On the first anniversary of the #UriAttack, replugging some thoughts I tweeted last year, a day after the attack. Glad to note that many things turned out as hoped!

    Here goes..

    Firstly, what happened and how it happened is well known by now. Will not dwell upon that. One thing that can be safely said without fear of contradiction is that the attack in itself was nothing new. Terror attacks on army camps have happened before at a number of locations, including Uri (Remember Lt Col Sankalp Kumar?). What makes this attack ‘different’ is the sheer numbers of fatal and non fatal casualties. Let me go out on a limb here. I say this magnitude of damage wasn’t anticipated by the terror handlers in Rawalpindi. It is this which is a potential game changer.

    I bet there are anxious khakis in Pindi waiting for how India will react now, esp given the PM’s Independence Day speech in which he raised a ‘sensitive’ issue, Balochistan, and the days thereafter wherein there seems a concerted campaign to name and shame Pakistan for its state sponsored terror. IMO, the govt will HAVE to react to this provocation ‘differently’ than similar ones in past. There seems no other way. When and how that retaliation happens needs to be seen.

    There already exists a precedent wherein after the massive casualties in Manipur last year, the Govt took a few days to prepare and retaliated with a massive blow in the form of the Special Forces raid in Myanmar. I still remember some Paki handles tweeting something like ‘Pakistan is not Myanmar’ or such likes.

    Will come to that in a while.

    Right now, the issue at hand is whether the Govt will react or not. I guess that is a call for the Govt of the day to take. What follows is the options I see are available. In a nutshell, let us say there are 2 options: military and non military.

    Talking about the non military ones first, these may take form of a string of dossiers as done after 26/11, or a speech in the UN, or not resuming the already suspended dialogue process for a bit longer. All have been tried time and again, with the same result -failure. The one single reason is that we want others to do what is essentially our own job. No one in the world has any love lost for any Indian lives lost. Not until we put a heavy price on each and every Indian life ourselves. THAT is the bottom-line.

    This is not to say that diplomacy doesn’t matter. It does. Just as it did in 1971 and Kargil. But at those times, it was backed with the full might of the Indian military machine. THAT is what clicked then and not in 26/11 – the military option. This current ‘lull’ after Kargil is perhaps the longest we’ve been without a military confrontation with Pak.

    What this seems to have led to is a mindset which, originally defensive, has become even more so. Covert retaliation et al seem to be the answer of choice lately, but what we are forgetting is that we are playing into the enemy’s strength by doing this, even as our strength – Military Might – remains idle and unacknowledged.

    Yes, I use the phrase ‘Military Might’ because it is exactly what it is when facing Pakistan. For all the issues of equipment etc flogged daily on social media, fact is that even in its present state, the Indian Army will prevail over the Khakis across the border with ease. With ease indeed, given the overwhelming superiority in the air that will come to bear in sync with the grunts on ground who must already be raring to have a go. Now add to this the relative strengths of the navies and you’ll understand why Paki Army have tried to keep the levels of provocation below the perceived Indian threshold – a ‘war avoidance’ strategy, if you will.

    They know that for all the bombast and swag, they don’t stand a chance. And given what they’ve consistently fed their population, if push comes to shove, their nakedness will be exposed to the very population that they have ruled for practically all of last 69 years.

    Coming back to the current day. Retribution HAS to follow, there is no doubt about that. However, IMO, it should also be SEEN as having been visited upon the perpetrators. And the perpetrator is not a Hafiz Saeed / Masood Azhar. It is the Khakis sitting in Rawalpindi that planned it, and those immediately across the LC from Uri that executed it. I wouldn’t mind a bit if they are flattened with some help from the heavens above. Killing the terrorists that came in isn’t enough. They are in numbers unimaginable, a practically endless stream. Pain needs to be visited upon those who control the tap – Remember the taped conversation of Musharraf during Kargil – ‘Inki tooti hamare haath mein hai’?

    They don’t have the b@lls to fight man to man, and sadly, we oblige them by being reactive and restricted to own side of the borders. It is time to change this state of affairs.

    I understand that this chain of thoughts, or rant, call it what you will, is asking for an emotive response when our forte has been a rational one. Even in case of Myanmar, it took a few days to put things in place before the raid went in, but the point is, being rational hasn’t had much effect wrt Pakistan. It takes 2 hands to clap, with just one hand, all you can do is slap the other fellow. I feel it is time to change the rules a bit. Let it be India that is ‘irrational’ for a change, that is if you consider a legitimate military response to this provocation, irrational. Mind you, the Indian soldier is down, but not out. He still has a LOT of fight in him, despite the losses. Instead of losing fine young men merely on this side of the border, let the enemy too get an opportunity for the same.

    Unlike what some #Presstitutes said yesterday, being a soldier is not a suicidal job. Yes, you may lose your life, but that is a known risk. It is deaths like the ones that came visiting to the boys in Uri yesterday that hurt. In the long run, a military confrontation is the ONLY way to arrive at a lasting solution, given that it is the Paki Army that runs the show, regardless of the democratically elected govt in power.

    As for the idiotic calls for people to people contacts and Pakis artists etc, remember, they make money in India off you and me, go back and pay taxes in Pakistan, enabling their govt to foment terror back in India. I tweeted my thoughts on that some days ago. MUST have a look and let me know if I am wrong, here’s the LINK to that.

    To sum up, status quo as of now is they provoke, we react in a predictable manner. I say, break this pattern. Let us be the irrational ones for a change. Let us bring our strengths to bear, instead of playing to the enemy’s strengths.

JMTs

(One year later, today I am somewhat glad to note the way things have turned out to be. Surgical Strikes across the LoC were exactly the kind of ‘public’ response one had hoped for and the recent shifting of gears with respect to operations inside the Valley. Fact remains, however, that the Khakis across the border STILL remain comfortable in Pindi. Hope that changes too. Soon)

 

Came across THIS tweet above some time yesterday and got thinking .. Can we really be ‘CHINDIA’?

After all our ‘history’, the question sure seems interesting!

Of course, the fact that I recently re-started this book does help a bit!

Just sharing some thoughts, still somewhat disjointed. But here goes!

I’ll set the tone by paraphrasing a Hindi saying. ‘There can NEVER be two swords in a single scabbard’. I started tweeting on 29 Jan 12. THIS tweet below was amongst my first few, on 12 Feb 2012.

The one thing about the Cold War was that the two major powers were separated by an ocean or two, and a number of buffer states in Europe. However, another ‘not so major’ power, China shared a land border with the USSR and another ‘not so major power’, India. And guess what happened across those borders in 1962, 1967 and 1969!

All this while the major powers were fighting each other too, though not directly. Proxies did the dirty job, even where atleast ONE of the superpowers was involved – Cuba, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Korea .. the works. But USSR & US troops never faced each other directly.

Flash back to 1962 and 1967. What happened on the battlefields is mentioned here in THIS Blog Post from some days ago. The one thing that the PLA (hopefully) learnt that the Indian soldier was no pushover. A fact that was only reinforced in 1987 at Sumdorong Chu when they were stared down, just as it happened 3 decades later at Doklam. The PLA knew that a shooting match with the IA will be VERY costly.

However, something happened in 1963 that gave the Chinese, an army for hire .. a fanatic army at that, with one single ambition – to show ‘Hindu’ India its place. And it came at not much cost. Heck, they even kowtowed, offering a strategic piece of land too, the Shaksgam Valley!

