Featured Post

Wake up Now ! جاگو ، جاگو ، جاگو

Wake up Pakistan ! Presently the Muslim societies are in a state of ideological confusion and flux. Materialism, terrorism,...

Sunday, August 18, 2013

Independence for whom?

Every year we celebrate Independence Day with fervour and official ceremonies including military parade and state banquet. Titles and awards are bestowed upon military and civilian persons for their meritorious services and performances. Generally, it is believed that we got independence from colonialism after the British departed. We became free in our homeland from slavery and subordination by foreign powers.

There is no doubt that the country became independent and the era of colonialism ended. But the question remains — who really got freedom? The common people, feudal lords, tribal leaders, bureaucrats, military officers or political leaders and the business community? The reality is that the common people still suffer as slaves and are not free. Those who got freedom are the privileged and ruling classes.

During the British period, the feudal lords were supervised and controlled by the British officers. They acted as the most loyal group who supported the colonial government with money and manpower.

However, the British government evolved a system to control them. If a feudal lord disobeyed or violated rules and regulations, his seat in the darbar of the commissioner or the governor was lost. It meant a reduction in his status and the displeasure of the government. The disgrace lowered his position in the eyes of his contemporaries as well as his own people. The feudals would immediately apologise so that their status could be restored. It was common practice for government officials to keep them waiting for hours before a meeting. Those loyal to the British were awarded titles and granted privileges which raised their social status. David Page in Prelude to Partition and Sara Ansari in Sufi Saints and State Power have discussed in detail the imperial control system over the feudals.

In the early period, the Indians were appointed only on lower posts in bureaucracy. Slowly, more posts would be reserved for Indians, especially for those who passed the competitive examinations. However, their conduct was supervised by British high officials and they had to observe special rules and regulations reserved for bureaucracy which suited the interests of the colonial government. Same was the case with the army as the higher ranks gradually opened for Indians.

When the government allowed political parties to be formed, the leaders had to adhere to a strict political framework. It was only during the struggle for freedom that they actually had the opportunity to act freely.

There are two different views regarding independence. The British claimed that they shifted power peacefully but the people of the subcontinent argued that they won their freedom after significant struggle.

So who were the real beneficiaries of independence? The feudal lords previously under British control were now without a supervisor who would watch and check their conduct. They became free to treat the peasants as they liked. They could imprison, flog and even kill them without being punished. They could not be challenged, were above the law and masters of their landed property. The police and government administration came under their control which by violating the law, they could use for personal interests. Their power increased when they joined political parties and became winning candidates as their captive voters elected them for the national and provincial assemblies. Similarly, tribal leaders became sole spokesmen for their tribes.

Both groups emerged as most powerful and influential on the political scene of Pakistan as they now enjoyed privileges that were denied to them during the colonial period.

The military was no more under the control of British officials and high posts now opened up for Pakistanis. Ayub Khan admitted in his memoirs that in the British army, at the most he could have been promoted to the post of a brigadier. But in Pakistan he became field marshal.

Bureaucrats emerged as the most privileged group in the country. They enjoyed unlimited power by appointments on high positions during martial law as well as in democracy.

The business community was free to hoard commodities, increase prices and earn unlimited profits as well as to evade taxes and become the wealthiest section of the society.

Politicians who assumed power used it for personal gains, accumulated wealth, established dynasty rule and retired after plundering state resources.

After independence, the status of the common people changed from being subjects to citizens but they remain unprivileged. Politicians treated them merely as voters and once the elections were over, they were forgotten. If the masses demonstrated for their rights, they were crushed by law enforcement agencies. They are still voiceless, helpless and denied a role in the development of society.

It is an illusion that the people of Pakistan got freedom, and that independence day should be celebrated by hoisting the flag and listening to patriotic songs. Sadly, independence has failed to give the common people freedom, dignity and respect.
By Mubarak Ali: http://www.dawn.com/news/1036689/past-present-independence-for-whom

Free-eBooks: http://goo.gl/2xpiv
Peace-Forum Video Channel: http://goo.gl/GLh75

Saturday, August 17, 2013

جہالت اور ترقی Ignorance and Progress

اکثر علماء کا خیال ہے کہ اسلام میں تعلیم کا مطلب صرف دینی تعلیم ہے . سائنس کی تعلیم ضروری نہیں . یہ ان کی لا علمی یا جہالت یا تنگ نظری ہے . اسلام دین اور دنیا دونوں کے درمیان توازن رکھتا ہے. الله تعالیٰ کا ارشاد ہے :
" ہمارے پروردگار ہمیں دنیا میں بھی بھلائی عطا کر اور آخرت میں بھی بھلائی عطا کر اور ہمیں دوزخ کی سزا سے بچا۔ (201 سورة البقرة)

Ignorance and progress: By Irfan Hussain

For a Darwinian biologist, it is remarkable that Richard Dawkins has practically made a career out of atheism. Books like The Selfish Gene and The God Delusion have elevated him to the position of high priest of non-believers. Many who share his beliefs – or their lack – are put off by his strident advocacy of atheism, and his virulent attacks on religion.

Never far from controversy, Dawkins was at the heart of a Twitter-storm recently when he sent out this tweet to his 777,000 followers: “All the world’s Muslims have fewer Nobel Prizes than Trinity College, Cambridge. They did great things in the Middle Ages, though.”

Quoted by the Guardian, Owen Jones sent this tweet in response: “How dare you dress your bigotry up as atheism? You are now beyond an embarrassment.” Faisal Islam, Channel 4’s economics editor added: “I thought scientists were meant to upbraid journalists for use of spurious data points to ‘prove’ existing prejudgments.”

Just for the record, Trinity College at Cambridge has 32 Nobel Prizes, as against 10 for all Muslims. This number would go down to nine if, as many Pakistanis assert, our Dr Abdus Salam was not a Muslim because of his Ahmadiya belief. So, Dawkins was being quite factual in his tweet.

Defending himself against the charge of racism, Dawkins said: “Am I surprised (by the accusation)? Only at the number of people who seem to think Islam is a race, rather than a religion. I regard that view as racist. Anything you can convert to, or convert from, is NOT a race.”

In point of fact and belief, a Muslim cannot convert from Islam, although new converts to the faith are always welcome. But Dawkins does have a point: the Muslim ummah comprises around 1.5 billion people from virtually every nation and every continent. So comments questioning Muslim achievements should not, logically speaking, be ascribed to racism.

But then the first casualty in discussions about faith is usually logic. Muslims tend to be very touchy about even implied criticism of their economic and scientific backwardness. So when Dawkins pointed out, again quite accurately, that if we were to compare the number of Nobel prizes won by Jews with those awarded to Muslims, the contrast would be even more striking, the reaction was one of outrage.

