Nationalist leaders of Pakistan (split topic)

mulz

your example of the taleban thing goes both ways..as far as afghanistan goes, they always came to us when they needed us, war, refugees, help in internal warlord squabbles, but as soon as they dont need us, they start blaming pakistan for all their ills. They are watching for their interests just as much as we are.

as far as Liaquat ali khan goes, No, i do not know how type of division he created..but was he the first one, only one, names like ghaffar khan, wali khan, G M syed come to mind, with voices from sindho-desh to pkahtoonistaan. others saying that mohajirs can stay in karachi or basically go in the ocean..remember who that was? anyways thsi thread is not about liaquat ali and i frankly have little knowledge of the subject.

interesting that he was the only one shot. if someone would have tkan the time to do some rodent cleaning and gotten rid of ghafar khan , wali khan and G M Syed and other assorted idiots including the tribal heads of baluchistaan we would have been much better off.

interesting that he was the only one shot. if someone would have tkan the time to do some rodent cleaning and gotten rid of ghafar khan , wali khan and G M Syed and other assorted idiots including the tribal heads of baluchistaan we would have been much better off.

Hmm, Fraudia: GM Syed, was one of the most pro Pakistani, politicians of Sindh prior to 1947, he is said to have wept on the floor of the Sindh assembly in 1946 when he heard rumours that Quaid-e-Azam had been killed.

Some of the tribal leaders and progressive members in politics of Baluchistan at one time, were very pro Pakistan, while Wali Khan was considered a potential Prime Minister in the 70's. What changed their minds? Well...trust me, if you want to know who are the real rodents, find the ones who were power mad, cruel or corrupt.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by mulz: *
You know as well as I do why Liaqat Ali khan was bad - he was first one fo segregate the society which once was heaven, a dream for united single entity - muslims of the subcontinent. He chose Mohajirs for safety of his political career ignoring locals of the land he was ruling - the process never ended there - we went on dividing and fighting amongst ourselves. It is not even funny Bangladesh was created, Sindh was dissatisfied, we could never rule NWFP and Shia-sunni fight always fills newspaper columns - with many divisions like Qureshi, Rajputs, etc even in Punjabis (thought to represent P of Pakistan), we have outclassed Hindu caste system by miles.
[/QUOTE]

Mulz, yara I am not sure if your feeling against Liaquat Ali Khan is right. I mean he was from Karnal, Esst Punjab, a wealthy landowner who gave up everything to be with Pakistan. As for helping the migrants from India, don't you think they needed the help? I mean come on, they left everything...family, property, jobs to come to Pakistan. At that thime they were also the best educated and most involved with the Indian Civil Service, so it made sense for them to take control of the civil bureacracy. Punjabis and Pashtuns were mostly involved with the army before partition. I am speaking to you as a person whose family has lived in Attock for years, so I'm not being being biased.

I agree about what you said regarding divisions but very honestly I think Fraudz is right in mentioning other nationalist leaders in Pakistan that worked to create a division and they are still working at it.

As for the Taliban, I think they were the best thing for Afghanistan in terms of keeping the country out of civil war, ensuring the security...The strict social policies came as a reaction to the excesses of the Afghan warlords like Gul Agha Sherzai who liked to take young boys and women for his pleasures. They may not have been smart in understanding geopolitics but they sure did follow Islam and Pashtonwali in terms of not handing over their guests...that takes guts.

My bottom line on the Afghan issue is that we as Pakistanis would like a strong stable Afghan government that is Pro-Pakistani and can work with us on my business, military fronts..If you want to call it a loose confederation, thats also fine. I know some people will object to what I said but lets look at reality of Afghanistan being forever dependent on us and the reasons for the growth and acceptance of the Taliban.

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Zakk: *
**interesting that he was the only one shot. if someone would have tkan the time to do some rodent cleaning and gotten rid of ghafar khan , wali khan and G M Syed and other assorted idiots including the tribal heads of baluchistaan we would have been much better off.
*

Hmm, Fraudia: GM Syed, was one of the most pro Pakistani, politicians of Sindh prior to 1947, he is said to have wept on the floor of the Sindh assembly in 1946 when he heard rumours that Quaid-e-Azam had been killed.

