The history of the human race is full of seemingly small incidents that have led to catastrophic results.
This holds true both for the distant past and for more recent events.
The first episode relates to the most un-diplomatic and arrogant behaviour displayed by Alauddin Khwarizm Shah. The Khwarezmid Empire was a highly developed area with a well-developed civilisation and high standard of education. It had been conquered by the famous Muslim general Qatiba bin Muslim in 714 A.D. (93 A.H.) It had beautiful gardens, lakes, rivers and orchards, and included present-day Iran, Afghanistan, Punjab and the area east of Uzbekistan and north of the Amu River. The city of Gergania was adopted as the capital and renamed Khwarizm.
Visitors to the area in those days described Gergania as the largest, most beautiful, richest city in existence. The nearby city of Khiva was maintained in its original form by the Russians as a national heritage centre of historic significance. The country’s dynasty was founded by Khwarizm Shah and his kingdom extended all the way to the Indus River. However, all the wealth and grandeur caused him to become so arrogant that he humiliated the Caliph of Baghdad, the most revered figure in the Islamic world at that time. The result was that the Caliph encouraged Genghis Khan to reign him in and cut him down to size. Though possessing a large army, Alauddin avoided direct confrontation with Genghis Khan and stayed away from the Mongol army. In this manner the public became disheartened and lost all hope of facing up to the threat.
In the year1219 AD, while Alauddin was actively trying to destabilise the whole Muslim world by inciting neighbouring Muslim kingdoms and willing to attack even Baghdad, Genghis Khanthe valiant Mongol Emperor had extended his empire to northern China and eastern Europe. Their only common border was Utrar, a frontier town in Khwarizm. Realising that Alauddin had a vast empire and was a powerful King, Genghis Khan decided to cultivate friendly relations with him. He sent a letter and gifts suggesting trade and good-neighbourly relations. Alauddin was pleased by this and sent some expensive gifts in reciprocation. Genghis Khan then sent a caravan of about 400 Muslim traders to Khwarizm, which stopped at Utrar. The governor of Utrar, Ainalgaq, was Alauddin’s uncle. When he saw all the valuable goods and the beautiful horses, he lost all sense of reality and thought only of getting hold of the goods. He falsely informed Alauddin that the traders were actually spies in disguise and should not be allowed to proceed. Alauddin, stupidly and without thinking out the consequences, ordered all the traders to be killed. Ainalgaq complied and confiscated all the goods. One trader survived, as he had been away from the camp at the time. He went back and informed Genghis Khan. Nontheless the Mongol emperor still showed tolerance and sent an emissary to Alauddin, asking him to either punish the governor for his mischief or to hand him over for dispensing justice. Alauddin , in his arrogance, had the emissary murdered. Genghis Khan sent yet another emissary, who complained about violation of diplomatic norms and Khwarizm’s stooping to disgraceful acts. This emissary was also killed. When news of this reached Genghis Khan, he is reported to have gone to a nearby hill, raised his hands towards the sky and said: “O Creator of this world, Alauddin is not a king. He is a thief. He has violated all norms of diplomacy. Please give me the strength to destroy him.” Alauddin, possessing an army of almost 500,000 soldiers and horses, sent troops to Utrar, Bokhara and Samarqand to protect them but the Mongol army swept aside all resistance like a whirlwind and wiped out each and every living soul in these cities.
The most unfortunate aspect of this episode is the fact that the Caliph Al-Nasir was indulging in intrigues against Khwarizm Shah and encouraging the Mongols to attack Khwarizm. Instead of forming a united front with Khwarizm Shah and Shamsuddin Altamash, king of India, Al-Nasir refused to help Jalaluddin, Alauddin’s valiant son who had taken command of the available troops and put up stiff resistance to Genghis Khan for years. He was finally cornered on the bank of the river Indus and when he saw no way out, he and a few colleagues leapt into the river on horseback and swam to the other side. It is said that he was finally murdered by a Kurd whose brother had been slain by Khwarizmi soldiers. Thus were sown the seeds of the destruction of the Islamic Empire. Due to a last-minute change in plans by the Mongol emperor, Altamash of India was saved from Mongol wrath. In 1259 A.D. the last Caliph, Mustasim, was trampled to death by galloping horsemen on the orders of Genghis Khan’s grandson Hulagu Khan– history had taken its revenge. According to historians, the Mongols massacred more than 10 million Muslims in Bukhara, Merv, Samarqand, Bamiyan, Nishapur and Baghdad. Muslim disunity resulted in the total destruction of various kingdoms and subsequent colonialisation, first by the Mongols and then by the Russians and Europeans.
It seems people never learn from history. What happened almost 800 years ago seems to be repeating itself again. Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan would not be facing the situation they are in today if they had followed the Islamic religious edicts of mutual help, brotherhood, justice, kindness and avoidance of oppressive, unlawful wars. Jalaluddin Khwarizm Shah was a valiant warrior and fought bravely against the Mongols but was not helped by short-sighted Muslim rulers. Ultimately the Muslims faced the wrath of the Mongols and paid the price – more than 10 million dead, cities razed and a whole Muslim empire had disappeared. In 1260 the Mongols tasted their first defeat near Nazareth at the hands of the valiant Mameluk sultan Al-Zahir Baybars of Egypt and then, in 1277, at Van near the Syrian border.
Showing posts with label Dr A Q Khan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dr A Q Khan. Show all posts
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Catastrophic results
In continuation of last week’s article on the same topic, the first unfortunate episode I would like to mention here is a decision made by Field Marshal Ayub Khan. Right from the time he was made commander-in-chief of the Army, he was reported to have been conspiring to usurp government powers. Lord Cockcroft, head of the British Atomic Energy Commission and father of Britain’s nuclear weapons programme, mentions in his autobiography that once, while passing through Karachi in the early fifties on his way to Australia, he met Ayub Khan at a state banquet.
He wrote that he was shocked to hear Ayub Khan openly declaring that all the local politicians were incompetent and unfit to rule the country, and that he had no option but to do something about it. All the facts about his intrigues with Ghulam Mohammad and Iskander Mirza are now well-documented. His ungrateful and insulting treatment of his benefactor, Iskander Mirza, is given in detail in Shahabnama written by Qudratullah Shahab, one time ambassador to Holland (and my witness at our marriage at the Embassy in The Hague in March 1964). When Ayub Khan took over, the Army had its heyday and many persons became rich overnight.
The particular decision of long-lasting consequences to the history of our country that I am referring to happened in 1962 when India and China went to war in NEFA. China and India had previously been bosom buddies and members of the Non-Aligned Movement. Nehru’s arrogance (“I have asked the Army to throw out the Chinese from our territory”) led to full-scale war. The Indians were defeated and demoralised and fled. China occupied a large part of Assam, which it later peacefully vacated. It was at this point that Ayub Khan made a major mistake. Many people had asked him to grasp this golden opportunity, send troops into Kashmir and close that chapter once and for all by presenting a fait accompli.
Our Army was very strong at that time and we could have taken Kashmir in a week; but to do something like that you need a Bulent Ecevit of Turkey or a Khalid Bin Walid (RA) type of personality. Instead of taking immediate action, Ayub Khan is reported to have sent a message to Nehru asking him to withdraw Indian troops from our borders and promising not to take any hostile action in return. Pakistan lost the golden chance and would not get another one like it. Had there been a democratically elected government, things would have been different, as we saw during the decision on the nuclear tests. According to international analysts, we would then not have suffered defeat in 1965, would not have faced the ignominious defeat in East Pakistan and would not have been forced into surrender on Dec 16, 1971. When the Indians got a chance in 1971, they used it efficiently and ruthlessly, and inflicted the humiliating surrender of 92,000 troops. The Indians openly bragged that when Pakistan got a golden chance, they foolishly failed to utilise it, while when they got such a chance, they used it most efficiently and wisely.
The debacle of 1971 was a direct result of Ayub Khan’s follies, the appointment of Yahya Khan as his successor and the corrupting of the Army by bringing it into politics. Since then many adventurists have usurped power and got away with it without being held responsible. Ayub Khan was the son of a Subedar Major and was only a matriculate. Military training in England was just that – military training – it had nothing to do with wisdom and maturity. The results are there for everyone to see.
Equally unfortunate for democracy in Pakistan is Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s decision, upon the advice of his close aids, to appoint Pervez Musharraf as COAS. When the topic came up with the father of Mr Nawaz Sharif and myself once while I was there, I even told him that it would be Mr Nawaz Sharif’s undoing. Mian Sahib had no plausible answer. Sorry to say, but my forecast came true and Mian Sahib paid heavily for that decision. The penalty was paid not only by him but by the whole country. The dictatorial rule that was subsequently enforced led to the disintegration of the national fabric, ever-growing corruption and nepotism. One telephone call from US deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage was enough to lead to unilateral submission resulting in Pakistan becoming a partner in the death of almost two million Afghans and thousands of our own nationals.
Again we see the results of the background (the son of a clerk promoted to a section officer at the fag end of his career) and limited formal education (Intermediate) leading to lack of political acumen and wisdom. It is quite clear that there is no substitution for good, solid education. Field Marshal Ayub Khan, Gen Yahya Khan, Gen Zia-ul-Haq and Gen Musharraf, all confirmed the rule that army training is no substitute for a good university education. However, even university education is no substitute for wisdom, good character and a solid family background. Leadership, wisdom and foresight are gifts from Almighty Allah and good manners and good character come from family background.
One by one, personal decisions had devastating consequences, each in its own way, but all to the detriment of the country. Ayub Khan’s decision led to a missed opportunity to solve the Kashmir problem once and for all. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s decision led to the breakdown of democratic institutions and complete submission to the US. Unfortunately, we cannot always foresee what dire consequences our decisions might have. All the more reason for politicians to stop and think and take well-considered decisions for the benefit of the country.
He wrote that he was shocked to hear Ayub Khan openly declaring that all the local politicians were incompetent and unfit to rule the country, and that he had no option but to do something about it. All the facts about his intrigues with Ghulam Mohammad and Iskander Mirza are now well-documented. His ungrateful and insulting treatment of his benefactor, Iskander Mirza, is given in detail in Shahabnama written by Qudratullah Shahab, one time ambassador to Holland (and my witness at our marriage at the Embassy in The Hague in March 1964). When Ayub Khan took over, the Army had its heyday and many persons became rich overnight.
The particular decision of long-lasting consequences to the history of our country that I am referring to happened in 1962 when India and China went to war in NEFA. China and India had previously been bosom buddies and members of the Non-Aligned Movement. Nehru’s arrogance (“I have asked the Army to throw out the Chinese from our territory”) led to full-scale war. The Indians were defeated and demoralised and fled. China occupied a large part of Assam, which it later peacefully vacated. It was at this point that Ayub Khan made a major mistake. Many people had asked him to grasp this golden opportunity, send troops into Kashmir and close that chapter once and for all by presenting a fait accompli.
Our Army was very strong at that time and we could have taken Kashmir in a week; but to do something like that you need a Bulent Ecevit of Turkey or a Khalid Bin Walid (RA) type of personality. Instead of taking immediate action, Ayub Khan is reported to have sent a message to Nehru asking him to withdraw Indian troops from our borders and promising not to take any hostile action in return. Pakistan lost the golden chance and would not get another one like it. Had there been a democratically elected government, things would have been different, as we saw during the decision on the nuclear tests. According to international analysts, we would then not have suffered defeat in 1965, would not have faced the ignominious defeat in East Pakistan and would not have been forced into surrender on Dec 16, 1971. When the Indians got a chance in 1971, they used it efficiently and ruthlessly, and inflicted the humiliating surrender of 92,000 troops. The Indians openly bragged that when Pakistan got a golden chance, they foolishly failed to utilise it, while when they got such a chance, they used it most efficiently and wisely.
The debacle of 1971 was a direct result of Ayub Khan’s follies, the appointment of Yahya Khan as his successor and the corrupting of the Army by bringing it into politics. Since then many adventurists have usurped power and got away with it without being held responsible. Ayub Khan was the son of a Subedar Major and was only a matriculate. Military training in England was just that – military training – it had nothing to do with wisdom and maturity. The results are there for everyone to see.
Equally unfortunate for democracy in Pakistan is Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s decision, upon the advice of his close aids, to appoint Pervez Musharraf as COAS. When the topic came up with the father of Mr Nawaz Sharif and myself once while I was there, I even told him that it would be Mr Nawaz Sharif’s undoing. Mian Sahib had no plausible answer. Sorry to say, but my forecast came true and Mian Sahib paid heavily for that decision. The penalty was paid not only by him but by the whole country. The dictatorial rule that was subsequently enforced led to the disintegration of the national fabric, ever-growing corruption and nepotism. One telephone call from US deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage was enough to lead to unilateral submission resulting in Pakistan becoming a partner in the death of almost two million Afghans and thousands of our own nationals.
Again we see the results of the background (the son of a clerk promoted to a section officer at the fag end of his career) and limited formal education (Intermediate) leading to lack of political acumen and wisdom. It is quite clear that there is no substitution for good, solid education. Field Marshal Ayub Khan, Gen Yahya Khan, Gen Zia-ul-Haq and Gen Musharraf, all confirmed the rule that army training is no substitute for a good university education. However, even university education is no substitute for wisdom, good character and a solid family background. Leadership, wisdom and foresight are gifts from Almighty Allah and good manners and good character come from family background.
