He had gone from being the party's Hanuman to its Ravana, a tearful Jaswant Singh said on Wednesday shortly after he got a phone call
from Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) president Rajnath Singh that he had been expelled from the party. ( Watch Video )
Saying that he was "sad and regretful", the 71-year-old former union minister, who has held the portfolios of defence, finance and external affairs, said he got a phone call at 1pm from Rajnath Singh informing him that he had been expelled from the "basic membership of the party".
"It is sad and I regret it for a number of reasons, which I cannot explain in detail," Jaswant Singh said in Shimla where the BJP began its three-day introspection meeting Wednesday.
The expulsion comes two days after the release of his controversial book praising Pakistan founder Mohammed Ali Jinnah, "Jinnah: India, Partition, Independence".
He referred to a cartoon in India Today magazine that had portrayed him as Hanuman and said he had now become the Ravana of the BJP.
"I have been a member of the BJP since it was formed (in 1980)," he said.
"I had never imagined that 30 years of my service would have ended this way. It's regretful," the visibly emotional Jaswant Singh added.
He said he also "regretted" that the party president informed him about the decision over the phone and not personally.
"I would have stepped down had they informed me in person," he said.
"I am worried and sad that just one book has led to my expulsion," he added, wondering what would happen if "soch, vichar and chintan" (thinking and introspection) stopped in Indian politics.
He, however, said he didn't regret writing the book.
A few days back, two days before the Independence Day of Pakistan the Khan of Kalat Suleiman Dawood announced the formation of a council for Balochistan’s independence in London. Dawood said reconciliation with Pakistan was impossible without the interference of the United Nations and the European Union. “Independent Balochistan is our aim and objective. Therefore, we have formed a Council for Independent Balochistan,” he said. He assured that the Baloch of Iran would also be given representation in the council. Another Baloch leader Hyrbiyar Marri urged the Baloch people to observe 11th August as their Independence Day every year. The Baloch leaders said that contrary to the decision of both houses of Kalat State, Pakistani forces forcefully annexed Balochistan with Pakistan.
Let us turn to another page of the story; The 63rd Independence Day of Pakistan was celebrated on Friday with enthusiasm, national zeal and fervor in the provincial capital and rest of the province. The day dawned with special prayers in mosques for the country’s stability and prosperity and well-being of Ummah. The main event of the day was the befitting flag hoisting ceremony at the lawn of the provincial assembly where Chief Minister Nawab Mohammad Aslam Raisani unfurled the national flag followed by the playing of the national anthem. Speaking on the occasion, the Chief Minister Balochistan highlighted the importance of the independence and said the nation is committed to safeguard its independence, integrity and sovereignty at all cost. Meanwhile, the Speaker Balochistan Assembly launched Independence Day Bicycle Rally by handing over the national flag to the cyclists participating in the rally. In Harani, Balochistan Minister for Prisons Malik Sultan
Tareen kicked off the Day celebrations by hoisting of national flag at the DCO office. A large number of citizens attended the ceremony. In Dalbandin, the main function was held at the office of District Nazim where District Nazim Hashim Notezai along with the DCO hoisted the national flag. Similar ceremonies were held at headquarters of Kalat, Noshki, Zhob, Pishin, Killa Saifullah, Shirani and other districts.
The announcement by the Khan of Kalat and Hyrbiyar Mari in London and the statement of Nawab Raisani and other Baloch leaders on Pakistan Day celebration in Quetta and adjacent areas present two different pictures; all these leaders are Balochis by caste and by birth but have a different approach and different feelings for Pakistan. Some of them are praying for the prosperity and long life of Pakistan while others are abusing the state of Pakistan for depriving Balochistan of its basic rights. Now we have two pictures of the Baloch leaders; one of those who are among their own people on their own land and the other of those who are taking shelter in the land which does not belong to them. Do the leaders sitting away from their people have any right to represent their nation? Are they really the spokesmen of their own people or someone else? In the past few months people like Hyrbiyar Mari and Brahamdagh Bugti had been exposing their strong relations with India in their statements. And sorry to say that very respected people like Nawab of Kalat have forgotten that the decision of joining Pakistan was the decision of their respected and honourable elders. It is true even at that time some of the Baloch leaders were not in favour of joining Pakistan but it was the Holy Prophet (PBUH) who directed them through their dreams to be a part of Pakistan and being true Muslims they could never even think of ignoring the direction of the Holy Prophet (PBUH).
No doubt the people of Balochistan have always been neglected. Though the previous governments of Pakistan are also responsible for this injustice but we cannot put aside the Baloch sardars. They are also accountable for the situation. They had always been taking care of their own personal interests. We have so many examples of the so-called Sardars who are keeping an army of their own and many fleets of luxurious automobiles and kingly palaces but on the other hand a common Balochi is unable even to have a glass of clear water. There are no medical and educational facilities but the Sardars never pay any attention to the sorry plight of these innocent people. If they had thought, strived and planed for the common people of Balochistan, the situation could have been much different. The common man of Balochistan is very well ware of the role of so-called Sardars in keeping him away from any type of development resulting in prosperity. Unluckily now the same sardars are making that common man realize of his deprivations.Taking full advantage of the situation created by the Sardars and the increasing poor economic conditions in Balochistan Indian Raw is aiding jobless youngsters of Balochistan with arms and using them as a conduit to smuggle drugs from Afghanistan. International think tanks and opinion makers agree that Indians are trying to brainwash the ever-crushed, ever-ignored Balochis against Pakistan. The government of Pakistan and the intelligence agencies must not overlook the heinous role played by the Raw in Balochistan.
