The Western civilization can delay the demise
of Pakistan for a limited period, but not forever. The Pakistani themselves
have no will to maintain the state. External preservation has its limit. Is it
morally justifiable to maintain a state that the majority of Pakistani
population do not support?
A nation
is founded by a sense of its member’s cultural relations with each other based
on a shared past, a heritage of common ways and traditions. Pakistan is colonial
components combined of five indigenous nations plus Indian migrants who
migrated after British consented to divide the subcontinent on religion.
“Society
is an achievement of human nature not divorced in nature from natural in
general. Having a certain degree of solidarity i.e. being able, up to a certain
point to endure the tests and answer the questions which are suggested by the
scrutiny of human life from the point of view of value and completeness”.
Pakistanis as a nation does not have a sense
of solidarity as a result of historic achievement. However, five nations each
have a strong sense of their own individual identity and each group jealously
guard their cultural ethnic boundary from each other. The state has not been
able to satisfy and maintain harmony between these ethnic groups and within the
state. Instead it has relied on force to maintain the state, and with Islamic
identity; an Islamic identity which the migrants brought with them from India
and revitalised Iqbal’s, Lahore myth.
Islam as
an identity of the state produced Taliban and other fundamentalist groups.
There is no such thing as political obligation any more than moral obligation.
People do what they want to do unless and until they are forcibly restrained by
force. Pakistan is a matter of physical force and nothing else, and there are
170 million of them which is their sense of self-confidence, self-government
and self-maintenance destroyed may be beyond repair. The use of force cannot go on
forever and the use of the force has its limit.
The Western civilization can delay the demise
of Pakistan for a limited period, but not forever. The Pakistani themselves
have no will to maintain the state. External preservation has its limit. Is it
morally justifiable to maintain a state that the majority of Pakistani
population do not support?
The army
is a state within a state, financed by western states.
Western
countries finance Pakistan’s army in order to prevent the state from verge of
collapse; Pakistan is nuclear state, Pakistani nuclear weapons may fall in to
the wrong hands, which is to suggest that these weapons are not in the wrong
hands already. The Saudi financed Pakistan because Pakistan holds the Islamic bomb and
the majority of Pakistanis belong to the Sunni sect of Islam that makes Pakistan
the Saudi’s natural pawn.
Fanatics
support Pakistan because Lahore is the capital of Islamic Umah, this is the
same reason why Saudi supports Pakistan. Most fanatics spend some time in
Lahore Madrasses, the world fanatical power house.
Pakistan survives today only by force. Once
force ceases Pakistan would cease to exist. There may come a time when two
forces collide and one has to prevail. To some Pakistan is not a legitimate
state and its elite rulers are not legitimate rulers.
Religious
parties are seeds of fundamentalist brought from India, by migrant (Mullana Madodi),
cultivated in the NWF frontier in order to counter early Pakhtoon nationalist
movement, and the religious party and Jihad have thrived by Saudi’s and Gulf
States money. Now Pakistan is the champion of new form of Jihad backed by the
Gulf petro-dollar.
http://www.gulf-times.com/pakistan/186/details/375419/religious-schools,-last-option-for-poor-people-in-baluchistan
http://www.gulf-times.com/pakistan/186/details/375419/religious-schools,-last-option-for-poor-people-in-baluchistan
The state
of Pakistan contradicts itself in every issue.
State can survive when the state can exercise
authority over its territory and has moral legitimate claim over the
territory its rule. Unfortunately for the Pakistani the authorities and legitimacy
is thought of solely in terms of physical force, then it is impossible to see
how a man can discipline and exercise control over himself. He can only
discipline and control others against whom he can bring to bear physical force.
Therefore it is impossible to see how there can be such a thing as self-government.
No society can be said to govern itself, if government and self are thought of
purely in physical terms. There can only be the exercise of physical control
and coercion by one group over another.
What
Baluch want is not what Punjabi-Mohijir wants. Punjabi Mohijir wants to colonise.
The Baluch want liberation from colonisers (failed state) Pakistan. Pakhtoon
have sought their own design to govern their life. What public want in any
moment must be corrected and amended by what public want at every other moment.
M.Sarjov
a Baluch political activist strive for Independent Baluchistan based in London.
No comments:
Post a Comment