One by one, personal decisions had devastating consequences, each in its own way, but all to the detriment of the country. Ayub Khan’s decision led to a missed opportunity to solve the Kashmir problem once and for all. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s decision led to the breakdown of democratic institutions and complete submission to the US. Unfortunately, we cannot always foresee what dire consequences our decisions might have. All the more reason for politicians to stop and think and take well-considered decisions for the benefit of the country.
Sweet talk – sour lemons
There was a lot of publicity and great expectations about President Obama’s visit to Saudi Arabia and Egypt. While not much was expected in terms of public engagements, all attention was focussed on his visit to Egypt and his address to students and faculty at the famous Al-Azhar University in Cairo. I heard that speech live and, as was to be expected, it was more rhetoric than substance.
We were given the good news that America planned to pull its troops out of Iraq by 2012. (Weren’t we given the impression during his inaugural speech that the pullout would be almost immediate?) That would indeed be surprising considering that, even after 60 years, the US still has troops in Japan, South Korea and all over Europe.
Another “great disclosure” was that there was a need for two independent states – Israel and Palestine. Have we also not been hearing this for the past 40 or 50 years? Just the other day the Israeli government announced that Mr Bush as president had secretly given tacit approval of expanding Jewish settlements (on Palestinian lands, of course). This makes one wonder what tacit promises President Obama has given to the Israelis. Only the future will tell. One thing he was very categorical about – the permanent mutual bond between the US and Israel and the fact that the US was bound to ensure Israel’s security and existence. (Even if this means the killing of thousands of Palestinians and the usurpation of more of their land. All this is considered justified, even though the Palestinians had nothing to do with the holocaust.)
Another surprising disclosure was admitting that military action was not a solution to conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. If that is the case, then why is America sending large numbers of additional troops into Afghanistan and why is the US conducting drone attacks in Pakistan in total disregard of our sovereignty? I seem to remember our leaders saying that with the inauguration of President Obama, drone attacks would ease off. We have all seen the results – even more frequent drone attacks and the deaths of hundreds of innocent civilians, men, women and children.
Of course, Iran’s nuclear programme did not escape attack. Iran’s peaceful programme (regularly scrutinised by IAEA inspectors) is considered to be a threat to world peace, to the USA and to the Middle East. This while the 200 or so Israeli nuclear weapons are considered “peaceful” and are not talked about at all. Have you ever heard a word by any US president against Israel’s nuclear programme, its weapons or its not joining the NPT? Never! This despite the fact that Israel showed its aggressive stance in its illegal, unprovoked pre-emptive strikes on Palestinian and Lebanese civilians and on the Iraqi Osirak nuclear reactor, which was being built, under IAEA safeguards, by the French.
President Obama offered improved relations with the Muslim world, which I believe to be no more than a “soother.” Mark my words. Nothing substantial will come of it. The rhetoric against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban will continue, and so will that against Iran’s and Pakistan’s nuclear programmes. We will be tied down economically to whatever conditions the World Bank and the IMF see fit to foist on us.
Here are a few ideas on what President Obama preaches and what he actually practices.
1. Withdrawal from Iraq put off for four years. (It is quite possible that he won’t be there for the final act and the matter lands up in the hands of another President with his own agenda.)
2. More troops for Afghanistan, despite earlier indications to the contrary.
3. More coercion and pressure on Iran to wind up its nuclear programme despite Iran’s agreement to IAEA inspections, but not a word about Israel’s nuclear weapons.
4. Reneging on promises to publish photos of the shameless, illegal torture of hundreds of detainees in Iraq and at the Guantanamo prison camp, while he had previously promised on many occasions that he would expose President Bush’s inhuman torture practices. One wonders what is wrong in accepting previous wrongdoings and ensuring that it doesn’t happen again. The American Civil Liberties Union had already made known that these included rape, water boarding, electric shocks, hanging upside down and damaging of genitals. If there was no hesitation in showing (encouraging, as a matter of fact) the genocide committed against the Jews in Nazi concentration camps, then why not the same openness here to shake American conscience (or was that, perhaps, the reason not to)? It is even more surprising when we consider the brutality meted out to President Obama’s forefathers and fellow Africans who were kidnapped, killed or sold into slavery. There was no hesitation in making those atrocities known. Painful for us is the fact that many of those kidnapped were Muslims from Kenya, Tanzania, Mali, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Ghana, Nigeria, Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Cameroon, etc. History has recorded the horrible conditions under which these hapless people were shipped to the Americas – chained and half of them dying on the way. How those sold into slavery were made to work in the fields for 18 hours a day and women were raped in order to create a never-ending workforce of mulattos. It seems to be a case of disclosing the atrocities committed by others, but keeping your own hidden.
5. While President Obama is an eloquent (rhetorical) orator, but that on its own doesn’t achieve anything. Hitler and Mussolini were also good orators but their actions and deeds were horrendous. Remember Napoleon Bonaparte’s speech to his soldiers and the Muslim clerics of Alexandria in 1798? What conciliatory terms he used, how he eulogised Islam, Muslims, their history, their culture and their contribution to civilisation. His purpose was purely to recruit traitors to overthrow the Mameluke dynasty and to make Egypt a French colony. However, the French were defeated by Muhammad Ali Pasha within two years and left Egypt. President Obama will not be able to achieve anything because he is tied down by the course set by his predecessors, by the strong Jewish lobby and by the neocons. His promises of withdrawal of troops in 2012 will be overturned by his successor. (I strongly doubt he will be re-elected.) If he were sincere, he would set a date of 2010 or 2011. The Palestinian problem will drag on indefinitely, and more Palestinian lands will be usurped to be included in the Zionist state, thanks to US support and the cowardice and incompetence of the Arab nations.
6. In 2002, 22 Arab states took the initiative to offer Israel full normalisation of relations in return for Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied illegally in 1967. This initiative has been put on a backburner while the Arab countries are constantly being told “to take meaningful steps and important actions to facilitate the US to take some action.” Meaningful and important in this case may be taken to mean “don’t talk about the return of the West Bank and the rights of the Palestinian people.”
I believe that President Obama, for all his good intentions and his nice words will achieve no more than did the two Muslim presidents and the two Muslim vice presidents that India had. It will be a “puppet-on-a-string” show. As the Indian gentlemen in question could do no more than be good propaganda material for the Indian government, so Mr Obama will be for the US government. The well-entrenched establishment is too strong to be overruled and it will allow Mr Obama hardly any freedom to pursue his own policies freely. The election slogan “Change we can believe in” will soon become a forgotten page of world history. In this connection Aayats 51, 52 of Surah Maida perfectly describe the present situation. There we read: “O believer! Do not make friendship with Jews and Christians. They are friends to one another. If you make friendship with them, you will be one of them. Indeed, Allah does not guide the wrongdoers. Those who are hypocrites will rush to the Jews and Christians and say they do this lest calamity befall them. It is possible that Allah may give you victory or some commandment. They will then repent for what they have concealed in their hearts.”
We were given the good news that America planned to pull its troops out of Iraq by 2012. (Weren’t we given the impression during his inaugural speech that the pullout would be almost immediate?) That would indeed be surprising considering that, even after 60 years, the US still has troops in Japan, South Korea and all over Europe.
Another “great disclosure” was that there was a need for two independent states – Israel and Palestine. Have we also not been hearing this for the past 40 or 50 years? Just the other day the Israeli government announced that Mr Bush as president had secretly given tacit approval of expanding Jewish settlements (on Palestinian lands, of course). This makes one wonder what tacit promises President Obama has given to the Israelis. Only the future will tell. One thing he was very categorical about – the permanent mutual bond between the US and Israel and the fact that the US was bound to ensure Israel’s security and existence. (Even if this means the killing of thousands of Palestinians and the usurpation of more of their land. All this is considered justified, even though the Palestinians had nothing to do with the holocaust.)
Another surprising disclosure was admitting that military action was not a solution to conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. If that is the case, then why is America sending large numbers of additional troops into Afghanistan and why is the US conducting drone attacks in Pakistan in total disregard of our sovereignty? I seem to remember our leaders saying that with the inauguration of President Obama, drone attacks would ease off. We have all seen the results – even more frequent drone attacks and the deaths of hundreds of innocent civilians, men, women and children.
Of course, Iran’s nuclear programme did not escape attack. Iran’s peaceful programme (regularly scrutinised by IAEA inspectors) is considered to be a threat to world peace, to the USA and to the Middle East. This while the 200 or so Israeli nuclear weapons are considered “peaceful” and are not talked about at all. Have you ever heard a word by any US president against Israel’s nuclear programme, its weapons or its not joining the NPT? Never! This despite the fact that Israel showed its aggressive stance in its illegal, unprovoked pre-emptive strikes on Palestinian and Lebanese civilians and on the Iraqi Osirak nuclear reactor, which was being built, under IAEA safeguards, by the French.
President Obama offered improved relations with the Muslim world, which I believe to be no more than a “soother.” Mark my words. Nothing substantial will come of it. The rhetoric against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban will continue, and so will that against Iran’s and Pakistan’s nuclear programmes. We will be tied down economically to whatever conditions the World Bank and the IMF see fit to foist on us.
Here are a few ideas on what President Obama preaches and what he actually practices.
1. Withdrawal from Iraq put off for four years. (It is quite possible that he won’t be there for the final act and the matter lands up in the hands of another President with his own agenda.)
2. More troops for Afghanistan, despite earlier indications to the contrary.
3. More coercion and pressure on Iran to wind up its nuclear programme despite Iran’s agreement to IAEA inspections, but not a word about Israel’s nuclear weapons.
4. Reneging on promises to publish photos of the shameless, illegal torture of hundreds of detainees in Iraq and at the Guantanamo prison camp, while he had previously promised on many occasions that he would expose President Bush’s inhuman torture practices. One wonders what is wrong in accepting previous wrongdoings and ensuring that it doesn’t happen again. The American Civil Liberties Union had already made known that these included rape, water boarding, electric shocks, hanging upside down and damaging of genitals. If there was no hesitation in showing (encouraging, as a matter of fact) the genocide committed against the Jews in Nazi concentration camps, then why not the same openness here to shake American conscience (or was that, perhaps, the reason not to)? It is even more surprising when we consider the brutality meted out to President Obama’s forefathers and fellow Africans who were kidnapped, killed or sold into slavery. There was no hesitation in making those atrocities known. Painful for us is the fact that many of those kidnapped were Muslims from Kenya, Tanzania, Mali, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Ghana, Nigeria, Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Cameroon, etc. History has recorded the horrible conditions under which these hapless people were shipped to the Americas – chained and half of them dying on the way. How those sold into slavery were made to work in the fields for 18 hours a day and women were raped in order to create a never-ending workforce of mulattos. It seems to be a case of disclosing the atrocities committed by others, but keeping your own hidden.
5. While President Obama is an eloquent (rhetorical) orator, but that on its own doesn’t achieve anything. Hitler and Mussolini were also good orators but their actions and deeds were horrendous. Remember Napoleon Bonaparte’s speech to his soldiers and the Muslim clerics of Alexandria in 1798? What conciliatory terms he used, how he eulogised Islam, Muslims, their history, their culture and their contribution to civilisation. His purpose was purely to recruit traitors to overthrow the Mameluke dynasty and to make Egypt a French colony. However, the French were defeated by Muhammad Ali Pasha within two years and left Egypt. President Obama will not be able to achieve anything because he is tied down by the course set by his predecessors, by the strong Jewish lobby and by the neocons. His promises of withdrawal of troops in 2012 will be overturned by his successor. (I strongly doubt he will be re-elected.) If he were sincere, he would set a date of 2010 or 2011. The Palestinian problem will drag on indefinitely, and more Palestinian lands will be usurped to be included in the Zionist state, thanks to US support and the cowardice and incompetence of the Arab nations.
6. In 2002, 22 Arab states took the initiative to offer Israel full normalisation of relations in return for Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied illegally in 1967. This initiative has been put on a backburner while the Arab countries are constantly being told “to take meaningful steps and important actions to facilitate the US to take some action.” Meaningful and important in this case may be taken to mean “don’t talk about the return of the West Bank and the rights of the Palestinian people.”
I believe that President Obama, for all his good intentions and his nice words will achieve no more than did the two Muslim presidents and the two Muslim vice presidents that India had. It will be a “puppet-on-a-string” show. As the Indian gentlemen in question could do no more than be good propaganda material for the Indian government, so Mr Obama will be for the US government. The well-entrenched establishment is too strong to be overruled and it will allow Mr Obama hardly any freedom to pursue his own policies freely. The election slogan “Change we can believe in” will soon become a forgotten page of world history. In this connection Aayats 51, 52 of Surah Maida perfectly describe the present situation. There we read: “O believer! Do not make friendship with Jews and Christians. They are friends to one another. If you make friendship with them, you will be one of them. Indeed, Allah does not guide the wrongdoers. Those who are hypocrites will rush to the Jews and Christians and say they do this lest calamity befall them. It is possible that Allah may give you victory or some commandment. They will then repent for what they have concealed in their hearts.”
