The Destiny Of Politics
And Choices In Pakistan!By Dr Salim Nazzal
06 January, 2008
Countercurrents.orgIt has been said that novels can sometimes express the deep water of the social and political change more than political writings do. Train to Pakistan, a novel written by Kushwant Singh, explores the horror which took place under the partition of India in 1947.
Sigh clearly has a moral message to tell; when the voice of reason disappears violence emerges. This is obvious in his way of presenting the views of individuals of various ethnic and ideological backgrounds in one of the most critical times in the history of the subcontinent India. Yet despite the dark picture Singh was able to convey how love can defy the evils of war and hatred. It is a heartfelt story exposing the horrors endured by Muslim girl and a noble and courageous Sikh boy who made the ultimate sacrifice so that his lover could make a safe journey to Pakistan.
Pakistan which evolved from the partitioning of India, was the second country founded on religious lines. The first was the Vatican, which represents the spiritual capital of the Roman Catholic Church. The third was the state of Israel, which is the last surviving settlement state in third world which was created against the will of its natives. Other similar settlements such as Rhodesia and South Africa proved unworkable and have subsequently been dissolved.
States born out of messianic ideas are usually expressing certain ideals and certain utopian dreams. In real life states are run by politics and political calculations. History does not merely lie in museums, or gathering dust between the pages of yellowing books, as some may assume. Even if history is not felt on the daily level it influences and colors much of people's lives, especially the times of crisis. Therefore it is perhaps difficult to predict what the spiritual founding fathers of Pakistan, such as Muhammad Iqbal and Muhammad Ali Jinnah, would have to say about the current conflict. It was their dream to construct a state for Muslims, where it was hoped that they would live in complete harmony in parts of India and linked with the idea of salvation from the dominance of the Hindu majority. It is difficult in light of this development to avoid questioning the validity of religion in nation building.
In the Indo-Pakistani experience there is clear evidence which cast serious doubts about the capacity of religion to form a national state. Two examples from that region would consolidate this view: The first is the division of Pakistan in 1971 and the split of western Pakistan consists of Beghngali majority which "felt that it was occupied or dominated by eastern Pakistan" according to the justification given by Mujeeb Al Rahman the Awame party leader who led the split from the mother Pakistan. This question must be an actual question in the Arab world because many Arab Islamists are still attracted to the theory of religious state .The second example is the existence of more than 150 million Indian Muslims who the evidences show that they are not less happy in the secular "Hindu" India than their brothers in the Muslim Pakistan. More over despite that both countries India and Pakistan adopted the British style of democracy of having a symbolic head of state and operative government based on the parliamentary majority. Past experience has shown that the experience was successful in India while Pakistan military powers have blocked the democratic system several times, the most recent being the military coup d'état of Muhammad Barwiz Musharaf.
Today's Pakistan is safe compared with that period. However developments which culminated in the assassination of Benazir Butu demonstrate that Pakistan is not immune from new danger and new conflict. Some observers predict that the unrest might reach a level threatening the very integrity of the country. This fear has apparently been mostly reflected in western circles that are concerned about the destiny of the Pakistani nuclear power in the worst case scenario. As it stands there is no indication that this concern is warranted, because the Military appears to be powerful enough to hold power.However, it would be naïve to ignore the question about how long the military can keep things under control in the absence of agreed upon political solutions.
History and experiences in other parts of the world clearly demonstrate that security is a political issue per excellence. Even if the current conflict is compared with the mother conflict of 1947, earlier conflict seems somehow easier because it was a clear cut conflict between two major communities, while the current situation is many sided. On the domestic front there is Musharaf and his adversaries, and the conflict between Musharaf and the strict Islamists, also the differences between the moderate Isalmists and the strict Isalmists. Then there conflicts between secular parties and the strict Islamists. In addition to which there are other tribal and inter faith, ethnic, and regional conflicts between Pakistan and India over the question of Kashmir, which caused three wars and was at the core of much tension in the past 60 years. Finally there is the international in the question of Afghanistan and the position designed to Pakistan in the so called war against terror.
There is no doubt that United States has played a major role in inflaming the situation in the region with a position that has continued to vacillate. Firstly they supported the Mujahedeen against the soviet. After the freeing of Afghanistan the USA did nothing to assist in the reconstruction of Afghanistan which has prepared the social ground for a stricter form of Islamic movement to emerge with the support of the Pakistani government and the blessing of the USA. It is however an oversimplification to assume that Taliban is only a product of the Pakistani intelligence service. The social and political phenomenon is much more complicated and cannot be studied in this way. The Taliban is in the final analysis a product of a number of political, economical conditions of the pre modern Afghanistan.After 9.11 the USA pressurized the Pakistani government to play an active role in the so called "war on terror" which has paradoxically resulted in the Taliban expansion to Pakistan, especially on the border areas where the tribes are mixed. Which in fact is more or less is the same experience in Iraq where the extreme Islamic forces were born after the American invasion. The Bush discourse to Pakistan and the world was Ben Ladinist language par excellence: either you are with the USA or against them, which means that the USA will support India against Pakistan if Pakistan was to show any hesitation to join the USA war. Most importantly the moral weakness of the USA position has resulted in a weakening of the influence of the USA to a level which may be unprecedented in our history. While the USA aims to confront the strict Islamic movements, strict forms of pro Zionism and evangelical Christianity has taken hold USA with a grip on power more influential than has existed at any other time since its foundation. This position is fundamental in portraying the conflict with the USA into forms of cultural groupings, a position which is not incompatible with the belief of the strict Islamic movements that the USA is the neo-crusader state. The outcome of the US foreign policy is that it has led to the weakening of the liberal and democratic influence in the Islamic world and further consolidated fundamentalist Islamic trends .
In the present time the Pakistan train does not seem to be heading towards a safe destination. There can be little doubt that Benazir Bhutto's return to Pakistan with a liberal agenda was done at great risk and did cost her life, as it did with her father Ali Bhutto in 1979 who was executed by the Zia al haq military regime.
Who is to be held accountable for this cowardly act? So far many theories have already been published and whether or not it was the current regime that was behind Mrs. Bhutto's assassination, or the strict Isalmists who viewed her as their enemy, or who had contributed directly or indirectly in the creation of the religious strict culture which led to her murder, or some other entity who may have benefited from eliminating her from the political scene in Pakistan, the question "where the train of Pakistan is heading?" has for now remained unanswered. It is difficult question and cannot be answered simply to everyone's satisfaction because of the weight of complexity that exists. However, it is almost certain that Pakistan may need a new social contract, which would lead the state towards new hope for peace and stability.
Dr. Salim Nazzal is a Palestinian-Norwegian historian in the Middle East, who has written extensively on social and political issues in the region. He can be contacted at: [email protected]
Leave A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
Digg it! And spread the word!
Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands of people more. You just Digg it, and it will appear in the home page of Digg.com and thousands more will read it. Digg is nothing but an vote, the article with most votes will go to the top of the page. So, as you read just give a digg and help thousands more to read this article.
Syndicate CC Headlines On Your Blog
