presented no persuasive arguments and a flawed reasoning. His suggestions would propel the region into even further disaster and mayhem.
Homogeneous ethnic make up of a state doesn't guarantee that a stable nation-state is at hand. Don't believe me? Look at my home country Somalia. A true nation-state but by far the worst case. I think Pakistan might need some devolution of power to regional assemblies to speed up development and lower the regional tension over resources especially in Balochistan. But, tearing it apart is insane and very unwise. Like all developing countries, Pakistan has its share of issue to deal with. But, that's no different that India where religious pogroms especially against Muslim isn't that uncommon. I don't hear Mr Etefagh asking for the splitting of Gujarat into its constituent parts to neuter violent Hindu extremism.
The same things could be said about Iran. Iran has been a troublemaker throughout its history. Attacking its neighbours, killing multitudes and plundering and ransacking countries far beyond its geographical location, for thousands of years.
More recently it has added chemical and biological weapons to the list of weapons it has been using to the same end against its peaceful neighbours.
Everybody knows that if Iran had atomic weapons it would have definitely used them in Iran-Iraq war. Even today, all the nations in the world agree that if Iran will have these weapons it would use it against anyone who would dare to stand up against the hegemonic desires of the present regime of Iran.
With mullahs at the helm of affairs and the government imposing its (ill) will in the name of Islam, it is small wonder that the Iranians shows their disdain and contempt of the version of Islam imposed by the Ayatullahs by doing everything that is totally against Islam when they are out and away from the grips of that totalatarian regime.
When saying things about Pakistan, like having English as an official language, it is a pity that the author doesn't know that you can go to any part of Pakistan and talk to anybody in Urdu; Islam is not the only common denominator among the Pakistanis; Urdu is another one...yet another one.
Yes, we have had problems but name a country which country doesn't. What about the Balauchis and the Kurds and Hazara in Iran; one day when they will get independance from the yolk of Iranian's grinding salvery, people around the world would wake up to the horrific stories of these helpless people who have been mauled by centuries of Iranian fits of terror and today not only their identity but their very existence is at stake; and that also in their own lands (occupied by the Iranian usurpers).
The world knows that Iran is a big threat to the peace of the whole world and it is high time for the world to stop this reckless and irresponsible country from getting the nuclear weapons. This menacing country should be disarmed and not only the Kurds, Hazaras, Balauchis and many more nations like them should be liberated but also the people of Iran should be freed from the slavery of their illegitimate government.
They had America and Israel on their hit list for a long time; now another Iranian humbug has added Pakistan to that list.
I tell you what, ...... despite all the problems and outside interferences (including Iranian terrorism in Balauchistan), we have existed and we will exist till the end of time. We are a proud nation, with a mighty, diligent and intelligent human resource and a profusely gifted land. Once we will have a truly represented and democratically elected government, we will show to the whole world that unlike Iran we are one of the most responsible nations on the map of the world. We have always talked about co-existence between the community of nations and never threatened anyone to wipe them out of the map of the world, not even our worst enemies and we will continue to play our positive role.
Its not Pakistan that we should worry about it only and only Iran that the whole world should concentrate on; or we will have a third world war at our hands.
Ali Attefagh sounds convincing. Ali thinks by merely redrawing new boundaries along the tribal traditions and ethnicity of Pakistani provinces, a better outcome can be produced. But a closer look to the immediate neighboring country India will prove Ali is wrong.
In India, as you move from East to West or from North to South, you will notice India has more languages, cultures and traditions than Pakistan. Without a democratic and secular political institution, India would have been less governable than Pakistan. Democracy teaches tolerance. Also, Indian politicians did not allow outsiders interfere in their internal matters.
Pakistani politicians failed, Pakistanis did not. Pakistan rarely lived as an independent country. The politicians of Pakistan were always subservient to super powers. Most ME and North African Islamic countries have the same problem. Pakistan will be a successful country if it follows Turkish, Malaysian or the neighboring country India’s model of democracy, women’s right and modern education. Besides, a mixture of religion and state rarely had good outcome anywhere.
you call pakistan a failed british fantasy and imply the brits set it up as a kind of counterweight to india. that's not the way i understand it.
my understanding is that it was set up at the insistence of mohammed ali jinna, the indian muslim leader who feared muslims would be overwhelmed if they became part of an independent india which was dominated by hindus. gandhi campaigned desperately against partition.
and the british viceroy, lord ountbatten, "looked on india's unity as the greatest legacy britain could leave behind," according to the book "freedom at midnight."
but the great calcutta killings of aug. 16, 1946, a year before independence, in which large numbers of hindus and moslems slaughtered each other, led jinna, the muslim leader to declare: "we shall have india divided, or we shall have india destroyed." and so it was divided. and so we have pakistan.
Nice try sir, please put the pipe down. Enough with that Iranian Charis.
I don't have a problem with your thesis, but as they say in India. " Hum tho dobey sanam, sath tum ko be lay dobey" If you going to cut Pakistan into pieces, the Iran and Afghanistan is going with that too.
I'm not sure exactly what Dr. Ettefagh's agenda is in advocating this position. However, personal agendas aside this opinion piece cannot be taken anymore seriously than Bush's statements about "World War III". I agree with the premise that the "nation-state" is not an iviolable entity and that the most stable notion of a nation-state will be which is itself a collection of semi-autonomous nation states. The U.S. is a good example of this. The increasing Federal control over States is however a move in the wrong direction.
Language such "so and so's borders must be redrawn" is as irresponsible as Bush/Cheney/etc. etc.'s statements. Pakistan needs more federalism, not all out civil war. Sure it was born of fire, so now it should be dismembered? Sorry, it doesn't work that way.
Nice try sir, please put the pipe down. Enough with that Iranian Charis.
I don't have a problem with your thesis, but as they say in India. " Hum tho dobey sanam, sath tum ko be lay dobey" If you going to cut Pakistan into pieces, the Iran and Afghanistan is going with that too.
The article itself is a clear scholarly work. But Mr. Ettefagh should have chosen a better headline, something that doesn't get misunderstood by Pakistanis in general, and doesn't lead radical Pakistanis to ask for his head.
Mr. Ettefagh describes Pakistan as a semi-failed state, and traces the causes back to its creation several decades ago. But he missed the opportunity to address the most important reason: the lack of honest, visionary leadership.
India was born under the same circumstances and with the same problems, but it turned into a successful democracy and is now headed to be one of the world's greatest nations. The difference: their leaders.
We, citizens from many nations, would like to hear Pakistanis express their views:
- what is your vision for your country? a democracy, a monarchy, a military dictatorship, a theocracy?
- how do you plan to address internal regional/ethnic conflicts?
- what role do envision for your country in the region and in the world?
Please remember this is a forum created to exchange ideas and to learn from one another. Respect leads to understanding. Understanding may, hopefully, lead to peace.
Actually, Pakistan means "land of the Pak" or "land of the pure" and has nothing to do with the manufactured nomenclature in this article. It was named by Iqbal who was an Urdu poet.
Btw, the NWFP was allowed/encouraged by the military to become this religious and feudal problem-state. NWFP was greatly enamored of Gandhian ways (remember Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan -- the so-called Frontier Gandhi) and wanted to merge with India on independence so the military had to get around that and did that by creating this essentially lawless region. And btw, the Hindu Maharaja of Kashmir asked for standstill agreements from both sides, while his Muslim Prime Minister (Sheikh Abdullah) wanted to accede to India. Of course, Pakistan did not give him a choice as has been noted here.
It is clear that Pakistan should never have been created, but at this point there is no point in harping over history. Even the BJP in India does not advocate merger with India. The country needs the rule of law like all others, India, Iran and the US included. Also, it is unfair to blame only Jinnah: the Congress leaders' greed in India was also equally to blame.
One could say the same about Iran as well where only 50% of the population speaks Farsi, while it is forcibly imposed on the Baloch, Arabs, Turkmen, Azeris, and Kurds whose culture and language are forcibly suprressed by the arrogant Persian elite
Ali has some interesting analsys. He truely underline some facts about Pakistani culture and politics, but he shied awy to to mention that Pakistan has economy that is based on agriculture and manufacturing not oil or gas like Iran. In addition, Pakistan has thriving libral culture and a viberent relatively free media. That's way, it is distance to be a democracy and a natio state with all its problems.
hi my name is hamza and am from Malakand Agency(tribal area).Dear Mr.Ali Ettefagh ,being a Pakistani first of all I must tell you that seperation of provinces is not the solution to your unknown problem.And not just Iran But the rest of the world knows that there is great unity amongst the provinces ,let me tell you we share same traditions ,same languages ,cultures ,courage and the most important we share one religion Islam,which gives the whole world the message of peace .So these things prove that no one can seperate our provinces.And as far as the drug smugling is concerned ,Afghanistan is the main hub of it and it is from Afghanistan drugs are smuggled to else where may be to Iran as well.And the i think sir you should be more concerned about Iran ,because currently it is Iran which a fish in trouble waters!
thank you.
If what the writer says is true, then can't the same arguments be applied to most if not all of the Middle East? Post WWI, colonial powers drew lines on a map creating 'countries' where none had existed, forcing disparate peoples who had little in common except for mutual hatred to live together in their new 'country'.
The wholesale restructuring the writer suggest is probably what 'should' happen; however, I can't imagine a leader much less a group of them with the wit and wisdom and intelligence and guile to EVER pull off such prodigious feat. Sad to say, I think greed and corruption will prevail for the foreseeable future.
There is more democracy and human rights in Pakistan than Iran, and our ethnicities have a share in the country, unlike total-Persian dominated Iran.
Pakistan is going through a difficult time, we will overcome our difficulties. I challenge Mr Ettefagh or anyone who thinks like him to come to Pakistan and ask for dissolution. Then watch what happens to you.
How do you tell a 60 year old person she should never have born... especially when she's holding nuclear weapons in each hand? Grow up, Mr. Ettefagh. Pakistan may be a highly flawed state but it is an internationally recognized one and not the pariah you call home. A nation that produced Khomeini, the Shah AND Ahmedenijad gives you little right to be sanctimonious about others.
Pakistan, along with Viet Nam, Yugoslovia and many others, should have been proof to the unread members of the present administration as to what happens when old hatreds between factions are allowed to rekindle, when a strong thumb is removed. Most fail to remember that it was the folks in the south part of Viet Nam were in favor of, and the Norh Vietnamese who were against, the French re-establishing their Indo China colony. We got in the middle of that mess, at cost of 58,000 American lives. Anyone, who had even a small dose of history, would have predicted the outcome in Iraq, once the dictator's thumb was removed from the kettle lid. When the Brit's left India, after WWII, the kettle boiled and the Muslims and Hindus were at each other's throats, making Pakistan/India division necessary. Pakistan was not a country, no experience in government. We now see what happens when we expect that a country can be "planted" and that it will grow in less than many, many years.
All Comments (491)
Handle u r right that india gt 14 major langs lol..bt thats y jinnah said "india is nt a country or a nation" it involves many types of ppl bt wat the thing lacks is that there is no same NATION!there is nothing same.bt in pakistan urdu is major lang which is spoken everywhere and all r equal n our religion is same, lang is same etc other things r same too...i would like 2 tell u if u honestly think of pakistan's problems u wont need any1 to explain ull realise everything!b honest realise its problems PPL b aware of its problems dun think its nt ur country bt think that wats the best thing u can do for it! .thats the truth pakistan is greatest n see this quote"Every Great person gt alot of problems bt that person solves it thats y he is called GREAT"
July 29, 2008 11:29 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on July 29, 2008 11:29
Salam and hi,
y u want pakistan to b destroyed?wat has pakistan done to u??N when the terrorism is held whole world blame pakistan y?this is offensive.
AND u non pakistanis no one can destroy pakistan its nt afghanistan or iraq that its easy to destroy it... Its a NECLUER COUNTRY so keep ur fingers out of this. ALLAH is with us.. One more thing that some pakistanis dont have faith in Allah PLZZZZ have faith ... pakistan will never destroy n the ppl of pakistan r brave enough .
So never ever try to harm pakistan!!AND i want government of pakistan to b good cuz..the government dont relises any thing about pakistanis like the amounts of oil r increasing day by day..the poor r being more poor.REALIZE!!the broken heart of poor pakistanis..they dont gt anything to eat.V R PAKISTANIS N V CAN DEAL WITH EVERY CHICK... Allah is pakistan ki halat achi kr de or aik din pakistan bohot powerful aur bohat rich hojae.(AMEEN)
Pakistan zindabad Long Live pakistan!!!:}
July 29, 2008 11:17 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on July 29, 2008 11:17
This article of dr Ettifagh i read of dissoluting Pakistan as is an artifical state boundaries with multiple issues.This would be annoying most Pakistanis like me which country doesn't have problem like India in our neighbourhood facing ethanical issues Iran on western border has political stratageic controversies and all around world. Thou we are in our bad hard run crisis but we maintain our FEDERATION despite conspiracies and west intervention because we had leaders like Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Benazir and millions of patriotic Pakistani who will give their lives but not surrunder our great nation to the millitants. And we will make it times are changing civil, political and judicial awareness is smoothly and gradually coming and heralding a social revolution.
April 11, 2008 1:05 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on April 11, 2008 01:05
It is really very nice to know that soo many people out here care soo much for the ordinary citizens of Pakistan that they are sitting right there in the protection of their little dumb houses, enjoying the luxury of the internet and plotting the new world order around it.
Talk sense. Talk humanity. Talk about building instead of tearing Pakistan apart and gluing it to India.
The only reason why Pakistan stands where it stands today is because of the US interference in our personal problems and constant supply of aid and instruction to encourage training of militants that they needed in their 'cause of Afghanistan' - We stood there with the US in their war against terror sending our troops to Afghanistan along with their army, letting the US use our land and bases to launch attacks in their pseudo hunt of bin Ladin. What do we get in return? The title of terrorists?
Leave us alone. We can take care of ourselves.
March 8, 2008 8:24 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 8, 2008 20:24
Absolutely reasonable., and sensible. The 2-Nation Theory was fraudulent, and based on a poor reading of history. Lets accept that first. Agreed, there were problems among Hindus and Muslims (the 2 major communities of undivided india), but partition was NOT the solution. Exlusivity led to alienation and Andulasian Syndrome. That was about the past.
Now what ? Pakistan will go down in a very bloody way (unlike the Soviet union). At Pakistan's birth, millions died. At Pakistan's demise millions will die again (in civil war).
It will be very very bloody. Then it will disintegrate into 4 peices - Sindhudesh, Balochistan, and land-locked states of Pakhtoon`khwaa and Punjabistan. This is the natural state of their being. Eventually, to realise economies of scale, one by one., these states would join the Indian Union.
Bangladesh too would realise their folly and join India.
United India (indo-pak-bangla) is the destiny of the subcontinent. 1947, 1971, are mere footnotes. They will be washed away. India will be a super-power when united... based on respect for its 2 major communities Hindu and Muslim.
Both will thrive and both will progress. (This is what Maulana Azad said... but no one listened to him. Even Gandhi ji.. ditched Maulana Azad and Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan [Frontier Gandhi], and accepted Pakistan, after calling it a sin first !). Anyways... this is 2008... so lets be forward looking.
Cheers for a United India. Only this will root out terrorists and criminals of humanity (both hindu and muslim). These safforn and green fascists deserve to be marginalised. United India would do JUST that.
February 13, 2008 9:52 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on February 13, 2008 09:52
Dr Ali you are absolutly wrong and unaware of Pakistan
The people of all the provences are having very good relations and they are not against each other ,only its maliter and cevil buracices are creating problems for the commen people but now awarness is being created and in very near future Pakistan will be emerge a strong and stable country.No country in world consistr of a single nation or ethnicity rather consist of multy ethnic multilangual and multi religen entities.Look at U.S.A it has a very diversified population havind different colors ,religeons,races and languages.
Iran too is not a single nation it has Baloch,kurd and arab but it is a nation.
February 6, 2008 4:39 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on February 6, 2008 04:39
I am very sorry to say but this is a really pathetic approach . Pakistan is an independent Nuclear state which have a common religion culture and traditon the people of Pakistan are one and united when somebody attacks its soverigntity which we had already proven in the War of 1965.I agree that there are riots voilence and coups in this very short history of 60 years but then again doesnt that happen in India , indians had Muslim,Hindu riots several times they had Sikh Hindu riots which were all very voilent leaving thousands dead.So why dont you dissolve india as well. whatever happens in a country is the countries own responsiblity nobody has the right to interfere .
The author mentioned about Opium sumgling let me correct him if you analyse in the Taliban era the opium sumgling was almost stopped and they destroyed many harvest of Millions of Dollar, but as Amercians doesnt want that to happen and from the time Amercian based Govt have been enforce in afghanistan opium sumgling has increased so who is too blame now?
Pakistan is a soverign state and its not iraq or afghanistan that Western power can destroy it so easily. So please stop thinking of such fantasies which will never happen and thing something more productive.
February 4, 2008 4:47 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on February 4, 2008 04:47
You are right. Too bad they didn't listen to you from the beginning.
January 2, 2008 10:00 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on January 2, 2008 10:00
Pakistan is only a breeding ground for terrorists and a nuisnace for India and the whole world. Its people will never come to terms with the fact that their country, such as it is, was created out of hatred towards India.
We do not want such a dangerous country in our neighbourhood.If the world wants peace it has to look squarely and solve the Pakistan problem. It is not going to go away.
Dissolving Pakistan does not mean dissolving its citizens. It means helping them build an alternate arrangement to live in peace.
Pakistanis could have made a different future, but the time is lost. Dissolving Pakistan is not just an idea it is the ONLY option.
December 28, 2007 5:27 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 28, 2007 05:27
Ettefagh you need not worry, after we defeat PorkAssTan Iran's next.
December 13, 2007 6:50 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 13, 2007 06:50
Hi,
I agree you are right about diverse thoughts and traditions people have in Pakistan. But isn't it better to find similarities and unite people instead of dividing them. A process of 'new boundries' will end in hundreds of innocent people death.
I know people are different but very few want a new country. Multiple relations with America, Alqaeda or 'extremists!' can be used to communicate and resolve the problems....not just increase.
December 5, 2007 4:41 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 5, 2007 16:41
...then also dissolve Iran too because if Pakistan is dissolved there should be Greater Baluchistan. Then some of the parts of Iran belong to Kurds, the tribe of Sultan Salahudiin Ayubi, who have no land.Then why to forget Azaris they also need a piece of land to make Azaristan. Then what Iran is left with....?
Mr. Ettifagh, please don't throw stones on others while sitting in a glass-room.
December 5, 2007 7:07 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 5, 2007 07:07
Good idea, should it be done before or after the sham elections, actually selection of the same old faces, in January?
December 3, 2007 4:09 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 3, 2007 04:09
great idea. do it quickly.
November 26, 2007 11:25 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 26, 2007 11:25
Mr. Keep eye on your own state..... dont keep poking nose in others.... its a bad habit.... I hope u'd remember this in future
November 23, 2007 11:57 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 23, 2007 11:57
Do it, and do it quickly. Before the Egypt-Saudi-Pakistan axis of evil sunnis try to wipe out the very young roots of democracy in the region.
Pakistan is indeed a failed project while the bigger piece of the carve-up, India, has a bright future ahead. Cannot help but think that it is due to the hateful version of Islam that is practiced in Pakistan.
November 23, 2007 6:59 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 23, 2007 06:59
Pakistan is not your father's property doc. Stop posting such weak topics.
November 22, 2007 3:32 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 22, 2007 03:32
Dr. how much are you getting paid for posting such articles? why don't you post one article about Iran's history?
November 22, 2007 3:29 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 22, 2007 03:29
elaboratory nemocera hellespont arapaho xanthium unscandalized wittingly catharize
Asian Film Reviews
http://www.teamsters111.com/
November 21, 2007 3:29 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 21, 2007 15:29
Very clear thinking and a good idea.
Pakistan is about to implode and we must get ahead of the curve and not watch the Tsunami from a distance. And it is going to be a big problem either way. Can we afford a mass export of terrorists from Pakistan?
November 21, 2007 3:29 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 21, 2007 03:29
Wow!! excellent piece, great analysis and hope the US think tanks are taking note of your recommendations apart from hoping to build Pakistan to counter India & China. Pakistan has its history of training terrorists,grooming Taliban, Alqaeda, harbouring criminals, Lawless land and Army/ISI/Dictators are rulers of the nation. Pakistan is the origin of world Terror planning and training. One cannot be an expert terrorist until they get trained by Pakistani Army. This is known to rest of the world except Americans, after 911 Musharaf was doing lip service for the $10Billions and protecting his Taliban thugs, Alqeda,ISI,QA khan and modernizing Army to fight with India for Kargil war mis-adventure. Mush realized the double sword Taliban only after sucide bomb attempts on his life for playing double game with them. Before 911, Army thugs were training Alqaeda & Taliban and ISI was busy planning terror activities against non-Islamic countries except China, as China was providing technology and building their Military might with US Aid Money.
All the terror network is still intact in Pakistan, Osama is still enjoying freedom in this country & so are the Madrasas which spit out venom against non-islamists.
What you sow is what you get, this is exactly true in their case.
November 20, 2007 6:52 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 20, 2007 18:52
Before going in the details i think we should really consider the ground facts and realities.
Dear Mr Ettifgah,
You are just another ordinary human being, your opinion is just another opinion.
if you are from iran then you should better know the besides the smuggling you are ignoring the ground fact that THE ATOM you have on basis of which you show eyes to AMERICA, given to you from WHOM? can u exactly state WHOM?
NO because nobody is here to take the responsibility of showing GOOD side,
But you know what
PAKISTAN is forever, and will be. besides the 60 bad yrs we still have much more than some other countries.
INSHALLAH ALLAH is with us HE'll let pakistan through all this and you will be the witness.
SO KEEP YOUR FINGERS CROSSED....
LONG LIVE PAKISTAN
November 19, 2007 5:50 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 19, 2007 17:50
If Pakistan is divided....
Resources will also be divide among different provinces. Which includes Nuclear arsenals, that will also be divided among the provinces.
Anyway guess.... from which province that extremists would have taken over, where the first nuclear arsenal will go to.....
Just a thought.....
Anyway practically Unity and stability (economic and social etc.) is very important in Pakistan, not only for Pakistanis, but for the rest of the world also. Furthermore Islam is part of Pakistan, will remain part of Pakistan and will keeps Pakistan united (ENSHALLAH). If anyone wants Islam taken away from Pakistan, I encourage them to go and study Islam before you make any judgments.
November 19, 2007 12:27 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 19, 2007 12:27
Furthermore about the Indians commenting on Pakistani politics....
Look at your country India before commenting on Pakistani situation.
There are 16 (sixteen) insurgencies going on right now in India.
4000 Muslims were burned alive and killed by Hindu extremists, just few years back.
Siks had an uprising against the government and many massacred.
Approx. 700,000 Indian troops are in Indian held Kashmir, denying peoples rights and freedom. No media personal is allowed there. (Look at the contrast to about 200,000 American troops in Iraq).
No private NGO is allowed in India.
Furthermore if India does not have a very huge army it would probably break apart.
November 19, 2007 11:49 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 19, 2007 11:49
Benezir Partially lives in UK (PPP). Altaf Hussain lives in UK(MQM). Nawaz Sharif partially lives in UK(PML-N). Imran Khan partially lives in UK(PTI). And many other top Pakistani politicians are in one way or the other are connected to UK. If Pakistan breaks up then definitely UK will soon become Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Even if Pakistan doesn't break up, UK will soon become Islamic Republic of Pakistan, as none in UK politics can compete with Pakistani Politicians. People of UK don't even know the people they are harboring and protecting.
Anyway EnshALLAH Pakistan will grow boundaries based on One Way of Life i.e. Islam. And EnshALLAH it will never break up.
November 19, 2007 11:26 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 19, 2007 11:26
Well If the witer of the column may read it I think there r certain things he didn't knew himself and certain things are clearly baseless in his own mind.
First there is a much strongly understandable and commonlanguage in Pakistan rather than English , which is URDU . I know its a bit badluck that its not the official language.
The views about lawlessness, smuggling and terror are basically not directly from Pakistan.
AS you said Afganistan is producing 90% of opium , Y not to stop them. Smuggling is taking between IRAN and Pak , Y dont we go on to stop cross boader mutually. Extremism , well I believe that only the media is highlighting the extremism in Pakistan, and not showing the complete picture of what is happening in Indian Held Khashmir, Afghanistan and IRAQ .
Then As per the Kashmir Issue, I think UN has passed the rasolution in favour of Pakistan.
I believe Pakistan is a Nation with a short 60 years history but it has seen alot of goods and bads, and I think its the greatness of this country that it is serviving all these things and its our Solid Believe that it will Servive this tough political time too.
November 19, 2007 7:51 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 19, 2007 07:51
Interesting. Possible if problems continue.
The current situation in Pakistan cannot be sustained in the long term.
November 19, 2007 6:55 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 19, 2007 06:55
I disagree with the ideas presented by Mr. Ali Ettefagh. There may be political difficulties and constitutional crises but thats not because of four provinces with different cultures.
November 19, 2007 1:23 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 19, 2007 01:23
I disagree with the ideas presented by Mr. Ali Ettefagh. There may be political difficulties and constitutional crises but thats not because of four provinces with different cultures.
November 19, 2007 1:19 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 19, 2007 01:19
This writer had a thought and wrote an article just to prove that.
Pakistan is definetly not a perfect state, but points raised here in this article can be found in all countries and may be worse than this....
November 19, 2007 12:44 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 19, 2007 00:44
Ali Ettefagh
I think you are out of your mind. We have a emergency its our problem not yours.You shiya always have a problem with the wahabisim.Why don't you understand all Pakistani's(97% muslims,3% minorities) all have the same problem.But we donot want your help, we want moral support from the countries who new what the freedom is not your hypothetical Islamic Shiya state.
The thing i remember is that we are not the one who's border you want to dissolve its your country that western countries want to tear apart, so why don't you see the matters of your country and leave us alone because we take good care of ourself INSHALLAH.
November 19, 2007 12:24 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 19, 2007 00:24
The most ill conceived article ever written on washington post. The writer is stating too many things without any facts to back them up.
November 18, 2007 3:46 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 18, 2007 15:46
I don't get what are you trying prove through this article. Racism exists in every part of world so does in Pakistan, drugs story was true but its not the case anymore, as Americans have occupied Afghanistan and there are many independent reports about Opium free pakistan, even if there is any such thing then i think its better to blame USA rather than blaming Pakistan, and by the way I confess Whatever is going on in here is not right, and we pakistani are all sick of it, but can someone bother to address the root cause of all this mess? reigns of all the politicians{elected by paki people} in pakistan's history were demolished by pakistan's army, and this is the only reason why pakistan has such a bad political history unlike india may be. But Question is "WHO" always supports Pakistani Armys action, its not paki ppl but USA itself. Even now whatever is happening in pakistan USA is watching all this mess with zipped mouth, as USA can't afford to loose a supporting unit against taliban, but all it takes sacrifices of the rights of paki ppl who've been deprived of all the basics rights by Army Generals, over and over again. I'm just 23 years old and I believe its the only time If we as a nation doesn't take some serious steps then we'll never do anything regarding this mess and you can call this a Nation's failure or whatever.but its Now or Never i guess.
November 18, 2007 3:17 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 18, 2007 15:17
I don't get what are you trying prove through this article. Racism exists in every part of world so does in Pakistan, drugs story was true but its not the case anymore, as Americans have occupied Afghanistan and there are many independent reports about Opium free pakistan, even if there is any such thing then i think its better to blame USA rather than blaming Pakistan, and by the way I confess Whatever is going on in here is not right, and we pakistani are all sick of it, but can someone bother to address the root cause of all this mess? reigns of all the politicians{elected by paki people} in pakistan's history were demolished by pakistan's army, and this is the only reason why pakistan has such a bad political history unlike india may be. But Question is "WHO" always supports Pakistani Armys action, its not paki ppl but USA itself. Even now whatever is happening in pakistan USA is watching all this mess with zipped mouth, as USA can't afford to loose a supporting unit against taliban, but all it takes sacrifices of the rights of paki ppl who've been deprived of all the basics rights by Army Generals, over and over again. I'm just 23 years old and I believe its the only time If we as a nation doesn't take some serious steps then we'll never do anything regarding this mess and you can call this a Nation's failure or whatever.but its Now or Never i guess.
November 18, 2007 3:14 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 18, 2007 15:14
I don't get what are you trying prove through this article. Racism exists in every part of world so does in Pakistan, drugs story was true but its not the case anymore, as Americans have occupied Afghanistan and there are many independent reports about Opium free pakistan, even if there is any such thing then i think its better to blame USA rather than blaming Pakistan, and by the way I confess Whatever is going on in here is not right, and we pakistani are all sick of it, but can someone bother to address the root cause of all this mess? reigns of all the politicians{elected by paki people} in pakistan's history were demolished by pakistan's army, and this is the only reason why pakistan has such a bad political history unlike india may be. But Question is "WHO" always supports Pakistani Armys action, its not paki ppl but USA itself. Even now whatever is happening in pakistan USA is watching all this mess with zipped mouth, as USA can't afford to loose a supporting unit against taliban, but all it takes sacrifices of the rights of paki ppl who've been deprived of all the basics rights by Army Generals, over and over again. I'm just 23 years old and I believe its the only time If we as a nation doesn't take some serious steps then we'll never do anything regarding this mess and you can call this a Nation's failure or whatever.but its Now or Never i guess.
November 18, 2007 3:12 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 18, 2007 15:12
Great writing, thanks.
November 18, 2007 12:42 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 18, 2007 12:42
This writer had a thought and wrote an article just to prove that.
Pakistan is definetly not a perfect state, but points raised here in this article can be found in all countries and may be worse than this....
November 18, 2007 9:48 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 18, 2007 09:48
Et tu Brutus! Well done Mr. Etibagh What a great way to respond to the feelings of love and warmth people in Pakistan harbour for their brothers in Iran just because they share the same faith.
I guess it is more to do with the Iranian charachter of backstabbing anyone capable of standing up on its feet because the schezophrenic Iranian mind sees any freedom as a threat to its existence.
Anyway thank you for your comment, for I as a muslim cannot wish a brotherly muslim collection of about 70 million people ill.
I guess it is something to do with the basics of our faith- atleast the version practiced on our side of the border.
November 17, 2007 9:01 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 17, 2007 09:01
I totally disagree with Mr. Ali. Who is he to comment on Pakistan. All due respect but with all its flaws Pakistan has survived 60 years when it was claimed that it wont even survive 48 hrs.
There is a joke among intellectuals regarding Pakistan. When a writer comes to Pakistan he says i'll write a book on Pakistan. After staying for 6 months he says I think i'll write an article on Pakistan and after staying for a year he says I better try and understand the dynamics of the country first before doing any writing.
So Mr. Ali, from our very friendly neighbouring country Iran, I should first Thank you for such a thoruogh analysis of my country. But you dont have your facts straight at all. Pakistan has experienced much more development than Iran has in the recent years, its economic development matching that of India and China. And the border you talk about so ravaged by smugglers, is not just Pakistan's fault. People on your side have their share too. There is a deep rooted sectarianism in your country where sunni Muslims suffer the most, living below poverty line in some places.
By the way our nuclear Arsenals aren't under inspection by IAEA but Iran's are. I wonder why?
Every country has their share of problems. Where there are individuals, there is always a difference of opinion and where there is just dictatorship and religious fanaticism, like Iran, individuality fails to rise up to national levels.
Our country can boast of atleast some form of freedom of expression......but can your country do that?
November 17, 2007 8:47 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 17, 2007 08:47
I never thought an 'Idiot' like Ali Ettefagh would be given editorial space on a respected forum like this. Mr Ettefagh should look at his country Iran and It's problems before raising issues in other countries. Theocracies like Iran are the major problem facing the world right now not Pakistan. Mr Ettefagh would laugh at me by saying that he belongs to a country which has one of the oldest civilizations(Persians) in the world but he should recall history how they were formed and how they have survived. Many historians have shown that this civilization was at one time full of barbarians, bastards and prostitutes sent from all over the world. Evidence of that is Mehmood Ahmedinjad.
November 15, 2007 2:57 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 15, 2007 14:57
I never thought an 'Idiot' like Ali Ettefagh would be given editorial space on a respected forum like this. Mr Ettefagh should look at his country Iran and It's problems before raising issues in other countries. Theocracies like Iran are the major problem facing the world right now not Pakistan. Mr Ettefagh would laugh at me by saying that he belongs to a country which has one of the oldest civilizations(Persians) in the world but he should recall history how they were formed and how they have survived. Many historians have shown that this civilization was at one time full of barbarians, bastards and prostitutes sent from all over the world. Evidence of that is Mehmood Ahmedinjad.
November 15, 2007 2:57 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 15, 2007 14:57
I never thought an 'Idiot' like Ali Ettefagh would be given editorial space on a respected forum like this. Mr Ettefagh should look at his country Iran and It's problems before raising issues in other countries. Theocracies like Iran are the major problem facing the world right now not Pakistan. Mr Ettefagh would laugh at me by saying that he belongs to a country which has one of the oldest civilizations(Persians) in the world but he should recall history how they were formed and how they have survived. Many historians have shown that this civilization was at one time full of barbarians, bastards and prostitutes sent from all over the world. Evidence of that is Mehmood Ahmedinjad.
November 15, 2007 2:56 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 15, 2007 14:56
Love For My Country
Please give a serious thought to the situation currently existing in the country. Why did it come to this stage?
Whenever things are getting better for Pakistan and whenever it is on the road to achieving greater economic development and progress something happens which not only stops all this but takes the country back many many years. This has happened before and is happening now!
All those people blaming General Musharraf for the prevailing situations have to stop and think why did this happen?
What would have happened if the 11 member Judicial Panel had, let say, given the decision in favour of the President letting the Notification be issued and the President taking the oath as planned. He would have removed his uniform as promised and the elections would have been held in January 2008 as per the schedule already announced. The Country would have had a civilian setup and democracy would have prevailed.
The path of progress and development which was matching China and India would not only have continued but, the way things were going, would have reached the height which other developing countries could only dream of. The number of foreign investors queuing up to enter the Pakistan market would have increased many-a-fold.
In case the Supreme Court had given a decision against General Musharraf becoming a President then what would have happened?
General Musharraf would have left his appointment as President and COAS. The assemblies would have been dissolved between November and December 2007. An interim arrangement would have come up to hold the general elections. The war against terrorism and extremism would have been left directionless as no Army Chief would take the responsibility of being involved in any Military adventure or campaign without the legal coverage of the government. The confidence the foreign and domestic investors and entrepreneurs had in the present arrangements in the country would have been shattered. The Stock Exchange would have collapsed affecting each and every segment of our society. Knowing the ‘love and affection’ our political parties have for each other, they would have gone all-out attacking their opponents and creating a state of anarchy through out the country. As a united front would not have been there, the Talibization Forces would have had an open field to propagate and expand their ‘interpretation’ of Islam, initially to the areas adjoining Tribal Areas and then to other parts of the country. The part of the general public opposing them would have to come out in force, if they wanted to have a winning chance in countering them. Result: Civil War? The enemy of the State would not miss a golden opportunity like this! Number of suicide and terrorist attacks would have increased many-a-fold.
Why did the Judiciary create conditions forcing the government in chair to take such an extreme step of declaring an Emergency? Why did they not let President Musharraf take the country towards elections, the civilian rule and the democracy in its true sense?
Are they working for anti Pakistan forces which want to let down Pakistan but in the garb of providing justice and fair-play? Or do they have a personal vendetta against General Musharraf for which they are willing to put the Country at stake?
Why is Imran Khan, supported by certain other political parties, trying to create anarchy in the Country by forcing the students to leave their studies and to come out on the street? Does he not understand the implications of what he is trying to do? Who is he helping? The people of Pakistan or its enemies? The ‘cover’ he is using for motivating them to agitate is restoration of Constitution! He is also willing to put the integrity of Country at risk to hurt General Musharraf! Should the students play in his hand? Do we want him and his “friends” to create a situation which encourages people to write anti Pakistan articles such as (Cut and paste):
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/ali_ettefagh/2007/11/why_not_dissolve_pakistan_too.html
If the Judiciary had not got their personal egos involved and had thought of the welfare and betterment of the country all of this could have been avoided. For the first time the transaction to the civilian government would have taken place peacefully setting a very good precedence for all to follow. This in the long run would have strengthened the political institutions and Judiciary, bringing in stability, unprecedented progress and development to the country ensuring end to any future military take over.
We as good Pakistanis have to answer this question:
“Do we love our country more than we hate our opponent? Or do we hate our opponent more that we love out Country?”
This question means that if we love our country more than we hate our opponent then there would be a cut off point where we stop letting our opponent down because if we don’t, the country would suffer. On the other hand if we hate our opponent more than we love our country then we couldn’t care less what happens to Pakistan as long as we can hurt our opponent.
I sincerely hope all Pakistanis especially our Politicians and Judiciary can understand and answer this question positively proving that their love for the country is greater than any other issue they may have.
Samina Tariq
Islamabad
November 15, 2007 3:39 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 15, 2007 03:39
great writing and true!
November 13, 2007 11:53 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 13, 2007 11:53
Pakistan is a Frankenstein created and raised by the west.
November 12, 2007 6:06 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 12, 2007 18:06
Writer is correct that the creation of Pakistan was a huge mistake, though his solution may be equally improbable. Indian leaders (Gandhi/Nehru/Patel) were against a religion based separation, but had to cave in to jinnah/muslim league. Britain stoked the partition demand in the garb of trying to be just to muslims, a united India was not in it's interest. What happened was a blunder where a nation was born just with the idea of muslim fundamentalism. Need one say more.
The world will have to bear the consequence as well as find solutions...
November 12, 2007 5:59 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 12, 2007 17:59
Great observations. You ought to be the UN Secretary General.
November 12, 2007 4:09 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 12, 2007 04:09
Pakistan's story of independence is full of sad episodes.It wasn't treated fairly, in the first place by the then British Rulers and many muslim majority areas were annexed to India. Then too many problems, like unsufficient funds to run the country, foreign intervention esp. from India which resulted in its further division, Army's role in politics and Western support for dictators, then nuclear race initiated by India, failed foreign policy and blind support for US which gave birth to radical fighters(mujahideen), and now corrupt leaders vs corrupt generals,,,,All these factors all responsible for the prevailing circumstances but one thing is sure that Pakistani People has shown strong stand in all these challenging circumstances and will stay united , no matter how hard are the problems and dissolution ?? ,,, NO QUESTION SIR !
November 9, 2007 9:02 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 9, 2007 21:02
Do it. It is a good idea.