Sadly, we are just not prepared to face reality. The reason Muslims have been left so far behind is their refusal to embrace modern education, and to cling to rote learning and dogma. By confusing Western thought and influence with rationality, we think we are better Muslims by rejecting modernity. As a prime example of this, consider the Ottoman refusal to install printing presses when they were first invented. The reason given was that this would result in the mass production of holy texts by machines instead of being calligraphed.

While this can be defended on aesthetic grounds, it set back learning and ultimately, weakened the Ottoman Empire. In Nigeria, Boko Haram, the extremist terrorist group, has been attacking schools and killing students because it opposes ‘Western’ education. Our own jihadis have been doing the same thing. When they were in power, the Afghan Taliban decreed that only ‘Islamic’ subjects could be taught in schools, and then only to boys.

With these attitudes still widely prevalent in the Muslim world, it should hardly surprise us that Muslims have won only 10 (or nine, depending on your level of tolerance) Nobel Prizes. Unfortunately, many Muslims do not understand that scientific knowledge is neither ‘Western’ nor ‘Islamic’, but is part of our collective inheritance, no matter what faith we follow. It is a steady accumulation of observations and theorising, and has nothing to do with religion.

Another factor impeding our progress is the patriarchal and authoritarian structure of most Muslim societies. Both in the classrooms and at home, young people are discouraged from asking questions and challenging the established order. And yet this sceptical attitude is at the heart of scientific progress. If mankind as a whole had accepted received wisdom as the immutable truth, we would not have made the progress we have. Dawkins, for all his abrasive ways, has popularised the Darwinian evolutionary theory through his TV programmes and his books. Partly as a result, this is now the accepted explanation for how life evolved on our planet, at least among rational, well-educated people.

And while many Muslims in the UK and elsewhere were upset by his comments on their scientific backwardness, the fact is that he has been attacking all religions for years. Christians in the UK are bitter about the fact that while his criticism has often been given a public platform by the BBC, issues relating to Muslims have been soft-pedalled.

I find it slightly odd that while so many Muslims reject modern education as being ‘Western’, East Asian countries like South Korea, Japan and China have made remarkable progress by embracing the same ‘Western’ education. I suppose if you believe that we need to focus on the after-life, our physical existence on this world is of secondary importance. This makes it acceptable to have a second-rate educational system that is somehow ‘Islamic’.

Today, we take our phenomenal scientific progress for granted. From medicine to engineering to astrophysics, we are truly blessed by the enormous possibilities opening up before us. As we pursue the quest for discovering the nature of the universe at the gigantic particle collider at Cern, or invent an instrument that will predict the length of our lives (as has just been announced), we are in the midst of a scientific revolution.

In such exciting times, it is a source of constant amazement that we should squander so much time and effort in debating – and fighting over – religious differences. And yet, as we in Pakistan know only too well, our killing fields are populated by zealots who use faith to justify their murderous ways. As long as they have public support, there can be no progress.
By Irfan Hussain: http://www.dawn.com/news/1035350/ignorance-and-progress
Free-eBooks: http://goo.gl/2xpiv
Peace-Forum Video Channel: http://goo.gl/GLh75

Friday, August 16, 2013

The Use and Mususe of Army in Pakistan

“If you want to destroy a nation, just deprive them of two assets- their ideology and their armed forces”. Akhtar Malik

Ideology and the armed forces are vital for the survival of any nation. Ideology inspires will to survive and the armed forces thwart any external (and at times internal) aggression against the integrity of nation. Both these facets complement each other and one cannot survive without the other. 

Since the creation of Pakistan in 1947 our enemies had been curiously working on the agenda to finish Pakistan. India had never accepted the partitioning of subcontinent and had always worked to dismember Pakistan. Nehru is on the record to have said that newly created state Pakistan will not survive for many years and will soon revert back to its ‘mother land’. The Indian-sponsored movements like Bengali nationalism, Sindhu-desh, Pakhtunistan and Azad Baluchistan were all meant to achieve the same aim.

Apart from attacks on the ideology of Pakistan there have been many lethal assaults on the armed forces of Pakistan, both from inside and outside the country. The analysts around the world had believed that the center of gravity of Pakistan lies in its armed forces, and no substantial gains against Pakistan can be acquired without damaging this prestigious institution of the country.


The first ever well planned attack to undermine the armed forces of Pakistan was launched not by any foreigner but by one of our own political leaders- Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. Being a young minister in the cabinet of President Ayub Khan he knew that he cannot achieve his aim of ruling Pakistan without decimating the Army. In 1964 Bhutto was instrumental in creating situation that led to India- Pakistan war of 1965. Bhutto was sure that Pakistan Army will not be able to endure a war with an enemy which was six times bigger and stronger. However Bhutto was baffled when Pakistan Army successfully beat back Indian attack on international border and emerged as the most respectable institution in the country. India was compelled to sign the Tashkent Declaration with Pakistan. The legendary tales of heroic deeds of armed forces have become the part of our folk songs and literature.

Duly frustrated by the failure of his scheme Bhutto quit the government, formed Pakistan People’s Party and launched a movement against President Ayub Khan. He told the nation that the President had sold the interests of Pakistan to India in Tashkent Declaration and that he will soon reveal the secret behind this deal- a promise which he never fulfilled.

General elections of 1970 gave another opportunity to ZA Bhutto to materialize his dream. The sweeping victory of Sh. Mujeeb ul Rehman from East Pakistan thwarted the ambitions of Bhutto to rule the country. He therefore acted in a very discordant manner by not accepting the mandate of Bengalis and prompted President Gen Yahya Khan to initiate military action against the ‘traitor’ Sh. Mujeeb and his party. The logical result of such action was the Indian military intervention and subsequent dismemberment of East Pakistan on 16 December 1971 and paved the way for Bhutto to rule the remaining part of the country. Pakistan Army was made to surrender in East Pakistan due to none of its fault, and the country was humiliated. The individual gallantry actions of our officers and soldiers who were made to fight a war under worst ever conditions will be written in golden words.

But Bhutto was as satisfied as ever. His body language and behavior would never show any resentment or dismay which a leader should display whose half of the country was lost. ZA Bhutto also took some other initiatives to molest the Army. He violated all the rules of merit and made Gen Ziaul Haq as Army Chief by superseding six general who were senior to him. Bhutto also opened a political cell in Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) thus paving the way for military interference in civilian politics- a practice that cost the nation heavily in times to come.

Bhutto committed rigging in elections 1977 in order to secure his rule. A mass agitation started against him. Bhutto refused to undo his mistakes and behaved in an arrogant manner. There is no doubt that Martial Law of Gen Ziaul Haq was an outcome of Bhutto’s apathy, lack of sensitivity fro people’s feeling and ineptness of his part to resolve crisis at national level. The result was that Pakistani nation had to bear with military rule for 11 years.


