Our Announcements
Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.
Posted by admin in CURRENT EVENTS on July 31st, 2023
ASIA–PACIFIC, 24 Aug 2020
Mahboob A. Khawaja, Ph.D. – TRANSCEND Media Service
17 Aug 2020 – British imperialism was not accidental but a planned scheme of things to perpetuate its cultural and political dominance over the weak and most vulnerable people of the globe. Its aims were no different in the Sub-Continent of India-Pakistan. The immediate focal aim was to destroy the existing culture of the established Mughal Empire and divide and rule the whole of India. Remember, imperialism was an unadulterated civilization on its own with massive possibilities and material possessions to control the masses.
The 1857 belligerent war on Mughal India and its occupation is referred to as “Mutiny” in imperial history. Bahdur Shah Zafar, the last emperor was arrested, his son’s head chopped off and exiled to be imprisoned in a garage in Rangoon, Burma. It is estimated that two millions Indians, mostly Muslims were killed by the invading British armies. It was the beginning of rethinking as how to expel the British and freedom to be restored to the Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs and other minorities in India. You should know that truth explained in full clarity becomes indisputable. British imperialism took India from the Mughals and robbed their wealth, moral and spiritual cultural development of eight centuries.
Not much has changed of the legacy of British rule. For over 73 years, Indian and Pakistani people try to celebrate Independence Day, not in peace but with the missing objectivity of the national freedom movement. Both nations somehow lost the sense of political reality and are overburdened with a sickening mental microscope of unreality. Both are in desperate need of political change and reformation, not revolution to imagine the historic freedom from British imperialism. Plato made it clear that “thinking is man’s natural instrument for problem solving, and any problem could be solved by thought…”
Kashmir map-Plus Indian Occupied Jammu & Kashmir
Towards Thinking of Reasoned Political Change and Unthinking of Extremism and Occupation of Kashmir
Indian and Pakistani politicians remained buried in the past. For change and future-making, they urgently need people of new ideas, new vision and proactive intellect. At the outset, nobody appears to be rethinking – how to restore normal relationships between people and nations who lived together for centuries in the same sub-continent. Revolution is not the answer as it is a configuration of mostly passion and national emotions subject to transitory feelings, time and place. A reasoned thinking is often the sparking guideline for sustainable human relationships. Anarchy of absolutism or nationalism is as dangerous today as it was centuries earlier – causing the Two WW and killings and dehumanization of millions and millions across the globe. What is the way out to reason and rationality to deal with problem-solving and return to peace and tranquility between the warring societies? Kashmir is at the heart of conflicts between India and Pakistan which was left unresolved by the departing British colonialism.
The political leaders in India and Pakistan have no rational sense of their strengths and weaknesses. India is overwhelmingly claiming to be a Hindu nationalist regime under PM Narinder Modi. Its constitution and national freedom movement had the philosophical and political soul of secularism. Pakistan had the vision of an Islamic State. None of the two are connected to their originality of the freedom movement. None would show a sense of guilt for the disconnection and trivial policies and practices in their own affairs. The spirit of democracy, secularism and respect for equal rights is tormented by the leaders of the two nations. Both are nuclear nations and often remind the people of the world – what could go wrong when the nuclear option is miscalculated for one-sided peace as it happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Could men of knowledge and genius rise up against the obvious political odds and ignorance that wars could resolve the problem without catastrophic human destruction?
India and Pakistan are not ruled by the wisest or brightest politicians. The masses suffer by neglect and anarchy. Their public institutions lack human care, services and efficiency. Those who grab political power by extreme ideologies and hateful manipulation are men of political intrigue assuming power through exploitation of fellow human beings and impose their absurdity on human consciousness striving for survival.
Truth is One and the same unchanging as it was many centuries earlier. Contrary to historic India under the Mughal Empire, we are seeing in India, denial of human rights and freedom and prolonged captivity of the people of Jammu and Kashmir – a framework of extreme Hinduism ideology. The masses of Kashmir seek their rights to freedom, not forced captivity. What if they had the freedom to express their will, if they want freedom from India or want to join Pakistan? Historically, Kashmir was never a part of the British Raj but a separate entity and its geography and socio-economic lifelines run through Pakistan, not India. India after military confrontation with China will look for escape from reality to confront Pakistan. Kashmir is not a domestic issue of India or Pakistan. Conscientious Indian thinkers and people of conscience oppose the RSS Hinduism strategy and are adamant to these violations of human dignity and freedom.
Arundhati Roy, an international peace activist and author of the novels The Ministry of Utmost Happiness and My Seditious Heart, makes this candid observation (“The Silence is the Loudest Sound”, New York Times, 15 Aug 2019):
“Amid these vulgar celebrations the loudest sound, however, is the deathly silence from Kashmir’s patrolled, barricaded streets and its approximately seven million caged, humiliated people, stitched down by razor wire, spied on by drones, living under a complete communications blackout…. Today Kashmir is one of the most or perhaps the most densely militarized zone in the world. More than a half-million soldiers have been deployed to counter what the army itself admits is now just a handful of “terrorists.” If there were any doubt earlier it should be abundantly clear by now that their real enemy is the Kashmiri people. What India has done in Kashmir over the last 30 years is unforgivable. An estimated 70,000 people, civilians, militants and security forces have been killed in the conflict. Thousands have been “disappeared,” and tens of thousands have passed through torture chambers that dot the valley like a network of small-scale Abu Ghraibs….. The danger will come from many directions. The most powerful organization in India, the far-right Hindu nationalist Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, or the R.S.S., with more than 600,000 members including Narendra Modi and many of his ministers, has a trained “volunteer” militia, inspired by Mussolini’s Black Shirts. With each passing day, the R.S.S. tightens its grip on every institution of the Indian state. In truth, it has reached a point when it more or less is the state.”