November 9, 2007 11:11 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 9, 2007 11:11
Pakistan is not alone in its historical reason for its establishment. There were simply too many countries formed when the colonial era by western countries started to fade or retreat. The instability and false democracy in Pakistan to a large degree is not the Pakistanis' own doing. There are simply too many external factors, coupled with the blind ambition of the current dictator, who along the way made a mess of the country as we are seeing today. As a person who does not have high remarks on lawyers in our socity in the States, I would like to pay my highest respect to those lawyers in Pakistan now who are taking the lead to defend the country's democracy. Just for that, Pakistan desires to be an independent country because democracy and freedom should be the dream of any humanbeing in this world. We enjoy it in the States. We certainly support the same right for any freedom loving people in any country: in Pakistan, as well as in Iran.
November 9, 2007 10:58 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 9, 2007 10:58
T-55
Great liberty with the facts!
Pakistan ranks as one of the countries with the lowest support for suicide bombings and terrorism, according to the most recent polls. Polling on the basis of Al Qaeda is not enough, since most people distrust the US to the extent that they think AQ is just a scapegoat for US ambitions to conquer the Muslim world. The important questions are about support for killing civilians and violence to achieve ones political goals, and in that Pakistan ranks lower than Iran. Heck a poll in the US showed more Americans willing to nuke Muslim countries (thereby killing millions of innocent civilians)than any Muslims willing to do the same.
The rest of you, including Ettefagh, can continue daydreaming about Pakistan breaking up. Pakistani identity is strong -from Pastun to Sindhi, and we ain't going anywhere, and there is nothing you can do about it other than rant.
The Indians with their silly "Akhand Bharat" ideas can keep day dreaming too.
November 9, 2007 10:14 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 9, 2007 10:14
Musharraf represents the sum and substance of Pakistan....a fraud!
Thank you Dr. Ettefagh for this article.
November 9, 2007 9:51 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 9, 2007 09:51
Your thinking is according to the willing of the peoples.
November 9, 2007 9:44 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 9, 2007 09:44
Mr. Bhutto is now Aung San Suu Kyi in her own country! So, the only differences between Burmah and Pakistan are:
1. Nukes
2. Pakistan is not a NPT signatory....dangerous!
3. The Burmese generals have no claims to democracy or tricks about elections up their sleeve.
4. The Burmese always wear their uniforms and they do not think of themselves as civilians.
5. The burmese religious schools and monks are peaceful and simple people. The Pakistanis preach hate and promote terrorism.
November 9, 2007 9:37 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 9, 2007 09:37
Tahnk you for a good idea.
All posters above that want to divert attention to other countries and get ready to split other countries must first realise that the issue and the problem is Pakistan, not Azerbaijan, Iran, Kurds, etc. Why, you ask?
Iran, Kurds, Azerbaijan, Europe, etc. do not approve of hate-teaching and madrassas on their soil to "educate" or develop terrorists and then send them to New York to hijack planes and slam them into buildings and kill people at random, or blow up the underground in London. None of these countries have a 505% approval rating of Al Qaeda!
November 9, 2007 9:12 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 9, 2007 09:12
Dear Ali Ettefagh,
PAKISTAN was initially the brainchild of CHOUDHARY REHMAT ALI OF Punjab(undivided) who lived in London in 1920s. Jinnah was not in its favour, initially. REHMAT ALI is supposed to have done at the behest of some of his mischjevious BRITISH FRIENDS who wanted to scuttle the CONGRESS LED freedom movement in India. Rehmat Ali had coined this term with three MUSLIM DOMINATED states of pre-indepemdence i.e Punjab, Assam(not Afghania) and Kashmir. Jinnah had remarked," A drunkards's silly day-dreaming". It was inner politics of GANDHI's CONGRESS that pushed JINNAH into it and religion-based UP elections in 1937 converted him fully. It was the BRITISH idea of reserving constituencies for the MUSLIMS and the RIFT started--which consumed great NATIONALISTS like JINNAH and Dr sir IQBAL MOHAMMED--who was a famous URDU POET. HINDU-MUSLIM divide by BRITAIN was deliberate to ensure its HOLD over JEWEL IN THE CROWN.
If history is any evidence then BRITAIN of 1947 and its leaders of the times stand accused for creating the KASHMIR problem. One should know that the biggest LOSER of SECOND WORLD WAR was not GERMANY or JAPAN or even ITALY but BRITAIIN--which lost its empire as an aftermath of it. When HISTORY of AFRO-ASIAN Nations is rewritten, HITLER will emerge as their greatest BENEFACTOR for initiating the collapse of GREAT BRITISH EMPIRE --Where supposedly SUN NEVER SET prior to the WAR.
Pakistan is the HISTORICAL NECESSITY of TORRID TIMES of 1947. Let us not assume otherwise. By 1947, SOCIAL divide had been complete and BRITAIN had suceeded by religion- based elections to tear away the INDIAN society. But BRITAIN was looking for herself a future role in the sub continent by creating KASHMIR PROBLEM.this would have given him some say in the POST WAR WORLD. Mountbatten and BRITISH ARMY OFFICERS on both sides of INDO-PAK borders had played a key role in this. Mountbatten played up NEHRU, JINNAH and MAHARAJA HARISINGH--advising all three ---three different things to create a stalemate. And stalemate it remains even after 60 years.
Pakistan has been unfortunate since its inception because of self-motivated ambitions of their leaders of post Jinnah and Liaqat--who had banished in the early period when PAKISTAN was still in its cradle. Scheming BUREAUCRATS and MILITARY Generals collaborated to create a role for themselves. And they have consolidated their positions over the 60 years.
If you have to dissolve and dismantle anything in PAKISTAN then train your guns and thoughts on its military and its brain child ISI--who operates AL Queda and its TERROR MACHINE. PAK MILITARY IS THE MOTHER OF GLOBAL TERRORISM. Pakistan in itself is a nation of god fearing emotional people--who have been exploited by scheming GENERALS. I SUPPOSE THE SURVIVABILITY OF PAKISTAN IS A MUST FOR THE EXISTENCE OF INDIA. It is ironical but true that against the 'HATE INDIA PHILOSOPHY' OF PAKISTAN's ADMINISTRATION and MILITARY since its inception---India ought to now adopt 'LOVE PAKISTAN' TO ENSURE ITS OWN SECURITY AND SAFETY. Rajee Kushwaha
November 9, 2007 8:01 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 9, 2007 08:01
It is beyond doubt that US administration has supported Pakistan in every manner possible. US needed, and still needs, such a government in Islamabad that can counter the threats from the terrorist network in the country. US wants a man in seat in Pakistan who can act even going against the will of the locals. General Musharraf fits in the role.
November 9, 2007 2:51 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 9, 2007 02:51
this is all anti islamic propoganda n all nonsence.bloody christians are after muslims n how come the Pope is silent.look your own affairs and for GOD sake don,t interfere in others religion or u the christians will vanish from this world.all the humanity r against the bloody chirstians.
November 9, 2007 2:19 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 9, 2007 02:19
Ali E. lives in a provincial world. Pakistan has not been allowed to build its nation but everything-almost the pseudo-expert Ali has said applies to Iraq, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Israel,India, Scotland etc. As a matter of fact to reach his ideal borders we must immediately take Kurd territories from Iran, syria, Iraq and Turkey to create a logical nation. Has Mr. Ali the guts to apply his principles to Israel? Present human experience could reach the maturity that once existed in the recent US itself where people of diverse background could live without the petty divisions of humanity- to some extent we still live in the US under that doctrine. Others can learn. Borders should not be important for coexistence. Recent integration of Europe is a good improvement unlike Ali doctrine.As Qur'an said God created different nations so they can compete (sabaqat) with each other in doing good for all humanity. Nobel Prizes emphasize the principle. Mr. Ali needs to reach out to ultimate civility than to divide people and reorganize earth.(Dr. Zubairi)
November 8, 2007 6:10 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 8, 2007 18:10
Have Gun, Will Rule
Musharraf is bent upon ruling Pakistan because he has a gun in his hand and Bush & Chenye are backing him. The people of Pakistan be damned.
One the one hand US Administration tries to justify Iraqi occupation by saying it is bringing democracy to Iraq and on the other, it supports a military dictator who decimates democratic institutions, independent judiciary and rule of law.
The Pakistan Supreme Court was about to rule whether Musharraf could be a candidate for President for another term. According to the constitution Government employees are not allowed to contest elections within two years of retiring and Musharraf has not even retired yet. It was a forgone conclusion that Supreme Court will find Musharraf ineligible. Instead of stepping down quietly and handing over power to Senate Chairman, Musharraf has resorted to extreme and ultra constitutional steps.
How many people in the U.S. would stand for it if George Bush did this to the U.S. Supreme Court and its judges? No civilised society should stand for subversion of the highest courts, shredding of constitution and detention of judges, lawyers and politicians.
People of Pakistan have always complained that various U.S. Administrations develop friendships with their rulers & dictators and not with people of Pakistan. This has led to resentment and strong anti-American sentiment in the country. It is time that the ordinary citizens of United States impress upon their Administration to stand up against the rule of gun and express solidarity with people of Pakistan as they need and support to defeat a dictator.
Musharraf is not the only person in Pakistan who can help fight terror. The people of Pakistan are fed up with extremists and want to ensure that terrorism is brought to an end. This is better achieved through democratically elected leaders rather than through a military dictator.
The only way Musharraf will listen is if US Administartion insists that he immediately restore constitution, allow the Supreme Court to function with all its judges as before, withdraw emergency rule and release all lawyers, judges, politicians and other citizens.
November 8, 2007 4:03 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 8, 2007 16:03
Taking your anti-sunni frustrations out on Pakistan Mr. Ettefagh?
lets not forget that there was no one country in existence before the British colonized South Asia and created a colony called British India. What existed before then were sometimes great empires and civilizations, never over the entire region, and several princely states and kingdoms. If we accept your argument, then India should be split into hundreds of independent nations as well, since it too is comprised of states with different cultures, languages, religion and even races.
And what about the Kurds and Baluch in Iran? I take it that under your plan Iran would be divided up to give the Kurds their autonomous state and the Baluch merged with their brethren in Pakistan? And can we start dividing the Hispanic majority areas in the US into independent states after a few years too?
You have no idea of the ground realities in Pakistan. Pakistan is as much a nation as is India, since neither existed before 1947, and are both comprised of different ethnicities.
November 8, 2007 1:47 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 8, 2007 13:47
Mr. Ettefagh has done a knee-jerk and a hasty analysis, not supported by any historic fact or content. US, although a country of great hard working people also consists of 52 states. Try comparing North with the South and East with the West Coast of US and you will get an answer.
True that Pakistan consists of diverse cultures, but nearly all the people with little education can speak and communicate in Urdu. So the binding force is not only and only religion, but similarity of cultural origins. Same is true about India. In India, there is only one language that effectively binds 100 different kinds of people and that is English. If you talk to a Malayalam or a Tamil speaking Southern Indian person in Hindi, you will invariably get an answer in English. Look at Uttarakhand and the mountaneous regions of India and compare them with Bombay or New Delhi, they are all poles apart. The areas bordering China are similar to Chinese and do not talk or lead their lives like average North Indian people.
Having said all that, there is only one aspect that binds people together and that is good governance, justice and equality, something that Pakistan could never get, but the reasons as given by Mr. Ettefagh are totally untrue. Actually, the reasons have not much to do with religion, but have a lot to do with Feudal system and its total control of governance. Religion has just recently started to play a role in national politics of Pakistan and that too after Pakistan fought a US proxy war against Soviet Union in Afghanistan.
I would advise Mr. Ettefagh to read and understand the political dynamics of the region, before attempting to embark upon the adventure of churning out worthless articles like this one. I can understand the typical Iranian jealousy of the military might of Pakistan, in terms of nuclear technology and the backwardness of the Iranian technology and the political leadership but fail to understand how a news medium of prestige like Washington Post, publish articles based upon personal hatred, that have unsubstantiated and totally wrong assertions.
November 8, 2007 1:28 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 8, 2007 13:28
A country based on a flawed premise cannot survive. Hindus and Muslims of the subcontinent were not two nations. Consider that there are more Muslims in India than in Pakistan today. The reason why India survives (it is also an artificial construct) is because it is secular. On the other hand had India been a Hindu nation - it would be in the same state as Pakistan is today.
November 7, 2007 5:02 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 7, 2007 17:02
Ridiculous article indeed.On same principle, almost all countries in the world should be divided into smaller groups starting with Iran where presians form only 50 percent of the total population.Try to be more realistic in your thoughts Mr, Ettefagh.
November 7, 2007 4:45 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 7, 2007 16:45
Buggs Bunny @November 7, 2007 8:18 AM: "Americans do not blow up bombs when a rival politician and they do not deport politicians from their own country, no matter the politics and differences between them. And Americans do not suspend the constitution or make a deal with Taliban. There is a slight difference between USA and Pak."
You are right. But, unlike Pakistan, we invade countries for no reason and cause hundreds of thousands of deaths. We also feel free and unrestricted to poke our noses into other countries' affairs, and then we run like heck when all hell breaks loose. That is what makes us particularly dangerous.
November 7, 2007 12:58 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 7, 2007 12:58
Buggs Bunny! Perhaps you forgot about the assassination of past U.S. presidents. Violence has always been part of U.S. history. However, events need to be put in their context.
November 7, 2007 11:46 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 7, 2007 11:46
time for mass street protests and implosion of the place formerly known as Pakistan....
November 7, 2007 10:30 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 7, 2007 10:30
Correct and bold view. Let's do it!
November 7, 2007 9:54 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 7, 2007 09:54
ANDREW BURROUGHS
Americans do not blow up bombs when a rival politician and they do not deport politicians from their own country, no matter the politics and differences between them.
And Americans do not suspend the constitution or make a deal with Taliban. There is a slight difference between USA and Pak.
November 7, 2007 8:18 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 7, 2007 08:18
How nice, we have some of the same crowd that brought the Iraq War now calling for its disolution. Now we have a new call for the breakup of Pakistan. On the logic expressed in this essay, one could have also argued that the United States was an artificial construction made up of two peoples in 1860. What the writer does not deal with, nor Senator Biden in his quixotic call for Iraq to be divided, is the minor detail- the majority in both countries might actually be proud of their country and rather than seeing it divided wish to see it emerge even more united and stronger. It is the political terms of unification and goverance that are at issue- not whether they should remain united.
November 7, 2007 7:00 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 7, 2007 07:00
It is hard, if not impossible, to deny that Pakistan is a failed state. Failed states are always dangerous. Time to go back to the drawing board. Pakistan is not like China, India, Russia, Persia or Egypt that are ancient settlements and civilisations and the blind "nationalism" of Pakistanis above seems to be short-sighted.
Those that are attacking the writer and his country should also take note that the Iranian National Youth football (soccer) team defeated Pakistan yesterday in Tehran....14 to zip!
Not a good week for Pakistan...at all!
November 7, 2007 2:37 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 7, 2007 02:37
Deconstruction makes its entrance in geopolitics. If generalized around the world, it will be a big program for the United Nations. Starting in Europe, I suppose?
November 6, 2007 9:45 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 21:45
Very interesting article. Yes Pakistan is a failed state because It is an artificial state created by England as a parting kick to India. but the solution is not breaking Pakistan into small tribal states. A reunited Indian subcontinent where all the different entities are respected and given full democratic rights is the solution. If the present multi ethnic and multi religious India can survive successfully the united states of India will also survive and prosper
November 6, 2007 9:41 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 21:41
Very interesting article. Yes Pakistan is a failed state because It is an artificial state created by England as a parting kick to India. but the solution is not breaking Pakistan into small tribal states. A reunited Indian subcontinent where all the different entities are respected and given full democratic rights is the solution. If the present multi ethnic and multi religious India can survive successfully the united states of India will also survive and prosper
November 6, 2007 9:41 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 21:41
Aamir Ali - There is no change in tune. Things are not as simplistic as you suggest. "Let the Indian army leave and Kashmiris will tear out the Indian flag", you stated simplistically. I might suggest that let the Indian army leave and the let the Pakthuns invade Kashmir again. I am sure Kashmiri women cannot wait. It has been 60 years and Pakthun men are salivating already. Only, my analysis is based on reality!
November 6, 2007 9:38 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 21:38
Mike the Bostonian:
It is legitimate to attack a person's ethnicity and citizenship when that person launches an attack on your country.
Dr Ali Ettefagh is a silly Iranian nationalist who should advocate freedom for Arabs and Kurds in Iran, then talk about somebody else.
November 6, 2007 9:32 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 21:32
Shabana:
You are changing your tune now, earlier you were blaming everything in Kashmir on "Islamofascism" now you admit Kashmiris also support Pakistan alongwith Independence.
What else are you willing to admit? Wont be a stretch to also admit how many thousands of Kashmiris have been killed by the Indian Army.
November 6, 2007 9:27 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 21:27
Very thought provoking (unfortunately not practical) idea.
Advice to Pakistani readers: Please do not attack author’s ethnicity or citizenship
November 6, 2007 8:46 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 20:46
Aamir Ali - you presume too much. I know families in Kashmir that are torn between Pakistan, India and independence. I am talking where one spouse prefers India and another Pakistan.
Abbas from Peshawar - How come the first thing that is pointed out to a Muhajir is either the color of skin or how sub-muslim they are? Why do you think there is a guy in London controlling Muhajirs in Karachi.
November 6, 2007 8:06 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 20:06
Shabana:
The Indian Army has been in Kashmir, with strong presence since 1947. Today there are 500,000 Indian troops in Occupied Kashmir, who have been killing Kashmiris for last 60 years. They are the only reason the Indian flag flies in Kashmir.
Withdraw the Indian Army from Kashmir and you will see how quickly the Kashmiris tear down the Indian flag.
And talk nonsense about "terrorism". The biggest killer in Kashmir is the Indian Army.
November 6, 2007 7:58 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 19:58
Shabana:
Did you know Musharraf is a Muhajir and that the political party that controls Karachi and lower Sindh is also a Muhajir party? Sounds like Muhajirs are doing fine in Pakistan.
You didnt know anything about Muhajir's just like you didnt know anything about the Kashmiris.
To the Afghan posters on this page: You Afghans willingly took money and guns from foreigners and destroyed your own country. Accept it.
November 6, 2007 7:53 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 19:53
Aamir Ali, there was no significant Indian Army presence in Kashmir till the "insurgency" Islamofacism started. I was there in 1982-1984.
November 6, 2007 7:51 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 19:51
Shabana:
Thousands of Kashmiris were killed by the Indian Army in the 1980's, why do you think the insurgency started in 1989 ?? Kashmiris hate India and wish to be rid of it.
5454:
Pakistani life is more valuable that your garbage opinion.
November 6, 2007 7:46 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 19:46
Abed - Muhajir - just see how you are being treated in Pakistan. You would have been slightly better off in India with its huge Hindu population. Just see that 10 people, all Hindus, jailed for the Gujrat riots. Any Muslims ever jailed for picking on minorities in your chosen land? No wonder it is self destructing!
November 6, 2007 7:43 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 19:43
No power on this earth can undo Pakistan, certainly not the silly insults of Dr Ettefagh and his supporters.
Truth is automatical anything provocative.
November 6, 2007 7:37 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 19:37
There was a Persian civilization creating culture, engineering and military innovation, recognizing the rights of all humans and respect for religions, when the British lands were nothing more than barbaric inhabited lands, only to be tamed much later by the Romans.
Britian didn't create Persia. They did however play a significant role in diminishing it. Whereas Britian and the French created what today is the middle east and other asian countries.
November 6, 2007 6:26 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 18:26
To Abed, you say that Iran is also a "British carve out"?
What have you been smoking?
Once again to you, M. Saeed Chaudhary, and others who talk about the kurds and Baluchis in Iran and those provinces being carved out, I ask that you read your history.
In the middle east, the only 2 countries to have, for the most part, territorial integrity and continuous cultural and geographic presence over the last 2,500 years are Egypt and Persia.
To say something so idiotic as what M. Saeed Chaudhary says "Kurdistan was never a part of Iran" just really stinks up this joint.
Lets debate, but lets not be stupid either. The Kurds are of the same race as the persians, which is why Saddam slaughtered them the way he did. They are non-arabs. Based on your logic, Persians can lay historical claim to most of middle east, including pakistan and central asia. But obviously this argument wouldn't make much sense to reasonable people. At various times and after various declines of empires, Persia was in fact carved out and left to what it is now, basically its core. Similar to the Ottoman empire being scaled down to what is now modern turkey.
November 6, 2007 6:15 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 18:15
It is country held together by a cricket team. Please don't spoil the fun for south Asian cricket fans.
November 6, 2007 6:07 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 18:07
Mr. Ettefagh: Iran (apparently your home country) and Iraq are pretty much British carve outs as well. Let's just extend your hypothetical then. We'd certainly be free from asking Shia and Sunni to live together.
Pakistan's Muhajirs I would probably disagree with your characterization of their country as a "relic set up as a counterweight to India". They would probably mention that it was a shelter from Hindu discrimination against Indian Muslims.
November 6, 2007 4:56 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 16:56
Mr Ettefagh,
You seem to be a spokesman of Pakistan's rival country, India which never accepted Pakistan as an independent country and has always been attempting to dismember it. You also may be eyeing the province of Baluchistan which is close and has some similarities to Iran. Your argument that it was formed from four different provinces and thus should be dismembered is also quite flimsy as several countries in the world have quite dissimilar ethnic components in their formations. It were the people of those eprovinces who voted to be a part of the new country, called Pakistan. Moreover, Iran itself consists of differing ethnic groups. Does that mean it should also be dismembered into those ethnic groups just for that reason? Besides, Pakistan is a country that has not gobbled up any other country or region. Whereas Iran has done so during recent past. Kurdistan was never a part of Iran. Why shouldn't it give it up to the Kurds to form their own country? I would like to go on and on, but I would only say that let people decide where and how they want to live and not wizards like Ali whose ulterior motives will only exacerbate problems than solve them.
November 6, 2007 4:09 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 16:09
That's right. Blame the British for everything! *yawn*
As anyone with any knowledge of history is well aware, the fault was Jinnah's. Before Partition Nehru offered him the leadership of the undivided subcontinent. He refused, and the rest is history, the horrors of Partition in 1947, and the continued misery and hardship of millions of people.
I remember the "good life" in Kashmir before Muslim militants turned this multicultural community into a misery, either killing or scaring away the Buddhists and Hindus whose ancestors had long been part of its fabric. Remember that a millenium ago Kashmir was indeed a paradise, with great Buddhist teachers who attracted followers from far away. What have Muslim fanatics done? Destroyed Bamiyan, occupied the sacred land of Swat where the great teacher Padmasamhava was born, and swept away the tolerant way of life that these peoples had enjoyed for so long.
Kashmir? It's worth recalling its history. When Ghulab Singh and his brothers joined Kashmir with Jammu and Ladakh in the middle of the nineteenth century, life became better for the average Kashmiri. Don't believe me? Read Moorcroft's account of the time he spent in the Vale of Kashmir in the 1820s, while it was still under the thumb of the Sikhs based in Lahore. He saw Sikh soldiers supervising the rice harvesting, taking away nine-tenths of the grain and leaving only one-tenth for the villagers! And even this was an improvement over their previous overlords, the Pathan, whose favourite sport was to tie two Kashmiris together, throw them into Dal Lake, and watch them drown! The Pathan called the Kashmiris "Zul parast" ("lovers of slavery")! Under Ghulab Singh and his successors, Kashmir was, from the 1850s on, a good place to live for the average citizen.
I'm tired of Ali Ettefagh's ignorant formulaic diatribe. This sort of thing gets old really quickly. He may be clever at making money, but that, it seems, is the extent of his talents!
November 6, 2007 3:51 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 15:51
Zahid Raja, go get a life. Kashmiris were doing fine till the Islamofacists brought terrorism to the valley. You should have checked it out in 1984. It was serene and beautiful. And, then came the Islamofacists/terrorists from across the border!
November 6, 2007 3:47 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 15:47
All of you putting down the author of this brilliant article, stop shooting the messenger. Pakistan is on its way to self descruction, ready to implode or explode or whatever. Pakistan's founder's grandson lives and thrives in India. That should tell you something about the stink in Pakistan.
November 6, 2007 3:22 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 15:22
I think Mr.Ettefagh has a luxury to write whatever he wishes,however, it is very much apparent from his writting that he does't know much about Pakistan.His prejudice about Pakistan is very much evident from his comments regarding Pakistan's position on kashmir.I like to tell Mr. Ettefagh that the Kashmiris who are living under repression know a lot about opression than Mr. Ettefagh.I regret very much that such a reputable paper allows such a rubish to be printed from a hate monger.
November 6, 2007 3:16 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 15:16
Extremism in Afghanistan and Pakistan is the direct result of cold war as well as desire by the west to control the middle east oil which is likely to continue to haunt us. The U.S. and its western allies are not innocent in what is going on in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
November 6, 2007 2:40 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 14:40
Well, if we had only realized it was that simple... we'll just wave our magic wand and voila, Pakistan is gone.
November 6, 2007 2:12 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 14:12
Well, if we had only realized it was that simple... we'll just wave our magic wand and voila, Pakistan is gone.
November 6, 2007 2:12 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 14:12
Wwwwho gets to keep the nukes?
November 6, 2007 1:37 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 13:37
Some of these points are solid. I really cannot argue with the author and I think he has opened the right subject for debate.
November 6, 2007 11:54 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 11:54
Unfortunately most Pakistani commentators on this forum have verbally attacked the author and the publisher (Dr. Ettefagh and Washingtonpost&Newsweek). The attackers are educated Pakistanis with Ph.Ds from Islamabad Universities, also known as Jihad Universities.
I wonder what is the difference between general Busharaf and the Pakistani crowd here?
Neither of them like freedom of speech and want the people to shut up and publish what the Pakis like.
The truth is always hard to bear.
November 6, 2007 10:41 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 10:41
This is a good way to share clear thoughts and I congratulate the writer on being bold enough to share his thoughts.
Although the article is written before the recent coup, it has predicted the nature of the Pakistani sham. Musharraf is not convincing enough and his recent speech after the coup that he is doing it for Pakistan shows the stranded state of mind in that country. He rounded up diplomats that he is doing this for Pakistan but said very little about how he will handle terrorists. Pakistan has arrested human rights activists, judges and lawyers that want rule of law, instead of rounding up terrorists, smugglers and shady operators. By itself, it is a telling story!
November 6, 2007 8:51 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 08:51
Mr. Ettefagh:
I know we all have freedom of speech, no matter how irresponsible. By the same token we torrelate all sorts of not so intelligent views. I did not realize Washington Post will give space to your views. This brings down the calibre of the Newspaper.
It is like going to a movie house and shouting "Fire". The person has a right to free speech but how irresponsible is that.
Got the hint?
November 6, 2007 8:36 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 08:36
hi,
yes there are few facts in that article if not all. But havin said this, i think there is nother side of it aswell...i mean what diffrent in 2007 is that people have sort of consensus that , we as a nation need democracy, so that we have defeat the threats Pakistan have.
i think first time in history agenda is Pakistan for those who are fighting the army rule, the extremism. people here are not politically organize, they dont learn to participate in it. so its hard to fight, but as i said first time , there is a sense which need few years to deliver great results...just wait for few years....we are normal people and normal nation, yes not as mature, not as organize, not as united, but like any other nation, we have potential , infact more then few other nations,,,so bee careful, we will dissolve or emerge as great nation in few years time...before 2015.
November 6, 2007 6:59 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 06:59
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/opinion/06tue1.html
November 6, 2007 6:00 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 06:00
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/world/asia/06musharraf.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
November 6, 2007 5:22 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 05:22
Pull the plug on Pakistan, disarm it and make it subject heavy sanctions like Iraq and Saddam. Every thing must be shutdown: financial channels, flights, shipping and certainly an ams embargo.
November 6, 2007 4:16 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 04:16
Sanctions against Pakistan, now!
November 6, 2007 3:53 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 03:53
Keen observations and true. Fixing a mistake sooner than later is always advised.
November 6, 2007 3:35 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 03:35
Powerful logic that is not going to happen.The British division of former colonies seems to be the basis of many of the problems in todays society.Lest we forget it was the British who drew the lines for the middle east.Unfortunately power likes to accumulate not divide.So alas a wonderfully logical column but in the real world to no avail.
November 6, 2007 2:59 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 6, 2007 02:59
Is Persians are ready to see Independent Balochistan beside their occupied Balochistan??
November 5, 2007 10:20 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 22:20
I think Pakistan is a Bastard Nation born out of lust of Jinnah. There is no third party intervention required to dissolve this unholy mess, Pakis will do themselves with their inner contradictions and external heat because of their love for Bin Laden and Taliban.
Pakistan is a saza to the world(Yeh to phirron ke garror ke saza hai).
November 5, 2007 9:11 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 21:11
now here is a fascinating theory? somehow out of the colonial shipwreck of britains failed expansionist ventures, we are supposed to create light brigade type charge into pakistan to remake central asia to the detriment of balance and peace, and to the bi-polaristic visions of iran and india. quite a concept, but who is to lead the charge?
November 5, 2007 8:17 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 20:17
YEAH RIGHT!!!!!!!!
WHAT ETTEFAG HAS WRITTEN IS NOT SCHOLARSHIP. THIS IS JUST WITCHCRAFT, PURE AND SIMPLE.I AM WONDERING HOW ONE ANSWERS WITCHCRAFT.
LISTEN MR.ETTEFAG PAKISTAN IS NOT SOME CONCOCTED REALITY THAT SICK MINDS LIKE YOU CAN WISH AWAY.WE CREATED PAKISTAN BECAUSE WE WANTED TO LIVE BY OUR OWN RULES.
November 5, 2007 4:32 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 16:32
I was shocked to see the biased,derogatotry comments of Dr.Ali about Pakistan in your newspaper.It is very surprising and shocking for me and every Pakistani that one of the leading newspaper of the world has published such criminal,very biased,derogatory and discriminatory comments about a sovereign state.
These comments are prejudice and show the hidden agenda and enemosity of dr Ali towards our motherland.Pakistani nation is giving alot of sacrifices since Afghan war.We have suffered alot since that war.Klashinkov and heroin are the gifts of that war.After 9/11 once again we are the frontline ally of the war aginst terrorism.Our armed forces and civilians have given and giving very great sacrifice.The sacrifices of our armed forces and civilians are much more than the combined losses and sacrifices of allied nations.
Dr.Ali is leaving in paradise of fools when he says that we are not one nation.No doubt we have different tribes but we are one nation.He has misperception about our oneness and unity.Who is he who decide the fate of our motherland.
We believe in Non violence but its not our weakness but strength.
We believe that non violence brings Peace and Love whereas violence brings hatred and destruction to the world.
Through this letter i request the leaders of USA,UK,France,China,Germany,Russian,European Union to please immediately convene an Imternational Peace conference. Bt war no force can eliminate the growing violence and hatred.
Its my firm belief that non-violence is the key which give guarantee for Peace and Love.Let us join hands to defeat violence and hatred with non-violence,peace and Love and make the world peaceful and beautiful place.
Media is one of the most effective tool in promoting Peace and Love.
Zubair Aslam Marwat
Ph.D Scholar Muhammad Ali Jinnah University, Islamabd,Pakistan
Email; peace.lover1@yahoo.com
November 5, 2007 3:08 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 15:08
If that is what it takes to get rid of a terrorist factory, why not? It has gotten worse since the first coup of Musharraf.
November 5, 2007 1:19 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 13:19
Yes, it is time. They are stuck between their two big friends, the Al Qaeda extremists and the Bush extremists.
Time to force them to act like adults.
November 5, 2007 11:49 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 11:49
Yes, it is time. They are stuck between their two big friends, the Al Qaeda extremists and the Bush extremists.
Time to force them to act like adults.
November 5, 2007 11:48 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 11:48
A really good line of thought. The terrorist factory called Pakistan must be shut down. Yes, Pakistan is the most dangerous country.
November 5, 2007 11:44 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 11:44
One thing that is so common, and it is on full display here as well from the Pakistani and in general other muslims around the world is that they immediately want to shoot the messenger when they don't like the message.
In this particular case, Mr. Ettefagh wrote an opinion for an organization that he is a panelist on. This opinion was surely intended to be provocative and thought provoking, not just focussing on Pakistan, but for that matter all of Middle East (less Iran and Egypt).
Yet what you have here is ill-wishes and prayers, insults and perhaps a few subtle threats as well. You have insults hurled at his country of birth, when perhaps many of his countrymen do not share his viewpoints.
The funniest of all is that these insults and ill-wishes and prayers are preceded by "enshallah" or god-willing. I guess these people see themselves as devout muslims and very holy. They invoke god at every turn and pray to him to harm other human beings. Perhaps that is why the world views muslims as less than civilized and very radical.
My guess is that this behavior, in particular in Pakistan and Arab states are symptoms of insecurity and a sense of inferiority. One looks to India and feels small and the other looks to the rich history and culture of the persians and feels insignificant without their western puppetmasters.
November 5, 2007 11:22 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 11:22
Dr. Ali Ettefagh's Why Not Dissolve Pakistan, Too?
It is an interesting insight into the making of the country Pakistan. During the 50th Anniversary of the 'Independence Day' I remember Nawaz Sharif going round Jinnah's Mausoleum. Pity there was not a single other freedom fighter Pakistan could even remember let alone celebrate. Independence from whom? It is a misnomer. They could celebrate 14th August as an 'extortion day' certainly not as an Independence Day. When East Pakistan was dismembered there was agony for the shame of the Pakistani soldiers surrendering en masse but never felt about losing the Bangladeshis as such. I found the same shocking treatment when Nawaz Shariff was deported from his own country. None felt bad about it. But one thing I am positive about Pakistanis - No, they would not allow others to dissolve their country they would do it themseleves!
November 5, 2007 11:00 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 11:00
A good article and a good idea. Immediate action needed to disarm Pakistani nukes.
NOW!
November 5, 2007 10:34 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 10:34
The author's post is less about dissolving Pakistan or redrawing the boundaries as everyone knows that it is neither possible nor desirable. It is designed to draw attention to the fact that Pakistan is in chaos and has been in chaos since it came into existence in 1947. The democratic impulses have not taken roots. The leadership of the country is game of musical chair to see which corrupt leaders would take the seat. There have been a series of coups. There does not seem to be anything that unifies the country. It has becoming a breeding ground for extremism. I would like to see people who care about Pakistan to confront this state of affairs.
November 5, 2007 9:30 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 09:30
TO Syed Bhokar
So you are saying that the three wise men were from Kashmir? You really need to do some reading.
I'm not sure if the whole story or the three wise men is true or not, but the experts are pretty much in agreement that they were probably persian Magi of zoroasterian faith.
But lets take your word. The guy who says the events proved correctly that India was not a place for Muslims. This in a country that still has over 150M Muslims?
Also this from a guy whose name here implies a direct descent from the prophet Mohammad? Tell me, do you put Syed as your first name because you and your family claim descendency from the muslim prophet?
Also, believe it or not, Pakistan is not all Muslim. It does have a small minority of other faiths, which accordingly puts it neck-and-neck with India for the second and third largest muslim populous country.
November 5, 2007 9:17 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 09:17
To CHRIS THOMAS, really I'm not that "young" or "inexperienced". I would say quite the opposite.
Why I call you and your kind "idiots" is because of statements such as the last sentence in your last post: "May God and Allah bless the Pakistani people in this time of uncertainity."
Again, Idiots like you don't understand that God and Allah are one an the same. Allah, Khoda, Yahweh, Gott, Dieu, and God are all the same in different languages. They all refer to the God of Abraham.
November 5, 2007 9:05 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 09:05
Pakistan must be immediately taken under full and complete control of UNSC and full set of sanctions must be set up against it and be forced to join NPT and disarm from its nukes.
This article is brightly thought and clear written. Thank you Dr. Ettefagh
November 5, 2007 8:27 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 08:27
Sir
With all due respect to you it is not for a foreigner to decide wether we ought to dissolve or not, it is for the 160 million proud Pakistanis to decide their fate. Your comments will bring alot of hurt to a generation which vividly remembers the blood, toil and tears that went into its creation. No one can take our freedom from us and neither our NUKES!! You talk about deportation of Nawaz Sharif, I think your memory has failed to serve you in what happened to Shah Reza Pehalvi Last Ruler of Iran(and a citizen like Nawaz Sharif) and his family, last I remember they were not to be seen munching on Chelo Kebabs in Iran atleast.You owe an apology to each and every Pakistani for posting such an article. One last thing PAKISTAN ZINDABAD......as every Pakistani knows the meaning of this I think we are here to stay!!!!!!I think with looming attacks on I RAN I suggest U RAN!!!!
November 5, 2007 7:53 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 07:53
Sir
With all due respect to you it is not for a foreigner to decide wether we ought to dissolve or not, it is for the 160 million proud Pakistanis to decide their fate. Your comments will bring alot of hurt to a generation which vividly remembers the blood, toil and tears that went into its creation. No one can take our freedom from us and neither our NUKES!! You talk about deportation of Nawaz Sharif, I think your memory has failed to serve you in what happened to Shah Reza Pehalvi Last Ruler of Iran(and a citizen like Nawaz Sharif) and his family, last I remember they were not to be seen munching on Chelo Kebabs in Iran atleast.You owe an apology to each and every Pakistani for posting such an article. One last thing PAKISTAN ZINDABAD......as every Pakistani knows the meaning of this I think we are here to stay!!!!!!I think with looming attacks on I RAN I suggest U RAN!!!!
November 5, 2007 7:52 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 07:52
several of us have been advocating this perspective for some time. pakistan should cease to exist. it's actually a dead nation, whose corpse is kept alive by the yanks, in bizarre imitation of Lenin's corpse being kept embalmed in Moscow.
November 5, 2007 7:10 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 07:10
Thanks to Mr Ali Ettefagh. hope this article will open the eyes of india,afghanistan and iran governments.
November 5, 2007 6:38 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 06:38
Thanks to Mr Ali Ettefagh. hope this article will open the eyes of india,afghanistan and iran governments.
November 5, 2007 6:37 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 06:37
on second thoughts...newsweek needs some quality control. Seriously...or has the author been playing too much sim city?
November 5, 2007 6:24 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 06:24
Pakistan is now a real challenge for UN and the world.
The so-called West is completely unprepared. It is time to get the UN in high gear, set up a plan of sanctions on Pakistan, disarm it, and set up an orderly system of breaking up the country in two or three sensible pieces. This will isolate the terrorists and terror friendly minds and will also isolate the problem to a smaller region.
It is also beneficial for Russia and China to help along to stop terrorism as neither want this wild fire of terror expand into Central Asia.
Act Now!