Investing in agriculture
The population of what now constitutes Pakistan has escalated from 30 million to 170 million. Food production should have kept pace with the rise, if not exceeded it. We are spending billions of dollars on imports of basic items like wheat, sugar, tea, spices, edible oil, pulses and vegetables. These imports are financed by ill-affordable loans at high rates. Furthermore, to make these commodities affordable for the common man, huge subsidies are given, putting further strains on the already unsustainable domestic budget resources. The import of food items at prices higher than those of the local market is also having an adverse effect on all sectors of the economy causing major inflation. (in July-December 2008 inflation on foodstuff was 31.2 percent). Long periods of load-shedding and high prices of electricity have proved to be the proverbial last straw that broke the camel’s back (i.e., the economy). With this, a vicious circle is started. Higher prices lead to higher wage demands, which lead to higher domestic production costs, which lead to decline in agricultural exports, which lead to layoffs of farm employees. All this apart from the adverse implications for the balance of payments.
In food autarky lies the remedy to removing fiscal deficits in our predominantly agricultural economy. Fiscal deficits lead to higher taxation affecting mostly the common man, who is already the victim of several types of indirect taxation. By the simple elimination of food imports, which is required within a short span of time if we are to see results, foreign exchange and budget deficits can at least be minimised, if not totally wiped out, and the economy stabilised.
According to the July-December 2008 Economic Review, which is available on the official website of the ministry of finance, imports under the food group escalated to $2,218,500 million–i.e., 38 percent higher than that of the same period of the previous year. Wheat alone was imported at a cost of $734 million. The Statistical Supplement of the Economic Survey indicates that subsidies during the fiscal year 2007-2008 rose to Rs407,485 million–i.e., more than half-a-billion dollars. This is more than the expenditure on defence, which stands at Rs296,077 million. A separate figure for agricultural subsidies has not been given, but it can safely be assumed that the bulk of the subsidy goes to agricultural products. If the agricultural sector is directly supported by initiating and executing new schemes, the need for this large amount in subsidies could be eliminated in 3-5 years.
Water resources
While large dams would require an eight-to-ten-year period of construction (and that too only if political and financial impediments can be sorted out), small dams are required in all the four provinces. These need not necessarily be made on rivers, where they would interfere with village life, and the flora and fauna downstream. Conservation and storage of rain- and floodwater would be sufficient. During the time of President Ayub Khan, the Small Dam Organisation of WAPDA did an excellent job in this regard. Now nobody knows whether or not this organisation still exists. Funds need to be allocated and programmes initiated to build small dams wherever feasible. During a bus journey early in the morning on way to Turfan in Xinjiang province in China in 2003, I saw hundreds of workers carrying out large earthworks with picks and shovels. These were villagers carrying out voluntary spadework to build an earth-filled dam. The rainwater thus stored would be used for growing paddy in an otherwise arid, Balochistan-like desert area. By the time we returned that same evening, visibly substantial work had been carried out.
Food storage
We lack adequate storage facilities, resulting in wastage of produce acting as a disincentive to farmers. In 2003/2004, after large wheat crops of 19.1 to 19.5 million tons were harvested, the provinces did not have proper warehouses and silos for storage and wheat was left lying at railway sidings, fields and open warehouses. Fearing that there would be major spoilage, since the monsoons follow immediately after the harvest and procurement season, I had advised the government of Gen Musharraf to distribute the surplus free to those poor entitled to zakat, to be paid for out of the zakat funds. My suggestion was not followed up, with the expected consequences. When we have again achieved surplus wheat targets. I would like to reiterate my previous suggestion of distribution to the poor, to be financed either from the zakat funds or the Benazir Income Support Programme. I would also like to suggest the building of large, prefabricated sheds for storage of food and agricultural products, which should be made available to farmers all over the country. A factory to produce such (and other) prefabricated structures would be useful and economical. Sharjah has such factories, which produce prefabricated, large sheds with excellent insulation. Such sheds were used at Kahuta and were found to be durable, practical and useful.
Setting up of provincial agricultural research councils
All the provinces should set up agricultural research councils and they should be given sufficient federal funds to provide local and foreign resources to carry out research and experimental work. Our provinces vary greatly in climate and social conditions. The provincial agricultural research councils would be better geared to solving local problems and experimenting with locally suited crops. However, federal financial and technical support is a requirement, as is also strict performance monitoring.
Agriculture investment board
To attract domestic and foreign investments in agricultural projects, the government should consider establishing an agriculture investment board solely to organise financial and technical reserves. It would be preferable for such boards to be established at provincial levels as well. The federal board could then act as a holding company to provide financial, technical and monitoring support. The setting up of such boards could also assist in the division of resources between the agricultural and non-agricultural sectors, thus building up a strong base for the agricultural sector. The engineering industry has an engineering development board at the national level. It is ironic that the agricultural sector, while being the backbone of the country’s economy, does not have a national platform where issues, policies, plans and projects can be formulated and articulated at a national level to serve the farming community.
I hope that at least some of these suggestions will be considered and be incorporated in future budgets.
In food autarky lies the remedy to removing fiscal deficits in our predominantly agricultural economy. Fiscal deficits lead to higher taxation affecting mostly the common man, who is already the victim of several types of indirect taxation. By the simple elimination of food imports, which is required within a short span of time if we are to see results, foreign exchange and budget deficits can at least be minimised, if not totally wiped out, and the economy stabilised.
According to the July-December 2008 Economic Review, which is available on the official website of the ministry of finance, imports under the food group escalated to $2,218,500 million–i.e., 38 percent higher than that of the same period of the previous year. Wheat alone was imported at a cost of $734 million. The Statistical Supplement of the Economic Survey indicates that subsidies during the fiscal year 2007-2008 rose to Rs407,485 million–i.e., more than half-a-billion dollars. This is more than the expenditure on defence, which stands at Rs296,077 million. A separate figure for agricultural subsidies has not been given, but it can safely be assumed that the bulk of the subsidy goes to agricultural products. If the agricultural sector is directly supported by initiating and executing new schemes, the need for this large amount in subsidies could be eliminated in 3-5 years.
Water resources
While large dams would require an eight-to-ten-year period of construction (and that too only if political and financial impediments can be sorted out), small dams are required in all the four provinces. These need not necessarily be made on rivers, where they would interfere with village life, and the flora and fauna downstream. Conservation and storage of rain- and floodwater would be sufficient. During the time of President Ayub Khan, the Small Dam Organisation of WAPDA did an excellent job in this regard. Now nobody knows whether or not this organisation still exists. Funds need to be allocated and programmes initiated to build small dams wherever feasible. During a bus journey early in the morning on way to Turfan in Xinjiang province in China in 2003, I saw hundreds of workers carrying out large earthworks with picks and shovels. These were villagers carrying out voluntary spadework to build an earth-filled dam. The rainwater thus stored would be used for growing paddy in an otherwise arid, Balochistan-like desert area. By the time we returned that same evening, visibly substantial work had been carried out.
Food storage
We lack adequate storage facilities, resulting in wastage of produce acting as a disincentive to farmers. In 2003/2004, after large wheat crops of 19.1 to 19.5 million tons were harvested, the provinces did not have proper warehouses and silos for storage and wheat was left lying at railway sidings, fields and open warehouses. Fearing that there would be major spoilage, since the monsoons follow immediately after the harvest and procurement season, I had advised the government of Gen Musharraf to distribute the surplus free to those poor entitled to zakat, to be paid for out of the zakat funds. My suggestion was not followed up, with the expected consequences. When we have again achieved surplus wheat targets. I would like to reiterate my previous suggestion of distribution to the poor, to be financed either from the zakat funds or the Benazir Income Support Programme. I would also like to suggest the building of large, prefabricated sheds for storage of food and agricultural products, which should be made available to farmers all over the country. A factory to produce such (and other) prefabricated structures would be useful and economical. Sharjah has such factories, which produce prefabricated, large sheds with excellent insulation. Such sheds were used at Kahuta and were found to be durable, practical and useful.
Setting up of provincial agricultural research councils
All the provinces should set up agricultural research councils and they should be given sufficient federal funds to provide local and foreign resources to carry out research and experimental work. Our provinces vary greatly in climate and social conditions. The provincial agricultural research councils would be better geared to solving local problems and experimenting with locally suited crops. However, federal financial and technical support is a requirement, as is also strict performance monitoring.
Agriculture investment board
To attract domestic and foreign investments in agricultural projects, the government should consider establishing an agriculture investment board solely to organise financial and technical reserves. It would be preferable for such boards to be established at provincial levels as well. The federal board could then act as a holding company to provide financial, technical and monitoring support. The setting up of such boards could also assist in the division of resources between the agricultural and non-agricultural sectors, thus building up a strong base for the agricultural sector. The engineering industry has an engineering development board at the national level. It is ironic that the agricultural sector, while being the backbone of the country’s economy, does not have a national platform where issues, policies, plans and projects can be formulated and articulated at a national level to serve the farming community.
I hope that at least some of these suggestions will be considered and be incorporated in future budgets.
Nostalgic memories
Some memories are just nostalgic. I have such memories about Bhopal.
The other day I was looking through Bhopal Nama, a poetic version of the history of Bhopal, its people, language and culture compiled by my elder brother, Abdul Hafeez Khan, a poet in his own right. This book was launched in Bhopal in 2007 by Dr Balram Jhaker, governor of Madhya Pardesh, a graduate of Aitchison College, Lahore, with excellent knowledge of Urdu literature. The famous episode of Shaqqul-Qamar (cleaving asunder of the moon – Para 27 Surah Qamar) has been mentioned in Bhopal Nama. The phenomenon was sighted by Bhojpal, the then ruler and founder of Bhopal. It is said that, on seeing the moon’s cleavage and learning about our Holy Prophet (PBUH), he sent emissaries with many gifts, including betel leaves, for the Holy Prophet (PBUH). Hazrat Amir Khusro, greatest of all poets, wrote a famous couplet on this:
Sabzie o qateh baras-o-juzam
Baquole Nabie waqt Alaehissalam
(The Holy Prophet, after tasting the pan leaves, said that it could cure leukoderma and leprosy.)
Ziauddin Barni, his compatriot, wrote in Tarikh-e-Feroz Shahi that there were many poets in the reign of Sultan Alauddin Khilji, but one such as Khusro had never existed before and have never appeared since. Amir Khusro was a master in every field of prose, poetry, masnavi, ghazal, qasida, and music. He knew Urdu, Persian, Hindi, Sanskrit, Turkish, Arabic, etc. His forefathers came from Trans-Oxania and were of Turkish origin. Khusro was not only a man of letters but also an expert swordsman. Through his marriage with the daughter of Imadul Mulk, Minister of War of Sultan Balban, he was an integral part of the royalty. He was a disciple of Hazrat Nizamudin Aulia.
It is said that when Hazrat Nizamudin Aulia was sick and bedridden, Hazrat Amir Khusro used to tell him stories and anecdotes that he made up to cheer him. Here follows one, The Three Princes of Ceylon.
There was once a wise king who reigned in Ceylon. He had three sons who all excelled in learning and physical sports. One day the king decided to test them. He called them, one by one, starting with the oldest. “I am old,” he said. “You are the heir to the throne. Rule wisely, so your subjects may be loyal, and protect them well.” All the princes bowed deeply before their father and denied any wish to ascend the throne during his lifetime. Although pleased with their responses, the king, to their consternation, banished them from the kingdom. They travelled together to a neighbouring kingdom. On their way to the capital they were met by an Ethiopian who cried: “Gentle travellers! Have you seen my camel?”
“Had it lost an eye?” asked the first prince.
“Had it lost a tooth?” asked the second prince.
“Was it lame?” asked the third prince.
“Since you have seen it, tell me where to find it,” cried the Ethiopian.
“Go straight and quick,” the three princes replied simultaneously.
The Ethiopian went in search of his camel and the princes travelled on. While resting under a tree, the Ethiopian fell upon them with cries of anger declaring that he had searched all over and had not found his camel.
“Does your camel carry a jar of oil on one side and a jar of honey on the other side of its back?” asked the first prince.
“Is there a woman seated on it?” asked the second prince.
“And is not that woman in the last stage of pregnancy?” asked the third prince.
The Ethiopian angered into thinking that they must have stolen his camel if they knew so much about it, raised a hue and cry and insisted that the princes be taken to the king for punishment. When the case came before the king, the princes stated that they had travelled far and wide and, coming upon the Ethiopian, decided to have some sport in order to increase his anxiety. The king too became angered by this and had them thrown into the dungeon. Next morning the camel was duly found, with the woman still sitting on it. The king was immediately informed and the princes released and brought before him. “How did you know so much about the camel while you had never seen it?” he enquired. The princes bowed deeply before him and explained:
“I saw that only the leaves and branches on one side of the road had been eaten and thus assumed that the animal was blind in one eye?” said the first prince.
