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.