November 5, 2007 5:51 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 05:51
The deadly message from Pakistan
Robert Fox explains why the risk of civil war in Pakistan threatens worldwide repercussions:
In his broadcast announcing Pakistan's emergency, Pervez Musharraf quoted Abraham Lincoln's famous letter of March 1864 about the need to preserve nation and government before the constitution. "Was it possible to lose the Nation and yet preserve the Constitution?" Lincoln wrote.
Musharraf, and many other Pakistanis beside, now believe his country is on the cusp of civil war.
This is the terrible point that the messages of mild condemnation from the likes of Condoleezza Rice and David Miliband have failed to convey. The prospects for the 175m Pakistanis are dreadful. And there is a deadly message too for closely associated communities and nations like Britain.
For Musharraf it is a last desperate throw. Now he has to rely on the army, which is badly split between reformers, Islamists and active supporters of the Taliban.
With pro-Taliban and pro-al-Qaeda organisations now mushrooming in the frontier provinces of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, the troubles in Pakistan will help the Taliban now fighting the British and their Nato allies across southern Afghanistan. The Taliban are making huge gains outside the traditional Pashtun areas, and deep into Punjab. Furthermore Pakistan and Iran both face a major insurrection in Baluchistan.
For Britain, the fanning of violence and tension in Pakistan is sure to have an effect among extreme Islamist sympathisers in the UK itself - the leaders of both the July 7 and 21 London bomb plots appear to have received support and training from Pakistan.
Finally, the potential implosion of Pakistan throws into strange light the obsession of Dick Cheney and supporters like Elliott Cohen for bombing Iran. Iran may get a nuclear device inside ten years - possibly. Implosion in Pakistan could lead to a Taliban regime with a nuclear arsenal up and running now. For this Bush, Brown and Sarkozy seem totally unprepared.
November 5, 2007 5:43 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 05:43
when was review of national structures and redrawing of borders option available. OR is this a nightmare vision of the future?
Pakistan may have been fabricated on a map by the british, but it certainly is a nation today and not an assembly of waring tribes. In 2007 most of these tribes have evolved into complex communities trying to live lives as others do on the planet. Unlike the author claims there is a well known and documented common language in the country called "Urdu". Linguistically its on far more common grounds then say multilingual and bilingual countries like Belgium and Morocco. Also I believe Irans border with Iraq must have been far more troubling than that with Pakistan.
The problem with Pakistan is not about tribes being strange bedfellows, it is persistent military intervention ever since its existence.
The silver bullet that the author is offering fails to take into account the fact that people from the north west frontier province do not want to be part of afghanistan anymore as that country has been gutted out of its soul through the years through foreign intervention.
what exactly will happen to the nuclear program after the suggested disolution is also worth pondering! will it be a quick operation like Iraq? or Afhghanistan?
I think portraying Pakistan as a bunch of waring tribes (speaking english) and sitting on nuclear bombs is way off the reality and complexties of the country.
November 5, 2007 5:30 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 05:30
This article is good and correct.
Send all Pakistanis to Guantanamo!
November 5, 2007 4:50 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 04:50
Good and clear article. Now is the time. Start with sanctions and disarm Pakistan from its nukes.
It worked with Saddam and he in fact gave up his nukes.
November 5, 2007 3:08 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 03:08
I came, I saw, …..I got deported from my own country!
-Nawaz Sharif
November 5, 2007 2:14 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 02:14
to EJAZ ASI
We re now in the 21st Century, not the Dark Ages. It appears that Pakistan IS STILL in the Dark Ages, given than 50% of its population think bin Laden & Co. did a good!!! thing on 9-11.
You decide whether this kind of people, 80+ million have a place in a modern world.
November 5, 2007 2:01 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 02:01
I have a question from Ali Ettefagh. Why didn't they burn Europe in the Dark Ages?
November 5, 2007 1:39 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 01:39
I have a question from Ali Ettefagh. Why didn't they burn Europe in the Dark Ages?
November 5, 2007 1:38 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 01:38
We agree fully with what Ali Ettefagh has written in the columns of your esteemed paper..The provinces forming part of Pakistan have ethenically nothing in common except religion which Pakistan has been using skilfully in teaching and promoting terrorism and fundamentalism. Because of these policies hundreds of innocent lives have been lost and people stand immensely perturbed. Around two lac Kashmiri Pandits have had to leave their ancestral homes and live as paupers in distant parts of India. Armed hordes are moving around in N.W.F. province and it now seems difficult to control them. It is indeed high time to think of suggestions made by Dr. Ali and to act thereon
November 5, 2007 12:56 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 5, 2007 00:56
I think a lot of Pakistanis are just being nationalistic and not confronting the problems in their own countries. Gen. Musharraf came to power in 1999 by overthrowing the government in a military coup. Just he was supposed to step down, he has declared a state of emergency, suspending judiciary, arresting hundreds of people and literally placing the country under a police state. I am surprised that not only there is no condemnation of this from the Pakistani people here but they are actually defending this state of affairs. Pakistan has a lot of serious problems and they need to be addressed before its too late. What I see here is simply a lot of jingoistic talk and utter reluctance to face up to the facts.
November 4, 2007 9:19 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 21:19
Sorry for pointing this minor error by one of the commenters:
Wrong: "India has 14 major languages ..."
Correct:
India has 22+-2 Major languages (recognized by govt), 415/425 living languages are listed in Ethanologue for India. And each of them consists of many dialects.
My mother tongue "Tamil" itself has 16 dialects.
Reference: http://www.ethnologue.com/show_country.asp?name=in
November 4, 2007 9:17 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 21:17
Sorry for pointing this minor error by one of the commenters:
Wrong: "India has 14 major languages ..."
Correct:
India has 21 Major languages (recognized by govt), 425 living languages are listed in Ethanologue for India. And each of them consists of many dialects.
My mother tongue "Tamil" itself has 16 dialects.
Reference: http://www.ethnologue.com/show_country.asp?name=in
November 4, 2007 9:16 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 21:16
I believe India should capitalize on the weakened Pakistan situation and break it up. We can witness another Bangladesh kind of situation here. I believe broken up Pakistan is good for India as the individual provinces will not be anti-India. I believe Pakistan and India can never have peace. Hence it is better to break up Pakistan.
I believe if you have smaller states then the radical Islamic idealogy will not propagate. The local cultures of the people will create more stable states rather than integrating them through Islam.
November 4, 2007 7:58 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 19:58
There is one more important issue about Pakistan totally missed in the article. When Pakistan was created some Indian Muslims from the state of Uttar Pradesh (UP) migrated to Pakistan. These people are called Mujahirs in Pakistan and they only speak Urdu language. They actually don't belong to the any of the provinces of Pakistan but these people control Pakistan today. They constitute 8% of Pakistani population. Even the idea of independence for Indian Muslims came from UP Muslims not from the five provinces of present day Pakistan.
Today Pakistan's national language is Urdu (spoken by 6% to 8% of the population at the time of independence) and these Mujahirs propagate Islamic nation agenda as it provides them control over the tribal provinces. Even Musharaff is a Mujahir he was born in UP, India. Adding to this Pakistan's main commercial capital Karachi is completely controlled by Muhajirs. This minority population from India are effectively controlling Pakistan today.
Indian state of UP has a tendency to produce both good and bad leaders. Most of the India's prime ministers are from UP. An example of a bad leader is Iran's Khomeni was also born in UP.
November 4, 2007 6:41 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 18:41
Imperialism does not work.
The Big Powers formed and dismembered nations. Of course, they were immune from this barbarism. How would the USA or the UK like it if the Congo decided that it should cut the USA into smaller segments with each one being a state. Europe and Africa consist of smaller nations so why isn't that OK for the USA?
The USA was the force that gave rise to ISrael. The Jews came from Europe, where they had lived for centuries, to claim their right to the Holy Land. This meant that the Arabs and Palestinians were dispossessed. IN other words, the West felt entitled to create Israel at the expense of others whose wishes were ignored. That was cruel.
Wherever and whenever new nations have been formed, Africa, South and Central America, Asia, Europe etc it was done in rooms in Paris. The West carved up the world. The selfish consequence has been festering turmoil.
November 4, 2007 6:37 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 18:37
Imperialism does not work.
The Big Powers formed and dismembered nations. Of course, they were immune from this barbarism. How would the USA or the UK like it if the Congo decided that it should cut the USA into smaller segments with each one being a state. Europe and Africa consist of smaller nations so why isn't that OK for the USA?
The USA was the force that gave rise to ISrael. The Jews came from Europe, where they had lived for centuries, to claim their right to the Holy Land. This meant that the Arabs and Palestinians were dispossessed. IN other words, the West felt entitled to create Israel at the expense of others whose wishes were ignored. That was cruel.
Wherever and whenever new nations have been formed, Africa, South and Central America, Asia, Europe etc it was done in rooms in Paris. The West carved up the world. The selfish consequence has been festering turmoil.
November 4, 2007 6:36 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 18:36
Pakistan is a failed state - no doubt about that. It has become the center of international jihadi terror network and Al-Qaeda has finally found a safe-haven in Pakistan. The only way to counter al-qaeda, taleban and other jihadi networks is to dissolve pakistan. With that the Pakistan army will dissolve and so will the international islamic terror networks.
November 4, 2007 6:33 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 18:33
The proclamation of Emergency (under Article 232) has not been issued by the President but by the COAS Mr.Musharraf this very act tantamounts to treason under Articel 6 of the Constitution . This is Sixth martial law since independence of Pakistan , a state under virtual hostage of Millitary , attained a uniqye reputation for criminal Millitary - Mullah nexus with impeccable record of Nuke peaddling and threatening global peace and stability . Pakistan is a byproduct of Great Game I to contain Russian Southern march and If one recollect Tariq Aziz words -- Pakistan is a condom State. Yes it all happened because Millitary which sold the soul of the nation to enrich themselves . Pakistan is an illusion and it will meltdown and regional powers and International powers should quarantine all it's nuclear assets , INCLUDING NUCLEAR SCIENTISTS .
November 4, 2007 5:27 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 17:27
I commend Dr.Ettefagh for suggesting a bold solution to the quagmire that is modern day Pakistan.
Even if the Military State masquerading as a Nation is not entirely dismembered, assigning to Afghanistan only the Pashtun dominant areas, which range from Chitral in the Northern Areas to Quetta [Balochistan] in the south will go a long way in ensuring, not only the survival of Pakistan but also a more prosperous Afghanistan.
November 4, 2007 3:45 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 15:45
I would echo same opinion as Saeed Mehr. Mr Ali Ettefagh should rather keep his tongue shut b/w the canines. He should perhaps be more worried about his native Tehran whose policies keep on ringing alarm bells in all world capitals!
November 4, 2007 2:14 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 14:14
my sincere advice to Ali Ettefagh is to shut up and keep his thoughts to himself.
November 4, 2007 2:00 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 14:00
A strikingly original opinion and absolutely correct.
Pakistan is a political anomaly and should go or perhaps be absorbed into Afghanistan.
November 4, 2007 1:59 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 13:59
my sincere advice to Ali Ettefagh is to shut up and keep his thoughts to himself.
November 4, 2007 1:59 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 13:59
K2,
Answer to your question at 8:03 a.m. -- every idiot thinks that he is King Solomon. There is a dispute about whose baby it really is. Chop the baby in two!
Except that idiots can't have the wisdom of King Solomon. When the real mother said "better give the baby to the other woman", King Solomon understood.
Not so, Mr. Ettefagh! There are many, many Pakistanis out there (and I hope that a post-crackdown, chastened Musharraf are among them, togeher with Benazir and Ashfaq Kiani and Maulana Fazlur Rahman as well as other well-reasoned opinion-leaders) who will be willing to make the necessary sacrifices to marginalise and neutralise extremists, to encourage the army to be a little more confined to the barracks and make room for dynamic entrepreneurs to engage in land-holding and business, to set the example for a vigorous anti-corruption drive (*starting with Asif ali Zardari!), to carry forward the education and other godd reforms that Musharraf has started. Maybe the Musharraf/Benazir coalition may still hold and maybe a wisened (but then REALLY wisened and less muscle-flexing) Musharraf can be given a year as President to collaborate with Beanazir and Kiani to crack down on extremsists, it being understood, after those 12 months, that Musharraf will bow out, the PM Benazir (if she hasmeanwhile proven her mettle) will have considerable executive powers, but with adequate checks-and-balances powers given to the judiciary and legislative-and-administrative branches of government.
The agenda is still doable, but the military-rule move has made it harder.
November 4, 2007 11:39 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 11:39
Great article.
The fact taht more than 50% of 169 million Pakistanis are in favour of Osama bin Laden is enough cause on its own.
November 4, 2007 11:31 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 11:31
Completely agree with this author. Well said.
Paks brought us the taliban, nukes, and a sham. There is no democracy, no human rights and no future for that mess. carve it up!
November 4, 2007 11:18 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 11:18
dear mr ettefagh,
please worry about the impending doom about iran's nuclear fantasy.we had respect for reasonable Iranians and would but the problem is post global gave space to a man who has missed his daily dose of lithium.Psychosis mixed with mania is beyond home care.God bless Iran.
November 4, 2007 11:02 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 11:02
Excellency Dr. Ettefagh,
Another solution is to create a United States of India (U.S.I.), with a federal system of governance in line with the United States of America, of course, with minor adjustments to local character, social and political invoironment. Punjab and Sindh can then join the U.S.I. South Asia can be stabilised if India gets a fresh, healthy, new, progressive, strong and democratic constitution and eliminates corruption in all its forms.
India could become a very stabilising force in Asia and the world, provided it fights, controls and prevent religious extremism in all its manifistations and expressions, particularly Hindu nationalism and extremism, which has been and is the biggest enemy of India and has led to its disintegration and colonisation many times in the history of that nation. It has prevented India from becoming a strong nation state compared to China, the Indians have performed relatively very short.
Muslims of Indian subcontinent (half of it in today's Pakistan) should be very greatful to the Afghans who saved them from Hindu slavery many times in the past. Everytime Afghanistan invaded India (12 times), it was mostly to defend Muslim minorities in India against the Hindu extremists. It was also the AFGHANS that defeated the Soviet Russia, British Colonialists and slave owners, not to mentions the Arabs, the Turks and the Moguls, who could never subjugate or control Afghan territories.
The Hindus should be greatful to the Afghan people and great Kings, such as King Amanullah Khan, who supported the independence of India and the freedom of its people. Remember that Afghanistan is (1747) one of the first nation states in the world after the French Revolution, when the concept of nation states was introduced into the political dictionary of the world. It has played a leading role against colonisation, imperialism and communism, for which it has also payed and sacrificed very heavily. Afghanistan has never been colonised and defeated all foreign invaders and colonisers through the history of the region.
India's biggest, historical, strategic and political mistake in regards to Afghanistan was when it chose to keep quite about the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the U.N.G.A. in 1979, ignoring the illegal occupation of its historical neighbor which had wholeheartedly supported it against the British colonisers. India later supported a totalitarian puppet communist murderous regime in Afghanistan and continues to side with the most criminal forces in Afghanistan, such as the Northern Alliance, who were raping Hindu and Sihk women in Kabul (1992--1996) and who were destroying Afghanistan from the ground and that India knew it, but prefered to shut its mouth, eyes and ears.
The Cold War balancing act of India is not pleasant or briliant, but to a great extent very destructive for Afghanistan and the subcontinent.
The mistakes of India was a big shock and disappointment for the majority Pashtuns of Afghanistan, to some extent for the West, who now felt allienated from India. This mistake of India provided the Paki Punjabi Terrorist Army with the biggest opportunity to defeat the nationalist and progressive forces among the Pashtuns, Balochs and other supressed and opressed nationalities in the colonial entity of Pakistan. As a result, the NWFP and Balochistan are virtually in the hands of Punjabi, Pashtun and a few Baloch extremists.
It radicalised the politics of Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Inter Service Intelligence (ISI) and the bloodsucking generals of Paki Army, who are dreaming of a Punjabi Impire, are all the products of Indian mistakes, which unfortunately can not play the role of a wise Mother India.
Reintegration at all levels of the society is the key for peace in South Asia. It could be ethnic, religious, cultural, political, geographical, economic etc.
I wish the Pakistani commentators on this forum behave a bit constructive and not jumping to the gun, which has become the culutre of the Pakistanis. When the Gun is not enough, I'm sure, you will jump to your nukes, which freightens me very much.
Momand
November 4, 2007 10:59 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 10:59
The British creation of Pakistan resembles verbatim the "new Middle East" envisioned by the most ignorant, and retarded of American presidentes. Fortunately, his administration will come to an end, unfortunately...not soon enough. The best part is that the new president WILL NOT BE a Repo.
November 4, 2007 10:31 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 10:31
The history of Pakistan contained in this article does not go back far enough. To consider Pakistan a product of British imperialism doesn't describe the area well enough; it could be just as easily described as a set of tribes that go as far back as Mongol and Islamic imperialism. The British attempt to create a nation-state from seventy or eighty tribal enclaves did not take into account the need for a semi-totalitarian central authority that is needed to begin a transition to any form of democratic justice in a region. Many of these tribal enclaves work with the Taliban types because the clans themselves do not want a government they individually can’t control through some from of totalitarian minority (the traditional form of power). What might be more in the interest of the Pakistani tribes IS a form of totalitarian authority that exists for at least two generations that does not permit the tribal aggression accentuated by primitive religious ideas to endanger the ‘normal’ citizens of Pakistan.
November 4, 2007 10:17 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 10:17
It is true that Pakistan's location next to Afghanistan is problematic. The fact that the border between these countries cuts through historically unified cultural areas doesn't help. And the fact that the areas thus cut-though are inhabited by relatively wild and well-armed mountain tribes is also a problem.
The diversity of traditions and languages in Pakistan, however, is not a characteristic of Pakistan alone. It is mirrored by the same diversity within the many states which constitute India itself.
There was, indeed, a strong indigenous desire and political movement among the religious-nationalist intellectual Muslims of British India to establish a Muslim state.
Jinnah, Iqbal and Maududi (born between 1876 and 1903) were the great leaders of this movement.
And please bear in mind that Gandhi was killed by a (misguided) Muslim nationalist.
So it was not just an arbitrary or ill-considered afterthought for Britain to establish a separate Muslim state.
One could imagine that even within a unified greater India, the majority Muslim states, which today constitute Pakistan, would have presented this unified greater India with the same problems.
November 4, 2007 10:16 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 10:16
I really agree with this writer. Well researched piece and facts. Most of the British fantasies have failed in any case around the world. Something should be done with this terror sate called Pakistan before it blows the world.
November 4, 2007 10:04 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 10:04
Good idea, TOOLATE.
November 4, 2007 10:00 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 10:00
I find Dr. Ettefagh's short version of Pakistan's origin to be highly revised. Any reading of late Raj history indicates that the British were absolutely opposed to the concept of partitioning India (the notion of providing any part of India any bit of independence was controversial). Dr. Ettefagh is certainly correct that having a majority population was a major factor in allocating East Bengal to Pakistan once partition was inevitable, but an attempt to provide some amount of economic parity between India and Pakistan was another. And the notion that Pakistan was established as a pro-Western counter to India's pro-Soviet leanings is pure fiction- the desire and concept of Pakistan predates cold war politics by two decades.
The birth of Pakistan was far from British fantasy- it was a British nightmare born of oppressive colonialism and a desire of Muslims for self-rule. Pakistan has a myriad of problems, and to revise its history places those problems in a false context and hampers efforts to fix them.
November 4, 2007 9:42 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 09:42
In this moment, the paradigm democratic of the west go been contest in the many countries. The instituitions europeans was carried for many countries by imperialists and colonialists reasons. I think that very good if all countries of the worl become nations where the peace and democracy were the maxim law. But its do they like. This is fact and Condolize Rice and USA have not legitimate for change this reality.
November 4, 2007 9:22 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 09:22
Interesting piece, but some of the history is missing, e.g., Ali Jinnah and the All India Muslim League.
Although many ills in the world today are laid at the feet of former European Colonialists—justifiably—they could not have acted thusly without the aid of the many self-serving indigenous people (PLO, are you listening?).
Pakistan is an independent nation-state today for many reasons; chief among them though is the hardheaded sponsorship of such a state by Ali Jinnah and the All India Muslim League (much to Gandhi’s consternation).
And, finally, could we all please stop with “should not have been in the first place” of many policy apologists and deal with the “what we’ve got now” reality of the various international imbroglios around the world. I am not suggesting we ignore history, rather I am suggesting we incorporate it to new solutions and new pathways that are radically different from the status quo and fit better with the tapistry of people and customs that exist today.
Let’s end the constant abuse of historical context (aka hysterical context) in order to prop up newly burnished forms of the old. A shift in our thinking might actually aide in progress rather than the constant one step forward, three steps backward that exist in the multitude of global hotspots that exist in our post Cold War era.
November 4, 2007 9:16 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 09:16
Pakistan is proven to be a rip-off. Time to bust it up and create a more transparent system. If that means dissolution, there is nothing wrong with that. Are Czechs and Slovaks better off than 20 years ago? Are the Yugoslavs in a better shape for the most part?
The fact is Pakistan is dangerous. It has become the hub of terrorists that hijack planes and run it into buildings. The $10 billion in U.S. aid over the last 7 years has been wasted. They have no true intentions to have democracy and now have martial law. Time for sanctions, restrictions, disarming of nukes and setting up a UN protectorate and break up! Game over boys!!
November 4, 2007 8:45 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 08:45
Totally agree with the writer. There are many similar cases though. In fact, the colonial powers in the ME established several Arab countries. Jordan and Iraq and Saudi Arabia were established by Britain, Syria and Lebanon by France.
November 4, 2007 8:43 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 08:43
Oh my, this essay spawned an interesting debate, and made me recollect a lot of history. After some contemplation, I decided to agree with the commentators who ask "What about Iran?". Which in term, reminds me of an old saying: If you live in a house made of glass, do not throw with rocks....
Sorry Ettefagh, let's form a comission to carve up Iran as well.
November 4, 2007 8:38 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 08:38
Dissolve hatred mongers all over the world;no matter who and how stronger they are.Pakistan is again run over by military.Tell USA to outrighly oppose it.Or,think of dissolving all those countries which create disturbances in other countries;overtly and covertly.
November 4, 2007 8:27 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 08:27
THE ARTICLE IS A CHEAP SHOT AND WISHFUL THINKING OF DR ALI ETTEFAGH. HE BETTER BE ADVISED TO WRITE ON INVESTMENT SUBJECT IN WHICH AREA HE IS SUPPOSED TO THRIVE.
November 4, 2007 8:24 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 08:24
We can settle the nature vs nurture debate to a great extent by following the birth, growth and development of India & Pakistan.
One nation was divided into two parts.In the beginning their problems were alomost similar. The framework each adopted to solve their problems were different. One was formed on religious identity and other even after divison decided to be secular and inclusive.
There was a recognization in the beginnig by Nehru that religion as a national identity cannot hold a country together. Growth and equality could.
India invested in its institutions, the framework for Governance, sometimes those frameowrk were so fragile that it looked a strong wind would just blow it away but it survived.
Pakistan's political leadership (Jinnah included) was myopic at its best. The idea that a country can be held together by religious identity. They never invested in any frameworks of Governance. Even after 60 years. We don't realize that they have lost all these years. What happens after Musharraf is gone ? There isn't any national institutions which exists there today. We cannot say same about India. They have a vibrant democracy, number of political parties and some brilliant leadership at top.
To sum it up, they were almost nurtured in same set of variables but it was in their nature that they ended up where they are today.
Pakistan a failed state, India a hope.
November 4, 2007 8:07 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 08:07
We can settle the nature vs nurture debate to a great extent by following the birth, growth and development of India & Pakistan.
One nation was divided into two parts.In the beginning their problems were alomost similar. The framework each adopted to solve their problems were different. One was formed on religious identity and other even after divison decided to be secular and inclusive.
There was a recognization in the beginnig by Nehru that religion as a national identity cannot hold a country together. Growth and equality could.
India invested in its institutions, the framework for Governance, sometimes those frameowrk were so fragile that it looked a strong wind would just blow it away but it survived.
Pakistan's political leadership (Jinnah included) was myopic at its best. The idea that a country can be held together by religious identity. They never invested in any frameworks of Governance. Even after 60 years. We don't realize that they have lost all these years. What happens after Musharraf is gone ? There isn't any national institutions which exists there today. We cannot say same about India. They have a vibrant democracy, number of political parties and some brilliant leadership at top.
To sum it up, they were almost nurtured in same set of variables but it was in their nature that they ended up where they are today.
Pakistan a failed state, India a hope.
November 4, 2007 8:03 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 08:03
The answer to the problems facing Pakistan is to break up the country???
November 4, 2007 8:03 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 08:03
We can settle the nature vs nurture debate to a great extent by following the birth, growth and development of India & Pakistan.
One nation was divided into two parts.In the beginning their problems were alomost similar. The framework each adopted to solve their problems were different. One was formed on religious identity and other even after divison decided to be secular and inclusive.
There was a recognization in the beginnig by Nehru that religion as a national identity cannot hold a country together. Growth and equality could.
India invested in its institutions, the framework for Governance, sometimes those frameowrk were so fragile that it looked a strong wind would just blow it away but it survived.
Pakistan's political leadership (Jinnah included) was myopic at its best. The idea that a country can be held together by religious identity. They never invested in any frameworks of Governance. Even after 60 years. We don't realize that they have lost all these years. What happens after Musharraf is gone ? There isn't any national institutions which exists there today. We cannot say same about India. They have a vibrant democracy, number of political parties and some brilliant leadership at top.
To sum it up, they were almost nurtured in same set of variables but it was in their nature that they ended up where they are today.
Pakistan a failed state, India a hope.
November 4, 2007 8:02 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 08:02
Why all of Pakistani posters above continue to deflect answering the question and jump on Iran, USA, the author, religion, etc.?
Why not consider alternative ways. If the entire "nation" of Pakistan was really in harmony and unity, why have all these bombings, coups, deportation of previous politicians and Al Qaeda and Madrasa hate-teaching centres?
November 4, 2007 8:00 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 08:00
It is matter of great shame that this Article is from a muslim if that would have been from some Indian then v would have said that It is prejuidice but shame
shame
shame
shame
shame for hurting feelings of all Pakistan
why not dissolve India where people are fighting for Independence against tyrant Indian regime
why not dissolve Afghanistan which is home for terrorists
Shame on you
November 4, 2007 7:54 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 07:54
"Pakistani Military & civil bureaucrats" who are denying power to the people, are the grand-sons of those muslims,who were boot-polishers, sepoy, peon and clerks of British Raj in India. They became Mohajers in Pakistan and are ruling the land.
The greed of power has created racism among different ethnic groups. Mohajers hate Panjabis and Sindhis, Panjabis hate Balochs and Pashtun hate Mohajirs and etc. etc.
Pakistan is a fail State and it is divided among
different "ethnic groups". It`s broken on moral basis. It needs a kick to break the country ......before the confiscation of her WMD and destroy her nuclear facilities as it poses a great threat to the people of Pakistan, South Asian Countries and the whole world.
www.dividepakistan.blogspot.com
November 4, 2007 7:44 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 07:44
some factors are true about pakistan , and some are false any way what else we are pakistani and we only need God blessing from all muslim to upgrade us in good way. God bless us always and get rid from those elements who damaging our religion, culture and our country. ameen
November 4, 2007 7:43 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 07:43
"Pakistani Military & civil bureaucrats" who are denying power to the people, are the grand-sons of those muslims,who were boot-polishers, sepoy, peon and clerks of British Raj in India. They became Mohajers in Pakistan and are ruling the land.
The greed of power has created racism among different ethnic groups. Mohajers hate Panjabis and Sindhis, Panjabis hate Balochs and Pashtun hate Mohajirs and etc. etc.
Pakistan is a fail State and it is divided among
different "ethnic groups". It`s broken on moral basis. It needs a kick to break the country ......before the confiscation of her WMD and destroy her nuclear facilities as it poses a great threat to the people of Pakistan, South Asian Countries and the whole world.
www.dividepakistan.blogspot.com
November 4, 2007 7:43 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 07:43
Very interesting article, very interesting concept that deserves praise. You should watch "Kabul Express" to understand what is going on in the region. Maybe it will all make sense then.
November 4, 2007 7:40 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 07:40
WHY NOT DISSOLVE IRAN?
WHY NO DISSOLVE AFGHANISTAN?
WHY NO DISSOLVE INDIA?
LIST PAKISTANIS WE HAVE TO BREAK UP WHY? BECUASE OUR DEAR MR. ETTFAGH CANT MAKE SENSE OF OUR COUNTRY. SO LETS NOT GIVE HIME MORE TROUBLE AND SPLIT UP.
WHAT IF HE CANT STILL MAKE SENSE OF OUR EXISTENSE?
November 4, 2007 7:30 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 07:30
DESOLVE U.S.A THAT WILL BETTER FOR WHOLE WORLD
November 4, 2007 7:18 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 07:18
"There is no commonly accepted language among these tribes and thus the official language of Pakistan is English."
Speaks a lot about authors knowledge of Pakistan.URDU is Pakistans national language and very well spoken across the coutry.
If language argument is accepted then Iran and Afghanistan also deserve to be dissolved as they dont have one common language.
November 4, 2007 7:10 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 07:10
I am sure after reading the responses from Pakistani’s now this should open your eyes that Pakistani’s are a proud nation regardless of ethnicity.
READER IN EUROPE: there are conflicts in Europe isn’t it time for ya’ll give basq’s etc independence. WHY in perfect democratic Europe you got conflict such as Basq’s??
Pakistan got stable economy. US had given only military aid to Pakistan. With all our differences we the PAKISTANI’S are ONE PROUD NATION.
November 4, 2007 7:05 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 07:05
I just got out of Pakistan. It is hell on earth since yesterday's de facto coup. Very strict controls on communication with outside, most TV and radio stations are shut, foreigners under strict control.
Sorry President Bush, but you just got stabbed in the back by some one that fooled you as a friend.
November 4, 2007 7:05 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 07:05
I don't know why Pakistan has become a night mare for all the evil countries of the world.People like the one who wrote this article are making their livelihood by writing against Pakistan.World should be grateful to Pkistan for ending the cold war otherwisw their would have been more blood shed around the world.Pakistani people and soldiers along with their Afghan brothers fought and sacrificed their lives to end the bloody era of cold war.Now world needs Pakistan again.You can not tackle 1 country Pakistan then how can you deal with 4 Pakistans if provinces are independent.We are 1 nation with 1 language URDU and rich cultural and social diversities.There are more than 40 languages in Pakistan.You should think to save your ass first before writing a word agianst anybody else.Its Pakistan who has supported you in nuclear field and now Iran is showing eyes to America.You believe it or not whole world knows about it and you got no right to write such articles when your own people dying of hunger torture and sanctions.
November 4, 2007 7:03 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 07:03
Good article and a bold way of thinking out loud. Pakistan is now what Afghanistan used to be a few years ago, and that is dangerous.
November 4, 2007 6:58 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 06:58
Hey Mr. Rationalist first learn to READ and WRITE proper English. Then learn some manners and then return in about 10 years when you have lost your zits and gained some maturity!!!!!
November 4, 2007 6:51 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 06:51
Please do not use personal attacks and offensive comments in a civilized forum like this or any other. Take it easy. It is just a debate however dearly you feel about it. It's not like your the President of Pakistan about to be able to do somehting about it.
Leave everything aside. The basis on which the country was founded and the tribal and other divisions and the many other factors that are a feature of not only this but also of all other nations. Nations will either evolve over time into being something better or dissolve and destroy themselves.
If for now, a group of Pakistanis irrespective of their tribal and racial affiliations can come togther here on this forum (at least one from each province) and convince the readers that Pakistan can and will be, we should see some hope for the future.
And I do apologize for the multiple postings of my previous comment.
November 4, 2007 6:47 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 06:47
Dr. Ali Ettefagh has written very well about Pakistan. Redrawing the boundaries would aggravate the problem rather than solving it.. No body would have taken cognizance of developments bit for the 9/11 and the nuclear weapons they possess.
November 4, 2007 6:45 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 06:45
Since 9-11, the United States has given more than $10 billion to Pakistan to fight terrorists. We want a complete report on what has happened to our money, where is the promised democracy in Pakistan, where is bin Laden and why is it that PAkistan is not letting NATO forces to operate from its territory?
November 4, 2007 6:37 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 06:37
No doubt what the author says is true and can be agreed on about Pakistian. But his solutuon to dissolve the Pakistani State into independent provinces is no solution at all. It will only mean that many times as problems as there are now faced by this one single failed state. I think that there is still hope for the Pakistanis to get their act together. Look on the positive side of things. When they want to they can all come together and develop something as advanced as nuclear technology. Now all they need to do is to apply that thinking to social engineering, eradication of poverty and other benefical programs rather than be on an un-ending warpath with one another.
November 4, 2007 6:29 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 06:29
It amazes me that how much vitriolic Verbiage and verbigeration of same message of pure hatred is being salvosed to Dr.Ettefagh. That it self proves that He is right and talking on the premise of truth. He struck a serious blow to the heart of Pakistanis Prides. Though their pride systems based on false identity and false nation hood - because they have no real National identity. Pakistan is an aberration of History, and has no solid foundation. In this perspective this nation is bound to fall and to disintegrate.
There are also a concerted serious effort to Drag India in to their own created hell hole? But such attempts have failed miserably.
So called Pakistanis, should know that, The Baluchis, and Sindhi's are not keen at all to join Your Band Wagon of so called Pakistan- Nation Hood. Rather they will prefer to create their own Identity of Nation- Hoods, I men- they wants their own home lands -Baluchistan and Sindhistan. They are heading [ Marching] on that direction, and You fellas can not stop it.
The question of India? India doesn't want the existence of Terrorist and Fundamentalist Islamic nation called-**Pakistan**, at her door step. Better She prefers that this abominable monster should die as quickly as possible.
You may think that Your borrowed Nuke -missiles and A-Bomb will deter your enemy to harm you or attack you? But in civil war situation as is now exists in your country will not be affected by your **Fear Weapons**. If that is so , then why Soviet was broken down even She had more Nuke war Heads than USA??
I tell you what India will do- Hindus will support Baluchis and Sindhi's with all logistic and hard ware supports, so that these fellows will succeed. By chance if you contemplate of striking preemptivly on India? With your will- gotten N-Devices? then make sure that India has Antimissile defence system, installed already and with which She will safe gourd Hes self, we call it self reliance.
Then what role Uncle Sam will play? In my View He had enough in dealing with you Terrorist Entity, and this time SAM will not save you from the gutter -where you are stuck now.
The Question- what Uncle Sam's Position in this respect today?? Sam doesn't feel comfortable with You fellas, and you failed delver what he wanted and you fellas again back bitten Him, betrayed Him. So you guys have lost all credibility. A bigger game is brewing up in the Horizon, I mean rise of China and her influence on SEA, which Sam feels threat, and that is why America going to make Nuke Dill with India, In that respect you Pakistani fellas have lost credibility platform, and you can't bargain any more.
November 4, 2007 6:24 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 06:24
And how is this dissolution going to occur? Magic wand?
November 4, 2007 6:12 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 06:12
This article is about Pakistan, not about personal attacks on the author or Iran.
The writer is correct to say that the original plan/design did not work and there is no democracy or a continuing political process in Pakistan. If the interests of several tribal groups create a conflict rather harmony, then it is time to separate them and let them have their own system and as the last sentence indicates, a more clear political agenda will be the result.
November 4, 2007 5:53 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 05:53
Mr. Ali Ettefagh
You appear to be tolerant about the purchases made by Iran from Dr A Q Khan, May be it for some toy making. You got Clergy in power and we are resisting it.
What a standard of democracy you have. Candidate has to pass through religious cults test.
Why don't you see inside your country.
November 4, 2007 5:52 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 05:52
It is an old stinking curry of Ralph Peters which Mr Ali is trying to put on boil again. Some time ago, Ralph Peters in persuasion of Greater Middle East Plan of United States, suggested to redraw the borders of Middle and south East Asia in the name of uniting the ‘Blood Brothers’; i.e. when British left Middle East, very deceitfully they divided Kurd lands into four parts and handed over to Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran. He suggested that Kurds be united and new country be carved. He suggested the same ----in regards to areas of Greater Baluchistan and Afghanistan.
Although in the wake of US Global War on Terror, Pakistan being a front state is passing through some very testing times and is in untenable situation; but by Grace of Allah, peoples of Pakistan are steadfast, strong and united to face such challenges. Mr Ali should not worry much about Pakistan rather he should spend his energies to put his own house…Iran in order.
November 4, 2007 5:44 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 05:44
I shall try to be brief. Pakistan is imploding because of the negative mindset and instilling hatred into heads and hearts - for the “other”. Hatred is bad in all shades. There is a lesson to learn from this. Fascist R.S.S would do to India what the Mullah did to Pakistan. HATE SPEECH must invite capital punishment. Perpetrators of MOB VIOLENCE (Riots / Genocide / Holocaust) must be hanged. A clear message has to be sent. You cant have Law and Hatred together. Babu Bajrangi and Narendra Modi are criminals of Humanity. One cant be selective on this. A society can live without religion, but not without justice.
Hatred / Hate Speech / Mob Violence / Genocide / Holaust AND the concept of Law / Civilised society cannot go hand in hand. The history of R.S.S acts since 1925.. its role in the riots are fully documented and needs to be exposed. For how long can one close his / her eyes to this Factory of Hatred ?
Tks for your time.
Mohan
November 4, 2007 5:41 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 05:41
Mr Robert: Before rattling on please note that a million people scarfised their lives back in '47 to leave hindu dominated areas of India for Pakistan. Even now in this so called secular India, thousands of Muslims, and Sikhs have lost their lives at the hand of hindu mobs.
November 4, 2007 4:15 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 04:15
I certainly didn't expect such an illogical & biased post on Washingtonpost.
November 4, 2007 4:07 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 04:07
By Mr Ettefagh logic most most authoritarian countries should be disbanded because they haven't been able to become democracies. And who should actually redraw these boundaries ??
Giving these remote tribal areas Independence would allow the extremist to overcome some of them. That is asking for more trouble. Pakistan needs to modernize economically and democratize. That is the only solution.
A factual error in the article is that there is no common language. There is more in common between the provinces of Pakistan than the provinces of India. Urdu is the national language of Pakistan. Most Pakistanis speak Urdu in addition to their local language. English is the official language of India.
According to the article Opium is produced in Afganistan and some how it is Pakistan's fault that Opium is transited through it... Bye the way, it is said that a lot of Opium is transited through Iran as well.
