USA's Foreign Policy and Pakistan

                   

Hangu Drone attack is a clever move by USA. Through this attack, USA wants to convince Afghan Taliban that Pakistan is on USA's side against Afghan Taliban. It is a dangerous move which Pakistan can foil only by taking real steps against USA's intervention; otherwise seeds of mistrust sown in Afghan Taliban's minds would be a real, clear and near danger for Pakistan's security.

I have stated in my article ‘Imperatives of Pakistan’s Foreign Policy’ that Pakistan’s internal conditions are greatly influenced by conditions prevailing in Afghanistan. The USA’s war in Afghanistan is nearing its end, and Taliban are strong enough to assert their will in certain portions of Afghanistan. With or without presence of USA and its allies in Afghanistan, Taliban are not likely to accept a secular government in Afghanistan; they will keep on struggling for establishment of an Islamic State like one which was overthrown by USA and its allies previously. It is the destination of Afghanistan, which cannot be neglected either by USA or by Pakistan.

The major consideration of USA is to prevent the probability of China emerging as economic and political super power and Central Asian Muslim countries including Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan all joining Chinese block. In the backdrop of this consideration, the USA may have two opposite choices/policy options regarding Afghan situation. The first choice of USA may be to oppose establishment of Islamic state in Afghanistan. The pre-condition of such a choice would be installation of a USA friendly government in Afghanistan so that USA’s regional interests may be protected. Such an option would be made viable and achievable through winning over both Pakistan and India to favor this policy option so that threat of emergence of China and Islamic block may be addressed. For this purpose, Pak-India disputes would be resolved to keep, on the one hand, Pakistan away from China and Chinese dependence and, on the other hand, to encourage and enable Pakistan to fight Pakistani Taliban which are aligned with Afghan Taliban to establish Islamic state in Afghanistan. 

  

In case of failure of first choice, the second choice of USA may be to support Islamic state in Afghanistan, provided such an Islamic state is anti-China and anti-Iran. The basic objective behind such a policy option would be the same i.e. to undo the threat of emergence of Chinese-Muslim block.

The Drone attack in Hangu should be seen in the backdrop of scenario elaborated above. The USA is clearly working on the first policy option  presently. This attack clearly seems to have been designed to develop mistrust in Afghan Taliban’s minds that Pakistan is on USA’s side in the war between USA and Afghan Taliban.

In the same article i.e. ‘Imperatives of Pakistan’s Foreign Policy’  it also has been stated that if Pakistan adopts USA’s either of two policy options afore-mentioned, it would enhance threat to Pakistan’s national security because such a foreign policy option adopted by Pakistan would not be in line with Pakistan’s internal imperatives. If going along USA’s first policy option, Pakistan opposes establishment of an Islamic state in Afghanistan, that would mean Pakistan’s war against Pakistani Taliban would never come to end because Pakistani Taliban are aligned with Afghan Taliban which are struggling for an Islamic state in Afghanistan. Such an exigency would seriously threaten Pakistan’s security which is already undermined by Pak-TTP war; Pakistan’s economy would continue to be paralysed. Such a regional situation would never let Pakistan join likely Islamic-China block; Pakistan would be kept away from benefitting the enormous economic and strategic advantages likely to be accrued from this regional block/Cooperation.  It was concluded that present geo-strategic and internal conditions of Pakistan demand it to forge an Economic and Political Cooperation with China, Central Asia, Iran and Afghanistan. Pakistan should primarily employ all its economic resources to make this Cooperation a viable and vigorous framework leading Pakistan to a prime position in this Alliance. All this is not possible without defying USA’s regional policy which aims at diluting the chances of establishment of anti-USA block consisting China and regional Islamic countries.

