We all must have a very-very deep sense of history

Kamila Shamsie is the author of five acclaimed novels: In the City by the Sea; Kartography(both shortlisted for the John Llewellyn Rhys Prize); Salt and Saffron; Broken Verses; and Burnt Shadows, which was shortlisted for the Orange Prize for Fiction and has been translated into more than twenty languages.

Three of her novels have received awards from Pakistan’s Academy of Letters. She is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature and in 2013 was named a Granta Best of Young British Novelist. She grew up in Karachi and now lives in London.

Recently she was in New Delhi for the launch of her latest novel, A God in Every Stone (Bloomsbury Publications)—here she spoke with Atul K Thakur, about her new book and love for fiction writing—writing in subcontinent and beyond, the place of history in modern time and how the western hype of their tradition and literature keeping heightened misinterpretation around. The edited excerpts of the interview are:
Tell us about your new book: A God in Every Stone? What made you writing on undivided India, struggling against the empire in early 20th century?

For first time, I went to Peshawar two years back—then, I did not know it well. Those days, things were in very bad shape in Pakistan—that seemed wrong to me. I came to read a piece in DAWN about an archeological initiative to shave the monuments—and as

I was always interested in history, I drawn towards it.In Pakistan, women started taking part in archeological activities—when in India that was unheard off. This is an interesting reality.

I do value history and when it is retold in fiction, it creates greater sense. And I tried to absorb the importance of empathy—thus the book bears that and came out.

This book has in center a powerful story of friendship, injustice, love and betrayal—it travails across the globe, into the heart of empires fallen and conquered, reminding us that we all have our place in the chaos of history and that so much of what is lost will not be forgotten.

What exactly the discovery of Temple of Zeus is for Vivian Rose Spencer?

She is a young woman who has lived a very sheltered life—that particular moment of discovery comes to her like first breeze of independence. It is like you do something significant for first time in life and get a sense of discovery. In that discovery, she lives her personal existence—outside the comfort of empire and roving in alien lands with unusual quest.

The call of adventure and the ecstasy of love—all are the better part of fantasy or near about reality?

Yes, a sort of fantasy—as she is very young and has sheltered existence. It is good to be 21 and full with idealism—expectations getting more matured with the time.

At near the age of 30, it is hard to get away from naïve issues—but when one reaches to around 40, the perceptions get shaped through realistic considerations. There might be exceptions, as it is truly hard to be perfect with the perceptions—it fluctuates.

What made you finding another locale, thousands of miles away where a twenty-year old Pathan, Qayyum Gul is learning about brotherhood and loyalty in the British Indian army?

I became interested in the story of Indian soldiers fighting in the world war—and also in the history of freedom movement. The book recalls Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan in great deal—he was called Frontier Gandhi, and as the book is centered on that geography where he worked tirelessly—we see in character Najeeb, a staunch follower of him.

I have chosen to write this novel in post-colonial narrative—so I have particularly found the space for a stretch of subcontinental history( 1910-1940), badly affected with the British Empire.

Nevertheless, this is not the lone reason of making the novel spread into the odd geographies—there is strong personal angle of the protagonists, which necessitated it to further the story from two distant poles.

Both Lahore and Delhi have deeply imagined society—with their old structures and monuments, the city dwellers must ask themselves, how to imagine your cities? Like in imagining Karachi—it felt learning this city. Every city has its own characters—with modern cities, I have hedgy experience. We all must have a very-very deep sense of history.

How perfect is the mysterious long trail of Viv for her beloved? Why A God in Every Stone carries us across the globe, into the heart of empires, almost fallen and conquered?

She is very young, meeting Turkish Man and then they separated. Love story is not to be tested—it’s a romance in very beginning. She has liberty to be with her imagination. A very young naïve women but the book ended with decisive changes.

She believes in empire—English men are superior—their places are in better side of the history. She is a girl of empire, still she recognises empire is damaging. But she changes, the moment she knows the world.

Massacres in Peshawar in 1930’s—made strong disillusionment from the empire. Besides, non-cooperation movement and the world wars made British Empire defensive in stances.

Peshawar was full with events in those periods—and in general, North West frontier has a long history of receiving invasion and instability. Its history is replete with the interventions of Empires, including Ottoman Empire.

Beyond the construct of this novel—how you see our place in the chaos of history and that so much of what is lost will not be forgotten?

I don’t know how to see the chaos in history. It is very hard to assess the time people living in.

You have written acclaimed novels: Burnt Shadows, In the City by the Sea, Kartography, Salt Saffron and Broken Verses—do you write usually for the imagined readers or they come to your writings, and thus you write?

This will sound very self-centered in saying I write for myself—readers come to the novel from diverse locations and tastes.

What makes you dedicated for fictional narrative? At some point of time, will you be also writing a non-fiction book?

I love writing novel. I write for Guardian/Guernica among the other publications—mostly prose and non-fiction but in long term project, fiction writing is my natural forte. I believe, short stories are unfairly under-valued—people still wants to read novel. It’s not declining.

I am recalling your conversation with Pankaj Mishra, about the absence of political anger in western literature and why we shouldn’t be so quick to condemn the writers like, Mo Yan—what made you comfortable for taking position on this?

It was my actual position. I was asked by Guernica to write on it. Pankaj has already written on it—and he has written important books. There is big mismatch on this in western world. Not surprising, if remarkable books from the US is in short supply.

The western part of the world or even China has to address the anger in writing with care and better sensitivity—in absence of that, it is not possible to expect genuine expressions routed through the books.

May we know the answer of your own question asked to Pankaj Mishra: You say fiction comes from a different side of the brain than politics, but doesn’t an overtly political novel demand we engage both sides of the brain at once?

It does—often people have problem with the political norms. They disagree—some people think novel should be essentially written like nice and pleasant story.

This is impossible to achieve—the consciousness for politics very much stays in fiction writing as well. However the degree of reliance on it varies on the personal capacity and choice of a writer.

What is your take on new English writings in India and Pakistan?

Indian English writing is doing very well in non-fiction category—we see many remarkable books have been in recent years by Indian writers. And with fiction writing too, India has lot to offer—from Salman Rushdie, Amitav Ghosh to Kiran Desai, there are many names to be recalled.

Pakistan has seen a very impressive rise in writers, writing standard literary fiction about their troubled land. Nadeem Aslam is an extraordinary writer—he takes his writing very seriously. Mohammed Hanif is so good being fiery and serious.

Usma Aslam Khan is another serious writer, who is writing incredibly beautiful about the Pakistani landscapes. Jamil Ahmad has written an important book on Baluchistan. Mohsin Ahmad has written impressive novels. We can add more names here.

In the Indian subcontinent, this is high creative time—where the history is being reread and retold, with sense of urgency to know the spent time, with rational angle. This is indeed a welcome development.
-Atul K Thakur
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in Rising Kashmir on April21,2014)

Kashmir:A tale of travesty

Discussions on how the Kashmir issue has been represented over the years

The beginning of a new age of violence in Jammu and Kashmir in 1989 took off with the mayhem ensued by the permission of the then Prime Minister of Pakistan, Benazir Bhutto, for the intelligence apparatus of her country to export fighters outward from the Kashmir valley. Since then, Kashmir is visible more like a chessboard for a large malicious game of intrigue, where the official truth appears manufactured narrative rather than it should be in its natural shape.

The tug of war between India and the opposition forces from Kashmir along with the clear support of Pakistan and its allies can be understood lucidly through Edmund Burke’s quote conveyed in the House of Commons on April 19, 1774: “The use of force alone is but temporary. It may subdue for moment; but it does not remove the necessity of subduing again; and a nation is not governed, which is perpetually to be conquered.”

History does not flow in straight lines, but in outlines—and in Kashmir’s painful history there are many forgotten references due, to negotiate. Since October 1947, when the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir conditionally acceded to the Government of India, there has been a gap between India’s democratic and secular ideals and the reality of New Delhi’s relationship with Srinagar. This has led to various bouts of disillusionments, the first of them as early as the 1950s—largely in the Muslim dominated Kashmir valley.