The period from 1988 to 1999 saw a musical chair play between Ms. Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif. As and when one party would assume power the opposition would start a campaign to overthrow the government through conspiracies. Both of them used the Army to destabilize the sitting government. A popular stance of the opposition would be to ask Chief of the Army Staff to interfere and play his role as the country was at the brink of destruction. The politicians in opposition would conduct secret meetings with COAS and try to convince him to topple the government. All the four civilian governments were terminated either by the President or by direct intervention of Army. This was a severe blow to democracy due to ineptness of the politicians but at the end whole blame was placed on Army who allegedly did not allow democracy to prosper.

During his 2nd tenure in late 1990’s Nawaz Sharif also committed the same mistake. He made Gen Pervez Musharaf as Army Chief by superseding many senior and more capable generals and thus set the stage for his own downfall. The ‘Kargil Operation’ was the turning point in his relations with Gen Pervez Musharaf and the Army. I am not a supporter of Kargil operation and feel that it was an unnecessary adventure but I am also against any apologetic attitude of Pakistanis once this even had taken place.


Our analysts say that Kargil was an uncalled for and unjustified intrusion in India. I ask how many ‘uncalled for’ and ‘unjustified’ intrusions have India launched against Pakistan in the past? Was Indian intrusion in East Pakistan in 1971 justified? Was unilateral occupation of Siachen Glacier by India in 1984 justified? So once Pakistan Army had achieved a tactical advantage in Kargil over its arch enemy, it should be seen in the backdrop of the peculiar relations between the two countries since 1947.

While bashing Pakistan Army on Kargil issue our intellectuals forget to mention factors which led to this event. No one goes into the depth of reasons which forced the whole episode. No one talks of the Indian intentions and placing of Indian 70 Bde in Mashkoh Valley contrary to its usual deployment in Srinagar Valley during winters and our preemptive move. No one highlights the absence of move of our strategic forces which encouraged the Indians to move all assets up and achieve the 15:1 parity. The role of Indian Artillery and Indian Air Force is totally over bloated. It can be gauged from the facts that a total of only 12 individuals sustained injuries on gun positions on the entire front of 400 Km and the IAF could knock out only 16 individuals and some stores through over 1500 sorties. One can have long sessions on this issue, I’ll leave it at that. My heart goes out to all those brave men and officers who roughed it out in those trying conditions. It’s easy to criticize and in hindsight everyone becomes a thinker. We never lost although suffered few casualties in withdrawal. Indians have accepted their casualties as 587 in this Conflict and very heavy losses of equipment and ammo. The Indians were short of 155 mm ammunition and they purchased from South Africa.

As I remember, Kargil area was occupied by India in 1971. This was no violation from Pakistan but a reply at a suitable time. Even if we are convinced that Kargil operation was a mistake this mistake should have been owned by Pakistan and justified at political and diplomatic level. We should have told the world community in 1998 that this ‘violation’ is similar to that committed by India in Siachen. And if India wants us to vacate Kargil they should also vacate Siachen simultaneously. That was not a difficult option. Recall the event when Indian Prime Minister Rajev Gandhi during visit to Pakistan in 1990’s committed with Ms. Benazir Bhutto that India will withdraw from Siachen. But when Rajev went back he telephoned Benazir and regretted his commitment on the plea that his Army Chief was not agreeing to withdraw from Siachen. When Indian PM could give that much weight to his Army Chief why couldn’t our PM? It was a total political and diplomatic failure on the part of our civilian government of that time who could not handle the situation with courage and dexterity.

On assuming power in 1999 Gen Pervez Musharaf visited India. A brief interview was conducted by a female host of ND TV of India with Musharraf where she asked him, ”Do you have any regrets about Kargil, now that you are such a welcome visitor in India?” Gen Musharraf smilingly gave her a very apt reply, ”Do you expect me to ever say that ‘Yes, I regret it’ ? If somebody was to ask Indian Prime Minister ‘Do you regret having divided Pakistan and made Bangla Desh?’, would he say ‘yes, we are very sorry’? How would you expect that I would regret?” Leaving aside all criticism of his policies I like the way Gen Musharaf rebuts such questions of our arch enemy.


The era of Musharaf rule saw the worst kind of criticism being unleashed against Pak Army and ISI, mostly due to wrong policies of the ruler. During this period the war on terror was brought on our soil which has so far resulted in over 40,000 Pakistanis losing their lives, including 5000 troops. The country suffered heavy financial loss and was set decades beyond in terms of economic development. The war and the loss still go on unabated. Pakistan Army became unsafe on its own soil. Though the fateful events of 9/11 had placed Pervez Musharaf at a sheer disadvantage but we feel that he could still have saved the country from the colossal loss with little better diplomacy and strategy.


When Nawaz Sharif was ousted from power, he also became a so-called ‘anti establishment’ leader. During his exile to Saudi Arabia and as an opposition leader after the Elections 2008, Nawaz Sharif always remained at dagger drawn with the Army. He could not distinguish between the armed forces as a state institution and an over ambitious Army Chief, who topples the civilian government and enforces martial law. He equated both of them in one bracket.

After Elections 2008 the dignity and respect of the Army was rescued to certain extent by Gen Kiyani as Army Chief when he disengaged the institution from politics. Though the Army virtually got itself detached from civil affairs but the criticism against it continued with full force.

The PPP government under Zardari was no exception to this Army-bashing. Though Mr. Zardari apparently maintained good working relationship with Army, mostly with an aim to prolong his stay in power, he was no less an evil as far as damaging this institution is concerned. Whenever he felt that his grip was becoming loose on state affairs due to his inept governance, he would usually divert the attention of the people by saying that ‘There is a conspiracy of pen (judiciary) and bayonet (Army) cooking up against his government”. The notorious Memo-gate Scandal and behavior of Zardari after Abbottabad Operation of the US against Osama bin Laden, are clear indicators as to how the highest functionaries of the state, including the Supreme Commander of Armed Forces have been conspiring to decimate the defensive strength and capability of Pakistan. 



The fateful events of 9/11 placed Pakistan under immense pressure. Though no Pakistani was involved in any act of terror across the globe the whole world was made to believe that Pakistan is the actual source of terrorism. America’s war on terror pushed Pakistan in real terrific situation and has damaged us only next to Iraq and Afghanistan. It was not our war but when Pakistan became an ally of America the whole garbage of war was transferred to Pakistan. Pakistan Army as usual was on the forefront of this war and had bore the major brunt of its consequences. Despite all odds Army has fared well in this war also. Whatever task was given to Army it completed it with professional dexterity and devotion. May it be the cleansing of Swat from the occupation of the Taliban or campaign in South Waziristan to liberate this rugged country from terrorists Army has never disappointed the nation.