The Balochistan issue is not an incurable disease. The people of Balochistan are very sincere, dedicated and devoted Pakistanis. They should be taken into confidence. The government should take revolutionary measures for the betterment of the people of Balochistan. It should always be kept in mind that Pakistan is surely a land of miracles. It can turn impossibilities into possibilities, abstracts into concretes and dreams into realities. Nothing is beyond the access of Pakistanis. Be it the field of science or technology, politics or economics, the nuclear research, or the war against terrorism, Pakistan always comes up with a high head.
The astonishing fact is that the whole world is busy in creating hurdles and obstructions in Pakistan’s way to its progress but the people of Pakistan are so determined and strong-minded that they never give any importance to the wind blowing against them. They are always ready to tame the wild forces. The situation in Balochistan can be very easily improved by giving autonomy to all federating units including Balochistan; in accordance with 1940 Pakistan Resolution.
This act would give birth to a new season of national progress, prosperity and stability. All time new challenges new threats, new fronts and new battles; but salute to the brave people of Balochistan for never giving up the courage and determination even in the most critical moments when their veiled enemies are offering them a hypocritical hand of friendship.
The unenviable position of the most invidious of Pakistan’s rulers, among democrats and dictators alike, is occupied by Ziaul Haq, the dictator-general who died 21 years ago on Aug 17.
The outward display of humility and affection masked a duplicitous and vengeful personality. These were reflected in the retrogressive and punitive measures the general unleashed on the benighted nation during more than a decade of unmitigated dictatorship.
Whether it was the knotty Article 58-2(b), the much-exploited blasphemy laws or the promotion of a misogynous mindset, Pakistan and Pakistanis continue to be haunted by Zia’s dark decade.
Ziaul Haq was a usurper. He overthrew an elected and arguably Pakistan’s most popular prime minister. As justification he cited danger of civil war as a possible consequence of an impasse in talks between the government and the opposition. This was a lie. It is now fully documented that by July 4, 1977, both protagonists — the PPP and the Pakistan National Alliance or PNA — had reached an agreement to be announced by the prime minister the next day. The general could not have been unaware of this development. His move was purely and simply a power-grab.
The second deception was his avowal of not having any political ambitions, his sole aim being to hold elections within three months in October 1977. But when it dawned upon him that the premier he had ousted continued to enjoy widespread public support, he, not for the first time, conveniently retracted on his promise. He announced that it was neither in the Quran, nor was it revealed to him to hold elections on Oct 18. The promised elections were postponed. The people were provided an insight into his real plans when he pronounced that the country could only be kept together by the armed forces and not by politicians. Obviously, the fact that barely six years ago Pakistan had disintegrated under the watch of a military junta did not seem to bother him.
The sinister general continued to dangle the election bait before the public, while proceeding simultaneously to transform Pakistan into an authoritarian, nay totalitarian state. The constitution was amended beyond recognition in a bid to further empower himself. The notorious Article 58-2(b) corrupted the parliamentary form of government by transforming it into a semi-presidential system. The president now had the power to dissolve the National Assembly. (This power was used to dismiss the prime minister in 1988 while he was on an official visit abroad.)
He arrogantly proclaimed that he was here to stay and would not allow anybody else to rise. So much for the humility and selflessness that some of his apologists were attributing to him. On April 4, 1979, amidst curses from the masses and condemnation from the international community he hanged the legitimately elected and the most accomplished of Pakistan’s prime ministers. Soon thereafter elections were cancelled and political parties banned.
Military courts, armed with massive powers by the chief martial law administrator, spread terror among the people. Political activists and journalists were incarcerated. Some were even flogged in consonance with the punitive punishments that martial law orders had prescribed.
Responding to criticism on the dismissal of certain journalists for demanding restoration of democracy, the general angrily shot back that the punishment was too lenient. They should have been hanged in order to teach others a lesson. The press was muzzled and students and trade unions banned. The right of habeas corpus was annulled for the first time in the history of Pakistan. The judiciary could no longer review the legality and constitutionality of executive decisions.
Despite the comprehensive use of force to quell dissent, the question of legitimacy continued to stalk the regime. It was decided to give an ideological underpinning to Zia’s authoritative rule. In messianic mould the general told BBC that God had entrusted him with the mission to bring Islamic order to Pakistan. A referendum asking the people whether they supported Islamisation resulted in an embarrassing 10 per cent turnout. The ban on political parties was kept intact.
Islam, it was claimed, did not provide either for political parties or for western democracy. The Council of Islamic Ideology was entrusted with the task of preparing a blueprint for an Islamic ideological state. Primitive punishments including amputation of limbs, public lashings and stoning to death were promulgated. Blasphemy laws were introduced which have since become an exploitative instrument in the hands of militants and extremists to manipulate public sentiment and to target minorities.