Persistent calls for Kashmiri secession only intensified through the next three-and-a-half decades as disenchantment with assertive Indian actions and lures from the unhygienic communal supports from cross of the border mounted and finally took a violent turn in November 1989. Though the Indian state may not always have got it right in Kashmir, the dissent’s tailor made delineation represents intellectually dishonest simplification of the real issues, leaving aside the hazards associated with the intensely aggressive geopolitical forces at work.

The fateful periods of the independence of India on August 15, 1947, and Kashmir’s accession to it on October 26, 1947, is still fogged in mystery. But the most genuine truth at that time was that no one wanted Kashmir’s accession to Pakistan. Majority had a preference for its independence, but for different and complex reasons—Kashimiri Pandits were in favour of Indian state albeit on the covert condition of not losing Kashmir’s unique native identity.

Not even a tint of deviation from syncretism they would like as on line of the rest thinking Kashmiris—so far, there was not much hype of communal programming in the valley, this began and intensified only with the blunder of making Kashmir an international issue by moralistically overcharged Nehru in early 1950’s.

Consolidation of a nation like India had to happen through the diverse maneuverings on endless impediments—then inclusion of independent royalties in India was the most crucial among many citable challenges. Sardar Patel, a straight forward man, had tirelessly succeeded in making India with an impressive geographical size—he made the idea of sovereignty a complete prerogative of this newly born nation. But alas, this man was neither a sage nor an immortal being—so he passed away when the complete inclusion of Kashmir was still in progress. That shrewd political executioner passed away, rest the lead on Kashmir was transferred to Nehru, though as said he was by birth a Kashmiri but hardly a native in typical sense.

He had pious ideas, which were broader in outlook but unfortunately—people with whom he had to deal with on Kashmir—were of dishonest merits. Had he relied on the referendum or on hard action against the first attack of Pakistan in 1947, he could have easily escaped the unfortunate internationalization of Kashmir as a formidable dispute. Moreover, shady and impractical deals with Sheikh Abdullah at wrong times and most importantly the division of Kashmir sabotaged peace forever from these regions.

Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre’s interview with Mountbatten for their book, “Mountbatten and Independent India” (Vikas; page 37) makes clear the fatal motive of this unholy colonial moron, as in a conversation to Maharaja Hari Singh, he said: “the majority of your populations are Muslim”, but Hari Singh had replied “I don’t want to accede to Pakistan on any account…. I don’t want to join India either, because, if so (sic), I would feel that perhaps which’s not what the people of Kashmir wanted.

I want to be independent." Mountbatten told the authors, “I must tell you honestly, I wanted Kashmir to join Pakistan…(Sir Cyril) Radcliffe (Chairman of the India-Pakistan Boundary Commission) let us in for an awful lot of trouble by making it possible for them to accede to India,” by awarding to India a part of Gurdaspur, which facilitated the land link to Jammu and Kashmir.” Unfortunately those virulent designs were misunderstood by the high ranked and nosed politicians, particularly by Nehru and Jinnah that finally lead the Kashmir to a dangerous trajectory of conflict.

In 1971, India facilitated the secession of Pakistan’s easternmost province (now Bangladesh), which was another turning point that immensely affected any veritable advancement on Kashmir for many decades. India’s strategic win provoked Pakistan’s humiliated army and intelligence officials to pursue a policy of creating ‘strategic depth’ against India by seeking Pashtun clients inside Afghanistan for using them in Kashmir valley—that was not a squeak but a full-fledged design of proxy war directed to Kashmir through multiple active channels, including those of “communal interference”.

In the 1990s, many of the same Pakistani officials who helped supply the Mujahideen during the CIA-led anti-Soviet jihad in Afghanistan turned to fuelling the popular Islamic insurgency in India-ruled Kashmir—which in turn claimed more than 80,000 lives and exodus of Kashmiri Pandits from the valley since1989. Throughout the last two and half decades, Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the ISI, trained and financed militant groups for jihad in Kashmir, even as it settled on the Taliban as its proxy in Afghanistan, which had been abruptly abandoned by the United States following the Soviet withdrawal.

Since then, once known for its opulent beauty and peace, the valley of Kashmir was forced to host the military occupation awkwardly against the theoretical democratic ethos of India. It’s indeed an unfortunate truth; the killings fields of Kashmir supersede those of Palestine and Tibet. Curfews, raids, and checkpoints have been routinely enforced by nearly 700,000 Indian soldiers—the valley's staying populations are harshly exposed to extra-judicial execution and torture. India has contained the insurgency provoked in 1989 but the growing disenchantment of the average Kashmiri from endemic military occupation of India is not comforting in any manner.

The hundreds of thousands of demonstrators that fill the streets of Kashmir's cities today are overwhelmingly young and desperate, most of them in their teens, and armed with nothing more than stones. Yet the spanking goes on, such sneaky approaches must be stopped and the different voices should approach our conscience. It’s true that Pakistan has lost its undeserving war in Kashmir from India and native Kashmiris, so now India must bolster its ties with the aspirations of Kashmiris, like it does with its citizens, atleast notionally.

Looking back on the ‘Chenab model’ would be worthwhile for knowing the conflation that disturbed the lives of Kashmiri Pandits from 1990 onward. This was aimed to partition Kashmir along the river Chenab, was conceived by political leaders, mostly from Pakistan to promote a communal agenda. “Most of the districts in Jammu and on the left bank of the Chenab are Hindu majority in the state of Jammu and Kashmir while in most of the districts on the western side of the Chenab, the Muslims are predominant,” wrote Sartaj Aziz in his book ‘Between Dreams and Reality’ (page 228).

“In short, the River Chenab will form the separation line between the Pakistan and Indian held areas …Since India was no longer willing to go back to the concept of Hindu versus Muslim majority, the Chenab formula basically converted a communal formula into a geographic formula since most of the Hindu majority is east of Chenab and Muslim majority districts are west of Chenab.” Unfortunately, some partial aim of this guff was come into reality through the incessantly untamed involvement of Pakistan and India’s own casing of the burning situation in Kashmir from any constructive public discourse.

The dispute over Kashmir is not just the most enduring flash-point in the relationship between India and Pakistan; it is, equally, the largest question-mark next to India’s claims to secularism and democracy. Nationalist passions, political imperatives, security concerns and emotions of bitterness and distrust (including those between Kashmiris themselves) have undermined much policy-making and scholarship. Kashmir, today, is known through the prism of triangular political relations: between Srinagar and New Delhi; between politicians and the public within Kashmir; and between Kashmir’s different regions and identity groups.

Autumn normally leaves dual effects on mind. This season in Kashmir once used to be the time of rejoice that continuity broken in 1990 with the exodus of Kashmiri Pandits and subsequently with the end of syncretism from valley. Never to forget, that was the culmination of incessant political follies directed towards the Kashmir which distorted the Kashmiriyat from the region where once Lal Ded and Noorudin Reshi were reflexive of all humane convictions in collective lives.

Introspection on the essence of Kashmiriyat could be too deep. It could be looked as far back as the time of Rajtarangini or Akbar’s colonisation of Kashmir, but here the focus should be unanimously channelised to draw the points: how the harmony in collective lives was the essence of Kashmiriyat and how it started losing those specialties of universalism with the partition in 1947? Post partition, Kashmir was one among the many troubled royalties but not most shaky in any terms. Then few would have thought about the evolvement of this paradise, as India’s weakness and centrepoint of notorious cold war politics!