November 4, 2007 3:57 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 03:57
I am highly surprised that you would have such a critical viewpoint of Pakistan when in the global scheme of things Pakistan has played a positive role whereas other countries have dropped the ball. Yes, Pakistan suffers from many problems, however do not blame the people of Pakistan for the mistakes of one individual who has, well, we all know what he's done. Pay attention, fortune favors the bold and there will be permanent changes in the land of the pure soon.
November 4, 2007 3:51 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 03:51
I find Mr. Ettefagh's article quite amusing, he appears to have a superficial knowledge of pakistan. 14 insurgencies are going on in india and 160 districts according to its prime minister are out of control. There is serious trouble in my other countries. That does not mean the country should be broken up. It is the Usa which has caused division and destruction in iraq and begangstan and is poised to create trouble o iran. Much of the troubled conditions in pakistan are due to american intervention and coercive tactics. Pakistan intrinsically is a stout country which can look after its self he only the americans do not support a dictatorial regime. Inayatullah
Columnist, Pakistan
November 4, 2007 3:51 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 03:51
Mr Ettefagh needs to do homework before writing such rubbish. First the tribal system in Pakistan only exist in border areas of Afghanistan and Iran, and that accounts to less than 1% of Pakistan's land area. Secondly, Pakistan was never a British "Fantasy" in fact the British did everything possible to prevent its creation, case in point the unresolved issue of Kashmir. More than a million people scarified their lives to achieve the dream of this independent Muslim state.
In fact it is Iran and it’s Mullahs that are the real source of instability in the region. They have actively supported extremist shia groups in Pakistan since the '70s creating instability and hatred. Even now they're openly funding the Taliban and other extremist and nationalist groups in Pakistan and Afghanistan not to mention Iraq!
November 4, 2007 3:50 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 03:50
I am highly surprised that you would have such a critical viewpoint of Pakistan when in the global scheme of things Pakistan has played a positive role whearas other countries have dropped the ball. Yes, Pakistan suffers from many problems, however do not blame the people of Pakistan for the mistakes of one individual who has well, we all know what he's done. Pay attention, fortune favors the bold and there will be permanent changes in the land of the pure soon.
November 4, 2007 3:50 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 03:50
As a Pakistani I am extremely surprised and disappointed that the Washington post actually published such a load of trash.
"Dissolve Pakistan" ?!?!, there are a million problems with my country, as their are with many other countries. Most of the problems have actually been created due to a one-sided alliance with the US, which has used Pakistan for short term gains, leaving our country in the state it is now. but dissolving a country isn't really a solution. Mr. Ettefagh seems have a over simplified view of our history and overly simplified solution.
I little thought before you go on rambling about other peoples HOMELAND would be appreciated. An editor might be a good idea too!
November 4, 2007 3:40 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 03:40
General Musharraf on, 12th October 1999, has usurped power in a coup against the civil government. The aforementioned action was extra-constitutional, which was though not appreciated but reluctantly accepted by people of Pakistan for time being with this hope that Gen. Musharraf would hold free and fair election and reinstate democracy within the time frame of 3 years as given by the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Following his predecessors military rulers, he extended his rule by holding infamous referendum and proclaiming himself as the elected president. In elections 2002, his political stooges and sycophants could not get a simple majority to form a government even after rigging the elections, so he threatened and offered political inducements to the elected parliamentarians of other political parties in order to form the government of his choice. These ugly politics worked well and he eventually succeeded in forming a tamed government. The motive of all these extra-constitutional actions and politically maneuvering were to serve his vested interests and to keep the highest political post of President and military post of chief of the army staff, simultaneously. In 2002, he did not call the first session of the national assemble till the time he was assured that the notorious 17th amendment would be passed by the parliament. In order to achieve his self-serving mission, he played an ugly game not only with political alliance MMA but also with the whole nation by making a false pledge that he would shed his uniform on 31 December, 2004, which he had not fulfilled till today. Once again on the 3rd of November 2007, when he felt that power might go away from him, he has made a second coup and imposed Martial Law without any genuine grounds under the shadow of emergency. To keep the highest political office of president, he once again with the help of army generals derailed the process of democracy, which should not be despised but must be condemned, strongly.
This time, he committed a despicable crime by attacking the supremacy, integrity and independence of judiciary, which they were showing first time in the history of Pakistan. He tried to undermine their independence and integrity by accusing them that they were taking decisions in the favor of terrorist. Like 9th March 2007, once again he openly attacked on the independence of judiciary by changing the Chief Justice and removing senior judges who refused to accept his new Provision Constitutional Order. In his speech, he charged them for interfering in the matters of the executives and encouraging terrorist, which is completely absurd accusation.
The fact is that his poor leadership, ugly political tactics and poor policies have increased number of bomb blasts, enhanced frustration and alienation among people, and weaken integration of the federation - not the judicial decisions. Undoubtedly, he attacked on the judiciary because, in the hindsight, he got scared that the Supreme Court of Pakistan might declare recent presidential elections null and void and not allow him to contest presidential election for the next two years. Hence, he imposed emergency or martial law before the announcement of the decision of the Supreme Court. It is a fact that if the Supreme Court had barred him from contesting presidential election, it would have been accordance with the country’s constitution in which it is clearly stated that public servants during service cannot participate in politics. It is evident from his midnight speech on 4th November, 2004 that he is perturbed on the Supreme Court decisions that have gone or will go against him and his corrupt acolytes, therefore, he has now initiated media trial against the judiciary.
The recent proclamation of Martial Law and suspension of 1973 constitution shows that he is power hungry and can go up to any extent to keep it. He does not have any respect for any institution that takes a stand against his rule. Musharraf is a self proclaimed hero who has never won any war - neither as a solider nor as a president. As a solider he miserably failed in Kargil and as a political leader he failed in integrating the nation.
For the sake of country existence, provincial integration, democracy, independence of the judiciary and other institutions, we must strongly demand that Gen. Musharraf must step down as President and Chief of the Army Staff forthwith and immediately announce interim government that holds free and fair elections within three months.
Please sign this petition to support that we all want genuine (not controlled) democracy in Pakistan and disallow any army role in the national politics.
Sign petition here
http://www.petitiononline.com/demo07/petition.html
November 4, 2007 3:28 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 03:28
After reading Mr.Ettefagh's post, it seems he is way off the mark and his senses. as a pakistani who has lived and prospered in this country all my life of 60 years. I can say that maybe we had our share of misfortunes but certainly there is no dearth of national spirit in the masses. it is the military that has played the part of the mercenary of the US and destroyed this proud nation of 160 million souls.
About Iran,the less said the better. remember when Zahedi was leading the coup to reinstall a puppet monarch at the instigation of a world power. Read CIA.Iranian morale and its currency was penny a million.
November 4, 2007 3:08 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 03:08
General Musharraf on, 12th October 1999, has usurped power in a coup against the civil government. The aforementioned action was extra-constitutional, which was though not appreciated but reluctantly accepted by people of Pakistan for time being with this hope that Gen. Musharraf would hold free and fair election and reinstate democracy within the time frame of 3 years as given by the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Following his predecessors military rulers, he extended his rule by holding infamous referendum and proclaiming himself as the elected president. In elections 2002, his political stooges and sycophants could not get a simple majority to form a government even after rigging the elections, so he threatened and offered political inducements to the elected parliamentarians of other political parties in order to form the government of his choice. These ugly politics worked well and he eventually succeeded in forming a tamed government. The motive of all these extra-constitutional actions and politically maneuvering were to serve his vested interests and to keep the highest political post of President and military post of chief of the army staff, simultaneously. In 2002, he did not call the first session of the national assemble till the time he was assured that the notorious 17th amendment would be passed by the parliament. In order to achieve his self-serving mission, he played an ugly game not only with political alliance MMA but also with the whole nation by making a false pledge that he would shed his uniform on 31 December, 2004, which he had not fulfilled till today. Once again on the 3rd of November 2007, when he felt that power might go away from him, he has made a second coup and imposed Martial Law without any genuine grounds under the shadow of emergency. To keep the highest political office of president, he once again with the help of army generals derailed the process of democracy, which should not be despised but must be condemned, strongly.
This time, he committed a despicable crime by attacking the supremacy, integrity and independence of judiciary, which they were showing first time in the history of Pakistan. He tried to undermine their independence and integrity by accusing them that they were taking decisions in the favor of terrorist. Like 9th March 2007, once again he openly attacked on the independence of judiciary by changing the Chief Justice and removing senior judges who refused to accept his new Provision Constitutional Order. In his speech, he charged them for interfering in the matters of the executives and encouraging terrorist, which is completely absurd accusation.
The fact is that his poor leadership, ugly political tactics and poor policies have increased number of bomb blasts, enhanced frustration and alienation among people, and weaken integration of the federation - not the judicial decisions. Undoubtedly, he attacked on the judiciary because, in the hindsight, he got scared that the Supreme Court of Pakistan might declare recent presidential elections null and void and not allow him to contest presidential election for the next two years. Hence, he imposed emergency or martial law before the announcement of the decision of the Supreme Court. It is a fact that if the Supreme Court had barred him from contesting presidential election, it would have been accordance with the country’s constitution in which it is clearly stated that public servants during service cannot participate in politics. It is evident from his midnight speech on 4th November, 2004 that he is perturbed on the Supreme Court decisions that have gone or will go against him and his corrupt acolytes, therefore, he has now initiated media trial against the judiciary.
The recent proclamation of Martial Law and suspension of 1973 constitution shows that he is power hungry and can go up to any extent to keep it. He does not have any respect for any institution that takes a stand against his rule. Musharraf is a self proclaimed hero who has never won any war - neither as a solider nor as a president. As a solider he miserably failed in Kargil and as a political leader he failed in integrating the nation.
For the sake of country existence, provincial integration, democracy, independence of the judiciary and other institutions, we must strongly demand that Gen. Musharraf must step down as President and Chief of the Army Staff forthwith and immediately announce interim government that holds free and fair elections within three months.
Please sign this petition to support that we all want genuine (not controlled) democracy in Pakistan and disallow any army role in the national politics.
Sign a Petition here
http://www.petitiononline.com/demo07/petition.html
November 4, 2007 3:07 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 03:07
I notice that a lot of responses go for the
classic ad hominem attack instead of debating
the actual points brought out by Mr Ettefagh.
Could the fact that he is Iranian have something to do with it?
November 4, 2007 2:43 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 02:43
Being a Pakistani, myself sick of our idiotic and selfish generals and politicians, I would like to see and read comments from other Iranis. We, Pakistanis, feel something grow bigger in our throats when we hear someone from the west calling Iran a threat to world's peace. I invite other Irani's to express their views on the comments (article of Mr. Ettefagh). I know Mr. Ettefagh's hatred for Pakistan is due to its Sunni Muslim majority; but rest assured Pakistani Shias are as patriotic as their sunni brothers.
November 4, 2007 2:34 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 02:34
What a load of crap!!! This person either does not know a dime about Pakistan or is doing some other's bidding by ignoring all positives about Pakistan. He is conveniently forgetting about the 16o million people living in Pakistan and their will (which is not at all represented by what he has mentioned in his absurd article). I can understand that he wants to divert the attention from the overall perspective of Iran and its foiled attempts to become a nuclear nation and he wants to depict Pakistan as some entity like Afghanistan or Iraq but I am a citizen of Pakistan since birth and have never experienced one thing mentioned in this article. The remaining four provinces do not act as tribes and there is a common language that we Pakistani speak and it is known as URDU!!! (if Mr Ali Ettefagh doesnt already know). He should better talk about Iranians and their sponsorship of world wide terrorism. Yes Afghanistan is the biggest producer of opium so he should talk about US and its false war on terror which has increased the production by hundred folds. Why talk about the transit way (if there is one) and not talk about the basic problem of production. No production, no transit way. In the end I would like to suggest Mr Ali should come to Pakistan and look at the ground realities on his own rather than making claims from faraway places. The most preposterous thing to say is to divide the country into tribes as if Pakistan is a piece of pie on a kitchen shelf. Pakistan is a country with a thriving economy and wealth and not a US colony or an American spy state like Iran. It would be run by the will of Pakistani people!!!!
November 4, 2007 2:32 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 02:32
I think the author has failed to grasp the true meaning behind the identity and creation of Pakistan. I think this article is a futile attempt to view world events with a lens of the past and not the future. While 60 years might not appear as a long period in terms of the global history, a true examination of Pakistan would show how far this nation has come in the last 60 years. To run an economy of 160 million people with the amount of resources that Pakistan has is nothing short of a testament to the ability of the people to strive and thrive in today's world and a willingness to live together and cherish one another's cultures.
November 4, 2007 2:28 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 02:28
I have been long frustrated by the political instability of my neighbor.
I know there is great diversity across their provinces, India has greater diversity. I do not believe cultural diversity or different languages can be attributed to political failure.
Nothing will help till basic civil liberties in Pakistan aren’t restored. If it takes a democracy to achieve it, so be it. In the current state, breaking down geographic boundaries will only add to the mayhem.
November 4, 2007 1:55 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 01:55
Ali; I am guessing you are not iranian but you are persian!! Your father is a persian but your mother is swedish. Ali you are from persia; which is next to denmark. Ali unfortunately iran will be in pieces before pakistan everwill. Iran and araps have the same curse!! the oil, and the west wants to get them for free. Ali is not an indian agent he is a poor personality and lost soul.
November 4, 2007 1:55 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 01:55
Makes a lot of sense.
There was a good article titled "Blood Borders" in the June 2006 issue of the Armed Forces Journal, which proposed a similar solution to Pakistan and other such frankenstates of the region. It sent many Pakistanis into panic. Here's a version: http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899
November 4, 2007 1:54 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 01:54
Pakistan and its states have been in existence for 60 years.
The fact is Pakistan exists.
One must reconcile with this fact and move forward giving way to the youthful leaders of tomorrow whose faculties are not fettered with feelings ill and old.
We must be wise neither to entertain, propagate nor to pursue such nineteen century notions of divide and conquer in a century where countries shed their nationalism to form communities for economic and social prosperity
November 4, 2007 1:51 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 01:51
Seger:
In your post you state that "... a massive joint strike by the US and India (and possibly Israel) is in order to take out the N-weapons which Pakistan holds."
This is crazy and dangerous talk. Implications of any such foolishness are immense.
November 4, 2007 1:51 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 01:51
There is wisdom in your words. But, the older I get the less I believe in the goodness of man and change. Too many large players have their fingers in too many pies.
November 4, 2007 1:50 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 01:50
i am wondering if mr ettefagh made a grave typographical error. I think instead of the word 'Pakistan' he meant and should've had 'Iran' throughout his article !!
November 4, 2007 1:45 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 01:45
Pakistan's Biggest folly is that we never made a system for Governance except ''Rhetorics''No one followed any rule other then Loot & Plunder, Rule & Perpetuate it,From Facts to Fiction the likes of Religious Zealots. We never gave to the Nation what was enshrined to us by the Founders that though Islam shall be our Religion But our Governance shall be Secular.
The Agencies were deputed to play foul on one another and they do till the day,Judges became a commodity where Justice was never dispenced, Army became Rulers under the garb of saviours and our Politicians grabbed moni like wild dogs.
I still belive Pakistan will Survive But that responsibility lies on our Politicians to all sit in one Boat and sail the people to safety thru acceptance of Provincial Autonomy, Follow the Rules of Fair Play within thier Parties and when in Govt or in Shadow.I am sure they will have to adopt these rules of the Game to bring Respectability,Sustainability,System.Thank you.
November 4, 2007 1:38 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 01:38
Who are you to suggest your dirty idea of dissolving Pakistan?
Why not dissolve IRAN ? Iran has seen more militancy then Pakistan, The fall of Shah Iran, in whose time IRAN was prospering and then the so called Islamic revolution - by Ayat Ullah Khumeni Hindi.
Pakistan, has never posed a threat to any country, India walked into our borders and got kicked out in 1965, we surrendered in 1971 (East Pakistan) Just when were about to Capture Kargil, America Intervened and yet another time we pulled our troops back.
Iran is a threat to the world then, as Iran's president clearly said 'that he wants to wipe off ISRAEL from the map' I am not a supporter of ISRAEL but you are trying to give a suggestion or had no other thing to write , thus you came up with this idea of dissolving Pakistan !!!!!
We don't grow opium, Afghani's does, Pakistan fought for the Afghans in Soviet war and they were smuggling in our country, you call urself a muslim state ? and yet suggesting to dissolve Pakistan.
The organisation you work for (United Nations) is as useless and baseless as Your article !
What have the UNO Done in Africa ? Jonathon Dimblebee of Britain did a documentary in 2004 and he said he can't believe that the sanitary system was totally unacceptable as it was flowing where the poor african people were sleeping. Where do all that money goes ? UNO is good for nothing, I think UNO should be re-structured.
One More thing, Britishers are best colonizers not Americans.
Mutahir
November 4, 2007 1:18 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 01:18
Who gave permission to this joker Ali Ettefagh to write this rubbish? I find it too amusing to even give a slightest response to this piece of nonsense.
But would not hesitate to say that Iran has to be divided into at least six independent states and of course Iranian Balouchistan should be part of Pakistan.
November 4, 2007 1:04 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 01:04
Where to start? First Pakistan should never have been created. However, here it is. The best thing that can happen is for the West, i.e the US, to stay the out. Sixty years of meddling from the cold war to the war on terror have only made a bad situation worse. Can the Pakistanis get their act together. Of course they can, but many of the players with their fingers in Pakistan need to get their act together first. I guess that means no foreseeable change in the near future.
November 4, 2007 12:56 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 00:56
Dr. Ali your views are uglier than the politics in your native Iran. I think You do not have to worry about Pakistan, it will exist just fine, however that country of your called Iran is actually the most dangerous country of the world.
Iran is a leader in global terrorism, its leadership is corrupt beyond belief, religious mullah's in Iran are the most reppresive in muslim world. After Shah woman were raped and killed on the name of Islam, many of you took refuge in Paksitan. In Education to trade you have benifit from Pak. have no doubt Pak has pressure to use its land to attack your nation, none of your niegbors like Iran.
Iranians in US are disliked and just to let you know every Iranian in USA is in debt of Pakistan every time you want to go to motherland you got Embassy of Pakistan's so called Special interest section of Iran to get visa. I am going to be honest to you, after reeading your comments I think Pak should not help your terrorist country and help the world to get rid of menace. Turkey can take Tabriz and Azerbaijan belongs to Azerbaijan.
November 4, 2007 12:52 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 00:52
Mr. Ettefagh's Logical Ettoufage,
The problem with rhetorical questions is that they tend to hoist one with one's own petard, as it were. Why not dissolve Pakistan, indeed? And why stop there? How about India? Good Lord, what a hodgepodge! And Iran - didn't I see some kind of thinktank groupthink exercise on "the many Irans"? And weren't the British involved there too? Let there be many Irans!
Before we start on universal dissolution, treating countries as some kind of monstrous sugar cubes that we can somehow dunk in an universal solvent, we ought to ask, that is, if we have any vestige of intellectual responsibility in our inner stuffings, where does this process stop? And how about the US? Shouldn't that country also be dissolved? But wait, wasn't that tried before?
Best regards,
Dave Pernas
Los Angeles, California
November 4, 2007 12:50 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 00:50
THIS IS THE HIGHT OF IRONY. AN IRANIAN TALKING ABOUT A FAILED STATE AND DEMOCRACY. MAY BE HE SHOULD BE LECTURING HIS PEOPLE. WITH MILLIONS OF BARRELS OF OIL, ALL THEY HAVE ACHIEVED IS A 45% UNEMPLOYMENT RATE AND A RULE OF MULLAHS.
November 4, 2007 12:48 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 00:48
This is a disgusting article written by an Israeli/Indian agent. Pakistan was achieved through hugh sacrifices by the Muslims of South Asia. Enemies of Islam want to dissolve it. They will not suceed.
November 4, 2007 12:43 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 00:43
To Robert,
I am sure you are probably one of those young inexperienced "kids" who has not had an opportunity to become worldly, seasoned or experienced. You have probably never met someone from another country or had professional discussions with anyone outside of your "little world". You strike me as someone with a very shallow ego who feels the need to strike out at others by calling them "idiots". Before you type any other comments attacking the persons who are commenting on the articles take a deep breath and grow up before you embarrass yourself further.
To those of you that have provided these thought provoking comments I thank you.
May God and Allah bless the Pakistani people in this time of uncertainity.
November 4, 2007 12:37 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 00:37
Excellent piece! Finally, a common sense discussion of these sham nation-states. While we are at it, how about a free Kurdistand that includes part of Turkey?
November 4, 2007 12:27 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 00:27
Hey Ali,
Pakistan is not a failed state, you should have a courage to blame and criticize selfish british system whose shortsightedness gave birth to premature country. Pakistan should learn that religion should not be mixed with politics and people of Pakistan should realize that Indian are their biggest wellwishers.
November 4, 2007 12:22 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 00:22
Ali Ettefagh doesn't seem to know the facts! He even does not know the right names of Pakistan provinces! If Pakistan needs to be 'dissolved' into 4 pieces then I think terroist Iran need to go 1st. Mr. Ettefah idea will further destablize the world and innoncent blood will shed.
November 3, 2007 11:49 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 23:49
This is one of the very few times I have seen a Muslim (the author of this article) make sense.
But are not you afraid of Paki Muslims declaring a death fatwa against you like they did against the Somalian (Hirsi) author (PBUH)?
November 3, 2007 11:43 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 23:43
Who gave this idiot a Ph.D. That university should ask him to return the diploma. Or if he has any commonsense, he should return all his diplomas and write on his forehead "you are looking at a complete insane person."
November 3, 2007 11:38 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 23:38
If Pakistan is split then i do not think that it will bode will for Iran as per your state Balochistan will be a country and we all know very well that Balochistan-o-Sistan province in Iran would very much like to join this new state. And based on your analysis that would make perfect sense because they have more in common with Balochis in Balochistan than people living in Tehran.
This is the single most stupid article that I have ever read.
November 3, 2007 11:31 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 23:31
Yo dude Robert or Laloo Indophile,
a) One of the three wise men was from Kashmir and not Persia. You r knowledge of Christians is suspect.
b) If you are going to quote Churchill to prove your ridiculous point about Eastern Bloc in 1947 then you must concede he also had prescient powers towards a robust prowestern democratic Pakistan. ... Only Mr Churchill asks you to hold your longotee(Sarang) until his full prophecy about Pakistan comes true.
It may take sometime for you to understand it.
c) Pakistan has 165 million muslim, India may have 150 or more. What does that prove El Roberto?
On the other hand I was talking about the truism of lives of my family members and real people I know who have benefitted from Pakistan and enjoyed the fruits of freedom and education and availed opportunities to better our lives because we live in Pakistan and NOT India. I have compared myself with others like me from Delhi and find myself in a much better position. So this BOB! is no falsity. And the "events" I quote are the massacres of Muslims in Bombay, Mumbai, Baroda and Mosques being razed elswhere which to us real people in Pakistan are an affirmation of our choice to be in Pakistan rather than India. If given the choice we non-Sunni non-Punjabis would pick Pakistan over India every time.
I do not expect you to understand. I mean who are you to tell us what we should choose? And I will propagate this as much as I desire.
In the present circumstances, Pakistan needs a new charter, constitution. If Musharraf is able to do this then Churchill will be proven right again vis-a-vis "half-naked faqir".
November 3, 2007 11:10 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 23:10
It is obvious the man made creation of country, state and nation state is still not understood by many who do not know that they do not know.
Start from the source - the evolution of humans.
Families into communities and communities forming countries.
It is too bad not too many many people in the Middle East read Darwin, Marx and Adam Smith.
The human named Dr. Ali is obviously a member of the Planetary Federation from Earth. Naturally the members of the Klingon spiecies will see the reality differently.
He is dead on in his perspective.
November 3, 2007 11:02 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 23:02
After reading a few of the responses given here about the article above I have to admit that there are a lot of interesting people out there. First of all the political and economic world is changing. A change on the balance of economic power is happening but that was inevitable, regardless of USA foreing policy, the world must continue its course. I firmly believe that economics in the end dictate the political outcomes, I prefer not to give any examples because there are always exceptions to the rules and people will be quick to point them out. However, the USA was extremely successful in using the IMF and the World Bank to promote its political ideals, either right or wrong, the end result was exporting economic and political models to other countries, and those countries greedily took the monetary reward that came with the American idealism and attempted to implement ideas that had not root within them. The end of the European imperalism gave birth to the US and the USSR, then the cold war left the USA as the only superpower. Now is time for a cycle to start again, now the USA will decline slowly because it is convinient to the rest of the world that it happens slowly. As the US loses political clout in the world other countries will step up to fill the gap. There are too many factors to predict how and when the chinese will begin to involve militarily on the international arena, but they will have to gain more military muscle to be able to do that. In my opinion all countries will rather use soft-power, however, you need to have a bigger military power in case that soft-power fails. From here on the world will be more divided economically and politically speaking, and I don't see any major changes from the current trends of politics and economics.
November 3, 2007 10:24 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 22:24
The border between Afghanistan and British India assumed by Pakistan is a questionable hold over from another British machination, the Durand Line. Afghanistan has failed to recognize the Durand Line's continued international border status.
I note that Pashtunistan fails to have been a conceptual unit. Like the Kurds, the Pashtuns continue to take themselves seriously in spite of the continued efforts by "greater" powers to dismiss their nation state self concept.
The UN Charter prohibits the changing of national borders through aggression.
It is not clear whether the author has the Checzoslovakian or Balkan or Biden model for Iraq in mind and what process acceptable for the rest of time to implement it does the author have in mind...or is he just ventilating out of justifiable frustration.
November 3, 2007 10:11 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 22:11
Wonderful bias-free analysis & perspective from the country´s beginnings to current day. Would love to know if Dr. Ettefagh has written any books on this topic, and if so, what are the titles. Thank you.
November 3, 2007 10:03 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 22:03
Ali Ettefagh
It seems to me that you are working for Israely lobby.
November 3, 2007 10:01 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 22:01
It is now 1-30 am now- where I live and I came to know that Mush had declared Emergency. He doesn't want relinquish his power?
In this turmoil situation, where are my Baluch- Brethren? Why you are so silent? The time has come for you to take action against Mush who is now in quite vulnerable and weak. Your fighting for your freedom- I do respect. Your attempted strive for emancipation always be remembered. God bless good hearted Baluchis, and I pray to our almighty for their success. Again freedom is the essence of Life.
November 3, 2007 9:52 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 21:52
I was keen to read what Pakistanis had to say was the way forward. Unfortunately the forum has now been hijacked by the "shoot the messenger" crowd. I too don't agree with most of what Dr. Ali has to say. That said, Pakistan is definitely a failed state, with large parts out of the control of the central governments, particularly the NWFP area.
The solution is to inject a lot of money into the education system from primary education onwards and hope in 20 years a civil society with respect for the rule of law will be established. As things stand now, Pakistan has nothing other than a few nuclear bombs to its credit and is introducing instability to all the neighbouring countries. The generals have learnt how to squeeze the western governments for money and the generals in turn need to keep the fundamentalist bogey alive and time to time hand over a few to the west to keep the checks coming. The Pakistani politicians too have not served Pakistan well and have only drained the national coffers.
Hopefully the next democratic government will pull the plug and stop tax payer funds from being squandared. Let the Pakistanis sort out their own problems. We should not be judging them nor interfering in their internal affairs.
Iran is shite majority and Pakistan is a sunni majority and the twain shall never meet.
November 3, 2007 9:50 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 21:50
Ali Ettefagh
It seems to me that you are agent of Israily Lobby.
November 3, 2007 9:46 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 21:46
Pakistan has Tribal issue, like many other countries in the world. I don't think it is as serious as Dr. Ettefagh described. I think he is very much off the mark. I belief Pakistan suffering from little bit of ego, and duel personality. It has yet to define, itself as a Islamic country or a democratic one. People of Pakistan thinks themselves as a defender of Islam, but cannot define Pakistan as a truly Islamic state. Because a country based on Islamic law just does not work. On the other hand, Pakistan cannot define herself as a true democratic state, because of the lack of courage. Before 1971, it could not operate as a democratic state, because they were not willing to share power with Bangladeshis. This is because Pakistanies think Bangladeshis are not as good of a Muslim( at least that's what people in Pakistan think), of course generally speaking.
What Pakistan need to do, be either a Islamic state or a democratic one. If it adopts Islamic law, then be courageous enough to talk about the pros and cons of the Islamic laws, and should have willingness to modify or change it, if needed. The country just should not follow the sharia law blindly. If the country does not have the courage to analyze and change sharia law, then it should go for democratic system in full force.
November 3, 2007 9:05 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 21:05
Writer seems to live in a fantasy world and does not even have facts correct. Fist of all there has never been a UN peace keeping force in kashmir and Pakistan always had a coherent policy on kashmir it has always demanded the implementation of un resolution demanding write of self determination of kashmiris.
Pakistan has some troubles with regards to its regional harmony than which country don't have these problem, if we take example of india, it is also marred by troubles in its different provinces based on cast, cultural and even religious grounds so based this writers suggestions india should also be redemarcated. The fact of matter is Pakistan is surrounded by unstable and hostile neighbours like india, iran and Afghanistan and there problems spillover in Pakistan too and we do have problems and have done mistakes but are trying to improve. As for opium trade, writer has perhaps forgotten that Afghanistan has borders with iran and other central asian states too and majority of opium finds its way there.
November 3, 2007 8:57 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 20:57
Sir, not to worry. Soon, the extremists will soon have their hands on Pakistan's nuclear missiles. They, of course, will launch missiles on India and Israel, and thereafter they will be destroyed by the response. Situation solved. This situation will be repeated in all muslim countries that have their dirty little hands on nuclear missiles.
November 3, 2007 8:49 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 20:49
so how come India is a working democracy? it is also a synthetic product of colonialism, without a common religion, language or ethnicity. surely there is more to Pakistan's collapse than British fantasy.
November 3, 2007 8:48 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 20:48
What a complete nonsense article. First of all URDU is the common language and is spoken by all the Pakistanis. Official language is English not because of the lack of common language but lack of true leadership which in turns comes from the US interference's in the political system of the country backing dictators which are imposed by themselves. If west supports free and fare elections things might change for good.
November 3, 2007 8:42 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 20:42
Mr Ali Ettefagh,
I don't want to be rude and unligical as you expressed in you socalled thesis...I request you to please study the history carefully don't forget your own history.TM
November 3, 2007 8:38 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 20:38
Ali Ettefagh is abs right in pointing out that an anarchist state such as Pakistan should be dissolved. The so called rulers of Pakistan are nothing but selfish zealots, desperate in clinging to their chairs, and milching the rich states just to promote their self interests.
November 3, 2007 8:27 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 20:27
Well-coming from an economic view point your view makes some sense, Your recipe is another example of changing countries to fit some idealized image of the world-ie-Iraq.
November 3, 2007 7:59 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 19:59
To Hans B, I could not agree with you more, all the way until your last 2 sentences.
What Mr. Ettefagh is saying is provocative, but he himself knows that it isn't possible, as it would create another mess brought on by outsiders.
November 3, 2007 7:44 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 19:44
No no no. India does not need Pakistan. Not its chaos. Not its poverty. Not its fundamentalists. Not its terrorists. Not its authoritarian politicians. Not its thoroughly corrupt Army.
Whatever positive Pakistan can contribute to India is always available to it from its 150M muslims.
November 3, 2007 7:13 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 19:13
I have a nasty feeling that Dr Ettefagh is reading these comments and laughing at all the people who took the bait without realizing that he's actually making fun of Senator Biden's plan to partition Iraq. But I'll react nonetheless, just in case it's a serious proposition.
You don't cure a trauma by creating a new one. I think that separating Pakistan from India was folly and that the wars between the two divorcees had more to do with unhealed wounds (especially on the Pakistani side) than with the perpetual excuse, Kashmir. And now you want to go further and separate Punjab from Sind, NWFP from Baluchistan?
If Pakistan's split-off from India taught us anything, it's that breaking up countries does not bring peace. Quite on the contrary, it brings war and a perpetuation of the tensions it was meant to solve.
And if Europe's recent history has taught us something, it is that centrifugal forces within a country are appeased when that country merges into a larger entity.
Maybe Pakistan will find peace when the Indian subcontinent is reunited, if not in a single nation then in an EU-style community. Just as Iraq would undoubtedly benefit from a similar mechanism within the Arab world.
November 3, 2007 7:10 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 19:10
That is true. Pakistan should be desolved. NWFP should join back with Afghanistan as it was before part of Afghanistan. And the rest of it should belong to India.
November 3, 2007 6:59 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 18:59
Yonkers, New York
03 November 2007
Ali Ettefagh's proposal to remake practically the whole of the Middle East in order to correct the mistakes of the British who were largely responsible for the present composition of the Middle East comes rather late in the day.
In the abstract his proposal may appear to be logical and rational. But logic and rationality cannot undo the serious mistakes committed by an imperial power rather hurriedly in the dying days of its imperium.
Those mistakes have jelled or hardened in what we now know as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Jordan, Palestine, Bangladesh and a few other nations. There is no practical or possible way to "unjel" those mistakes along more realistic and viable lines.
This part of the world, now in virtually a state of tension in parts, in crisis in others and in anarchy and chaos in still other parts, will have to continue to submit to a geopolitical dynamic of conflict and adjustment as their final arbiter.
MarPatalinjug
MarPatalinjug@aol.com
November 3, 2007 6:47 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 18:47
washingtonpost
I have participated year after year or months after months in your Talk Center many years ago on Caliphate and it became true as you went back to 1914 when west first invaded Iraq and Middle East and killed in thousands.
So I append same solution which is only Caliphate and Caliphate. Don't pay any one for further division of Muslim land or Asian and African land and be satisfied with other stolen 4 Continents besides Europe by Europeans or Anglo Saxons.
If India can remain as one country with one billion people and around 20 major languages without any martial law since it’s independence in 1947 Pakistan could survive and can survive if it’s Rulers accepted Islam in heart and implemented Islam in all sphere of life.
During 800 years of Muslim rule when Afghanistan, Pakistan present day India, Bangladesh including part of Burma and Central Muslim countries was one country.
Problem started after Muslims left Islam and followed anti-Muslim system of ruling and law in their own land and it started under Chairmanship of Britain when few Muslims wanted money, power and fame.
Muslims have no courage to write the truth as their writing will not be published or accepted by media and they write for only personal gain and not for the sake of Allah/God or Islam and that are the only problem.
Iran and Pakistan was part of Caliphate for around 6 hundred years as one country when there was no problem and Muslims were only one big power in whole World for around 1200 years and not for only 200 years like present Western power, military power.
Muslims started suffering after they left Caliphate and real Islam.
Please read wrings of a great Judge; a judge in the Calcutta High Court, he became the first Indian to sit as a Law Lord of the Privy Council, In 1910. His ancestors came from Iran to India during time Nadir Shah and he is a Syed.
More is in:
http://www.universal-publishers.com/book.php?method=ISBN&book=1581128770
Or Google for The Election of Caliph/Khalifah and World Peace
Again Muslims left Islam and few of them even dare to write more division like divide Iraq and divide Pakistan and so on to be able to act as writers and to earn a little money in this temporary world.
November 3, 2007 6:33 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 18:33
Agree. Rid this world of an evil nation. Besides 9/11 it has given us just bloodshed all over the world.
November 3, 2007 6:29 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 18:29
Pakistan was not set up as counterweight to India.
It was set up as an attempt to separate the warring Hindus and Muslims -- and the predictable and impending clash that would occur when the British withdrew from South Asia.
Nor was Pakistan set up as a counterweight to India's tendency to tilt towards the Eastern Bloc.
At the time Pakistan was established (simultaneously with independence for India), India had not had the time or opportunity to tilt in any direction.
Ali Ettefagh is clearly ignorant about both India and Pakistan.
November 3, 2007 6:26 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 18:26
I would agree(Ettefaq ) with Mr Ettefaq had he also visited the idea of Pakistan in some detail.
It seems he was in a bit of hurry to lecture at an investment forum where his interest lies deep.
More so later---
November 3, 2007 6:24 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 18:24
I would agree(Ittefaq ) with Mr Ittefaq had he also visited the idea of Pakistan in some detail.
It seems he was in a bit of hurry to lecture at an investment forum where his interest lies deep.
More so later
November 3, 2007 6:22 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 18:22
You mean my college paper about Jinnah in 1958 (when everyone else wrote about Gandhi) was chopped liver? Well ... at least were the country to be divided along the old provincial lines (how old ... would Bahawalpur qualify?), the linguistic tinkering that India has done to Bihar and Assam might be avoided ... for a while!
Brother ... what an example to India, China and Russia! On the other hand...!
November 3, 2007 6:08 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 18:08
WHAT KIND OF BEING ARE YOU BECAUSE OF COURSE IS NOT HUMAN. SNAKE HAVE LESS VENOM THAN YOU
November 3, 2007 6:05 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 18:05
Sir,
Get your facts before u declare yourself an expert on Pakistan.
Do u know what the urban/rural split is in pakistan and which way the trend is?
Do u know that tribal areas comprise only a minisicule part of the total territory of Pakistan.
Most importantly for all the problems Pakistan may be facing all the provinces believe in the sanctity of Pakistan and u will be surprised to know all the ethnicities u are so concerned about are not little islands amongst each other but people who are friends, relatives and proud compatriots.
And for the people in the forum that are sounding virtues of India, this same idiotic argument can apply more succinctly to it.
For the record with all the missteps Pakistan's per capita income/purchasing power parity/social development indicators are all higher than India's which had a head start at partition economically and unfair distribution of assets by the British (again facts not self serving analysis).
I would also request WP to give space in its valued publication to analysts who actually know what they are talking about and not armchair analysts like Ali with half baked analysis and self serving interests.
November 3, 2007 6:04 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 18:04
I think a massive joint strike by the US and India (and possibly Israel) is in order to take out the N-weapons which Pakistan holds.
If these fall in the hands of the bearded crazies god help us all!
November 3, 2007 5:51 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 17:51
KEVIN4567,
RE: YOUR POST AT 5:33 P.M.
You probably are right -- i don't have the evidence, but on the face of it you could well be 100% right.
HOWEVER, the evidence we have on George Bush, Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld etc. is far, far more damning than anything we have on Musharraf.
So, if you don't understand what you say you don't understand, what I, PERSONALLy don't understand is why YOU, PERSONALLY have not yet planted a bomb up those of the George Bush, Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld etc.
Please be honest for once and give me a reply that readers might feel comfortable about and that might elicit their respect for you.