USA is now staging final phases of its first policy option to materialize its objectives in this region. The Hangu attack is a shrewd move by USA to sow seeds of mistrust in Afghan Taliban’s minds against Pakistan so that by drawing Afghan Taliban away from Pakistan’s support, pro-USA puppet secular government may be installed and strengthened at Kabul, after USA’s withdrawal from Afghanistan. Pakistan should foil this clever USA’s move by taking real steps so that mistrust may not be stayed in Afghan Taliban’s minds; Pakistan should stop NATO supplies at least till time USA makes an apology and commits to abstain in future from such attacks on Pakistan’s soil. If Pakistan fails in appreciating the implications of USA's moves in this region, Pakistan would be a loser greater than any other country in this region.

Common Education System in Pakistan

           

We see in Pakistan various streams of educational institutions up to secondary education level, all imparting various syllabi at various levels.   As education system of a nation formats what should be the nation’s outlook towards life, national security and integrity demand one education system in a state.

In Pakistan we have various streams of education institutions up to secondary education level; these institutions include government institutions, private institutions, and religious institutions which impart non-religious education as well. Sparring a few, government institutions are lagging behind most of the private institutions; similarly most of the religious institutions are lagging behind the government institutions in non-religious education. In the way to adopting the same/one education syllabus, obviously government would not like to pull the better performing private institutions to the level of poorly performing government institutions.  In other words, in order to net government and private educational institutions into the same/one syllabus, government would require lot of financial resources, on the one hand, to train government institutions’ teaching staff to enhance their capacity and bring them at par with higher quality private institutions, and, on the other hand, to train religious institutions’ teaching staff to enable them to impart non-religious education, keeping with the minimum required standard. It means venture of adopting the same/one syllabus in government and private institutions may not be completed overnight; it would take many years before giving desired results. But this venture may be made result oriented in a shorter period of two to four years, if it is divided into two phases. In the first phase, a core syllabus  may be devised which may be taught by all government and private institutions including religious institutions imparting non-religious education; in addition to the core syllabus, education institutions may be allowed to teach extra syllabus of which they have enough capability in terms of financial and human resources.  But the extra syllabus should be in line with complete syllabus which would be adopted by the government in the second phase as the same complete syllabus to be adopted by all education institutions.  In the first phase, the Government may focus on providing financial and human resources relating to the core syllabus only. In the second phase, the government may focus on the extra syllabus in terms of providing financial and human resources in order to adopt the same complete  syllabus for all the educational institutions.

It may be appreciated that completely same syllabus may not be adopted for the government and religious institutions imparting non-religious education. The reason is obvious; the religious institutions are imparting education for the purpose/objectives different from those of non-religious educational institutions. However these two different streams of educational institutions may be harmonized by making Quranic Studies an essential part of core syllabus which would be taught by both religious and non-religious institutions (as stated above).

It may also be appreciated that by adopting same syllabus for educational institutions, we may also attempt to reduce the severity of extremism, if we are able to design contents of core syllabus according to belief set-ups of various/all Muslim groups; but, of course, it may be done only with the help  of scholars from all sects involved.

We may conclude that proposed venture of adopting same/one syllabus for all educational institutions up to secondary education level may harmonize educational institutions which may, in return, propagate uniform outlook towards life and resultantly strengthen national security and integrity.

Concept of 'zilli' Prophethood and its Falsity

         

Qadyani people claim that Mirza Ghulam Qadyani  is alike/ ‘maseel’/ ‘zill’/ reflection to  our Nabi (saww). This concept of likeness/ ‘zill’/reflection describes that a person capable of cultivating qualities /characteristics of some other person becomes spiritually alike ‘maseel’/ ‘zill’ to that other person; this alike/ ‘zilli’ person can claim all the attributes specifically associated with the original/ the other person. Such likeness/ ‘zilli’ status is spiritual only; it is not physical one. It means though alike/ ‘zilli’ person (maseel) and the original person have different physical entities, but in terms of spiritual attainments they are similar. If the original person is a prophet, his ‘maseel’/ ‘zill’ will also be a prophet. In line with this concept, Qadyani people claim that Mirza Ghulam Qadyani had attained all spiritual achievements attributed to Muhammad (saww) including prophe-thood; it is in this sense that Qadyani people believe that (maazal Allah) Mirza Ghulam Qadyani is a ‘zill’ to Muhammad (saww) and as such Mirza’s prophet-hood is ‘zill’ to prophet-hood of our Nabi Muhammad (saww). [Refrences: Rohani khazain (by Mirza Qadyani) vol.22, p-521. vol.18, p-212. vol.16, p- 258,259,270. Malfozaat Hazrat Masih Maood (by Mirza Qadyani) vol.3, p-270. Kalmatul fasl (by Mirza Bashir) p-113, p-105].