These all developments happened in Jammu and Kashmir after India’s independence, and more resolutely with the most brutal catastrophe took place in the valley with the Kashmiri Pandit’s unfortunate exodus in 1990—down the twenty-four years, hibernation is still going on among the opinion makers and those cry for secularism and human rights for these people who are living outside their homeland. Those who made Kashmir a living ruin are being taken as leaders by the pseudo polemists of high caliber—only solace is such voices is not being taken seriously any longer and their low capacity to interface with the Kashmir’s history is a moving example of persisting ignorance among these noisy New Delhi/Srinagar based intellectual/separatist cohorts.

Over the decades, politics and high class but baseless discourses have produced mostly the trashes on Kashmir—the devoid from realities remains a harmful trend which is yet to be over, but chances are dim for such change. A better part of Kashmiriyat is already extinct from the valley, or it could be said, the loss of Kashmiriyat itself that used to bind together the religious diversities in special fold, caused for the outbreak of communalism in late 1980s.

In the course of time, the soft side of socio-cultural structure gave easy passage to the virulent mix of political-communal beliefs for replacement.

The devastating changes came into existence under the guise of horrible conspiracies from Pakistan. In response, the regime in Delhi and its unworthy ruling puppets in Jammu and Kashmir did alarmingly unwell in getting rid from the third party intervention that was being directed on almost war scale from the fraternity of crooks for their own illegitimate interests.

By playing under-capacity game, India has only become able to weaken the external conspiracies in Kashmir valley but still has to fight hard to foil it from the root—force alone can’t do it, whatsoever may be its might-ultimately, only the radical repulsion of masses from the nasty role of ‘third party’ and belief in their own capacity to negotiate with Indian state can lead to a point of peaceful accord.

It is daunting to take a stand on it, because related issues have been moulded so badly in the last six decades in various policy circles in India and outside that finding genuine ground and its non-categorized expression can be possible only on the self-risk of getting strictly good or bad points from the largely ‘undefined progressive blocks’.

Though those who parted from the valley in unimagined circumstances to save their life, dignity and successors, still carries the native originality alive with them. However, now the young generations of Kashmiri Pandits appear more part of the cosmic world than of those lost interwoven life of valley, Kashmiris’ were entitled for, before the insertion of full scale communalisation.

Still, those lived the community values, earnestly feel the absence of non-existent Pandits in valley and they want returning back of normalcy and calmness of old days. Most of the Kashmiri Pandits too, though settled across the world and leaving their mark in different fields have more sense of disbelief than any consolidated amount of anger for their lost neighbourhood. That’s the most positive social understanding still exists among the Kashmiris—even though they are living in distance through unnatural causes.

Even superlatively, politics can provide at best a kind of “turf” that ends with either the ‘state of solipsism’ or between tussle of stakeholders. This is only the socio-cultural combine that constructs the proper psyche of the social values, but most often they neglected. Not least, because in idealization process, good thoughts hardly considered for practical optimisation.

Low emphasis on the other components such as culture, shared past etc—which formats and strengthens the social order and falls beyond the direct purview of new state could be forwardly termed as contempt against the ancient fabric of old social realities.
Here is need of revisiting the truth: India as a nation is still very young, if comparing it with its very unique continuance as society for long through the stretches of history. In respect of Kashmir, crux of this little bit theorization could assist in forming a new ground of recuperating its socio-cultural distinctness back—and on later stage—coming in terms at collective level to decide on political course, without losing the sight from realities.

The conspiracies of various sorts caused for the turmoil inside once a living paradise, but now need is to look around what forced at social, cultural, psychological level that frozen and broke Kashmir? With impressive past and articulate lifestyle, the land which should have been the role model for peace, how turned to be among the most dangerous places of the world?

After the folly of last six and half decades, Indian side must deal with Kashmir in straight terms—without stretching the existing approaches of public diplomacy, which otherwise will keep downgrading the genuine aspirations in incompetency to engage effectively.

Searching nativity should be the main plank of displaced Kashmiris who tagged for long with an unjust and illogical suffix, Sharnarthi! Never was it justifiable inside a free state like India—only it was an illuminating stance of center’s failure to reach on the basic flaws of Kashmir issues and getting involved for a constructive way out. What we have witnessed rather a consistent derailment of the sensible concern, substituted by Hippocratic rise of local leadership which remains devoid to attain any rational purpose.

For Pakistan, Kashmir is an escape route from its ruined state of affairs—for India, it’s the profound entity of its secular credential—and for the local leadership, Kashmir is nothing more than a survival object. Puzzles are still there, so people must show the temptations of realignment with the Kashmiriyat and to continue their reliance on the democratic values. Circumstances may have made Kashmir a difficult terrain, but still it would be improper comparing it with a place like Palestine on many terms—as whenever something went wrong from the Indian side, public opinion always stood against it from all over India.

The issue of nation and nationalities could not be brokered by sentiments alone, history gives the choices based on facts and those facts are clearly in favour of India on Kashmir. Before Independence, consolidation of Indian territories through such grand centralization was never a reality—it’s not alone Kashmir that lost its royal rule and witnessed a sort of break-up in local rule. Most of India’s princely states merged and aligned in nation-making but the Kashmir took the different route with no clear destination ahead.

Agha Shahid Ali, a Kashmiri-American poet who has written ‘The country without post office,’ died at a young age in the USA. He could be a very apt frame of reference in knowing what the idea of native belonging is. How does it appear from a distant land and in adverse time? Amitav Ghosh’s long essay, The Ghat of the Only World: Agha Shahid Ali in Brooklyn (February 11,2002, The Nation), which he has written as he promised his friend during his last days in Brooklyn provides the intricate details of looking on one’s troubled motherland with vivid charm and apprehensions.

Agha was a believer in composite culture, not surprising, as his drawing room had more Hindu deities than Islamic icons—there was nothing religious about that, rather merely it was a continuance of liberal collective bond. It’s true, Shahid wanted his last days to be spent in Kashmir and that was quite a normal wish for a sensible soul like him. The Pandits, those in forced exile too feel similarly despite having lived away from the valley for a long time. Do the separatists have any answer for such basic needs which a major chunk of Kashmiris lacking badly? Infact not, and why they are they supposed to look into this?

It’s hard to get a forethought on what would be the shape and sequence of separatist politics in Kashmir but it’s an open secret and no conjecture that neither those who left the valley found any political representation, nor who stayed in the valley—from mainstream political parties. From political standpoint, it’s bewildering. A democracy essentially should mean for the people and alongside for its institutions. Over the decades, Indian democracy has stablised well, though fissures are still many and in coping those, the centre has not kept so impressive track record.

Whether in North East or in Kashmir, the major fallout of keeping aside the people’s aspiration proved detrimental in reaching out the right kind of solution. State has primarily to learn how to deal with its citizens uniformly and not by vindictively treating the dissent voices, whose demands otherwise could be considered very benignly. Those throwing stones in valley or updating posts on social media against the state’s repression are not the enemies of the Indian union—rather enemies are those who serve through legitimate channels and consistently betray the real issues related to the fate of Kashmir.

The bone of contention that could be drawn from Kashmir is that those who are in valley are living in quagmire with alienation towards the nation’s progress. They are not being able to entitle with the good dividends that the economic rise of India is giving-up to young population in its rest part. For most of stone palters, life could be more smooth and promising have they provided an alternative way of thinking and opportunity to succeed. Unfortunately state is doing abysmal on this by taking such protests more as ‘security issues’ rather politically-economically generated dissatisfaction.

Over a long debate with one of my journalist friends from Kashmir, he asked me why we should celebrate Sachin Tendulkar’s performance on the cricket ground— though he wished, if he could do it and other matters where India has lead. His point of view was hard to denounce, as he was speaking more clearly from the heart and by knowing the existing situation on ground —but I finally made my point with citing that the same aspiration that is not flourishing today among the young Kashmiris would be not static forever and very soon the change will make it happen that Kashmir may host all the symbols of ‘new mainstream’: from cricket, fashion to industry. Apropos of our statements, we finally agreed that wariness is still high but hope shouldn’t be ruled out from the future either.