A raft of retrogressive measures was directed at women. The evidence of two women was made equal to that of one man and the amount of compensation payable for a murdered woman was half that for a murdered man. Women appearing on TV were required to cover their heads and female dancing on TV was prohibited. The regime’s sinister plan involved the establishment of a theocratic-authoritarian state where Gen Zia backed by the military would reign supreme over a fearful populace. It was completely at variance with Quaid’s vision of Pakistan, which was neither theocratic nor authoritarian.
This then is Gen Ziaul Haq’s dark legacy. Lack of space does not permit a chronicle of his foreign policy failures. The roots of all major problems facing Pakistan today lie in Gen Zia’s dark era. To name only a few — the habitual interference of the armed forces in civilian affairs, weakening of state institutions, democracy deficit, rise of intolerance and militant extremism, sectarianism, problems of the Afghan refugees, drugs and the Kalashnikov culture and perennial constitutional problems. To roll all this back is the unenviable task of the present democratically elected government.
India has not ratified the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Yet, it has been exempted from nuclear restrictions imposed on non-signatories. The West has accorded preferential treatment to India ostensibly in consideration of her `immaculate’ nuclear safety record. India’s Nuclear Power Corporation boisterously claims: “NPC engineers have shared their expertise internationally by participating in safety reviews and inspection of reactors in other countries conducted by the World Association of Nuclear Operators and the International Atomic Energy Agency. We are continuously updating our safety systems and procedures even at the cost of short-term economic benefit. Besides, all our plants are designed, constructed, commissioned, operated and maintained under strict supervision.” What’s the real situation? It is true that there has not been an accident, leading to core meltdown and radiation exposures. But, the fact remains that several minor accidents have happened in the past. These accidents range from leaks of oil to complete loss of power in the reactors causing all safety systems to be disabled. Let us look at some of the accidents. The accidents at Tarapur, Madras and Rajasthan plants were due to non-compliance with safety standards. According to the mandatory standards of operation, each reactor is supposed to have an independent emergency core-cooling system. But, in practice, one cooling system was being shared between two reactors. The investigators were astonished to find that the reactors at Madras and Rajasthan had been operating without backup pumps to continue smooth operation. The plants had to be shut down as whenever the operating pumps were disabled by external factors such as fluctuations in the grid. A study by India’s Atomic Energy Regulatory Board documented over 130 extremely serious safety issues warranting urgent corrective measures in the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Uranium Corporation of India, Heavy Water Board, Indian Rare Earths Limited and several other facilities. The CIRUS reactor had an inherent problem of radiation leakage. Candu reactors suffered from heavy leakage of water. Dhruva reactor experienced fuel leakage, attributed to imperfect design architecture. Radioactive waste from the Tarapur Plant endangered lives of about 3,000 villagers living nearby. The power plants functioned at substandard capacity levels. Inlets of a reactor at Madras Atomic Power Station cracked. Due to frequent breakdowns and leakage of heavy water, the power plant had to be shutdown. Rajasthan Atomic Power Station also had to be shutdown several times due to incorrigible design-related faults. That’s not all. The containment dome of the Kakrapar Power Station collapsed. Fire broke out at Narora Plant threatening a meltdown. An explosion took place at the Nuclear Fuel Complex at Hyderabad. Radiation exposures to workers from India’s power plants are ten times the world average for each unit of electricity and twice the world average for each monitored worker. The safety of the Russian Light Water reactors was rated substandard by the IAEA. Yet, it continued to be operated. Poor safety practices in India’s nuclear-power plants remain camouflaged under a cloak of secrecy. Authorities get alerted only when an accident occurs, necessitating a shut down. The NSG should have a second look at safety measures `observed’ in India’s power plants.. A cavalier approach to poor safety standards could result in a major accident, like Chernobyl or Three Mile Island. There is no reason why India should enjoy privileged use of nuclear energy, while other countries, with better safety records, remain deprived of it. Mohamed ElBaradei has rightly exposed this dichotomous policy in Time magazine dated August 17, 2009. In reply to a question, he emphasised: “Every country has the right to nuclear technology as long as they use it safely, peacefully and in a secure way”. Saman Malik
Reporting from Islamabad, Pakistan - For years, Al Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban have nurtured a symbiotic relationship that has paid off for both militant groups. The Taliban provided Al Qaeda and its leaders sanctuary within the rugged wasteland of Pakistan's tribal areas along the Afghan border. In turn, Al Qaeda trained and helped finance its host.
Now, with the purported death of Taliban leader Baitullah Mahsud and his organization temporarily rudderless, Al Qaeda finds itself made vulnerable by the disarray plaguing its patron, experts and Pakistani intelligence sources say. It's a window of opportunity that neither Pakistan nor the United States can afford to neglect.
"It's a bad patch for Al Qaeda, because of the infighting and the fight for top leadership going on right now within the Taliban," said a Pakistani intelligence source who spoke on condition of anonymity. "So, for the time being, Al Qaeda will be disturbed. But I stress, for the time being."
Mahsud's death has yet to be verified, but both Pakistani and U.S. officials are confident that an American drone strike Aug. 5 did kill the Taliban leader, long regarded by Pakistanis as their most-wanted militant. Since his death, Taliban commanders have been feuding over the right to succeed him, and rifts within the ranks have threatened to undo the unity Mahsud had carefully forged.