“I saw that the leaves and twigs had only been half eaten and thus assumed that the animal had lost a tooth,” said the second prince.
“I saw that the impressions left by the camel showed it to have been dragging one foot,” said the third prince.
“All very well,” said the king, “but what about your other remarks?”
“There were drops on the road. Those on one side swarmed with ants, while the ones on the other side had collected flies. This could only have been due to honey and oil,” replied the first prince.
“Marks on the road showed that, at one place, the camel had squatted. Beside those marks I saw the delicate impressions of a woman’s shoes,” replied the second prince.
“Beside those footprints I saw impressions of her hands also. Only a woman advanced in pregnancy would have to crawl in order to get on to the camel’s back,” replied the third prince.
The king, duly impressed, presented them with robes of honour and a house to live in, where he often visited them. One day he sent them roast lamb to eat and wine to drink.
“The wine seems to have human blood in it,” remarked the first Prince.
“The lamb seems to have been nursed by a bitch,” remarked the second prince.
“Why complain about trifles when the king himself is not the real son of his predecessor. He has a butler’s blood in his veins,” remarked the third prince.
The king, who had been listening from an adjoining room, bristled with indignation. He appeared before them and asked them to repeat what they had just said. Though angered, he decided to investigate. He soon came to know that the grapes were from a vineyard which had once been a graveyard. After much reluctance, the shepherd confessed that, having lost a sheep to the wolves, he had decided to let the kid be suckled by his bitch. Most difficult of all was the matter of his mother. After much prevarication from her and threats from the king, she finally confessed to having had an affair with the butler. Regretting what he had set out to find, he returned to the three princes.
“I congratulate you on your remarkable intelligence” he said. “It would be unfair to keep you cooped up in one city.” With that he gave them a hundred gold pieces each and bade them farewell. The three princes then returned to the kingdom of their father. The logical reasoning used by Khusro to explain the riddles could put even Sherlock Holmes and Inspector Colombo to shame.
The other day I was looking through Bhopal Nama, a poetic version of the history of Bhopal, its people, language and culture compiled by my elder brother, Abdul Hafeez Khan, a poet in his own right. This book was launched in Bhopal in 2007 by Dr Balram Jhaker, governor of Madhya Pardesh, a graduate of Aitchison College, Lahore, with excellent knowledge of Urdu literature. The famous episode of Shaqqul-Qamar (cleaving asunder of the moon – Para 27 Surah Qamar) has been mentioned in Bhopal Nama. The phenomenon was sighted by Bhojpal, the then ruler and founder of Bhopal. It is said that, on seeing the moon’s cleavage and learning about our Holy Prophet (PBUH), he sent emissaries with many gifts, including betel leaves, for the Holy Prophet (PBUH). Hazrat Amir Khusro, greatest of all poets, wrote a famous couplet on this:
Sabzie o qateh baras-o-juzam
Baquole Nabie waqt Alaehissalam
(The Holy Prophet, after tasting the pan leaves, said that it could cure leukoderma and leprosy.)
Ziauddin Barni, his compatriot, wrote in Tarikh-e-Feroz Shahi that there were many poets in the reign of Sultan Alauddin Khilji, but one such as Khusro had never existed before and have never appeared since. Amir Khusro was a master in every field of prose, poetry, masnavi, ghazal, qasida, and music. He knew Urdu, Persian, Hindi, Sanskrit, Turkish, Arabic, etc. His forefathers came from Trans-Oxania and were of Turkish origin. Khusro was not only a man of letters but also an expert swordsman. Through his marriage with the daughter of Imadul Mulk, Minister of War of Sultan Balban, he was an integral part of the royalty. He was a disciple of Hazrat Nizamudin Aulia.
It is said that when Hazrat Nizamudin Aulia was sick and bedridden, Hazrat Amir Khusro used to tell him stories and anecdotes that he made up to cheer him. Here follows one, The Three Princes of Ceylon.
There was once a wise king who reigned in Ceylon. He had three sons who all excelled in learning and physical sports. One day the king decided to test them. He called them, one by one, starting with the oldest. “I am old,” he said. “You are the heir to the throne. Rule wisely, so your subjects may be loyal, and protect them well.” All the princes bowed deeply before their father and denied any wish to ascend the throne during his lifetime. Although pleased with their responses, the king, to their consternation, banished them from the kingdom. They travelled together to a neighbouring kingdom. On their way to the capital they were met by an Ethiopian who cried: “Gentle travellers! Have you seen my camel?”
“Had it lost an eye?” asked the first prince.
“Had it lost a tooth?” asked the second prince.
“Was it lame?” asked the third prince.
“Since you have seen it, tell me where to find it,” cried the Ethiopian.
“Go straight and quick,” the three princes replied simultaneously.
The Ethiopian went in search of his camel and the princes travelled on. While resting under a tree, the Ethiopian fell upon them with cries of anger declaring that he had searched all over and had not found his camel.
“Does your camel carry a jar of oil on one side and a jar of honey on the other side of its back?” asked the first prince.
“Is there a woman seated on it?” asked the second prince.
“And is not that woman in the last stage of pregnancy?” asked the third prince.
The Ethiopian angered into thinking that they must have stolen his camel if they knew so much about it, raised a hue and cry and insisted that the princes be taken to the king for punishment. When the case came before the king, the princes stated that they had travelled far and wide and, coming upon the Ethiopian, decided to have some sport in order to increase his anxiety. The king too became angered by this and had them thrown into the dungeon. Next morning the camel was duly found, with the woman still sitting on it. The king was immediately informed and the princes released and brought before him. “How did you know so much about the camel while you had never seen it?” he enquired. The princes bowed deeply before him and explained:
“I saw that only the leaves and branches on one side of the road had been eaten and thus assumed that the animal was blind in one eye?” said the first prince.
“I saw that the leaves and twigs had only been half eaten and thus assumed that the animal had lost a tooth,” said the second prince.
“I saw that the impressions left by the camel showed it to have been dragging one foot,” said the third prince.
“All very well,” said the king, “but what about your other remarks?”
“There were drops on the road. Those on one side swarmed with ants, while the ones on the other side had collected flies. This could only have been due to honey and oil,” replied the first prince.
“Marks on the road showed that, at one place, the camel had squatted. Beside those marks I saw the delicate impressions of a woman’s shoes,” replied the second prince.
“Beside those footprints I saw impressions of her hands also. Only a woman advanced in pregnancy would have to crawl in order to get on to the camel’s back,” replied the third prince.
The king, duly impressed, presented them with robes of honour and a house to live in, where he often visited them. One day he sent them roast lamb to eat and wine to drink.
“The wine seems to have human blood in it,” remarked the first Prince.
“The lamb seems to have been nursed by a bitch,” remarked the second prince.
“Why complain about trifles when the king himself is not the real son of his predecessor. He has a butler’s blood in his veins,” remarked the third prince.
The king, who had been listening from an adjoining room, bristled with indignation. He appeared before them and asked them to repeat what they had just said. Though angered, he decided to investigate. He soon came to know that the grapes were from a vineyard which had once been a graveyard. After much reluctance, the shepherd confessed that, having lost a sheep to the wolves, he had decided to let the kid be suckled by his bitch. Most difficult of all was the matter of his mother. After much prevarication from her and threats from the king, she finally confessed to having had an affair with the butler. Regretting what he had set out to find, he returned to the three princes.
“I congratulate you on your remarkable intelligence” he said. “It would be unfair to keep you cooped up in one city.” With that he gave them a hundred gold pieces each and bade them farewell. The three princes then returned to the kingdom of their father. The logical reasoning used by Khusro to explain the riddles could put even Sherlock Holmes and Inspector Colombo to shame.
Bhutto, GIK and Kahuta
Mr Shafqat Mehmood, analyst, columnist and former senior civil servant, wrote a column (July 10) about the meeting between Mr Bhutto, Gen Zia, Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan and Gen Arif (COS to Gen Zia), at which Gen Imtiaz, military secretary to Mr Bhutto, was also present. Mr Mehmood mentioned that Mr Bhutto was in a bad mood and very annoyed and Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan was rather rude to him (no handshake, no greetings, etc.). While I don’t doubt Mr Mehmood’s observations, I would like to make some of my own. I came to Pakistan on vacation in 1976 and stayed on at the personal request of Mr Bhutto to work on Pakistan’s nuclear programme. Right from the beginning I had regular meetings with Mr Bhutto, Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan (SG Defence), Mr Agha Shahi (SG Foreign Affairs) and Mr A G N Kazi (SG Finance). The atmosphere was always relaxed and friendly. In the very first meeting Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan requested permission to smoke – he was a chain smoker. Mr Bhutto immediately gave a nod of approval and, to put him at ease, lit a cigar himself. There were many subsequent meetings and never once did I sense any tension between Mr Bhutto and the three gentlemen. My guess is that, since Gen Zia insisted that Mr Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan accompany him to Murree to meet Mr Bhutto, Mr Khan must have felt very awkward and tense, feeling that Mr Bhutto would probably consider him a traitor and accomplice of Gen Zia, hence his strange behaviour.
Soon after taking over, Gen Zia appointed his old colleague in the British Army, Lt Gen S Ali Zamin Naqvi as security advisor for the PAEC and KRL. Gen Naqvi and I used to meet Gen Zia late in the evenings to discuss the progress of work at Kahuta. After the imposition of martial law, Mr Kazi was sidelined and Gen Arif started participating in the board meetings. Gen Arif was very intelligent, sharp and efficient, and a no-nonsense person. He had a tremendously good memory. Gen Zia’s successful tenure was, to a great extent, due to Gen Arif’s excellent capabilities and Gen Zia used them to the full. It was a pity that Gen Arif was not given the opportunity to show his worth in his own right.
I had an extremely cordial relationship with Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan. I respected him as if he were my own father and I felt that he reciprocated my feelings. He had given instructions that I was to be allowed to see him without prior appointment. At that time he lived in a rented house near the old China Market. I often went to see him at 9 a.m. and would immediately be let in by his elderly servant. We would discuss the problems over a cup of tea and then I would leave to go to the office. Once I asked him about Gen Zia’s takeover. He told me that, on July 5, while he was taking a shower in the morning, there had been a call from the GHQ, which his wife took. When he called back he was put through to Gen Zia who told him that a coup had been staged, the government was dismissed and the Assemblies stood dissolved. He was asked to go the GHQ to discuss the future course of action. Upon reaching the GHQ, he had told Gen Zia that this action was going to harm the country, but since it could not be reversed, they should do their best to salvage whatever they could. I myself witnessed many instances where Ghulam Ishaq Khan openly differed with Gen Zia on policy matters.
Here I would like to relate an interesting episode that took place in August 1976. I had just been appointed project director of the Engineering Research Laboratories, an independent organisation. My first priority was to find a suitable site. After visiting many places, I decided on Kahuta. We had a meeting with Mr Bhutto soon after and I informed everyone present about my selection. Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan immediately proposed the formation of a committee to evaluate the site and then make recommendations, to which Mr Bhutto smilingly replied: “Khan Sahab, neither I nor you or any other person knows about the requirements of the site. If Dr Khan is satisfied, it is fine with us. These committees for everything have made a mess of our country.” With that the matter was closed.
At the meeting I also requested the prime minister to give me a small team of army civil engineers for construction of the plant. When Mr Bhutto asked why civilian contractors could not be used, I informed him that civil works was a domain infested with corruption – anything up to 50 percent. If the army officers did anything wrong, the COAS would sort them out. Mr Bhutto asked Gen Zia (then COAS) to take care of the matter. After the meeting Gen Zia asked me what type of officer I required. I told him a smart, efficient brigadier with a few other officers to help. The next morning Brig Zahid Ali Akbar Khan (later Lt Gen, corps commander and chairman WAPDA) reported to me. He was a tall, handsome and dashing officer. He complained about having been pulled out of the main service, but when I explained to him the purpose of the plant he was raring to go. We first went to Kahuta in his jeep and looked around. The next day we flew over the site in a helicopter. In two or three days he had made the line drawings and measured the area. He then went to see the defence secretary, Gen Fazle Muqeem Khan. Within a week the whole area had been acquired for defence work. I made it a point to stipulate that those effected by the project should be paid handsomely and promptly and Mr Kazi arranged to do so immediately.
Another interesting episode involving Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan is related to the powers I was given. I had prepared the papers in consultation with Brig Zahid. In one of the meetings Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan observed that the powers mentioned were enjoyed only by the prime minister. I explained that only with those powers could the project be rushed through. Mr Kazi then interjected: “Ishaq, if you want to create another PWD, then cut those powers. Let us allow him to do his job as instructed by the prime minister.” I stressed that since we would be holding meetings every month and they would be briefed about all matters, there would be no scope for anything illegal. They then agreed to post Mr I A Bhatty, a Grade 21 officer from the Finance Division to the project. I appointed him as DG Finance and Administration and all bank accounts, local and foreign, were maintained and operated by him.
Finally, I would like to emphasise that during my long association with Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan and Mr Agha Shahi, I never once heard any critical or sarcastic remarks against Mr Bhutto. I worked very closely with them, even to the point of being allowed to take some liberties. May Allah Almighty rest the souls of Mr Bhutto, Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan, Mr Kazi and Mr Agha Shahi in eternal peace for laying the solid foundation of our nuclear programme. Ameen.