Some of the tribal leaders and progressive members in politics of Baluchistan at one time, were very pro Pakistan, while Wali Khan was considered a potential Prime Minister in the 70's. What changed their minds? Well...trust me, if you want to know who are the real rodents, find the ones who were power mad, cruel or corrupt.
[/QUOTE]

by the same token you can say liaquat ali did all he could to help make Pakistan become a reality, and if you think that he changed later and thus was not good for us, why are u takign the side of these idiots liek g m syed and ghaffar khan wali khan etc.

They became separatists from loyalists as you indicate, why should they be treated any differnet than. I frankly do not care what changed their minds, but there is no excuse for their actiosn and words which i read in the 80's. They deserved to be tried for treason and lynched..

Zakk: While you raise very important and factual points, the issue here is the loyalty to the nation. You, I and MOST Pakistanis have issues with the country, on how we can improve it and get rid of it's ills. However you don't see us all advocating secessionism. The issues of the country should be resolved within the domestic arena...Bacha Khan and GM Syed openly courted Afghanistan, India..Now why would we tolerate that? Fine they had grievances but so do many other Pakistanis. Pakistan is a third world country try to improve itself, sure it's had hurdles and roadblocks, but I believe it will still move ahead, Inshallah.

These nationalists play the Punjabi card pure and simple. In Sindh they play the Urdu speakers card. They have tried to hide their hatred for Punjabis/Urdu speakers by playing the nationalist card. I know many "nationalists" meaning they want their culture/language/customs to be retained who are working within the system. I think Fraudz has it spot on!

Personally I have no gripe with Liqat ali Khan, but his refusal to hold snap elections did start the process which undermined moves to Democracy. Secularists also blame him for pandering to the Mullahs.

I frankly do not care what changed their minds,

A convenient argument Fraudia...in case of Wali Khan it probably was when his son had his toe nails extracted during the mid 70's. In Ghaffar Khan's case it might have been his own imprisonment, which was sufficiently rigorous to ensure that Amnesty International declared him an International political prisoner fof conscience in the 60's, or maybe it was his brothers assasination in the late 50's. Mind you even in 1947-48 Quaid E Azam wanted Ghaffar Khan in the Muslim League.
In Syed's case, he remained a favourite of Zia ul Haq and even Nawaz Sharif. A useful tool at times against the PPP. Despite that he did reach out to the MQM when it first appeared.

These nationalists play the Punjabi card pure and simple.

RF, Nawaz Sharif famously campaigned on a openly anti Sindhi card and had the support of Intelligence Services and the President of Pakistan. Why the double standard? Slapping treason charges or lynching people who speak of secession does little for the development of Pakistan. Consider, how many rulers of Pakistan Civilian and Military openly committed acts of treason, they violated the constitution, ordered the crackdown and murder of their opponents sometimes with targetting only certain ethnic groups, how many of those people have been charged with treason? Or been lynched?

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Zakk: *
**These nationalists play the Punjabi card pure and simple.
*

RF, Nawaz Sharif famously campaigned on a openly anti Sindhi card and had the support of Intelligence Services and the President of Pakistan. Why the double standard? Slapping treason charges or lynching people who speak of secession does little for the development of Pakistan. Consider, how many rulers of Pakistan Civilian and Military openly committed acts of treason, they violated the constitution, ordered the crackdown and murder of their opponents sometimes with targetting only certain ethnic groups, how many of those people have been charged with treason? Or been lynched?
[/QUOTE]

Zakk, I don't care for Nawaz Sharif. The man isn't even Punjabi and for him to play the anti Sindhi or anti whomever card gives more fuel to Punjab haters. We cannot sit back and let people talk about successionism just because they have had rights denied.. I mean that would break down the country in so many pieces. Has there been unfairness? Yes no doubt, Could changes be made? Definately. The key to solving disputes is through a vocal opposition or in the democratic sense, voting in the people who can correct the wrongs.

I do not hold the dictators, PMs, and Presidents on a different standard. I have highlighted ZAB's wrongdoings, BBs treatment of Karachi, Ayub Khans wrongs, Nawaz Sharifs "Punjabi" nationalism. Treason is treason whether its BB telling the world media about Pakistani secrets of Bacha Khan raising the flag of Pashtunistan.

On a related contemporary matter..the Kalabagh damn issue has elicited a lot of anger and friustration in Sindh/Sarhad..I do not claim to be an expert on the subject so I think both sides should discuss the matter. Now if some politicians make it into an anti-Punjab issue then I have problems.