The question arises; why after all the Army has always been condemned is still the target of criticism? The Army had already distanced itself clearly from the politics and has suffered the worst kind of attrition while saving the nation from terrorists. But still Army and ISI remain the major scapegoat for all the ills that the nation is facing. Talk of any segment of society- the electronic media, the politicians, the civil society organizations, the NGOs, the human rights organizations, you will find them unanimous in criticizing and condemning Army on one pretext or the other. To find reasons we will have to slightly go back in history.

David Ben Gurion, the first Israeli Prime Minister commented on Pakistan as follows:

“The world Zionist movement should not be neglectful of the dangers of Pakistan to it. And Pakistan now should be its first target, for this ideological State is a threat to our existence. And Pakistan, the whole of it, hates the Jews and loves the Arabs. This lover of Arabs is more dangerous to us than the Arabs themselves. For that matter, it is most essential for the world Zionism that it should now take immediate steps against Pakistan. Whereas the inhabitants of the Indian peninsula are Hindus whose hearts have been full of hatred towards Muslims, therefore India is the most important base for us to work there from against Pakistan. It is essential that we exploit this base and strike and crush Pakistanis, the enemies of Jews and Zionism, by all disguised and secret plans”.
(David Ben Gurion, the first Israeli Prime Minister Jewish Chronicle, 09 August 1967)

The shocking statement of the founder Prime Minister of Israel has some cardinal points. One, Pakistan is an ideological state. Two, Pakistan is more dangerous for Israel than even the Arabs. Three, the world Zionist movement has been told to take action against Pakistan and four, India will be the base to used by Zionists to crush Pakistan.

The world in general is in the grip of Zionism. The Zionists control the economy, business, finances, media, journalism and even the politic of the world. The ruling political elite of most of the countries is being controlled by Zionists. The war and peace is also made in the world by this organization. So when the Zionist movement is told to fight against and crush Pakistan one can imagine how all the concerned actors across the globe would be operating.

A strong and stable Pakistan armed with nuclear weapons is just not acceptable by the Zionists. With the help of sole super power, the US, its allies the NATO and even its pawn in the Middle East, the Zionists have launched a well planned, well coordinated and well executed campaign against Pakistan which is called ‘Fourth Generation War’. America attacked Iraq on the pretext of locating and destroying weapons of mass destruction in Iraq which they didn’t possess. Pakistan possesses nuclear weapons and has declared it as such. So America could not possibly attack Pakistan the way they did in Iraq because of the fear of any unexpected reaction from Pakistan. Fourth Generation War was the only effective tool to deal with Pakistan. The sole aim is to neutralize the nuclear assents and render Pakistan as an insignificant country in the region.

Pakistan Faces Fourth Generation War on its Soil

Fourth Generation War is essentially a civilian (non-military) doctrine which is characterized by attack on ideology, culture and social values, small combat actions by non state actors, media and information warfare and psychological operations. In such warfare the media persons and journalists are purchased for propagating a set pattern of information and the target nation is broken into various segments on racial, sectarian and linguistic grounds. The target country is isolated on diplomatic forums and incapacitated in economic fields. The corrupt and compromised journalists, political analysts, media owners, TV anchors, advertising companies, sold out religious scholars / teachers and the fifth columnists form the frontline soldiers in this kind of warfare. The terrorist organizations are created, paid and trained to carry out sabotage activities in the country, the main targets are the military installations, defense and security personnel and intelligence setups, with an aim to demoralize/ incapacitate the fighting machinery of the country. Such war may not see a full fledge operation of conventional forces like army, navy and air force of the attacker but the enemy keeps its combatant forces in ready position for bringing them into action at short notice.

4th generation war started on Pakistani soil when America attacked Afghanistan in 2001 in order to topple the Taliban regime who was allegedly providing safe heavens to Al Qaeda leadership and Osama Ben Laden. It seems that real aim of America was not to eliminate terrorism while it attacked Afghanistan but was to create a foothold from where they could control the politics and economy of the whole region.

Before 9/11 the Taliban were not the enemies of America. Despite of their myopic view about Islam and crude way of governance they never attempted to carry out any terrorist activity against the West. It was a well known fact that after being attacked by American forces the Taliban will spill over to Pakistan territory for taking refuge. The restive tribal areas provided excellent sanctuaries to them both from geographical and social point of view. It was beyond the capability of Pakistan security forces either to stop the infiltration of Taliban or to evict them after they had infused with local population. America’s policy was to entangle Pakistani forces in a fight against Taliban in tribal area which they knew, was a mechanism of total disaster for Pakistan. They also knew that once Pakistan Army got involved in tribal area it will not be possible for them to extricate.

On the Afghan side the situation of war was that despite mustering forces from the whole world under the flag of NATO, America could not subdue the Taliban. Throughout the decade of war the Taliban had been controlling about 40 % of Afghanistan’s territory. They had been levying toll tax on NATO containers, holding press conferences and punishing offenders through ‘Sharia’ courts. The growth of poppy continued unabated right under the nose of NATO forces. The conclusion can be drawn that the US and allies never wanted to eliminate the Taliban. They just put that much effort which was necessary to maintain a semblance of conflict going on in the area. They had other agenda in their minds.

Nurturing of Militant and Terrorist Groups in Pakistan

When Pakistan Army got fully involved in tribal areas as per their plans, they created Tehreek e Taliban Pakistan (TTP). This group was funded, trained and given intelligence / logistic support by CIA, Mossad and later by Indian RAW. Other banned outfits from Pakistan like Lashkar e Jhangwi (LeJ) also assembled under their umbrella. This was the enemy which was ‘invented’ for us. Our new enemy wore Islamic attire, kept beards, carried flags having ‘Kalima’ on them and shouted slogans of ‘Allah o Akbar’. No doubt our nation was totally confused on this issue. Some consider them enemies and others call them ‘Mujahideen’. The population in tribal areas was the worst hit by this confusion. Not surprising that the nation has paid the price of 40000 lives including 5000 troops.

Pakistan was never allowed to make peace in tribal areas. All its efforts to negotiate with militants were thwarted by America by killing people like Mulla Nazeer. The drone attacks, the CIA /Blackwater operations on Pakistani soil, provision of safe heavens to our terrorists like Mulla Fazlullah, Brahmdakh Bugti, Harbiyar Marri and TTP leadership, all resulted in a planned attrition of our Army.

In Baluchistan BLA has been resuscitated by CIA with the help of Indian RAW and Russian ex KGB agents in 2002 which had gone dormant after the withdrawal of Soviet Union from Afghanistan in 1988. The aim is put pressure on Pakistan Army by involving it in counter insurgency and to weaken the hold of Pakistan government on Baluchistan so that it can be separated from Pakistan at an appropriate time. Baluchistan has some 45 to 55 training camps, with each camp accommodating from 300 to 550 militants. Based on the geographic spread of training camps there is a triangle of extreme instability in Baluchistan with Barkhan, Bibi Nani (Sibi) and Kashmore as three cardinal points. The terrorist leaders like Barahmdagh Bugti and Harbiyar Marri are on self imposed exile where they frequently get in touch with officials of CIA, RAW and get necessary funds / intelligence from them.