The new generations of Kashmiri Pandits are upwardly mobile and whatever was their difficult past, now they are availing the right fruit by converging with the changing times. But naturally they still have quest to involve with the Kashmir, and that’s for good. As the shape of political cunningness is well evident now, there are feeble chances for separatist ideology to remain in mainframe for long in Kashmir. However, the state’s insensitivity would be a big deterrent to thrive on the positive chances. Still, the truth-telling should be wishfully continued and the stunning disclosures too must be acknowledged properly by the concerned affiliates on Kashmir.

Despite the major breakup of opinion, it is still nice to see Kashmiri Pandits more apolitical than falling as piggyback of fundamentalist forces, which plays wrong politics and generates hate on the similar line that Islamic fundamentalists have been doing in clusters. The true justice either for Kashmiri Pandits or for every Kashmiris would only take place with stronger denouncement of communal stands in political negotiation and by searching the true secular ideas, which will make the state and its citizens’ passive with religious over-exhibit.

The issue of Kashmir is indeed political in nature but intensification of all wrong precedents could thrive and strive by the crafted communal agendas—the cold war politics ended long back in 1991, but Kashmir sustained its wounded legacy and India’s weak stand to curb militancy in its early days. Once it reached to the valley, it took time to get solemnised. The barbed wires replaced the scenic beauties of Dal Lake and Nishat Bagh and all the Kashmiri Pandits become homeless overnight—all what communalism has given to the Kashmir.

In post independent India, the forced eviction of Pandits from the Kashmir valley was one amongst the most brutal tragedies. As it happened under a consolidated democracy at that time, the state had lesser excuses than during India’s partition way back in 1947. It is shocking to ponder why their plights are still not part of large secular discourse that makes aghast in calling ourselves a nation with democracy. All humans are equal, as idealist as it may sound but with believing this, the cruel play of communal politics could be halted.

The US realised that terrorism exists, only after the 9/11attack took place on its land. Since then, it played the role of a good consensus ally with India on Kashmir. It is wishful India too should realise though not in the spellbinding influence of USA—but through own approaches that the greater common good is possible, only through practicing secular ideas and not through the hypocritical preaching. Essentially, Kashmir should be taken as a living space which has a recognizable past and many set of people, including Pandits and other suffering masses. With remorse on what happened in 1990s, the valley is waiting for its
Pandits—only the state can make it or not. And the people are waiting for justice, for their voices to be heard.
-Atul K Thakur
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in The Kashmir Walla on February24,2014)

Delhi by Heart

Book Review: Non-fiction/ Delhi by heart by Raza Rumi, Harper Collins, 322p; Rs399 (Paperback)

As Raza is Rumi, so ploy of narrower gratifications should normally evade his identity. Surprisingly (for conformity between author and editor), the cover of Delhi by heart presents this most impartial and genuine self-narration on the city Delhi as—‘Impressions of a Pakistani Traveler’. In actual, the author was never alien to this city—as like many of us, he too could see beyond the boundary without falling in guise of extreme limiting factors—such as nationality and uncomfortable equations among the two nieghbouring nations.

Like insiders of this city, his comfort level is more competent with the old parts of Delhi than its shining hotels and sprawling urban extensions, which tirelessly ostracize wisdom and release endless hallucination of modernism. Clearly, this can’t be confronted by wimps—praying to be separated from the load of past and oddness of present.

Still there is no dearth of alibis from the people and machinery that make the old urban structures, marginalised and dying slow death. Sadly, the pattern of certain kind of living too diminishes with the demise of symbols. Delhi is catching up that pattern blindly—so it’s naturally justified, if majority of its residents know Chirag Delhi by a nearby over-bridge than for its historic significance.

The days are not far when Nizamuddin Dargah would be better known as a landmark to reach Hotel Oberoi—and Kutub Minaar as picnic spot for absentee landlord type scholars from western part of the earth, living in the farmhouses of M.G.Road. This road ends Delhi, hence civilisation and brings Gurgaon—an anti-thesis of former. This book has no taste to travail any uncivilized roads.

Raza’s leaning with the northern India, as he confesses in writing—grown-up by listening the pre-partition stories from elders at home. That part of the land was once his home—he got that sense and also pain for not being able to see it freely. This happened with so many people, we have various accounts on that but those were from earlier generation. Author leads the debate here, as he represents those who didn’t see the trauma of partition though felt its darkness even after decades.

As he shares, his first visit took place to see his forefathers’ land—and in the course of the time, his bond of sharing developed with fellow Indian students in LSE during University days and later working in Multilateral Agencies, being part of Pakistan’s elite Civil Services.

Years back, he moved from the service to become primarily a writer, with free pen and conscience. That made him writing this meticulously researched and well involved book on Delhi—a city that was in want of authentic looking back on its fading edifices and cultural tradition.

As a columnist too, Raza has been writing about Delhi, its people, who are his friends. And on different side—he is the person, whose writing infuse hope from Pakistan. He can speak of his mind, for making the ills obvious, and thus less harmful. However, the establishment running Pakistan like a half-baked democracy has no intention to stop its slumbering for listening rational commentaries.

Raza likes Delhi—and this city reciprocates with him in same warm way. This book marks it better than any other additional attribute. He has remembered his Delhiwaala and they are reading this book and loving it. Even in conservative estimation, I see this book reaching in ‘essential reading list’ on Delhi. This solely based on the authenticity, the book upholds.

Delhi’s eternal characteristics defies partitioning views—so compilation of its good and bad can be sensibly done only by those not pursuing many goals at a time. That stands opposite with most of the historians, claiming to have expertise on this restless city. Raza Rumi’s Delhi by heart is an important addition to the literatures on Delhi and for delinking the concentration of history writing from royalty to people. In either or both ways—the book will command a wide readership, from across the sections.

If travelling can enrich entitlement with the places—its articulation could make history, simple to be remembered. We can believe it, if not overlooking a remarkable book like this one.
-Atul K Thakur
Email:summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in The Kashmir Walla on October23,2013)

Too early to drop one’s guard

India must work closely with the newly-elected Nawaz Sharif Government in Pakistan. But, while it must explore enhancing relations in areas of trade, New Delhi must remain vigilant all the time.

Mr Nawaz Sharif’s return to power and his exuberant shower of constructive announcements offer hope, both to the Pakistani people as well to those in India wanting to improve relations with Pakistan. But India has had a mixed experience dealing with democratic regimes in Islamabad — at the start, things appear to be promising but suddenly the relationship turns sour. This was the case with Mr Sharif’s previous stint as Prime Minister, when friendly summits and goodwill trips to Pakistan by the NDA leadership were reciprocated with heavy infiltration in Kashmir.

Also, Mr Sharif, groomed under the cunning shadow of former President Zia-ul-Haq initially had little problem with limited military-political interface within the Pakistani establishment. His perception changed, however, after his Army chief Pervez Musharraf’s coup d'état in the post-Kargil days. While in exile, Mr Sharif has supposedly become more gentle, practical and reliable. So, he exudes hope to the crowds in Pakistan as well as to the Congress-led UPA regime in New Delhi, which has no strategic foreign policy for the South Asian neighbourhood.

But let us not forget that the root cause of pessimism in Pakistan lies in the fact that this country knows not how to live with rational actions. Today, Pakistan exists somewhere between the grim world of Saadat Hasan Manto and Faiz Ahmad Faiz.

These two literary greats had witnessed the making of Pakistan, and knew the country better than others and much before it was overrun by fundamentalists. A country created on religious lines, and also a product of the tussle between the elitist leaders of the Muslim League and those of the Congress, Pakistan has never been able to outgrow the complexes attached to its birth.

The history of democracy in Pakistan is blurry and replete with instances of continuous military interference, which till date distort political processes. Sixty-three years after its birth, Pakistan is far from how its founder Mohammad Ali Jinnah, an astute politician, had envisioned it. And even though a small segment of progressive Pakistanis may like to hold on to Jinnah’s vision, it is, for all practical purposes, now lost.