Pakistan’s Masses Hope for Political Change and Future-Making
Since 1947, Pakistan for the first time fair public elections allowed new generation leadership under Imran Khan- a cricketer and outspoken supporter of rights of freedom for the ten millions people of Kashmir. He claims to be an ambassador for the besieged people of Jammu and Kashmir under Indian administration since 1947. Lack of dialogue between India and Pakistan on Kashmir and normalization of people to people relationship are multiplying temptations and increased frustration on both sides demanding new thinking for a reasoned and conscientious soul-searching. One wonders why Pakistani leaders could never think to hold an international conference on Kashmir. Does Pakistan have competent diplomats to argue for the rights of Kashmiri people in global forums? If Pakistani leaders could evolve a capacity of moral and intellectual values and educated and honest people of new generation could hold offices of political responsibility, it could make the difference in dealing with some of the compelling socio-economic and political issues.
For over 50 years, Pakistan had a junk history of Bhuttos, Zardari, Sharif and Musharaf- all thugs, wicked and indicted criminals to rule a moral sensitive nation of values and spiritual history. PM Imran Khan, the first elected leader after a long time, should focus on institutional development and recruit educated and intelligent people of new generation – people of ideas and vision rather than thumb lickers and “yes men” in his governing circle. So far, he does not seem to have any educated person of international integrity and strategic planning to uplift Pakistan from a non-productive political economy and governance to a status that could advance its originality of the freedom movement and a stronger and politically viable Pakistan. He needs to address the issues of missing public service, political accountability, law and order and justice. Pakistanis are waiting what they do not see a focused Plan for political reformation. If Pakistanis are intelligent enough they should start thinking – what is after Imran Khan?
The former political monsters are still free and one wonders when Zardari, Bhutoos and Sharif and Musharaf would face the firing squads for their crimes of stolen wealth and killings of people. They looted banks, time and opportunities for change, yet, they claim to have done nothing wrong. If he could enlist morally and intellectually able people to his governance, the issue of Kashmir could ably be presented in global settings and perhaps an exercise of referendum- plebiscite be practiced to ensure the encompassing reality for the deprived masses of Kashmir. Stupid clichés of freedom and casual allusion of political change and resolution of Kashmir will not make any difference on the ground. If Pakistani leaders have individual conscience and reality of the history to organize a Strategic Action PLAN, the issue of Kashmir could be amicably resolved. The essence of political change lies in being strong, not weak or divided in policies and practices.
Challenge – How to Become Effective Leaders?
Leaders create new leaders with vision and integrity to imagine the universal phenomenon of change and futuristic developments. Human happiness and progress move horizontally in peace-time, not in continuing warmongering and irrational threats to other people and nations. In situation of crises, responsible leaders provide assurances and comforts to the masses – would leaders of India and Pakistan come out of the psychologically neurosis box and see the enlightenment of the 21st century of informed humanity and honor the rights of self-determination of the people of Kashmir and let them decide their own future and freedom and once for all rewrite a history of peaceful co-existence and friendship?
______________________________________
Dr. Mahboob A. Khawaja specializes in international relations-global security, peace and conflict resolution with keen interests in Islamic-Western comparative cultures and civilizations, and author of several publications including the latest book: Global Peace, Security and Conflict Resolution: Approaches to Understand the Current Issues and Future-Making, Lambert Academic Publications, Germany, 2017.
Tags: Conflict, India, Kashmir, Pakistan, Solutions, Violent conflict
This article originally appeared on Transcend Media Service (TMS) on 24 Aug 2020.
Posted by admin in CURRENT EVENTS on April 30th, 2023
Kashmir kept in Cold Freezer
Asif Haroon Raja
When it comes to the question of honour and dignity, then the tangible superiority, or diplomatic and economic superiority doesn’t matter. For the defence of the motherland and to protect the dignity and honour of the nation, all materialist ambitions and internal feuds should be set aside, and everything in hand sacrificed to push out the offenders and to eliminate the conspirators.
The Afghan Mujahideen did it in the 1980s and the Afghan Taliban repeated it in 2021. On both occasions, the Lilliputians defeated the Goliaths because of their cohesion, unity and abiding faith in Allah. The leaders and the led fought hand in hand and they braved the difficulties equally. The TTA achieved the miracle on their own and without external support.
During Napoleon’s campaign in Russia, when the Corps of Marshal Michael Ney was encircled while withdrawing from Leningrad to Moscow and was asked to surrender, he replied, “Marshal’s do not surrender”, and he fought his way out of the encirclement after a savage fight.