This concept of likeness/ ‘zilli’ prophet-hood is completely unscientific, totally mythical, and logically baseless.

With advancements in Genetics, scientists are increasingly advocating that human personality/ traits are based on genetic set-up. Two persons can’t have similar genetic set-up (unless they are cloned); it means two persons can’t have similar personality traits; in other words, two persons can’t have completely similar worldly/ spiritual achievements. Not to speak of complete similarity, two persons can’t have any one spiritual quality to the same degree, because the trait/genes composition relating to that quality can’t be the same in two persons. According to science of Psychology, human personality is shaped, to much extent, on the basis of environment he/she is subjected to. Two persons subjected to different environments can’t cultivate completely similar personality. Mirza’s claim to be alike/ ‘zill’/ (maseel) to Muhammad (saww) in terms of spiritual attainments is un-scientific.

Logically too, the concept of likeness is not tenable. The whole mankind has been directed in Quran to follow Muhammad (saw); this direction is forever and compulsory for every human to achieve Allah’s love. It was also compulsory for Mirza Qadyani to follow Muhammad (saw) if he wanted Allah’s love. Now the moment the follower and to be followed are elevated to the same spiritual level, the person to be followed no longer remains a person to be followed. But Muhammad (saw) is the person to be followed forever by whole mankind. It means no one can be a “maseel” to Muhammad (saww) in spiritual attainments. Secondly, Muhammad (saw) has been declared as “universal rehmat” forever; it means primary/basic source of Allah’s “rehmat” among the creations is Muhammad (saww). There can’t be another primary/basic source of Allah’s “universal rehmat” after Muhammad (saww); there can’t be two primary/basic sources of Allah’s universal rehmat. If  two entities are taken as basic sources, it would mean no one is basic source. It means no one can be a “maseel”/ ‘zill’ to Muhammad (saww) in spiritual attainments. Thirdly, all attributes of Muhammad (saww) are not cultivable; they can’t be developed through effort and deeds. Prophethood is also “wahbi”- it is bestowed upon whoever is chosen by Allah ( of course, it was bestowed upon the person who is the best among the people in terms of his deeds); but nobody can make a claim for Prophethood on the basis of his deeds. Similarly out of attributes of Muhammad (saww), which are described through his names, many are “wahbi” and can’t be attained through effort. A few such “wahbi” attributes are: Rasul; Nabi; Muhammad; Ahmad; Mehmood; Aqib; Yasin; Taha; Ha-mim; Tasin; Mujtaba; Mustafa; Qasim; Mansur; Khatam-al-anbiya; Awwal; Akhir; Zahir; Batin; Rasheed; Munji; Mahdi; Fatih; Mutahhar; Hasib; Habib; Murtaza; Sahib; Shafi; Shaheed; and Muhrrim. All these attributes should not be understood with only the literal meanings of these words, because only literal meanings of these words fall short of explaining true nature of these attributes; acctually specific meanings, based on literal meanings, are associated with all these names. For example, Nabi literally means a person telling about unseen; but as per specific meanings-based on literal meanings- “Nabuwwat” is a designation bestowed by Allah upon a chosen person for the guidance of mankind. No one can attain all these “wahbi” attributes through effort and pious deeds. In other words, no one can be “maseel” to Muhammad (saw).