Its international borders notwithstanding, Pakistan’s alliances with China and the US have already compromised its sovereignty. Driven by their imperial compulsions, these countries use Pakistan to maintain their grip on the South Asian region. And this is obvious to Pakistani leaders, civil society activists and journalists.

The other factor that defines Pakistan’s geo-strategic policies is Afghanistan. The ground realities from that country plague Pakistan on a real time basis even as one powerful class of Pakistanis reap the benefits of instability. This class knows how important it is to keep stirring the pot — as, in a political order that is driven by force rather than constitutional values, it is troubled times that offer better strategic dividend than peace times.

India has the burden of history to bear when it comes to its foreign policy vis-à-vis Pakistan. However, New Delhi has often failed miserably to carry the load. This maybe in part due to the inadequacies of those who have sought to shape India’s policy towards Pakistan in recent years. Many of these so-called ‘Pakistan experts’ in New Delhi have practically no on-ground exposure to that country and only limited understanding of the historical linkages between India and Pakistan. They look upon Pakistan as a project that they need to handle. This impedes any deep and long-term study of the Pakistani problem in India.

Even New Delhi’s diplomatic corps, from the IIC to the Gymkhana generation, has failed to make its mark when it comes to strategic thinking with respect to Pakistan. Yet, India cannot afford to remain indifferent to this neighbour. As for now, India should keep playing safe with Pakistan. New Delhi may allow for an enhanced trade engagement with Pakistan, for instance. More importantly, it should support Mr Sharif so as to keep hardliners at bay in Islamabad. A fresh round of goodwill summits may also be encouraging for bilateral relations.

But through it all, India must remain vigilant. It must not be caught off-guard like it was in the 1990s when the then Prime Minister was indeed working to make a long-lasting improvement in India’s relations with Pakistan. Of course, both countries are in a different state now — this is especially true in Pakistan where the people have chosen the ballot over the bullet. Hopefully, Mr Sharif too will stay democratic and the Pakistani military will be cut to size by him. At this juncture, New Delhi should work closely with Islamabad for a positive turn in bilateral ties but while keeping its border security mechanism firmly in place.

-Atul K Thakur
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in The Pioneer on June18,2013)

The network

Book Review: Non-fiction/ Fountainhead of Jihad: The Haqqani Nexus by Wahid Brown and Don Rassler, Hachette, 320p; Rs650 (Hardback)

The Haqqani network’s area of operation, the fountainhead of Jihad-Durand Line accidentally adjoins the international border of Afghanistan and Pakistan. This part of the world is largely unexplored for the intellectual communities, living on its periphery or located distant. So, Wahid Brown and Don Rassler open new chances to look on a terrain, known for all the bad reasons.

At the beginning, authors examine the origination of Haqqani network from Southeastern Afghanistan and the role played by the Haqqaniya seminary in northwestern Pakistan in its mushrooming. The Haqqanis are rooted in both these countries and ensured a never ending conflict between them. Pakistan has been maintaining a closer relationship with the Haqqanis, once the direct American support for the Haqqani network ended in the early 1990’s.

Though as the book confirms, Pakistan never felt shy in tying up with Haqqanis. Its military support for the Haqqanis began in the 1970’s when Pakistan looked to Afghan Islamists for countering Moscow-leaning Afghan government-this way Pakistan started the proxy war with Afghanistan, which continues to this date.

The book gives detail in great deal about the base of Haqqanis-Zhawara in the province of Khost-also establishes CIA/ISI’s direct support to this deadly terror network in their opportunistic quest. In anti-Soviet days, the nexus among them was running high-further the support from Arab for anti-Soviet Mujahidin: ‘Abdullah’ Azam and Osama bin Laden made the ‘global Jihadism’ imminent.

The Haqqanis continue to support a group of regional and transnational militants from their hub in North Waziristan. The Haqqani network has survived for more than four decades, and this through a carefully balancing act, which ensured its prominence in nexus of violence. Also, these militants have kept them away from the command of Talibanis.

The Haqqanis have lived the tussle of contradiction with Taliban and other local/global forces playing the dirtiest game in Af-Pak regions. Since the US entered in Afghanistan to revenge 9/11, Al-Qa’ida and a segment of the Pakistani Taliban (in particular the Tehrik-a-Taliban Pakistan) are at war with the Pakistani state-still, Pakistan has to support the US in its war against Taliban and the TTP, as it’s caught in alarming spiral.

On the height of wildness, the Haqqanis appearing as a platform for the delivery of violence that serves their various interests, and also strengthen the Haqqani network’s strategic position in North Waziristan and Loya Paktia. One of the major plank of the nasty game is to limit the influence of India in India-Pakistan is quite determined for it, and so paying big price with embracing the unregulated stock of terror.

The Haqqanis are the natural ally in this covert war against India-the US is enabling a meantime engagement, but the real goal of these terror networks is much dangerous, than it appears in casual looking on their mode of action. The book provides otherwise a sensible analysis of the ground realities from world’s most difficult terrain, except missing the end results of Cold War and the stake of India in the trouble surfaced post1990.

The book could have better enquired about the impact of Afghanistan’s vandalism by British/Soviets/Americans/Pakistanis/Talibanis and Haqqanis on Kashmir-the root cause of Kashmir conflict, has bigger and diverse dimensions. Ofcourse, the role of Cold War was most atrocious among them-although, the realisation is still dim on this particular aspect and probably that prolonging the unease in valley. The book is a good read, as it opens the world of terror, with no superficial hype!
-Atul K Thakur
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in Rising Kashmir on April20,2013)

The Blind Man's Garden: loss of odd times!

Book Review: Fiction/ The Blind Man’s Garden by Nadeem Aslam, Vintage Books/Random House, 415pp; Rs550 (Hardback)
Like his preceding work, The Wasted Vigil, Nadeem Aslam’s fourth novel-The Blind Man’s Garden, follows difficult overtures with the recent history. However, this new book has much bigger geo-strategic and humane canvas, as it draws the ground realities of war torn Afghanistan-Pakistan regions through immaculate sensibility and with unprecedented authenticity. The better strength of the book comes through Nadeem’s relying on his natural impulses rather submerging with the unmanageable amount of views on new world order, which runs on the notorious design of neo-imperialism.

This extraordinary war novel has merit to be listed with the best of literary fiction, the beautiful prose and momentous details of tragic lives completely justify the rating. Nadeem portrays the grimness of social conditions in Pakistan that is an end result of collusion between its army and terrorism. Such circumstances make lives too vulnerable and fragile to be lost. Radicals clearly want war-they push youth for Jihad and subsequently slaughtering by Talibanis or Americans.

Otherwise a brutal scenario, the prevailing starkness of Pakistan makes it super-normal. The insiders’ views are of participants or sufferer and outsiders’ views come with shocking uniformity. They temper with the sentimental inner core and leave the chances of noticing the innocence, which is another sort of violence in high order. This novel walks forth with aiming to deconstruct the stereotypical narratives on these difficult terrains, came into fashion and later developed as trend in the world of post 9/11.

The Blind Man’s Garden searches the obscure lives; those were forced to be part of the communal war, started with the US’s sudden realisation in 2001 that the world is no longer safe as it used to be for its own sake. The disastrous presumption lead a war not against the ’terror’ but to dismantle the figure and soul of unfortunate terrains in Afghnaistan and Pakistan. It affected all but as the war supported by the state managed financial capital, it stops treating live in equally precious terms, so mostly we know the fabricated sensational stories about the war. Seldom we know, what could be an ordinary point of view in hyper time like this?

The novel sets in a small town of Pakistan named, Heer. Jeo and Mikal are foster brothers, the former received success with academics and love and later failed, hence tracked the opposite path. Joe died in Afghanistan while helping civilians and Mikal offered him a helping hand in warzone and later in family matters. Joe’s widow gets hope of new life and Mikal the reason for life through channelizing the things properly in difficult circumstances. The last few pages of the book, which ends in positive configuration depicts the unusual normalcy of uneasy time.

