Posts Tagged ‘jinnah gandhi’

h1

On Jinnah, Democracy, Leadership & Current Affairs in Pakistan

November 1, 2009

Zainab Interviews the Honorary Sharifuddin Pirzada



Q & A BREAKDOWN

PAST LEADERS: Jinnah

  1. 2:39 – 3:17 – Former BJP Parliamentarian Jaswant Singh authored a book on Jinnah that is receiving a lot of controversy, having actually worked with Jinnah, can you share your thoughts on the book ?
  2. 3:20 – 4:42 –  In recent interviews, Singh has said Muslims in India are “robbed of their psychological security” and basically downtrodden. He says what Jinnah should have done is left some advice for Indian Muslims who stayed back and didn’t migrate to Pakistan after partition, what do you think Jinnah might have said?
  3. 4:44-6:01 – He also refers to Jinnah as a “nationalist” not at all Anti-Indian, please expand
  4. 6:01-7:34 – Referring to politics, when Jinnah split from the Congress party eventually formulating a two state idea later in his career, were there any politics referring to Nehru or Gandhi that had an impact on decision making? Jaswant Singh makes a mention to some, what does your experience tell us?
  5. 7:35: – 8:15 –  You’ve mentioned previously that Jinnah was a self made man, more details?
  6. 8:15 –  8:55 : Tell us about your experience with Jinnah, its a rare treat for us to have your insight
  7. 8: 55 – 9:22 – Further details, conclusion on Jinnah.

“Jinnah had the Charm of Churchill, Dignity of de Gaulle, Magnetism of Mandela, and Objectivity of Obama”

CURRENT LEADERS : Musharraf

  1. 9:23 – 10:47 – Shifting to current leaders now, lets talk about Musharraf. You’ve got great experience, tell us about your work with the former General and Leader of Pakistan.
  2. 10:48 – 11:55 – How did your work with Musharraf expand during his tenure?
  3. 12:56 – 13:45 – You served on the national security council &  as senior advisor to Gen. Musharraf, tell us howthe context of national security in Pakistan changed after 9/11. Specifically what came on the agenda, what were the immediate concerns and interests and what drove the decision to behave the way Pakistan did at the time?
  4. 13:45 – 15:48 – Recent polls indicate a majority of pakistanis think Musharraf should be punished for treason as per laws under article 6 of the Constitution, how do you feel about that?
  5. 15:48 – 14:55 – Do you think it’s a valid case that Musharraf be tried for treason?
  6. 14:54 – 15:38 – Regarding an increasingly free media in Pakistan, please offer further insight
  7. 15:38 – 16:16 – There’s a contention that the currently free media be attributed to Benazir Bhutto’s regime wherein sateilite technology allowing expanded media was put in place, while others assign credit to Musharraf. Can you clarify this?
  8. 16:16 – 18:39 –   Do you think it was the state of emergency and sacking of the judiciary that caused Musharraf to lose elections?
  9. 18:42 – 19:35 – Final question on Musharraf, what do you think his legacy would be?

“The Media is very free in Pakistan, and Musharraf is to be given a great deal of credit for that”

CURRENT LEADERS : Zardari

  1. 19:48 – 20:55 – Recent military achievements in SWAT and international trade deals penned by Zardari paint a somewhat rosy picture for the future, what are your thoughts on him so far?

US – PAKISTAN RELATIONS:

  1. 20:57 – 23:14 – There’s a US special envoy in the region, drone attacks continue, the west is pushing for rapid democratization and are heavily investing in counterterrorism through cooperation with Pakistan while Islamabad hopes to secure itself and expand economically in this engagement. But there’s a long history of cooperation but still a lot of skepticism on both sides, do you think current engagement with a new administration who promises more diplomacy will yield different results than we’ve seen in this alliance?
  2. 23:14 – 24:52 – What advice might you offer President Obama or the State department in terms of engaging Pakistan?

“Pakistan was member of SEATO and CENTO but certain conditions were not fulfilled and there is a strong section of Pakistan who has reservations with a cordial relationship with the United States”

PAKISTAN & THE MUSLIM WORLD

  1. 24:55 – 25:11 – Your position at the Organization of Islamic Conference?
  2. 25:13 – 25:57 – On the Israeli Palestinian issue, how do you assess the current two state solution that Obama has put forward? How viable is it?
  3. 25:57 – 26:25 – What is Pakistan’s diplomatic/official stance on the Israeli Palestinian Issue?e Islamic Conference
  4. 12:25 – 26:35 – What are the main priorities of the Organization of the Islamic Conference?

“The Palestinian Issue followed by Kashmir are of top priority to the Organization of Islamic Conference”

PAKISTAN BORDER RELATIONS : INDIA & AFGHANISTAN:

  1. 26:35 – 27:42 – Manmohan Singh & Prime Minister Gilani at the NAAM summit this summer agreed to bracket issues of Terrorism and move forward on peace talks and trade issues. Such rhetoric is not new, and might not reach fruition, so do you see anything being resolved in Kashmir anytime soon, without the help of the US?
  2. 27:44 – 28:44 – Elections in Afghanistan are being contested between Abdullah Abdullah and incumbent Karzai. Pakistan doesn’t seem keen on either because both signal a warming of relations between Kabul & New Delhi which is believed to come at a direct expense to Islamabad. How do you feel about that?