If we look at Pakistan's history and leaders, Punjabis have rarely occupied the leadership of the nation. By Punjabis I mean real Punjabis not Kashmiri Nawaz Sharif or Jullundari Zia-ul-Haq, perhaps one of the Noons comes to mind and even their leadership was deemed inconsequential. Now if you look at it from a glance, Punjab province seems like a monolithic entity, however in reality it is divided between North, Central and South Punjab all with different oulooks and roles. Zakk, I know your not a racist and most Pakistanis aren't either, that is why I see right through these nationalists.

^ Rf, I know where you stand on these issues, you know I am not defending racist attacks by any ethnic group. But, the double standard bothers believed by a significant group of people bothers me. Ghaffar Khan did not kill other Pakistanis (or people of his own ethnic group) and cover his actions underneath a flag (although if given a chance some extremists who claimed to be followers of his might have), you can't equate Ghaffar Khan's actions with Zia's or ZAB's.

Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, as they say, and people who advocate lynchings should at least be fair and advocate it first for those at the top who actually openly committed acts unpardonable.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by RajputFury: *

If we look at Pakistan's history and leaders, Punjabis have rarely occupied the leadership of the nation. By Punjabis I mean real Punjabis not Kashmiri Nawaz Sharif or Jullundari Zia-ul-Haq, perhaps one of the Noons comes to mind and even their leadership was deemed inconsequential. Now if you look at it from a glance, Punjab province seems like a monolithic entity, however in reality it is divided between North, Central and South Punjab all with different oulooks and roles. Zakk, I know your not a racist and most Pakistanis aren't either, that is why I see right through these nationalists.
[/QUOTE]

The problem is that many pakistani politicians use the "panjabi card" to fulfil their own political aims. And unfortunately the normal panjabi, who is leading the same miserable life as a baloch, let them use this ethnic card. In this regard I'm fully agreed with Hanif Ramay. Please read his book "Panjab Ka Muqadma", if you haven't read it yet.

^ Although many people will call him a panjabi nationalist, but I agree with most of the things he wrote in his book.

RF:

Last night I saw a report on CNN that showed the pakistani soldiers patrolling the Pak-Afghan border. Almost all of them were obviously of Panjabi origin. When I am seeing the baloch or pakhtun soldiers guarding the Wagah border?

**
^ Rf, I know where you stand on these issues, you know I am not defending racist attacks by any ethnic group. But, the double standard bothers believed by a significant group of people bothers me. Ghaffar Khan did not kill other Pakistanis (or people of his own ethnic group) and cover his actions underneath a flag (although if given a chance some extremists who claimed to be followers of his might have), you can't equate Ghaffar Khan's actions with Zia's or ZAB's.
**

I think thats a fair statement. However how do we differentiate the charge of treason? And more importantly, the punishment for it? I do not believe that ZAB or Zia's actions were good for the country and in many intances did undermine Pakistan..Bacha Khan's words did the same, in undermining Pakistani soverignty.

I have studied the man, and in frankness he would have been a great asset to Pakistan. I think his philosophies had a lot of value but how could I or another Pakistani support him when he speaks about secession? As for him not killing others, I gave credit to the population of Sarhad which was and is patriotic enough to not agree to secession.

I understand your issues with the double standards..but calling Ghaffar Khan a less of a traitor than Zia, ZAB will not change the fact that his words were treasonous nonetheless.
**
Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, as they say, and people who advocate lynchings should at least be fair and advocate it first for those at the top who actually openly committed acts unpardonable. **

I think I was extensively made my views clear atleast on ZAB. In the end look at the demise of ZAB, Zia? I think that was the worst type of lynching. I do not condone mob rule or guilty before proven innocent. That is why the murders of Zia, ZAB were not justified. If we want to kill our traitors, we must have a trial, so that all the people of the country will know the reason for executing them all. Leaders of Pakistan, whether nationalist or not, have greatly let the people down, and they must all be held accountable.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by shawaiz: *

The problem is that many pakistani politicians use the "panjabi card" to fulfil their own political aims. And unfortunately the normal panjabi, who is leading the same miserable life as a baloch, let them use this ethnic card. In this regard I'm fully agreed with Hanif Ramay. Please read his book "Panjab Ka Muqadma", if you haven't read it yet.
[/QUOTE]

I don't think thats limited to Punjab only. Baluch, Pakhtuns and Sindhi peoples have also been exploited by their leaders. The Bhuttos, lionized in Sindh, have done very little to alleviate the plights of Sindhis. Same goes to the Baluch sardars and the ANP in NWFP.