The Pakis had found their ‘Higher than Himalaya’, ‘Deeper than Deepest Ocean’, ‘Sweeter Than Honey’ (the list of a$$ licking platitudes continues to grow still) benefactor. A benefactor that knew no scruples. All it needed was a (pin)prick that could keep a potential rival – India – engaged away from the LAC.

And the Pakis revelled in this ‘job’. They were simply ‘Made of It’!

The Hans too did their bit. The Chinese too made a big show of ‘helping’ their ‘friends’. In 1965, they made a HUGE show that fizzled out.

In 1971, Tikka Khan’s rapist army in East Pakistan was fed on false hope till the very end that the Chinese are coming! None came, though. Their job was done – Indian Army was fighting AWAY from the LAC! But things somewhat changed thereafter. With Bhutto promising a 1000yr war with India & pledging to even eat grass in his quest for nukes, the Han overlords were only too happy to oblige!

Such was the benevolence that they even invited the then Paki Foreign Minister to ‘witness’ a nuclear test at Lop Nor in May 1983. Mind you, this was NOT a case of nuke proliferation. Or was it? Will talk about it at a later day.

But SURPRISE .. the Pakis soon ‘hinted’ about the ‘nuclear option’ during Brasstacks just a few years later!!

Mere coincidence? Your call! (This LINK might help)

But the topic I intend to cover here is not nuke proliferation. Instead I wish to talk about Missile proliferation from China to Pakistan. Indian IGMDP was launched in 1983. With the experience of a decent space pgme atleast 2 decades old, the missile pgme saw the Prithvi launched in 1988 & the Agni in 1989.

Suddenly, out of the blue, the Pakis ‘magically’ came up with a missile pgme of their own! The Hatf 1 magically appeared in 1989, tested and inducted! Soon followed by Shaheen, Ghauri, Babar series of missiles!

This from a country that STILL does not manufacture even a decent car of its own. But it’s military hardware production is supposedly all indigenous! Magic, no? Yup. Magic indeed, If u discount the fact that Chinese entities were in fact, under sanctions at about the same time for exporting M-9 & M-11 missiles to Pakistan. The reports available online are very candid with details. Here’s an EXAMPLE

China being under international pressure, the proliferation in the second half of the 90s was ‘outsourced’ to Pyongyang! So much so that Benazir Bhutto herself acted as a conduit while on one of her short, fauj approved stints as the Paki PM! Of course, the ‘pinnacle’ was reached in 1999, when North Korea was caught shipping an entire assembly blueprint + hardware of missile assembly line, when the Captain of the ship docked at Kandla Port looking to make an easy buck on the side! (LINK: On North Korean Freighter, a Hidden Missile Factory)

Another giveaway is the apparently 100% success rate of Paki missile tests!

A test of a ‘new’ missile out of the blue and the same is declared an instant success, with the missile being inducted into the Pak Army inventory! Yes, ppl are simply amazed at this level of technological ‘advancement’ of KRL!

Unless of course, failed missiles end up in Iran! (LINK)

100% successes are possible only because failures have been outsourced to China/North Korea.

Bottomline: China has played a smart game by outsourcing the fight against its principle regional adversary to an all to willing proxy, something that we either cannot, or refuse to see.

(Photo: Pakistani and Chinese Border Guards – Hand in Hand!)

Chanakya’s soul mAust surely be mightily agitated at seeing our passive acquiescence at this wanton disregard to our national security. And what have we to show for it?

Zilch!

Things are slowly changing lately, but the opportunities lost are simply mind boggling. Vietnam still awaits the Brahmos, even after many years of first asking for it. Prithvis are not even being considered for export!

Today, even Bangalore is in the range of Chinese missiles based out of Pakistan, and here we are, still abiding by the rules like ‘good boys’! This when China blatantly disregarded each and every treaty / commitment to play merry hell with our security! Prithvis / Brahmos on Vietnamese / Taiwanese soil will do for us exactly what China has achieved – force your adversary to look behind his back.

So yes, coming back to where it all started from. Chindia ain’t gonna happen!

Not till they keep arming proxies.

Not till they continue to be on our borders by occupying Tibet.

India and China is a civilizational conflict. Period.

It stayed dormant till the Hans came calling in Lhasa in 1950. It will continue to be active till such time they continue to be in occupation of Tibet. Like I said in the beginning – ‘Ek Myaan Mein Do Talwar’

JMTs

    So Sh Shyam Saran has written a book that has again started a cacophony of opinions on demilitarization of #Siachen!

    Sharing some thoughts of my own, to add to that cacophony

    Firstly, the battlefield is NOT Siachen. It is the Saltoro Ridge further to the West of the glacier. This is a fact which needs to be put on record.

    That said, the genesis of the conflict in #Siachen is worth studying. Nitin Gokhale’s book on the same is an excellent read. In short, the Shimla Accord delineated the LoC till Point NJ 9842 and, assuming areas further North to be too inhospitable, left the issue by saying that the LoC would thereafter run ‘northwards along the glaciers’.

    Things stayed calm until the late 70s, when Pakistan started granting clearance to mountaineering / trekking expeditions in #Siachen on its own. This was accompanied by ‘Cartographic Aggression’, wherein Pak maps suddenly started showing their territory ahead of NJ 9842 with a straight, north easterly line joining the point with the Karakoram Pass.

    Then in the early 80s, own agencies informed the govt of the day that Pakis were busy shopping for high altitude gear, with an intention to occupy Saltoro Ridge and enforce their claim line. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi ordered the Indian Army to move in, and the army flew in a bunch of tough Kumaonis to occupy strategic heights / passes on the Saltoro Ridge. The timing was perfect, it pre-empted the planned Paki operation by mere weeks.

    Pakis moved in soon, to occupy some unheld areas on the Saltoro, and trying to evict the Indian army.

    Bloody clashes followed before the positions of both sides stabilized. The Indian army was in possession of almost all strategic and dominating heights on the Saltoro, less one sore spot – The Quaid Post – a post so important that the Pakis named it after their father of the nation, Jinnah. And then they lost it to a diminutive Khalsa, Bana Singh, in 1987!

    A certain Brigadier Pervez Musharraf of the SSG was tasked to retake it. He threw in his best, and lost them all. Bana post continues to fly the Tricolour to this day.

    Fast forward to the previous decade. Weather related casualties were, and continue to be at an all time low. Most of the men out of the 800+ as is being touted by the usual suspects, were lost in the first two decades or so. Of late, the Indian Army is comfortably dominating the battlefield. The Pakis know that dislodging the Indians from this area is impossible. Thus began the chant of ‘global warming’, ‘pollution’ etc, ironically, from a country that gives a damn about its own forest cover. The dream of the previous Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh to convert #Siachen into a ‘Mountain of Peace’ was replied to by the Army with a single statement – ‘Let Pakistan authenticate its and our positions on a map jointly signed by both nations.’

    This was a pre-requisite of the army which basically told its govt that once we withdraw, if the Pakis come and sit on the Saltoro, then don’t ask us to recapture it again, because we will be unable to do so.

    They were right, Kargil had happened less than a decade ago, this DESPITE the LoC mutually agreed to in 1972! Bottomline – You cannot trust Pakistan to stick to its word. (Apparently, Shyam Saran’s book brings in some more details). But regardless of that,I still wonder why the eff have Pakis steadfastly refused to exchange authenticated maps of their and our positions on Saltoro, if that is what they had indeed agreed to as is being hinted?