With the Taliban mired in disarray, experts say Pakistan and the U.S. need to ratchet up their bid to track down and eliminate other top Taliban commanders. The aim, they say, is not just to dismantle the Taliban, but to cut off Al Qaeda from the entity that keeps it insulated and secure deep within the badlands of Waziristan.
Officials in Washington have repeatedly pushed Islamabad to aggressively pursue militants throughout northwestern Pakistan. However, the Obama administration has taken care to not be perceived as dictating Pakistan's military strategizing.
At a joint news conference with Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi on Sunday, Obama's special envoy for Pakistan and Afghanistan, Richard C. Holbrooke, said the U.S. would not intervene in Pakistan's handling of the effort to root out militants from South Waziristan.
"It's a decision for the Pakistan government to make, and to make alone," said Holbrooke, who was on the second day of a 12-day regional tour.
Qureshi promised in turn that the Pakistani army would carry out a long-anticipated drive against militants in South Waziristan. "We will go to every area to clear our territory of terrorists," he said.
But some analysts fear that Pakistan will not move aggressively against the South Waziristan strongholds. Lisa Curtis, a former U.S. government South Asia analyst now at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, said that Pakistan's follow-up is one of the key issues between the two governments.
In some areas, the U.S. government "still hasn't gotten cooperation on counter-terrorism," she said. With Pakistan, "the glass is half full and half empty."
Al Qaeda fighters streamed over the Afghan border into Pakistan's tribal areas after the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001. Seeking protection from Pakistani tribal warlords, Al Qaeda's militants, many of them Arabs and Uzbeks, found an ideal partnership with Mahsud, who had fought alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan during the 1990s. By 2007 he had set his sights on the Pakistani state as his prime target.
Under attack from unmanned U.S. aircraft, Al Qaeda militants in Waziristan needed a tribal ally who would not only provide safe haven, but would also pressure Pakistan's security establishment with suicide bombings and ambushes so that support for cooperation with the U.S. would eventually erode, said Pakistani security analyst Imtiaz Gul.
Gul and other experts believe the best strategy against Al Qaeda is to forge ahead with the dismantling of the Taliban in the tribal areas. The hope is that Al Qaeda would eventually become unprotected and vulnerable.
"They must keep the pressure up, and take out as many people in the Taliban's top tier leadership as possible," Gul said. "That would be the effective way of dealing with Al Qaeda, by taking the carpet from under their feet. And with the Taliban in disarray right now, this is the right time."
Whether the Pakistani military adopts that strategy remains unclear, despite Qureshi's reassuring words Sunday. An all-out offensive against the Taliban in Swat during the spring succeeded in flushing militants out of the volatile region's urban centers and towns. However, the military has held off on unleashing a second offensive against the Taliban in Waziristan, arguing that the best tack there is to blockade militants' supply routes and use airstrikes against hide-outs and camps.
"In Waziristan, we will wear them out, and whatever intelligence we get, we will use to go and hit them," said Pakistani army Lt. Gen. Nadeem Ahmed. "There won't be a major ground action. There will be small ground operations, but nothing like we saw in Swat."
Under that plan, some experts say, wearing down the Taliban could take years. "I would say time is running out, even now," said Masood Sharif Khattak, a security analyst and former top Pakistani intelligence official. "It has to be faster. If they let the Taliban regroup, they will win. If we don't let them regroup, then probably it will be the beginning of the end of militancy."
Whether Pakistan succeeds in rooting out militants in the tribal areas will depend largely on the quality of intelligence it gets from informants and operatives in the region. Pakistani intelligence officials found out Mahsud was staying at his father-in-law's house in South Waziristan and relayed the militant leader's whereabouts to the U.S., leading to the drone strike that killed him.
However, Pakistan acknowledges that it has far more intelligence on Pakistani Taliban militants and their leaders than it has on Al Qaeda.
"As far as the Taliban is concerned, we have data on their people and their areas, and that's why they are an easier target for us," said the Pakistani intelligence source. "But the Al Qaeda members are fewer in number, and they come, interact, and then leave."
U.S. officials believe airstrikes nonetheless have killed nine of Al Qaeda's leading 20 commanders.
A major test of Pakistan's commitment to fighting militancy within its borders will be its willingness to help capture or eliminate other major militant leaders with strong links to Al Qaeda, such as Jalaluddin Haqqani in North Waziristan and Afghan Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar, who is believed to be hiding out in Pakistan's remote Baluchistan province. Both leaders have directed their efforts at Afghanistan rather than Pakistan, and up until now neither has been regarded by Islamabad as a major target.
Pakistani intelligence sources say that, if asked, they would be willing to cooperate in helping track down both Omar and Haqqani.
"Why wouldn't Pakistan help?" the Pakistani intelligence source said. "There's no reason why we would say no. We want to stand by the world community, and we will."
An opinion poll has shown that Pakistanis do not support suicide bombings that target civilians in the name of religion.
According to the poll, released earlier this week by the Pew Research Centre in Washington, only 5 per cent of Muslims said they believed these kinds of attacks could often or sometimes be justified. As recently as 2004 roughly four-in-ten (41 per cent) held this view.