I do not believe in Punjabi nationalism, however I am proud of who I am. I do not think that by being proud of your past, culture, language makes you a nationalist or a traitor.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by shawaiz: *
RF:

Last night I saw a report on CNN that showed the pakistani soldiers patrolling the Pak-Afghan border. Almost all of them were obviously of Panjabi origin. When I am seeing the baloch or pakhtun soldiers guarding the Wagah border?
[/QUOTE]

That is such a childish statement. Punjabis can't cross the Indus now? Last time I checked, it was all in the same country. You should not talk about putting restrictions. How DID you decipher they were Punjabi? So you have an idea of how Punjabis look like or did you see it written on their foreheads?

  • Go to Wagah and look at some the guards names.
  • Look up the % of Baluch in PNS. -Look up the composition of the Frontier Corps.

Your message shows your racism. I am glad that most Pakistanis don't stand for this sort of rubbish.

** Zia, ZAB will not change the fact that his words were treasonous nonetheless.**

In the end speaking of something even treasonous alone can be acceptable because it comes under freedom of speech unless it's an open incitement to violence or the toppling of the system. In the end, Ghaffar Khan went to jail for much of his life for his beliefs, as did G M Syed, while people like Zia and others ended up in the Presidency.

We need to past issues of certificates of patriotism or treason to former politicians, in Taiwan and South Korea, people formerly considered traitors since have been elected into high office and served with distinction. Something similar has happened in Irish history and in South America. Countries and Nations are destroyed by self righteous hypocrites with power fixations. Ethnic Nationalists in Canada and the UK have been very easily dealt with by simply devolving power, after that many of their more inflammatory statements vanished from political discussions.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by RajputFury: *

That is such a childish statement. Punjabis can't cross the Indus now? Last time I checked, it was all in the same country. You should not talk about putting restrictions. How DID you decipher they were Punjabi? So you have an idea of how Punjabis look like or did you see it written on their foreheads?

  • Go to Wagah and look at some the guards names.
  • Look up the % of Baluch in PNS. -Look up the composition of the Frontier Corps.

Your message shows your racism. I am glad that most Pakistanis don't stand for this sort of rubbish.
[/QUOTE]

Can you deny the fact that the Pakistan army is completely dominated by Punjabis? Even the soldiers for frontier corps and Baloch regiment are recruited mainly from Punjab. Sutlej rangers guard the wagah post, tell me how many non-punjabis are represented in Sutleg rangers, although I don't know exactly but I can imagine none. Gone those days when the Pakhtuns made up 30 percent of the pak army, since the days of Zia it has been dominating by the sunni punjabis. The frontier force has 65,000 personnel, assumed, all of them are Pakhtuns, even though it will make only 10 to 12 % of the Pakistan army.

Don't you think the time has come that every ethnic group in Pakistan should be given it's full share.

Not exactly a positive article about the plight of Sindh.

link

The soulful sorrows of Sindh

By Syed Shahid Husain

A perception has taken hold in Sindh that it has been given a short shrift by the federation both in inter-provincial dispensation and between the federation and the province.

The list of grievances is so large that it is difficult to list them in one piece. Absence of the NFC award is one, because in spite of Article 160 of the Constitution, ‘that the president shall constitute a finance commission’ the NFC has not been constituted, although provinces have conveyed the names of their nominees long time back. The nominee of Balochistan was not acceptable to the Federal government.

The other issue dominating the debate is the Greater Thal Canal. It has galvanized Sindh. Even the MQM has thrown in its lot with them. A project, feasibility of which has yet to come, has been started post-haste on the basis of wishful availability of floodwater, about a year back. In spite of two unanimous resolutions by Sindh Assembly, the work is proceeding apace with full speed.

A resolution by Punjab government, on the other hand, recommending the construction of Kalabagh dam elicited an immediate response of the prime minister who wrote to all the chief ministers urging them to examine the proposals with a view to taking immediate action.

The president issued orders to construct the project while inaugurating the first unit of Ghazi Barotha Hydroelectric project. The treatment meted out to the two resolutions of Sindh Assembly and one of Punjab Assembly are causing greater pain to the Sindhis.

In a recent article, Abdul Khalique Junejo, chairman, Jeay Sindh Mahaz, has highlighted some of the real and some perceived grievances of the province. One of the interesting instances cited by him is the Sindh demand that water resources to be apportioned among the provinces must also include underground water.