Is it because we don’t know where they are placed?

Or is it because Pak Army has continuously lied to its own people that it is THEY who dominate Indians in the #Siachen battlefield?

Some points to ponder upon before the idiotic (IMO) calls for demilitarization.

Bottomline: Let us not let the sacrifice of hundreds of our best go waste because someone somewhere would rather trust the Pakis on their word instead of their past record.

In the end, just one question from me to the worthies about #Siachen. Would be glad if someone can answer me :-

 

Folks, here’s a post on the ‘motivated’ journalism by #NDTV. First noticed a distinct ’tilt’ some years ago. Chronicled some, missed .some. For all I know, I might be reading a bit too much into it all, but still thought of archiving my thoughts here on my blog. Here goes!

‘Alleged’ is a beautiful word, used with alleged ‘care’ to ensure the intended meaning is not lost on those who ‘matter’!

This is not my tweet, but quite a reputation that #NDTV have built

Then there is the issue of calling Kashmiri terrorists anything but that ‘T’ word. Happens far too many times to be a mere coincidence

I guess we should just be grateful to #NDTV for not calling them ‘Freedom Fighters’. (atleast not thus far)

 

But we are getting ahead of ourselves. Getting back to ‘alleged’ .. apparently #NDTV is allegedly the BEST at use of the word ‘alleged’!

 

God bless the person who came up with this word, ‘Alleged’ .. a godsend for the good folks at #NDTV! It’s allegedly a way of life there!

 

Sometimes one wonders if the keyboards at #NDTV offices have a special key to type in ‘allegedly’ in one touch!

 

Then there is the ‘small’ issue of territorial integrity of the Union of India. Who needs PoK / Aksai Chin, no?

 

And just in case you missed it, #NDTV will ‘remind’ you. Over and over again! So very considerate of them, allegedly! (Map behind anchor)

Apparently, #NDTV KNOWS what Indian Map looks like. They even did a pgme on that! Yet keep using wrong maps. I wonder why!

 

Let alone maps showing Indian territories occupied by neighbours, even Indian lands within our administrative control are fair game!

(IMO, the above isn’t a mere editorial error, but in perfect sync with PRC view that Sikkim still doesn’t belong to India, 2003 be damned)

Of course, then there is the issue of the ONLY Indian (some ppl might use ‘allegedly’ b4 that) channel that calls it ‘India Controlled’

 

And that too isn’t a one off ‘incident’. Apparently there has been atleast 1 more instance of such ‘editorial oversight’

 

Of course, there is the small matter of Al Jazeera getting banned for depicting wrong maps, while other go away scot free!

 

Moving on to editorial ‘oversights’. He is ‘a’ VK Singh. Of course, #NDTV won’t mention his rank which he carries even post retirement!

 

THIS I can believe to be a genuine editorial gaffe .. atleast it says ‘Indian Air Force’ on the ALLEGED chopper!

 

Then there is another #NDTV editorial ‘oversight’ in that they choose to use photo of Assam Rifles troops for a report on Indian Army

 

In this instance of alleged editorial error, no one can better the comment of @attomeybharti right below the alleged #NDTV tweet!

 

Damn, I missed this one – another #NDTV tweet putting Indian territory up for negotiation. Yup, ‘disputed’ is the official GOI line, no?

 

Report on Myanmar Raid. Using a picture of an IA chopper in Kashmir in 2009, possibly a flight carrying mortal remains of Maj Suresh Suri, KC (P)

 

This was tweeted in immediate aftermath of the 2014 General Elections. Coincidentally, this theme was VERY popular among Paki tweeple too!

And this one too

 

But THIS YouTube Video remains an all time favourite No one can accuse #NDTV of biased reporting. Heck, they question the Supreme Court too! (Do watch. I Insist!)

Of course, the bread and butter – FACTUAL Reporting – too is sometimes up for ‘tempering’ (NOT tampering, mind you), when deemed fit

 

Given the above, can one really blame this handle for tweeting what he did? #NDTV does have a certain ‘reputation’ in some circles

 

Then they give out IAF plans, even if dated. Info which should never have been released as a matter of propriety.

(LINK to above report)

The above was a scoop indeed. A scoop worthy of prosecution under the Official Secrets Act, though

I would definitely want to know how #NDTV came to know what was written in the Squadron Diary. Espionage, anyone?

Sorry, apologies for using the word ‘espionage’ when the correct word is ‘EXCLUSIVE‘ So what if it is IAF war plans we’re talking about

 

More inappropriate words, atleast in my opinion

 

Far too many ‘coincidences’ in terms of ‘editorial oversights’, no? Or is there a method in this ‘madness’? I’ll leave it for you to decide.

 

Well folks, this is it for the time being, allegedly!

 

 

 

 

         Sambhaji Bhonsle was the once estranged elder son of Shivaji who ascended to the Maratha throne after his death, in Jul 1680. This was in the middle of the Mughal – Maratha war. Sambhaji carried on his father’s war with renewed vigour. and zeal. In the process, Sambhaji inflicted serious defeats on Aurangzeb’s army in a cycle of death and destruction. In 1689, however, his fortunes took a turn for the worse. Sambhaji was at Sangameshwar, unaware of the nearness of his enemies & with a scant force around him. After a sudden raid under Muqarrab Khan, Mughals reached the place & after a bitter fight succeeded in capturing him and his Prime Minister, Kavi Kalash.

        Sambhaji was brought to Aurangzeb’s court on a donkey, with the local population mocking him. When they were brought face to face with Aurangzeb, the latter offered to let Sambhaji live if he surrendered all the Maratha forts, turned over all his hidden treasures and disclosed the names of all the Mughal officers who had helped him. Sambhaji refused, and instead sang the praises of Mahadev (Lord Shiva).

Aurangzeb ordered Sambhaji and Kavi Kalash to be tortured to death.

        What followed was two weeks of inhuman torture of the Maratha King, Sambhaji and his Prime Minister, Kavi Kalash. Offers of conversion to Islam too were refused by both. The brutal torture continued. It involved plucking out their eyes and tongue and pulling out their nails. The later part involved removing their skin. On March 11, 1689, Sambhaji was finally killed, reportedly by tearing him apart from the front and back with “Wagh Nakhe” (Tiger Claws, a kind of weapon), and was beheaded with an axe.

        This brought an end to the two weeks of torture which included gouging of eyes and cutting of tongues of both, Sambhaji and Kavi Kalash. They were put to death at Tulapur on the banks of Bhima River. An arch has been constructed at the site as a memorial.

        After the killing, Sambhaji’s severed head was paraded throughout the empire, taken to Delhi and hung on a gate there. All accounts referring to days of horrific torture and agony tell that they borne with astonishing firmness and stoicism by Sambhaji and his Brahmin minister Kavi Kalash. Even the purported offers of clemency on the public display of submission and/or an escape from the horror by conversion to Islam had little effect on the proud Maratha king.

        After being blinded & his tongue cut from his mouth, he surprisingly with great difficulty was still able to communicate and to continue to offer defiance to his oppressors. The memory of his inspirational father must have been close to Sambhaji in the last days – given just sufficient time to rest between the tortures and removal of limbs. After two weeks of horrendous and unthinkable pain the still defiant King was executed. His head was cut off and placed in public display around the cities and towns of Maharashtra as a warning. But it didn’t have the desired effect. Far from it, in fact.

