Adil Najam
Mohammed Hanif, the brilliant author of the engrossing book “The Case of Exploding Mangoes†(I have been planning to write about it ever since I first read it many months ago; and I will) – known to many for his stint at Herald before he joined BBC’s Urdu Service – has just written a most cogent and readable op-ed in The Times of India which is wroth reading; whether you agree with it or not. It is a good argument as well as a good read. And I say that even thought there are more than one points here that I might quibble with. But before we quibble, lets give Mohammed Hanif the floor – and a full and proper hearing. Here is the op-ed he wrote in The Times of India, in full:
Ten Myths About Pakistan
Living in Pakistan and reading about it in the Indian press can sometimes be quite a disorienting experience: one wonders what place on earth they’re talking about? I wouldn’t be surprised if an Indian reader going through Pakistani papers has asked the same question in recent days. Here are some common assumptions about Pakistan and its citizens that I have come across in the Indian media.
1. Pakistan controls the jihadis: Or Pakistan’s government controls the jihadis. Or Pakistan Army controls the jihadis. Or ISI controls the jihadis. Or some rogue elements from the ISI control the Jihadis. Nobody knows the whole truth but increasingly it’s the tail that wags the dog. We must remember that the ISI-Jihadi alliance was a marriage of convenience, which has broken down irrevocably. Pakistan army has lost more soldiers at the hands of these jihadis than it ever did fighting India.
2. Musharraf was in control, Zardari is not: Let’s not forget that General Musharraf seized power after he was fired from his job as the army chief by an elected prime minister. Musharraf first appeased jihadis, then bombed them, and then appeased them again. The country he left behind has become a very dangerous place, above all for its own citizens. There is a latent hankering in sections of the Indian middle class for a strongman. Give Manmohan Singh a military uniform, put all the armed forces under his direct command, make his word the law of the land, and he too will go around thumping his chest saying that it’s his destiny to save India from Indians. Zardari will never have the kind of control that Musharraf had. But Pakistanis do not want another Musharraf.
3. Pakistan, which Pakistan? For a small country, Pakistan is very diverse, not only ethnically but politically as well. General Musharraf’s government bombed Pashtuns in the north for being Islamists and close to the Taliban and at the same time it bombed Balochs in the South for NOT being Islamists and for subscribing to some kind of retro-socialist, anti Taliban ethos. You have probably heard the joke about other countries having armies but Pakistan’s army having a country. Nobody in Pakistan finds it funny.
4. Pakistan and its loose nukes: Pakistan’s nuclear programme is under a sophisticated command and control system, no more under threat than India or Israel’s nuclear assets are threatened by Hindu or Jewish extremists. For a long time Pakistan’s security establishment’s other strategic asset was jihadi organisations, which in the last couple of years have become its biggest liability.
5. Pakistan is a failed state: If it is, then Pakistanis have not noticed. Or they have lived in it for such a long time that they have become used to its dysfunctional aspects. Trains are late but they turn up, there are more VJs, DJs, theatre festivals, melas, and fashion models than a failed state can accommodate. To borrow a phrase from President Zardari, there are lots of non-state actors like Abdul Sattar Edhi who provide emergency health services, orphanages and shelters for sick animals.
6. It is a deeply religious country: Every half-decent election in this country has proved otherwise. Religious parties have never won more than a fraction of popular vote. Last year Pakistan witnessed the largest civil rights movements in the history of this region. It was spontaneous, secular and entirely peaceful. But since people weren’t raising anti-India or anti-America slogans, nobody outside Pakistan took much notice.
7. All Pakistanis hate India: Three out of four provinces in Pakistan – Sindh, Baluchistan, NWFP – have never had any popular anti-India sentiment ever. Punjabis who did impose India as enemy-in-chief on Pakistan are now more interested in selling potatoes to India than destroying it. There is a new breed of al-Qaida inspired jihadis who hate a woman walking on the streets of Karachi as much as they hate a woman driving a car on the streets of Delhi. In fact there is not much that they do not hate: they hate America, Denmark, China CDs, barbers, DVDs , television, even football. Imran Khan recently said that these jihadis will never attack a cricket match but nobody takes him seriously.
8. Training camps: There are militant sanctuaries in the tribal areas of Pakistan but definitely not in Muzaffarabad or Muridke, two favourite targets for Indian journalists, probably because those are the cities they have ever been allowed to visit. After all how much training do you need if you are going to shoot at random civilians or blow yourself up in a crowded bazaar? So if anyone thinks a few missiles targeted at Muzaffarabad will teach anyone a lesson, they should switch off their TV and try to locate it on the map.
9. RAW would never do what ISI does: Both the agencies have had a brilliant record of creating mayhem in the neighbouring countries. Both have a dismal record when it comes to protecting their own people. There is a simple reason that ISI is a bigger, more notorious brand name: It was CIA’s franchise during the jihad against the Soviets. And now it’s busy doing jihad against those very jihadis.