Rohan, their blind father, who is the owner of a garden in backyard and unrelenting misfortunes without bound appears haunted by the premature death of his progressive wife, and on his mistakes made on the name of narrow religious convictions. Ironically, the blind man’s late wife personifies the life in their garden, which he can feel but not see any longer. In oblivion, he remembers her for secular and humane approaches. Rohan recalls his great-grandfather was in the service of British Empire during the mutiny of 1857 and now the changed equation after 9/11 makes him feeling betrayed.

The narration of loss is poignant and gets deeply expressed in symbolism. The loss of Rohan’s sight or losing loved ones comes outside the primary construct in same way. The turmoil of war goes long way and says lot in his helplessness to keep things on normal. Until the novel ends with magic realism effects, it shows the struggle for basic from commoners in Pakistan. Nadeem shows well the pathetic state of big democratic ideas in Pakistan, which is plagued through wrong leadership and choices of internationalism. Before 1980’s, this country was going better than India in economic terms, socio-culturally too, situation was not bad.

The final years of cold war politics ruined Afghanistan first, and to Pakistan subsequently. The Blind Man’s Garden unveils on many occasions, the ghost of Pakistan’s shadow democracy, which neither respect citizenship nor the dignity of human life. Beyond politics, these all ideas seem on wane. But still these are functional and making perceptions blurred for any changes. A new generation of Pakistani writers is doing amazingly well, for them ‘the cruel distance of geography’ hardly matters.

Nadeem Aslam’s The Blind Man’s Garden is a remarkable reading of the existing situation in Af-Pak region. It has quality of pure literary fiction, and strikingly without cornering the wider strategic odds. With inclusion of harsh living scenes, this novel gives uncomfort but never allows to drive for disorientation-as not only Pakistan, but the whole South Asia region is problem ridden in one or other ways, so a compiler like Nadeem will have engaged time in future too!
-Atul K Thakur
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in The Kashmir Walla on March 11,2013)

Jinnah vs. Gandhi and the divided dreams!

Book Review: Non-fiction/ Jinnah vs. Gandhi by Roderick Matthews, Hachette, 330pp; Rs499 (Hardback)

Soon to be published...

Thrill and revelations of stunted Kashmir

Book Review: Non-fiction/The Meadow by Adrian Levy &Cathy Scott-Clark, Penguin, 510 pp; Rs499 (Hardback)
By the 1995, Kashmir valley was accustomed for hosting the worst of terror plots by the Pakistan supported militant operatives. This year, six foreign nationals were abducted by an obscure Islamic outfit in valley for securing the release of Pakistani militant leader Maulana Masood Azhar (few years later, this man has plotted the attack on Indian parliament) and the world for the first time started acknowledging panic stricken Kashmir’s grim plight.
Though this incident initially electrified the international governments and the government in India too, but the whole episode ended non-descript and without getting back the remaining four hostages (one miraculously escaped and another was beheaded and found a month later). Only some foibles were melted in the collective perceptions towards India and over the complex issue of Kashmir but it took another six years till the twin towers were collapsed and Pentagon attacked in 2001-9/11 to get USA realised that the world is not so flat by the counter-posing strong assertive power of international terror networks.
Discourse changed radically henceforth and war on terror became so inevitable that even the uproaring capitalist virtue seemed halted for a while. That was a late consciousness and ineffective too, as it was neither meant to end the terror nor had any welfaristic aims for other struggling countries against the militancy-clearly USA had single plan in action to reestablish its hegemony in the crucial oil rich terrains of Middle East and strategically essential, Afghanistan. That was ineluctable from the USA part seeing the might, it hold over the new strategic composition in post cold war years, but ensuing after single massive attack on its land, its riff raffling outweighed all limits against the structured rogues.
‘The Meadow’ is based on the authentic account of that lone survivor and Adrian Levy-Cathy Scott Clark’s painstaking research in Kashmir and throughout the world where they could get anything particular about those six hostages and the series of events followed. A sizable part of the research for this book is based on the verbatim authors has collected through their meticulous and ministering search over the years. So locutions sound horribly shocking and suffice for flouting big claims that the governments across the world make against their win over illegal terror (legal terror is that pursued by the state with some acceptance and more intrigue!).
This book presents a good example of investigative and also narrative journalism barring few dispensable details. On many places, this creates confusion in differentiating between author’s opinion and their commentary on real incidents. Like few pages on Jagmohan’s gubernatorial stint in Jammu&Kashmir with inefficient clarity of authors on his stand during the most turbulent phase of early 1990’s distracts from the theme, and in real, it has less to do with the triangular dispute of Kashmir that has multiple layers.
Gathering large number of facts is quite normal with the kind of book, this is, however excessive leeway of the authors for collecting more news than views produces the overall effect less natty and disorganised. Seeing through the pages, book projects many forgotten side stories, few of them are worth of revisiting and rest are easily escapable. Turning of Kashmir into a conflict zones from an abode of peace and syncretism didn’t take too long after the end of world war-II that ruined the erstwhile colonial powers. The power shifted from the ageing Europe towards USA and USSR, newly independent nation like India has stout aspiration to succeed in a new world and that was troublesome for the departing imperialists.
So they made the extremely virulent planks by converging ‘identity issues’ with the twins-religion and geography and also backed the whole plan by some strongest futuristic pronouncements. More than any other issue, this nasty idea of Mountbatten became able to confuse Nehru on Kashmir matter in the later years and that hyper-moralism tolled negatively on the peace and stability of this region. The masterly hateful antics on which M.A.Jinnah’s career thrived in the politics, succeeded to form a country with the brutal tantamount on the uncountable numbers of people who lost their lives or lost their calm forever. Unlike Nehru, Jinnah was not leading a real democracy, so he lost his control from his most unrealistic venture-Pakistan very soon and this newly born nation’s democratic training halted in infancy and never could recuperate those exercises, even half willingly since then.
The tussle of the two nations was begun as regional dispute and soon turned a hotcake of multilateral discussions without any plans to resolving the complications at fore among the different stakeholders. Abduction of those six foreign tourists in 1995 was inhuman, lately refutation got place against the Pakistan’s proxy war in Kashmir valley but so far condition was deteriorated much badly. India faced challenge on its secularism through a troubled Kashmir, Pakistan almost failed as a nation in projecting the very wrong agenda and what happened to Kashmiriyat, very few had any afterthought!
Situation has indeed changed in the Kashmir valley today, if compare the existing scenario of 1995, but is it really marks the win of good on evil? To a large extent, state had no option but to crush the terror networks being handled from the outside with very active interface of local dissents, those who were not qualified to be called ‘revolutionary’ since they did not know the meaning of their fight against India. The demand of ‘Azaadi’ couldn’t be simplified under the incredible leadership, Kashmir faced in the last six and half decades. That’s why, grand narrative like the ‘The Meadow’ is the simplest outcome of Kashmir’s long forgotten existential needs.
A book of this serious stature has been written for those six kidnapped tourists, this is indeed commendable as working on such project requires commitment, far ahead than one comes through the professional obligations alone. But it would be unlikely that thousands, who lost lives and lakhs of Kashmiris in valley or outside suffering the mental agony, will be ever able to be narrated through even the voluminous meta-narrative compositions…their distorted past and uncertain future probably needs no chronicler!
Atul Kumar Thakur
June 24th, 2012, Sunday, New Delhi
Email: summertickets@gmail.com
(Published in The Kashmir Today,June 24,2012/ http://kashmirmonitor.org/kashmonitor/06242012-ND-thrill-and-revelations-of-stunted-kashmir-28818.aspx )

A Voyage through History

Book Review: Non-fiction/Current Affairs, Tinderbox: The Past and Future of Pakistan by M.J.Akbar, Harper Collins publishers, 376 pp; Rs399 (Paperback)

M.J Akbar is one among the iconic journalists, India has produced. He contributed immensely for the nation, both as journalist and writer of many remarkable books. His uncountable articles written in the last three decades and some of his books are very important contributions to contemporary history, which shows his early interests and inclinations for regular reading and meticulous independent research.