When ten times superior Indian forces invaded the encircled and isolated EP, although the heavily outnumbered troops fought with extraordinary grit and determination despite the extremely heavy odds, the senior leadership buckled down and drowned their sacrifices in the sea of humiliation. The defenders of Hilli who had blunted repeated attacks of Indian 20 Mountain Division from 21 Nov till 4 FF was ordered to withdraw on 11 Dec, had to bear the shame of surrender. Lt Gen AAK Niazi in command of 45000 regular and irregular forces could have made history had he opted to die fighting like a tiger instead of surrendering. Defiance might have opened an honorable avenue of exit and possibly a political resolution of ‘confederation’.
India, supported by the USSR, annexed East Pakistan in Dec 1971 through treachery and subversion. No Pakistani leader pledged to avenge the defeat and wash off the humiliation. All aspired for friendship with India and went an extra mile to keep India appeased.
Pakistan didn’t untie the knot with the duplicitous USA despite its betrayal in the 1965 war and in the 1971 war. A policy of one-sided appeasement was adopted.
With this mindset, Kashmir which had emerged as the unfinished agenda of the Partition and the chief bone of contention between the two neighbours was never taken seriously and was put in the cold freezer. No long-term Kashmir policy was framed and India was given a free hand to consolidate its hold over the disputed territory. Only a reactive policy was adopted. Even on the diplomatic front, no meaningful effort was made to counter the Indian narratives and the disinformation campaign.
Without Kashmir, Pakistan is incomplete and without the free flow of water in our rivers, Pakistan’s survival is impossible. India was allowed to build over 60 small, medium and large dams over the three eastern rivers and to indulge in water terrorism.
It is dismaying to know that all our civil and military leaders did politics with Kashmir. Many in the army earned promotions by posing as peacetime Napoleons while some made profits.
The game started when Liaqat Ali Khan accepted Jawahar Lal Nehru’s request for a ceasefire at a time when our brave hearts had turned the tide of the 1948 war. Maj Gen Akbar who wanted the war to continue and had made plans to interdict the vulnerable lines of communication was court martialled and imprisoned.
Nehru duped our leaders by making a false pledge that he would resolve the issue by granting the right of self-determination to the Kashmiris. Thereon he kept buying time and absorbing Kashmir into the Indian Union through fake elections, buying the loyalties of puppets in Kashmir and affecting changes in the Indian Constitution. The UN and other world powers remained tilted towards India.
Field Marshal Ayub Khan was the only leader who made an earnest effort to liberate Kashmir through use of force, but luck didn’t favour him and Op Gibraltar and Op Grand Slam couldn’t meet its planned objectives. Yet he had made Pakistan armed forces a robust fighting machine which was able to defeat the nefarious designs of six times superior Indian armed forces that had vowed to destroy the Pak military in the battle of Chawinda in the 1965 War. He has several other feathers in his cap for which the nation should remain grateful, but the chronic army haters paint him in black.
Tashkent Accord was not a sell off of Kashmir as falsely alleged by ZA Bhutto, but Simla Accord in 1972 was the first sell off. Bhutto agreed to convert the ceasefire line in Kashmir into Line of Control (LOC), and both mutually consented to convince their respective people to accept the LOC as a permanent border between the two Kashmirs’. Third party involvement was replaced with bilateralism which favored India since it could buy time and parry the UN intervention.
Gen Ziaul Haq was the only leader who had a vision of liberating Kashmir. While he mandated the ISI to carry out biggest proxy war in Afghanistan in the 1980s without the involvement of any other agency, he triggered the Khalistan movement and fixed his periscope on Kashmir. After the defeat of the Soviet forces in 1988 and their readiness to quit in Feb 1989, it was very easy to take on Kashmir. India was internally at its weakest in the late 1980s and Pakistan had acquired weaponized nuclear capability. Gen Zia had planned to link Khalistan movement with the Kashmiri freedom movement. After the ten-year experience in covert war, the ISI was in sound position to push out the Indian occupying forces from IOK; Gulbadin Hikmatyar had pledged to send one lac Mujahideen to the aid of Kashmiris who had taken part in the Afghan Jihad.
Gen Zia had gained tremendous influence and popularity in the Pashtun belt of Afghanistan, and was all set to introduce Islamic system. This was not to the liking of the western powers and it became obligatory to bump him off. He along with many generals were killed in an air crash in Aug 1988. His departure was rejoiced by Russia, India, and his detractors at home which included the PPP and the liberals.
After his death, all the plans made for the liberation of Kashmir were shelved. Benazir, Nawaz Sharif (NS), Gen Musharraf and Zardari favored friendly ties with India and played politics to damage Kashmiri freedom movement. None exploited the armed uprising in IOK which had nailed down 7 lacs of Indian forces in the narrow Kashmir Valley. All favoured converting LOC into a permanent border, not realising that it would not quench the thirst of expansionist India. None took the Kashmiris in the loop while engaging in peace talks with India.
NS claimed that Kashmir resolution was round the corner when Vajpayee visited Lahore in Jan 1999, but lamented that his hand-picked Gen Musharraf stabbed him in the back by launching Operation Dras-Kargil on his own. In his second tenure, he cultivated personal friendship with Indian PM Gujral, and in his third term he established business ties with Modi and business tycoon Jindal. Gen Musharraf took the steam out of Kashmiri freedom struggle after signing peace deal with India in 2004, allowing India to fence LOC, floated the out of box solution and divided APHC. Zardari declared the Kashmiri freedom fighters as terrorists. To restart the suspended composite dialogue that were snapped after the Mumbai attacks in Nov 2008, NS agreed with Modi at the Uffa meeting in 2015 to accord higher priority to terrorism over Kashmir. Imran Khan (IK) desired friendship with Modi soon after he took over in 2018, but the latter declined to meet him. Reportedly, both IK and Gen Qamar Bajwa tried to arrange Modi’s visit to Pakistan in April 2021.