November 3, 2007 5:45 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 17:45
-MUCH WHAT THE WRITERS SAYS ABOUT PAKISTAN MILITARY RULERS IS TRUE-BUT WEST HAS TO CHANGE ITS PERSECTIVE FROM SHORT TERM POLITICAL EXPEDIENCY AND MISGUIDED PRECOLONIAL MINDSETS TO MORE MODERN ACCOUNTABLE OVERT POLITICAL THINKING AND SUPPORT FOR WORLDS EMERGING BUT STRUGGLING SECULAR DEMOCRACIES. BUT THEN WHO IS TO COUNSEL THE WESTERN LEADERS MIRED IN THEIR OWN PERSONAL POWER GAMES AND SELF INTERESTS AND MUCK RAKING AGAINST EACH OTHER. THE STARK EXAMPLE OF RELIGION BASED POLITICAL DEVASTATION AND STRIFE IS UK N IRELAND WHERE MINDS BLINDED BY RELIGIOUS HATREDS STILL DESTROYS LIFE IN N IRELAND YET FUNNILY N IRELAND HAS WORST RECORD OF RACIAL COLOUR RELIGIOUS DEMOGOGUE!!
November 3, 2007 5:45 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 17:45
It is USA which needs be dissolved and not Pakistan. Actually it is USA which is leading this havoc in the world at the moment, so after dissolving USA Pakistan may not need dissolution, who knows.
When USA is your friend, you don't need an enemy.
November 3, 2007 5:41 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 17:41
That's "bloc" not "block".
November 3, 2007 5:39 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 17:39
It seems to have has become trendy to not only imagine but advocate as well the partition of any country, be it Palestine, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkey, etc.
Is this a new epidemic?
Or is it rather, more simply, the same person (an unemployed "diplomat"?) projecting repeatedly his/her obsessions around indiscriminately, only under different names?
November 3, 2007 5:38 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 17:38
While you make a compelling case, it's not practical and will lead to more bloodshed. It may be that they follow a medieval religion or their most enlightened moderates are those that shave and feel non-muslims shouldn't be killed but just given second-class status until they covert - but given how India is surviving as a secular (if barely) entity even with a subsection of their own polity wanting it to become a Hindu version of Pakistan, maybe there will evolve a movement in Pakitsan that, with Gillette's help will eventually modernise Pakistan and civilize it
November 3, 2007 5:37 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 17:37
While I can understand the anger this post has generated among Pakistanis, what I don't understand is the support expressed for Gen. Musharraf. He is a first rate thug and should be ostracized by the international community.
November 3, 2007 5:33 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 17:33
Robert:
From your comments to me and a few of these blog writers, you seem to be a highly opinionated loud mouth who does not know what he is talking about. As they say it: a fool who remains quite can pretend to be wise. I recommend it to you particularly when your knowledge about the topic is suspect. Your accusation about me is not only wrong but also frivolous. My stand against Ali Ettefagh and his ilks stand.
November 3, 2007 5:32 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 17:32
i do agree with your last paragragh that pakistan is a relic and a failed one at that.even its economy is due to the handouts from usa and saudi treasury.in the last 60 years the sum of its contribution to its people and to the world at large is religious radicalism and spread of jihadist terrorism globally,not to talk of nuclear clandestine proliferation again with a religious slant.however the total blame for the unfortunate failed state status of pakistan has to be borne by only two nations UK and USA.we all are aware of the old adage "WE REAP WHAT WE SOW".if drastic and urgent measures are not taken thru UN the unraveling of this rapidly deteriorating condition will prophetically end up as "THE CLASH OF CIVILISATION".
November 3, 2007 5:16 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 17:16
It is a teerible and poorly thoughtout analysis.
The same kind of thinking is now being cinsidered in usa, where it is being recommended that Iran Should be bombed to stone age.
May be the author will agree with that too.
November 3, 2007 5:02 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 17:02
Who gets the nukes that Pakistan has developed?
November 3, 2007 4:55 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 16:55
Re: India which cannot provide food to its teeming poor has to maintain a large army just ot keep the Pak trained and funded terrorists out
unquote
But those same teeming and poor millions can spend billions of rupees every year on filthy hindi movies, biris/cigarettes, drugs, alcohol, cricket, you name it.
You have one rain storm in Bombay and the city is in ruins.
Is Pakistan to blame for that too?
Nice!
November 3, 2007 4:35 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 16:35
Re: The world is going back to fix mistakes: the Armenian genocide, the Holocaust, the crimes of Stalin against its people, Pol Pot and Cambodia, Idi Amin and Uganda.
unquote:
You either out of ignorance or deliberately have left out:
The millions of Asians killed by the Japanese during WWII, the 10 million Vietnamese killed during the Indo-China War, the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians killed by Jordan and Israel, and the millions of Bangladeshis killed by Kissenger's friends Yahya Khan and company in 1971.
November 3, 2007 4:27 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 16:27
Eh Lah.. Key Hoa hun ( Well See.. What happened,now!) Darn it don't blame this one also on that poor visionary Dr. Etterlagh!
Hey Paki Brotherens here he comes & brings,now---
Musharaf & his beloved EMERGENCY-- and suspension of any RIGHT if ever there was any for Paki Citiizens & whatever constitution and Justice was there! Please, please!PAKI BROTHERS, please GROW UP--if not now then when?
TELL US WHAT IN THE HECK YOU ALL PAKI SUPPORTERS --who have been throwing sharp barbs & stones on the Iranian Doctor who tried to open your eyes to DISOLVE this JIN-HAA"S dream to create a theatric land-- called PAKISTAN --ARE PROUD OF! Go ahead praise Jinah's CHUMCHA and enjoy the fruit-- EMERGENCY!
Hey Paki GUYS-- run to USA, INDIA, Afganistan, TURKEY, Bangladesy East or West EUORPE, RUSSIA and or where you can than have your beloveds rot in that rotten land.
Do it atleast for the sake of your children!
REMEMBER.. fanatic Religious Aspirations and Terrorism has NO PLACE IN THIS WORLD. Stop kidding yourselves!
Hail to the Humanity & Civilized WORLD!
Is that any way to run a railroad? Creating Musharaf's Umbrella of happiness for all Pakis!
November 3, 2007 4:21 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 16:21
It's about time this issue is resurfaced. More than half of Pakistan belongs to the Afghans. Here is the map of Afghanistan before a British General Durand, drew the Duran line and later on the land was called Pakistan: http://www.afghan-network.net/maps/afghan-map.jpg The British made forced the Afghan kings on 1885 to sign a 100 year deal to give this land to the British. The document exist on Londan. As the map illustrates, the land should be given bank to the Afghan and remainder of Pakistan divide into smaller stated. Please visit the map link, over half of Paki land should be given back to the Afghans and make is free Nuclear country. I hope this idea gains momentum..
November 3, 2007 4:21 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 16:21
Thank you Dr. Ettefagh for your oversimplified analysis of Pakistan. Using you rationale, it would make sense to break down more then half the worlds countries into their respective provinces. So, that when we are a world of 2000 separate nations universal peace and stability will be finally achieved!?! Pakistan is in crisis. The divide and conquer principle that you advocate would lead to only a further vacuum in the region; hence leading to different parties vying for the booty of nuclear weapons and power. Instead, Pakistan needs further support from the world community in establishing democracy through further backing of president Musharraf. If Pakistan is to ever escape from the post-colonial cycle and triumph over fundamentalism, it will require continued support of a strong figure who can hold all factions together. Musharraf may not be the dream leader that Americans desire, yet he thus far has done a satisfactory job in supporting the war against terrorism. True democracy will only arrive in Pakistan when an Attaturk type of figure will be given the support and patience of the world in order to pave the way for stability in the country.
November 3, 2007 4:18 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 16:18
America better be ready the day pakistan falls, to get those nukes. or the radical will bring it to them one at a time in big bangs.
November 3, 2007 4:16 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 16:16
Of the many blind hatemongers I find here, there is one that I recognise having been spreading his Islamophobic (not just anti-Pakistani) hatred all over the place for long months now : OASIS.
If this hatemonger is from India, his more intelligent compatriots (to which my family belongs) will tell him that the misfortunes of the object of this hatred do not automatically translate into good news for him. In case they don't convince him of this evident truth, events will soon force him to accommodate himself to this truth.
November 3, 2007 4:13 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 16:13
correct, but who should keep the nukes. because most of the pakistan is radical.
November 3, 2007 3:50 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 15:50
When India achieved independence, many people said that it was also an unworkable impoverished conglomeration of many races with different languages, cultures, and castes. It also included wild tribal areas in the East that had been loosely administered by the British and were also smuggling centers. It also had several language controversies that resulted in the use today of English as an official language. Yet here we are almost 60 years later and India is a thriving, united nation. I think the real reason that India has thrived and Pakistan has stagnated lies beyond sheer diversity. Except for a short dictatorial period under Indira Ganhdi, India has been a secular democracy that has tried to accommodate the needs of the lower castes, Muslims, Naga tribemen, and other minorities.
India is certainly far less than perfect, but it compares well with Pakistan. Pakistan has had very little true democracy, just a succession of military dictators and short-lived civilian regimes. While not an Islamic state, it certainly is not a secular one like India. In Pakistan, there has been very little improvement in the quality of life for the poor, the minorities, and the tribals - everything goes to the military or the aristocratic elite. Don't blame the people of Pakistan - blame the rulers.
November 3, 2007 3:48 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 15:48
Let’s just date back as far as the famed era of the Kurdish Republic of Mohabad in Iranian Kurdistan.
November 3, 2007 3:47 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 15:47
This is a very interesting article. It shows how, by standing fast by the artificial creations of post-colonialism, we will always suffer from constant internal and regional conflicts.
I'm from Latin America, a place where colonialism ended (seemly) in the early 19th Century. Nevertheless, the artificiality of nations described by Dr. Ettefagh is the same. Countries with similar cultures, language, religion, and shared history stand separated by borders created for administrative purposes by an empire (the Spanish) that ceased to exist almost two hundred years ago.
I guess it will be easier for Pakistan to break apart than for Latin America to become united.
November 3, 2007 3:44 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 15:44
Do not be bothered about Pakistan. Let first resolve the Kurdish dilemma in Iranian Kurdistan. The destiny of 10 million underprivileged Kurds in that country.
November 3, 2007 3:44 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 15:44
correct, but one problem who would keep the nukes. because most of pakistan is radical.
November 3, 2007 3:40 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 15:40
Mr. Etterlagh, Pakistan is not just an artificial country it is an imaginery country, a nostalgic, wistful dream. Many of its earliest promoters conceived of it as the land of the pure (pak=pure; stan=land) unsullied by the presence of infidel hordes, a place where Islamic culture and piety would so suffuse the very air people breathed that disharmony would be impossible. Others, peering through equally rose-tinted lenses, saw Pakistan as a successor to the Mughal Empire – a country automatically blessed with the unity, glory and grandeur of its predecessor.
All this was, of course, a vast delusion. Religion brought violence and chaos to the country, rather than unity. The effort to inherit the mantle of the Mughals brought extreme centralization of power, the dominance of a feudal aristocracy over political life and the subjugation of the government to the will of the military establishment. These developoments, instead of unifying a diverse people, created conflict, alienation and turmoil.
Pakistan has become a chimera, a virtual state, quite ungovernable by normal institutions. Even the iron hand of the military is no longer sufficient and Musharraf’s latest gambit, declaring emergency, will not do the trick. There is no substance to the country anymore, no substance that any authority can control, all has become fluid and formless. It's end lies in its beginnings.
November 3, 2007 3:20 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 15:20
If India can remain as one country with one billion people and around 20 major languages without any martial law since it’s independence in 1947 Pakistan could survive and can survive if it’s Rulers accepted Islam in heart and implemented Islam in all sphere of life.
During 800 years of Muslim rule when Afghanistan, Pakistan present day India, Bangladesh including part of Burma and Central Muslim countries was one country.
Problem started after Muslims left Islam and followed anti-Muslim system of ruling and law in their own land and it started under Chairmanship of Britain when few Muslims wanted money, power and fame.
Muslims have no courage to write the truth as their writing will not be published or accepted by media and they write for only personal gain and not for the sake of Allah/God or Islam and that are the only problem.
Iran and Pakistan was part of Caliphate for around 6 hundred years as one country when there was no problem and Muslims were only one big power in whole World for around 1200 years and not for only 200 years like present Western power, military power.
Muslims started suffering after they left Caliphate and real Islam.
Please read wrings of a great Judge; a judge in the Calcutta High Court, he became the first Indian to sit as a Law Lord of the Privy Council, In 1910. His ancestors came from Iran to India during time Nadir Shah and he is a Syed.
More is in:
http://www.universal-publishers.com/book.php?method=ISBN&book=1581128770
Or Google for The Election of Caliph/Khalifah and World Peace
Again Muslims left Islam and few of them even dare to write more division like divide Iraq and divide Pakistan and so on
To able acted as writers and to earn a little money in this temporary world.
November 3, 2007 3:17 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 15:17
If India can remain as one country with one billion people and around 20 major languages without any martial law since it’s independence in 1947 Pakistan could survive and can survive if it’s Rulers accepted Islam in heart and implemented Islam in all sphere of life.
During 800 years of Muslim rule when Afghanistan, Pakistan present day India, Bangladesh including part of Burma and Central Muslim countries was one country.
Problem started after Muslims left Islam and followed anti-Muslim system of ruling and law in their own land and it started under Chairmanship of Britain when few Muslims wanted money, power and fame.
Muslims have no courage to write the truth as their writing will not be published or accepted by media and they write for only personal gain and not for the sake of Allah/God or Islam and that are the only problem.
Iran and Pakistan was part of Caliphate for around 6 hundred years as one country when there was no problem and Muslims were only one big power in whole World for around 1200 years and not for only 200 years like present Western power, military power.
Muslims started suffering after they left Caliphate and real Islam.
Please read wrings of a great Judge; a judge in the Calcutta High Court, he became the first Indian to sit as a Law Lord of the Privy Council, In 1910. His ancestors came from Iran to India during time Nadir Shah and he is a Syed.
More is in:
http://www.universal-publishers.com/book.php?method=ISBN&book=1581128770
Or Google for The Election of Caliph/Khalifah and World Peace
Again Muslims left Islam and few of them even dare to write more division like divide Iraq and divide Pakistan and so on
To able acted as writers and to earn a little money in this temporary world.
November 3, 2007 3:07 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 15:07
Berry:
"The article itself is a clear scholarly work. But Mr. Ettefagh should have chosen a better headline, something that doesn't get misunderstood by Pakistanis in general, and doesn't lead radical Pakistanis to ask for his head." end of quote.
Berry :
You took words out of my mouth.
November 3, 2007 3:02 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 15:02
this is exactly what the baloch and sindhi nationalists have been saying. Would like to point out one error in this piece which is Baluchistan was never part of Pakistan. It remained independent for 9 months after which it got amalgamated by Pakistan by force.
November 3, 2007 2:56 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 14:56
You put it in a very straightforward words. Many readers may not like your idea but its a fact and sooner the world realize the better it is for Pakistan. Unfortunately, there is a section in this world who mass up the things for nothing so that they can stay in top 1%, Pakistan is a product of it. If the foundation is based on claver,short-sighted and are not well established, the county is bound to fail. It was created to counter weight India and now it seems its its not working. Sixty year of time is good enough to realize, unfortunately it appears the word need more time to wake up. The west should take a closer look at the society of Pakistan, the military rule and their policies and UN should interfere to make a better place.
November 3, 2007 2:53 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 14:53
At one point in the world there were only tribes and there was little in common.
So shall we go back to stone age??
November 3, 2007 2:48 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 14:48
You hit the nail right on the head Sir.
Pakistan has been a source of serious trouble not only for Iran, it is constant source of serious trouble for all its neighbors, India and Afghanistan as well. It created the Taliban, which now controls large parts of Pakistan with its 7th century style barbarianism. One day the Pakistan's nuclear arsenal will surely
be controlled by Taliban. Than What. India which cannot provide food to its teeming poor has to maintain a large army just ot keep the Pak trained and funded terrorists out. Ditto in the case of Afghanistan.
I agree 100% with you sir.It is brilliant. If the five Provinces go their separate ways, that will bring much needed peace and prosperity in the region. That will also solve the al Quaida problem.
Thank you
November 3, 2007 2:40 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 14:40
What a good and reasonable solution Dr. Ettefagh has suggested for such a failed state. The existance of Pakistan has become a great threat for the whole wolrd's peace.
November 3, 2007 2:38 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 14:38
The good doctor calls it as is it, straight to the point. Pakistan is indeed the most dangerous state or failing state on the planet. Apart from its nuclear weapons, there is the specter of rising religious extremism, religious intolerance, tribalism, and a venomous hatred for India. These realities undermine any meaningful cohesiveness, and places the country on a dangerous path not only to self destruction, but also to being a conduit and instigator of regional instability.
November 3, 2007 2:36 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 14:36
There is not much to be gained by dwelling in the past and debating if Pakistan deserves to be a separate nation or not. The fact is that we do have the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in our midst that is armed with nuclear weapons and the nation is in a state of crisis today.
The jihadi's who were fostered by Pakistan's military and its ISI to torment India and Afghanistan among others have come home to roost and have turned against their own masters. Now the ordinary citizens of Pakistan are burdened by both their military rulers as well as these Jihadis who have no plan for the future other than to blow themselves up and take as many bystanders as possible as victims.
It is in the long term interest of India, Afghanistan, Iran and other nations such as China, Russia, USA, EU and others to help calm the situation down in Pakistan. Eventually the people of Pakistan will prevail and the military will return to its barracks. The militants will be eliminated from their hideouts. Pakistan will return to nation building and democracy will take root and economic development can begin in earnest.
In this, Pakistan will find a willing ally in India and the two nations will be reconciled. This is my hope and the hope of millions of people across the subcontinent.
November 3, 2007 2:30 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 14:30
I posted shortly after this piece first appeared - my comments had little to do with the idea of dissolving Pakistan, but rather with the glaring factual inaccuracies and complete ignorance displayed by the author. For example, as I pointed out and many others have, "Pakistan" was not an acronym - yes, some "clever" fellow at one time suggested it and people like Ettefagh bought it hook, line and sinker. Afghanistan - land (stan) of the Afghani or Afghans, and Pakistan, land (stan) of the Pure (Paak or Paaki). As someone said, the term was suggested by the famous poet Iqbal who, incidentally wrote in Urdu and, I believe also Farsi.
I am not a Pakistani, but I have taken the time to try to learn about the country.
Now, taking Ettefagh's comments, I thought it might be fun to apply them to my country, the United States of America.
Ettefagh, with all his ignorance fanned out like a peacock's tail (ah yes, Iran was the land of Peacock's no? - at least in poetry and on carpet motifs) might say.
America is not a country. It is a failed anti-British fantasy about the fabrication of a nation state. It has failed and has other failing peers in the western world.
The "United States" was a phrase coined for an idealistic confederation of 13 Christian provinces within the old British-controlled American colonies. Later, there were added territories by conquest, purchase and assimilation. These are distinct lands and have very little in common.
These states were all knocked together on presumption of a common religion, and a "federal" system was fabricated.
America's short 235-year or so history is full of war, violence against an indigent population, even a civil war among its own people, and major wars in Europe and the pacific in the early part of the last century as well as wars in Korea, Vietnam, Granada, Panama, alliance in a war with the former colonial rulers in the Falklands, and most recently, in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Today, even the commonly accepted language of America is under attack as it becomes bilingual and almost 50% Spanish speaking. And the Christianity dominated land is now said to be under control of the Israeli lobby representing another fabricated country.
For as long as I can remember, America's southern border has been a hub of instability, illegal immigration, drug smuggling, and the main transit route for cocaine and marijuana from Latin America. "In turn, that cash flow encourages money laundering, armed banditry, murder, violence and corruption."
There are other issues to ponder, namely a formidable nuclear arsenal, missiles, a brisk small-arms export business (billions of dollars a year) and the schizophrenic dual-tracked “friendship” with the Saudis and Middle East Emirates. America’s aimless Iraq and Iran policies are perfect examples of circular political indecision. U.S. troops have remained stationed in Iraq for more than four years and in Korea and Germany for decades.
I think it is high time to revisit the old composite structure of fifty states combined into one artificial country. A redrawing of borders might serve useful and to cut through the farce. Let each state mature and declare independence. Some will eventually join their long-time regional allies, leaving two or three independent lands and a more transparent political agenda.
__
Mr. Ettefagh, if you read this, you might get a glimmer of how truly stupid what you have written is. At a minimum, you will know you have been exposed as ignorant of the facts and perhaps you will study before you write more.
As many have pointed out, it is truly shocking and disheartening that a paper like the Washington Post does not have an editorial staff capable of weeding out the ignorant and inaccurate rubbish that is oft offered on these pages.
Let's see if you and they have the guts to let this comment stand.
November 3, 2007 2:26 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 14:26
The splitting of British India into separate tribal entities didn't create peace. It created two separate nations that have been at each others throats for more that fifty years and have fought several major wars over Kashmir.
In the highly improbable event of Pakistan splitting-up into its ethnicities the likely outcome is constant strife around the ethnic interface and widespread ethnic-cleansing (most of Pakistan is ethnically mixed). Wars radicalize populations, and the only other certainty is that the area would become progressivly radicalized and unstable with a breakdown of centrally-directed authority and security. Add nuclear-weapons to this witches brew and you would have a security nightmare for the US and India. As I have previously said, this breakup scenario is improbable.
Hwever, the alternative is not much better. The US has hitched its wagon to the tyannical Musharrif who is now in the twilight of his malignant career. Two possible scenarios will follow Musharrif. The first is rule by the deeply-flawed and corrupt Benazir Bhutto who would rule subject to the same understandings and compromises with the Islamists as did her predecessor. The alternative is an Islamic democracy along the lines of Iran (but Shi-ite). Islam (besides Pakistani nationalism) being the glue holding Pakistan together.
Whatever happens, the US doesn't have the military power to alter the future course of this distant nation of 160 million people - other than in the negative sense that it might well by its intervention further unite the population in its antipathy to the US and its policies towards the Islamic world.
November 3, 2007 2:23 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 14:23
Dr. Ettefagh is more than right when it comes to the epicenter of Islamic terrorism and extremism called Pakistan, which has a state ideology of terrorism that builds on hatered of Hindus, Christians and Jews. That is the foundation of this dark colonial entity and legacy with disputed borders from the first day of its bloody creation during the hotest days of the Cold War in 1948. From the first day of its creation, the Pakistani military has been busy destabilising Afghanistan and India, which won three wars against it. Destabilisin India and Afghanistan is the only way for the military to keep Pakistan together.
Then there is the question of Balochs and Pashtuns, who never wanted to join this imposed British artificial creation. Neither they want to be part of it today.
It is now clear as the sun that Paki generals have sold nuclear technology to Iran, North Korea and EVEN al-Qaeda. Most terrorists rounded up around the world have Pakistani Punjabi background. Most of the bombers in Europe and Americas have been Pakistanis. Most of the suicide bombers in Afghanistan are Pakistanis. The Pakistani generals gave refuge to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda after the Tora Bora operation in 2001.
It is also known that the Pakistanimilitary is very heavily invoved in drug trade. It is the Pakistani generals who make the most from the drugs and without their involvement it would be impossible to get the opium out of Afghanistan. There are hundreds of advanced opium labratories and thousands of terrorist factories called Madrassas.
Pakistan is a place where the Military Inc owns almost everything.
Pakistan is a stumbling block in the way of peace, stability and properity in South and Central Asia. Pakistan is blocking India's access to Central Asia, it is destabilising Kashmir, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Afghanistan. Its army is killing innocent Balochis and Pashtuns. The Paki generals have sold Baloch territories to the Chinese, who will soon have military bases in Gwadar, which is threatening the security of India, Afghanistan and Iran, not to mention Western interests in the region.
Pakistan must be dissolved, preferably in a peaceful manner, because Afghanistan has never recognised (and never will) the imposed and shameful borders between the two countries. Pakistan can not be hold together by dividing Pashtuns. NWFP is a natural and inseparable part and terrortories of Afghanistan with 100% Pashtun population, which had never seen Punjabi soldiers on its soil but after the War in Terror which provided the Paki Army to, for the first time in its 60 years "history", invade and occupy sovereign and independent Pashtun lands.
The only way Pakistan can survive is through creation of instability in Afghanistan and India, therefore it should be disolved as soon as possible for the good of all nationalities in that entity, for peace, stability and prosperity of the inhabitants of Pakistan, South and Central Asia.
This is the best way to do it:
1. Reintegrate NWFP into the Motherland, Afghanistan, the rightful and historic owner of these territories since thousands of years.
2. Reintegrate Punjab and Sindh provinces into India.
3. Create independent nations of Kashmir and Balochistan.
That way we will stabilise South and Central Asia, promote democracy and prosperity instead of proping up a military regime which does nothing good for its oppressed population or the world.
That is all for now.
Momand
November 3, 2007 2:12 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 14:12
Good Option. More than 500 million muslims of South Asia Could bcomes World's Greatest Power.Persians will be cornered,So will the hindus in another great struggle...Inshallah.
November 3, 2007 2:07 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 14:07
What is your address again?
Signed Muhammad
Just kidding.
November 3, 2007 2:04 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 14:04
I think that this article makes absolutely no sense. Dissolution is hardly an answer to Pakistan's internal problems. As someone rightly wrote, there is nothing wrong with Pakistan, but it is the bad leadership that is the cause of such havoc. Year in year out, for decades, Pakistan has been unfortunate enough to terrible leaders who are in it just for personal financial gain. They all grow giddy with power the moment they are voted in. And lets not even get into how each and everyone of them bend over backwards to appease the West.
The solution to Pakistan's problems is strong, honest leadership, serving the people with the utmost dedication. And also, leadership that is subserviant to no one but the Lord.
November 3, 2007 2:02 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 14:02
Respectfully Mr.Ali Ettefagh, Sir you have a right to your opinion. I wish we could think of having an arrangement of co-existing the "European Union" way. Countries are man made. Geographical Boundaries keep changing. Why can't the inhabitants living on different continents co-exist together. The continents and countries were not demarked as we see them to-day.
We wish well for all the oppressed people of the world.
November 3, 2007 2:01 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 14:01
I wonder if a "Balkanization" of what now consitutes Pakistan will (a) be practicable, and (b) actually achieve what Mr. Ettefagh envisions.
The calculus of this process is hard to figure out. But his idea is certainly worth examining. I do not see the break-up of Pakistan happening anytime soon, and most likely not with the results portrayed in the article.
Definitely, smaller units are likely to be less of a threat, but radical Islamism is not so easily contained within such boundaries.
November 3, 2007 1:58 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 13:58
who is this retard and why does washington post one of the most respected newspapers give him a column?
November 3, 2007 1:55 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 13:55
I, myself, am not quite happy with the political developments in Pakistan. But the gentleman appears to be not very well versed in history of nation-making or state formation. I will suggest him to have a cursory look on the process of state formation in Europe (the birthplace of nation State-Westphalia 1648).
It may be too much for an investment banker to understand the political developments. Mr./Dr. Ettefagh please do not fanaticize what you do not know. Just keep your eyes on market ups and downs. History of nations does not fluctuate with interest rate cuts or Fed meetings, it is a historical process. GOT IT?
November 3, 2007 1:54 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 13:54
I think the respected writer knows very little or almost none at all about history of Pakistan. He seems to be speaking the same language as majority of Indians speak. I feel pity on his lack of knowledge and would like to challenge his knowledge about his own country also. I would also request him to keep his ill thought views to himself and instead of becoming a pseudo intellectual be practical and rationale. Hot tempers and non sense gossip is likely to place his repute in a dangerous position. Through him I would also request Washington post to prevent any further posts by him which greviously hurt the feelings of its readers.
I wish the writer bad luck and misfortune.
November 3, 2007 1:52 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 13:52
Mr. Ali,
Either you are stupid or you were drunk when you wrote this baseless opinion.
November 3, 2007 1:51 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 13:51
Mr. Ali,
Either you are stupid or you were drunk when you wrote this baseless opinion.
November 3, 2007 1:51 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 13:51
Mr. Ali,
Either you are stupid or you were drunk when you wrote this baseless opinion.
November 3, 2007 1:50 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 13:50
it is too painful for me to be a pakistani and more than it in these times when ,no doubt, we are a cumbersome crowd and not a nation state at all. why? -becuse of a Army whome we fed 60 long years out of our meager resources. Is it not a tragedy which cannot be translated into words-at least not possible for me. Hence i believe Dissolve Pakistan, Too.
ASGHAR KHAN MAYO
lahore
November 3, 2007 1:46 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 13:46
The logic of the writer's piece is warped. The values of San Fransico and Birmingham hardly match. Why not just divide the USA up into 50 states?
November 3, 2007 1:42 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 13:42
Mr. Ettefagh cites english as Pakistan's official language as measure of her failure to form a cohesive state. But english is also India's official langguage, which is an established democracy. The ultimate recipe to dissolve Pakistan along provincial borders would perpetuate the solution sought by the British in 1947 that the author criticizes.
Pakistan's provinces have ethnic majorities but also significant ethnic minorities. The bloodshed caused by such reckless and radical dissolution would be epic.
Pakistan needs to find a transitional path to democracy. While the recent events are a serious set back, in recent years Pakistan has taken huge steps in rebuilding its civil and private institutions. For example, creation of local governments, banks in financial sectors, tremendous increase in tax collection to finance public infrastructure etc. Not the least is unprecendented freedom of the press and private media outlets.
A radical change would not usher in western style democracy in Pakistan but only more chaos. International community should help Pakistan find the transitional route to stable democracy. Pakistan has taken a step back but not as deep as bringing back failed, corrupt and incompetent political leaders of the 90s. She will find a way forward.
November 3, 2007 1:32 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 13:32
The Turks occupied what is today is Afghanistan in 12th century and mongolian-mughals spread to today's Pakistan and parts of India till the end of 17th century. In essence all the land originally belonged to India and most of the people in pakistan are either forced converted hindus or occupiers from middle east. Pakistan is just a part of India and will be attached to India in 10 years or less. It was created by mistake. Pakistan soon will be divided in three parts. Baloch, Sindh and Punjab. Most of it will be attached to India again. Some of it will go to Russia and some rightfully to India's friend Afghanistan. Take it easy.
November 3, 2007 1:27 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 13:27
I agree with you sir. Paksitan should never have been a state. As you said, there are many nations within this failed state. This is true not only in Pakistan but other countries affected by colonial rule, but Pakistan is more unique than any other failed state. Its people have no true pride of their state, no identity they could call their own, and everything is for sale including their honor.
November 3, 2007 1:19 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 13:19
This Iranian should know that there are many many lanugages in Iran also. Pakistan like India uses English as a language of science and technology
Languages of Iran
[See also SIL publications on the languages of Iran.]
Islamic Republic of Iran, Jomhouri-e-Eslami-e-Irân. 67,503,205. National or official language: Western Farsi. Literacy rate: 70% to 75% among those 6 years old and over (1995–1996 Iran Statistical Center). Also includes Eastern Farsi (1,000,000), Hulaulá (300), Tajiki, Turkish (2,570), people from Afghanistan (3,000,000), Kurds from Iraq (120,000), Shi'a Arabs from Iraq. Information mainly from E. Drower 1939; R. Macuch 1965; I. Garbell 1965; T. Sebeok 1969, 1970; G. Doerfer et al. 1971; R. Oberling 1974; D. L. Stilo 1981; R. D. Hoberman 1988a, b. Blind population: 200,000 (1982 WCE). Deaf population: 3,978,055. Deaf institutions: 50. The number of languages listed for Iran is 77. Of those, 75 are living languages and 2 are extinct.
Living languages
Aimaq [aiq] 170,000 in Iran (1993 Johnstone). Mazanderan Province. Dialects: Teimuri (Teimurtash). Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Persian
More information.
Alviri-Vidari [avd] Near Saveh, Markazi Province. Dialects: Alvir (Alviri), Vidar (Vidari). Related to Gozarkhâni and Vafsi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Arabic, Gulf Spoken [afb] 200,000 in Iran (1993). Southern coast; Khamseh nomads live in eastern Fars Province; other Arab nomadic groups in several southcentral provinces of Iran. Alternate names: Khaliji, Gulf Arabic. Dialects: Al-Hasâ, Khamseh. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, South, Arabic
More information.
Arabic, Mesopotamian Spoken [acm] 1,200,000 in Iran. Khuzestan Province, southwest side of Zagros Mountains, along the bank of the Shatt al Arab. Alternate names: Mesopotamian Gelet Arabic, `Arabi, Arabi. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, South, Arabic
More information.
Armenian [hye] 170,800 in Iran (1993). Northern Iran, Azerbaijan Provinces around Khoi, Shahpur, Ahar, Tabriz, Tehran, Esfahan, Shiraz. Alternate names: Haieren, Somekhuri, Ermenice, Armjanski, Armani, Erâmani. Dialects: Eastern Armenian, Agulis, Astrakhân, Jolfâ (Dzhulfa), Karabagh Shamakhi, Khoi-Salmst (Khvoy), Urmia-Maragheh. Classification: Indo-European, Armenian
More information.
Ashtiani [atn] 21,099 (2000 WCD). Ashtiyan and Tafresh, Markazi Province. Alternate names: Astiani, Ashtiyani. Dialects: Ashtiani, Tafresh. Transitional between central Iranian dialects and Talysh. Dialects may be separate languages. Very close to Vafsi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Assyrian Neo-Aramaic [aii] 10,000 to 20,000 in Iran (1994). Ethnic population: 80,000 (1994). Reza'iyeh (Rizaiye, Urmia, Urmi). Most in TehranTehran. Dialects: Iranian Koine (General Urmi). Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, Aramaic, Eastern, Central, Northeastern
More information.
Azerbaijani, South [azb] 23,500,000 in Iran (1997). Population includes 290,000 Afshar, 5,000 Aynallu, 7,500 Baharlu, 1,000 Moqaddam, 3,500 Nafar 1,000 Pishagchi, 3,000 Qajar, 2,000 Qaragozlu, 130,000 Shahsavani (1993). Population total all countries: 24,364,000. East and West Azerbaijan, Ardebil, Zanjan, and part of Markazi provinces. Many in a few districts of TehranTehran. Some Azerbaijani-speaking groups are in Fars Province and other parts of Iran. Also spoken in Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Jordan, Syria, Turkey (Asia), USA. Alternate names: Azeri, Torki. Dialects: Aynallu (Inallu, Inanlu), Karapapakh, Tabriz, Afshari (Afshar, Afsar), Shahsavani (Shahseven), Moqaddam, Baharlu (Kamesh), Nafar, Qaragozlu, Pishagchi, Bayat, Qajar. Distinctive linguistic differences between the Azerbaijani of the former USSR (North) and Iranian Azerbaijani (South) in phonology, lexicon, morphology, syntax, and loanwords. Teimurtash (7,000 in Mazanderan; possibly the same as Teimuri, Timuri, Taimouri) and Salchug (in Kerman Province) may be dialects. Qashqa'i may be a dialect. Part of the Qizilbash merchant group speak the Afshari dialect, which is strongly influenced by Persian. The dialect spoken in Syria is different from Kirkuk of Iraq, and may be closer to Turkish (Osmanli) than to Azerbaijani. There is a gradual transition of dialects from Turkish to Azerbaijani from central to western Turkey. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Azerbaijani
More information.
Bakhtiari [bqi] 1,000,000 (2001). 350,000 monolinguals. Ethnic population: 1,000,000 (2001). Southwestern Iran: western Chahar-Mahal va Bakhtiari, eastern Khuzestan, eastern Lorestan, and western Esfahan. Masjed-e Soleiman, Shahr-e Kord, Dorud. Alternate names: Lori-ye Khaveri, Luri, Lori. Dialects: Haft-Lang, Charlang, Chelgerd, Kuhrang (Kohrang). Bakhtiari is on a dialect continuum between Northern Luri and Southern Luri. Farsi dialects in Chaharmahal va Bakhtiari Province are mutually intelligible with Bakhtiari. Close to Kumzari. Lexical similarity 75% with Southern Luri (Mamasani), 86% with Southern Luri (Boyerahmadi), 73% with Northern Luri (rural), 78% with Northern Luri (Khorramabadi), 76% with Western Farsi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Luri
More information.
Balochi, Southern [bcc] 405,000 in Iran. Southern Sistan va Baluchistan Province. Alternate names: Baluchi, Baluci, Baloci. Dialects: Makrani (Lotuni). Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Balochi
More information.
Balochi, Western [bgn] 451,000 in Iran (1986). Northern Sistan va Baluchistan Province. Half are settled in cities and villages, half are nomadic. Alternate names: Baluchi, Baluci, Baloci. Dialects: Rakhshani (Raxshani), Sarawani. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Balochi
More information.
Bashkardi [bsg] 7,033 (2000 WCD). Eastern Hormozgan, Southern Kerman, and possibly southwestern Sistan va Baluchistan provinces. Alternate names: Bashaka. Dialects: Northern Bashaka, Southern Bashaka. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Balochi
More information.
Brahui [brh] 10,000 in Iran (1983). Central Sistan and Baluchistan provinces, including Zahedan. Alternate names: Brahudi, Birahui, Kur Galli. Dialects: Jharawan, Kalat, Sarawan. Classification: Dravidian, Northern
More information.
Dari, Zoroastrian [gbz] 8,000 to 15,000 (1999). Yezd and Kerman areas. Alternate names: Dari, "Gabri", "Gabar", "Yazdi". Dialects: Related to Parsi-Dari and Nâyini. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Dezfuli [def] Dezful, northern Khuzestan Province. Alternate names: Dezhfili, Dizfuli. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Unclassified
More information.
Domari [rmt] 1,338,271 in Iran (2000 WCD). Population total all countries: 1,876,116. Kurbat and Luli are in western Iran. Mehtar is in Fars and Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad Province. Karachi is in northern Iran. Also spoken in Afghanistan, Egypt, India, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Libya, Palestinian West Bank and Gaza, Russia (Europe), Sudan, Syria, Turkey (Europe), Uzbekistan. Alternate names: Middle Eastern Romani, Tsigene, Gypsy, Luti, Mehtar. Dialects: Kurbati (Ghorbati), Qinati, Yürük, Koli, Karachi, Luli, Maznoug, Nawar. A number of the dialects in Iran may be highly divergent from one another. Not intelligible to Romani speakers. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Indo-Aryan, Central zone, Dom
More information.
Dzhidi [jpr] Alternate names: Judeo-Persian, Djudi, Judi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Persian
More information.
Eshtehardi [esh] Eshtehard and environs, Karaj District, Markazi Province. Dialects: Close to Takestani. Eshtehardi may be the same language as some other dialects spoken to the southwest of Qazvin. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Fars, Northwestern [faz] Scattered in isolated pockets of Fars Province. Dialects: Close to Sivandi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Fars, Southwestern [fay] Central Fars Province: Somghun, Papun, Masarm, Buringun, Kondazi, Davâni, others. Alternate names: "Tajik". Dialects: Related to Lari. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Fars
More information.