Mirza Qadyani’s claim of likeliness/ ‘zill’ to our Nabi (saww) is marred with so many contradictions. For instance, at one place he says “all spiritual attainments of Muhammad (saw) have been bestowed upon him”. [Ref.Malfuzaat Hazrat Masih Maood (by Mirza Qadyani) vol.3, p-270]. But at other place he says “spiritual quality pertaining to name of “Muhammad” (which is “jalali” in its nature) is not to be manifested; now the spiritual quality pertaining to name of “Ahmad” (which is cool like Moon) has manifested itself in his form. [Ref.Rohani Khazain (by Mirza Qadyani) vol.17, p-445/446]. This way he admits that all spiritual qualities of Muhammad (saw) have not been bestowed on him. It means he himself contradicts his claim of likeliness to Muhammad (saw).

The futility of Mirza’s claim for “Nabuwwat” is even more exposed, when his claim is judged on the basis of his actions/ performance. Islam is based on Quran and Sunnah. The linchpin of Mirza’s argumentation was the argument that Muslims did not understand Quran and Sunnah in the proper context and in the correct manner. But it is amazing to know that he did not write any “tafseer” of Quran so that the “ignorant” Muslims might rectify their understanding of Quran ( he did make interpretation of some verses). He also did not do any work of sifting huge collection of “ahadith” so that the Muslims might know what hadith was correct and what was not (he did make his views about some ahadith). Is it not strange and unbelievable that a person was receiving “Wahi” but he was not separating the right from the wrong out of sources of Islam? The answer is very simple; the sifting of huge collection of ahadith and writing “tafseer” of Quran required lot of knowledge which Mirza Qadyani was lacking in. One may argue that Muhammad (saw) also did not give detailed account of what was right and what was wrong in the previous divine Books. Therefore it is not objectionable if Mirza did not give such detailed account about interpretation of Quran and Books of Hadith. Such a argument would not be valid. Muhammad (saw) did not need to give such detailed account about the previous divine Books, because after coming of Muhammad (saw), Muslims were required to establish “Deen/ Shariah” on the basis of Quran and Sunnah, not on the basis of previous divine Books that is why Muslims were not required to have correct version of previous divine Books. But Qadyanis still require a valid account of ‘ahadith’ and valid interpretation of Quran. 
Quran and 'hadith' clearly state that our Nabi (saww) is the last of the prophets; there will be no prophet/prophethood (in whatsoever form) after our Nabi (saww)/ after our Nabi Muhammad's prophethood.

We can conclude that concept of likeness/ ‘zilli’ prophet-hood is completely unscientific, totally mythical, and logically baseless. There is no concept of 'zilli' prophethood in Islam; this concept has been resorted to by Mirza Ghulam to deceive the Muslims. If he made claim of prophet-hood directly, he would be killed by the Muslims; therefore he resorted to indirect claim of prophet-hood so that he might avoid wrath of the Muslims.

Defining Moment for Pakistan

                  

It (Mehsood's murder) is a defining moment like one presented to Pakistan twelve years ago (at the time of 9/11), but involving much lesser risks and much more opportunities than the previous moment. The present defining moment presents Pakistan with opportunity to cure their ills by defying USA. If Pakistan can avail this opportunity benefits would be invaluable: i. all pro-Pakistan forces would be united rendering much needed unity to Pakistan, and resultantly foiling nefarious designs of anti-Pakistan forces aiming at weakened Pakistan; ii. terrorists activities would come to end which further would give a boost to Pakistan's economy; iii. Pakistan's foreign policy would come out of USA's clutches which would further open new openings to Pakistan to create and avail economic and political benefits to be presented at regional and international level; iv. USA's power in this region would be eroded and the gap would be filled by regional powers including Pakistan; v. the eroded USA's power in this region would lead to USA's economic and political power deterioration at international level, which would further lead to USA Dollar depreciation at international level and such depreciation would go in benefit of the nations like Pakistan which are indebted to USA. The most importantly the risks involved in the proposed defiance to USA would be temporary. Because all such risks are economic in nature, all these risks may be offset by the benefits mentioned above coming out of defiance to USA.

If Pakistan still keeps toeing USA's policy, all benefits mentioned above coming out of defiance to USA would be non-available to Pakistan and it would be a great damage to Pakistan's interests.