Soon after taking over, Gen Zia appointed his old colleague in the British Army, Lt Gen S Ali Zamin Naqvi as security advisor for the PAEC and KRL. Gen Naqvi and I used to meet Gen Zia late in the evenings to discuss the progress of work at Kahuta. After the imposition of martial law, Mr Kazi was sidelined and Gen Arif started participating in the board meetings. Gen Arif was very intelligent, sharp and efficient, and a no-nonsense person. He had a tremendously good memory. Gen Zia’s successful tenure was, to a great extent, due to Gen Arif’s excellent capabilities and Gen Zia used them to the full. It was a pity that Gen Arif was not given the opportunity to show his worth in his own right.
I had an extremely cordial relationship with Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan. I respected him as if he were my own father and I felt that he reciprocated my feelings. He had given instructions that I was to be allowed to see him without prior appointment. At that time he lived in a rented house near the old China Market. I often went to see him at 9 a.m. and would immediately be let in by his elderly servant. We would discuss the problems over a cup of tea and then I would leave to go to the office. Once I asked him about Gen Zia’s takeover. He told me that, on July 5, while he was taking a shower in the morning, there had been a call from the GHQ, which his wife took. When he called back he was put through to Gen Zia who told him that a coup had been staged, the government was dismissed and the Assemblies stood dissolved. He was asked to go the GHQ to discuss the future course of action. Upon reaching the GHQ, he had told Gen Zia that this action was going to harm the country, but since it could not be reversed, they should do their best to salvage whatever they could. I myself witnessed many instances where Ghulam Ishaq Khan openly differed with Gen Zia on policy matters.
Here I would like to relate an interesting episode that took place in August 1976. I had just been appointed project director of the Engineering Research Laboratories, an independent organisation. My first priority was to find a suitable site. After visiting many places, I decided on Kahuta. We had a meeting with Mr Bhutto soon after and I informed everyone present about my selection. Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan immediately proposed the formation of a committee to evaluate the site and then make recommendations, to which Mr Bhutto smilingly replied: “Khan Sahab, neither I nor you or any other person knows about the requirements of the site. If Dr Khan is satisfied, it is fine with us. These committees for everything have made a mess of our country.” With that the matter was closed.
At the meeting I also requested the prime minister to give me a small team of army civil engineers for construction of the plant. When Mr Bhutto asked why civilian contractors could not be used, I informed him that civil works was a domain infested with corruption – anything up to 50 percent. If the army officers did anything wrong, the COAS would sort them out. Mr Bhutto asked Gen Zia (then COAS) to take care of the matter. After the meeting Gen Zia asked me what type of officer I required. I told him a smart, efficient brigadier with a few other officers to help. The next morning Brig Zahid Ali Akbar Khan (later Lt Gen, corps commander and chairman WAPDA) reported to me. He was a tall, handsome and dashing officer. He complained about having been pulled out of the main service, but when I explained to him the purpose of the plant he was raring to go. We first went to Kahuta in his jeep and looked around. The next day we flew over the site in a helicopter. In two or three days he had made the line drawings and measured the area. He then went to see the defence secretary, Gen Fazle Muqeem Khan. Within a week the whole area had been acquired for defence work. I made it a point to stipulate that those effected by the project should be paid handsomely and promptly and Mr Kazi arranged to do so immediately.
Another interesting episode involving Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan is related to the powers I was given. I had prepared the papers in consultation with Brig Zahid. In one of the meetings Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan observed that the powers mentioned were enjoyed only by the prime minister. I explained that only with those powers could the project be rushed through. Mr Kazi then interjected: “Ishaq, if you want to create another PWD, then cut those powers. Let us allow him to do his job as instructed by the prime minister.” I stressed that since we would be holding meetings every month and they would be briefed about all matters, there would be no scope for anything illegal. They then agreed to post Mr I A Bhatty, a Grade 21 officer from the Finance Division to the project. I appointed him as DG Finance and Administration and all bank accounts, local and foreign, were maintained and operated by him.
Finally, I would like to emphasise that during my long association with Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan and Mr Agha Shahi, I never once heard any critical or sarcastic remarks against Mr Bhutto. I worked very closely with them, even to the point of being allowed to take some liberties. May Allah Almighty rest the souls of Mr Bhutto, Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan, Mr Kazi and Mr Agha Shahi in eternal peace for laying the solid foundation of our nuclear programme. Ameen.
A history of Kahuta
Almost 33 years ago, on July 31, 1976, to be exact, the uranium enrichment project was established by the late prime minister Zulfikhar Ali Bhutto as an independent organisation. This was done on the advice of Mr A G N Kazi, Mr Ghulam Ishaq Khan, Mr Agha Shahi and Gen Syed Imtiaz Ali. It was named Engineering Research Laboratories and I was appointed its head. The history of Kahuta is known to many and the achievements made there are known to the whole nation. On Aug 1, 1986 – i.e. on its 10th anniversary – I had published an article in a national daily detailing this challenging endeavour to the nation. For those who were too young at the time, I am reproducing it here.
“Ten years ago our government established the Engineering Research Laboratories at Rawalpindi with the task of setting up a uranium enrichment plant based on the ultracentrifuge method. In the following lines I would like to reflect on the early part of our work and our efforts during that time to make Pakistan self-sufficient in this most important and invaluable technology of isotope separation.
“The Kahuta Plant has put Pakistan on the world nuclear map and has laid a solid foundation for our self-sufficiency in the future in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. The enriched uranium (3-3.5 percent) being produced at Kahuta will be used as fuel in our future nuclear power reactors. It will save the country hundreds of millions of dollars and will also ensure our self-reliance.
“The use of the two atomic bombs by the USA in Japan laid the foundation for a mad nuclear arms race, which is still going on. The Russians, genuinely suspicious of American intentions, went all out to have their own atomic and hydrogen bombs. This was followed by Great Britain, France and China.
“While these nations were busy manufacturing and stockpiling nuclear bombs, simultaneous attempts were underway to use the same immense power of the atom to produce power. The USA, the USSR, Canada and the UK succeeded in making nuclear reactors for this purpose and there was a widely published campaign of atoms for peace. However, knowledgeable and sane people never overlooked the fact that there was a grave danger of nuclear weapons proliferation with the spread of peaceful uses of nuclear energy. After all, there is only a weak, transparent screen between the two. Once you know how to make reactors, how to produce plutonium and how to reprocess it, it becomes a relatively easy task to produce nuclear weapons.
“Concerted efforts of the Third World countries, supported by some genuinely worried Western countries like Sweden, Ireland, Holland, Switzerland, etc., led to a consensus on the urgent need for an international agreement to stop the spread of nuclear weapons. This resulted in the establishment of the now world-renowned Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1970. About 130 countries have so far signed this treaty despite its highly discriminatory nature, as it allowed the nuclear-weapon powers to accumulate and enhance their stockpiles of nuclear weapons while putting severe restrictions on even the peaceful utilisation of nuclear power by the have-nots. In 1964 the People’s Republic of China became the last nation to join the nuclear weapons club before the NPT came into existence in 1970. China had serious security problems from both the USA and the USSR and had no alternative but to go nuclear to safeguard her integrity, independence and sovereignty. Things had settled down nicely and there was a status quo on this matter when, on May 18, 1974, India shattered this delicate balance and tranquillity by exploding a nuclear bomb in Rajasthan.
“The sad part of the whole story was that, unlike China, India had no such serious security problems (it had a Friendship Treaty with the USSR) and that it violated a sacred trust by clandestinely using the Canadian reactor and American heavy water to make this weapon. Nothing damaged the NPT as much as the Indian nuclear explosion did.
“As far as Pakistan was concerned, the whole story now started. As a result of the Indian betrayal of trust, the Canadians abruptly cut off all nuclear cooperation with us. Fuel and heavy water were refused for KANUPP and internationally made solemn agreements were turned into useless litter. We were penalised for the mischief done by India. All efforts by the government of Pakistan to impress upon the Canadians to honour their solemnly made pledges failed. Pakistan was left high and dry.
“To complete the humiliations of a developing Third World country, the French backed down from an agreement made under the aegis of the IAEA. It was an international agreement made between two sovereign states with the IAEA as referee. The Americans succeeded in arm-twisting the French and the French, who normally take great pride in their independence, went back on their international agreement. The reprocessing plant was going to be under IAEA safeguards and there was neither the remotest possibility, nor any intention, of misusing this facility for any non-peaceful purposes.
“It was at this stage that a Third World developing country – Pakistan – took up the challenge and decided to go alone and be self-reliant. In July 1976 our government decided to go all-out to master enrichment technology and to ensure self-reliance on our own fuel for all further light water nuclear power reactors. The Engineering Research Laboratories were set up on the July 31, 1976, to undertake the enormous task of putting up an indigenous enrichment plant.
“I had just returned from Europe after almost 15 years. I had studied at the famous Technical University of West Berlin, at the prestigious Technological University of Delft, Holland, and at the famous and old University of Leuven, Belgium, and had published many research papers. I had worked for a number of years in Holland and had specialised in uranium enrichment technology. I was young, had a doctorate of engineering in physical metallurgy (a most suitable discipline for handling sophisticated technological projects), had relevant experience and was thus well equipped to deal with the job. I accepted the challenge and got down to business. I gathered together a team of highly dedicated, efficient and patriotic scientists and engineers and we went all out to do the job as quickly as possible. As one can imagine, it was not an easy task. The scientists and engineers whom I had recruited had never heard of a centrifuge, even though some of them had Ph.D. degrees.
“A country that could not make sewing needles, good and durable bicycles or even ordinary durable metalled roads was embarking on one of the latest and most difficult technologies. Of the whole nuclear cycle, enrichment is considered to be the most difficult and most sophisticated technology. It was a real challenge to me and to my colleagues. The problem was quite clear to us. We were not going to find out new laws of nature, but were dealing with a very difficult and sophisticated engineering technology. It was not possible for us to make each and every piece of equipment or component within the country. Attempts to do so would have killed the project in the initial stage. We devised a strategy by which we would go all out to buy everything that we needed in the open market to lay the foundation of a good infrastructure and would then switch over to indigenous production as and when we had to.”
“Ten years ago our government established the Engineering Research Laboratories at Rawalpindi with the task of setting up a uranium enrichment plant based on the ultracentrifuge method. In the following lines I would like to reflect on the early part of our work and our efforts during that time to make Pakistan self-sufficient in this most important and invaluable technology of isotope separation.
“The Kahuta Plant has put Pakistan on the world nuclear map and has laid a solid foundation for our self-sufficiency in the future in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. The enriched uranium (3-3.5 percent) being produced at Kahuta will be used as fuel in our future nuclear power reactors. It will save the country hundreds of millions of dollars and will also ensure our self-reliance.
“The use of the two atomic bombs by the USA in Japan laid the foundation for a mad nuclear arms race, which is still going on. The Russians, genuinely suspicious of American intentions, went all out to have their own atomic and hydrogen bombs. This was followed by Great Britain, France and China.
“While these nations were busy manufacturing and stockpiling nuclear bombs, simultaneous attempts were underway to use the same immense power of the atom to produce power. The USA, the USSR, Canada and the UK succeeded in making nuclear reactors for this purpose and there was a widely published campaign of atoms for peace. However, knowledgeable and sane people never overlooked the fact that there was a grave danger of nuclear weapons proliferation with the spread of peaceful uses of nuclear energy. After all, there is only a weak, transparent screen between the two. Once you know how to make reactors, how to produce plutonium and how to reprocess it, it becomes a relatively easy task to produce nuclear weapons.
“Concerted efforts of the Third World countries, supported by some genuinely worried Western countries like Sweden, Ireland, Holland, Switzerland, etc., led to a consensus on the urgent need for an international agreement to stop the spread of nuclear weapons. This resulted in the establishment of the now world-renowned Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1970. About 130 countries have so far signed this treaty despite its highly discriminatory nature, as it allowed the nuclear-weapon powers to accumulate and enhance their stockpiles of nuclear weapons while putting severe restrictions on even the peaceful utilisation of nuclear power by the have-nots. In 1964 the People’s Republic of China became the last nation to join the nuclear weapons club before the NPT came into existence in 1970. China had serious security problems from both the USA and the USSR and had no alternative but to go nuclear to safeguard her integrity, independence and sovereignty. Things had settled down nicely and there was a status quo on this matter when, on May 18, 1974, India shattered this delicate balance and tranquillity by exploding a nuclear bomb in Rajasthan.
“The sad part of the whole story was that, unlike China, India had no such serious security problems (it had a Friendship Treaty with the USSR) and that it violated a sacred trust by clandestinely using the Canadian reactor and American heavy water to make this weapon. Nothing damaged the NPT as much as the Indian nuclear explosion did.
“As far as Pakistan was concerned, the whole story now started. As a result of the Indian betrayal of trust, the Canadians abruptly cut off all nuclear cooperation with us. Fuel and heavy water were refused for KANUPP and internationally made solemn agreements were turned into useless litter. We were penalised for the mischief done by India. All efforts by the government of Pakistan to impress upon the Canadians to honour their solemnly made pledges failed. Pakistan was left high and dry.
