The creation of Pakistan was a necessity brought about by the history and demographics of the subcontinent.

It came about because to the upper class (mostly Feudal, but not necessarily so) muslims in India, who had been in politcal power before the British Raj, feared that they will be out of power in a democratic state. Such fear was justified, as we are yet to see a single muslim person with any degree of political power in India, except in the state of Kerala, where there is a considerable muslim population.

It was a dream of muslim people, that they will be better off in a country of their own. The British Raj may have facilitated the formation of the country, but to discount the emotions of the common man is an amazing re-writing of history.

I would think that India has been able to move forward and become a successful democracy is in part due to the partition, and the departure of many of the Feudal elements who would have otherwise constantly worked to destabilize the country.

The issue of the current problems in Pakistan, is a problem of identity, and the place of religion in society. It is also a question if the Pakistanis are going to give more importance to their cultural identity, which is closer to India, or to their religious identity, which is closer to the middle east.

Islam in the Indian subcontinent has been modified over the last 1000 years, and has taken on a form that is unique to the region. Specifics of hindu culture and philosophies have been alamgmated with the teachings of the Koran, and the current form does not pass the purity test. This is compunded by the fact that Arabic was never a strong point for common muslims in the subcontinent.

The main issues in Pakistan is the clash between this modified version of Islam that is followed by a vast majority of people, and the "pure" form that is preached by the small, but well funded and very vocal minority, funded by Saudi Arabia.

Lets not blame the British for everything thats wrong in this part of the world.

Another article funded by Shia or Sunni money of middle east Asia. Instead of lobbying for the failed state - Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq, discuss why they are failed at the first place. money in the hands of stupids is the most dangerous thing- and these middles eastern people are earning through fossil fuels and opium (another product of desert) without even moving their a***. Yes west did wrong in the past by trusting all these Sunnis and Shias and their conspiracies against each other and rest of the world. This is the time now to straighten up. After Afghanistan it was Pakistan not Iraq who deserve air strikes.. hoping Obama will make right by not trusting other goons like Musharraf and Zardari.

ONE OF THE BETTER ANALYSIS OF PAKISTAN IN A WHILE.

The "West" - mainly London and Washington - has used Pakistan successfully for decades. This is the Pakistani's fault. The were blinded by their hatred for India and Hindus, and they sold out their own country. Pakistan is still a colony of the British, with the "western-trained" military generals doing the work for the British Great Game.
They have accomplished nothing, and the people who have paid the highest price is ordinary Pakistani's and Muslims throughout South Asia.

Mr. Ettefagh writes, "But what more can the “West” do, above and beyond precious little? Save for a complete rethink."

Pakistan cannot be improved without outside influence. The Islamists and military generals still live on hatred of India, and do not care about their own people. The West will have to do something.

THE COMPLETE RETHINK SOLUTION: 4 autonomous provinces in a very loose confederation - Sindhi, Punjabi, Balochi, Pashtun. This will weaken the Islamists in the military/ISI and allow the 4 Provinces to concentrate on economic development.

Yeolds

There is much that the west has done which is wrong. You and I and others have talked about it before and Dr. Ettefagh is adamant in not letting anybody forget it also. But if you go back to my first post you should see that it was the last paragraph of Dr. Ettefagh’s essay regarding the future of Pakistan that I initially commented on. We can talk about who is working towards and improving on the technologies of the future (may it be solar or you name it) all you want. But since the subject matter is the future of Pakistan and the prescribed choice of Dr. Ettefagh will end in Taliban consolidating all power, I would prefer it if we talked about what can go wrong if fundamentalists siege the power, unless you believe that anything anti-western is automatically perfect.

I advocate civility and maturity for Iran. I wish a good life full of happiness for all Iranians especially on this eve of “Nowrooz” the Iranian New Year. May the wicked shadow of the present regime leave that country soon.

Shiveh:

Wishful thinking about western munificience towards muslims does not serve any rational end.

The converse is true, since UK, Fr etc redrew the maps of the world so they can control it. the USA is a late comer to the game, post WWII, but fully subsribed thereto: puppets, dictators, assinations, regime changes, allowing unlimited human rights transgression versus arabs [by Israel, CIa, US armed forces, et al], illegal wars, etc].

Similarly your notion that the Irani youth are learning the way of the xxi-st century is based on false premises. The xxi-st century is the century of PEAK AND DECLINING HYDROCARBON, and of global warming. Both of these issues have far-reaching civilization endangering quallities, which seems to be beyond the cognize of the Western elites. Following such denials [we against nuclear power, we against change in life styles, we all for armament manufacturing and using same to attack anyone not submitting to us etc] is contrary to the well being of the Irani youth.

Marginal issues, such as way of dressing, theological beliefs, shortage of gasoline, are totally irrevelant with respect to the needs of 10-20 years hence.

Were you to advocate for IRan [your original home] installation of as much nuclear and other alternative energy sources as Solar [you do have sunny skies] as possible, water treatment [including recycling of waste water] agricultural practices opposed to industrial agriculture [though far more demanding in manpower] you would be helping Iran adjust to the near and far future.

Please note that so called secular societies as the USA Government, destroy all moral verities, and create the biggest problems of civilization: economic collapse, never ending war, ecological abuse, depletion of the sea's fishes, and other lovely things, all contrary to a well functioning civil society.