In Karachi the instability has been ensured through terrorism. Target killing, ‘Bhatta’ mafia, land grabbing mafia, kidnapping for ransom have been initiated and maintained through militant wings of various political parties who are being provided protection through politicization of police and inept / corrupt judicial system. These elements have now been reinforced by terrorists from banned outfits and underground crime gangs. The aim is to weaken the writ of Pakistan government in Karachi so that it can be separated from rest of Pakistan at an opportune moment.

Achievements of Army in War against Terror

Pakistan Army was plunged into American war on terror by Pervez Musharaf with a total disregard to our own security concerns. It was well known fact that Army was neither trained / equipped nor was prepared to undertake an unconventional war like this. But once Army was put into such a strenuous test it came out victorious. The terrorists had occupied Sawt by 2009 and were threatening to march on to Islamabad. It was sheer brilliance of military leadership and enormous courage of the officers and men of the security forces who turned the tables on our enemies once threatening to occupy Islamabad. No Army of the world can match the achievement of our security forces who in the Malakand / Swat Operation took so short a time to dislodge the militants who were entrenched on the heights in such a vast mountainous terrain and were in effective control of the area for some years.

The Army, whenever launched to undertake operations, has delivered beyond expectations surprising our enemies. The details of Swat operation are not likely to be known because of our apathy to accurately record events and making analytical studies of such operations. The results of this operation are however so obvious that one can confidently assert that no Army of the world today could have achieved such success in such a short time in so vast a mountainous terrain. No helicopter pilot in any other Army of the world could start his day at 4 a.m. and switch off by 11 p.m. ferrying troops to be placed on heights, drawing hostile fire in the process. This was a routine with Pakistan Army's helicopter pilots during those operations.

Same was true for South Waziristan where Pakistan government had totally lost its writ. The Army not only restored the writ but also started developmental projects which the local population had seen for the first time in their lives. However it is unfortunate that no civilian government has ever been able to enforce its writ though Army had provided enough space for the civilian leadership in Swat, S. Waziristan and other parts of tribal areas. These areas are still under control of the Army and civilian administration is shy of taking responsibility anywhere.

Anti Army Role of Pakistani Media and Journalists

Despite immense sacrifices the Army bashing continues from different quarters. They are still blamed on the TV channels by media personnel, journalists and politicians for interfering in civil affairs ‘from behind the curtains’. They are held responsible for missing persons in Baluchistan and mutilated bodies. Not a single criminal / terrorist who were arrested for attacking GHQ, Mehran Naval Base, Kamra PAF Base has been punished by our judiciary. The irony is that Zain Bugti is caught red handed while transporting illegal lethal weapons and he is set free by the courts, but same courts are quick to order registration of FIR against Army personnel for the ‘murder’ of Nawab Akbar Bugti!

One will be astonished to see that many diverse segments of society are on the same page as far as Army bashing is concerned. People like Asma Jahangir who are known to be so-called ‘liberals’ are on the one side of extreme while TTP is on the other side of the extreme. But both are one and the same as far as hostility towards Pakistan Army is concerned. Asma Jahangir always blames Army and the ISI for missing persons, meddling in politics, hatching conspiracies against democracy etc. TTP along with its auxiliary outfits physically attacks Army and takes ‘revenge’ against America. How funny that a TTP leader is killed in American drone attack and the revenge is taken from Pakistan Army!

Electronic media is on the forefront in terms of Army bashing. Just listen to the talk shows and discussions conducted by anchors and journalists like Hamid Mir, Kamran Shafi and you will find how they spit venom against Army. They are performing their duties very well according to instructions issued by their masters. They will not miss a smallest chance to punch the Army and the ISI. They will ask embarrassing and leading questions from the guests and will only highlight the weak points of the Army. Have you ever heard them appreciating the role of Army in assisting people in natural calamities like floods, earthquakes? Has the Army ever been valued for their policies of non interference in politics for the last five years? So much so, that the coverage of the heroic deeds of our ‘Shaheeds’ and ‘Mujahids’ in the past and recent wars has been drastically cut down on the media. You will hardly find any commemorative programs on Defense Day (6 Sep) in praise of our defense forces. But you have to be very observant and have a keen eye and ears to feel their hatred against Army and Pakistan. The anti Army propaganda is so strong that even some ex Army persons - turned- intellectuals also do not remain behind anyone else to bash and criticize Army.

Media is an important tool in opinion building and creating awareness but you will hardly find any meaningful discussion on media that would address our security concerns. They will never highlight the colossal increase in Indian defense budget, rather will always be obsessed with even a slight increase in our defense budget. While sitting in front of Pakistani TV channels at times we have a dismal feeling as if we are watching Indian channels instead. Have you seen any TV programs which highlights Two-nation Theory and Ideology of Pakistan, particularly in the month of August? You will mostly find those guest speakers on TV channels who give their logic against the ideology of Pakistan. No one would focus on the need of promoting our ideology which draws its strength from injunctions of Islam. This deficiency was badly felt in the ongoing month of August which is marked by our ‘Youm e Azadi’. It was so obvious to see that no TV anchor wore the insignia of a Pakistani flag on the onset of August as was the practice in previous years. Moreover it was astonishing to learn that not a single national song (milli naghma) has been composed and sung in Pakistan in the last 10 years. Is this the way the ‘living nations’ survive?

The war against Ideology of Pakistan and Army is going on unabated on all fronts. The media persons, journalists and anchor persons have been purchased to propagate anti Pakistan, anti Army and anti Islam concepts. Judiciary has been instructed not to take any action against terrorists and black sheep in media unless ‘concrete proof’ is available, and government of the day has been ‘briefed’ not to take drastic steps against terrorists of TTP, BLA and Karachi gang war. This is the reason why the government has not yet declared BLA as traitors and has refrained from dealing with them accordingly. On diplomatic front the governments have been told not to pursue a policy that goes against the interests of India, America and some Arab countries, may it be at the peril of Pakistan. The government has been stopped from raising any question about TTP and BLA terrorists who are residing in safe heavens in Afghanistan, UK and Europe. In order to further squeeze Pakistan Army, India has been prompted to carry out violations on LoC so that further pressure is put on the Army to stretch its already depleted and meager resources.

International Zionist lobby is active against Pakistan in the light of the statement of Israel’s founding PM that Pakistan must be crushed by using India as a base. So it is not surprising that a close nexus exists between India and Israel. Army bashing in Pakistan must be seen in the backdrop of this scenario.