“To complete the humiliations of a developing Third World country, the French backed down from an agreement made under the aegis of the IAEA. It was an international agreement made between two sovereign states with the IAEA as referee. The Americans succeeded in arm-twisting the French and the French, who normally take great pride in their independence, went back on their international agreement. The reprocessing plant was going to be under IAEA safeguards and there was neither the remotest possibility, nor any intention, of misusing this facility for any non-peaceful purposes.
“It was at this stage that a Third World developing country – Pakistan – took up the challenge and decided to go alone and be self-reliant. In July 1976 our government decided to go all-out to master enrichment technology and to ensure self-reliance on our own fuel for all further light water nuclear power reactors. The Engineering Research Laboratories were set up on the July 31, 1976, to undertake the enormous task of putting up an indigenous enrichment plant.
“I had just returned from Europe after almost 15 years. I had studied at the famous Technical University of West Berlin, at the prestigious Technological University of Delft, Holland, and at the famous and old University of Leuven, Belgium, and had published many research papers. I had worked for a number of years in Holland and had specialised in uranium enrichment technology. I was young, had a doctorate of engineering in physical metallurgy (a most suitable discipline for handling sophisticated technological projects), had relevant experience and was thus well equipped to deal with the job. I accepted the challenge and got down to business. I gathered together a team of highly dedicated, efficient and patriotic scientists and engineers and we went all out to do the job as quickly as possible. As one can imagine, it was not an easy task. The scientists and engineers whom I had recruited had never heard of a centrifuge, even though some of them had Ph.D. degrees.
“A country that could not make sewing needles, good and durable bicycles or even ordinary durable metalled roads was embarking on one of the latest and most difficult technologies. Of the whole nuclear cycle, enrichment is considered to be the most difficult and most sophisticated technology. It was a real challenge to me and to my colleagues. The problem was quite clear to us. We were not going to find out new laws of nature, but were dealing with a very difficult and sophisticated engineering technology. It was not possible for us to make each and every piece of equipment or component within the country. Attempts to do so would have killed the project in the initial stage. We devised a strategy by which we would go all out to buy everything that we needed in the open market to lay the foundation of a good infrastructure and would then switch over to indigenous production as and when we had to.”
A History
“Tremendous pressure was brought on Pakistan; our economic aid was cut off by the USA and an embargo was put on even such small things as rubber O-rings and magnets. We faced these problems with boldness and increased our efforts to finish the job as soon as possible.
“Once it was known that we were working on the enrichment technology, the Western press mounted a most vicious and unfounded propaganda against our programme. A case was initiated against me in Holland for writing two letters from Pakistan to two of my former colleagues. The letters were said to be an attempt to obtain information which the Public Prosecutor interpreted as being classified. I was prosecuted without my knowledge and in my absence. The information I had asked for was ordinary technical information available in published literature for many decades. I submitted certificates from six world-renowned professors from Holland, Belgium, England and Germany stating that the information requested by me was public knowledge and was not classified. I filed an appeal against this unjust case and the High Court of Amsterdam quashed the verdict of the lower court. On 16th June, 1985, the Dutch government finally dropped all charges.
Enrichment “is the most difficult of all the technologies in the whole fuel cycle. Centrifuge technology involved top-notch expertise in metallurgy, mechanical engineering, chemical engineering, process technology, electronics, automation and control, nuclear physics, vacuum technology, etc. An ultracentrifuge runs at 70,000 to 80,000rpm and one can imagine the problems arising from the demands made on materials, the tolerances, bearings, imbalance of the rotating components, etc. Naturally, the Western world was fully aware of these problems and was sure that an underdeveloped country like Pakistan could never master this technology. We proved otherwise. We not only succeeded in mastering this difficult technology, but also in putting up a plant which symbolises our national pride and competence. When we bought inverters from Emerson, England, we found them to be less efficient than we wanted them to be. We asked for improvement of some parameters and we suggested the method. As was later pointed out in the notorious BBC film “Project 706 – the Islamic Bomb,” the requested modifications took the wind out of the sails of the people at Emerson.
“…Many Western companies approached us with details of equipment they had sold to Almelo, Capenhurst, etc. They literally begged us to buy their equipment. We bought what we considered suitable for our plant and very often asked them to make changes and modifications according to our requirements….
“Notwithstanding the fact that we were handicapped by not being able to hold open discussions with foreign experts or organisations, we attacked all the problems successfully. Our scientists and engineers not only designed and ran good centrifuges, but designed the cascades, worked out the header piping system, calculated the pressures, developed the control philosophy and developed software and hardware for it.
“…Once the Western propaganda reached its climax and all efforts were made to stop or block even the most harmless items, we started indigenous production of all the sophisticated electronic, electrical and vacuum equipment.
“Kahuta is an all-Pakistan effort and is a symbol of a poor and developing country’s determination to refuse to submit to blackmail and bullying. It is not only a great source of personal satisfaction to me, but is also a symbol of pride for my colleagues and the whole nation.
“Usually in setting up a plant, the sequence followed is idea, decision, feasibility report, basic research, applied research, construction of a table model, construction of a pilot plant, engineering for the real plant and, finally, the construction of the facility. This is a long chain of steps and usually takes a very long time. We took a very bold step and started all the steps simultaneously.
“While preliminary work was being undertaken at Rawalpindi and procurement was being done for the most essential and sophisticated equipment and materials, we were manufacturing the first prototypes of centrifuges, were setting up a pilot plant at Sihala and were preparing blueprints for, and starting with, the construction of the main facility at Kahuta. It was a revolutionary and bold step and we never repented following this course, which virtually ensured our success in record time.
“In any large and difficult undertaking, there are rough times to go through and of course success may not come till one is dead, but these things (difficulties, embargoes, failures, etc.) do not matter if one is in earnest. My colleagues and I were in earnest and by the grace of Almighty God, and through our sustained and untiring efforts, we were lucky to see the success in our lifetime. My interview of 10th February, 1984, to Mr Tariq Warsi of the daily Nawa-e-Waqt put an end to all speculation and gave the nation the first happy tidings since the ugly debacle of East Pakistan in December 1971.
“I would like to emphasise that the success of the Kahuta Plant is due to the enormous sacrifices made by the families (parents, wives, children, etc.) of the scientists, engineers and non-technical staff working at the plant. It was only due to their understanding, love, affection and encouragement that all those working at Kahuta could concentrate fully on the enormous task entrusted to them. The engineers and scientists did a wonderful job; a task any nation could be proud of.
“Time and again it had been solemnly declared by our national leaders, including the president, the prime minister and the foreign minister, that ours is a solely peaceful nuclear programme. In late 1985, the president went so far as to make the following proposals to India on the floor of the United Nations:
a. To declare South Asia a nuclear weapon-free zone.
b. To sign the NPT simultaneously.
c. To sign a bilateral nuclear non-proliferation treaty.
d. To agree to an international inspection team to visit and inspect each and every nuclear facility in each of the two countries.
e. To renounce mutually the use of nuclear weapons.
“While both India and Pakistan are fully justified in pursuing their individual nuclear programmes and not to allow themselves to be blackmailed or bullied by other countries, it is in the larger interests of their millions of people that they remove mutual distrust and come to a clear, unambiguous and failsafe understanding regarding the manufacture or use of nuclear weapons.
“The Pakistan enrichment experience has demonstrated that if a nation is sincere and determined to achieve a certain goal, she will do it and will do so much sooner than anticipated. What we achieved in seven years at a much lower cost was considered unattainable in 50 years by others. Goal-oriented and concerted efforts by the PAEC now would definitely result in our own reactors in the coming years. It is still not too late and Pakistan can again show that it can meet any challenge when it comes down to national pride and honour.
“I would like to mention that our efforts in the enrichment field have been most challenging, most adventurous, most hazardous but most satisfying and gratifying. My colleagues and I are really proud of our contribution to the scientific and technological progress of our beloved country in this most important field. We are sure that our efforts and achievements will always be remembered by a proud and grateful nation and that they will always be a source of inspiration to our future generations. Pakistan Zindabad.”
“Once it was known that we were working on the enrichment technology, the Western press mounted a most vicious and unfounded propaganda against our programme. A case was initiated against me in Holland for writing two letters from Pakistan to two of my former colleagues. The letters were said to be an attempt to obtain information which the Public Prosecutor interpreted as being classified. I was prosecuted without my knowledge and in my absence. The information I had asked for was ordinary technical information available in published literature for many decades. I submitted certificates from six world-renowned professors from Holland, Belgium, England and Germany stating that the information requested by me was public knowledge and was not classified. I filed an appeal against this unjust case and the High Court of Amsterdam quashed the verdict of the lower court. On 16th June, 1985, the Dutch government finally dropped all charges.
Enrichment “is the most difficult of all the technologies in the whole fuel cycle. Centrifuge technology involved top-notch expertise in metallurgy, mechanical engineering, chemical engineering, process technology, electronics, automation and control, nuclear physics, vacuum technology, etc. An ultracentrifuge runs at 70,000 to 80,000rpm and one can imagine the problems arising from the demands made on materials, the tolerances, bearings, imbalance of the rotating components, etc. Naturally, the Western world was fully aware of these problems and was sure that an underdeveloped country like Pakistan could never master this technology. We proved otherwise. We not only succeeded in mastering this difficult technology, but also in putting up a plant which symbolises our national pride and competence. When we bought inverters from Emerson, England, we found them to be less efficient than we wanted them to be. We asked for improvement of some parameters and we suggested the method. As was later pointed out in the notorious BBC film “Project 706 – the Islamic Bomb,” the requested modifications took the wind out of the sails of the people at Emerson.
“…Many Western companies approached us with details of equipment they had sold to Almelo, Capenhurst, etc. They literally begged us to buy their equipment. We bought what we considered suitable for our plant and very often asked them to make changes and modifications according to our requirements….
“Notwithstanding the fact that we were handicapped by not being able to hold open discussions with foreign experts or organisations, we attacked all the problems successfully. Our scientists and engineers not only designed and ran good centrifuges, but designed the cascades, worked out the header piping system, calculated the pressures, developed the control philosophy and developed software and hardware for it.
“…Once the Western propaganda reached its climax and all efforts were made to stop or block even the most harmless items, we started indigenous production of all the sophisticated electronic, electrical and vacuum equipment.
“Kahuta is an all-Pakistan effort and is a symbol of a poor and developing country’s determination to refuse to submit to blackmail and bullying. It is not only a great source of personal satisfaction to me, but is also a symbol of pride for my colleagues and the whole nation.
“Usually in setting up a plant, the sequence followed is idea, decision, feasibility report, basic research, applied research, construction of a table model, construction of a pilot plant, engineering for the real plant and, finally, the construction of the facility. This is a long chain of steps and usually takes a very long time. We took a very bold step and started all the steps simultaneously.
“While preliminary work was being undertaken at Rawalpindi and procurement was being done for the most essential and sophisticated equipment and materials, we were manufacturing the first prototypes of centrifuges, were setting up a pilot plant at Sihala and were preparing blueprints for, and starting with, the construction of the main facility at Kahuta. It was a revolutionary and bold step and we never repented following this course, which virtually ensured our success in record time.
“In any large and difficult undertaking, there are rough times to go through and of course success may not come till one is dead, but these things (difficulties, embargoes, failures, etc.) do not matter if one is in earnest. My colleagues and I were in earnest and by the grace of Almighty God, and through our sustained and untiring efforts, we were lucky to see the success in our lifetime. My interview of 10th February, 1984, to Mr Tariq Warsi of the daily Nawa-e-Waqt put an end to all speculation and gave the nation the first happy tidings since the ugly debacle of East Pakistan in December 1971.
“I would like to emphasise that the success of the Kahuta Plant is due to the enormous sacrifices made by the families (parents, wives, children, etc.) of the scientists, engineers and non-technical staff working at the plant. It was only due to their understanding, love, affection and encouragement that all those working at Kahuta could concentrate fully on the enormous task entrusted to them. The engineers and scientists did a wonderful job; a task any nation could be proud of.
“Time and again it had been solemnly declared by our national leaders, including the president, the prime minister and the foreign minister, that ours is a solely peaceful nuclear programme. In late 1985, the president went so far as to make the following proposals to India on the floor of the United Nations:
a. To declare South Asia a nuclear weapon-free zone.
b. To sign the NPT simultaneously.
c. To sign a bilateral nuclear non-proliferation treaty.
d. To agree to an international inspection team to visit and inspect each and every nuclear facility in each of the two countries.
e. To renounce mutually the use of nuclear weapons.
“While both India and Pakistan are fully justified in pursuing their individual nuclear programmes and not to allow themselves to be blackmailed or bullied by other countries, it is in the larger interests of their millions of people that they remove mutual distrust and come to a clear, unambiguous and failsafe understanding regarding the manufacture or use of nuclear weapons.