        The news of the execution of the son of the much revered and loved King Shivaji send a wave of horror and revulsion throughout the land. His brother Rajaram took the crown and continued the struggle against the Mughals. For his stout defence of Hindu Dharm and refusal to convert to Islam, even at the cost of his life, Sambhaji was named by his people, Dharmveer.

        Ironically, some 310 years later, a tale of similar, brutal torture would be re-written by Aurangzeb’s ‘self styled’ descendants, the Pakistanis, when their army captured and killed Lt Saurabh Kalia & five of his men in similar fashion.

The more things change, the more they remain the same.

God Bless the souls of the countless who fell to this fanaticism in our lands.

       Sharing some ramblings on the way the #Doklam standoff has played out so far. I say ‘so far’ because it is still not over. Far from it!

        Will not go into the background of it all. Have already shared my thoughts some days ago in this BLOG POST. For a historical and geographical background to the nature of the dispute, this short BLOG POST should suffice.

        Bottomline is that Dolam is indeed a vital piece of ground for China, not only because it will enable them to rapidly cut off the Siliguri Corridor during war, but also enable unhindered observation of the same during peacetime due to the commanding heights. So here’s what China did. Some years earlier, it offered to forego its claims on other parts of Bhutan in exchange for the Dolam Plateau. Basically China told Bhutan – We will let you retain your own lands in North if you let go of your lands in the South!

        Bhutan decided to graciously decline this ‘generous offer’! Regardless, China kept up its claims and poking Bhutan until the 2012 agreement to agree to retain the status quo on ground. And full marks to China that they stuck to this agreement for FULL FIVE YEARS! But the ‘inevitable itch’ soon shifted from its Eastern Bum (South China Sea) to its Western Bum(LAC). Soon the flag bearers of the so called ‘Peaceful Rise of China’ peacefully marched into sovereign Bhutanese territory with impressive road building equipment. The OBOR had arrived in Bhutan, so what if it was sort of uninvited!

        But this is where China realized that the warts on its Eastern Bum are a tad bit different from the warts on its Western Bum! Whereas the PRC could easily steamroll over its smaller neighbours in the SCS, in Doklam, however, the Chinese found themselves on the other side of the steamroller. Literally. Indian army came down and destroyed whatever road the Chinese had constructed thus far. The Chinaman was zapped. This was not what he was told would happen! He was told by his commie bosses that the Elephant would turn tail at the first sight of the Dragon. Now the Chinaman was confused. And enraged!

        How dare the barbarians to the West refuse to kowtow to the Middle Kingdom! Thus started the sabre rattling (or the noise of the empty vessels, if you will!) Enraged princelings revved their super car engines in anger in Sydney. VERY LOUDLY! (LINK)

        Then came a ‘cute’ little video on the Seven Scenes of India by the State Broadcaster. But full credit to them in taking pains to ensure it was NOT RACIST (India-China border dispute: Bizarre video mocks New Delhi with racist stereotype) at all! In fact they even put out a cute little Sardar!

(I’m sure his photos must still be circulating in WhatsApp groups in the Land of Five Rivers, he is just so ‘cute’!).

        However, all that huff and puff was met with a DEAFENING silence by India. So much so that a dozen page long ‘chargesheet’ let out by Beijing was met with a one line statement by the Indian MEA! Leave along kowtowing, the barbarians simply dismissed the Middle Kingdom with one sentence. Yes, ONE SENTENCE! The Dragon was now stuck riding the Tiger. It didn’t know how to get off without being devoured because, well, they are very well aware of how the PLA might fare in case bullets started to fly (People’s Liberation Army – Calling the Bluff)!

        So they decided to do a very ‘clever’ thing. They announced that the Indians had unilaterally started withdrawing from the ‘Chinese Territory of Dolam’! Bad move!

        The Tiger now replaced its deafening silence with a low growl. There was no such move by Indian troops, he said. Poor Dragon. Yeh daanv bhi fail!

        The Tiger was very clear on what he wanted – Chinaman OUT of Bhutan and restoration of status quo. Now the Winnie lookalike was worried!

(Who’s Winnie, you ask? Well this LINK should help :D)

        BRICS summit was fast approaching. And the barbarians, far from kowtowing, were making fun of him (LINK)!

        Didn’t they get the memo wherein they were supposed to roll over and die at the mere sight of the Chinaman? His plans for a grand ‘victory’ right before the BRICS Summit, and more importantly, the Chinese Commie Party’s Congress soon thereafter, where he was to proclaim himself the next Chairman, after Mao, were in danger!

        But just short of his moment of glory, not only was he being shown a middle finger by the Tiger, but also his much vaunted PLA was at the receiving end of flying karate kicks from the Indian Army at the other end of the border (Blow by Blow Analysis of the Pangongso Lake Incident)

        Finally, the Dragon realized he’d bitten off more than he could chew. His huff and puff wouldn’t work across the LAC. The Tiger was in no mood to humour him. Far from that, in fact,the Tiger threatened to devour him instead. Bottomline: Fatt Gayi (India Building up Troops and Supplies Along Border Amid Doklam Standoff: Alleges China)

        With the shrill antics (and of course the Video with the cute Sardar!), the Dragon had become the laughing stock of the world. One so called ‘gentleman’ by the name of Hu kept up the #HuSays rambles, but the Tiger thought is was #ChuSays (LINK)!

(Note to self: Get eyesight tested to avoid reading Hu as Chu next time)

        Finally, the Middle Kingdom blinked. It huffed & puffed and quietly requested the Tiger – ‘Saar, galti se mistake ho gaya. Plizz adjust na thoda sa.’ The Tiger’s bottomline was clear. You and your road – Bugger Off.

        The Dragon meekly acquiesced in private even as the benevolent Tiger permitted it to continue huffing and puffing and saying we will keep patrolling and yada yada. Quietly though, the Dragon also said that it has ‘decided’ not to construct a road any more (LINK). (Translation: Even though it is MY territory, Tiger doesn’t want me to make a road here)

        But then there were some internet warriors who didn’t get the memo and kept bleating ‘China Win India Lose’! Some of them were quietly and ‘patiently’ explained facts in a language that they understood best – use of graphics (LINK). 🙂

        The Dragon left, all his fire extinguished. The Tiger got what it always said it wanted – NO FCUKING ROAD. Period

This, folks, in a nutshell, is what happened to the Dragon’s ‘nutshells’ in #Doklam.

Thank you for your patience 🙂

 

Blogged about the Myths of PLA some days ago (Link). Now continuing from there.

        Huge parades, shiny ‘toys’, rows and rows of it. The President, or as he would like to be addressed – The Chairman, inspecting the troops in an open jeep with FOUR mikes, exhorting them to be loyal to him (Yes, apparently the PLA needs to be reminded of it’s obligation to be loyal to the CPC over and over again!). A shiny new aircraft carrier with beautiful introductory videos that would put Top Gun to shame. Or was it the other way round (LINK : China copied not only the music, but also the choreography of Top Gun)?

            Then there was the ‘small’ issue of an officially released video of their BESTEST fighter jet, which ‘unfortunately’ was found to be a video from the same ‘Top Gun’ instead! (LINK: China red-faced after footage of new fighter ‘was from Top Gun’)

            The PLA, PLAAF and PLAN are the future of warfare, as the People’s Republic of China would like us to believe. Well, there’s only one way to find out the amount of truth in this ‘fact’ – and given the sabre rattling happening on the other side of the LAC (or is it empty vessels. Let’s leave that for later), it might not be too far in the future.

