I am reading works by Dr. N.S. Rajaram, an Indian thinker and Historian. He makes some striking points that have forced me to think about the very nature of Pakistan.
We have a 4 province unit, with 2 of those provinces divorced from the other 2 by factors of history, language, race, culture and development. Sind and Punjab are historically part of Indian civilization, they, like India, were ruled directly by the British, whilst the other 2 provinces formed the wild frontier of the subc. Furthermore, Balochistan and NWFP represent Iranic peoples who are in part, or alot, uncomfortable with being part of Pakistan.
His notion that a state bounded by Islam died when Bangladesh broke away is, sadly, 100% accurate. That notion of Islam led brotherhood is dead. The provinces of Sind and Punjab, bastions of civilization and with legacy of great empires and tradition, risk being over run by essentially wild hordesmen from the wild North.
Are Punjab, and Sind to a lesser degree, parts of historic India tacked on to the wild fringes of the lands of the Iranic tribes of central Asia? Does our survival rest in re-union with India, or some complete break from the culturally and historically alien tribes to our north?
what akhand bharat
even before muslims they were divided in to 100s of small states owned by rajas who use to fight with each other all the time
akhand bharat, lol
Indians and pakistanis always think about the history and past (mostly 1000's year old history) and keep thinking how proper we were once upon time. The reality is although we were ahead of other part of world till 1600th century we lost the race after we started fighting each other. (Started with Aurangzeb who didn't care about the economic and political tie between hindu and muslim like his father/grandfather did) That resulted in breaking up of the whole empire and thus economic and social prosperity.
Further problems were aggrevated by education system imposed by Britain (in both areas) which will produce only clerks and not Managers. Now we know how to work, can work hard but do not know how to handle others (or ourselves)
there is no harm in united nation bcos reason of tension between hindu and muslim were british who fooled muslim league that they will be supressed by Nehru/Gandhi as they are hindu. And India as united, secular, democratic country will not survive. But results are in front of all. even pakistan is doing well after many years of military rule.
Can we start debate on implications of united India-pakistan? I remember 8-10 years back people in india use to talk about combine country and it's effect on Cricket.. Imran khan and Javed Miyadad were major plus point for this theory :)
I can't think of any negative point right now but may be if this post evolve in healthy discussion we can come up with pros-cons of this.
+ve points
- We may become Super Economy in asia
- Great military power with combine Nuke and largest army
- with civilian nuke energy we can solve all our energy needs
- with Russia at india side, US and China at pakistan's side ; we will have all friends
- IT super power
- major Agriculture producer in world and exporter
- and those who are obsessed with 'religion only' we be home to largest muslim population
- And will surpass China and become most populated country in world...
what akhand bharat
even before muslims they were divided in to 100s of small states owned by rajas who use to fight with each other all the time
akhand bharat, lol
pakistan came to existence only after 14th August before that it was ruled by several small rajas only.
pakistan came to existence only after 14th August before that it was ruled by several small rajas only.
Yes Pakistan came into existence on 14th August 1947. But do not forget that
India came into existence only after 15th August 1947.
Thus India is younger sibling even by a day.
Before their respective birthdays, both of them were part of British ruled Indian subcontinent. And yes both of them had significant areas under the control of Rajas and Nawwabs.
Unfortunately so many Indians have this romantic notion about the past which more like a Mahabhartha story instead of being grounded in reality. Few Indian historians in fact may be one professor Vasai is honest. The rest of the lot are no better than typical Pakistani Mullah when it comes to un-biased analysis.
I am open minded and read all academics. Many good Indian thinkers. I would be open to analysis of a South Asian Confederation, unified monetary/foreign policy, with all else left to the local level?
I am open minded and read all academics. Many good Indian thinkers. I would be open to analysis of a South Asian Confederation, unified monetary/foreign policy, with all else left to the local level?
errr! lbg bro! you are just 62 years late with the idea that Muslim leadership accepted and Hindu nationalists rejected.
The very grounds on which Hindu nationalists were against the confederation idea back in 1946 are still the same, namely religious intolerance by both Hindus and Muslims.
And yes do read history but do not forget the present. It has been only days if not weeks that minority Christians and Muslims were attacked and persecuted in India. It has been only days if not weeks that Shias and Sunnis fought pitched battles in Pakistan's terrible tribal area. Pakistan and India are fighting over water distribution and yet another river aka Chenab is running dry.
So it is good to enjoy these intellectual discussions over a cup of tea, but sadly these ideas of friendship are all but little storms in the same teacup.
But surely out futures are both rosier if we work together, rather then fight?
India/Pakistan are both horrendously poor states, with HDI of African nations as with per capita incomes. If we can find peace, we can do what is dear to all of our hearts...and focus on human development.
SAARC economic area is possible and thats only if Pakistan and India comes into some terms. When India always thinking Pakistan has no identity and actually is part of India, its neglecting a whole nation of 160 and dont really recognise them.
How is it possible in a combined sub continent Indian majority will ever recognise a minority and play fair? when we see Muslims and christians living a second class life in India everyday and are behind in every walk of life in jobs, education, business and economy their respresntation is not true reflection of population at all.
that proves 2 nation theory was right, DB creation was pakistan elites mistake and successfull exploitation by India by waging war at plotical turmoil in Pakistan.
Never questioned that. This is about cooperative efforts for maximum regional gain.
The thinking of people are different in two countries. I dont think there will be any advantage of making it one infact it will be a disaster for people for both the countries.
Yes combine union (if not politically than at least economically) like European would help all sub-continental countries. (Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Nepal and Bangladesh including)
It will prevent poorer countries like Bangladesh in case they are struggling with natural disaster, or help fight terrorism in any other country.
And with common currency (that's one thing both india and pakistan have in common Rupee :P, but new name would also do) trades will be easier.
And if Muslim, Hindu, Jain, Sikh, Tamils, Buddhist all are part of one South Asian Union there wont' be any issue of discrimination against any particular community. Note the european union impose restriction on trades, work permit and other issues on every member.
As an economic model EU is a miracle. The South Americans are copying it full speed (Research SA Union). We South Asians will be felt behind if we too do not cooperate between ourselves.
errr! lbg bro! you are just 62 years late with the idea that Muslim leadership accepted and Hindu nationalists rejected.
The very grounds on which Hindu nationalists were against the confederation idea back in 1946 are still the same, namely religious intolerance by both Hindus and Muslims.
.
The problem during that time was British didn't want us to be united. Second was politics and Power. No body wanted to give power to other. Like Gandhi assured Jinnah that muslim's will be protected and given higher post in ministry but nehru wanted PM seat and so Jinnah too.
And this uncertancy over future of country which was divided on religious thought created anger between both community. If muslim's really wanted new country than why would they choose to stay back in India? when there was option to join East or West Pakistan?
The newspapers do not have any other job than post claims of attack on particular community. Mind that BJP who tried to create communal riots, was not elected during their Mandir drive... They got elected later on when they changed their stance to nationalism...