“The Pakistan enrichment experience has demonstrated that if a nation is sincere and determined to achieve a certain goal, she will do it and will do so much sooner than anticipated. What we achieved in seven years at a much lower cost was considered unattainable in 50 years by others. Goal-oriented and concerted efforts by the PAEC now would definitely result in our own reactors in the coming years. It is still not too late and Pakistan can again show that it can meet any challenge when it comes down to national pride and honour.
“I would like to mention that our efforts in the enrichment field have been most challenging, most adventurous, most hazardous but most satisfying and gratifying. My colleagues and I are really proud of our contribution to the scientific and technological progress of our beloved country in this most important field. We are sure that our efforts and achievements will always be remembered by a proud and grateful nation and that they will always be a source of inspiration to our future generations. Pakistan Zindabad.”
Science of computers
In Part I last week on the importance of computer technology I discussed the subject in general and gave a few useful related web sites. In this second part I would like to discuss artificial intelligence, bioinformatics, the professional scope for computer engineers and what is expected professionally from them. In addition to the disciplines mentioned in Part I, emerging technologies, applications and curriculum recommendations have appeared, which need to be mentioned as well. 1. Artificial intelligence (AI): The subfield of computer science that is concerned with understanding the nature of intelligent action and making computer machines, especially intelligent computer programmes, capable of such action is known as artificial intelligence. It can also be described as the performance by computer systems of a task that normally requires human intelligence, such as visual perception or decision-making. Artificial intelligence combines computing with psychology, linguistics and philosophy. It is concerned with the design of intelligent computer systems and the study of intelligence in both people and machines. Using artificial intelligence techniques, computers are being programmed to do things previously done only by people. Artificial intelligence systems are already in use for such tasks as fault diagnosis, mineral prospecting and language translation and are not confined to methods that are biologically observable. The main emphasis of computer science and artificial intelligence studies is on the principles and practice of software design. Distinctive features include human-centred computer systems, foundations of concurrent systems, networking and distributing systems, vision, national language processing, neural networks and artificial life. These study programmes are supported by powerful computing facilities running a wide range of software. The Stanford University website: http://www-formal.standford.edu/ jmc/whatisai/whatisai/html provides a description and applications of AI. 2. Bioinformatics: Bioinformatics is the application of computer technology to the management of biological information. More information on this can be found on websites like http://www.bioplanet.com/education.htm . Some universities have added other subjects, like accounting, finance and law to their computer science curriculum. Computer science and engineering graduates have perhaps the largest spectrum of jobs to select from. Computer architecture, computer-aided design and manufacturing of VLSI/ULSI circuits, intelligent robotic systems, computer-based control systems, telecommunications and computer networking, wireless communication systems, signal and information processing and multimedia systems, solid-state physics and devices, micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS), electromagnetic and electromechanical systems, data-storage systems, data mining, embedded systems, distributed computing, mobile computing, real-time software, digital signal processing, optical data processing, banking, insurance, healthcare and multinationals, to name but a few common careers. After having followed a good university course in any discipline of computer science and engineering, graduates are normally expected to have learnt two types of skills: Technical computing skills: Problem-solving ability, recognising levels of abstraction in software, hardware systems and multimedia. Practical skills such as building and using database management systems and other sophisticated software tools. Programming: using existing software libraries to carry out a variety of computing tasks, such as creating a user interface. Being aware of the uses to which computers are put, recognising issues to do with security and safety. Looking at innovative ways of using computers, creating tools, providing tools support, etc. General professional skills: Communicating in writing, giving effective presentations and product demonstrations and being a good negotiator (both in traditional environments and electronically). Preparing for a job search; this involves building an impressive curriculum vitae and basing this confidently on technical and other skills. In addition, depending on interests, specialised domain knowledge such as business, medicine and biology will be acquired. Being an effective team member. Understanding the special requirements of a globally distributed project with participants from multiple cultures. Recognising the challenges and opportunities of keeping skills up-to-date and understanding how to do so. Knowledge of fundamental principles and their applications to develop software-based solutions. The ability to apply and implement appropriate theories and techniques to the design and development of computer systems and to use correct criteria and tools for the planning, development, testing and evaluation of software systems. The ability to recognise the capabilities and limitations of computer-based solutions as well as sources of risk. I still vividly remember the large, room-sized configuration of the IBM computer system, which used big stacks of punch cards that had been installed in Sweden at the Oxelosund Steel Mills, which I visited as a graduate student. It was the most modern steel plant in the world at the time, using the newly developed Kaldo Process for the purification of steel (reducing its carbon content). We were visiting educational and industrial institutions in Sweden in July 1964 as a delegation from the Technological University of Delft, Holland. Sweden was a beautiful, clean country – cleaner than any I had seen anywhere before. The people were extremely polite, hospitable and disciplined. At that time Holland was known as the cleanest country, of which the Germans never hesitated to inform me when I praised their cleanliness. They did have a point and I was duly impressed by what I later found in Holland. However, after seeing Sweden, I had to admit that their country was even cleaner. We visited the Royal Institute of Technology, Uppsala University, Volvo, Husquarna, Scania Vabis, Oxelosund and Sandvik Steel Mills, etc. It was our first exposure to an operational computer system. The IBM computer configuration was the first of its kind and was installed and operated by the Americans for the automatic control of the steel mills. Nowadays a very small unit is more powerful and more efficient than that huge configuration was. About 25 years after that memorable visit I heard the shocking news that the Prime Minister of Sweden, Mr Olof Palme, had been brutally shot down while walking back to his residence after seeing a film. How could anyone be so callous as to murder such a good human being, a pacifist, was beyond my comprehension. I wrote an obituary in a local English daily and was pleasantly surprised to receive a letter of thanks from Mrs Palme through their embassy in Islamabad. I was lucky to have a team of experts in theoretical computation (Computational Fluid Dynamics, etc.), computer systems engineering (Control and Automation, etc.), complex process technology (fault-free running of the enrichment plant) and maintenance of these complex systems (hardware engineering) headed by Dr M Alam, Nasim Khan, Dr M Ashraf Atta and Brig. Rafiuddin, respectively. They, together with their other competent and able colleagues, managed to solve all the problems related to the centrifuge plant and the manufacture of nuclear devices and ballistic missiles.
Ghairat: an extinct commodity
Some time ago I was having a conversation with one of my friends, a renowned professor settled abroad. He is internationally known for his academic work and books published in Britain and Germany, which are reference works in most of the world’s best universities. He is a Pathan and is proud of the fact that he is a Bangash. He correctly pointed out that most of our social and other maladies are due to the disappearance of ghairat.
His father, a Bangash from Hangu, went to England decades ago, from where he obtained a FRCS degree and then returned to his area. He then started treating many of Faqir Epi’S warriors fighting the British colonialists. Once, my friend asked his father the meaning of ghairat. His father jokingly replied that a nation that was bereft of ghairat would not have that word included in its dictionary. He had a point there. Our current national character testifies to that. We are now universally looked down upon as beggars. We are now totally devoid of that golden trend we used to be famous for. Prof Muhammad Al-Ghazali has drawn my attention to this important topic and has helped me with useful input.
Ghairat is an Arabic word that has no equivalent in any other language. It has been adopted in both Persian and Urdu. In Urdu we use this word in a much narrower sense than its original meaning. In Arabic it embraces the sense of self-esteem, courage, chivalry, honour, bravery and loyalty to one’s highest values, and readiness to sacrifice everything for the sake of these values.
The Arabs, even before Islam, were known for ghairat. One of the greatest poets of all times in Arabia, Amr bin Kulsoom, had killed the king of his time, Amr bin Hind in his own court when his queen had insultingly addressed the poet’s mother. They were invited by the king to test the level of their ghairat. In a tone as if she were speaking to a maidservant, the queen asked the poet’s mother to fetch a spittoon. Thereupon the poet’s mother called for help. As soon as the poet, who was with the king in his chamber, heard his mother’s cry for help, he took out his sword and decapitated the king there and then. It was on this occasion that he recited his famous ode (qaseeda) extempore. This ode is included in the best collection of poetry known as Muallaqat. In English this qaseeda is known as “Seven Odes” and has been translated by the famous scholar of Islamic history and literature who also translated the Holy Quran, Prof A J Arberry.
Muslims, their great leaders, trusted rulers and popular heroes, always displayed the quality of ghairat at all crucial moments of history. The conquest of Sind by Muhammad bin Qasim was itself a consequence of the feeling of ghairat by Hajjaj bin Yusuf. A group of Muslim traders travelling on the Arabian Sea were attacked by some local pirates who looted them and insulted the women who were on board. One of these Muslim ladies called for help. She was addressing Hajjaj bin Yusuf, the Umayyad governor of Iraq. Some of the Muslims who managed to escape the pirates conveyed this woman’s call for help to Hajjaj. He was very angry and with a feeling of ghairat, he immediately dispatched an army under the command of his young nephew, Muhammad bin Qasim. He came to Daibal (Karachi) and after a fierce fight defeated Raja Dahir, the local Hindu ruler who took the side of the criminals. After some time bin Qasim, who had become quite popular for his heroic help to those victims, annexed Sind to the Islamic Empire.
In fact, all great events and achievements have been possible only because our elders were full of self-esteem, faith, courage, chivalry, honour, bravery and an unlimited capacity for sacrifice. On every page of our golden history there is a story of a great achievement. These series of achievements made it possible for our rich culture, civilisation, state and society to progress, expand and advance in the face of all challenges and difficulties. These challenges were far greater than what we face today. However, the present difficulties seem to be insurmountable to us because we are devoid of that courage, honesty and commitment that were the hallmark of our forefathers.
At this time what Muslims in general, and Pakistanis in particular, need most is ghairat. We should remember that our great leaders and heroes of Muslim India, to whom we owe our present existence as an independent nation, were all embodiments of ghairat. All the great men who made history and shaped our destiny, were paragons of the great qualities of leadership – Muhammad bin Qasim, Mahmood Ghaznavi, Shihabuddin Ghauri, Tipu Sultan, Sirajud Daula, Sayyed Ahmad Shaheed, Shah Ismail shaheed, Allama Iqbal and Quaid-e-Azam — all of them did what they did by a great impulse of ghairat. Their inspiring lives provide us with clear evidence.
Ghairat is transmitted from generation to generation through proper education, upbringing and, above all, through inspiring examples set by the elders. If someone does not receive this quality from his family, environment and education, then he/she cannot acquire this quality by any intellectual effort. Either one is ghairatmand or one is not. Some people reading this might find it difficult to appreciate. But there will be many who, having a tradition of life based on these values, inherited from their ancestors, teachers, mentors and other exemplary characters, will find in their hearts an echo of the thoughts expressed here.
The feeling of ghairat is not to be confused with anger and a reaction thereto. It is a positive quality, not a negative one. It helps a person overcome the inner baser impulses for sin and wrong-doing. It also provides the energy for action when one’s moral values are threatened. When this quality assumes a collective trait, it provides society with a great deterrence against external threats to undermine prestige, honour and other vital interest of that society.
The difference between a self-respecting and a self-debasing person is that of ghairat. The former maintains his/her honour at all costs and reacts whenever there is any threat to this honour. The latter digests all threats on account of cowardice or greed or just lack of sensitivity. What is the main distinction between a prostitute and a chaste woman? It is none other than ghairat. In the eyes of the former, honour has no value. In the estimation of the latter, it is the highest value that must be protected, whatever the cost, and it can never be bartered away for any gain, however high. For a free man, his freedom is more valuable than whatever might be offered in terms of compensation for purchasing this freedom. However, for a slavish man, freedom could be sold for any immediate material gain.
Ghairat is the greatest capital of a nation. Once this capital is lost, then no amount of prosperity, affluence or material wealth can bring back the lost honour and prestige. Poets, leaders, opinion-makers, teachers, men of letters, thinkers, philosophers, etc., of a nation constantly strive and exhaust their potential to protect and maintain their nation’s honour and prestige in the world. Like all valuable things, honour and prestige is acquired with tremendous effort but lost with negligence and omission. The nation’s collective awakening and awareness guards itself against such disasters. I ponder, hope and pray that our nation finds this lost treasure. Am I asking for the moon?
His father, a Bangash from Hangu, went to England decades ago, from where he obtained a FRCS degree and then returned to his area. He then started treating many of Faqir Epi’S warriors fighting the British colonialists. Once, my friend asked his father the meaning of ghairat. His father jokingly replied that a nation that was bereft of ghairat would not have that word included in its dictionary. He had a point there. Our current national character testifies to that. We are now universally looked down upon as beggars. We are now totally devoid of that golden trend we used to be famous for. Prof Muhammad Al-Ghazali has drawn my attention to this important topic and has helped me with useful input.
Ghairat is an Arabic word that has no equivalent in any other language. It has been adopted in both Persian and Urdu. In Urdu we use this word in a much narrower sense than its original meaning. In Arabic it embraces the sense of self-esteem, courage, chivalry, honour, bravery and loyalty to one’s highest values, and readiness to sacrifice everything for the sake of these values.
