Nuclear Pakistan On A Slippery Path

Nuclear Pakistan

On a slippery path.

When we walk into the pages of the history, it is amazingly revealed that most of the nations or power centers on the globe destroyed themselves in the arrogance of their unblessed reliance on the strength of their weaponry, skilled forces, logistics infrastructure and their developed economy. Undoubtedly this blemished strength coupled with fascist political leadership forced their judgments to concur the other nations and their resources. The initial success on the basis of this mighty vitality was, nevertheless, achieved instantly but at a later stage it was instrumental to diminishing them as nation and its cultural hypothesis. Even in most of the cases their names were sunk in the history. Scholars have admitted this fact and Historians have inked it. I would not go in detail of Roman’s, Egyptian and Magnolia’s history. There is a precious example in the recent history of World War II when Nazism buried into history in a result of their blemished strength and fascism. In the current history of post cold war in late 20 th century, drastic territorial changes emerged on the map of the globe and resulted rise of a unilateral power. Although the blended democracy has changed the phenomenon yet the principles remain the same. In my humble opinion it’s a historical cycle which takes place one after one and nations having absolute power have to answer the history itself. The survival of such states remains on the sky only with their disciplined attitudes and liberties within their own nation owing to the democratic norms and respect for the other nations. Under this philosophical doctrine, time kept on changing the parameters of self defense. However, geopolitical environments of under developed countries reform its own characteristics in comparison of its neighboring countries and super power states. Here is the best example of Pakistan, when we see her conceding before the idol of possessed deterrence without building requisite infrastructure for the progressive development and safety of the nuclear weapon. Here I do not mean the physical safety; which might have been exercised as per international standards. I stand for the intangible security which is derived from the people with their sound fondness emerged for the protection of their national assets through the rationale patriotic policies of the State which we can hardly claim under the prevailing national political scenario and with the present nation divided into so many directions. So, instead of securing people’s liberties under the umbrella of time-honored democracy and fulfilling the promises made by the leadership responsible for formation of Pakistan and its post creation survival, the successors played their own grimy and vested interest game to suppress the aspiration of people of the country which finally led to split it into two geographical entities.

1

We are still under dreadful threat of losing some more geographical areas if we would not embrace the will of the people and straightened up our path to lead this dynamic nation. The deterrence developed to integrate the nation and its geographical boundaries would fail miserably to keep it intact even would jeopardize other way around. The arguments against this inference taken as Pakistan is more protected (in military sense) than ever, is based on securing time factor only. The more time is passed, the more closer she would be to the diminishing point. If fortunately had we been able to acquire the visionary leadership in the initial years after our independence, and even at a later stage for the sake of arguments, we would have been standing as a strong and disciplined nation at this moment and then perhaps after revolutionary and visionary decisions by such leadership, we could have thought of becoming nuclear power. The premature possession of nuclear power has now put us into diversified crises, which under the umbrella of terrorism is focused to run down for denial. However, the matured acquisition of nuclear power can be witnessed in Israel. We may consider this hypothesis on the basis of doctrine of choices. Whatever you choose to be and whatever aspect of divinity you wish to pursue but as nation, the status should have been decided once for all through a popular vote. So far in Pakistan, its so-called leadership has yet to decide what sort of democracy she intends to carry along. Some time we look for the absolute parliamentary system, then after some time we go for semi parliamentary-presidential system. Then a long fascist rule wash up all marks of young democracy in its dream palace and nation starts again striving for an array of even dumb & deaf democracy. But the true solution lies in the only parliamentary democratic system which can change the scenario, if we wish to settle down from a crowd to nation. The non-conservational attacks on the democracy should have been stopped through the constitutional amendments. The child who decides to go outside into the street to play in traffic is not making a choice to die. She may be making number of other choices but dying is not one of them. Mother knows that. The problem here is not that nation has chosen to die; but the so-called mother, who has been keeping the child under stress of poverty and basic amenities, persuaded the child to believe on an unwarranted constant ignited threat from the neighboring country, which has made their game that could lead to more than one outcome including her dying. This fact is not clear to her; it is unknown to her. This is what happened in Pakistan, piled-up choices were on conveyor belt and whosoever ruler came to lead the nation, picked up one choice most suitable to his own veiled manifesto and started working on it. Here comes the question of leadership who should have pursuit wisdom leading a nation to bring her into peace of mind. Before I reach to conclude on the subject I would like to register a quick and brief background of the United States. In a sense, authority became symbol of American liberalism's ability to marshal the social sciences, state planning,

2

civil society, and technology to produce extensive social and economic change. For proponents, it became a valuable weapon to check the influence of menacing ideologies such as Fascism and Communism. Yet it all happened in a democratic way through popular vote. Besides this, modernization took on profound geopolitical importance as the United States grappled with its expected threats. After World War II, modernization remained means to contain the growing influence of the Soviet Union. This made how U.S.-led nation-building efforts in global hot spots, enlisting an array of nongovernmental groups and international organizations, were a basic part of American strategy in the Cold War. Although they knew that conservatism has an anguished attack on democracy, they deftly weaved social and intellectual history; they bring to life the social practices of the Enlightenment. In circulating libraries and Sunday schools, deferential subjects developed an avid taste for reading; in coffeehouses, alehouses, and debating societies, they boldly dared to argue about politics. The way, in Pakistan, we are facing and urging that abstract political theories are manifest in everyday life, we need to unflinchingly explore the unsavoury emotions that threaten social hierarchy, so that extremists (in vast meaning) could be dished out as an unrelenting diet of contempt. But I do not agree to pretend that the day's democrats are saints. They invested in contempt as enthusiastically as did extremists. Then what left in our basket, how we may transform our humble subjects into proud citizens? And just how successful would be the transformation? At once history and political theory, absorbing and disquieting, poisoning the Minds of the Lower Orders challenges our own commitments to and anxieties about democracy. So it is imperative to stop bringing such a wide variety of political experiences over and over, the constitutional amendment is a certain key to the solution. Preemptive strikes from the cultural fronts with the assistance of civil society should be taken into hand. The recent scenario on composite dialogue with India, under the global threat of terrorism, is one of the choices to curb cross-border infiltration which we have already taken into consideration but with the poor management: either with the International game planners or local non-state actors, strict adherence with the lawful action within the state is ought to be accomplished. And at the same time cohesive measures should be adopted to curtail the longstanding need of budgetary restraint on the economy in letter and spirit. This would attract adequate approval of our nation living with an impression of deprivation syndrome and the international stakeholders as well besides the western intellectuals who are keenly watching the socio-economic and political developments in Pakistan. These steps would also help to mechanically evaporate ultimate threats felt by the globe from the land of Pakistan.

By Naeem Baig.

3

Dated 5th September, 2009.

4