Almost 87 per cent said such attacks could never be justified – the highest percentage among the Muslim publics included in the 2009 survey.
Long-running concerns about India were also reflected in the poll. The dispute between Pakistan and India over Kashmir was cited as a major problem facing the country by no fewer than 88 per cent. And growing worries about extremism notwithstanding, more Pakistanis judged India as a very serious threat to the nation (69 per cent) than regard the Taliban (57 per cent) or Al Qaeda (41 per cent) as very serious threats.
Most Pakistanis saw the US as on the wrong side of this issue: by a margin of 54 per cent to 4 per cent the US was seen as favouring India over Pakistan.
Analysis of the survey data found a number of important patterns regarding views of the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
First, both groups were unpopular across the board. Among all the major subgroups within Pakistani society analysed in the study, negative views of the Taliban and Al Qaeda outweighed positive views.
Second, support for both groups was low even among those who agreed with some of the severe punishments endorsed by the Taliban and Al Qaeda, such as stoning adulterers, cutting off the hands of thieves, and executing people who leave Islam.
Still, those who disagreed with these harsh measures were somewhat more likely to express an unfavourable view of both groups. For instance, among Pakistanis who supported the death penalty for people who leave Islam, 69 per cent had a negative view of the Taliban, while 77 per cent of those who opposed the death penalty in such cases gave the Taliban a negative rating. Third, education played a role in views about extremism. Pakistanis with higher levels of education were consistently more likely to reject the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
Fourth, the Taliban and Al Qaeda tended to be unpopular across regions, including the NWFP, where government forces were currently fighting extremist groups.
Sindh stood out as the region with the most negative views. For example, 82 per cent in Sindh had a negative opinion of the Taliban, compared with 75 per cent in the NWFP and 67 per cent in Punjab. More than half in Balochistan did not offer opinions about the Taliban or Al Qaeda.
Fifth, views about the Taliban were linked to the extent to which people believed the country was threatened by extremist groups. Analysis of the data showed that people who thought extremist groups might be able to seize control of the country were more likely to voice negative views about the Taliban.
One of the ironies in the survey is the extent to which Pakistanis embrace some of the severe laws associated with the Taliban and Al Qaeda, even as they reject religious extremism and these extremist groups.
The new poll found broad support for harsh punishments: 78 per cent favoured death for those who leave Islam; 80 per cent favoured whippings and chopping off hands for crimes like theft and robbery; and 83 per cent favoured stoning adulterers.
Pakistani public opinion departed significantly from the Taliban on the issues of girls’ education and extremist violence, with 87 per cent saying they believed it’s equally important for boys and girls to be educated.
Gunmen killed the leader of a sectarian group branded a terrorist organization by the US in southern Pakistan early Monday, police said. His supporters staged riots in response, but no injuries were reported.
Ali Sher Haideri was gunned down along with a guard as they drove in Sindh province around 220 miles northeast of Karachi, the country’s largest city, officer Pir Mohammad Shah said.
One of the attackers was killed as Haideri’s guards returned fire, he said.
Haideri was the spiritual leader of Sipah-e-Sahaba, an extremist Sunni group blamed for attacks against the country’s minority Shiites, whom they regard as heretics.
Shah said the killing appeared to be related to a land dispute, not sectarian tension. Haideri’s supporters took to the streets in some parts of Karachi, torching two buses and throwing stones at vehicles, witnesses said. They also burned tires, dumped garbage and uprooted trees along the main highway into Karachi causing traffic jams.
Pakistan banned Sipah-e-Sahaba after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks as part of efforts to purge the country of extremism. Al-Qaida and the Taliban are also extremist Sunni groups and share Sipah’s anti-Shiite stance. The US State Department designated the group a terrorist organization in 2003.
Qari Mohammad Shafiq, a spokesman for Sipah, said Haideri was in his 50s.
The death of Haideri came a day after 17 Taliban militants were killed in an ambush in South Waziristan, a northwestern tribal region near the Afghan border.
It was unclear who was responsible for the deaths of fighters loyal to commander Maulvi Nazir, though Nazir was known to have disputes with Pakistani Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud, who was believed killed in a CIA missile strike Aug. 5.
Shaheen Wazir, a commander of the Nazir faction, said the 17 fighters had been ambushed inside a Mehsud area.
Pakistani Taliban spokesman Azam Tariq confirmed the incident, but said there were no differences between the Mehsud and Nazir groups. He theorized the incident could be a conspiracy to create a split in the Taliban.
Since Mehsud’s presumed death, several clashes among militants have been reported, with Pakistani officials saying they were evidence of a succession struggle among commanders to replace the Taliban leader
Senior BJP leader and former foreign and finance minister, Jaswant Singh has called Pakistan's founder Mohammad Ali Jinnah 'a great Indian' who he said was "demonised" by India and admitted that he has been 'greatly attracted to (and) drawn to' Jinah's personality.
Jaswant, whose book "Jinnah - India, Partition, Independence", will be released tomorrow, also said Indian Muslims are treated as aliens.