When India illegally annexed the disputed territory of IOK on Aug 5, 2019, that was the time when Pakistan should have gone all out to free Kashmir from the cruel clutches of fascist and racist India. Nothing else should have mattered after the jugular vein was severed. At least covert operations should have been stepped up in Kashmir and some other disturbed regions of India.
But like the former leaders, IK and Gen Bajwa favoured a similar outcome of the Kashmir dispute as envisaged by the predecessors and they continued with the old apologetic and defensive policy in spite of India’s intense firings across the LOC and Working Boundary, surgical strikes and other offensive acts.
A tacit understanding was given to Trump and Pentagon during the visit of the two to Washington in July 2019. Trump’s mediation offer was meant to guarantee the safety of AJK and GB. Both were informed about Modi’s plan of changing the special status of IOK and they were told to control the people. 21-gun salute to Gen Bajwa by Pentagon, who was retiring in Nov that year, was a clear indication that he had consented, and it was decided that he will be given a three years extension.
It is most distressing that Pakistan’s policy makers allowed India to usurp IOK without a whimper. The Indian brutes were permitted to carry out genocide and rapes of locked down Kashmiris in the biggest military garrison and open prison. Encouraged by pacifist response from Pakistan, Modi went ahead with his plan to change the demography and culture of Kashmir by settling non-Muslims and letting them buy lands and marrying Muslim Kashmiri girls. He is now welcoming foreign business tycoons as well as G-20 to invest and build business empires and resorts in the Kashmir Valley.
The abject plight of the Indian Muslims, rendered stateless and treated as 2nd rated citizens of India and brutally oppressed, doesn’t bother the insensitive elite class in Pakistan, which is smug in their money-making ventures, and in infighting for power. They are least concerned about the dangerous designs of India wanting to fragment Pakistan into four parts.
The writer is a retired Brig Gen, war veteran, defence, security & political analyst, international columnist, author of five books, Chairman Thinkers Forum Pakistan & director Measac Research Centre. [email protected]
Posted by admin in CURRENT EVENTS on December 19th, 2022
REMORSE. by Inayet Ullah
Something tragic happened in our country in December 1971 as a result of which one of our two
arms (East wing) was separated.
Pakistan was created as a Islamic Republic of Pakistan in 1947 by referendum with majority
votes coming from Bengal.
Although the people of East Wing played an important part in creation of Pakistan with their
majority votes, with the passage of time, East Pakistan had genuine grievances of being
neglected economically, politically and in all spheres of life, so much so that Sheikh Mujeebur
Rehman, the head of East Pakistan’s political party Awami League, at the end of his complaints
against grievances and injustices to East Pakistan, said: “Please behave like brothers, not like
rulers”.
In December 1971 general elections, which perhaps was the most transparent election in the
history of Pakistan, Sheiks Mujeeb-ur-Rehman’s Awami League swept the elections with
overwhelming majority. As a rule, following the elections, a National Assembly meeting was to
be called and the winner party had to form a new government. But the then west Pakistani
rulers continuously delayed and postponed to do so and finally abandoned it completely causing
wide range protests and uproar throughout East Pakistan. The intent of this was obviously to
deny Awami League its rights to form a new government.
If we did not like the people of East Pakistan why did we seek their votes in referendum in
favour of Pakistan? Is it not unfair and selfish to use their majority votes for creation of Pakistan
as a homeland for us and after completing the task to deny them even equal rights?
Then what happened? When they asked for justice and their legal and constitutional rights to
form a new government, they were brutally killed, innocent women raped, and their life and
property put to arson. Pakistan was made to provide a safe haven for muslims of India, but what
was happening was muslims against muslims.
Unfortunately, our the then rulers, for political gains and for lust of power, did no care even to put
the survival of our country at stake, and where we ended up is history. What happened in 1971
in our country is a blot, not only on our national history but also on the face of international
affairs.
We should be ashamed of ourselves for the heartless tyranny unleashed to our own brothers
and sisters, if our conscience is not yet dead. The guilt is great, and so is remorse. The
perpetrators were our forefathers. Nevertheless, we, the existing generation, have the feeling
that we owe them an apology. I think an official apology should be sent to them and diplomatic
relations with trade and cultural relations established between the two brother independent
nations.
I quote the following opening line of his poem poet Naseer Turabi wrote on the day of the East
Pakistan tragic event which truly interprets the popular feelings of all patriots of Pakistan:
Wo hamsafar tha magar us se hamnawai na thi
America, Russia and NATO’s Geneva diplomatic talks ended in failure without any formal course of action to avoid military confrontation on Ukraine’s border. Other vital issues include how to treat each other in a futuristic imaginary encounter of common interests. The global community is watching the prelude to a staged drama of unwarranted warfare with profligacy, malevolence and unknown miseries of unthinkable multitudes. All the superpowers — the stage actors of the 21st century have fictitious monsters equipped with innovative sophistry and captivating eloquence to talk about peace, security, human rights, global order and justice. They are master of deception playing on the passion of entrenched and exhausted mankind as if they could stop the emerging pains, horrors and devastations of warmongering to ensure a return to normalization of human affairs. To an inner human analytical eye encompassing proactive sense of global peace and harmony, it does not appear rational to articulate fears and misleading intentions to safeguard human peace and dignity while all the actions speak of a different language of obsessed assertions based on their own despotic national interests.