The Arabs, even before Islam, were known for ghairat. One of the greatest poets of all times in Arabia, Amr bin Kulsoom, had killed the king of his time, Amr bin Hind in his own court when his queen had insultingly addressed the poet’s mother. They were invited by the king to test the level of their ghairat. In a tone as if she were speaking to a maidservant, the queen asked the poet’s mother to fetch a spittoon. Thereupon the poet’s mother called for help. As soon as the poet, who was with the king in his chamber, heard his mother’s cry for help, he took out his sword and decapitated the king there and then. It was on this occasion that he recited his famous ode (qaseeda) extempore. This ode is included in the best collection of poetry known as Muallaqat. In English this qaseeda is known as “Seven Odes” and has been translated by the famous scholar of Islamic history and literature who also translated the Holy Quran, Prof A J Arberry.
Muslims, their great leaders, trusted rulers and popular heroes, always displayed the quality of ghairat at all crucial moments of history. The conquest of Sind by Muhammad bin Qasim was itself a consequence of the feeling of ghairat by Hajjaj bin Yusuf. A group of Muslim traders travelling on the Arabian Sea were attacked by some local pirates who looted them and insulted the women who were on board. One of these Muslim ladies called for help. She was addressing Hajjaj bin Yusuf, the Umayyad governor of Iraq. Some of the Muslims who managed to escape the pirates conveyed this woman’s call for help to Hajjaj. He was very angry and with a feeling of ghairat, he immediately dispatched an army under the command of his young nephew, Muhammad bin Qasim. He came to Daibal (Karachi) and after a fierce fight defeated Raja Dahir, the local Hindu ruler who took the side of the criminals. After some time bin Qasim, who had become quite popular for his heroic help to those victims, annexed Sind to the Islamic Empire.
In fact, all great events and achievements have been possible only because our elders were full of self-esteem, faith, courage, chivalry, honour, bravery and an unlimited capacity for sacrifice. On every page of our golden history there is a story of a great achievement. These series of achievements made it possible for our rich culture, civilisation, state and society to progress, expand and advance in the face of all challenges and difficulties. These challenges were far greater than what we face today. However, the present difficulties seem to be insurmountable to us because we are devoid of that courage, honesty and commitment that were the hallmark of our forefathers.
At this time what Muslims in general, and Pakistanis in particular, need most is ghairat. We should remember that our great leaders and heroes of Muslim India, to whom we owe our present existence as an independent nation, were all embodiments of ghairat. All the great men who made history and shaped our destiny, were paragons of the great qualities of leadership – Muhammad bin Qasim, Mahmood Ghaznavi, Shihabuddin Ghauri, Tipu Sultan, Sirajud Daula, Sayyed Ahmad Shaheed, Shah Ismail shaheed, Allama Iqbal and Quaid-e-Azam — all of them did what they did by a great impulse of ghairat. Their inspiring lives provide us with clear evidence.
Ghairat is transmitted from generation to generation through proper education, upbringing and, above all, through inspiring examples set by the elders. If someone does not receive this quality from his family, environment and education, then he/she cannot acquire this quality by any intellectual effort. Either one is ghairatmand or one is not. Some people reading this might find it difficult to appreciate. But there will be many who, having a tradition of life based on these values, inherited from their ancestors, teachers, mentors and other exemplary characters, will find in their hearts an echo of the thoughts expressed here.
The feeling of ghairat is not to be confused with anger and a reaction thereto. It is a positive quality, not a negative one. It helps a person overcome the inner baser impulses for sin and wrong-doing. It also provides the energy for action when one’s moral values are threatened. When this quality assumes a collective trait, it provides society with a great deterrence against external threats to undermine prestige, honour and other vital interest of that society.
The difference between a self-respecting and a self-debasing person is that of ghairat. The former maintains his/her honour at all costs and reacts whenever there is any threat to this honour. The latter digests all threats on account of cowardice or greed or just lack of sensitivity. What is the main distinction between a prostitute and a chaste woman? It is none other than ghairat. In the eyes of the former, honour has no value. In the estimation of the latter, it is the highest value that must be protected, whatever the cost, and it can never be bartered away for any gain, however high. For a free man, his freedom is more valuable than whatever might be offered in terms of compensation for purchasing this freedom. However, for a slavish man, freedom could be sold for any immediate material gain.
Ghairat is the greatest capital of a nation. Once this capital is lost, then no amount of prosperity, affluence or material wealth can bring back the lost honour and prestige. Poets, leaders, opinion-makers, teachers, men of letters, thinkers, philosophers, etc., of a nation constantly strive and exhaust their potential to protect and maintain their nation’s honour and prestige in the world. Like all valuable things, honour and prestige is acquired with tremendous effort but lost with negligence and omission. The nation’s collective awakening and awareness guards itself against such disasters. I ponder, hope and pray that our nation finds this lost treasure. Am I asking for the moon?
The curse of lying
Even a child can differentiate between truth and a lie. As we all know, its opposite is lying. A lie is defined as something which one says despite knowing it to be incorrect and being against one’s conscience, belief, knowledge and iman. There are various proverbs on truth: “Nothing can harm the truth,” “The truth shines, the lie is black,” “The irony is that those who speak the truth often end up in trouble, while liars get away.”
In the Quran, Almighty Allah pronounced a curse on all liars in Surah Aal-e-Imran, Ayat 61. As if once is not enough, in the Surahs Shura, Naml, Taha, Tur, Saf, Munafiqun, Raad, Baqara, Zukhuf and Taubah, and ten times in Surah Mursalat the Almighty has pronounced a curse on all liars. In Surah Baqarah, it is not only the telling of truth that is stressed, but also the need to keep a promise.
However, when we look at our leaders and examine their behaviour, we hang our heads in shame. They seem to be neither afraid of Almighty Allah nor of his painful punishment.
Public representatives are answerable to Allah Almighty and the trust the voters have placed in them is sacred. If public representatives or those in authority indulge in lying or do not keep their promises, the wrath of Allah Almighty will definitely be upon them. To claim that, since they have been elected by the people, they are innocent of the misdeeds they are accused of, is misleading, a distortion of facts and nothing less than an insult to the intelligence of the public. No law, legal or moral, can justify wrongdoing of any sort.
Persian, which is full of wise proverbs, has this to say about lying: “Darogh go ra hafiza na bashad” (a liar has a very short memory). Under certain, compelling circumstances one could image a “white lie” being permissible. “Darogh-e maslehat-aamez ba az raasti fitna-angez” (it is better to tell a white lie to avoid mischief that could be caused by truth).
The most fertile field for lying is politics. Public representatives make false promises and tell blatant lies without batting an eyelid. How can the public forget the unfulfilled promises made by Mr Asif Ali Zardari, Mr Yusuf Raza Gilani, Raja Pervez Ashraf and others at the beginning and during their terms of office?
This phenomenon is rampant in international politics as well. We all remember how the so-called “custodians of civilisation” lied to the world about the presence of WMD in Iraq and attacked that country, killing almost one million innocent citizens on that pretext. Even more unfortunate was the fact that many other countries jumped on the bandwagon of lies.
When the 9/11 fear gripped the whole world, an attack took place on the Indian parliament. Strangely enough, not a single parliamentarian was present and no lawmaker was hurt. Pakistan was immediately blamed. No-one knew how Pakistanis managed to reach the Indian parliament, who they were and why the Indian army and other law enforcing agencies failed to stop them, but Pakistan was blamed all the same.
Immediately after the Mumbai carnage, Pakistan was targeted and threatened with military action. Fortunately, good sense prevailed. Otherwise both countries would have suffered major destruction. One lawyer disclosed that Ajmal Kasab was already in Indian custody before the event. He had been arrested in Nepal and the Indians were keeping him for “later use.” It is surprising to note that the attackers were so familiar with every nook and corner of the hotel, whereas the security personnel were not, which indicates that the attackers had not just “come from Pakistan,” as claimed.
The attack on the Samjotha Express, as was proven later, was planned by Indian army personnel. When an efficient police officer, Karkare, exposed this, he was brutally eliminated. An honest Congress legislator, A R Antule, resigned, but no action against the perpetrators was undertaken and the lies continued.
The demotion of the Babri Masjid by the BJP is another example. The enquiry commission put the blame squarely on BJP leaders Advani and Vajpaee, but no action was taken and they continued to lie about it. Whether it be the BJP or Congress, Indian animosity towards Pakistan continues to be their main policy and every possible incident is twisted in such a way as to make Pakistan the culprit.
Our leaders fail to understand that the Western countries will never help us in our dispute with India over Kashmir, in the same way as they will never help the Arabs in the dispute with Israel over the genocide of the Palestinians. They will simply continue to lie to the whole world and shut their eyes to reality.
Here are a few quotes from Western writers and philosophers relevant to the topic under discussion:
“One of the most striking differences between a cat and a lie is that a cat has nine lives, a lie only one.” — Mark Twain
“The most common lie is that one tells to oneself; lying to others is relatively an exception.” — Nietzsche
“Truth will come to light, murder cannot be hidden long.” — Shakespeare
“Truth is so obscure in these times and falsehood so established that, unless we have the truth, we cannot know it.” — Pascal
“Hard are the ways of truth, and rough to walk.” — Milton
The last one very aptly applies to our chief justice and our judiciary.
In the Quran, Almighty Allah pronounced a curse on all liars in Surah Aal-e-Imran, Ayat 61. As if once is not enough, in the Surahs Shura, Naml, Taha, Tur, Saf, Munafiqun, Raad, Baqara, Zukhuf and Taubah, and ten times in Surah Mursalat the Almighty has pronounced a curse on all liars. In Surah Baqarah, it is not only the telling of truth that is stressed, but also the need to keep a promise.
However, when we look at our leaders and examine their behaviour, we hang our heads in shame. They seem to be neither afraid of Almighty Allah nor of his painful punishment.
Public representatives are answerable to Allah Almighty and the trust the voters have placed in them is sacred. If public representatives or those in authority indulge in lying or do not keep their promises, the wrath of Allah Almighty will definitely be upon them. To claim that, since they have been elected by the people, they are innocent of the misdeeds they are accused of, is misleading, a distortion of facts and nothing less than an insult to the intelligence of the public. No law, legal or moral, can justify wrongdoing of any sort.
Persian, which is full of wise proverbs, has this to say about lying: “Darogh go ra hafiza na bashad” (a liar has a very short memory). Under certain, compelling circumstances one could image a “white lie” being permissible. “Darogh-e maslehat-aamez ba az raasti fitna-angez” (it is better to tell a white lie to avoid mischief that could be caused by truth).
The most fertile field for lying is politics. Public representatives make false promises and tell blatant lies without batting an eyelid. How can the public forget the unfulfilled promises made by Mr Asif Ali Zardari, Mr Yusuf Raza Gilani, Raja Pervez Ashraf and others at the beginning and during their terms of office?
This phenomenon is rampant in international politics as well. We all remember how the so-called “custodians of civilisation” lied to the world about the presence of WMD in Iraq and attacked that country, killing almost one million innocent citizens on that pretext. Even more unfortunate was the fact that many other countries jumped on the bandwagon of lies.
When the 9/11 fear gripped the whole world, an attack took place on the Indian parliament. Strangely enough, not a single parliamentarian was present and no lawmaker was hurt. Pakistan was immediately blamed. No-one knew how Pakistanis managed to reach the Indian parliament, who they were and why the Indian army and other law enforcing agencies failed to stop them, but Pakistan was blamed all the same.
Immediately after the Mumbai carnage, Pakistan was targeted and threatened with military action. Fortunately, good sense prevailed. Otherwise both countries would have suffered major destruction. One lawyer disclosed that Ajmal Kasab was already in Indian custody before the event. He had been arrested in Nepal and the Indians were keeping him for “later use.” It is surprising to note that the attackers were so familiar with every nook and corner of the hotel, whereas the security personnel were not, which indicates that the attackers had not just “come from Pakistan,” as claimed.
The attack on the Samjotha Express, as was proven later, was planned by Indian army personnel. When an efficient police officer, Karkare, exposed this, he was brutally eliminated. An honest Congress legislator, A R Antule, resigned, but no action against the perpetrators was undertaken and the lies continued.
The demotion of the Babri Masjid by the BJP is another example. The enquiry commission put the blame squarely on BJP leaders Advani and Vajpaee, but no action was taken and they continued to lie about it. Whether it be the BJP or Congress, Indian animosity towards Pakistan continues to be their main policy and every possible incident is twisted in such a way as to make Pakistan the culprit.
Our leaders fail to understand that the Western countries will never help us in our dispute with India over Kashmir, in the same way as they will never help the Arabs in the dispute with Israel over the genocide of the Palestinians. They will simply continue to lie to the whole world and shut their eyes to reality.
Here are a few quotes from Western writers and philosophers relevant to the topic under discussion:
“One of the most striking differences between a cat and a lie is that a cat has nine lives, a lie only one.” — Mark Twain
“The most common lie is that one tells to oneself; lying to others is relatively an exception.” — Nietzsche
“Truth will come to light, murder cannot be hidden long.” — Shakespeare
“Truth is so obscure in these times and falsehood so established that, unless we have the truth, we cannot know it.” — Pascal
“Hard are the ways of truth, and rough to walk.” — Milton
The last one very aptly applies to our chief justice and our judiciary.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)