So wake up, an old civilization with its culture as Iran or China, has memory of rougher times, and can adjust to the needs of the future. Spoiled brats as the MASTERS OF THE UNIVERSE are totally unnecessary and incapable to adjust to the depravation coming due to declinig hydrocarbon production and increasing votality in weather due to global warming. HAving A-bombs' as the Iranian President cogently noted, is of little use in the xxi-st century.

HGCSATO,

It is not about me. It is about a theocracy foolishly hung up on superficial displays of a bankrupt religious ideology, and an article or series of articles dedicated to ridiculing everything western while whitewashing all that is wrong in such autocratic societies.

In this last article Dr. Ettefagh extensively describes and rightly mucks the “West”s behavior in Pakistan. But then through some fancy sentence structure plants a solution which is both wrong for the situation in Pakistan and misleading for involving 1.2 billion Muslims in a situation that great majority of them abhor. If I have to emphasize it again, here it is “the isolating concept about Muslims in a Pakistan carved out by hallucinations is merely another foolish riddle, wrapped in a mystery about Muslims and concealed in an enigma about more than 1.2 billion Muslims in the world.”

It is not about Muslims. The West has been kinder and more protective of Muslims in the recent history than Muslims themselves. From the Balkans to Chechnya to Darfur to the minority Muslim communities in Western countries to accepting and paying for massive refugee movements from Islamic countries, these have all been done by the West at the same time that the West is fighting with a backward fundamental Islamic Ideology that if left alone will take humanity back to the dark ages.

What you call technological advancements is another gift from the West. It is through western educational institutions that Iranians learned the basics for these advancements and it is through importing western factories and knowhow that Iranians are able to better their lives. It is through the Internet and western satellite TV that the Iranian youth is learning the 21st century living. It is all done despite of their own leadership which is concentrating on their clothing and obedience and itself is full of the filth of fraud and embezzlement.

What is wrong with saying it as it is. Why not give credit when credit is due and talk honestly about our own shortcomings before others remind us of them? What is wrong with maturity?

@SHIVEH

You are probably Iranian, an exile. Hence your hang-up about Iran and Khomeini, etc. The Islamic Iran, 30 years later, is in fact a stronger country, more advanced technologically, no longer a food importer and a much higher level of education amongst its population especially amongst its women.

Where does the article that the country must be left to Islamists? And again, if that is the wish of the majority, let it be. Votes will decide, not skewed and stuffed ballot boxes or sorry and stupid election contests run between Zardari (a crook) and other crooks. Your analysis that the military can help is wrong too. The Yanks brought Musharraf just to bring such calm and 10 years later, where is the calm? But, hey, look at the "good side", using your interpretation.... the street price of heroin on western streets has gone down over the last 10 years ........ As the article states, it is a sub-prime situation. But there can be no bailouts from Uncle Sam!!!!!

Yoleds,

It is the good doctor’s conclusion that I have problem with not his premises. What the Dr. prescribes will end in Taliban ruling both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Is this the better solution? Are Taliban not “shadowy”? Are they “transparent”? Is this the “change” that you are looking for? Read his conclusion again and see if you can agree with it. I don’t.

“To kick this habit, the first step of self-appointed leaders of the ever so elusive “West” must be a factual realization. To borrow Churchill’s words about the USSR, the isolating concept about Muslims in a Pakistan carved out by hallucinations is merely another foolish riddle, wrapped in a mystery about Muslims and concealed in an enigma about more than 1.2 billion Muslims in the world. To frame it in a historical replica, such thinking is bound to meet the USSR in the dustbin of bad ideas. Western deciders ought to realise that they are gamed by a few self-interested, shadowy groups in Pakistan that are least interested in change, principles of transparency, power sharing and a responsive government. It is bad for their true business”

Shiveh:
Dr Ettefagh is right, Pakistan must be left to the Pakistanis. Most of them are opposed to any more interference by the USA [and her lackeys, a.k.s. allies], they oppose the war on Afganistan -for many are related by blood, they are opposed to the WAR ON TERROR [an oximoron] when such "war's" casualties are Pakistani citizens.

Uncle Sam and her lackeys should concentrate on rebuilding the world's economy so well wrecked by WALL Street and THE CITY [London, UK].

the USA and cohort does not have excess cash, especially not for keeping a single solider in Afganistan at a cost of $775 000+ [this was the cost in Irqaq, shorter and easier supply lines] USA to Estonia trough Russia, through Uzbekistan is very long way top haul water or food is frightfully expensive..

Beautifully written, as always; forcefully debated, as always; wrongly concluded, as always.

Dr. Ettefagh points out beautifully and forcefully all that has been done to Pakistan to get it to today’s sorry state but then prescribes a wrong solution without bothering to reason it. Why leaving Pakistan to Islamic forces is the right answer?

The most basic concept of democracy is “one person, one vote”. When people of a country submit their votes to a religious edict without understanding the consequences of their submission, this concept is forgone. Pakistan is not ready for democracy at this sick and feverish state. To show a parallel, Once in Iran the will of people brought Dr. Mossadegh to power, another time it gave rise to Khomeini. At this time there is no Mossadegh in Pakistan and they can do better without a Khomeini.

Pakistan needs a period of calmness to sober up. It looks like army will be back at the helm. West can help in an economic revival which is the best and increasingly the only remedy against Islamic extremism.