10. Pakistan is poor, India is rich: Pakistanis visiting India till the mid-eighties came back very smug. They told us about India’s slums, and that there was nothing to buy except handicrafts and saris. Then Pakistanis could say with justifiable pride that nobody slept hungry in their country. But now, not only do people sleep hungry in both the countries, they also commit suicide because they see nothing but a lifetime of hunger ahead. A debt-ridden farmer contemplating suicide in Maharashtra and a mother who abandons her children in Karachi because she can’t feed them: this is what we have achieved in our mutual desire to teach each other a lesson.
So, quibble if you will. But do tell us what you think about the argument that Hanif is making.
Nice article. Pakistan has enough real problems of its own and then its neighbors keep trying to dump their problems on us. I guess this time its really the Congress govt making use of this crisi to prop themselves up before an election and win some hawkish votes in the process.
@ rumi
sorry about the delay in replying, but yes, it is much clearer now and I agree wholeheartedly with what you have said. Swat must be a serious priority!
I didn’t know about gen hamid’s quote and thanks for bringing it to my attention—that was a very odd remark!
I would like to add one thing though, wrt the Frontier going way downhill, I blame Musharraf even more than I blame zia. His coddling with the MMA for the 17th ammendment gave them a free hand in the province….and this double game was played during his long rule! Instead of reversing the damage zia had done, he made it much much worse. That is why though Mush has his supporters in karachi and lahore, there are no takers for him in the Frontier…he really did that province in!
The comment post about Pakistan as a “failed state” is interesting. In my view a failed state is one in which the govt/military and civil bureaucracy has completely collapsed, large scale violence is present and international forces have to fix the place up. The other definition of failed state is one where the country simply disintegrates. By that definition Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and Soviet Union are indeed failed states.
When we come to Pakistan, no doubt the country has serious problems, but people in Pakistan are trying to solve those problems. I dont get how some “experts” sitting abroad put Pakistan in the same category as Afghanistan/Somalia! I would define Pakistan as a “struggling state”.
Very useful and interesting piece by MH. equally interesting comments in resposne to Mr Najam invitations to quibble with MH’s 10 myths which he cannot explain without writing a book but gives, very candidly, food for thought to many, thinking Indians.
As a proud and patriotic Pakistani, I see no contradiction in stating that I care less for whether this land that I love and where I was born and live and so shall my children, is called Pakistan, Hindustan, New Tamil Nadu or Spranglyoneeyedoodhbalaoistan, than that each and every one of its kids should have clean water to drink, enough to eat, the opportunity to learn from truthful books nothing more or less than how to be a good human being, an opportunity to make something of their lives and to be able to live in peace and with dignity. I wish no less for every kid in India and the rest of the world.
It enrages and saddens me like something unbelievable to see generation after generation of these kids being lined up at the brink of the dark pit of poverty condemed to live miserable lives until they slip or are pushed in to the pit in droves every year. while billions are spent on propaganda, hate, militaries, weapons and nukes which can only dig deeper and darker pits to swallow even more of S Asia’s humanity and its dignity. That India’s or Pakistan’s economies are growing, the middle classes adding to their numbers and/or bank balances, the rich are getting richer, and even that some poor can or have been able to escape from the brink of the presipice, does not excuse the cruelty of perpetually preparing for war instead of ever working for peace.
Believeing that it’s a dog-eat-dog, law of the jungle out in the world of international politics is a self-fulfilling prophecy. For two neighbours who can never wish each other away, no matter how hard they try, it’s suicidal madness. Those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad (Eruipides?). Since I do not wish to make self-fulfilling prophecies of doom, I will celebrate the several comments here, instead, for the hope they show and bravely hold on to.
I haven’t read MH’s book yet (local library doesn’t have it), I did enjoy his op-ed, esp. this part:
“5. Pakistan is a failed state: If it is, then Pakistanis have not noticed. Or they have lived in it for such a long time that they have become used to its dysfunctional aspects. Trains are late but they turn up, there are more VJs, DJs, theatre festivals, melas, and fashion models than a failed state can accommodate. To borrow a phrase from President Zardari, there are lots of non-state actors like Abdul Sattar Edhi who provide emergency health services, orphanages and shelters for sick animals.”
I am very glad he said that. I vehemently dislike the definition “failed state” (vs. “successful state”?), which comes from the realpolitik school of thought (which I think is completely inaccurate, dehumanizing, hypocritical, and often encourages statesmen to disregard international law, etc)
I think it is absolutely important to note that whatever definitions some officials like to slap onto Pakistan, life has been happening in Pakistan– like the trains running, people going about their own business, etc. I think once people realize that, it will be more difficult to dismiss a nation of hundreds of millions of people and think of Pakistan has devoid of people and life.
“6. It is a deeply religious country: Every half-decent election in this country has proved otherwise. Religious parties have never won more than a fraction of popular vote. ”
Another crucial thing that I cannot fathom why, why, why some media (i.e. NYT) failed to state this during the anti-Musharraf protests and continued to publish apologetic articles on behalf of the General?