Farsi, Western [pes] 22,000,000 in Iran (1997). Population includes 800,000 Eastern Farsi in Khorasan, Gilan, Tat, Bakhtiari, Lur. Population total all countries: 24,316,121. Throughout Iran. Most heavily concentrated in central, south central, and northeastern Iran. Also spoken in Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, India, Iraq, Israel, Netherlands, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Sweden, Tajikistan, Turkey (Asia), Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, USA, Uzbekistan. Alternate names: Persian, New Persian, Parsi, Irani. Dialects: Ketabi, Tehrani, Shirazi, Old Shirazi, Qazvini, Mahalhamadani, Kashani, Esfahani, Sedehi, Kermani, Araki, Shirazjahromi, Shahrudi Kazeruni, Mashadi (Meshed), Basseri, Yazdi, Bandari. The literary language is virtually identical in Iran and Afghanistan, with very minor lexical differences. Zargari may be a dialect used by goldsmiths (also see Balkan Romani in Iran). Dialect shading into Dari in Afghanistan and Tajiki in Tajikistan. Many of the dialects may be separate languages. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Persian
More information.
Gazi [gzi] 7,033 (2000). Gaz. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Georgian [kat] 50,000 in Iran. Fereydan and Fereydunshahr provinces, Esfahan, Najaf Abad, Shahin Shahr, Yazdanshahr. Alternate names: Kartuli, Gruzin. Dialects: Fereydan (Ferejdan). Classification: Kartvelian, Georgian
More information.
Gilaki [glk] 3,265,000 (1993). Population includes 2,000 Galeshi. Gilan Region, coastal plain, south of Talish. Galeshi is a mountain dialect. Alternate names: Gelaki, Gilani, Guilaki, Guilani. Dialects: Galeshi, Rashti. Close to Mâzanderâni. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Caspian
More information.
Gozarkhani [goz] Gozarkhan (northwest of Qazvin); Tajrish, north of Tehran; Alamut area. Dialects: Close to Maraghei, as well as Semnani languages. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Harzani [hrz] 28,132 (2000 WCD). West Azerbaijan Province: Qalingie, between Marand and Jolfa, northwest of Tabriz; related varieties in Galin Qaya, Babra, and Dizmar. Dialects: Close to Karingani and Talysh. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Hawrami [hac] 22,948 in Iran (2000 WCD). For all speakers of Gurani group, several million; Hawrami dialect: 20,000 (Blau 1989). Western part of Kordestan province, near Iraqi border, in Hewraman, east of Sanandaj, also north of Kermanshah. Alternate names: Hewrami, Howrami, Hawramani, Awromani, Gurani, Gorani. Dialects: Kakai (Macho), Hawraman-I Luhon, Hawraman-I Taxt, Kandula, Gawhara, Gurani (Gorani). Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Zaza-Gorani
More information.
Hazaragi [haz] 283,000 in Iran (1993). Population has increased significantly due to the influx of Hazaragi-speaking refugees from Afghanistan. Throughout Iran, especially urban centers. Alternate names: Hazara, Hezareh, Hezare'i. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Persian
More information.
Jadgali [jdg] Alternate names: Jatgali, Jatki, Jat. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Indo-Aryan, Northwestern zone, Sindhi
More information.
Kabatei [xkp] Rudbar District, Gilan Province. Dialects: Kalas, Kabate. Close to Upper Taromi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Kajali [xkj] Khalkhal District in Eastern Azerbaijan Province, Kaqazkonan District, Kajal. Dialects: Close to Shahrudi and Koresh-e Rostam. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Karingani [kgn] 17,583 (2000 WCD). East Azerbaijan Province, Dizmar District, Keringan village, and Hasanu District, northeast of Tabriz. Alternate names: Keringani. Dialects: Various dialects. Very close to Harzani. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Kazakh [kaz] 3,000 in Iran (1982). Gorgan City, Mazanderan Province. Alternate names: Kazak, Kazakhi, Gazaqi. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Western, Aralo-Caspian
More information.
Khalaj [kjf] 42,107 in Iran (2000 WCD). Also spoken in Azerbaijan. Dialects: Related to Kurdish and Talysh. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern
More information.
Khalaj, Turkic [klj] 42,107 (2000 WCD). Northeast of Arak in Central Province. Alternate names: Khalaj. Dialects: Not a dialect of Azerbaijani, as previously supposed. An independent language distinct from other extant Turkish languages (Doerfer 1971). Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Azerbaijani
More information.
Kho'ini [xkc] Kho'in District, Zanjan Province. Dialects: Various dialects. Related to Kabatei and Takestani. Closely related varieties spoken in the nearby villages of Balbavin, Sefidkamar, Halab, Sa`dabad, and other villages. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Khorasani Turkish [kmz] 400,000 (1977 Doerfer). Northeast Iran, in the northern part of Khorasan Province, especially northwest of Mashhad. West dialect in Bojnurd Region; north dialect in Quchan Region (probably the largest), south dialect around Soltanabad near Sabzevar. Alternate names: Quchani. Dialects: West Quchani (Northwest Quchani), North Quchani (Northeast Quchani), South Quchani. Midway linguistically between Azerbaijani and Turkmen, but not a dialect of either. Oghuz-Uzbek in Uzbekistan is reported to be a dialect. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Turkish
More information.
Khunsari [kfm] 21,099 (2000 WCD). Esfahan Province, Kashan and Esfahan areas. Dialects: Khunsari may be only one of a large complex of dialects in Esfahan Province. Other Northwestern dialects that have been described in the same area and which may be very closely related include those of Vonishun, Qohrud, Keshe, Zefre, Sedeh, Gaz, Kafran, Mahallat, So, Mejme, and Djaushaqan. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Koresh-e Rostam [okh] Eastern Azerbaijan Province, Koresh-e Rostam District. Dialects: Related to Shahrudi and Kajali. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Koroshi [ktl] 160 to 200 (1992 Mohamedi). 40 to 50 families. Fars Province. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Balochi
More information.
Kurdish, Central [ckb] 3,250,000 in Iran. Northwest Iran, primarily Kordestan, West Azerbaijan provinces, areas north of Kermanshah. Mukri is spoken around Mahabad, and Sineyi (Sine'i) is spoken around Sanandaj (Sine). Alternate names: Kordi, Korkora, Kurdi, Kurdy, Sorani, Mukri, Mokri, Sine'i, Wawa. Dialects: Mukri, Sanandaji (Sine'i, Sina'i, Sineyi), Southern Jafi, Pijdari. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Kurdish
More information.
Kurdish, Northern [kmr] 350,000 in Iran (1988 Stanzer). North and west of Lake Urmia, extending to border with Azerbaijan. Some small communities live in the Caspian region (Mazandaran, Kalardasht [Fattah 2000]). Khorasani Kurmanji speakers live east of the Caspian Sea, in northern Khorasan Province, bordering Turkmenistan. Centers include Quchan and Bojnurd. Alternate names: Kurmanji, Kurmancî, Eastern Kurmanji, Kordi, Kurdi. Dialects: Khorasani Kurmanji. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Kurdish
More information.
Kurdish, Southern [sdh] 3,000,000 in Iran (2000 Fattah). Western Iran, Kermanshah, Ilam provinces; Eastern Iraq bordering these provinces including Xanaqin. Also spoken in Iraq. Dialects: Kolyai, Kermanshahi (Kermanshani), Kalhori, Garrusi (Bijari) Sanjabi, Malekshahi (Maleksh ay), Bayray, Kordali, Feyli, Luri. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Kurdish
More information.
Laki [lki] 1,000,000 (2002 Fattah). 150,000 monolinguals. Population includes 10,000 Nahavand Lurs. Western Iran, Ilam, Lorestan provinces, cities of Aleshtar, Kuhdesht, Nurabad-e Dolfan, Khorramabad. Alternate names: Leki, Alaki. Dialects: Lexical similarity 70% with Western Farsi, 78% with Luristani (Khorramabadi), 69% with Northern Luri (central rural dialects). Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Kurdish
More information.
Lari [lrl] 80,000. Ethnic population: 100,000. Throughout Lar District, South Fars Province; Shiraz; United Arab Emirates. Alternate names: Larestani, Achomi. Dialects: Lari. Verbal system is quite distinct from Western Farsi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Fars
More information.
Lasgerdi [lsa] In Lasjerd, Semnan Province (40 km southwest of Semnan). Dialects: Related to Sorkhei. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Semnani
More information.
Luri, Northern [lrc] 1,500,000 (2001). Ethnic population: 1,700,000 (2001). Western Iran: Central and Southern Lorestan, Northern Khuzestan, Southern Hamadan Province, the southern edge of Markazi Province, some regions of Ilam, and possibly a small population in eastern Iraq. Populations also in Khorramabad, Borujerd, Andimeshk. Alternate names: Lori, Luri. Dialects: Khorramabadi, Borujerdi, Nahavandi, Andimeshki, Bala-Gariva'i, Mahali (Rural), Cagani. The major Northern Luri dialects (Khorramabadi, Borujerdi, etc.) are found in Lorestan and Khuzestan. Some local regions in Ilam Province (Posht-e Kuh) are said to speak Northern Luri dialects. Mainly south Kurdish dialects are spoken in Ilam Province (Fattah 2000). Also, according to Fattah, there are a small number of villages in Iraq, where a dialect of Northern Luri may be spoken. Close to Kumzari. Lexical similarity of Mahali dialect 80% with Western Farsi, 69% with Laki, and 73% with Bakhtiari (Haflang); Khorramabadi dialect 85% with Western Farsi, 78% with Laki, and 75% with Bakhtiari (Haflang). Similarity to Western Farsi is due to language shift, but also to lexical borrowing. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Luri
More information.
Luri, Southern [luz] 875,000 (1999). 300,000 monolinguals. Ethnic population: 900,000. Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad Province (Yasuj is center of Boyerahmadi, Dehdasht is center of Kohgiluyeh), eastern Khuzestan Province (Kohgiluyeh), Northwestern Fars Province (Nurabad is center of Mamasani, Shul is center of Shuli), Shiraz. Alternate names: Ruliy, Lori-ye Jonubi, Luri, Lur, Lor, Lori. Dialects: Boyerahmadi, Yasuji (Yasichi), Kohgiluyeh, Mamasani, Shuli. Southern Luri is on a continuum between Bakhtiari and Western Farsi "dialects" such as Bushehri and Fars Province varieties. There is a non-Lur tribe in Fars Province called Kurdshuli, which is reported to speak a Southern Luri dialect. Their winter quarters are at Qasr-e Dasht near Sivand, which is 70 km from Sharaz on the Shiraz-Esfahan road (Ivanow 1959, unpublished). Close to Kumzari. Lexical similarity 75% with Western Farsi, 80% with Bushehri dialect of Western Farsi; Mamasani dialect 75% with Bakhtiari, Boyerahmadi dialect 86% with Bakhtiari. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Luri
More information.
Mandaic [mid] 500 (2001). Ethnic population: 23,000. Hoveiseh and other towns, Khuzestan. Alternate names: Mandaean, Neo-Mandaic, Modern Mandaic, Manda:yi, Mandi, Subbi, Sabean, Sabe'in. Dialects: Ahwaz (Ahvaz), Shushtar, Iraqi Neo-Mandaic. Little dialect variation. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, Aramaic, Eastern, Mandaic
More information.
Maraghei [vmh] Upper Rudbar area (Rudbar-e Alamut). Dialects: Dikini. Various dialects. Close to Gozarkhani. Dialect in Kuhpayeh may be the same language. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Mazanderani [mzn] 3,265,000 (1993). Northern Iran near Caspian Sea, southern half of Mazanderan Province. Alternate names: Tabri, Mazandarani. Dialects: Mazanderani, Gorgani. Related to Gilaki. Qadikolahi (Ghadikolahi) and Palani may be dialects. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Caspian
More information.
Natanzi [ntz] 7,033 (2000 WCD). Esfahan Province: Natanz, on the Esfahan-Kashan Road. Dialects: Natanzi may be part of a larger complex of Esfahan Province dialects including Yarani (Yarandi) and Farizandi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Nayini [nyq] 7,033 (2000 WCD). Esfahan Province: Nayin and Anarak, 100 km east of Esfahan; Khuri is spoken in Khur (Khvor) and Mehrjan, 250 km northeast of Esfahan. Alternate names: Biyabanak. Dialects: Nayini, Anarak, Khuri. Dialects listed may be separate languages. Khuri is distinct from other dialects. Related to Zoroastrian Dari. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Parsi-Dari [prd] 350,000 in Iran. Population total all countries: 700,000. Also spoken in Afghanistan. Alternate names: Parsee-Dari. Dialects: Parsi-Dari is reported to not be inherently intelligible with Parsi of India, Pakistan, and other countries, but linguistically and ethnically related. They diverged 600 to 700 years ago or more. It is related to Dari. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Pashto, Southern [pbt] 113,000 in Iran (1993). Population does not include refugees. Khorasan on Afghanistan border east of Qa'en. Alternate names: Pashtu, Paktu, "Afghani". Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Eastern, Southeastern, Pashto
More information.
Persian Sign Language [psc] Classification: Deaf sign language
More information.
Qashqa'i [qxq] 1,500,000 (1997). Southwestern Iran, Fars Province and Southern Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad Province. Shiraz, Gachsaran, and Firuzabad are centers. Alternate names: Qashqay, Qashqai, Kashkai. Dialects: Very close to Azerbaijani. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Azerbaijani
More information.
Razajerdi [rat] Qazvin and Kuhpayeh area, Razajerd. Dialects: Various dialects. Related to Takestani. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Romani, Balkan [rmn] Dialects: Zargari. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Indo-Aryan, Central zone, Romani, Balkan
More information.
Rudbari [rdb] Sefid Rud Valley. Dialects: Various dialects. Transitional to Caspian languages and related to Vafsi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Salchuq [slq] Dialects: Probably a dialect of Azerbaijani. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Azerbaijani
More information.
Sangisari [sgr] Semnân Province. Alternate names: Sangesari. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Semnani
More information.
Semnani [smy] 21,099 (2000 WCD). Semnan Province. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Semnani
More information.
Senaya [syn] 60 in Iran (1997 H. Mutzafi). Population total all countries: 460. Tehran and Qazvin. Originally in Sanandaj, Kordestan Province. Some in western Europe. Also spoken in Australia, USA. Alternate names: Sena:ya, Christian Neo-Aramaic, Shan Sray, Lshan Sray, Soray, Sray, Shan Gyanan. Dialects: The variety in Qazvin is slightly different from that spoken by Sanandaj-born people. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, Aramaic, Eastern, Central, Northeastern
More information.
Shahmirzadi [srz] Shahmirzad, Semnan Province. Dialects: Close to Mazanderani and Gilaki. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Caspian
More information.
Shahrudi [shm] Khalkhal District in Eastern Azerbaijan Province, Shahrud District, Shal, Kolur, Lerd. Dialects: Close to Kajali and Koresh-e Rostam. Different from Sharudi, a Western Farsi dialect. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Sivandi [siy] 7,033 (2000 WCD). Sivand, Fars Province (70 km northwest of Shiraz on the Shiraz-Esfahan Road). Dialects: Related to Northwestern Fars varieties. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Soi [soj] 7,033 (2000 WCD). Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Sorkhei [sqo] Semnan Province: Sorkheh, 19 km southwest of Semnan. Dialects: Related to Lasgerdi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Semnani
More information.
Takestani [tks] 220,000. Zanjan, Qazvin and Markazi provinces: various towns and villages in the mainly Azerbaijani-speaking region from Khalkhal to Saveh, especially in Takestan and villages to the south and southeast. Alternate names: Takistani. Dialects: Khalkhal, Tarom, Zanjan, Kharaqan, Ramand (Takestan). Close to Talysh, especially Khalkhal dialect. Transitional between Talysh and Semnani languages. Close to Eshtehardi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Talysh [tly] 112,000 in Iran (1993). Northwest Gilan Province along Caspian coastal plain and adjacent mountainous areas from Masuleh, Masal, and Kapur-Chal (Kepri-Chal) (each about 50 km east of Rasht) to the Azerbaijan border. Northern Talyshi is centered around Astara and the Caspian littoral in Azerbaijan; Central Talyshi is centered in the Asalem-Hashtpar area along the Caspian littoral in Gilan Province; Southern Talyshi is centered around Shandermen, Masal, Masuleh, and surrounding mountainous areas in Gilan Province. Alternate names: Talyshi, Talish, Talishi, Talesh, Taleshi. Dialects: Northern Talyshi, Central Talyshi, Southern Talyshi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Taromi, Upper [tov] Upper Tarom of Zanjan Province, Hazarrud, Siavarud. Dialects: Various dialects. Close to Kabatei. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Talysh
More information.
Tat, Muslim [ttt] 8,000 in Iran. Alternate names: Mussulman Tati. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Tat
More information.
Turkmen [tuk] 2,000,000 in Iran (1997). Northeast, mainly in Mazanderan Province, along the Turkmenistan border; important centers are Gonbad-e Kavus and Pahlavi Dezh. Alternate names: Torkomani. Dialects: Anauli, Khasarli, Nerezim, Nokhurli (Nohur), Chavdur, Esari (Esary), Goklen (Goklan), Salyr, Saryq, Teke (Tekke), Yomud (Yomut), Trukmen. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Turkmenian
More information.
Vafsi [vaf] 18,000 (2003). Markazi Province, Arak District, Vafs, near Tafresh. Dialects: Various dialects. Transitional between central Iranian dialects and Talysh; very close to Ashtiani. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran
More information.
Extinct languages
Avestan [ave] Extinct. Alternate names: Pazend, Avesta. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Eastern, Northeastern
More information.
Mandaic, Classical [myz] Extinct. Also used in Iraq (Basrah) and small communities in the USA (New York) and Australia (300 Mandaeans in Sydney in 1995). Alternate names: Classical Mandaean. Dialects: Appears to be the direct ancestor of Modern Mandaic. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, Aramaic, Eastern, Mandaic
More information.
November 3, 2007 1:11 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 13:11
In response to Ali's blah blah...all I can say is "Bomb Iran, Bomb Iran, Bomb Iran"
November 3, 2007 1:07 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 13:07
Robert,
Obviously you don't understand what you read. My Vegas reference was a left-handed "compliment" about celebrating Pakistan as a "great culture". How can a country of 60 years old be considered as a great civilisation, especially with Taliban, Al Qaeda, etc.
November 3, 2007 1:06 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 13:06
Fascinating concept, this, but seemingly one more geopolitical self indulgence. It seems unlikely that the power structure of Pakistan will voluntarily offer to deconstruct. I would prefer commentary which is both thoughtful (this is) AND practical (this most definitely is not).
November 3, 2007 12:59 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 12:59
Well as an Indian I don't agree Pakistan will/should be broken into smaller countries.
I understand the writer is not American. But there is a tendency in American media to pile it on. Pakistan was never as worthy as you thought it was (I guess 'normal' might be the word- just foreign policywise even given FP is mostly self-interest), and I don't believe it's as dangerous it is being made out to be.
I think current Pakistani problems can be brought under control. But my Pakistani friends have to look for answers within, not just attack others.
It doesn't take genius to figure out where this was headed even 5 years ago. I think Pakistanis are sensible people, but if collectively they keep going down this path (militancy/stretegic depth/ 3rd column/taliban whetever u want to call it), world should be ready for the conversation by Mr. Ettefagh
November 3, 2007 12:58 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 12:58
I commented at 10:06 p.m. on November 2.
On November 3, early morning my time, Musharraf had declared a state of emergency (at Condi's behest, believe me, though I don't have proof! and Benazir had been gone to Dubai and tipped that she should fly back to Karachi in case Musharraf is pressured out of office by popular dissent and she could take over as a more pliant pupeet in US hands).
Your wish (and that of several Indian Hindus like Jay who are posting comments on this blog) is come true -- Pakistan is about to embark on a process of slow-motion breaking down into several
separate provinces. Happy? You'd be mad to be happy at the prospect of the total chaos that will unleash in your region.
But, like Bush you are blinded by crazy resentments and reach for destructive power to solve problems.
I pity you, the whole unthinking lot of you.
November 3, 2007 12:57 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 12:57
The Tajiks in northern Afghanistan and the Punjabi in southern Pakistan are not the troublemakers, yet they would suffer enormously if this idea were carried out to create a "Pashtustan". While this may have worked 30 years ago, today a Pashtustan would very quickly fall into the hands of Al Qaeda and the Wahhabis. The best hope would be to partition Afghanistan and Pakistan between Uzbekistan, Tajikstan, Iran and India, rather than letting each country split into several independent entities. With the help of India and Iran, the area could be pacified, and that's probably the only thing that will put a stop to the problem. We should have let India go to war with Pakistan instead of stopping it- to take over the Pashtuns and the Punjabis. We should have encouraged Iran to take over the rest of Baluchistan- which would have had the added benefit of tying down Iran so that it would not threaten the Gulf and Israel for a while. Unfortunately, this administration doesn't have enough sense to do these sorts of things.
November 3, 2007 12:56 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 12:56
your nuts!
November 3, 2007 12:53 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 12:53
this is perhaps one of the most naive and silly postings i've read. nevermind the false assertion that the british engineering the creation of pakistan. (it was the product of one of many internal separatist movements within india, some of which still smolder). of course, pakistan is an amalgam of disjointed ethnic groups, as is india, iran, turkey, syria, iraq. the punchline is, it would certainly be helpful were each ethnic group in their own country. unfortunately, with borders such as they are, it would only cause much misery and death to re-draw borders. if the baluchs and pashtun separate from pakistan, what about those people in iran? and the kurds in iran, turkey, iraq and syria? and, of course, india's maoist separatist movements would be sure to flare up. in some cases, it will indeed prove smart and just to encourage the formation of new nations. for the most part, however, the smart move is to support local cultures with autonomy, which managing a common security structure. unfortunately, the authority of baluch village elders are being displaced by foreign fanatics, overflowing with money and guns funded by the oil trade. it doesn't help that the u.s. has handled iraq with insufficient commitment, that iran attempts to set up new hezbollahs in every unstable country in the region, and that the west is so addicted to oil.
November 3, 2007 12:51 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 12:51
A one-world government ran by a democratic United Nations might be a good solution. Composed or two houses. The First with each country getting a porportional vote according to population. The Second with representatives awarded by GNP. All the worlds resources working for all the worlds people. Too pie-in-the-sky? Democracy is crazy that way. Democrazy?
November 3, 2007 12:44 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 12:44
Mo, you are the biggest idiot here. "how come
we don't have a mock Pakistan in Vegas?"
What the hell are you saying here, that we should have a mini-islamabad themed hotel in Vegas where people can play the slots and blackjack? And doing this would celebrate the greatness of a culture?
Having a hotel called Sahara celebrated the Saharan culture? What does it say when they blow it up to build a new hotel?
Building the Excalibur hotel demonstrates the great culture and nation of Camelot? Did this place even exist?
Or what about the Mirage Hotel or Pirates of the Carribean. I'm sure we can all agree how great a culture these Pirates in the Carribean had and what a great nation they formed.
All together now: YOU ARE AN IDIOT.
November 3, 2007 12:41 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 12:41
A one-world government ran by a democratic United Nations might be a good solution. Composed or two houses. The First with each country getting a porportional vote according to population. The Second with representatives awarded by GNP. All the worlds resources working for all the worlds people. Too pie-in-the-sky? Democracy is crazy that way. Democrazy?
November 3, 2007 12:38 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 12:38
Great writing.
Sanctions on Pakistan is now a must!
November 3, 2007 12:32 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 12:32
Good article. A step that we should have taken long ago....
By the way, all those posters above that talk about Pakistan as being great and all inclusive cultural, etc., how come:
(a) we don't have a mock Pakistan in Vegas, as America's way of celebrating great cultures such as France, Italy or China; and
(b) what made you people of Pakistan think that supporting the uncivilised Taliban and Al Qaeda is a good idea?
November 3, 2007 12:28 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 12:28
To Syed Bokhari, you are way off. I have no horse in this race, and really don't know or care about Mr. Ettefagh. But he isn't an "exiled" money manager. If I'm not mistaken, he still lives and works from his native Pars.
Most ridiculous of your statements is when you say the "British but conceded to after an intense campaign by people who felt they had no place in an Hindu dominated India as the events later have proved that to be correct."
What a ridiculous statement. To all the readers here, do you know what country is the second most populous Muslim country (First in Indonesia) in the world? The answer is India. Not Pakistan.
So please don't go way overboard here by saying that these people had no place in India and that "events later have proved correct" this falsity that you are peddling here.
Additionally, to say that "Pakistan is not a counter weight to anyone and in 1947 there was no Eastern Bloc" shows your lack of education.
Winston Churchill in his famous 1946 speech in Missouri talked about the descendence of an iron curtain in Europe and really the beginning of another war immediately after World War II. THis of course being the COLD WAR.
November 3, 2007 12:24 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 12:24
My Dear Bushy Chief!!
You had chosen two of your trusted lieutenants at the beginning of of your personalized war against Terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq.
One of your trusted lieutenant- Mr. Tony Blair, who stabbed your back at the end as Brutus did on Caesar in Roman senate, and later fled away in to oblivion. Tony's whole political ethos was based on total mother of all lies.
Now Your trusted Second Lieutenant "General Musharraf of PakiLand, who is still there in battle ground, but failing in every front of ensuing battle, against Taliban and Al-qaeda in Nor then Pakistan and afghan border. Most unfortunately he telling lies to confuse you, just like Cassius played trickery against Rome.
Your loss of insight on what Pakistan's condition is now, that made more vulnerable, and if you don't take any corrective measure, then whole your ball game will fall into disrepute, and Russia and China will have last lough.
November 3, 2007 12:13 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 12:13
All Pakistanis should remember that Pakistan gave the Taliban to the world and nursed bin Laden and gave his gang safe passage.
November 3, 2007 12:11 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 12:11
There is now a state of emergency imposed in Pakistan.
Immediate Sanctions are necessary, especially against a country of drug runners, a hub of money laundry and nukes.....that is a bad cocktail, before adding the Islamist extremists and Wahhabi yahoos....
Those Pakistanis above that are engaged in self-congratulations and prayers ought to take note.
November 3, 2007 12:05 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 12:05
Dear Ali Ettefagh,
With all respect ... your views have put me in major confusion. What is your subject? A country with 5 states having different cultures dont deserve a country called pakistan? Are there no achievements? one shud compare it with Iran first.
Economics gives basic rule of demand n supply .... Opium supply is from afghanistan and demand according to yourself isnt pakistan. Yet blame pakistan to be a route to supply? i am pretty sure drugs mafia is about individuals that you will find in Iran, The states or any country around the globe. Any drug supply has many routes and it circulates around the globe.
It is a proud muslim nation that feels sorrow for any islamic country around the globe suffering unfairness. Its unfortunate that true leaders dont last long and rules got corrupt. but the argument will be ... Pakistan is surely not the most corrupt country in this world?
You called pakistan dangerious? yet The whole news around the world says Iran is a threat to the world and pakistan still supports iranian ... How strange is that.
A country name is like a father name that stick to you for life and i am sure none wud want to lose it.
November 3, 2007 12:04 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 12:04
I think its fair to say that calling for the dissolution of a country into smaller, weaker, more pathetic, more amicable to foreign manipulation, parts is generally an amoral tactic to advance a selfish strategy of global imperialism with evil sentiments. People need to start using rhetorically accurate langauge.
If you want to conquer a people, split them into pathetic more manageable pieces. That's secular humanist capitalist, democratic logic.
Then you can piece them back together when it suits you, like the EU or ASEAN.
Nevermind the fallout, its not your backyard so no one will be throwing trash over the fence into your garden. Or so you think. Of course some disgruntled youth from the former Pakistan may find his way to blowing himself up and a few 100 more on your subway which is unconscionable and evil, but what America does is pure and Good, just because.
Maybe the entire line of logic is wrong.
November 3, 2007 11:58 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 11:58
Mr.Ali Ettefagh has no idea and yours esteemed web site should discourage thes kind of views by columnist, it is hurting sentiments of Pakistani.
We are very proud nation with Unity, Faith and Discipline but admit that due to some unavoidable circumstances , we are having problem.
Gen. Musharraf and his men are very capable, they will tackle the present situation as it deem fit,as troublemaker and evildoer are there and they are no doubt are instrumental ,like a pinch of Salt in Bread make it Salty or a drop of lime in bucketful of milk , turn it sour.
ALHAMDOLILAH, I am a Muslim and I love you all, whatever you do or say. I am not better than anyone; I don't want to convince you with anything. I am just sharing love with you and that's what my religion taught me to do.
MAY THE AL MIGHTY ALLAH BLESS US ALL AND ALWAYS.AMEEN.
November 3, 2007 11:54 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 11:54
Mr Etefagh may be investing millions for his masters but his hubris is shocking. I believe his insight into Pakistan is extremely limited.
First who can dissolve Pakistan? Not the Ali Etefaghs of the world. It is upto the people of Pakistan to make decisions about their homeland and not some mediocre money managers exiled form their native Pars.
Pakistan was not coined by the British but conceded to after an intense campaign by people who felt they had no place in an Hindu dominated India as the events later have proved that to be correct.
His arrogance and ignorance merge as he calls Punjab, Kashmir and Sind as tribal lands.
Sistan is tribal Mr Ali, and the Baloch there do not accept Persian Hegemony and that is why there is unrest at that eastern border and US has caught Iranian AlQaeda operatives at Afghan-Iran border, gun running and drug smuggling. Perhaps Iran should be liquidated to make Middle East a better place. It seems persians do not get along with any of their neighbors.
The official language of Pakistan is Urdu and is well-understood throughout Pakistan.
He should manage money or write about his own homeland which he abandoned for greener pastures and not bother commenting on Pakistan which he clearly has no knowledge of.
Pakistan is not a counter weight to anyone and in 1947 there was no Eastern Bloc!!!!
This dude has no serious background info on Pakistan.
November 3, 2007 11:49 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 11:49
To Chris Thomas, I would say that you are an idiot. No, he is not Pakistani. He is from Iran. Under his name and next to his picture, it states Tehran, Iran.
You can disagree with him, which alot of us do. But he can't keep his comments to himself as he is a Panelist here in PostGlobal. Basically he is doing his job in conversing and opining about global issues. Coincidentally, Emergency rule was just put in effect in Pakistan. So this topic really is as current as current events can be.
The man is perhaps being a bit too provactive, but not as provactive as a military dictator declaring a state of emergency, deporting and jailing opposition, and arresting the Chief of Supreme Court.
November 3, 2007 11:45 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 11:45
The world is going back to fix mistakes: the Armenian genocide, the Holocaust, the crimes of Stalin against its people, Pol Pot and Cambodia, Idi Amin and Uganda.
Why not go after fixing all other disasters like creation of Pakistan, Jordan, Leganon, Iraq, Syria, and Israel.....why not? Attacking the writer will not fix any problems, looking at problems in the eyes will.
I think this is a very good article by Dr. Ettefagh.
November 3, 2007 11:44 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 11:44
I hate to see all these personal attacks upon you for pointing out what has come to be a commonly and increasingly accepted fact that Pakistan is fast becoming a dangerous country with a nuclear arsenal and breeding extremism. It appears that you offended the sensibilities of a lot of Pakistanis and I guess to some extent that is understandable as well. A lot of people are making a good counter argument but I wish it was not directed in a personal way.
November 3, 2007 11:44 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 11:44
Dr. Ettefagh,
Your history on Pakistan is quite interesting.
I do not disagree with your comments however I am curious as to whether or not you are Pakistani or not? Have you ever lived there and if so why did you leave? Did you leave in order to better the standard of living for you and your family? When the skilled or educated portion of a population departs a country the exodus deprives that country's leadership of a vital human resource that will continue to drive the downward spiral into chaos. If you are Pakistani than shame on you for not staying and attemtping to change its course. The world is full of critics who do nothing to help solve issues and then critique those that are in the arena attempting to fix the situation.
If you are not Pakistani than who are you to tell citizens of another country how to govern themselves or whether or not they should remain a country at all?
And as far as your comment about the nuclear issue, as long as Musharraf is in power with his military the nuclear issue will probably remain stable. If a coup by muslim radicals overthrows the militarys control(unlikely) over their nuclear arsenal then we have a serious problem on our hands. The Pakistani military is the one force that provides stability within Pakistan borders. In order to appreciate this factor we must not look through the prism of the western world, but we must look through the prism of the lesser of the two evils. If we desire democracy in Pakistan than we can expect a muslim radical state to emerge with access to nuclear weapons. If we understand that stability is important than we must support those that provide stability in the region such as Musharraf and his military. In contrast to what we in the western world read in the media, the Pakistani Military has conducted hundreds of counter terrorist missions against AQ and has proven extremely effective within the borders of Waziristan.
So in closing, I would highly recommend before you start lecturing another country on how it should govern itself either provide assistance by going there and help out or keep your comments to yourself. The old proverb is appropriate here...
"walk a mile in my shoes".
November 3, 2007 11:30 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 11:30
Pakistan was not really a figment of the British imagination but the result of a megalomania of Jinnah. In the end, the failure of this nation-state must be considered in-light of the ONLY outsider who has had a continuous presence in Pakistan, and that is the U.S.! Expediency of short-sighted goals have led to monumentally blunderous decisions at several stages leading ultimately to a completely chaotic nightmare that is about slip into a catastrophic abyss. All the U.S. can do now is to sit and watch helplessly as this nation becomes the fountainhead of all terroristic training for the globe. Unless democracy takes hold, there is no hope for the future and U.S. must do some soul searching to figure out why repeated destruction of fledgling steps towards democracy were necessary over the last 60 years. Even as we speak, Iran is the focus of the U.S. attention as a way to distract attention from the failures in Iraq while Pakistan continues its drop into nothing but mayhem.
November 3, 2007 11:26 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 11:26
Ed must either be a pro-Bush supporter, who is clamoring for another war under false pretences.
Or he is a persian-hating Arab, in which case, what can you say and where would you start.
Read up on your history son, about the greatness and chivalry of the Achaemanids, Parthians, and Sassanids. Of Zoroaster (creator of perhaps the first monotheist religion), of Cyrus (the creator of Cyrus' Cylinder - the first published Bill of Rights), of Xerxes (Savior to Esther and the Jews), etc., etc.
If you are a Christian, think of it this way: Where were the 3 Wisemen from? Yes, that is correct, they were Persian Zoroasterians.
If you are an Arab, again, what to say and where to start?
November 3, 2007 11:19 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 11:19
Pakistan reminds me of Yugoslavia with their forced almalganation of separate peoples with their wildly different religeous identies into a violent war festering state. Let them divide into their constintuate parts and then, maybe, in their due time will develope into mature democracies. I fear the true reason for the U.S. schizophrenic behavior toward Pakistan stems from their knowledge of nuclear weapons which the U.S. respects more than democracy itself.
Here comes the heresy: If more countries of the world had nuclear knowledge there would be more mutual respect between nations ... a sort of "Mutually Assured Destruction" atmosphere that would prove to be peace producing and therefore more helpfull to the welfare of the peoples of the world. A prime example of this peace is the one that lasted between the Soviet Union and the U.S.
November 3, 2007 11:15 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 11:15
it was all part of india. its a shame that islamics, when given the chance cannot rule themselves, but i dont blame the british. they are not there forcing the paks into constant fighting. and its also true that iran would love to expand into the pak lands. so if there is a problem with their common border - lets look to iran, the spreader of hate and evil, for the cause.
November 3, 2007 11:14 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 11:14
Sir,
Do you any clue of what your are talking or writing about. You should be a perfect pundit for Tabloids or Fox News for that matter.
November 3, 2007 11:11 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 11:11
It seems that mischief making by the British is coming to haunt us in the middle east and south asia. Can there be a reparation case made against the British?
November 3, 2007 11:10 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 11:10
Well well if this missive had come from a person other than an Iranian I would have taken it with a grain of salt even it is a lunatic idea at best. But a lie to a Persian/Iranian is as natural as blinking his eye. Get a life Ali Ettefagh what you propose for Pakistan can easily be rationlized to Iran too.
November 3, 2007 11:04 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 11:04
Musharraf just declared emergency rule in Pakistan. All private media outlets are shutdown. Troops are out on the streets.
Internet and mobile phone systems are about to be cut.
The supreme court chief justice of Pakistan is about to be expelled from Pakistan. Which other country expells its own citizens?
This is a desparate last ditch attempt of a failed state.
November 3, 2007 11:03 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 11:03
I think Mr. Ettefagh's comments were meant to be provocative and not more than that.
Technically, he is correct in that Pakistan, along with much of the middle east were creations of the imperial British. Perhaps Pakistan is less so than Iraq, Syria, TransJordan, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, etc.
Alot of you are correct that Iran is also made up of various ethnicities, religions, and cultures. Much like the India, Russia, China, and more recently the U.S. But that is precisely the point. Iran, by and large, has had national and a cultural integrity for over 2,500 years. Whereas these other countries simply don't and perhaps that is a big problem.
I don't believe Pakistan can be dissolved or split up, especially by the western powers, as that would be no different than the original mess the Brits and the French left us in after World Wars I and II.
However, it was a great and revered Egyptian writer who years ago penned what everyone knows: That in the middle east, there are only two states that matter: Iran and Egypt. The rest are arbitrary borders drawn by the pencil of the British and French.
November 3, 2007 11:00 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 11:00
Many thanks to dr.Ali Ettefagh, for his timely reminder of what actually is going on in Pakistan.
There is growing realization amongst our think tank that, Bush is chasing the mirage of making Pakistan a land of " Milk and Honey", the Utopian conception based on **Bushy brand of democracy? And His vision of pushing democratic propagation proved to be illusive and non achievable.
Dr. Ali Ettefagh has busted such bubble.
In reality Pakistan is failed state, irreparable, unreconcilable and unamended fissures are visible all over Pakistan.
Pakistan is made up with- Punjab, Sindhi, Baluchistan, North Western Frontier province and part of Kashmir illegally occupied. For last 60 years these five pakistani provinces and their subjects totally failed to integrate themselves to create and establish a nation hood conception. These above mentioned provinces, each has its own language, dress code, and each followed own cultural norms, and having own Identity and uniqueness. These diversified characteristics are not allowed to integrate to form a status of unified role model for a Nation hood building, which in turn could help to build an Identity of nation. So Pakistan has failed miserably to do that, and to day all pakistanis are suffering from **Identity Crisis**.
Fortunate enough for Indians, who did unify the nation, and It's subjects do not have any kind of Identity problems. They claimed as INDIANS, irrespective of their creed, casts, religions, language and cultural identities. Today India is in unity amongst all diversities, and they have established a vibrant democratic Republic, and processing.