By Akhtar Malik, a retired Colonel of Pak Army : https://www.facebook.com/akhtarhmalik


Free-eBooks: http://goo.gl/2xpiv
Peace-Forum Video Channel: http://goo.gl/GLh75

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

Why Pakistan was created on 14 August 1947

Pakistan Independence day Flag
After 66 years of independence, some people still raise the fundamental question: 
Why was Pakistan created? 
While some prefer to emphasise the economic independence within secular Pakistan, others dream of theocracy like Iran. They try to support their perceptions by misquoting and twisting sayings of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan. Both are far from the reality. This fundamental question has been settled through Objectives Resolution, adopted by first constituent assembly on March 9, 1949, and subsequently by all assemblies till now. Any ambiguity was further clarified by Liaquat Ali Khan, the 1st Prime Minister of Pakistan, also a close associate of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, in his speech on the Objectives Resolution, March 9, 1949. 
"Pakistan was founded because the Muslims of this sub-continent wanted to build up their lives in accordance with the teachings and traditions of Islam, because they wanted to demonstrate to the world that Islam provides a panacea to the many diseases which have crept into the life of humanity today."
"Islam does not recognize either priesthood or any sacerdotal authority; and, therefore, the question of a theocracy simply does not arise in Islam. If there are any who still use the word theocracy in the same breath as the polity of Pakistan, they are either labouring under a grave misapprehension, or indulging in mischievous "propaganda."
"The Preamble of the Resolution deals with a frank and unequivocal recognition of the fact that all authority must be subservient to God. It is quite true that this is in direct contradiction to the Machiavellian ideas regarding a polity where spiritual and ethical values should play no part in the governance of the people and, therefore, it is also perhaps a little out of fashion to remind ourselves of the fact that the State should be an instrument of beneficence and not of evil."

"The Muslim [in Pakistan] shall be enabled to order their lives in the individual and collective spheres in accord with the teachings and requirements of Islam as set out in the Holy Quran and the Sunnah"
[Excerpts: Liaquat Ali Khan, the 1st Prime Minister of Pakistan, on the Objectives Resolution, March 9, 1949]