            But one thing that we CAN, and in fact MUST analyse is how the PLA has measured up when time has come to live up to their bombast. And there is plenty to talk about, given their ‘rich’ history of ‘valour’ too. Let us start with the PLA before the establishment of the PRC. They were actually raised as the armed wing of the Chinese Communist Party, and continue to be so even today. Yes, China, the country doesn’t have an army. What they have is the ARMED WING OF THE CPC, enabling the CPC in ruling over China.

            The PLA was raised in 1928 to help the CPC ‘struggle’ in its endeavour to establish a communist regime in China. Since almost its very inception, it found itself fighting Chiang Kai Shek’s Koumintang for the right to rule over China. This fight was, however interrupted when the Japanese showed up from across the East China Sea. This is where Mao played a masterstroke – he withdrew from the fight, preferring to let the Koumintang fight the Japanese instead. The same template carried on during the second world war too. So basically, the PLA did NOTHING for the freedom of China when occupied by the Japanese. On the contrary, as soon as the Japanese were defeated with the combined efforts of the Allies and the Koumintang, the PLA attacked a weakened Chiang Kai Shek and drove him to Taiwan.

            PRC established, the PLA soon marched into Tibet. There was NO resistance worth the name. Tick first ‘victory’ for the PLA. Fast forward three more years. Gen Eisenhower marched into North Korea, threatening to reach the very doorstep of the PRC on the Yalu River. Mao committed the PLA to ensure the survival of the commie regime. The Americans were ultimately driven back to the 32^nd Parallel, where they continue to be even today. This campaign was touted as a stunning victory for the PLA. But was is really a victory? Dig a bit deeper and what does one find? Waves after waves of PLA soldiers sent in to simply overwhelm the Americans by sheer numbers. No tactics. No manoeuvres. Nothing. Just keep sending them till the Americans run out of bullets to shoot them. Very smart, Mr Mao! I will let you google for the fatalities that the PLA as compared to those suffered by the Americans. It was a ‘victory’ indeed, or was it? Total lack of ingenuity. Just one resource that Mao had at his disposal aplenty – scores and scores of poor Chinese soldiers.

(Photo: TIME)       

    Less than a decade later came the 1962 war. Enough has been written about it. But still, I’ll add my own bit. As the Time Magazine wrote – ill armed, ill clad, ill trained, the only thing that the Indian Army didn’t lack was guts. The Indian army was thrust in a battle it was not prepared for. Couple that with questionable leadership and the result did NOT come as a surprise. BUT, one fact that is often left out is that wherever the local commanders did not panic, and actually LED their troops, the Indian soldier stood like a rock on his land. Till his very last breath. Names like Dhan Singh Thapa, Shaitan Singh, Jaswant Singh, Joginder Singh, Yog Raj Palta, Brahmanand Awasthi and the hundreds more became folklore.  A beautiful tribute to the Indian warriors who held on to Kibithu / Walong to their last breath appeared in the Pune Newsline on 07 Nov 1999. I still retain the original paper cutting. A must read piece.

            The Chinese admit to fewer than 750 casualties in that war. Let us analyse that a bit. 750 casualties. Let that sink in for a moment! Here is how the Chinese fought. They got a peasants’ army to march from the plains of East / South China into the high Himalayas in September / October. That done, they told them to attack. Uphill, against a stubborn enemy. At altitudes ranging from 12 to 18,000 feet. Across a theatre ranging from Ladakh to Kibithu. And then, with the plains of Assam in sight, they called for a ceasefire and withdrew!. Back up the hills from where they’d just climbed down. Back into the icy Tibet. In the peak of winters. And less than 750 casualties? The souls of Maj Shaitan Singh and his Ahirs would be laughing their heads off .. they would have accounted for a tad more than that figure at Rezang La itself! Another ‘victory’, but at what cost once again? And what did they achieve? No new lands came their way. On the contrary, they made an eternal enemy of a large neighbour. One that has given them considerable grief on the battlefield subsequently.

            Talking of grief on the LAC, the first instance came soon after 1962, at NathuLa in 1967 when Brigadier Sagat Singh ensured that his Grenadiers killed 300+ Chinese in response to they wounding their commanding officer. Soon thereafter came the incident at Chola, again in Sikkim, less than a month later wherein the Gorkhas of 7/11 GR did a repeat of that. And guess what, Sikkim has been so peaceful since then!

            Two years later came the faceoff between the PLA and the Soviets at Usuri River. Close to 1000 PLA troops were accounted for by the Soviets. So alarmed was Mao that he almost vacated Peking!

            Fast forward to a decade ahead. This time it was Shri Deng Xiaoping who thought he should ‘teach a lesson’ to puny Vietnam for opposing the China backed murderous Cambodian regime. He launched the much vaunted PLA to teach the said lesson to Vietnam. But no points for guessing who got taught the lesson! The PLA lost close to 200,000 soldiers, claimed a victory and moved back. Very smart of them. Just that the Vietnamese tend to disagree, though!

(Photo: Chinese POWs in Vietnam, 1979)

         Next decade came another standoff with India at Sumdorong Chu. Interestingly, Wikipedia has got it in good detail. Bottomline, the PLA tried to pre-emptively occupy some areas on the LAC in Arunachal Pradesh, but got the shock of their lives when the Indian army counter mobilised with an entire brigade! Thing is, the Chinese thought that this time too, the ghost of 1962 would prevent India from responding to them. But I guess they forgot that the ghost of 1962 was more than exorcised in 1967 itself. Something similar, in fact, happened at Dolam a few months ago, a standoff which carries on still. If only the PLA could learn from THEIR OWN FCUKING HISTORY!

            Then there was the ‘little’ incident in South Sudan some months ago, something that I blogged about earlier too (link at the top of this blog post), when the shiny toys failed to ‘persuade’ the PLA soldiers to hang on instead of running away in face of rag tag militias.

            At the end of it, I stand firm in my belief that the PLA is all huff and puff, but no WILL to prove that it is not mere bluster. Despite the shiny toys, the Chinese Emperor’s Army is Naked! I guess they know it too, ‘coz their aim seems to be to somehow win without fighting. And they just might succeed in doing so, atleast in the South – China, nay Indo – China Sea as it has historically been called. But they ran into a stone wall in Dolam, hoping for the same template to get repeated.

            To conclude all I will say is that this Indian Army is NOT the Indian Army of 1962, but the PLA soldier of today is STILL the same as the PLA soldier of 1962. He STILL cannot fight, esp when faced with a worthy enemy, and days of sacrificing him by the hundreds are gone for good.

Just my thoughts

This is the concluding part of a three part blog series. Links to the first two parts are as under:-

Part 1

Part 2

EFFECTS ON PAKISTAN SOCIETY

        The rapid descent into chaos of Pakistan as a nation is amply documented. However, most of the times people make the mistake of putting the blame squarely on the education imparted in the Madrassas in the country, not realizing that public school education is equally to blame. The failed Times Square bomber in May 2010, Faisal Shahzad was the son of Air Vice Marshal Baharul Haq of the PAF and did his early schooling in Pakistan.[1]

        A subtle subversion of the generations post 1971 has already happened and will take a lot of effort to be undone. That is, however, beyond the scope of this blog post. As regards the current school going generation too, the situation is bad, but salvageable with concerted effort. In words of Mr Karamat Ali, the executive director of the Pakistan Institute of Labour Education and Research, “I have heard of cases where Muslim students ask non-Muslim high achievers: Why don’t you convert to our religion? And it is not just Muslims and Hindus, but also Shias who are given this treatment. This is because of the horrifying myths about people of other faiths that we fill our children with.”[2]

        With a force feeding of religion in school curriculum despite the country’s constitution specifically forbidding it (as discussed in Part 1), the effect has been twofold. Firstly, it has resulted in a youth which has undergone subtle religious indoctrination at behest of its own govt for its own particular agenda, at times dictated by religious parties in the govt; and secondly, this has come at the cost of other, more relevant issues that the pupils might have been taught instead, in order to take their nation on the path of development and assimilation in the larger comity of nations.