Punjab, which has the largest good quality underwater resources, has refused, because it claims them to be its exclusive property. When Sindh counters by claiming exclusive rights to underground coal, petrol, gas and other minerals, the same are declared to be the national wealth and therefore subject to the federal controls for sharing by the provinces.

Statements, like the one quoting Governor Punjab that it was the responsibility of the Sindh government to ensure smooth supply of water downstream of Kotri, compound the situation. A similar position was taken by Punjab Water Council when it said that the coastal areas are Sindh’s responsibility and Punjab had nothing to do with it. As for the ports located in Sindh, Punjab claims its right to use.

And to top it all are the political issues setting the people of Sindh apart from the federation. For more than half of our national existence we have been under overt or covert military rule. The hugely rigged elections of 2002 yielded a divided Sindh Assembly with Pakistan People’s Party still the single largest group, but contrary to the treatment of other political parties in other three provinces, every ruse was adopted to keep it out of the government.

An artificial coalition has been cobbled up to ‘run’ the Sindh government. The people of Sindh excluding the urban areas feel left out. The denial of political power presents a serious ache agitating the minds of the people.

**People talk glibly of a Pakistani nation and complain of lack of patriotism. It is easy to bandy such concepts when one controls all the levers of power. But they forget that national spirit evolves over a period of time as a result of common stakes and joint ownership of the country based on social contract as embodied in a constitution. **

**With the imposition of military rule with regular frequency and the emergence of artificial political leaders, it is futile to wait for a national ethos to take shape. The military rule is associated with Punjabi domination. The data on provincial composition of the army is hard to come by because provincial quotas do not apply to armed forces. No wonder that 56 years after independence we do not have a single Sindhi major-general in the army. **

This writer had an opportunity of raising the issue of Sindh representation, or the lack of it, with the then Chief of Army Staff, General Aslam Beg, in the context of national cohesion. He came up with the stock unconsidered reply that Sindhis do not want to join the army. That obviously is not true, with employment opportunities vanishing by the day. He was reminded that the US faced a similar situation with respect to its Afro-Asian community.

But then that government did not give it up as a problem of the black community, but devised a workable solution. Now 25 per cent of the American army consists of blacks, although their share in the population is only 11 per cent. They have risen to the highest rank in the military.

Rangers are another source of Sindh grievance. Karachi’s civic bodies continue to be hampered by the daunting presence of the Pakistan Rangers. Monthly ‘Herald’ in its issue of August 2003’ carried a lead story on the power of the Rangers deployed in Sindh ‘to control law and order’. On July 17 this year, the government of Sindh asked Islamabad to grant one-year extension. The official request contends that owing to the growing threat posed by the militants, the presence of the rangers is essential, particularly in Karachi.

Ironically, it was the PPP government which had summoned the Rangers in the first place, because according to Senator Raza Rabbani, ‘there was an insurgency like situation in Karachi at the time and the Rangers were called in to assist the civilians in law enforcement. But they later overstepped their mandate.’ The Rangers now effectively control each one of Karachi’s eight water hydrants.

A large number of tankers fill up at the Water Pump hydrant in Federal ‘B’ Area and deliver to other parts of the city even when local residents have been without water for days, complains an area nazim. The Jamaat-i-Islami (JI), which heads the capital city government, insists that the Rangers are doing little or nothing to address Karachi’s security concerns.

Initially the federal government bore the cost of requisitioning the Rangers. Since 1995, however, this financial burden has been shifted to the province. A staggering sum of Rs.405.33 million has been earmarked for the upkeep of the Rangers and Frontier Constabulary in 2003-04 provincial budget.

Acquiring land is another favourite hobby of the Rangers and Kehkashan Scheme is by no means the only outrage. They have occupied hospitals, sporting complexes colleges and universities across Karachi and have turned them into their private lairs. They occupied Jinnah Courts Building in 1993 to serve as their headquarters. This 500-plus-room building meant to house students has remained firmly under their control. The next order of business was to raise a massive multi-storied structure in breach of building control laws and the laws of antiquity.

Bus depots are also targets of their avarice for forceful occupation of civilian property. They have occupied almost all the depots. Each is located on prime land. For example, a 500-square-yard plot in Gulistan-i-Jauhar sells for anything between 2.5 and three million rupees.JI’s Karachi Amir asks, if they are here to enforce peace, what are they doing at the water hydrants? Why are they involved in contracting out bus depots in Karachi?"