The Objectives Resolution is a basic and primary document of the constitutional history of Pakistan. It is a framework that provides mechanism to achieve goals for a better life of  the people of Pakistan. It's important that it embraces centrality of Islam to polity sustaining their links with the pre-independence period. The AIML leaders were modernist Muslims not in favour of an orthodox religious state or theocracy, as elucidated by Liaqat Ali Khan, the Prime Minister in his address. Therefore, they selected the middle way abiding by the Islamic laws and the international democratic values. The Resolution remains 'Preamble of all the constitutions due to its importance.
The Objectives Resolution was adopted on 12 March 1949 by the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan. The resolution, proposed by the Prime MinisterLiaquat Ali Khan, proclaimed that the future constitution of Pakistan would not be modelled entirely on a European pattern, but on the ideology and democratic faith of Islam. It has been incorporated in successive constitutions. The Objectives Resolution proclaimed the following principles:
  1. Sovereignty belongs to Allah alone but He has delegated it to the State of Pakistan through its people for being exercised within the limits prescribed by Him as a sacred trust.
  2. The State shall exercise its powers and authority through the chosen representatives of the people.
  3. The principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice, as enunciated by Islam, shall be fully observed.
  4. Muslims shall be enabled to order their lives in the individual and collective spheres in accordance with the teachings of Islam as set out in the Qur'anand Sunnah.
  5. Adequate provision shall be made for the minorities to freely profess and practice their religions and develop their cultures.
  6. Pakistan shall be a federation.
  7. Fundamental rights shall be guaranteed.
  8. The judiciary shall be independent.
The Objectives Resolution, which combines features of both Western and Islamic democracy, is one of the most important documents in the constitutional history of Pakistan. At the time it was passed, Liaquat Ali Khan called it "the most important occasion in the life of this country, next in importance only to the achievement of independence". It is included in the Annex of the current Constitution of Pakistan by virtue of Article 2A of the Constitution.
Speech of Liaquat Ali Khan, the 1st Prime Minister of Pakistan, on the Objectives Resolution, March 9, 1949, clearly spells out the spirit and genesis of Pakistan, and the fundamental role of Islam in the lives of people of Pakistan:
"In the name of Allah, the Benificent, the Merciful;
WHEREAS sovereignty over the entire universe belongs to God Almighty alone and the authority which He has delegated to the State of Pakistan through its people for being exercised within the limit prescribed by Him is a sacred trust;
This Constituent Assembly representing the people of Pakistan resolves to frame a constitution for the sovereign independent State of Pakistan;
WHEREIN the State shall exercise its powers and authority through the chosen representatives of the people;
WHEREIN the principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice, as enunciated by Islam, shall be fully observed;
WHEREIN the Muslim shall be enabled to order their lives in the individual and collective spheres in accord with the teachings and requirements of Islam as set out in the Holy Quran and the Sunna;
WHEREIN adequate provision shall be made for the minorities freely to profess and practise their religion's and develop their cultures;
WHEREBY the territories now included in or in accession with Pakistan and such other territories as may hereafter be included in or accede to Pakistan shall form a Federation wherein the units will be autonomous with such boundaries and limitations on their powers and authority as may be prescribed;
WHEREIN shall be guaranteed fundamental rights including equality of status, of opportunity and before law, social, economic and political justice, and freedom of thought, expression, belief, faith, worship and association, subject to law and public morality;
WHEREIN adequate provision shall be made to safeguard the legitimate interests of minorities and backward and depressed classes;
WHEREIN the independence of the judiciary shall be fully secured;
WHEREIN the integrity of the territories of the Federation, its independence and all its rights including its sovereign rights on land, sea and air shall be safeguarded;
So that the people of Pakistan may prosper and attain their rightful and honoured place amongst the nations of the World and make their full contribution towards international peace and progress and happiness of humanity."
Sir, I consider this to be a most important occasion in the life of this country, next in importance only to the achievement of independence, because by achieving independence we only won an opportunity of building up a country and its polity in accordance with our ideals. I would like to remind the House that the Father of the Nation, Quaid-I-Azam, gave expression to his feelings on this matter on many an occasion, and his views were endorsed by the nation in unmistakable terms. Pakistan was founded because the Muslims of this sub-continent wanted to build up their lives in accordance with the teachings and traditions of Islam, because they wanted to demonstrate to the world that Islam provides a panacea to the many diseases which have crept into the life of humanity today. It is universally recognized that the source of these evils is that humanity has not been able to keep pace with its material development, that the Frankenstein Monster which human genius has produced in the form of scientific inventions, now threatens to destroy not only the fabric of human society but its material environment as well, the very habitat in which it dwells. It is universally recognized that if man had not chosen to ignore the spiritual values of life and if his faith in God had not been weakened, this scientific development would not have endangered his very existence. It is God-consciousness alone which can save humanity, which means that all power that humanity possesses must be used in accordance with ethical standards which have been laid down by inspired teachers known to us as the great Prophets of different religions. We, as Pakistanis, are not ashamed of the fact that we are overwhelmingly Muslims and we believe that it is by adhering to our faith and ideals that we can make a genuine contribution to the welfare of the world. Therefore, Sir, you would notice that the Preamble of the Resolution deals with a frank and unequivocal recognition of the fact that all authority must be subservient to God. It is quite true that this is in direct contradiction to the Machiavellian ideas regarding a polity where spiritual and ethical values should play no part in the governance of the people and, therefore, it is also perhaps a little out of fashion to remind ourselves of the fact that the State should be an instrument of beneficence and not of evil. But we, the people of Pakistan, have the courage to believe firmly that all authority should be exercised in accordance with the standards laid down by Islam so that it may not be misused. All authority is a sacred trust, entrusted to us by God for the purpose of being exercised in the service of man, so that it does not become an agency for tyranny or selfishness. I would, however, point out that this is not a resuscitation of the dead theory of Divine Right of Kings or rulers, because, in accordance with the spirit of Islam, the Preamble fully recognizes the truth that authority has been delegated to the people, and to none else, and that it is for the people to decide who will exercise that authority.
For this reason it has been made clear in the Resolution that the State shall exercise all its powers and authority through the chosen representatives of the people. This is the very essence of democracy, because the people have been recognized as the recipients of all authority and it is in them that the power to wield it has been vested.
Sir, I just now said that the people are the real recipients of power. This naturally eliminates any danger of the establishment of a theocracy. It is true that in its literal sense, theocracy means the Government of God; in this sense, however, it is patent that the entire universe is a theocracy, for is there any corner in the entire creation where His authority does not exist? But in the technical sense, theocracy has come to mean a Government by ordained priests, who wield authority as being specially appointed by those who claim to derive their rights from their sacerdotal position. I cannot over-emphasise the fact that such an idea is absolutely foreign to Islam. Islam does not recognize either priesthood or any sacerdotal authority; and, therefore, the question of a theocracy simply does not arise in Islam. If there are any who still use the word theocracy in the same breath as the polity of Pakistan, they are either labouring under a grave misapprehension, or indulging in mischievous propaganda.
You would notice, Sir, that the Objectives Resolution lays emphasis on the principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice, and further defines them by saying that these principles should be observed in the constitution as they have been enunciated by Islam. It has been necessary to qualify these terms because they are generally used in a loose sense. For instance, the Western Powers and Soviet Russia alike claim that their systems are based upon democracy, and, yet, it is common knowledge that their polities are inherently different. It has, therefore, been found necessary to define these terms further in order to give them a well-understood meaning. When we use the word democracy in the Islamic sense, it pervades all aspects of our life; it relates to our system of Government and to our society with equal validity, because one of the greatest contributions of Islam has been the idea of the equality of all men. Islam recognizes no distinctions based upon race, colour or birth. Even in the days of its decadence, Islamic society has been remarkably free from the prejudices which vitiated human relations in many other parts of the world. Similarly, we have a great record in tolerance, for under no system of Government, even in the Middle Ages, have the minorities received the same consideration and freedom as they did in Muslim countries. When Christian dissentients and Muslims were being tortured and driven out of their homes, when they were being hunted as animals and burnt as criminals - even criminals have never been burnt in Islamic society - Islam provided a haven for all who were persecuted and who fled from tyranny. It is a well-known fact of history that, when anti-Semitism turned the Jews out of many a European country, it was the Ottoman Empire which gave them shelter. The greatest proof of the tolerance of Muslim peoples lies in the fact that there is no Muslim country where strong minorities do not exist, and where they have not been able to preserve their religion and culture. Most of all, in this sub-continent of India, where the Muslims wielded unlimited authority, the rights of non-Muslims were cherished and protected. I may point out, Sir, that it was under Muslim patronage that many an indigenous language developed in India. My friends, from Bengal would remember that it was under the encouragement of Muslim rulers that the first translations of the Hindu scriptures were made from Sanskrit into Bengali. It is this tolerance which is envisaged by Islam, wherein a minority does not live on sufferance, but is respected and given every opportunity to develop its own thought and culture, so that it may contribute to the greater glory of the entire nation. In the matter of social justice as well, Sir, I would point out that Islam has a distinct contribution to make. Islam envisages a society in which social justice means neither charity nor regimentation. Islamic social justice is based upon fundamental laws and concepts which guarantee to man a life free from want and rich in freedom. It is for this reason that the principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice have been further defined by giving to them a meaning which, in our view, is deeper and wider than the usual connotation of these words.