America can facilitate peace talks between India and Pakistan on Kashmir, but on the whole, people of Kashmir are still suffering and struggling.  The approach of prime ministers has been positive, but an extremist element in India exists which doesn’t want this. To stop suffering in Kashmir, a solution must be reached.

PAKISTAN’S INTERNATIONAL FUTURE:

  1. 28:44 – How do you see geopolitics playing out in the next decade for Pakistan, given amplified US presence, including super embassies being constructed in Pakistan/Afghanistan, perpetually stalled relations with India, a very likely nuclear neighbor in Iran, and increasingly influential China and polarized Russia, what does Pakistan look like ten years from now?

“Pakistan in the next ten years must concentrate on democratic set up, economic development & maintaining cordial relatoins with Islamic countries. There are two great friends of Pakistan: Saudi Arabia, the other is China. That’s a good starting point”

ALSO PUBLISHED @
h1

India Pakistan: Hostility Grows Stale

August 27, 2009

Muhammad Ali Jinnah, better known as the founder of Pakistan when India was divided in 1947 is making headlines today with controversy surrounding ex-Indian Parliamentarian Jaswant Singh’s recent book: India – Partition – Independence. Immediately following the books release, Singh was expelled from his position in the Bhartiya Janata (BJP) party,  protests wherein the book was burned and a prompt ban on the work in Gujarat ensued. But why the uproar?

In a recent interview, Singh reveals the following views on Jinnah  that are now apparently too controversial in India, but receiving mostly praise across Pakistan:

  • Jinnah was an Indian nationalist
  • He joined the Indian Congress party before the Muslim League implying an original loyalty to a United India and eventual shift to non secularism as a result of Congress party politics later
  • Jinnah fought the British for an Independent India, in tandem with fighting “resolutely and relentlessly” for Muslim rights in India
  • Jinnah is admirable for being a self made man, having created a position in politics for himself without the luxury of prior wealth or status
  • Jinnah was not anti-Hindu
  • Jinnah failed insofar as he received a “moth eaten” piece of divided India in the form of Pakistan and left Muslims who stayed back in India without sufficient guidance
  • Gandhi himself referred to Jinnah as a great Indian, so there should be no controversy in recognizing him as such today
  • Muslims in India today are downtrodden, live in pain and are “robbed of the essence of psychological security”
  • Both Indian Muslims and Pakistani’s have paid a price for Partition since both would have been stronger under a united India

To those who have not grown up or spent much time in South Asia, it may be difficult to understand why such ideas can be controversial and strike such polar chords in the hearts and minds of people divided by a man made border only 60 years ago. But the division of India, into two states resulting in an independent Pakistan saw extreme violence, mass refugee migration and that carnage left a lasting scar on South Asian mindsets. Put in a most blunt form: India suffered the bitter taste of a fractured state that is rooted among the great civilizations in history.  And Pakistan suffered the bitter reality of as Singh put it, “a moth eaten”, post colonial state with perhaps an inevitably fractured and frail territory from inception. From the bizarre geopolitical landscape of Bangladesh not contingent to, yet officially part of Pakistan to the conflict over Kashmir at the very onset of partition, Singh makes a fair point in explaining partition caused profound suffering on both ends. The subsequent bitterness is manifest in perpetual hostility between both states in the form of conflicts, and in India, even on a communal level where according to Singh, Muslims are still downtrodden.

So praising Jinnah as a “great man” in India may be akin to condoning the very fracturing of India. In Pakistan, it’s lauded as an admission that their founder heroically created a homeland where Muslims would no longer be downtrodden. Singh’s work also might acknowledge that partition dealt an unfair hand to Pakistani’s, an idea that can come across as unpalatable on the Indian side. But relying on interviews from Jaswant Singh on the book so far, I think the controversy is a tired insinuation of hostility from the state. Banning the book on the grounds that:

“the text in it is misleading for the public and against interest of the state, and therefore, the book must be forfeited and prohibited”

only fuels a hostile polarization of India and Pakistan. Mind you, India and Pakistan as states are increasingly polarized, which in turn results in a division of peoples. Because my guess is that had government kept its hands out of censoring Singh’s book it might have spoken to the hearts and minds of South Asian’s disseminating novel ideas that are not divisive. Noam Chomsky once said that “states are violent institutions”, in South Asia, at the very least they are bitter, but people inherently are not. Singh’s work might have tapped into that sentiment and in the banning of it, states tighten their grip on citizens by perpetuating division and hostility in South Asia. Against a backdrop of a desire for economic growth, stability and globalization, that kind of bitterness is stale 60 odd years later. So I’m looking forward to reading the book and am lucky that my copy was reserved before the ban, in safe hands far from from protests and government intervention.