As having fortune to know him from close (mostly through reading and listening him for years), can say this humble man’s journey started in journalism through honest aspirations and he rose to the crest of success by following the path of sheer excellence. In his teenage and during college days in Calcutta, like many young writers, he started writing letter and later unsolicited articles to the editor, The Statesman (then Sunanda Datta Ray was the editor)-the concern of writings used to be varied, from the shortage of fish in Bada Bajar to jams at college street etc.

Like his many earlier works, this book is seriously focussed on the liberal and modernist discourses and also about their weak formulations in the specific context of Islam in South Asia. The book has written with deep research, so details are very nuanced and proliferated but without ever loosing the focus in narrative. This work needs high level of concentration from readers, as the history of Islam in South Asia and the genesis of Pakistan have entirely covered throughout its pages with degree of high seriousness. The liberal and enlightened impulses of the author is being evident through the kind of effort he has placed for sincerely documenting the every essential facts in the formation of Pakistan

As chronicler of historical journey of an idea, M.J Akbar gives Tinderbox the touch of first-hand authenticity on events, peoples, circumstances and the rigid mindsets that divided India. For finding the mainframe, his overtures spans a thousand years and with the both good and bad factors, such as-visionaries, opportunists, statesmen, tyrants, plunderers, generals and numbers of unkind theologians beginning with Shah Waliulah who propagated “theory of distance “to protect Islamic identity from then still socio-culturally dominant Hinduism.

The book gives unprecedented insight to know Shah Waliullah’s intervention in the 18th century not be taken complex, rather it should be seen for very much directed with virulent aims to corner the liberal discourses-for now, this book should be considered authentic before Shah Waliullah’s works in Arabic and Persian is translated into English. Contrary to this, Syed Ahmad Khan was a modernist in conviction but inconsistent with same in action, though his works overall benefitted emphatically to atleast elite sections of Muslims under the Aligarh Muslim University, an institution of repute he founded at the height of independence movement. Despite few historic blunders, he deserves to be known as modernist, strongly for his exemplary contribution in education and also for his sporadic display of political prudence that assisted in strengthening anti British sentiment at crucial times.

The chapters, Gandhi’s Maulanas and The Non-violent Jehad explores very well about the Gandhi’s agenda for common struggle to meet the independence and further looking forward for a free nation out of the narrow religious confinements. Akbar seems doing right act with balancing the events of past that bloodied the nation and drawn the unfortunate boundaries over its fate. It’s true that non-conformity of few Congress leaders was the prime reason for the formation of obstinate and lustful greeds among high rank Muslim League leaders, particularly with M.A.Jinnah, who had his own dreams formatting and deformatting under huge fluctuations.

Jinnah was the man, who stood with all anti-thesis possible against the Islam. He was religiously non-practicing, English speaking, consistent drinker and married with a woman of different religion-moreover, his best friends were Hindus/Parsis until he seen the dream for modern secular Pakistan that unfortunately never realised. Why Jinnah moved under the aegis of blind religious faith and later in remorse, after triumphing Pakistan is still need to be reckoned?

Here, the major competitor of Jinnah, Jawaharlal Nehru alone gives frank account of the reasons why the Congress and the Muslim League couldn’t settle rights lucidly implied in the Act of 1935. Nehru noted in 1938 that Jinnah didn’t show much interest in the economic demands of the masses and shown no concern for issues like-poverty and unemployment, damaging even minimum attempts to propose democratic reforms and modern economic policies.

The essay on contemporary Pakistan highlights the over grown impact of religious conventionalism burdening the architects of the new nation. Those practices are being continues under the confused mental state giving fillip to all imagined misnomer about anything beyond that “defined and restricted construct”. That somehow makes stronger the blockade of mind and progressive policies with equal vigour. The new chapter/ Dark Side of the Moon on the events leading up to the killing of Osama bin Laden and its realised and potential impact on US-Pakistan relations are giving the picture of Pakistan till present day. Tinderbox has enough space and erudite range of narration to cover the every possible details related to formation, shattering of beliefs to the level of chaos in Pakistan.


This is a sort of work, which is not written to subvert the existence of Pakistan. If this book will be read by readers with rational angle, sure the crux would be very worthy for them, as here is concern for a nation consistently moving towards instability-the leaders of global politics will be hardly show off their concern for this fall. So, at some point solutions and good thoughts have to be come and accepted from the homeland or neighbourhood-this work should be taken in the same context!
Atul Kumar Thakur
April 06, 2011, Friday, 2012, New Delhi
Email: summertickets@gmail.com

Mango blues!

Book Review: Fiction/A Case of Exploding Mangoes by Mohammed Hanif, Random House India, 377 pp; Rs250 (Paperback)

Within literary writings, fiction and fantasies most often used in a blend to establish the plots that subverts the subtle differences and effects of these two. In a random search, most of prose writings fall in this category with their impregnable steadfastness and inflexibility. Deeply influenced with the colonialist tradition, Indian subcontinental writings too have been displaying similar temptations until the advent of post-colonialist consciousness broadly after the 1980’s. That made rational impacts on English writings in particular and henceforth a clear devoid from brownish tradition a ground reality. On this front, India edged out its neighbours as the prime mover of new consciousness though in the course of time, that gap established to be narrowed down.

The new generation of Pakistan’s English writers has strengthened that notion with amazing display of concern towards nation’s suffering in past and present. Mohammad Hanif is one among the strong voice of this literary generation who overtly displayed the malignity inside the Pakistan’s authoritative regime during the time of General Zia ul-Haq with his first novel, A Case of Exploding Mangoes. His deep inquisition of major and silly habitual status of Military rulers, ISI-foreign officials and most noteworthy of mimic politicians portrays very well the actual scene of Pakistan in 1980’s. That was by all means a very traumatic phase for the country whose quest for a real democracy was still on. As Hanif’s novel leads its reader to every nook and cranny of Pakistan through the progress of realistically imbibed theme, at some points it also makes clear that a “paralysed democracy” couldn’t be possible without the command hijacking by big brother, USA!

Unlike the political hotspots, creative terrains are little distinct in projecting real events and even imaginative ideas. Fortunately, Hanif lets enough spaces for his readers to feel and form opinion on the resentment against General Zia that exploded his presidential plane, Pak One midway along with US Ambassador to Pakistan, Arnold Raphel and few other influential officials. Figuratively, Zia’s obsession with mangoes, diplomacy and dualistic life styles are beautifully covered here, so are the intimate sides of this authoritarian ruler. Details are abundant; it seems stronger after reading past half of the book where few details were easily worth of escape albeit stylized narratives of Hanif and his close hold over the secretness till the end makes reader compelled to walk together with him.

So far Zia’s unexpected death has remains a mystery and any advance on simplifying this is possible only through the guess, the way this book has performed. Who has killed him? The impatient army generals growing old waiting for their promotions? The CIA? The ISI? RAW? Or Ali Shigri, a junior officer at the military academy whose father, a whisky-swilling jihadi colonel, has been murdered by the army? The unusual isolated huddling of Zia while boarding the last flight shows the kind of end he met was not totally unimagined for him. As in his confession, he repeatedly used to stress on his humble family background that given him lust rather inspiration to dramatically progress the ranks and his rise whatsoever its fallouts, was the crest of oddities! He rose and never fallen in true sense, which was not less tragical; he met to accident and not to a fairly exercised trail. In true introspection, only rise and rise of ruling generals have long history in Pakistan…their multitasking always harmed the democratic elements and soft socio-political fabric that could have easily possible with a proper democracy at place.