The next clause of the Resolution lays down that Muslims shall be enabled to order their lives in the individual and collective spheres in accord with the teachings and requirements of Islam as set out in the Holy Quran and the Sunna. It is quite obvious that no non-Muslim should have any objection if the Muslims are enabled to order their lives in accordance with the dictates of their religion. You would also notice, Sir, that the State is not to play the part of a neutral observer, wherein the Muslims may be merely free to profess and practise their religion, because such an attitude on the part of the State would be the very negation of the ideals which prompted the demand of Pakistan, and it is these ideals which should be the corner-stone of the State which we want to build. The State will create such conditions as are conductive to the building up of a truly Islamic society, which means that the State will have to play a positive part in this effort. You would remember, Sir, that the Quaid-I-Azam and other leaders of the Muslim League always made unequivocal declarations that the Muslim demand for Pakistan was based upon the fact that the Muslims had a way of life and a code of conduct. They also reiterated the fact that Islam is not merely a relationship between the individual and his God, which should not, in any way, affect the working of the State. Indeed, Islam lays down specific directions for social behaviour, and seeks to guide society in its attitude towards the problems which confront it from day to day. Islam is not just a matter of private beliefs and conduct. It expects its followers to build up a society for the purpose of good life - as the Greeks would have called it, with this difference, that Islamic "good-life" is essentially based upon spiritual values. For the purpose of emphasizing these values and to give them validity, it will be necessary for the State to direct and guide the activities of the Muslims in such a manner as to bring about a new social order based upon the essential principles of Islam, including the principles of democracy, freedom, tolerance and social justice. These I mention merely by way of illustration; because they do not exhaust the teachings of Islam as embodied in the Quran and the Sunna. There can be no Muslim who does not believe that the word of God and the life of the Prophet are the basic sources of his inspiration. In these there is no difference of opinion amongst the Muslims and there is no sect in Islam which does not believe in their validity. Therefore, there should be no misconception in the mind of any sect which may be in a minority in Pakistan about the intentions of the State. The State will seek to create an Islamic society free from dissensions, but this does not mean that it would curb the freedom of any section of the Muslims in the matter of their beliefs. No sect, whether the majority or a minority, will be permitted to dictate to the others and, in their own internal matters and sectional beliefs, all sects shall be given the fullest possible latitude and freedom. Actually we hope that the various sects will act in accordance with the desire of the Prophet who said that the differences of opinion amongst his followers are a blessing. It is for us to make our differences a source of strength to Islam and Pakistan, not to exploit them for narrow interests which will weaken both Pakistan and Islam. Differences of opinion very often lead to cogent thinking and progress, but this happens only when they are not permitted to obscure our vision of the real goal, which is the service of Islam and the furtherance of its objects. It is, therefore, clear that this clause seeks to give the Muslims the opportunity that they have been seeking, throughout these long decades of decadence and subjection, of finding freedom to set up a polity, which may prove to be a laboratory for the purpose of demonstrating to the world that Islam is not only a progressive force in the world, but it also provides remedies for many of the ills from which humanity has been suffering.
In our desire to build up an Islamic society we have not ignored the rights of the non-Muslims. Indeed, it would have been un-Islamic to do so, and we would have been guilty of transgressing the dictates of our religion if we had tried to impinge upon the freedom of the minorities. In no way will they be hindered from professing or protecting their religion or developing their cultures. The history of the development of Islamic culture itself shows that cultures of the minorities, who lived under the protection of Muslim States and Empires contributed to the richness of the heritage which the Muslims built up for themselves. I assure the minorities that we are fully conscious of the fact that if the minorities are able to make a contribution to the sum total of human knowledge and thought, it will redound to the credit of Pakistan and will enrich the life of the nation. Therefore, the minorities may look forward, not only to a period of the fullest freedom, but also to an understanding and appreciation on the part of the majority which has always been such a marked characteristic of Muslims throughout history.
Sir, the Resolution envisages a federal form of government because such is the dictate of geography. It would be idle to think of a unitary form of Government when the two parts of our country are separated by more than a thousand miles. I, however, hope that the Constituent Assembly will make every effort to integrate the units closer and forge such ties as would make us a well-integrated nation. I have always advocated the suppression of provincial feelings, but I want to make it clear that I am not an advocate of dull uniformity. I believe that all the areas and units, which form Pakistan, should contribute to the richness of our national life. I do, however, want to make it clear that nothing should be permitted which, in any sense, tends to weaken national unity, and provision should be made for bringing about a closer relationship amongst the various sections of our population than exists today. For this purpose the Constituent Assembly will have to think anew as to what will be the best method for the distribution of subjects between the Centre and the units, and how the units should be defined in our new setup.
Mr. President, it has become fashionable to guarantee certain fundamental rights, but I assure you that it is not our intention to give these rights with one hand and take them away with the other. I have said enough to show that we want to build up a truly liberal Government where the greatest amount of freedom will be given to all its members. Everyone will be equal before the law, but this does not mean that his personal law will not be protected. We believe in the equality of status and justice. It is our firm belief and we have said this from many a platform that Pakistan does not stand for vested interests or the wealthy classes. It is our intention to build up an economy on the basic principles of Islam which seeks a better distribution of wealth and the removal of want. Poverty and backwardness - all that stands in the way of the achievement of his fullest stature by man - must be eradicated from Pakistan. At present our masses are poor and illiterate. We must raise their standards of life, and free them from the shackles of poverty and ignorance. So far as political rights are concerned, everyone will have a voice in the determination of the policy pursued by the Government and in electing those who will run the State, so that they may do so in the interests of the people. We believe that no shackles can be put on thought and, therefore, we do not intend to hinder any person from the expression of his views. Nor do we intend to deprive anyone of his right of forming associations for all lawful and moral purposes. In short, we want to base our polity upon freedom, progress and social justice. We want to do away with social distinctions, but we want to achieve this without causing suffering or putting fetters upon the human mind and lawful inclinations.
Sir, there are a large number of interests for which the minorities legitimately desire protection. This protection the Resolution seeks to provide. The backward and depressed classes are our special charge. We are fully conscious of the fact that they do not find themselves in their present plight for any fault of their own. It is also true that we are not responsible by any means for their present position. But now that they are our citizens, it will be our special effort to bring them up to the level of other citizens, so that they may bear the responsibilities imposed by their being citizens of a free and progressive State, and share them with others who have been more fortunate than themselves. We know that so long as any sections amongst our people are backward, they will be a drag upon society and, therefore, for the purpose of building up our State we must necessarily took to the interests of these sections.
Mr. President, in the end we firmly believe that by laying the foundations of our constitution on the principles enunciated in this Resolution, we shall be able to put Pakistan on the path of progress, and the day is not far distant when Pakistan will become a country of which its citizens, without distinction of class or creed, will be proud. I am confident that our people have great potentialities. Through their unparalleled sacrifices and commendable sense of discipline, displayed at the time of a grave disaster and crisis, they have earned the admiration of the world. Such a people, I am sure, not only deserves to live, but is destined to make a contribution to the welfare and progress of humanity. It is essential that it should keep alive its spirit of sacrifice, and its adherence to its noble ideals, and Destiny itself will lead it to its place of glory in the affairs of the world, and make it immortal in the annals of humanity. Sir, this people has traditions of great achievement to its credit; its history is replete with deeds of glory; in every sphere of life it has contributed its full measure of achievement; its heroism adorns the pages of military chronicles; its administrators created traditions which have withstood the ravages of time; in creative art, its poverty, architecture and sense of beauty have won their tribute of appreciation; in the matter of spiritual greatness it has few parallels. It is this people which is again on the march, and, given the necessary opportunities, it will surpass its previous record of glorious achievement. This Objectives Resolution is the first step in the direction of the creation of an environment which will again awaken the spirit of the nation. We, whom Destiny has chosen to play a part, howsoever humble and insignificant, in this great drama of national resurrection, are overwhelmed with the magnitude of the opportunities which are before us. Let us use these opportunities with wisdom and foresight, and I have not the least doubt that these humble efforts will bear fruit far in excess of our wildest expectations, through the help of a Providence which has brought Pakistan into existence. It is not every day that great nations come into their own; it is not every day that peoples stand on the threshold of renaissance; it is not every day that Destiny beckons the down-trodden and the subjugated to rise and greet the dawn of a great future. It is the narrow streak of light heralding the brilliance of the full day, that we salute in the form of this Resolution.
Source: Documents and Speeches on the Constitution of Pakistan By G. W. Choudhury (1967). Green Book House, Dacca (East Pakistan), http://therepublicofrumi.com/archives/liaquat19490309.htm
Pakistan was definitely not created for the corrupt  & oppressors for loot and plunder