In an exclusive interview to CNN-IBN's Devil's Advocate Jaswant Singh, who is presently a BJP MP from Darjeeling in West Bengal, spoke about the founder of Pakistan, India's first Prime Minister Pandit Nehru and host of other issues in the interview to be telecast on Sunday night.
"Oh yes, because he created something out of nothing and single-handedly he stood against the might of the Congress party and against the British who didn't really like him...
Gandhi himself called Jinnah a great Indian. Why don't we recognise that? Why don't we see (and try to understand) why he called him that," Singh said, when asked by Karan Thapar in an interview whether he viewed Jinnah as a great man.
In another startling claim, Singh said that the view held by many in India that Jinnah hated Hindus was a mistake.
He claimed that Indian leaders had not only misunderstood Jinnah but made a demon out of him. According to him the demonisation of Jinnah was a direct result of the trauma of partition.
Watch the Interview
Extracts: In a special two-part interview to the CNN-IBN programme Devils Advocate, Mr. Jaswant Singh was first asked if he subscribes to the popular demonization of Mohammed Ali Jinnah and replied:-
“Of course I don’t. To that I don’t subscribe. I was attracted by the personality which has resulted in a book. If I was not drawn to the personality I wouldn’t have written the book. It’s an intricate, complex personality, of great character, determination.”
Asked by Devil’s Advocate if he views Jinnah as a great man, Mr. Jaswant Singh replied:-
“Oh yes, because he created something out of nothing and single handedly he stood against the might of the Congress Party and against the British who didn’t really like him ... Gandhi himself called Jinnah a great Indian. Why don’t we recognize that? Why don’t we see (and try to understand) why he called him that?”
Asked by Devil’s Advocate if, in his view, Jinnah was a nationalist, Mr. Jaswant Singh replied:-
“Oh yes. He fought the British for an independent India but also fought resolutely and relentlessly for the interest of the muslims of India … the acme of his nationalistic achievement was the 1916 Lucknow Pact of hindu-muslim unity.”
Mr. Jaswant Singh told Devil’s Advocate that there was a lot in Jinnah’s character that he personally admired stressing, in particular, the fact that Jinnah was a self-made man who had carved a position for himself in a metropolitan city like Bombay without seeking help or support from anyone else:-
“I admire certain aspects of his personality. His determination and the will to rise. He was a self-made man. Mahatma Gandhi was the son of a Diwan. All these (people) – Nehru and others – were born to wealth and position. Jinnah created for himself a position. He carved in Bombay, a metropolitan city, a position for himself. He was so poor he had to walk to work … he told one of his biographers there was always room at the top but there’s no lift. And he never sought a lift.”
Asked if the view held by many in India that Jinnah hated hindus was mistaken, Mr. Jaswant Singh replied:-
“Wrong. Totally wrong. That certainly he was not … his principal disagreement was with the Congress Party .. .he had no problems whatsoever with hindus.”
Mr. Jaswant Singh said that India had not only misunderstood Jinnah but made a demon out of him. He suggested that this was a direct result of the trauma of partition:-
“I think we have misunderstood him because we needed to create a demon … we needed a demon because in the 20th century the most telling event in the subcontinent was the partition of the country.”
Speaking to Devil’s Advocate about the partition of India and the political developments that led up to it, Mr. Jaswant Singh said that if Congress could have accepted a decentralized federal country then, in that event, a united India “was ours to attain”. The problem, he added, was Jawaharlal Nehru’s “highly centralized polity”:-
“Nehru believed in a high centralized policy. That’s what he wanted India to be. Jinnah wanted a federal polity. That even Gandhi accepted. Nehru didn’t. Consistently he stood in the way of a federal India until 1947 when it became a partitioned India.”
Mr. Jaswant Singh, in the Devil’s Advocate interview, strongly contested the popular Indian view that Jinnah was the villain of partition or the man principally responsible for it. Asked if he thought this view was wrong he said:-
“It is. It is not borne out of the facts … we need to correct it.”
Speaking about the political demands enunciated by Mohammed Ali Jinnah on behalf of Indian muslims prior to 1947, Mr. Jaswant Singh described them as demands for “space” in a “reassuring system” where they wouldn’t be dominated by the country’s hindu majority:-
Jaswant Singh “Muslims saw that unless they had a voice in their own economic, political and social destiny they will be obliterated. That was the beginning (of their political demands) … for example, see the 46 election. Jinnah’s Muslim League wins all the muslim seats and yet they don’t have sufficient numbers to be in office because the Congress Party has, without even a single muslim, enough to form a government and they are outside of the government. So it was realized that simply contesting elections was not enough.
Karan Thapar They needed certain assurances within the system to give them seats?
Jaswant Singh That’s right, that’s right … all of this was a search for some kind of autonomy of decision making in their own social and economy destiny.”
Speaking about Jinnah’s call for Pakistan, Mr. Jaswant Singh told Devil’s Advocate that from his 5-year long research into the subject he believed that this was “a negotiating tactic” to obtain “space” for muslims “in a reassuring system” where they wouldn’t be dominated by the hindu majority. As he put it:-
“From what I have written, I have found it was a negotiating tactic because he (Jinnah) wanted certain provinces to be with the Muslim League, he wanted a certain percentage of (seats) in the central legislature. If he had that there would not have been partition.”