They claim peace but talk about threats of wars — how to rationalize the irony of human wickedness and inherent deception. Was the same stage drama not enacted during the First and 2nd World Wars killings millions and millions of people across this Planet Earth?
Human progress and future-making are jeopardized when lessons of history are deliberately misinterpreted and ignored by the paranoid, vengeful and suspicious leaders. If war is the only avenue to seek peace, we are on the wrong side of history and thinking of our future. It took several centuries to Europeans to understand the false shadows of apprehension of peace and harmony and to come to terms with nation-building, some resemblance of democracy, human equality of rights and unity for future-making via the EU. A reasoned perspective would illustrate that Russia after breakdown of the former USSR is not the same inheriting entity of Communist authoritarian ideology, leadership, institutions, political thought, policies and practices within the working systems of global order. There are visible progressive movements for political change, open communications, elections, institutional developments and global interactions and seeking reunion with the global order, UNO, world institutions, friendly relationships with adversaries and balanced socio-economic ties with others. To enlarge the scope of reason and understanding, Russia needs formidable change as it appears to be forging on different national strategic interests; its position on Ukraine is not the same as eluded by most NATO members. Ukraine and Russia have common geography and history just like Britain, France and Germany have. Would it not be a matter of extreme political-strategic sensitivity if other perceived enemies would dare to come close to military confrontations in Western Europe? It is logical that true friends of humanity will not act blindly to cause wild uproars and evil-mongering against the people anywhere on this planet.
The focal issue seems to be the prospective membership of Ukraine to the community of NATO in Western Europe. America and Russia and other EU members enjoin conflicting views on this issue. Ukraine claims its freedom to join any international organizations for its betterment, peace and security. Russia and America should not be concerned except that they want to draw certain strategic gains out of this chaotic perceived tragedy of futuristic warfare. After the dreadful consequences of the Two World Wars, NATO was formed by the Europeans to maintain peace and security and avoid futuristic unwarranted national wars within the European hemisphere. Its formation and scope is limited to nationalistic conventional warfare in the European theatre.
One wonders, what wars did NATO fight to protect its ideals and strategic priorities after the 1945 WW? What NATO had to do with Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya? Were these accidental engagements or simply an extension of planned mischievous catastrophic instances of tyranny against the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and elsewhere who never posed any threat to NATO, America or to any Western European nations?
How would one rationalize the role and actions of NATO in a global theater of strategic interests? The history of NATO and its plans and ideological motives are equally distorted and disfigured on the global screen of reason, honesty and accountability. Russia overtook eastern parts of Ukraine — Crimea by forces aligned to Russian speaking masses and trying to integrate those territories into the Russian federation. This issue has been discussed between Russian President Putin, former German Chancellor Merkel and French President Macron on several occasions. Could America, Russia and Europeans not talk again for a peaceful resolution of this and other related problems?
Scott Ritter (is a former Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties, in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm, and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD): What War with Russia Look Like (Global Research: 01/11/2022): explains the irony of current affairs:
If the U. S. tries to build up NATO forces on Russia’s western frontiers in the aftermath of any Russian invasion of Ukraine, Russia will then present Europe with a fait accompli in the form of what would now be known as the “Ukrainian model.” In short, Russia will guarantee that the Ukrainian treatment will be applied to the Baltics, Poland, and even Finland, should it be foolish enough to pursue NATO membership. Russia won’t wait until the U. S. has had time to accumulate sufficient military power, either. Russia will simply destroy the offending party through the combination of an air campaign designed to degrade the economic function of the targeted nation, and a ground campaign designed to annihilate the ability to wage war. Russia does not need to occupy the territory of NATO for any lengthy period-just enough to destroy whatever military power has been accumulated by NATO near its borders.
Is NATO being managed by those people who lived in the distant past and perhaps post WW2 historic culture is still alive and flourishing? Is there any glimpse of hope for change and new reasoned relationships between America, Russia and West European people? The future of violence and nationalistic resentment looks embedded into the distorted strategic necessities of the current affairs, be it the argument of Russia or American-led NATO and or the EU on its own. NATO is run by the wrong people, glued to wrong thinking and doing the wrong things without any rational sense of time, people’s interest and history. Craig Murray (NATO-an idea Whose Time has Gone), a former British diplomat and Rector of the University of Dundee, UK, foresees the body as obsolete to emerging strategic thinking and needs of the Western alliance:
It is also the case that the situation in countries where NATO has been most active in killing people, including Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and Pakistan, has deteriorated. It has deteriorated politically, economically, militarily and socially. The notion that NATO member states could bomb the world into good was only ever believed by crazed and fanatical people like Tony Blair and Jim Murphy of the Henry Jackson Society. It really should not have needed empirical investigation to prove it was wrong, but it has been tried, and has been proved wrong….NATO’s attempt to be global arbiter and enforcer has been disastrous at all levels. Its plan to redeem itself by bombing the Caliphate in Iraq and Syria is a further sign of madness. Except of course that it will guarantee some blowback against Western targets, and that will “justify” further bombings, and yet more profit for the arms manufacturers. On that level, it is very clever and cynical. NATO provides power to the elite and money to the wealthy.
