Arthur C. Clarke, Pakistan, Terror and Science Fiction

I started reading Arthur C. Clarke's novel Time's Eye the day before he died. The novel is set in the NWFP, and it is a world where Lahore has been blown up by a nuclear bomb (ouch!). Here's a page from the novel's beginning that reminded me of the recent US missile strikes inside Pakistan:

He had been just four when he had first encountered the helicopters of the west. They had come at night, a pack of them. They flew very low over your head, black on black, like angry black crows. Their noise hammered at your ears while their wind plucked at you and tore at your clothing. Market stalls were blown over, cattle and goats were terrified, and tin roofs were torn right off the houses. Moallim heard, though he did not see it for himself, that one woman’s infant was torn right out of her arms and sent whirling up into the air, never to come down again.

And then the shooting had started.

Later, more choppers had come, dropping leaflets that explained the “purpose” of the raid: there had been an increase in arms smuggling in the area, there was some suspicion of uranium shipments passing through the village, and so on. The “necessary” strike had been “surgical,” applying “minimum force.” The leaflets had been torn up and used to wipe asses. Everybody hated the helicopters, for their remoteness and arrogance. At four, Moallim did not have a word to describe how he felt.

And still the choppers came. The latest UN helicopters were supposed to be here to enforce peace, but everybody knew that this was somebody else’s peace, and these “surveillance” ships carried plenty of weaponry.

These problems had a single solution, so Moallim had been taught.

The elders had trained Moallim to handle the rocket-propelled grenade launcher. It was always hard to hit a moving target. So the detonators had been replaced with timing devices, so that they would explode in midair. As long as you fired close enough, you didn’t even need a hit to bring down an aircraft-especially a chopper, and especially if you aimed for the tail rotor, which was its most vulnerable element.

Time's Eye – Clarke & Baxter

Science fiction is not always fiction.

Benazir’s Punjabi Volunteer

Everything worth saying about Benazir's assassination has already been said many times over, and by bloggers much more capable than myself, so I had no plans to write about the incident – until i came across the phrase "punjabi volunteer" for the 4th time in an hour. Seeing a phrase once or twice in an hour is understandable, 4 times is probably no coincidence. Google for 'punjabi volunteer' (with quotes) and 'benazir dead punjabi volunteer' (without quotes) to see what I mean. 1840 results on Google so far.

In these difficult times, its frustrating to see not only Indian or American websites (that would make sense) but a lot of Pakistani sites and blogs (and prominent ones at that) just copy/pasting the phrase without thinking twice. My questions to all those people regarding the use of this phrase are:

  • Are 'terrorist' and 'punjabi' synonymous?
  • Did the 'punjabi volunteer' give up his life for Punjab? If not, then what exactly was he fighting for?
  • Of course he was a volunteer, aren't most of the suicide bombers volunteers, fighting for a reason, however pure or twisted that reason is?
  • Would anyone have used 'pathan volunteer' (which was more likely) or 'sindhi volunteer' if that had been the case?
  • Another phrase being used is 'Lashkar-e-Jhangvi's punjabi volunteer'. Last time I checked, Jhang was in Punjab. Isn't it a bit redundant?
  • Are Pakistanis really that gullible to forget the 100+ years of British 'divide and conquer' rule?
  • I hear the killer was Al-Qaeda, so does this make him a "Punjabi Al-Qaeda Lashkar-e-Jhangvi" bombing?
  • Why not use the phrase 'Pakistani volunteer', as opposed to an 'Afghan volunteer' or an 'Al-Qaida volunteer' to stress the fact that we are still capable of killing our own leaders/rulers, no matter how corrupt they are, while ignoring the elephant in the room?

My paternal family migrated from India, and are settled mostly in Karachi (with some Lahori exceptions). My maternal relatives are mostly from NWFP, with many (again) who migrated from India and ended up in Karachi and Lahore. I was born in Lahore and have lived here ever since, though I can't (or don't) speak Punjabi, and preferred to call myself a Pakistani. Musharraf is a Formanite, so am I, does that make all Formanites including me pro-Musharraf? Benazir's killer was a Punjabi, so am I (partly at least), what does that make me? I think its time to have an identity crisis for me.

Please Pakistani bloggers, words are dangerous, use them with care… and please stop copy/pasting blindly. Thanks.

PS. The above rant is written minus the generous sprinkling of F-words as originally intended.

Musharraf’s Two Hat Tricks and Pro-BB CNN

Despite my aversion to political commentary, I couldn't help checking out the couple of remaining news channels that are still online. One of those channels has a news ticker saying:

"Chief of the Army Staff Pervaiz Musharraf has imposed a state of emergency…" and immediately afterwards:

"President of Pakistan Pervaiz Musharraf will address the nation anytime tonight".

Wicked.

CNN, on the other hand, in [this] post, thinks that its a euphemised Martial Law, and says "Emergency declared by president" … confusing me on whodunnit.. the President or the COAS? The CNN report seems to be more about portraying BB as a hero than Pakistan actually, claiming that "…Bhutto, who has defied death threats, is working to lead…" and "Bhutto received light wounds, but escaped largely unharmed  [in the suicide attacks]". I had the impression she was safely towed away from the mess in her armored vehicle. Stop confusing me CNN!

I guess I should start watching TV again. :-/

Pakistani Leader or Pakistani Ruler?

A leader leads, serves and guides, while a ruler governs and rules – people follow a leader, they are dragged and ruled by a ruler.

It never ceases to amaze me when the media refers to our ruler as a 'leader'. Do a google search for 'pakisani ruler' (557 results today) and another one for 'pakistani leader' (124,000 results today). While its true that there have been many real Pakistani leaders that those thousands of websites refer to, why do only 557 (Five hundred and fifty seven only) websites exist that acknowledge that some such thing as a "Pakistani ruler" actually exists?

Pakistani bloggers, please be a bit honest and at least use the correct term in your posts – unless, of course, you think you are being 'led'.

I just changed the wikipedia entry text from 'leader of Pakistan' to 'ruler of Pakistan' in the text:

"After the coup of Pervez Musharraf in 1999, Musharraf assumed the role of Chief Executive, and was the sole ruler of Pakistan."

on the page Prime_Minister_of_Pakistan as the first step. Lets see if it stays that way. Maybe one of you can edit Musharraf's page now.