The
Destiny Of Politics
And Choices In Pakistan!
By
Dr Salim Nazzal
06 January,
2008
Countercurrents.org
It
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
Comment
Policy
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.