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was US Assistant Secretary of the Treasury and is author The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West, How America Was Lost, and The Neoconservative Threat to World Order. “Provocations Have A History Of Escalating Into War: Can War Be Avoided and the Planet Saved?” Information Clearing House: (8/31/2018), strikes a proactive caution to all Western policy makers:
The Zionist neoconservatives who rule in Washington are capable of the same mistake that Napoleon and Hitler made. They believe in “the end of history,” that the Soviet collapse means history has chosen America as the model for the future. Their hubris actually exceeds that of Napoleon and Hitler. When confronted with such deluded and ideological force, does turning the other cheek work or does it encourage more provocation.
Every beginning has its end. America needs Navigational Change after January 6, 2021 Trump’s Revolutionary attack on democracy and the Constitution, and so does Russia and NATO in their search for peaceful transition to sustainable future-making. We, the People of global community live on one floating Planet Earth, and we must be conscious — who we are, how connected we are in human solidarity and where are we heading to in our imagination of the present and future. It is awful and a tragedy of human conscience to be speaking of military conflicts and territorial gains when mankind urgently needs an effective cure for the Covid-19 pandemic. George Floyd cries continues to be heard all over the globe: “I can’t’ breathe.” We are One People, One Humanity — ignorance, natural disasters, and man-made fatalities know not any borders, flags and nationalities but surge like wildfire as being witnessed in the COVID-19 pandemic worldwide. Again political absolutism heightens animosity and hatred rather than human understanding and cooperation for a precious cause of saving human lives on Earth. To save life of one human being is to safeguard the whole of humanity. We are all born equal One Humanity: — the Divine Message of Al-Qur’an clarifies the truth:
“Proclaim in the name of thy Lord and Cherisher, Who created, Created man (human being) out of a (mere) clot of congealed blood, Proclaim! And thy Lord is Most Bountiful, He Who taught (the use of) the Pen, Taught man (human being) that which he knew not.”
© 2024, All Rights Reserved by Pakistan Think Tank.
British Colonialism and How India and Pakistan Lost Freedom by Mahboob A. Khawaja, Ph.D.
Posted by admin in Anchor & Commentators, Mahboob A. Khawaja, OPINION, OPINION LEADER, Pakistan - Heart of Asia, Pakistan Security, PAKISTAN THINK TANK ANALYST, PAKISTAN THINK TANK DISTINGUISHED COMMENTATOR, Pakistan Thought Leaders on June 22nd, 2022
British Colonialism and How India and Pakistan Lost Freedom
Mahboob A. Khawaja, Ph.D.
29 Dec 2021 – Do nations and civilizations grow out of the moral mire of military conquests, killings of innocent people, political cruelty and subjugation by imperialism? For more than 800 years, India as a Moghul Empire was an economically well-integrated and politically viable entity and European maintained strong commerce, trade and political relationships. After intrigued conspiracies and planned division, the British invaded India in 1857, committing cold-blooded massacres of two million people mostly Muslims opposing the military invasion described just as a “Mutiny” in the British chronicle. Bahadur Shah Zafar – the last Moghul emperor was deposed overnight in Delhi, his youngest son’s head was chopped off and put on a breakfast plate to strangle the Shah and make him surrender unconditionally. Shah was hurriedly taken to Rangoon (Burma) and imprisoned in a garage and later on died and was buried only to write poems in loss of his freedom and beloved country. Did the British overtake India to be a free country for democracy or to support the Hindu domination of futuristic India? British robbed Moghul India and looted its wealth and heritage to become Great Britain and imagined India as an absolute entity of the British Empire.
Leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Nehru, Dr Mohammad Iqbal, Mohammad Ali Jinnah and Liaquat Khan though educated in British intellectual traditions but articulated new missions and visions for national freedom as a revulsion against the British colonial political traditions and continuity of the British Raj in India. Was this violent and ruthless indoctrination part of the British heritage or history-making efforts to besiege India forever? Lord Mountbatten, the last Viceroy made sure that Indians will remain loyal and committed subservient to the futuristic blending of so-called celebrated national freedom after the 1947 partition into India and Pakistan. British by design failed to deliver the truth of national freedom to both nations in a universal spirit of political responsibility. Hindu mythology believes in “Mahabharata” (Greater India) and teaches school children that Pakistan and Afghanistan are part of the “Mahabharata” plan. Ironically, Hindus practise a caste system denying human equality in public life, whereas, Islam teaches the unity of mankind offering equality to all. The successive states of India-Pakistan both betrayed the reality of equal human rights and participation in governance.
History could not have confined the tyranny and oppression of “divide and rule” of British imperialism against the will of the Indian masses. Canons of rationality clarify that national freedom granted to both new entities in August 1947 was a fake chronology of time and history. The so-called national freedom perpetuated a hybrid socio-economic and political culture – part human- part vulture, British made no security arrangements to ensure communal peace and harmony which resulted in millions of people being killed in ethnic violence while migrating from one place to another.