There is an unhealthy domination of Punjabi over Sindhi and Blanches, NWFP has gone out of central control. literally Punjabi army ruthlessly subjugating Them and push them to slavery. Countless Arm clashes and skirmishes continued between Baluch/NWFP and Punjab Army- since Its gaining independence. Wanton Human right violations are continued in this God forsaken Islamic [?} Republic. I wander where our HR groups are going to do about it??
Our Bush Chief has put his feet into sticky muddy land of Islamabad, and now unable to free himself and his Deputy- Cheney?
So all accounts for total Foreign Policy to wards Pakistan is a magnum flop. Bush spent billion dollars of tax payers' moneys to prop up Gen. Musharraf and his army to stay in power. The consequence is as we see the apparent break down of PAK social structures, Law and Order break down and that created ungovernable Nation as we see- Pakistan to day.
I blogged several times in recent past about Pakistan, and I find my version of Pakistan's malice, is quite similar to what Dr, Ali Ettefagh is telling us.
Again His remedy to cure Pakistan incurable illness, appears to be same medicine I prescribed before.
Only solution for Pakistan is to divide it into Three Independent states like Republics of Baluchistan, Republic of Sindhi, and Republic of Punjab and NWFP should be tagged with Afghanistan. The illegally occupied so called "Azad Kashmir", must be be allowed to reunite with Indian controlled Kashmir as an integral part of Indian territory. The fundamental reason is that Kashmiris themselves no longer want to live under Punjabi domination and occupation. These Kashmiri tribal have suffered to much in the hand of Punjabi Army.
By doing this America will gain firm footing in Afghanistan, and she will get easy access to Afghanistan via Indian territory, without any hindrance [ which America is facing transit difficulties via terrorist infested Pakistan border]. As days passing by, American presence in Afghanistan appears to vital for future confrontation against China, whose Clout is growing menacing proportion, and that not good for Sam's maintaining Vital interest in Central Asia.
Recent improved good relation with India, is a vital trump card for America and that can be played as a deterrent to China's Expansionist design.
Unfortunately for Tehran it will prove too much? Because Iran may lose quit a big chunk her present territory to Afghanistan and to Baluchestan Republic.
November 3, 2007 10:51 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:51
Who are you to think about like that? Pakistan is a homeland of 160million muslims and they love their homeland. If you are westernize tout then remember Europe was fighting among themselves for having same religion till WW-II who are so called civilized.
November 3, 2007 10:44 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:44
A good analysis and very clear thinking.
It is amazing to see the personal attacks of Pakistani posters as a way to divert the issue. It shows the national mindset of Pakistan and that is why the do not recognise the problems they have. It is a country of drug runners and terrorist hosts.
November 3, 2007 10:40 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:40
Isn't the question here really what a nation should be to be effective (that is, a nation in control of its borders and people, acting in a coherent manner)?
If you strip away the partisan comments from those who support this article and those who hate the author (or Persians or Shia more generally), the arguments seem to center on why Pakistan is different from any other state made of various factions who nevertheless act as a nation.
The answer to that question will likely come in book form from analyzing the social, political and economic differences between Pakistan and other countries.
In the meantime, shouldn't we at least consider that a country's current existence should not be sufficient reason for its continual existence?
After all, every country on Earth has had its borders changed (sometimes by internal forces, sometimes by external), and no country remains forever in one state.
Given that nations do change over time, why would we attack the author as an idiot for suggesting that that action might relieve some of the pressures that exist in Pakistan now?
Wouldn't a better question (for those who disagree with the author) be in what way is this dissolution plan likely to increase the very factors that he plans to reduce (like rivalry for resources, nukes, etc), rather than simply calling him an idiot?
If we're honest, this set of questions will likely need to be asked for many of the countries in the midst of conflict (think Turkey, Kurdistan, Somalia, Ethiopia, Lebanon, Iraq, etc). Some or all of these countries have civil and political unrest because the national borders do not reflect the aspirations of the citizens there.
Merely asking the question does not require endorsing the solution, just a willingness to examine why some countries work well as nations and others don't.
November 3, 2007 10:39 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:39
It does not seem that the author's intention is to actually have his propositions implemented. How? By whom?
He is simply venting about the disaster that has befallen Iraq and threatening the whole region for the long term. There is no denying that Pakistan is one of the top seats for the Dysfunctional Nations Club. All the drivel about Islamic/National unity vaporizes when one looks at a day's worth of news coming out of Pakistan - not only these days; it has been coming a long time. Ettefagh's piece is more a sarcastic commentary on the state of affairs in Pakistan in particular and the region as a whole.
November 3, 2007 10:38 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:38
My comments from yesterday seem to have been removed by the WP censors. Or was it Iranian censors?
So much for freedom of speech.
So I'll try again.
Divide and Rule an old and discredited British trick is what the erudite Iranian is trying to make us buy.
Similar to 50 US states with no state powerful enough to go against the US administration and states bickering over water sharing like they are different countries not patriotic American states.
BTW it is the same old ploy Joe Biden supports for Iraq.
Nothing new here!
I guess as an investment banker it offers smaller in size, but more customers to rip off!
November 3, 2007 10:35 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:35
The whole existence of Pakistan is unfortunately is based on fundamentalism and hatred towards its big massive secular neighbour India. Pakistan's leadership and army sowed the seed of terrorism to hurt and de-stabilise India. The terrorism spread to Afghanistan, it prospered in Islamic non secular environment of Pakistan, and ultimately to West (911, 77). The same terrorism is now engulfing Pakistan. Even so called modern and educated Benazir Bhutto used tools of Pakistan army sponsored terrorism in Kashmir in 1980s. The leadership in Pakistan be it from army, democratic or dynastic can only appease the slightly moderate but mostly conservative population by bashing India in one way or another. The west in specific Britain, France and US has unfortunately irresponsibly supported Pakistan's mischief with democracy and 60 year old honeymoon with fundamentalists by aiding it more weapons and cash.
November 3, 2007 10:34 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:34
PAKISTAN is: same like its cricket team.
The most exciting and unpredictable team in cricket today.It has wonderful cricketers : remember the likes of Hanif,Majid Khan,Asif Iqbal,Imran Khan,Miandad,Wasim Akram,Waqar,and currently Asif and Shoieb Akhtar(the fastest in the world).
What Pakistan needs is a CAPTAIN may be someone like IMRAN KHAN(possibly the world's greatest cricketer ever).
There are 3 things about Pakistan which you foreigners will never understand.
1. The culture and concept of Pakistan
2. Urdu Ghazal
3. Cricket.
November 3, 2007 10:32 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:32
It would make far more sense for this failed state to reunify with India in a federated structure.
November 3, 2007 10:31 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:31
If a central government has no control over large sections of a country for long periods of time, that's a strong indication that de facto there is no nation. Since when has the central government of Pakistan had any control over the northwestern states of Pakistan? If it was a unified nation, would the central government have to engage in peace treaties with these states? It would seem obvious that there is no Pakistan nation. Just collections of semi-autonomous states that do whatever they wish, including allow groups declared to be terrorists by the central government to operate freely.
Pakistan "the nation" is a farce.
November 3, 2007 10:30 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:30
The reason we are talking about pakistan as a failed state is because of the international terrorism environment it has fostered for a long time. Why are we not talking about Bangladesh as a failed state? The author is an independent and original thinker and has a valid point but the counter points offered on this board are excellent and that is the reason this is a good discussion.
My solution to pakistan's problems are:
1) Strict adherence to rule of law no matter how bad that law is.
2) No military interference in political, civil and judicial affairs.
3) Create and foster higher learning educational institutions with rigorous academic standards, not religious schools.
November 3, 2007 10:29 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:29
If a central government has no control over large sections of a country for long periods of time, that's a strong indication that de facto there is no nation. Since when has the central government of Pakistan had any control over the northwestern states of Pakistan? If it was a unified nation, would the central government have to engage in peace treaties with these states? It would seem obvious that there is no Pakistan nation. Just collections of semi-autonomous states that do whatever they wish, including allow groups declared to be terrorists by the central government to operate freely.
Pakistan "the nation" is a farce.
November 3, 2007 10:29 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:29
For someone who uses the word "esencially" and "rouge state" (I'd say we were more of a magenta state) I'd be careful about attacking others' pronunciation. Moreover, if you took a quick break from howling at the moon you'd see that you and Ali are both on the same side (and equally out of your minds).
November 3, 2007 10:27 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:27
Perhaps Pakistanis who are up in arms over the proposed solution to the failure that is Pakistan should themselves come up with a plan to rid their country of the terrorist factories. It would also be nice to have a semblance of a real democratic government. It is not enough for them to engage in hysteria anytime someone points to some truths about their country.
November 3, 2007 10:26 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:26
Ali, where on earth did you get these stories from? For someone who clearly dislikes Pakistan you sure spend a lot of your time doing research about Pakistan. When was the last time you visited Pakistan? Have you ever even been to Pakistan? Pakistan is a great country, and millions of people call it home, those who criticize Pakistan can just go and join your dumb side of the world.
People in Pakistan live a great and happy life, honest businessmen and well educated people thrive in Pakistan. The standard of education, jobs and living in Pakistan is very high. Every home has all the necessary electrical appliances that every home is the USA has, yes even the sweeper who earn $200 a month cleaning streets has a TV, fridge, DVD player etc. I am an Aircraft Engineer with a US degree and I went back to my country to work there. Why don’t you go and live in Iran, why do you not live in your country, is it not as good as my Pakistan? Hundreds of Pakistanis I know go abroad for higher education and come back to invest their knowledge and skills back in Pakistan, can you say the same for yourself? Then shut up!
November 3, 2007 10:23 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:23
I am amazed by Mr.Ettefagh's logic (or lack of it). One would seriously think that if any need there might be to dissolve any country, that country would be Iran for the following reasons: 1- Iran (at its present shape) occupies part of Azerbaijan and the Arab region of Arabistan.
2- Iran threatens the stability of the most strategic region in the world i.e. the Gulf.
3- Iran was always ruled by foreign powers.
Wake up Mr. Ettefagh and check the news before you start to compose.
November 3, 2007 10:22 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:22
A thoughtful piece by Dr. Ettefagh. One niggle at the outset though: Pakistan is not an acronym coined by Rehmat Ali Choudhary or anyone else. This view has received prominence in recent years to 'dramatize' the missing 'K' but it is for media consumption. East Pakistan for example, never figured in the acronym.
Dr. Ettefagh's provocative thought has drawn the usual: "Why not India..?" responses. The difference plain and simple is democracy. All states have centrifugal forces including Belgium for example, which seems to want to head toward a split along linguistic lines. If you have democracy, no matter how marginalized you feel, you can whip up like minded people to create a stir to get redress without taking up arms. In India's case, democracy, the creation of linguistically aligned states and subordination of the armed forces to civilian rule, play a strong role in keeping everybody within the circle.
The problem (among many) with Pakistan is that it is really an army disguised as a state. The military dominates economics and politics and keeps manufacturing security threats to get its toys and benefits. On top of it all, it has cynically exploited Islam to create the 'glue' and to fight asymmetrical war against its neighbors. All of this is coming home to roost--there is no such thing as a free lunch.
The imposition of martial law today is an acknowledgment of that reality. Pakistan's rulers have had their chance to prove the viability of their state and its willingness and ability to exist without being a constant source of danger to everyone else.
It will be interesting to see if Ms. Rice and the EU leaders actually follow through with their threats to withhold aid.
November 3, 2007 10:22 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:22
I think the piece scratches the surface of a much more serious dilemma. Mainly that the state system itself has produced mass amounts of violence and thoughtless environmental denigration. As Charles Tilly argues, states can be viewed as the most "successful racket" within a given society. I believe a scant review of the previous century reveal that one unified political entity commanding the ability to extract resources from millions of people leads to repressive Leviathans more often than not. Should any one entity controlled by universally imperfect human beings be vested with the level of destructive force existing in many modern states. I am not advocating anarchism, but arguing that concentrating vast amounts of power and destructive capability in one unified state is dangerous to all human beings. The state system has only existed for a blip on the continuum of human political history. If it has failed us there is no requirment that it be maintained....
November 3, 2007 10:21 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:21
I think Ali ought to go to Pakistan himself and fight it out to "dissolve" that country. Leave us out of it.
November 3, 2007 10:15 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:15
Yeah good thinking Ali. More partitioning is what we need in the Middle East. So whatever check the government of Pakistan had on the warlords would be completely eviscerated leaving entire regions subject to brutal totalitarianism a la, the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
Hey I have an idea, instead of bloviating on 60 year-old-mistakes that England made maybe you can turn some of your pontificating powers to actually helping people and solving problems that already exist, rather than suggesting ways to make things 10 times worse?
November 3, 2007 10:14 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:14
Fine article. Solution is flawed. How much time will be needed for maturity and independence? What will be the basis for econimic life of each territory? How will creating new rival states bring about stability?
November 3, 2007 10:10 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:10
Poor and naive analysis. diversity in a country does not mean dissoultion. unity in diversity! wether, sindhi, punjabi, pashtun, kashmiri or baloch...all identify themselves as pakistanis. sure there are some nationalistic elements, just like in EVERY country...spain, india, ireland an the list goes on....
the troubles pakistan faces are more due to lack of education and instability in neighboruing afghanistan. PAKISTAN ZINDABAD
November 3, 2007 10:05 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:05
Make no mistake, the United States is the most dangerous country in the world. We have, under this criminal administration, become militaristic, and aggressive to the point of invading other countries on mere suspisions. The worlds worst fears about american imperialism are comming true. This administration has even floated the idea of using nuclear weapons, and this from a man that cannot even pronounce the word. To make it worse, the state of our economy essencially makes us a wounded animal. With corporate america in desperate need of markets, and resources, and this rouge administration catering to their every wish, every country out there that has resources that the american corporatocracy wants should be very afraid. As far as dangerous, every other country in the world pales by comparison. This article just serves as more smoke and mirrors to distract us from the true danger, the one that lives on capital hill.
November 3, 2007 10:04 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:04
Pakistan, as one of the posters has correctly observed, means the land of the “pure” or clean. But there is nothing clean about this newly-formed country. Have you been there lately? People are filthy, crap covers the streets, people look like walking zombies, they rather kill 160 of their on citizens than allowing a former woman Prime Minster to return home and engage in politics-- just name it! One poster has suggested that Dr. Ettefagh should go to hell; well I say to him just go to Pakistan where the real hell is located. Bon Voyage!
November 3, 2007 10:01 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 10:01
And Iran too........
I will agree that Pakistan is not a 'classic nation state based on Stalin's definition'. Neither is Mulla-ist Iran. Baluchistan-Siestan should become part of Baluch living in Pakistan and Afghanistan. All the Kurdish areas of Iran should join in with Kuridstan Region of Iraq and so on. The same is true in Afghanistan.
Given the holocaust of 1947 partition it is better to make the 'bangy-dangy lands' work. Also, hold the Persian arrogance.
November 3, 2007 9:58 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:58
Pakistan's problems (which are very real) do not stem from ethnic divisions. The situation is very different from Yugoslavia, where you had explicitly nationalist movements seeking independence in every region. Even if Punjab, NWFP, etc, were separate entities, they would still each suffer from the main problems.
The main reasons for instability in the country have to do with the concentration of wealth in a traditional elite and the concentration of political power in the military. (The latter is strongly tied to the threat -- real and perceived -- posed by India.)
Progress in Pakistan would be better serevd, I think, by (1) serious land reform and (2) reaching a fundamental security understanding with India, one that addresses the Kashmir issue.
November 3, 2007 9:56 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:56
Actually Inida was like that, Indian subcontinent is full of tribes lanugages, own customs, traditions, religons. There should have never in Pakistan, India or Bangla Desh. There should have been different countries based on customs, traditions and historical records. So the best solution to the problems in india and pakistan or that..............all the old provinces, states should restored and made into federal or confendral units.
Experiment of Pakistan is total failure.
I commend you to write and come out with the truth
November 3, 2007 9:55 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:55
Dear Dr. Ali, thank to The Great Architect Of The Universe there are people like you, who explicit the true among the vices, the evil and the immoral acts of the said to be democratic superpowers such as England, the USA and their eyeball country Israel. We know that all of the problems within the Middle East are caused by the disgraceful past administration of mother England and the intruder US. Iraq, Taiwan, Hong-Kong, Palestine, Syrian Golan Islands occupied by Israel,Malvinas Islands which is occupied by mother England,...you name it!There might be too many others which I cannot point them out! Pakistan is a model which Mr. Bush has as his partner because he has some interest as he had with Saddam Hussein and Iraq a couple of decades ago. But Mr. Musharraf mut be aware, for this same partner my arrange a gallow for him in the future if he turn out to be his enemy. Mr. Miguel - Campinas - Brazil.
November 3, 2007 9:55 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:55
Mr Ettefagh is partially right - Pakistan was never a nation. Comparisons to India and Iran are meaningless. India was a nation by the 3rd century BC, when Ashoka ruled an India that was as large as Aurungzeb's India. Persia was older than ancient Greece. Thus in spite of having many different languages and ethnic groups, in spite of having splintered into smaller entities over the years, the concept of a single nation was always there in both India and Iran.
Creation of Pakistan was driven by fear - perhaps even reasonable given the many Hindu-Muslim riots India continues to have - but that is still not a valid ideology. Clever politicians and military fascists use the same fear of India and Islam to continue their rule, whose simple goal is to let a relatively small number of oligarchs hold on to their power. Within ten years of independence India had its land ceiling act that gave land to the peasants, the countryside of Pakistan is still ruled by sardars and chaudhrys. This is the crux of the matter - the rest is all hoax. East Pakistan separated because 75% there were peasants, the rulers in Islamabad could not care less about their needs. If tomorrow India gives Kashmir to Pakistan, Pakistan will disintegrate.
The solution to Pakistan's problems is not splintering, but democracy. They need to get rid of the military-mulla kleptocracy. This is where Ettefagh is wrong, because by NOW there are generations of Pakistanis who love their country as much as the Iranians and Indians love their countries.
November 3, 2007 9:51 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:51
How dangerous is a country that needs dissolution is none of the business of intellectual cum businessman.Intellectualism leads to fair,safe and sound solutions.Business focuses on competition(cut throats ones).Combining both(for anything except total sincerity) can be lethal,as we can easily observe in this case.Furthermore,Ettefagh seems to be urning more than he should.That's why he is demonstrating mental imbalance.I advise him a good psychiatrist.
November 3, 2007 9:50 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:50
Oh for crying out loud! Does anyone from outside the US REALLY think that people from New York City, Texas border towns, central Alabama or the deep south and Detroit or Puerto Rico think the same or even think alike on most issues? The problem is not that British Colonies are a conglomeration of tribes, the problem is the attitudes of the tribes. No one who ever visited the US with any education would think that THIS former colony was a monolithic group. We know that our differences strengthen us. Pakistan's differences should strengthen them if they thought about it for one moment. The problem with the ultra-conservatives in Pakistan, Iran, etc is that they invent make-believe differences that aren't real (like Shiite vs Sunni) and then try to extract power through that in-fighting. Either Malcolm X lied and there is no Umma or the differences between tribes in Pakistan are make-believe pretend children's games. One has to be true and one has to be false: which is it? Tribes or Umma? you decide.
November 3, 2007 9:49 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:49
Well, if this is what a province wants, they should be allowed. Anyone who wants to unite a form a country should be allowed to do that as well.
Let the people decide. Some of us may disagree with others, but we have no right to tell other people what they should want.
November 3, 2007 9:47 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:47
Mr. Ettefagh's provoctaive stance defies all common sense. Pakistan is not the only state which was created artificially, India too was created in the same fashion. The man who drew the border lines between India and Pakistan never visited the Indian subcontinent before partitioning the British colony. If disparate populations/ethnictities/tribes are basis of separate nationalism or statehood, then most of the currently existing nations and states must disappear.
The basic problem with Pakistan is not that its a conglomeration of population groups who lack a common language or ethnicity, its lack of rule of law. While India succeeded in establishing law and order--apparently through less-than-perfect democratic practices--Pakistan lacked democracy in toto from day one. The ruling cliques of Pakistan lack legitimacy, while India's ruling cliques somehow enjoy broad legitimacy. Dissolving Pakistan is not a solution, that cannot be. The Solution lies in making it truly democratic, getting rid of external enablers that help ruling cliques to cling to power autocratically or dictaorially, and establishing rule of law (as opposed to rule of man).
November 3, 2007 9:45 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:45
stupid insecure iranian. jealous fool. its your country that's about to be bombed into the stone age. you should be thinking more about that than about pakistan.
November 3, 2007 9:41 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:41
the same can be said of iran and india. I think we should start by splitting the artificial iran first. lead by example
November 3, 2007 9:35 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:35
Live, From Islamabad....it is Saturday Night State of Emergency (formerly known as Martial Law). All private papers, TV stations and media outlets are shut down!
So much for that liberal democratic state with lots of free papers, as the poster above said.
November 3, 2007 9:33 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:33
Musharraf is about to declare emergency rule (read: martial law). Is Musharraf General the modern version of Poland's General Jaruzelski ca. 1980s? And if so, who is his handler? Saudi Arabia?
see BBC report:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7076670.stm
November 3, 2007 9:25 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:25
good article
November 3, 2007 9:22 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:22
Let's ask a different and frank question:
Why is it that India is a success but Pakistan is not? They both started around the same time, did they not?
November 3, 2007 9:19 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:19
These are the views of an extremely biased Shia who see Sunni Pakistan neighbor as biggest their enemy. Extermist shia love India and hate Pakistan.
November 3, 2007 9:11 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:11
Good article. Time for Pakistan to grow up and face reality. Otherwise, all of their 150+ million people will be branded as a giant land of terrorist cells.
November 3, 2007 9:10 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:10
It is up to Pakistanis to decide what kind of a Government they want. I hate to see proposals to the extent of redrawing borders. It is a myopic view that does not take longer term consequences into account. To borrow a word from Ronald Reagan "Here we go again". I am from India but I respect sovereignty of people of Pakistan. I consider this author's views arrogant and counter productive to spreading peace in that region.
November 3, 2007 9:09 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:09
This is the most intelligent piece of writing on Pakistan that I've read for years. The creation of that country was a disaster that the British created and then walked away from, leaving it to sink or swim as best it could. Sinking and swimming has been Pakistan's story ever since. It has always lacked a coherent reason for existing. Its creation inflamed religious intolerance (again thanks to the British) where it had not existed before; led to mass murders on a horrifying scale; and an enmity between two countries that was never necessary but has been endlessly exacerbated by both. All this said, how unlikely it is that anything can now be changed. Readers interested in how this tragedy came about should turn to Alex von Tunzelmann's page-turning INDIAN SUMMER.
November 3, 2007 9:00 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 09:00
Good idea. This way, we can separate the majority that want peace from the blood thirsty minority. The drug trade story explains it all.
Thanks Dr. Ettefagh!
November 3, 2007 8:57 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 08:57
Excellent idea. Dividing Pakistan into Baluchistan, Sindh, Punjab, NWFP wold bring peace to the region, it's new nations and the world at large. None of these smaller nations would require nuclear weapons and can be easily pressured to give them up like Ukraine in exchange for freedom. The Kashmir problem would come to a logical end.
Punjab would be dependent on Sindh and India for supplies being landlocked and Sindh on Punjab for water. Same the dependency of NWFP on Punjab would be greater. Thus relations between the new states would have to be conducive. It would also be easy to isolate terrorist elements in either state and eliminate them.
The concept of a stable and united Pakistan will not work. Good article.
November 3, 2007 8:56 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 08:56
What has been done cannot be undone and the Pakistani people have evolved into hate and fear infested people just as the Indians have in most parts. Going back to the old days will set back the subcontinent back another hundred years. If the West in particular UK and US stop meddling, what the Subcontinent needs is a Federation of India, Pakistan, Napal, Burma, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Singapore and some others like Iran and Afghanistan to form the Federated States of Middle East. That is if any of these SOBs have any real vision to rid them selves of the constant war and conflicts, created by their corrupt leaders, often manipulated by the outsiders.
The oil resources of Iran, natural gas reserves of Bangladesh, fertile lands of Afghanistan, Punjab, the Indus valley and other rivers delta of Bangladesh, can be used for productivity and efficiency rather then the uncontrolled annual rains and flood. What is needed is the ingenuity of the Dutch to build a control system like they have in Holland.
Unfortunately they do not have a person like Gandhi, but they have India's Singh and some pretty good new smart business people that can mold a cohesive Union to establish equal justice for all, insure domestic tranquility for all, provide for a common defense for all, general welfare for all and secure the blessing of liberty and prosperity for all.
Provided, for a change all these people stop thinking as being different entities that divide them, but rather the common interests and needs that will unite them for a better more stable future, unbinding them from the hegemony of US and UK.
November 3, 2007 8:44 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 08:44
Nice solutioun, then we will have several Pakistans too deal with, as if one is not enough trouble for the world.
November 3, 2007 8:42 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 08:42
The Ettefagh is completely ignorant about the genesis of Pakistan. Pakistan was the brainchild of Muslims in what now India. They were afraid of being the ruled rather than the ruled after the British left. They were the ones who wanted a separate state. In what is now Pakistan, the Muslims were only a slim majority in the provinces of Sindh and Punjab but the Muslims had managed to retain power in the provincial elections and these Muslims had no initial desire for breaking away from India.
Kashmir did not factor in the Pakistani dreams until later. The rulers of the erstwhile states that were contiguous could choose to remain independent or join India or Pakistan. The ruler of kashmir decided to join India even though the population of Kashmir was about 55% Muslim at the time of independence.
Unfortunately after Independence the Muslims left behind in India were betrayed by both Pakistan and India when the two prime ministers signed a pact banning further immigration to Pakistan even though Muslims in what is now India had given up their lives to break up India and form their beloved country of Pakistan.
Breaking up Pakistan is not the solution.
The solution is to goad its people away from the cult known as Islam and urge them to return to their cultural heritage which is Hindu-Buddhist.
Islam is an evil cult that prevens democracy from taking hold.
The second part of the slution is to complete Partition by
1) allowing any Muslim in India to migrate to his/her beloved Pakistan at any time. Some 100 milliion talnted Muslims from India will benefit Pakistan immensely and they will not be left to the mercy of us evil Hindus.
2) by making Pakistan vacate the area in Jammu and Kashmir that is occupied by it. The rules of the Partition must be followed and all of Jammu and Kashmir should be returned to India.
November 3, 2007 8:36 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 08:36
The more I think about splitting up Pakistan, the crazier the idea seems. It is interesting to note that no one has thought of one possible consequence: the Northwest Territory could well end up being run by the Taliban and Al Qaida. They are trying to do that now, and have even tried to declare a Caliphate, with them in charge. What a nightmare that would be.
November 3, 2007 8:29 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 08:29
This will set an example for most of other countries to follow. What kind of world will emerge for the humanity to live. There is better solution than disintegration of countries on tribal lines. Let the armies of world be dissolved to save $ one trillion to address humanity needs. Writer is correct if just issues of nations like Palestine, Kashmir, Chachnia, Darfur are not addressed by the international and national government agencies people finally rise up to take control. World is reaping what it has sown over the decades of imposing hageomony, injustice, and corrupt leadership. All people are human seeking justice and tranquilty and resolution of their problems with soft power and not through guns. Armies are least equipped to solve civil problems. As for Pakistan it is conspiracy to dissolve the country by creating civil war and turning people against its own army.
November 3, 2007 8:25 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 08:25
This is bunch of bull. Turbulent time does not equal to splitting any country. Pakistani majority love their country and fiercely loyal to it.
Washington post while your bloggers and writers have every write to make their point of view, atleast make it on the intellectual level.
MOON
November 3, 2007 8:23 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 08:23
well said.a country that came into being on hatred cannot survive for long.the best example of that is the pshyce of every pakistani.they r in a constant state of anger, some times its india,U.S.A or even Isreal.oflately they have started hating U.K,france germany ...etc.they remind me of palestinians who r totally impotent so they curse the whole world for everything.i have a feeling pakistan will end up like palestine.everybody will want to keep them at a distance.that had already started after 9/11 but now that will be thrown out from every where.god bless pakistan.we must offer our sympathy for such a sorry state.
November 3, 2007 8:00 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 08:00
If you use the similar logic that the author has used, you will end up wiping out most of the countries off the world map including Iran, a country thats fueled by corruption and underground violence and thrives on Totalitarianism. Many third world countries are in the same position. Singling out Pakistan based on your personal opinion weakens your position as a journalist/writer who lacks the broader perspective. Instead of focusing on whats wrong with other nations lets look at ourselves and patch the giant holes in our foreign policies, provide the basic necessities to our public and see what we can do to help the struggling countries who have stood by us when we needed them the most. Pakistan is a crucial US ally and deserves to be treated as one.
November 3, 2007 8:00 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 08:00
I seriously doubt existence of such individual (Dr. Ali) in Iran. No one can harm Pakistan, it just the continuation of American policy of carrot & stick. History clearly shows what American establishment is capable of, i.e. make leaders like Saddam Hussian and Osama Bin Laden. Use them for its goals and then declare them terrorists. Without any doubt, its Musharraf's turn. It all started when Bush visited Pakistan last year. As far as I can understand, Musharraf already had plans of giving up and transfering power. But, Americans wanted to corrupt people like Benazir Bhutto to replace Musharraf, so that they can easily be bought thru money, when goals of American establishment are achieved. Ground realities clearly show that Benazir has lost vote bank, she still uses her fathers name for votes, even after being twice elected Prime Minister of Pakistan.
American establishment wants to destablise Pakistan, to make an excuse to enter Pakistan for greater target of attacking Iran.
Here I would like to mention what I mean by American establishment. It means Pro-Isreal groups and Jewish members of US government. Pakistan has been systematically pushed away from long time friend China, to pave way for attacking Pakistan.
Whatever the think tanks think about Pakistan, in reality Pakistan is a Nuclear armed state and intrusion by foreign forces might result in destruction of the region, which could include Israel and could also harm American interests in GCC countries.
November 3, 2007 7:50 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 07:50
Take Pakistan, Afghanistan, Russia, China, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egpyt, Jordan, Lebanon, Algeria, Morocco, Kuwait, Dubai, Libya, Gaza, West Bank (PA), Tunisia, Sudan, Yemen et al and nuke them. Let the chips fall where they may. We'll take a look at SE Asia next week.
November 3, 2007 7:45 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 07:45
I am astonish to read this full of hate article.I accept that Pakistan do have some problems, but how Dare the Author to propose to "Dissolve" Pakistan. Pakistan is for ever. The author even don't know the ground realities. He even don't know that the National language of Pakistan is Urdu, although the official language is English same like in India.
Author blamed that "Pakistan is the main transit route for opium and heroin from Afghanistan", may be correct, but where the "opium and heroin" is produced, in "Afghanistan". So why blame Pakistan? NATO and US should stop the production in Afghanistan.
Pakistan is not a relic set up, Pakistan is a country of 160 million people and we all Love Pakistan. We will over come all the problems of terrorism and extremist. 95% Pakistani are peace loving, remaining 5% are misguided by Iran, India , Afghanistan and Mullahs.
November 3, 2007 7:41 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 07:41
pakistan why safer because we follow policy of white house i have example in the 80s wat happen gernal zia time fight aginst rasia wat we gat result AK-47 culture but know dayz fight teror wat happen increase exstreems . iam a ordinary pakistani we love our nation
pakistan zaindabad.................
November 3, 2007 7:25 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 07:25
If we hold the theory that cultural ties are more important than religion, then we can start abandoning the whole concept of nationhood. How is United Kingdom then be legitimate when Scotland, England and Ireland are so different. How is Belgium a country when three languages and culture flourish? One has to be very imaginative to deny that United Kingdom or Belgium are not successful nations. Do we next dismember India and China because they too have different languages, cultures, appearance and religion within their borders. Iran also hosts a variety of people within its borders - the Kurds, the Baluchis, and numerous other tribes.
If culture and language defined the cement that bonds a country together then Central America, all of north Africa should emerge as united countries.
Nations are established for a host of reasons. It is not always the coming together of willing partners. The American civil war was fought to keep a unwilling confederate states within a nation. Nations are often forged together by conquest or by a small group of people who deem that they will be better off being independent.
Pskistan is not unique in having 'revolving door' politicians. Turkey has alternated between politicans, so have India and Italy.
Pakistan's problems are many - chief among them is the army who makes mockery of democracy, suppresses its own people, abets terrorism in the neighborhood, flouts the rule of law and is mired in corruption. These are traits that Pakistan shares with many poor nations.
I will leave it to people wiser than me to propose how Pakistan can extricate itself. The solutions offered by Dr. Ali Ettefagh, to me, seems like a recipe for disaster.
November 3, 2007 7:24 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 07:24
As a Pakistani i have three words for the writer" go to hell". News of our demise have been circulating among some circles since 1947. We are still alive and will remain so.
November 3, 2007 7:16 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 07:16
INCREDIBLY IDIOTIC...THIS ARTICLE LACKS THE DEPTH AND FACTS... I WONDER HOW IT FOUND ITS PLACE ON SUCH A FORUM...
November 3, 2007 7:15 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 07:15
After reading your views there are certain things that came in our mind and that also speaks your fear.
1.In case of pakistan ,Iran cannot be a dominant power in that region.
2 with a pakistan ,Iran cannot overpowered with Arab who has an strategic alliance with the arab sunni countries.
3 you suggestion to dissolve the pakistan into tribal identity is nothing but a dream of enemy of pakistan to loose the wolves to fight with each other and creat problem of security.
4 The strenghth of pakistan is not nationalism but the bond of islam.The more the islam will reighn the pakistani life the more the bond of brotherhood will be and so the unity of tribal people in pakistan.which you want to destroy with the idea of nationalism.
5 with coming of the european union the slogan of nationalism lost the ground.if the father land of nationalism in 16th century can turn down the idea of nationalism in favour of unity then why not tribal pakistna can unite in the name of islam.
6.The creation of pakistan was a final solution of future cancer of indian people and pakistani people.if there would be no pakistan there would be not any tribal provices in that region and we all face more than five kashmir problem at the same time.while in reality we are unable to solve one kashmir alone.
7The idea of pakistna led by chaudhry rahmat a western educated was not a fancy but dream to creat an area of islamic identity in the south east asia.
8 The support of british for two nation theory was the outcome of the failed settlement led by the indian national congress and Mr.jinnah.British goverment cannot trasfer the power to any indian faction without a unity in them and being a just ruler the british goverment didnot commit this historical blunder mistake.
9 The question of palestine and israel issue shows that if both indian leader and pro pakistani leaders would lost this opportunities then both would face the same situation like this.what we are seeing after more than fifty years no solution to this problem.
In the last i can say can u present a better solution than this if religion is there?
November 3, 2007 7:09 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 07:09
British Imperilalism was a symptom of colonial competition between several countries in Europe at the turn of the 16th century. After America repelled the British ownership of the new land. Britian became smitten with the pleasure of power that they were able to impose over a civilation and culture. In other words "the American colonialists destroyed our love and control of people and disuaded our ability to be demigods over them".
The rest of the world ie India, Pakistan, Iraq etc. were unable to mount any type of organizational resistence to the Imperialilism. It would seem that the puritanical nature of their religions and lack of a moral base of human living created a true anarchal structure, which is a basis for order and sadistic behavior. The Americans won in the fight against their masters where Asia lost.
The only way America was able to win this battle against evil was the creation of a lawful Consitituion that proscribed unalienable rights for ALL men. Respect for all forms of worship and equality of men and women, separation of extreme religions and state function. A fellowship of mankind.
Until Asia imbarks on these premises, a re-drawing of borders I think will be somewhat fruitless. The people of Asia must acquiesce to moral structure of a political nature and not rule by the sword and power. Culturals must be able to give up their self-love and form a cultural of humanity.
November 3, 2007 6:31 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 06:31
The west is full of ill conceived ideas bordering on illusion. The latest such examples are Kosovo and Bosnia. Bosnia will be this great multi-ethnic nation where Muslims and Christians will exchange flowers and walk hand-in-hand. That worked well, didn't it? Bosnia has been a hub for Islamic extremism. Similarly, Kosovo is a humanitarian solution. Reading the recent history since 1999 demonstrates the opposite, a land of extreme intollerance and ethnic cleansing, and then there was For Dix. So much for the Wests's fantasy ideal states...
November 3, 2007 6:31 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 06:31
I wonder how ethnically (or tribally) homogeneous the five Muslim provinces you cite are. If each is fairly homogeneous, then perhaps the people of Pakistan would be wise to choose this plan.
But if each province has large minorities that theoretically "belong" to a different province from the one in which they are now living, then this plan seems like a prescription for further conflict. Look at what happened to Yugoslavia. I don't think the people of Pakistan will be happier if rounds of ethnic cleansing are added to their troubles.
The real solution is for people to learn to live together in peace. We must not give up so easily.
November 3, 2007 6:26 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 06:26
Frankly, there is w whole lots of truth in Dr.Ettifagh's analysis of Pakistan.
It's sad that lots of Pakistani responders to his article are writing in the light of emotional outburst----------- Why don't Pakistani people accept his warning and work towards fixing the loose bricks in the structure called "Pakistan" than lashing out and making rude, unethical and violant comments. JUST think fellows--- TO THIS DATE ALL ROADS OF VIOLANCE ARE LEADING TO AND EMERGING OUT OF this pakstand.
Hey Paki brotherens...Rather than getting all upset and out of wack amend the problems which are failing Pakistan--- Work towards Democracy; Stop creating terrorism around the world; Stop refusing the citizens comming back to their country ( eg: Shariff); Stop selling weapons of terrorism (eg:Selling Nuclar shit to the world); Stop protecting rouges like Dr.Khan; Stop supporting & protecting terrorists creating troubles in Indian Kashmir; Ask why all that money the WORLD donated to Pakistan after the earthquakes has not left BIG-WIGS, bank accounts to where it was maent to go----------- ABOVE ALL dear PAKIS-- learn and act civilized & stop that religious laden shitty terrorism ... This world belongs to Jews, Chirstian,Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims and every body---- You pakstandi muslims don't have any preference in God's place.
Yes! Jinah was the the Culprit to create Pakistan;Yes! It should never been created--- Frankly Dr. Ettifagh's artcle and analysis should be respected by all good pakistanis to build their country .......... Hail to the Civilized World!
November 3, 2007 6:26 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 06:26
Well, maybe it shouldn't have been a country, but by golly it is now and has nuclear weapons and a huge military establishment. Like it or not, plans to redraw its borders or reorganize it will meet some pretty stiff resistance. I don't know what planet the writer comes from to advocate its dismemberment.