They also control the fishing rights to the exclusion of all the others in two districts of Sindh - Badin and Thatta. They grant contracts to their favourites and deny the local population their right to fishing. The impoverished fishermen are trapped in a no-win situation. The Rangers are meanwhile raking in the bucks, for doing nothing whatsoever.

** On and off they raid their houses under the pretext of border security concerns. Sometimes they randomly search people entering or leaving the villages. They have created an atmosphere of fear in the area. They reportedly treat them as virtual Indian agents. ‘When confronted by an immovable force, the only judicious option for the powerless is to calmly accept your fate’, a young boy was overhead advising a friend. **

These soulful sorrows of Sindh can conveniently be brushed aside, but that would be at our national cost. It is facile to claim that geographical proximity to the ultimate source of power will yield an outcome different from that of 1971. It would be much saner to coolly consider all these issues dispassionately before we hurtle into vortex of another calamity. Fact ceases to be relevant when perceptions take hold in the psyche of a people.

e-mail: [email protected]

Syed Shahid Husain retired as an OSD, Establishment Div. in Dec. 2002. For the last three years he has been writing on various subjects in Dawn and The News.

Originally posted by Zakk: *
**A convenient argument Fraudia...in case of Wali Khan it probably was when his son had his toe nails extracted during the mid 70's. In Ghaffar Khan's case it might have been his own imprisonment, which was sufficiently rigorous to ensure that Amnesty International declared him an International political prisoner fof conscience in the 60's, or maybe it was his brothers assasination in the late 50's. Mind you even in 1947-48 Quaid E Azam wanted Ghaffar Khan in the Muslim League. *

a convenient excuse for his behaviour is it not? so they suffer a little pain or maybe some tragedy and that changed them from loyalists into seperatists pronto? I would then argue that their love for the country or loyalty was not deep enough to begin with then.

there are people who suffered a lot more than these folks, I have not seen any of them become separatists, but then again, they are simple Pakistanis and not into power wrangling for political and monetary gain.

*In Syed's case, he remained a favourite of Zia ul Haq and even Nawaz Sharif. A useful tool at times against the PPP. Despite that he did reach out to the MQM when it first appeared. *

so he was the favourite of a ruthless dictator, whose idiotic policies are still hurting the nation, a corrupt politician, and reached out to a group which was responsible for such terror in Karachi...for some reason I dont really see that as a good bulletpoint on his political resume.

He hung abouse these folks who were in power because that is what he wanted...and they i.e. zia and nawaz needed him and other assorted jackasses to remain in power.

Anyways, whatever the reason, treason has a prescribed treatment and these clowns should have that gioven to them 2 decades ago atleast.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by shawaiz: *

Don't you think the time has come that every ethnic group in Pakistan should be given it's full share.
[/QUOTE]

everyt ethniv group should nto be "given" its share, every ethnic group should be given the opportunity to "get" that share.

Provide the right conditions, and leave it up to teh groups to take advantage of it.

and please ablish the godfforsaken quota system, where a 3rd rate student from bhakkar can get into DMC =, SMC, NED or dawood college while students with much higher marks than him who hold karachi domicile can not?

of course they have reciprocity and some seats for urban students into chandka and other institutes, but the conditions there for karachi students are such that most will not go due to the treatment they will receive.

anyhow..

point being, no spoon feeding, no "giving" of anything. only responsibility is to create conditions which will allow anyone from any ethnic and/orreligious group to do what they want to do and more importantly, are capable of doing above others who are vying for teh same opportunity.

no entitlement..

point being, no spoon feeding, no "giving" of anything. only responsibility is to create conditions which will allow anyone from any ethnic and/orreligious group to do what they want to do and more importantly, are capable of doing above others who are vying for teh same opportunity.

True but that's exactly what has failed to happen, the poorer areas do not have a level playing field. Even so some poorer areas outperform developed areas quite significantly. But those are the exceptions and not the rule.

*there are people who suffered a lot more than these folks, I have not seen any of them become separatists, but then again, they are simple Pakistanis *

Some of those that suffered were called Bengalis Fraudia, everyone has their own threshold. To resolve secessionist movements there are many peacful ways of solving the underlying problems (amnesty is offered followed by bring them into the political process). Generally ethnic feelings tend to increase during dictatorships.