Attempts at Reform

            ‘In the latest Class 10 Pakistan Studies textbook for Punjab, the section on the Musharraf years discusses his policy of ‘enlightenment’. The book states that “Musharraf changed the curriculum and tried to make it enlightened”. And earlier in that paragraph: “President Musharraf had also tried to introduce enlightenment in his country (like Ataturk in Turkey) but the religious people of Pakistan made it a failure.” Ironic that the textbook itself acknowledges the failure of the curriculum reform, given that it ostensibly follows the new 2006 curriculum.’[3]

        There continue to be many within Pakistan who are aware of the challenges posed by their school curriculum, and have made numerous attempts to reform the same. However, for most part, their attempts have failed on account of the inherent resistance by the clergy, sometimes from within the govt. During the early years of Musharraf regime, attempts were made to moderate the curriculum and subject matter experts approached for the same. One of the many changes made to the curriculum was the definition of the word ‘jehad’. Textbooks of the time defined it as ‘holy war against infidels’. This was changed to ‘fighting evils inside oneself’, a definition much closer to its actual meaning. The change was, however, short lived, and Musharraf had to bow to the diktats of the religious parties on whose support his govt was in power.[4]

        In 2006, Pakistan finally revised its curricula guidelines, removing a lot of negatives, while retaining others. However, new textbooks in conformity with the new guidelines have still not been created and published.[5] In fact, a review of curriculum indicated that more than doubled since the last time they were revised. For example, some 30 Grade 5 to 10 textbooks published in Punjab,  examined in 2009, were found to have 12 instances of biased material that could be considered “hate content.”  In 2012, the textbooks underwent a curriculum revision. After another review, the total number of quantifiable instances of questionable or factually incorrect material went up to 33.[6] In fact, in 2004 the Information Minister of the Govt of Pakistan was forced to apologise to the religious parties in the National Assemby after the Education Minister questioned the relevance of verses glorifying Jihad in Class XI Biology textbooks.[7] Such is the uphill battle that faces curriculum reform in Pakistan.

SUMMARY

        Awakening vs continued descent into chaos – these are the only two choices left for Pakistan now with respect to its school curriculum. As has been demonstrated earlier during the Musharraf refime, even if a correct choice is made, implementing it would mean overcoming the baggage of continued Islamization and radicalization that has been the norm in Pakistan over the past five decades. This is a matter which should equally concern India, since much of the bile is directed against it, including in the guise of Hindus.

        The real worry for India is that the current education system of Pakistan will continue to churn out young adults who will view India as a hegemon with the sole aim of subjugating Pakistan and its people. Over the past years, many generations have already been moulded by the system and are today in positions of influence wherein their individual / collective actions ensure continued enmity between India and Pakistan. Such a mind set can’t be reformed overnight. We must find a way to engage the Govt of Pakistan and encourage it to take corrective action at the earliest if there is ever to be any hope of a lasting India – Pakistan peace.

[1] Schapiro, Rich. ‘Times Square bomb suspect Faisal Shahzad ‘was just a normal dude’ before making neighbors suspicious.’ 05 May, 2010, ‘Daily News’. http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/times-square-bomb-suspect-faisal-shahzad-normal-dude-making-neighbors-suspicious-article-1.444286

[2] Usman, Mashal. ‘Pakistan: Bias in the textbooks and education – report on a meeting in Karachi’. 19 Mar 2013, ‘South Asia Citizens Web’.  http://www.sacw.net/article3995.html

[3] Afzal, Madiha. ‘A Failed Curriculum Reform’. 16 Jan 2014, Brookings. http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2014/01/15-pakistan-curriculum-reform-afzal

[4] Siddiqui, Taha. ‘Pakistan textbooks raise debate about curriculum of hate’. 28 Feb 2013. CS Monitor. http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2013/0228/Pakistan-textbooks-raise-debate-about-curriculum-of-hate

[5] Bandow, Doug. ‘The Problem of Pakistan: Teaching Intolerance and Violence.’  09 Jan 2012, CATO Institute. http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/problem-pakistan-teaching-intolerance-violence

[6] Siddiqui, Taha. ‘Pakistan textbooks raise debate about curriculum of hate’. 28 Feb 2013. CS Monitor. http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2013/0228/Pakistan-textbooks-raise-debate-about-curriculum-of-hate

[7] ‘Govt Apologises Over Remarks in NA.’ 13 Mar 2004, ‘The Dawn’. http://www.dawn.com/news/392528/govt-apologises-over-remarks-in-na

(contd from Part 1)

MANIFESTATION IN CURRENT CURRICULUM

“Pakistani textbooks have preached falsehoods, hatred and bigotry. They have constructed most non-Muslims, especially Hindus, as evil and primordial enemies, glorified military dictatorships and omitted references to our great betrayal of the Bengali brothers and sisters who were the founders and owners of the Pakistan movement. It is time to correct these wrongs.”[1]

 

 

        The understanding and subsequent implementation of such directions was aimed at promoting a particular worldview in the minds of the children during their formative years, so as to enable the nation to progress on its chosen path. The path chosen was clear – towards more Islamization. It has manifested itself in various forms, with attendant effects on the state of the society today. Some of these are discussed in succeeding paragraphs.

Lack of Sensitivity to Religious Diversity of the Country

        In his first speech to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, MA Jinnah said, “You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed — that has nothing to do with the business of the State.”[2] With this statement, he promised a more or less secular country with a population that was majorly Muslim. As a result of this demography, culture and life of the majority found similar echoes in the early school curriculum. However, with the govt mandated process of Islamization of the 80s, curriculum underwent a redesign, depicting a monolithic image of Pakistan as an Islamic Republic, with little or no understanding of the ways of life of religious minorities / minority sects within Islam. This is buttressed by the fact that the following basic principle occurs repeatedly in Pakistani curriculum policy documents:-

            “In the teaching material, no concept of separation between the worldly and

the religious be given; rather all the material be presented from the Islamic

point of view.”[3]

Following four themes emerge prominently in curricula in Pakistani school textbooks:-

(1)        Pakistan is for Muslims Alone.       The processes wherein Pakistani and Muslim identities are merged together commences quite early. An objective of the National Early Childhood Education curriculum, 2002 is “to nurture in children a sense of Islamic identity and pride in being Pakistani”[4] However, there is no mention of what is required to be taught to non Muslim students. Even ostensibly non-religious textbooks contain significant Islamic content, and they are used by Muslim and non-Muslim children alike. For example, in grade 3, 4, 5 and 6, Urdu-language social studies textbooks used in all the four provinces, lessons with Islamic content comprise about one-quarter of the total.[5] Religious minorities are often portrayed as inferior or second-class citizens who have been granted limited rights and privileges by generous Pakistani Muslims, for which they should be grateful, and to whom religious minorities should be subservient. The contributions of religious minorities towards the formation, development, and protection of Pakistan are also largely absent from the curriculum.[6]

(2)        Compulsory Teaching of Islamiat to All Students Irrespective of Their Faiths.    Another aspect of the above mentioned policy objective manifests itself in the form of compulsory learning of part of the Quran by students of all faiths, not as part of Islamiat curriculum, but of the compulsory subject, Urdu.[7] This in fact, constitutes a violation of fundamental rights of minorities as per Article 22(1) of the Constitution of Pakistan, that says:-

“No person attending any educational institution shall be required to receive religious instruction, or take part in any religious ceremony, or attend religious worship, if such instruction, ceremony or worship relates to a religion other than his own.”