Tormented by injustice, public discord and political lethargy, British imperialism changed the Indian mindset and behaviour within a century, but India and Pakistan even after 75 years remained glued to the British colonial systems in thoughts, systems and governance. Does it not signal a naïve and void imagination of national freedom professed by both nations since 1947? They continue to interact with one another as the most hated enemy of time and history, wars, the threat of nuclear arsenals, the Kashmir dispute and worst of all lack of direct people-to-people communication or business relationships – all seem to be part of a highly ruptured and purging pursuit of national freedom.
Indian and Pakistani Leaders Follow Egoistic Agenda for the Future
The aerial view of New Delhi reflects an Islamic image of the city – Grand New Delhi Mosque, nearby historic and beautiful Taj Mahal, Old Fort and a lot more. The first book ever written on India was “Kitab-al-Hind” (Book on India) by Abu Raihan Al-Brunei – a 10th-century Muslim scholar. Under the Moghul Empire, Delhi was one of the most intellectually and economically advanced progressive capitals. To foreigners, it does not look like the capital of Hindu India at all. If this inference has any reality, the future of India and Pakistan should have been a collaboration and lasting friendship. India always wanted to subdue Pakistan and its national freedom.
Pakistan’s bad luck entailed many military coups breaking its integrity and trust in freedom. Egoistic and foolish Generals created bogus and corrupt politicians claiming to be the leaders of future-making. They lacked the moral and intellectual capacity to imagine their future with a new generation of educated, intelligent and proactive people who could have contributed to a promising future for Pakistan. Most pernicious consequences defy logic as most Indian and Pakistani elite lack intellectual foresight to connect national freedom to a continuous movement for the greater cause of nation-building. Despite the political independence in 1947, the nation-building goal was forgotten and lost in the symbolic values of national identity.
India’s political agenda was intact when in December 1971, East Pakistan disintegrated and Bangladesh was created by Mrs Indra Gandhi –the Prime Minister – a power conspirator in India. Pakistani governing elite would not dare to admit that it was Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Genera Yahya Khan both major conspirators who led to the defeat of Pakistan. Even half a century later, Pakistanis still live in the delusional and unarguable conclusions of that historic misfortune. As a graduate student, I met General PNK Choudry (the former Chief of the Indian Armed Forces) arbitrarily retired by Mrs Indra Gandhi and sent as an Ambassador (HC) to Canada. At a local university campus, we met when he was a guest speaker. Later on, I invited him for a class gathering with fellow students and lunch. During the summer while working at a photo store, General Choudry comes in with two cameras on his shoulder and many times we had lunch together and walked and photographed together.
On weekends, at the university library- often I got library books to share with him and we talked about global affairs and his past and India-Pakistan. He denied any alleged conspiracy against Mrs Gandhi to oust her and bring a military coup in India. My interaction with General Choudry continued for almost two years. After his diplomatic assignment, he was hired by McGill University, Montreal as a lecturer and that is where he died in 1975. He was a simple, 6.5 ft approx tall person, humble and spoke openly and truthfully as I recall him. As an Indian top army Genera,l he may have been a tyrant but as a human being and a diploma, the was a decent person. He fought wars with Pakistan and knew most of the military establishments. Here is what he disclosed during many conversations and it should be alarming to Pakistanis if they deny it:
ZA Bhutto andSheikhh Mujib Were Appointed by Mrs Indira Gandhi Beforeo the defeat and surrender of East Pakistan in 1971, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto had direct contact with Mrs Gandhi and wanted India’s help to become the next leader of Pakistan. India was looking for such an opportunity and wanted East Pakistan to become a new entity- Bangladesh. Sheikh Mujib Rehman was a nationalist and enthusiastic about a new homeland except to become the next elected leader of Pakistan. Bhutto-Yahya Khanwase competing for power even without elections. Sheikh Mujib’s Awami Party won the majority of seats in the 1971 elections of the National Assembly to be a legitimately elected leader of Pakistan. The inept and naïve Pakistani Generals had questions about Mujib’s futuristic intentions and delayed the peaceful transfer of power. ZA Bhutto (Peoples Party) carved up his egoistic agenda for grabbing the political power even if Pakistan was defeated, otherwise,e Sheikh Mujib-Yahya could have become the next governing leader. Bhutto was a power-hungry individual without any political capacity to be a leader. Mrs. Gandhi helped both – ZA Bhutto and Sheikh Mujib and the price was the defeat and surrender of Pakistan. Mrs. Gandhi appointed Bhutto as the next President, Martial Law Administrator and Prime Minister of Pakistan and Sheikh Mujib ur Rehman as the next President of Bangladesh. Some Pakistani would blame General Niazi for the surrender but in reality,y it was Yahya-Bhutto and the Pakistani Generals who should have faced full accountability and perhaps fired squads for their treachery and dishonesty to the national freedom and integrity of Pakistan. The lessons of history are ignored as Pakistani politics lacks accountability. To see more, please view the articles by this author: “Pakistan: Leaders who Stabbed the Nation” (2009), “Pakistan: Leader or Criminals.” (2014); “Pakistan: Reflections on the Turbulent 69th Independence Day”, “Pakistan: How to Change the Culture of Political Corruption and Rebuild the Future.” (2014), and “Pakistan and India’s leader mark freedom from British Colonial Rule but Masses look for a Navigational Change.” (2020).