Asked by Devil’s Advocate if he was concerned that Nehru’s heirs and the Congress Party would be critical of the responsibility he was attributing to Nehru for partition, Mr. Jaswant Singh replied:-
“I am not blaming anybody. I am not assigning blame. I am simply recalling what I have found as the development of issues and events of that period.”
However, when pointedly asked by Devil’s Advocate if the final decisions had been taken by Mahatma Gandhi, Rajaji or Azad – rather than Nehru – a united India would have been attained, Mr. Singh replied: “Yes, I believe so. We could have (attained an united India).”
In the Devil’s Advocate interview Mr. Jaswant Singh also spoke about the relationship between Mohammed Ali Jinnah and Mahatma Gandhi. This is how he described the two of them as politicians:-
“Jinnah was essentially a logician. He believed in the strength of logic. He was a parliamentarian. He believed in the efficacy of parliamentary politics. Gandhi, after testing the water, took to the trails of India and he took politics into the dusty villages of India.”
Mr. Jaswant Singh explained that Jinnah had two fears of Gandhi’s style of mass politics. First, “if mass movement was introduced into India than the minorities in India could be threatened and we could have hindu-muslim riots as a consequence.” Second, “this would result in bringing religion into Indian politics and he (Jinnah) didn’t want that.”
Mr. Jaswant Singh pointed out that Jinnah’s fears were shared by Annie Besant and added that events had shown that both were correct.
Mr. Jaswant Singh also told Devil’s Advocate that at the end of their lives both Jinnah and Gandhi died failed men. Asked if he looked upon both as failures, he replied:-
“Yes, I am afraid I have to say that … I cannot treat this (the outcome of their lives) as a success either by Gandhi or Jinnah … the partition of India and the Hindu Muslim divide cannot really be called Gandhiji’s great success … Jinnah got a moth-eaten Pakistan but the philosophy that muslims are a separate nation was completely rejected within years of Pakistan coming into being.”
In the Devil’s Advocate interview, Mr. Jaswant Singh also spoke about Indian muslims who, he said, “have paid the price of partition”. In a particularly outspoken answer, he lent forward and said India treats them as “aliens”:-
“Look into the eyes of the muslims that live in India and if you truly see the pain with which they live, to which land do they belong? We treat them as aliens … without doubt muslims have paid the price of partition. They could have been significantly stronger in a united India … of course Pakistan and Bangladesh won’t like what I am saying.”
Later, Mr. Jaswant Singh pointedly added: “Every muslim that lives in India is a loyal Indian and we must treat them as so”.
Calling his book and its contents “a shake-up call”, he added: “We should learn from what we did wrong or didn’t do right so that we do not repeat the mistakes.”
In the Devil’s Advocate interview, Mr. Jaswant Singh was questioned at length about the likely response to his biography of Jinnah and his views on partition, Jawaharlal Nehru and Indian muslims and whether this would end up stirring a storm of protest. This is what he said:-
Jaswant Singh “I have written what I have researched and believed in. I have not written to please.
Karan Thapar In a sense you were driven to write this book?
Jaswant Singh Indeed … how do I abandon my search, my yearning and what I have found? If I am wrong then somebody else should do the research and go and prove me wrong.”
When it was pointed out to Mr. Jaswant Singh that at the BJP chintan bhaitak, starting on the 19th, his colleagues could express their resentment or anger, he answered:-
Jaswant Singh “I did not write this book as a BJP parliamentarian. I wrote this book as an Indian … this is not a party document. My party knows I have been working on this. I have mentioned it to Shri Advaniji and others.
Karan Thapar Are they aware of your views and the content of the book?
Jaswant Singh They cannot be aware unless they read them.
Karan Thapar Are you worried that when they find out about your views and your analysis they might be embarrassed and angry?
Jaswant Singh No, they might disagree. That is a different matter. Why should there be anger?”