(3)        Ideology of Pakistan.        MA Jinnah never used the words ‘Ideology of Pakistan’ in his lifetime. It was only in 1962 that a member of Jamaat-i-Islami, Maulvi Abdul Bari used this term for the first time when the political parties bill was under discussion. Chaudhry Fazal Ilahi, who later became President of Pakistan, objected to this construct and asked what he meant by this. On this the member who had moved the bill said, “Ideology of Pakistan is Islam.” Nobody raised any question or sought explanation and the bill under discussion was passed.[8] This ideology was at complete variance with that espoused by Jinnah in his 11 Aug, 1947 speech. Regardless, the curriculum documents mandate that pupils be taught the ideology of Pakistan as espoused by Jinnah, “Identify concepts relating to Pakistan’s ideology in the pronouncements of Allama Iqbal and Quaid-e-Azam.”[9] In Classes XI – XII, the same curriculum states the desired learning outcome as “Students will be able to describe Islam as the ideological base of Pakistan.”[10]

(4)       Hate Material.           Together, the above mentioned factors create a sense of ‘exclusiveness’ in the students at a very young age. With the stage thus set, the curriculum goes about infusing a sense of hatred towards India and Hindus in the impressionable minds. This fits in perfectly with the stated policy of perpetual enmity with India and the ideology of Pakistan coupled with the Two Nation Theory that led to the creation of Pakistan in the first place. The following excerpts from Pakistani school textbooks illustrate a method in madness wherein the Nation State is actively feeding wrong information to its children, leading to a radicalized society[11]:-

(i)         Hindus worship in temples which are very narrow and dark places, where they worship idols. Only one person can enter the temple at a time. In our mosques, on the other hand, all Muslims can say their prayers together.

(ii)        This division of men [among Aryans] into different castes is the worst example of tyranny in the history of the world. In course of time the Aryans began to be called the Hindus

(iii)       The Hindus lived in small and dark houses. Child marriage was common in those days. Women were assigned a low position in society. In case the husband of a woman died, she was burnt alive with his dead body. This was called ‘sati’. The killing of shudras was not punished, but the murder of a Brahman was a serious crime.

(iv)       Hindus thought that there was no country other than India, nor any people other than the Indians, nor did anyone else possess any knowledge. 

(v)        Hindus very cunningly succeeded in making the British believe that the Muslims were solely responsible for the [1857] rebellion.

(vi)       The Quaid saw through the machinations of the Hindus.

(vii)      The religion of the Hindus did not teach them good things. The Hindus did not respect women.

(viii)     The Hindus always desired to crush the Muslims as a nation. Several attempts were made by the Hindus to erase the Muslim culture and civilization. Hindi-Urdu controversy, shudhi and sangathan movements are the most glaring examples of the ignoble Hindu mentality.

(ix)       The caste system of the Hindus had made the life of the common people miserable. They were treated like animals. Nobody could claim equality with Brahmins. 

(x)        The Hindus who have always been opportunists cooperated with the English

(xi)       The Hindus praised the British rule and its blessings in their speeches. The Hindus had the upper hand in the Congress and they established good relations with the British. This party tried its best to safeguard the interests of the Hindus. Gradually it became purely a Hindu organization. Most of the Hindu leaders of the Congress were not prepared to tolerate the presence of the Muslims in the sub-continent. They demanded that the Muslims should either embrace Hinduism or leave the country. The party was so close to the Government that it would not let the Government do any work as would be of benefit to the Muslims. The partition of Bengal can be quoted as an example. 

(xii)      The British confiscated all lands [from the Muslims] and gave them to Hindus [This is stated despite the fact that all the large feudal lords in the part that later formed Pakistan were Muslims]

(xiii)     Hindus declared the Congress rule as the Hindu rule, and started to unleash terror on Muslims 

(xiv)     While the Muslims provided all type of help to those wishing to leave Pakistan, the people of India committed cruelties against the Muslims (refugees). They would attack the buses, trucks, and trains carrying the Muslim refugees and they were murdered and looted

(xv)      The Hindus in Pakistan were treated very nicely when they were migrating as opposed to the inhuman treatment meted out to the Muslim migrants from India. 

(xvi)     After 1965 war India conspired with the Hindus of Bengal and succeeded in spreading hate among the Bengalis about West Pakistan and finally attacked on East Pakistan in December 71, thus causing the breakup of East and West Pakistan

(xvii)    Hindu has always been an enemy of Islam 

Historical Omissions

            “When petty officials carry the brief of writing history as victory, the imaginings of power can discard the stray ‘truths’ of pure inspiration and pretend to monopolize the enterprise of creativity. A sort of selective amnesia descends which can be resisted and breached but never quite dissipated.”[12]

        Having been created on the premise that Muslims were a different nation from Hindus, Pakistan faced a unique challenge – that of its identity. If Pakistanis were not Hindus, then what were they. Did their religion make them Arabs, or even Persians who were their immediate neighbours? But when they looked towards their Western neighbours, they found no similarities, be it in terms of language, culture, diet or even physical appearances. Yet, they could not acknowledge a common ancestry with a ‘Hindu’ India. Thus was complicated the onerous task of writing Pakistan’s history for its children to study.

        It is common to hear that Pakistan’s history, as per its textbooks, commences from 712 AD, when Mohd bin Qasim invaded Sindh. Almost all of history before that is either ignored, or glossed over. The lands that comprise Pakistan today find mention in the epic of Mahabharat, however this is not taught to the children who live on those lands. Neither are they told that their lands were once part of the mighty Mauryan empire.

        As a result of these omissions, the children of Pakistan grow up without any knowledge of their glorious heritage. Instead, they end up with a bigoted view of the region they live in which, coupled with the falsehoods being fed to them in other subjects, makes for a dangerous mix. When they encounter the world outside and realize it is at a variance with beliefs instilled in them, they either withdraw further into their exclusivist shells, or become disillusioned and unanchored.

Glorification of Armed Forces

        World over, govts use education as a means to assist in the process of nation building. However, Pakistan is a different case in that for much of its history it has been directly ruled by its military. Even the periods of civil rule saw the military retain a significant say in critical affairs of the govt. Add to this the fact that the Pakistani military’s record on battlefield is not much to talk about, and one can put into perspective the glorification of the armed forces being fed to the children of Pakistan from very young age.