I have worked there, and while I found my colleagues absolutely wonderful, there is no doubt that it is almost, though not quite, a failed state. It is corrupt, its roads are falling apart, and unbelievably violent. Perhaps there is no solution, but to accept that its fate will affect us all. We must live with the uncertainty.
November 3, 2007 6:15 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 06:15
Sir
I can not agree any more on Pakistan than that it should be dissolved. It is an artificial, unnatural country. It was not there, it was not supposed to be their. Only two countries in the world have been artifically created one is Pakistan and the other is Israel. But what a contrast they are one is a Jewish democratic state. THe ither is a Muslim Dictatorship. In Israel atlest religion unites but in Pakistan religion has failed to unite people with common religious beliefs and diverse languages. Pakistan was not required in the first place and now its for every one to see what a disistaer can happen when he go against the nature. Pakistan was not a natural country but sn artifical man (mullah) made country. Pakistani dissident leader Altaf Hussain says that the biggest that the creation of Pakistan has been the greatest tragedy for the Muslims of Indian sub-continent. It is also claimed that the founder of Pakistan MOhammed Ali Jinnah is his last days also regretted the creation of Pakistan. Pakistan should be dissolved.
November 3, 2007 6:14 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 06:14
Consider a quilt analogy. When the whole quilt is in bad, bad shape, one solution that arises to any logical thinker is dissolving the quilt to see if the patches will do better framed on their own or as part of some other quilt.
I am absolutely not qualified to critique the idea of the dissolution of Pakistan except to say that it is a logical thought (with precedent - other non-working quilts were the USSR and Yugoslavia) and hence deserves discussion and in using this process, the idea can be dismissed logically by those who find no value in it. I have read all the posts so far and I see a lot of people who outrightly dismiss the idea - please explain why and enlighten the rest of us. Also, I do not find any one who has posted their solution to Pakistan's problems. There has to be some thought about a solution, however complex the problem is, otherwise there will be no improvement in the lives of millions and millions of people who live in that country now and who are yet to be born.
November 3, 2007 6:03 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 06:03
Pakistan is acountry of highly educated capable and hardworking people.The evidence is success of oveseas pakistanis in field of science financial services and business.There is no denying Pakistan has develomental and geopolitical challenges.
The author,s vitriolic is rflection of his prjudices for which he is using platform
November 3, 2007 5:59 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 05:59
How about we dissolve Mr Ettefagh and his Highmore Global Corporation? "Investment" under the hard sell suggested by the Cheneys, Challabis and Ettefaghs of the world have become synonymous with Mechanized Slaughter and Thievery.
Afterall, as Mr Ettefagh wrote: "It is time to seriously review all of these structures and redraw the borderlines." I would suggest it begins with the "dissolution" of these aggressive, BORDERLESS Corporate States run by tyrants MoreHigh on Greed than anything - or anyone - else in the world.
In brief- Pound sand, Mr Ettefagh. Think of it as a mutual favor. That way you won't have to come back whining to the American People later on to bail you out by airlifting your sorry ass back to the latest corporate-thief safe haven protected by gunboat diplomacy... And the American Public won't have to pay both in money and blood to finance your personal Fortune Seeking. Think of it as "Win/Win".
In a parallel story, the Post has done fine reporting on Blackwater. Essentially, via ripping off the US Government , the avoidance of payroll taxes on its myriad of "subcontractors", and access to privileged personel info within the Defense Department - Blackwater has been able to use the American Public as venture capital for a private enterprise to induce, cherrypick and gut key US Defense Personel, all to Blackwaters benefit.
What a joke, the "CEO" "Wartime" Presidency that fails to use non-compete agreements for key personel such as Special Forces, Intelligence spooks, and critical communications specialists....So very many flies are breeding now, like the Princes of Blackwater, the Ettefaghs of HigherPieMoreCapital and the like...All of them breeding on the stink, the necrotic stench that is The Era of Cheney, Bush and the Vichy Democrats. In more Enlightened times, they'd have all been summarily hung for High Treason along with their lawyers quibling over unneccesary words for things the open eye can see in plain sight...
November 3, 2007 5:57 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 05:57
Jeff Scott you are absolutely correct when you say that pakistan is nuke nude. There is growing evidence to this effect.
This Arif character seems like a typical hardline pakistani youth, the masala that terror groups feed on. His statements and thought process is but a window into the line of thinking that pakistan and pakistanis have.
November 3, 2007 5:38 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 05:38
Yes, some times one must dismantle something to save it, in this case it might serve a lot of good to dismantle Pakistan. Certainly not all of its people are dangerous, but a large enough group seem to profit from terrorists, drug runners and Wahabi extremists and their Madrassas that do not teach science, math and humanities.
November 3, 2007 5:31 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 05:31
Well, it is totally understandable that this world is full of this kind of self claimed or some interest sponsored mentally unstable scholars but it is absolutely mind blowing that a prestigious paper such as Washington Post has a place on its columns for this kind of crape.
I, sincerely, hope that my comments won’t hurt the intellectual feelings of the in charge of the editorial page of this paper.
November 3, 2007 5:22 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 05:22
Time to correct past mistakes.
November 3, 2007 5:20 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 05:20
Yes, indeed. Agree completely.
November 3, 2007 5:08 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 05:08
That Pakistan today is a nuclear armed state is suspect. There have been numerous suggestions to this effect by powerful people(Remember Condelissa Rice during the senate hearing let it slip that pakistan's nuclear weapon problem has been "secured"). The biggest threat that pakistan origin nuclear weapons pose is to the united states, pakistan's principle ally in the war against terror. The US is unlikely to have sat around and let this threat develop.
So I say again, I seriously doubt that Pakistan today has access to nuclear weapons
November 3, 2007 5:06 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 05:06
The comments of ARIF KHAN (presumably a Pakistani reader) posted above make the case for the author. Dangerous people must be allowed to have dangerous weapons.
As others have noted, and as the original question to this panel and Newsweek has mentioned, Pakistan is a very dangerous place and the centre for terrorism, islamic extremism and drugs. Each of these is enough to make the case.
November 3, 2007 4:57 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 04:57
Nations are sustained by shared values, common history, ethnicity and sustainable (as opposed to parasitical) inter dependence. Pakistan's failures are primarily in the areas of shared values and inter dependence of its peoples. The biggest fallacy was to equate shared values with Islam. Common religion has never been a unifier in any country as the history of Pakistan bears out.
Despite far greater diversity, India is one nation not because it is 82% Hindu, but due to the strong institutions it built since independence in 1947. Democracy, a strong independent judiciary, election commission, an apolitical army under total civilian control, clearly demarcated responsibilities for States and the Central Government and full protection to diverse cultural, religious, regional and linguistic traditions have made India strong and growing. In critical issues there is an unstated consensus among all political parties.
If Pakistan builds these very same institutions it will remain united and grow strong. It is in India's interest to see a prosperous Pakistan at peace with itself. Not even the most idealistic (or stupid) Indian would want Pakistan to reunite with India. Indian has its hands full trying to integrate its own 140 million Muslims into the national mainstream.
November 3, 2007 4:38 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 04:38
Maybe this heading should lead the dissolving of the U.S. it is far more dangerous to the world ecologically, politically, militarily, and terrorism wise than Pakistan will ever be. Then we can continue with Ethnic dividing of Europe and then Iran..
November 3, 2007 4:38 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 04:38
I have some sympathy with the sentiments expressed in this piece. Pakistan has not worked as a country, though I do think that Pakistanis have developed an outward sense of national identity (even if regionalism is the norm in practice within the country).
Pakistan is more than just one of many failed experiments in nation building. The magnitude of the failure has profoundly affected international politics. Pakistan is the center of international terrorism and provides shelter and training for jihadist groups of all sorts. For Pakistan, support of terrorist groups is fundamental to its foreign policy, as it is the only way it can keep India bogged down in Kashmir, keep the Kashmiri separatist/independence movement alive, and prevent Afghanistan from falling into India or Iran's sphere of influence.
Terroist groups that are based in Pakistan are responsible for attacks on a global scale. Without Pakistan's support, the Taliban would not exist as a political force in Afghanistan, and consequently, Bin Laden would have never had the freedom and flexibility to develop Al-Qaeda and expand the jihadist agenda.
Something clearly must be done about Pakistan if the problem of militant Islamic fundamentalism is to be addressed. Rather than redraw the map to break Pakistan into 4 countries, the best way is to insist on compliance with democratic norms and alliances with progressive political parties who can usher in an era of modern progressive thinking into a country that has been essentially dysfunctional and backward.
November 3, 2007 4:32 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 04:32
When someone is caught in extraordinary situation(problems) then the "sympathiser" is not supposed to suggest a "solution" from the worst available possibility no matter how many Ph.Ds elevate him,Ettifagh has only one.The basic principle is, 'do to others what you would like to be done to you in response'.I feel offended on such'intellectual analysis'.Should I reply in the same style(negative)?What would that mean if I do.I fear something is seriously wrong with our education or orientation.No one can have the liberty to go to such extremes without compromising one's claim to decency.
November 3, 2007 4:32 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 04:32
Sir.Why pick on Pakistan?What about,Iraq,Israel?Afghanistan?Half of the Latin American Countries?Lands inherited by the USA after the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo of 1848?and literally half of the Known World?What about your Beautiful Iran which is the biggest Trouble maker in the Universe?Let me tell you with Pakistans Nuclear Arsenal if we are FORCED by any Power to Disintegrate we will Take a LOT OF YOU WITH US WHEN WE GO?India knows what we are capable OF>So Keep your ideas to yourself and Believe me the Pakistan Armed Forces can take care of any Eventuality?? Rgds Arif Khan
November 3, 2007 4:18 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 04:18
Yep...back to the drawing board. That mixture of drug money and nukes is highly dangerous. Time to disarm Pakistan from its nukes.
November 3, 2007 4:15 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 04:15
Correct view. Let us take a step back and take a look at all fabricated countries during the 20th century: Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Israel, USSR plus Pakistan..... what is wrong with this picture, eh?
They are all in the news every day about one problem or another. Some dissolved and went about their own business, some with success (Czechoslovakia, USSR, some bits of Yugoslavia) and others with a hand bag of day dreams about vague interpretations of history (Yugoslavia's Serbia, Iraq and Israel).
So, we have to be objective about past mistakes and correct them, especially when we are talking about creatures of the last 60 years or so.
Those that are attacking the writer and his country are misunderstood. The topic is Pakistan and its absurd structure. One politician was deported from his own country (Nawaz Sharrif), another was scared off by a bomb that killed morethan 160 people (Benazir Bhutto) and Mrs. Bhutto was prevented from filing a complaint with the Pakistani police! And the writer is correct: where are the younger politicians in this supposedly free and open "democracy" ?! Where is Pakistan's Obama or Sarkozy or Merckel?
From abroad, it looks like it is Halloween is an every day event in Pakistan!
November 3, 2007 4:08 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 04:08
the author has spoken his personel venom against the established country with indepedent political structure and soverienty.the country which the author wishes to finish has by all records been a close ally to united states as thread monitor to south asia as then percieved by united states.however; the later period proved it that united states is most believed timely friend instead having the permanet basis to float such friendship.i wonder how author has assumed maturity to declare at international media that due to his personel like and dislike how the nations should stay and break up in the world.it is quite fortunate for united states that the learned author was not alive/born during 16trh' century when in the then state of "salem" of united states teen aged/women were ruthleesly hanged on the perception of being witchcraft.the author could go through the history atleast to make comment that how united states flourshed having such bitter past.the episodes as mentioned by the author for braking up pakistan would one lead to understand that no such events ever took place in any country including iran.Most ironically; if the people of pakistan as per author are exrememists; how would they change by redrawing of their borders/breaking up their states.i wish learned author a relaxed intellect to understand the existence of golbe in conflict and reconcillation. there appears more personel pungentof the learned author on the geographical name of pakistan than tendering some reasonable argument to its solution.the author may enjoy to read that in great country like india the father of nation MATMA GANDHI was ruthlessly killed and many ethinic voilences did subsist;still no reasonable person can say that it should have redrawing of borders etc.this is the ever casual thought i have gone through of the post.thanks.
November 3, 2007 3:54 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 03:54
Absolutely on target analysis of poor Pakistan's problem in the wake of British de-colonialization in South Asia, the middle-east and Africa. Now, after over a half-century, the difficulties are even more insoluable than they were in 1947.
November 3, 2007 3:53 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 03:53
good Dr.
i have had the same idea about pakistan for some time. unfortunate but true, they like eritrea, are not a legitimate state. they are renegade provinces torn from their motherlands by outside forces. but if pakistan is to be disbanded cant the same case be made for many other nations? what about the arab ahwaz region of iran itself? they seem to agitate for seperation. wont a disintegration of pakistan invite a similar case to be made for many other nations? i think partition always opens a pandoras box. pakistan is a mistake we must accept, lest a worse circumstance comes out of it's demise.
November 3, 2007 3:38 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 03:38
A couple of historical corrections (and present): Pakistan's official language is Urdu and not English. Partition of India was a result of a referendum, where the Muslim majority provinces decided to form a separate nation. It is called democracy. Besides, who will dissolve Pakistan? The fanatics in Iran who want to obliterate the Jews from the face of earth? Give me a break, man. Why don't you spend your energies convincing your president to stop making WMDs and the dirty bombs so that the world be a better and safer place. Oh,While you are at it, please also ask your government in Iran to stop financing the radical shia groups in Pakistan who are some of the most notorious terrorists.
November 3, 2007 3:27 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 03:27
The title of Mr. Ettefagh's article 'Why not dissolve Pakistan, too?' suggests that Mr. Ettefagh is arguing for dissolution of other countries in that region TOO. Which countries is he referring to?
One may not have to waste time to read Washington post anymore if irrational and poorly informed comments of an INVESTMENT BANKER are presented as an expert analysis on Pakistan or the region.
Unless current situation of Pakistan is analysed from the perspective of recent history, as to the causes of current problem one may not reach a solution and would perpetuate the misery of the people who will be LIVING in that region whichever name is given to their country.
The relevent context is Soviet occupation of Afghanistan with war against the occupation resulting in destruction of Afghanistan, loss of more than a million lives and refugee problem with 1.5 million refugees who have lived in Pakistan for over two decades with problems of arms and drugs coming to Pakistan associated with war and refugees. Thousands of Afghan children were trained to fight the soviets with religious fervour and probably an entire generation grew up not seeing anything but war and may not actually know what a civil life is or what education is. To keep up the support for Afghan war effort and refugees an entire Pakistani generation was taught lessons in favour of militancy and religous fervour for war.
For a solution and to improve the condition of the PEOPLE, now is the time to reverse that.
Mr. Ali Ettefagh should support proper modern education, economic development and a democratic rule for the people of Pakistan and Afghanistan so that militancy and extremism can be curbed.
Suggeted reading:
1. 'Jinnah of Pakistan' by Stanley Wolpert for intro to creation of Pakistan
2. 'Three cups of Tea' by Greg Mortenson for an idea about the people LIVING in Pakistan and Afghanistan and what education can do for them.
For an INVESTMENT BANKER some of the humane issues may be difficult to grasp.
On a different note, Mr. Ali Ettefagh mentions Pakistan at eastern border of Iran as a transit route for drugs from Afghanistan. But is Iran or any other country able to stop further transit of drugs? In that case there would be no drug smuggling issue.
On the lighter side, as an alternate solution Mr. Ettefagh may consider the following: Iranian province of Baluchistan merge with Pakistan's Baluchistan so that Pakistan becomes more stable with resultant stability on eastern border of Iran.
November 3, 2007 3:27 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 03:27
Sane idea whose time may have come.
November 3, 2007 3:19 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 03:19
am not at all surprised to read about the story about Pakistan. actually, it is a continuation of larger propaganda cycle being unleashed in the West from where the Writer like Ali get impressed. the story is misleading and based on faulty and inept knowledge of so-called writer. the present predicament is most attributed to the US and her allies, particularly UK. The US has been a regular actor in the region and used these called millitants these days in her pursuits to disintegrate erstwhile USSR while UK is a party to the problem by leaving behind Kashmir as an unfinished agenda of partition. Pakistan has the capabilty to survive and prgress,provided its people are allowed to rule themselves according to thier aspirations and wishes. If there is no foreign involement in the internal affairs of the Country, most of the problems will be amiably resolved. Pakistan is a land of hardworking 160 Millions people, who are blessed with the strength and resilience to take their Country on the path of progress and well-being. and the fact also needs to be kept in mind that 60 years is not a very long period in the history of any Nation to make her glory manifested.Afterall, these were the same Muslims who have been ruling the Subcontinet for about 900 years, before The Brithishers came. So lets not be get carried away with such a misleading. confused and self assumed fabrication and twisting of facts.
November 3, 2007 2:05 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 02:05
I think Ali Ettefagh has come up with a real gem of a piece, that hits hard at the root of the problem AND suggests a viable solution to this entire pan islamic jihad.
Pakistan was a vague idea to begin with, which nations of the west used to their end to defeat communism and as counterbalance against its socialist, pro-USSR neighbour, India. Pakistan today is a nation deeply fractured along ethnic and religious lines, the Punjabis rule the roost, occupy most of the higher government jobs, occupy the most important positions in the military, and over the years have ensured that maximum development takes place in punjab - to the detriment of the other states. Punjabis account for the political and military elite within pakistan which the other ethnicities detest.
Sindh, composed of mostly the highly educated masses who migrated from India during partition is an impoverished province with massive unemployment, despite a higher level of education within the nation. The migrants "The Mohajirs" as they are called within Pakistan, are resentful of the fact that despite them being at the forefront of the Pakistan movement, and losing the most during migration, were shortcharged by the punjabi elite, pushed into refugee camps, and were designated "Mohajirs". Their political representaiton has thus come from the militant Mohajir (Now Muttahida) Quami Movement. Incidentally General Musharraf is a mohajir, in a sea of punjabis (Thus his relatively weak position with pakistan).
The balochis who border iran have always strived for nationhood incorporating part of balochi areas in Iran into a Greater Balochistan nation. The pakistanis have repeatedly crushed armed rebellion in this region all the way back from the 60s to this day. Incidentally balochistan accounts for whatever little gas reserves that pakistan has.
The NWFP was a region dominated by the pakhtoon tribes, until the british created an artificial boundary "The Durand Line", bang through its middle. Pakhtoons don't respect this line and have always freely corssed to meet family on both sides in afghanistan and in pakistan's NWFP. During independance from India, the pakhtoons were eager to join the indian nation, because their charismatic leaders, Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan (AKA Frontier Gandhi) saw union with india as a natural analogy to their past associations in the freedom movement against the british. The rest of the areas under pakistan's control are a part of the Jammu and Kashmir state, where pakistan's never held elections (The Northern Areas), part where they have had a "Prime Minister" who was always a Punjabi, and always nominated from Islamabad. A large tract of this area has been handed over to china (So much for pakistan's claim over kashmir)
Pakistan today is a nation organized along feudal and ethinic identities, where the elite have their 'thumbs in the pie', and the rest, well...
Then there is the nuclear programme. This nation has only produced a couple of dozon Phd's during its entire existance, and has clandestine acquired nuclear weapons from china. I say so because, the success of their own nuclear efforts are suspect, because of the reason I mention above-sheer lack of any scientific environment within the nation. That their nuclear scientists have shared technology illicitly with Libya, Iran, North Korea is well known, the little secret is that they are now equiping the saudis with nuclear weapons made in pakistan of chinese design, on chinese supplied missiles to saudi arabia. The uranium enrichment facility in syria destroyed by israel in a bombing raid this year, was of pakistnai origin, routed through North Korea. Pakistan's nuclear scientists have in the past met with Osama Bin Laden himself, no less! and discussed ways in which Al Quida's needs may be met.
And finally there is the ISI, pakistan's secretive intelligence agency, accused of running a state within the state, feared by all within pakistan. This agency is the one which ran the mujaheedeen operation against the soviets, the taliban when they wrested control of afghanistan, and runs seperatist operations in various parts of india, in line with its policy of "bleeding india through a Thousand cuts". It includes former military officers who were in the past handlers of osama bin laden, and the numerous others (for example Omar Sheikh, Daniel Pearl's killer- who the indians had to release in the aftermath of the Kandhar Hijacking of an Indian Airlines Flight), and who are now reluctant to severe ties with their former wards.
Finally there is the pakistan military, whose reason d'etre for existance is tensions with neighbour, India. It has run the country for the majority of its existance, never allowed any elected government to complete its term, and lords over the nations riches like a private entity.
I think that the religious fanaticism created to somehow artificially hold the nation together is now becoming its undoing. Indeed the nations states created as a result of pakistan's splitting will be more at peace with themselves and with the world. Pan-Islamic Jihad which originates from the swamp we know as pakistan will be crushed only if its individual actors are isolted and seperated.
November 3, 2007 2:01 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 02:01
Yes yes Iranians are more Aryans than pakistanis except for Mr. Ahmedenejad who looks like a demented street sweeper
But the Aryans are in for a nasty surprise....
Ha..Ha...
November 3, 2007 1:58 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 01:58
well,
dissolution of a state is not that simple,even if we fully agree with authors point of view.What he suggests for the future of 160 million people just in case, if there is no Pakistan.
November 3, 2007 1:52 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 01:52
If Jinnah had lived for 10 years or more, Pakistan would have been the envy of the world. Partition was political and Jinnah wanted Pakistan to do better than India as it was his quest and vendetta against Nehru. Unfortunately he died, then at that moment Pakistan literally got dissolved. From then on it is being abused, wealth stolen, by most politicians and Military. This situation is maintained even today by indoctrination that is India is the only Enemy. Just look at freedom Muslims of India Enjoy in India. Partition made Pakistan to be whore ( cheap) to the west. It is the epicenter of terrorism. If chance is given to moderate Pakistanis, Pakistan still can bounce back. For that, it has to swallow the indoctrinated false ant-India pride and make peace with only per-condition that Kashmir will be resolved through dialogue only.
Amir Khan
November 3, 2007 1:49 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 01:49
This is one of the most ignorant piece of writing on Pakistan that I have ever come across. It is written by someone whose knowledge of the country is almost laughable. First of all, he claims that Pakistan is a country of infighting tribal clans. If anything, it is still basically a feudal country, where the main power lies in the hands of large Punjabi and Sindhi landowners and their military enablers. The tribal clans are principally in the NW Province and Baluchistan - their share of political power has always been minimal, even though the Wahabbi fundamentalists and jihadists among them are now clamoring for more say in the body politic. In Pakistan, the business class is still moribund, having mostly originated from a handful of business-savvy immigrants who arrived from India after partition. Today, many businesses and industries are owned by a rising class of wealthy Punjabis.
This is the true face of Pakistan - it is still mired in the feudalism of the middle ages. It has not undergone a demographic transition to a more Western style free market economy. Nor will it anytime soon, since those in power today are reluctant to change the status quo.
November 3, 2007 1:44 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 01:44
Dear Author
I beilieve u are really prejuicice in making ur non sense views, whatever inferences u have tried to draw for Pakistan pl put in the same parameters on ur beloved country Iran being led by sychophant clergy. i assure you u would find better options to draw boundries in illogical Iran, if you dont find hint let me give u some hints, Sistan o Balchistan, Khosistan, Armenia, Urumea, Azerbizan Shaki wa Gharbi. Mind you Iran had the most shameless no of quo ever, please see the mirror before making any exuberated, sponsored comments.
Pakistan is a proud nation who knows how to handle situations, not like Iran which makes hypocratic gestures on media and beg behind curtains for mercy.
Remember, Pakistan is to stay, if you have doubts try us, Insha Allah ur coming generations would remeber us.
November 3, 2007 1:06 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 01:06
Another piece written for shock value. I'm disappointed that a publication like The Washington Post would print it.
Hey Ali.... As pointed out by other people... Almost all countries are a collection of different types of tribes, races, and people of different ethnic background... Duh!
-hs
November 3, 2007 1:05 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 01:05
I understand why so many of our Pakistani friends are indignant at Mr. Ettefagh. But since I am not a Pakistani, I have the luxury of being dispassionate about what he has written.
Most of the comments heap vitriol at him or his ancestral country, Iran. But that does not answer the comments he has made, and one can discuss Iran some other time. This column is about Pakistan and the issues he raises is on everyone's mind. Are we seeing the beginning of something horrific happening in Pakistan leading to its dissolution or dismemberment, or are we merely witnessing a tough period in its history that it will overcome. I invite Pakistani readers to provide cogent well reasoned arguments for the latter possibility.
November 3, 2007 12:57 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 00:57
The creation of Pakistan came about for many reasons like:-
-british phobia of having to deal with a frankenstein state called India which was larger than that ever ruled by any Indian prince.
-fear of bosnia-type ethnic cleansing among muslims (read converts).
-uneven distribution of wealth i.e. hindus/sikhs were rich and muslims were v poor, and they wished they could free themselves of the vice-like grip of feudal lords (zamindari system).
The state never got itself up and running, but american phobia of India pairing up with USSR gave another fillip to the continuance of the state.
These concerns may not hold water now and it is probably in the interest of the starving lot to bring about a unification and let them enjoy the fruits of India's march to progress.
regards
-kamal
November 3, 2007 12:53 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 00:53
What a phenomenally insipid argument. The same can be said for your Iran. Let's give the Arabs, Azeris, Kurds, and Baloch their own state. After all, the Balochis you want to 'free' from Pakistan would have territorial claims to the sister province in Iran. Why not unify your Azeri north with Azerbaijan? Why not unite your Kurdish territory with areas of Syria, Turkey, and Iraq to make a Kurdistan?
And when Pakistan's Pathans join Afghanistan, do you think Afghanistan will stay whole? The Pathans will outnumber others even more. The country will further split into a Pakhtunistan and then the Tajiks, Uzbeks and others will want to join Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. But even these countries and the other Central Asian states have their own ethnic discrepancies. Remember Stalin messed with those borders big time.
In short, your silly argument presents a dangerous slippery slope -- it can be applied to virtually any state in region, the wider Muslim world, and in fact, beyond.
The challenge of our time is not map making. It's figuring out how to make the states that exist work. Call us in Islamabad when you figure that out in Tehran.
November 3, 2007 12:35 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 00:35
One could direct the same arguments at any nation in the world, which has its own internal regional diversity. To people sitting in the West, the culture, religion and ethnicity of the Pakistanis appears pretty darn similar.
Furthermore, India was a non-aligned nation, with better relations with the USSR and the Eastern Block than with the capitalist West.
Finally, the author provides no vision of what would arise if the Pakistani federal structure were dissolved. There is no evidence that smaller states would provide more stability, on the contrary, the author's own narrative proves the importance of the Pakistani state, because at least now the regions are not warring with each other.
Therefore, the author has presented no persuasive arguments and a flawed reasoning. His suggestions would propel the region into even further disaster and mayhem.
November 3, 2007 12:26 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 00:26
Berry:
We the Pakistani people ask you to stop pretending to have solutions and mind your own bloody business.
November 3, 2007 12:23 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 00:23
Homogeneous ethnic make up of a state doesn't guarantee that a stable nation-state is at hand. Don't believe me? Look at my home country Somalia. A true nation-state but by far the worst case. I think Pakistan might need some devolution of power to regional assemblies to speed up development and lower the regional tension over resources especially in Balochistan. But, tearing it apart is insane and very unwise. Like all developing countries, Pakistan has its share of issue to deal with. But, that's no different that India where religious pogroms especially against Muslim isn't that uncommon. I don't hear Mr Etefagh asking for the splitting of Gujarat into its constituent parts to neuter violent Hindu extremism.
November 3, 2007 12:21 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 00:21
I was going to write a long argument against your flawed and fullish article but then I saw how majortiy has posted its comment.
November 2, 2007 11:55 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 2, 2007 23:55
The same things could be said about Iran. Iran has been a troublemaker throughout its history. Attacking its neighbours, killing multitudes and plundering and ransacking countries far beyond its geographical location, for thousands of years.
More recently it has added chemical and biological weapons to the list of weapons it has been using to the same end against its peaceful neighbours.
Everybody knows that if Iran had atomic weapons it would have definitely used them in Iran-Iraq war. Even today, all the nations in the world agree that if Iran will have these weapons it would use it against anyone who would dare to stand up against the hegemonic desires of the present regime of Iran.
With mullahs at the helm of affairs and the government imposing its (ill) will in the name of Islam, it is small wonder that the Iranians shows their disdain and contempt of the version of Islam imposed by the Ayatullahs by doing everything that is totally against Islam when they are out and away from the grips of that totalatarian regime.
When saying things about Pakistan, like having English as an official language, it is a pity that the author doesn't know that you can go to any part of Pakistan and talk to anybody in Urdu; Islam is not the only common denominator among the Pakistanis; Urdu is another one...yet another one.
Yes, we have had problems but name a country which country doesn't. What about the Balauchis and the Kurds and Hazara in Iran; one day when they will get independance from the yolk of Iranian's grinding salvery, people around the world would wake up to the horrific stories of these helpless people who have been mauled by centuries of Iranian fits of terror and today not only their identity but their very existence is at stake; and that also in their own lands (occupied by the Iranian usurpers).
The world knows that Iran is a big threat to the peace of the whole world and it is high time for the world to stop this reckless and irresponsible country from getting the nuclear weapons. This menacing country should be disarmed and not only the Kurds, Hazaras, Balauchis and many more nations like them should be liberated but also the people of Iran should be freed from the slavery of their illegitimate government.
They had America and Israel on their hit list for a long time; now another Iranian humbug has added Pakistan to that list.
I tell you what, ...... despite all the problems and outside interferences (including Iranian terrorism in Balauchistan), we have existed and we will exist till the end of time. We are a proud nation, with a mighty, diligent and intelligent human resource and a profusely gifted land. Once we will have a truly represented and democratically elected government, we will show to the whole world that unlike Iran we are one of the most responsible nations on the map of the world. We have always talked about co-existence between the community of nations and never threatened anyone to wipe them out of the map of the world, not even our worst enemies and we will continue to play our positive role.
Its not Pakistan that we should worry about it only and only Iran that the whole world should concentrate on; or we will have a third world war at our hands.
November 2, 2007 11:52 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 2, 2007 23:52
Ali Attefagh sounds convincing. Ali thinks by merely redrawing new boundaries along the tribal traditions and ethnicity of Pakistani provinces, a better outcome can be produced. But a closer look to the immediate neighboring country India will prove Ali is wrong.
In India, as you move from East to West or from North to South, you will notice India has more languages, cultures and traditions than Pakistan. Without a democratic and secular political institution, India would have been less governable than Pakistan. Democracy teaches tolerance. Also, Indian politicians did not allow outsiders interfere in their internal matters.
Pakistani politicians failed, Pakistanis did not. Pakistan rarely lived as an independent country. The politicians of Pakistan were always subservient to super powers. Most ME and North African Islamic countries have the same problem. Pakistan will be a successful country if it follows Turkish, Malaysian or the neighboring country India’s model of democracy, women’s right and modern education. Besides, a mixture of religion and state rarely had good outcome anywhere.
November 2, 2007 11:28 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 2, 2007 23:28
you call pakistan a failed british fantasy and imply the brits set it up as a kind of counterweight to india. that's not the way i understand it.
my understanding is that it was set up at the insistence of mohammed ali jinna, the indian muslim leader who feared muslims would be overwhelmed if they became part of an independent india which was dominated by hindus. gandhi campaigned desperately against partition.
and the british viceroy, lord ountbatten, "looked on india's unity as the greatest legacy britain could leave behind," according to the book "freedom at midnight."
but the great calcutta killings of aug. 16, 1946, a year before independence, in which large numbers of hindus and moslems slaughtered each other, led jinna, the muslim leader to declare: "we shall have india divided, or we shall have india destroyed." and so it was divided. and so we have pakistan.
November 2, 2007 11:21 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 2, 2007 23:21
Mr. Ettefagh,
Nice try sir, please put the pipe down. Enough with that Iranian Charis.
I don't have a problem with your thesis, but as they say in India. " Hum tho dobey sanam, sath tum ko be lay dobey" If you going to cut Pakistan into pieces, the Iran and Afghanistan is going with that too.
So be very careful, what you wish for.
Good Luck!
November 2, 2007 11:12 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 2, 2007 23:12
I'm not sure exactly what Dr. Ettefagh's agenda is in advocating this position. However, personal agendas aside this opinion piece cannot be taken anymore seriously than Bush's statements about "World War III". I agree with the premise that the "nation-state" is not an iviolable entity and that the most stable notion of a nation-state will be which is itself a collection of semi-autonomous nation states. The U.S. is a good example of this. The increasing Federal control over States is however a move in the wrong direction.
Language such "so and so's borders must be redrawn" is as irresponsible as Bush/Cheney/etc. etc.'s statements. Pakistan needs more federalism, not all out civil war. Sure it was born of fire, so now it should be dismembered? Sorry, it doesn't work that way.
November 2, 2007 11:12 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 2, 2007 23:12
Mr. Ettefagh,
Nice try sir, please put the pipe down. Enough with that Iranian Charis.
I don't have a problem with your thesis, but as they say in India. " Hum tho dobey sanam, sath tum ko be lay dobey" If you going to cut Pakistan into pieces, the Iran and Afghanistan is going with that too.
So be very careful, what you wish for.
Good Luck!
November 2, 2007 11:10 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 2, 2007 23:10
The article itself is a clear scholarly work. But Mr. Ettefagh should have chosen a better headline, something that doesn't get misunderstood by Pakistanis in general, and doesn't lead radical Pakistanis to ask for his head.
Mr. Ettefagh describes Pakistan as a semi-failed state, and traces the causes back to its creation several decades ago. But he missed the opportunity to address the most important reason: the lack of honest, visionary leadership.
India was born under the same circumstances and with the same problems, but it turned into a successful democracy and is now headed to be one of the world's greatest nations. The difference: their leaders.
We, citizens from many nations, would like to hear Pakistanis express their views:
- what is your vision for your country? a democracy, a monarchy, a military dictatorship, a theocracy?
- how do you plan to address internal regional/ethnic conflicts?
- what role do envision for your country in the region and in the world?
Please remember this is a forum created to exchange ideas and to learn from one another. Respect leads to understanding. Understanding may, hopefully, lead to peace.
November 2, 2007 11:08 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 2, 2007 23:08
Actually, Pakistan means "land of the Pak" or "land of the pure" and has nothing to do with the manufactured nomenclature in this article. It was named by Iqbal who was an Urdu poet.
Btw, the NWFP was allowed/encouraged by the military to become this religious and feudal problem-state. NWFP was greatly enamored of Gandhian ways (remember Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan -- the so-called Frontier Gandhi) and wanted to merge with India on independence so the military had to get around that and did that by creating this essentially lawless region. And btw, the Hindu Maharaja of Kashmir asked for standstill agreements from both sides, while his Muslim Prime Minister (Sheikh Abdullah) wanted to accede to India. Of course, Pakistan did not give him a choice as has been noted here.
It is clear that Pakistan should never have been created, but at this point there is no point in harping over history. Even the BJP in India does not advocate merger with India. The country needs the rule of law like all others, India, Iran and the US included. Also, it is unfair to blame only Jinnah: the Congress leaders' greed in India was also equally to blame.
November 2, 2007 11:06 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 2, 2007 23:06
One could say the same about Iran as well where only 50% of the population speaks Farsi, while it is forcibly imposed on the Baloch, Arabs, Turkmen, Azeris, and Kurds whose culture and language are forcibly suprressed by the arrogant Persian elite
November 2, 2007 10:57 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 2, 2007 22:57
Ali has some interesting analsys. He truely underline some facts about Pakistani culture and politics, but he shied awy to to mention that Pakistan has economy that is based on agriculture and manufacturing not oil or gas like Iran. In addition, Pakistan has thriving libral culture and a viberent relatively free media. That's way, it is distance to be a democracy and a natio state with all its problems.
November 2, 2007 10:52 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 2, 2007 22:52
hi my name is hamza and am from Malakand Agency(tribal area).Dear Mr.Ali Ettefagh ,being a Pakistani first of all I must tell you that seperation of provinces is not the solution to your unknown problem.And not just Iran But the rest of the world knows that there is great unity amongst the provinces ,let me tell you we share same traditions ,same languages ,cultures ,courage and the most important we share one religion Islam,which gives the whole world the message of peace .So these things prove that no one can seperate our provinces.And as far as the drug smugling is concerned ,Afghanistan is the main hub of it and it is from Afghanistan drugs are smuggled to else where may be to Iran as well.And the i think sir you should be more concerned about Iran ,because currently it is Iran which a fish in trouble waters!
thank you.
November 2, 2007 10:46 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 2, 2007 22:46
If what the writer says is true, then can't the same arguments be applied to most if not all of the Middle East? Post WWI, colonial powers drew lines on a map creating 'countries' where none had existed, forcing disparate peoples who had little in common except for mutual hatred to live together in their new 'country'.
The wholesale restructuring the writer suggest is probably what 'should' happen; however, I can't imagine a leader much less a group of them with the wit and wisdom and intelligence and guile to EVER pull off such prodigious feat. Sad to say, I think greed and corruption will prevail for the foreseeable future.
November 2, 2007 10:38 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 2, 2007 22:38
There is more democracy and human rights in Pakistan than Iran, and our ethnicities have a share in the country, unlike total-Persian dominated Iran.
Pakistan is going through a difficult time, we will overcome our difficulties. I challenge Mr Ettefagh or anyone who thinks like him to come to Pakistan and ask for dissolution. Then watch what happens to you.
November 2, 2007 10:36 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 2, 2007 22:36
How do you tell a 60 year old person she should never have born... especially when she's holding nuclear weapons in each hand? Grow up, Mr. Ettefagh. Pakistan may be a highly flawed state but it is an internationally recognized one and not the pariah you call home. A nation that produced Khomeini, the Shah AND Ahmedenijad gives you little right to be sanctimonious about others.
November 2, 2007 10:34 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 2, 2007 22:34
Pakistan, along with Viet Nam, Yugoslovia and many others, should have been proof to the unread members of the present administration as to what happens when old hatreds between factions are allowed to rekindle, when a strong thumb is removed. Most fail to remember that it was the folks in the south part of Viet Nam were in favor of, and the Norh Vietnamese who were against, the French re-establishing their Indo China colony. We got in the middle of that mess, at cost of 58,000 American lives. Anyone, who had even a small dose of history, would have predicted the outcome in Iraq, once the dictator's thumb was removed from the kettle lid. When the Brit's left India, after WWII, the kettle boiled and the Muslims and Hindus were at each other's throats, making Pakistan/India division necessary. Pakistan was not a country, no experience in government. We now see what happens when we expect that a country can be "planted" and that it will grow in less than many, many years.
November 2, 2007 10:25 PM |