As writers’ perspectives, what is fresh and remarkable is the absence of blames towards external factors for big mess. As a writer, Hanif has a clear lead with this book; he accomplished it through relying on his long inside experiences in Pakistan’s arm force and later working as a journalist of repute for years. His writing is closer to the aspiration of pious yet subdued aspirations of a mass Pakistani and clearly separated from the hyped bandwagons that consistently made the undeserving participants, the deciding forces in mainstream. Away from the narrow prisms and consideration, this novel attracts only the genuine concern and leaving aside all non essential issues, that’s triumph of high standard. It could be solace for all realistic polemists and constructive participants of diplomacy that Pakistan’s positive side is quite resonant and it’s for good amidst all glooms of radicalism and ambiguous democratic functioning!
Atul Kumar Thakur
February29, 2012, Wednesday, New Delhi
Email: summertickets@gmail.com

Jinnah: An Evangelist of Virulent Ideas

Mr. Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the patriarch of a nation called Pakistan gaining utmost limelight nowadays at least in the imagination of Armed Force officer turned Politician turned a writer Mr. Jaswant Singh who’s getting mixed sort of tag for his juvenile researched book Jinnah: India- Pakistan-Independence. This book came with an unprecedented shock to India’s long standing ethos which culminated in the long process of time, further it engraved with an adversely personified exchange of India’s nation maker’s impressions.
Jaswant Singh’s moves seems to intended for big acclamation and commercial success; in this process he became so hurried that he even forgets to put some genuine historical facts in his historical queries of highly ambiguous political scenario of pre- independent India. In this regard early and timely suited remarks of India’s leading historian, Ram Chandra Guha that “History is not a mathematical game” astutely reveals the feeble nature of this book.

Indeed Mr. Jinnah began his political life as a child of the enlightenment the seeds of which were planted in undivided India by the statesmen of Victorian England but that was not sustained as last eventuality as he was an astute expert of legal practices and his success was largely due to the fact that he was quick to seize the tactical implications of any development. In reality he was a man of ambition and had a very high opinion of his own abilities and the success which he conquered relentlessly in his early professional life.
After a considerable phase of his idealistic convictions he changed his mind for a separate platform of a nation based on communal division, than foremost reason for his avoidance the older beliefs and the Gandhian Congress was his nervousness about the consequences of rousing mass enthusiasm. Some of his quotation sourced from the book “Religion in Politics (Arun Shourie) and Federation of Pakistan which also appeared in The Economic Times dated on August 20th beaks the silence on his actual visions of future.

Countering Congress demand for freedom of a united India, Jinnah raised his voice of protest to gathered crowd at Madras… “In this subcontinent, you have two different societies – the Muslim society and the Hindu society and particularly in this land there is another nation that is the Dravidian. Attacking Mahatma Gandhi for his refusal to accept Muslim League as sole representative of Indian Muslims, Jinnah said “Why should not Mr. Gandhi be proud to say “I am a Hindu, the Congress has a solid Hindu backing. I am not ashamed of saying that I am a Musalman.I am right, I hope and I think even a blind man must have been convinced by now, that the Muslim League has the solid backing of the Musalman of India.
Why then all this camouflage? Why not proudly representing your people and let me meet you proudly representing the Musalmans”. Attacking Muslim Congressmen as “dupes”, “betrayers, traitors and cranks”.

Jinnah said: “The conduct of these dupes of the Congress and these betrayers well nigh disheartens me and I some times ask myself if a community which can still produce so many foolish or treacherous men is worth carrying for, praying for and weeping for. Yet, gentlemen we must not, we can not and we will not yield despair.On a constitution for a united India and democracy, Jinnah said: “Democracy means, to begin with majority rule. Majority rule in a single society is understandable.
Representative government in a single nation, harmonious and homogeneous, is understandable but can such system ever succeed when you have two different nations? Demanding Pakistan, Jinnah told League legislators in Delhi: “I have explained in great detail the fundamental and vital differences between Hindus and Muslims. There never has been for all these two nations.

The Indian unity that we talk of up to today in held by the British and they by their ultimate sanction of the Police and Army maintained peace and law and order.Jinnah’s reply to Congress’ opposition to Pakistan “The Musalmans are not a minority as is commonly known and understood...Musalmans is a nation according to any definition of a nation and they must have their homelands, their territory and their state.
All these comments showed complete contrast to the Mahatma Gandhi with whom he shared some crucial initiatives during the three decades he dominated Indian political arena and who, however much he might adapt himself to the thrusts of circumstances but he aggressively managed on a long range of his own changed perceptions about the future political development with remarkable consistency. He anticipated that a backward community like the Musalmans could be roused to action only by an appeal, its religious faith.

He kept the vows of communalism for communal causes and drawn poignant inspirations from the hard core dictators of Europe like Mussolini, Hitler etc to emerge in the helm of power that further pushed him to a perfect technique of propaganda and mass integration with like minded to which atrocity – mongering was central. For materializing his isolatory aspirations which was also proportionally conducive for the sake of British rule further strengthen the disastrous “ Divide and Rule” diplomacy over a period of half a century was blindly motivated towards this goal.
In his megalomaniac action he could never visualized own faults and kept fostering the wild motives of colonial forces who possessed utmost interest in such large scale growing strife among the India’s political parties and likely changed in key discourses. All this later development in his mindset marked a complete shift from his early ideological temperament which he profoundly shown at many junctures.

On Minto- Morley reforms, he set his face sternly against the British attempts to entice the Muslims away from their allegiance to the Congress and India’s national movement; for long he kept aloof from the Muslim League but alas such thinking couldn’t be endured forever. Here it’s inevitable to illustrate that Jinnah was deeply surrounded with contradictions over his role in contemporary Indian politics; at one side he felt impatient with emerging leadership in Congress and kept himself aloof from the Congress on the other side he also shown cold response to some very strategic stand of Muslim League.
His little sympathy with the Ali Brothers’ Khilafat Movement in Turkey and his favour of unitary government at the first Round Table Conference because of its diversity and unviablity of federal propositions are some of very lucid example of federal propositions are some of very lucid example of his ambiguous policy.

So for any proper evaluation of his work it’s quite essential to conduct a comprehensive introspection in the light of diverse time frame and issues, otherwise any judgments would be ended with improper and frivolous ramifications. So, reaching on an amicable convergence is impossible by vilifying own national heroes in the context of an amorphous act to glorify a man of contradictory nature. Despite this Mr. Jinnah even during his most fractional state never undermine the viability of strong friendship between Pakistan and India besides he also shown great faith in democracy which in subsequent phase strucked downwardly in absence of his own replacement with equal international stature and unquestioned authority over the masses.
He might have been facing many anxious thoughts about the future of newly created Pakistan.Indeed he shown some temptation for secular ideas in his initial days of career but he couldn’t sustained it for longer time; consequently Independence could be materialized only for two divided nation.

So, with such harsh consequences of a long cherished dream of millions of Indian the leaving British colonizers received an unexpected and permanent gift in terms of a long- stretch of disturb south Asia. The British colonizers found a very inevitable place for them in upcoming level playing fields of diplomacy in south, such hassle free materialization of theirs dream became possible through a very synchronized political approach of Muslim League; there folly even haunting today the Pakistan and region in terms of a consistent western intervention in their own pursuits.
Even Jinnah was completely failed to endure his own democratic vision for Pakistan in later period; in no manner he does deserves the epithet like “secular” and any glorification's of his role as torch bearer of secularism would be misleading in an integrated assessment. It would have been quite better for Mr. Jaswant Singh to focus on his meticulous Statesmen quality rather than getting involved in frisking a very in-depth and complex side of his character. Whatever may be further reaction on such more subversive standpoints it must be taken in mind by the every creative person to avail their autonomy judiciously and never on the cost of India’s moral principles which culminated over the long period and sacrifices of countless martyrs. Unsolicited aberrations must be avoided for common goods.



Atul Kumar Thakur
25th August2009, New Delhi
atul_mdb@rediffmail.com