After the colossla failure of the Kevari engine and the Ligh Combat Aircraft (LCA), which has been in the design phase for more than 20 years, the IAF is struggling to replace its Flying Coffins (Migs 21s). The crash rate of the IAF is the highest in the world. About 300-500 Mig 21s have crashed. Delhi blames Moscow for sending it shoddy planes. Moscow blames Delhi for horrid local parts that don’t work. Desperate for planes, the IAF decided to spend about $10 Billion for foreign air craft. The tender bid for 126 planes has been submitted and a final decision is awaited in a few weeks. The MiG-35 Fulcrum-F, is a stripped down version of the Russian MiG-29M OVT which is exported to third world countries. When, and if, the MiG-35 wins a contract for the Indian MMRCA or any other tender, Sokol would be the manufacturing base for the aircraft. Russia has remianed very vague about the final configuration of the MiG-35’s onboard equipment. There is no information available on the On Board radar. The Zhuk-ME, Bars-29, and ELTA Systems’ EL/M-2052 radars are possible options. NIZHNY NOVOGORD – Production of MiG-35 multirole fighters offered for sale to India cannot start before 2013 or 2014, a Russian aircraft maker has said. “We have begun testing the MiG-35 fighter for the Indian tender,” Alexander Karezin, general director of the Sokol company based in Nizhny Novgorod, said Thursday. Russia’s MiG-35 Fulcrum-F, an export version of the MiG-29M OVT (Fulcrum F), is a highly manoeuvrable air superiority fighter, which won high acclaim during the Le Bourget air show in France last year. Six major aircraft makers — Lockheed and Boeing from the US, Russia’s MiG, which is part of the UAC, France’s Dassault, Sweden’s Saab and the EADS consortium of British, German, Spanish and Italian companies — are in contention to win the $10 billion contract for 126 light fighters to be supplied to the Indian Air Force (IAF). Sokol earlier said that the first two MiG-35 aircraft would be delivered to India in August for test flights prior to the award of the tender. In late 2009, Russia will conduct a series of flight tests with live firing for an IAF delegation at a testing ground in Russia. The fighter is powered by RD-33 OVT thrust vectoring engines. The RD-33 OVT engines provide superior manoeuvrability and enhance the fighter’s performance in close air engagements, its manufacturers say. RIA Novosti The export versions of Mig 35s are actually part of the family of MiG-29 fighters that includes the MiG-29M/M2 and the MiG-29K/KUB versions. Lockheed Martin, Saab and Russian Sukho and Migs have all put in thier offer. Six global aircraft makers – Lockheed and Boeing from the United States, Russia’s MiG, which is part of the UAC, France’s Dassault, Sweden’s Saab and the EADS consortium of British, German, Spanish and Italian companies – are in contention for the $11 billion MMRCA contract for 126 fighters to be supplied to the Indian Air Force. Domain B The issue is that American private manufacturers will never commit commercial suicide by giving up their secret “Coke Formula“. Similarly one of the biggest exports for Russia are her planes and missiles. It cannot let a Delhi aligned with Washington have the ability to compete with the Russian arms industry. A decade ago when USSR did not have the oil and it was really hungry for cash, Moscow sold Bharat a lot of equipment. Now things have changed. “Russia’s state arms exporter Rosoboronexport has said military aircraft will continue to dominate the company’s foreign sales in 2009, and will total about $2.6 billion (Domain B).” The geostrategic landscape in South Asia has been transformed. Moscow watches Delhi’s closeness with Washington with suspicion. Russia has recently reached out to Pakistan to build train and pipelines linking Pakistan to the Tajikistan and Iran. Gorprom, the Russian Oil company is ready to help in building the Iran-Pakistan pipeline. The fiasco of the price of the Russian Aircraft carrier describes the Delhi-Moscow relationship. The endless haggling over the price of the air craft career predicted Delhi’s predicament on the sale of the Mig 35s. Moscow now informs Delhi that it cannot begin the supply ’till 2014. Based on previous experience, it is a matter of record that planes from Russia are prone to perpetual delays and price hikes. It is not beyond comprehension that sensing a bit of a tiff between Delhi and Washington, Russia is using delay tactics to hike up the price of the Migs that are to be sold to Bharat. Will the Mig delay tilt the balance towards Lockheed Martin? Only time will tell. When Russian President Dmitry Medvedev visited the shipyard responsible for converting the aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov for the Indian navy at the beginning of last month, he suggested there would be “serious consequences” if Moscow failed to deliver. Political hyperbole aside, the fall-out from India’s effort to secure a new aircraft carrier could turn out to be far-reaching. Aviation Week. Russia, India Continue Carrier Haggling, Aug 13, 2009, By Neelam Mathews in New Delhi and Douglas Barrie in London The threat supposedly hinted at the $10 Billion plane contract. The current news from Ria Ovosti seems to tell the world how much Russia has taken the Bharati threat seriously. Medvedev, during a visit to the Sevmash shipyard at Severodvinsk, characterized the carrier program as a “very difficult experience.” This is a view shared by India’s comptroller and auditor general, the authority that audits and assists the state and central institutions on accounts and accountability. The audit body has been critical of the carrier deal, providing opposition parties with ammunition with which to attack the government. One, the Bhartiya Janta Party, accused the government of buying “junk” at an exorbitant price. India signed up for the program in 2004, with a delivery date of 2008. The new date for the ship—the INS Vikramaditya—is now set for 2012. Aviation Week. Russia, India Continue Carrier Haggling, Aug 13, 2009, By Neelam Mathews in New Delhi and Douglas Barrie in London The 12 MiG-29Ks and four MiG-29KUBs, a naval variant of the Fulcrum that came with the Admiral Gorshkov will be delivered a year late. The planes arrive before the Aircraft carrier. However these are meant to land on the Aircraft Career only. The entire Bharati establishment is built around refurbishing arcane Russian equipment. Introducing Amercan arms with their instrusive inspections, requirements for segration, and pop inspections is going to be a new experience for the IAF. Rupee News would be very surprised if Bharat buys the F-16s. However stranger things have happened in the Bharati quest for modern arms.
On either side of Shami road
-
Life is full of juxtapositions, rich and poor, educated and illiterate, bad
and good, they all coexist. The existence of such contrast in the middle of
the...
PKKH Unveils New-Look Website
-
As of today, all new content will only be posted on the new site which can
be accessed by going to: www.PakistanKaKhudaHafiz.com
Posts