        This process of glorifying the military commenced shortly after the 1965 war and gathered pace after the 1971 debacle. When Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto took over the Govt, the military was highly demoralized, its public image was very low and people had lost faith in its ability to defend the country. The Bhutto era curriculum is thus filled with war heroes, military values and the glorification of the army and its valiant exploits in the 1948 and 1965 wars with India.[13] In fact, Bhutto went so far as to introduce a two year course titled Fundamentals of War and Defence of Pakistan for Classes XI and XII respectively.[14] The process further intensified as Islam was added ‘to support the state‘s own militaristic policies in such a way that it appeared to the reader that Pakistan, the Pakistan movement, Pakistan‘s wars with India, the Kashmir issue were all connected not only with Pakistani nationalism but with Islam itself.’[15]

 

(Coming up in Part 3: Effects on Pakistani Society)

[1] Rumi, Raza. ‘Our Textbooks and the Lies They Teach’: The Express Tribune, 14 Apr 2011

[2] Jinnah, MA. 11 Aug 1947. http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00islamlinks/txt_jinnah_assembly_1947.html

[3] Sareen, Sushant. ‘The Jihad Factory: Pakistan’s Islamic Revolution in the Making.’ Pp 32

[4] National Early Childhood Education Curriculum (NECEC), Ministry of Education, Government of Pakistan,

March 2002, page 4

[5] Mirin, Amir. ‘How Pakistan Pumps In Hatred Through Textbooks.’, 16 Nov 2011, Rediff

[6] ibid

[7] ibid

[8] Chaudhary, BY. ‘The Quaid and the Ideology of Pakistan.’, 16 Aug 2009, ‘The Dawn’

[9] National Curriculum for Pakistan Studies, Grades IX-X, 2006, page 2. http://cdtp.gov.pk/userfiles/file/new_cur/Pakistan%20Studies%20%28IX-X%29.pdf

[10] National Curriculum for Advanced Pakistan Studies, Grades XI-XII, 2010, page 16. http://cdtp.gov.pk/userfiles/file/new_cur/Advanced%20Pakistan%20Studies%20%28XI-XII%29.pdf

[11] Rafiqui, Asim. ‘The Hindus Live In Small And Dark Houses Or Finding The Roots Of War In Textbooks – The Pakistan Episode’. http://www.asimrafiqui.com/blog/the-hindus-live-in-small-and-dark-houses-or-finding-the-roots-of-war-in-textbooks-the-pakistan-episode/

[12] Jalal, Ayesha. ‘Conjuring Pakistan: History as Official Imagining.’ Pp 5. http://www.tufts.edu/~ajalal01/Articles/conjuring.pdf

[13] Sabri, Zahra. ‘A Textbook Case’. 19 Mar 2015, ‘Herald’. http://herald.dawn.com/news/1152839

[14] ibid

[15] Rahman, Tariq PhD. ‘Denizens of Alien Worlds’. Pp 26

“Our education system must provide quality education to our children and youth to enable them to realize their individual potential and contribute to development of society and nation, creating a sense of Pakistani nationhood, the concepts of tolerance, social justice, democracy, their regional and local culture and history based on the basic ideology enunciated in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.”

– Vision, Ministry of Education, Pakistan

 

        Education of its children is perhaps the most vital investment a State makes in order to assure a steady ‘supply’ of ideal citizens that will further the State’s interests in future. Thus, each responsible Nation State strives to provide the best possible education to its young, depending upon factors such as demographics, economics and culture. At the same time, it is also true that Nation States at times also utilize this same, formalized education to perpetuate and disseminate their own political viewpoints, resulting in generations growing up with a blinkered view of their own history and flawed understanding of issues facing their nation.

        However, in the case of Pakistan, the Nation State sought to rid itself of the trauma of the events of 1971 by intensifying the use of education as a political tool. This was done mostly due to the identity crisis which faced the country after the loss of its Eastern Wing effectively nullified the Two Nation Theory on which the Islamic Republic of Pakistan was proclaimed during the independence struggle. Over the years, this has manifested itself in ways perhaps unimagined by the rulers of the day.

 

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

       

      The war of 1971, which resulted in the breaking up of Pakistan, can be viewed as a watershed event in the life of the country. The population had been steadily fed on govt propaganda of Pakistan being a strong nation, able to hold its own against a much larger but weaker adversary, India. They were kept in dark by the State about the situation obtaining in East Pakistan after the recent elections. As late as a day before surrender, newspapers ran reports of glorious victories over India. And then out of the blue, came a jolt – Pakistan Army in East Pakistan had surrendered to an adversary that was supposed to be much weaker.

        It was at this moment in Pakistan’s history that Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto ascended to the highest office in the land. Though his personal lifestyle, politics and general outlook can be described as ‘liberal’, he decided to use the glue of religion to bring the country back together. Accordingly, a ‘Curriculum Wing’ was established in order to perform curriculum related activities.[1] Even as article 22 of the 1973 constitution promulgated by Bhutto emphasized that: “no person attending any educational institution shall be required to receive religious instruction, or take part in any religious ceremony, or attend religious worship, if such instruction, ceremony or worship relates to a religion other than his own,” Bhutto introduced the subject of Islamiat (Islamic Studies) in the national curriculum vide Articles 31 (a) and (b) of the 1973 Constitution that required the State: “to make the teaching of the Holy Quran and Islamiat compulsory, to encourage and facilitate the learning of Arabic language…[and] to promote unity and observance of the Islamic moral standards.” Islamiat was devoted to imparting the fundamentals of Islam; the life and teachings of the Prophet Muhammad; his wives, companions and other important Islamic personalities; key events during Islam’s early history; and important passages from the Quran.

      The Islamic education thus introduced by Bhutto was made further rigid during the rule of Gen Zia ul Haq. Under Zia, education quickly became a tool of indoctrination and the means for the construction of a parochial Islamic/Pakistani identity. A National Education Policy and Implementation Program was announced in 1979, which stated: “The highest priority would be given to the revision of the curricula with a view to reorganizing the entire content around Islamic thought and giving education an ideological orientation so that Islamic ideology permeates the thinking of the younger generation and helps them with the necessary conviction and ability to refashion society according to Islamic tenets”[2]

        This process of subtle subversion via school curriculum carried on under the radar because international focus remained fixated on Madrassas as breeders of intolerance. The focus of Gen Zia ul Haq was clear. He said in his inaugural speech, “Our curriculum must ensure that our children are brought up educated as good Pakistanis and good Muslims. They must imbibe the lofty ideals and principles of Islam.”[3] Under the new policy, study of Islamiat was made compulsory from classes I to X, later extended upto BA. During the same period, a section of the Islamiat syllabus was separated for Sunnis and Shias at the level of Class IX and X. Separate books were introduced for students of the two sects but a common book was reintroduced in 1999. However, they would still attempt distinct sections of the examination paper.[4]

        This process must, however be seen a part of the larger process of Islamization that was underway since 1971, gathering pace during the Zia years during which many new laws were introduced by the Govt of Pakistan, including the Zakat / Usr system, Hudood Ordinance and the Blasphemy Laws.

 

(Coming up in Part 2: Manifestation of the above in current school curriculum in Pakistan)

[1] ‘Pakistan Curriculum design and development’; http://www.ibe.unesco.org/curriculum/Asia%20Networkpdf/ndreppk.pdf

[2] Bandow, Doug. http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/problem-pakistan-teaching-intolerance-violence

[3] Banuazizi, Ali. The State, Religion, and Ethnic Politics: Afghanistan, Iran, and Pakistan, pp 355

[4] Abbas Rashid, “Human Rights and Education” Open Society Institute: Education Conference 2005 (New York), July 2, 2005, pp 14-15