To General Choudry, if the whole of Pakistan was captured by India except for the Sindh province, ZA Bhutto would have gladly become the Chief Minister of Sindh to co-exist with India. He disclosed, that there were five or six soft-hearted” Pakistani Generals willing to align and not to challenge India’s plan for Bangladesh. General Yahya Khan and Bhutto were highly individualistic and morally corrupt. Mrs. Gandhi had daily briefings where Yahya and Bhutto held cocktail parties and slept with prostitutes. Shocking as it is, future Pakistani leaders never held anyone accountable for the crimes against the nation. Were ZA Bhutto and Yahya Khan more important than the existence, national freedom and integrity of One Pakistan? Dr. Ishtiaq Qureshi (Editor Urdu Digest) wrote “Skoote –Dahaka Say Purdah Uttha Hey” (1972), in which he described the details of how Bhutto and Yahya Khan betrayed Pakistan and stabbed the nation. Dr Qureshi was imprisoned by the Bhutto government. This dreadful tragedy infallibly resulted to question the very basis of the originality of Pakistan and remains unacknowledged and districted by the Pakistani political elite even to this day. Are the Pakistanis still living in any rational denials of their chapter of history?
Moral and intellectual corruption is rampant in both countries. Masses are systematically compelled to bribe officials to get the basic services and official necessities of nationality ID, passports, driver’s license and a lot more in life. National freedom has changed from the enlarged scope of corruption and exploitation – the legacy of British imperialism. BothIndiana and Pakistani neo-colonialists look for an escape from reality and are allergic to seeing the mirror of the present and future. Allama Iqbal (pioneer of Pakistani national freedom) did not live to see his dream come true in Pakistan. Mahatma Gandhi was murdered by a Hindu extremist, and Nehru died a natural death.
Mohammad Ali Jinnah passed away in a broken ambulance on a Karachi street, and Liaquat Ali Khan (first PM) was murdered by the then Pakistani politicians. Mrs. Indra Gandhi was killed by his Sikh bodyguard as revenge for the Indian armed attack on Sikh Golden Temple, Amritsar; Sheikh Mujib was murdered by his military commander and Bhutto was hanged for killing a political opponent. Both nations failed to produce proactive and intelligent leaders to usher in political change. Narendra Modi, leader of the Hindu Janta Party and Prime Minister believes in Hinduvata domination of the sub-continent, Pakistani could not produce any leaders except Bhutto, Ms Bhutto, Zardari, Sharif and General Musharaf –conspirators and gangsters who stole wealth and committed heinous crimes and bought palaces in Europe to enjoy life.
Is There any Glimpse of Hope for People-Oriented Change for the New Generations?
India has multiple problems of socio-economic and political diversity. It is unable to counteract the national freedom movement of the Sikh Nation for an independent Khalistan. Kashmir was never a part of British Indian dominion and its masses continue to seek freedom from India’s occupation and violations of their basic human rights. Muslim, Christian and other minorities are oppressed underHinduvata-managed India claiming to be a secular and democratic country. The Hindu Janata Party under the current PM is committed to making India a Hindutiva State regardless of other nationalities and identities. Pakistani miserably failed to take proactive initiatives to support the freedom movement for the people of Kashmir. The old service men-led elite could not imagine new and creative strategies to organize international conferences or effectively communicate to the Western world to share the aspirations of the Kashmiri masses.
The degeneration of the Indian-Pakistani moral and intellectual culture is well in progress. The essence, meaning and purpose of historic British colonial systems are operative across all public affairs, policies and practices in India and Pakistan. The armed forces, the civil service and legal jurisprudence all remain under the sinister influence and disfigured reality of the two so-called free nations. Police still beats the protesters and open fire on peaceful demonstrators, be in New Delhi, Kashmir or Islamabad. National freedom does not empower futuristic societies to establish political absurdity, immoral and intellectual decadence and political injustice. Common people in both countries are besieged by obsolete systems of political governance except rich landlords and the affluent compete in the elections and gain power.
There is no charge for the people in the colonized landscape exceptthe enlarged scope of moral and intellectual corruption used as freedom. If you will question both elites having many common values of the British Raj, they would deny if there is anything wrong with their thinking, role play and management of public affairs. The new and young generation who could not imagine a new sustainable future vanishing fast and migrating to Europe and America in search of better opportunities. The old generations of landlords and retired civilian-military officials manage the governing bodies whereas people of the new and educated generation are deprived of any practical participation and migrate to Europe and North America and never return to their home countries.
The hub of political culture is divided and delusional about national freedom and sustainable future-making. There are no wars for the people of the sub-continent to fight but they are fighting wars on several fronts without reason- known and unknown. The compelling realities across the beleaguered sub-continent demand new thinking, new visionary leadership, men of new ideas and plans to deal with the unwarranted exploitation of masses, communal deaths, and deliberate destruction of the historic culture and millions of people looking for a change and a new beginning of cordial borders and relationships.
______________________________
Tags: British Colonialism, History, India, Pakistan, UK
British Colonialism, History, India, Pakistan, UK
No Comments