Sunday, August 9, 2020
اب بلاول آخری جمہوری امید
تحریر: نعیم مسعود
حقیقی جمہوریت کی طلب کو زندہ رکھنا بھی بہت بڑا کام ہے ورنہ مصلحتوں کی راہ اور اقتدار کی چاہ
یہ تاریخ وہ باب تو نہیں بھولی جب عمرانی دھرنے سے جمہوری در و دیوار لرز رہے تھے تو وہ زخمی اور نڈھال لوگ اٹھ کر ان ہاتھوں کو مضبوط کرنے پارلیمنٹ میں بیٹھ گئے جو ہاتھ کاری ضرب دینے میں پیش پیش تھے۔
چوہدری نثار علی خان کو روزانہ کی دلخراش پریس کانفرنسیں، خواجہ آصف کے تابڑ توڑ حملے، خواجہ سعد رفیق کی تیز دھار لفاظی، پرویز رشید کی طنزیہ نشتر زنی اور مشاہد اللہ خان کا شاعرانہ و عارفانہ گولہ و بارود کو پس پشت رکھ کر خورشید شاہ نے کسی اور کے بجائے پھر سے جمہوریت ہی کو پارلیمان میں کھڑے ہو کر چشم ما روشن دل ماشاد کہا تھا۔
خوف کے سائے جونہی فضا میں تحلیل ہوئے تو پھر سے نون لیگ نے کراچی تا کشمیر پیپلزپارٹی قیادت کو تختہ مشق بنانے میں دیر نہ کی۔ پھر جب بڑے میاں نے جی ٹی روڈ کی مسافت اختیار کی تو بھی پیپلزپارٹی جمہوریت کے نعرہ مستانہ کے ساتھ تھی۔ خیر دل مضطرب نے اسے کسی پر احسان نہ سمجھا جنہیں ادراک ہے ان کا یہ کہنا تھا پیپلزپارٹی نے جمہوریت پر اسٹینڈ لیا ہے ورنہ اہل قلم و قرطاس کو تو معلوم ہے کب کس نے کھانے میں شرکت ہی سے انکار کردیا۔
بچوں کو ہوسکتا ہے نہ معلوم ہو تاہم بڑوں کو معلوم ہے کہ پیپلزپارٹی نے تو نیب کے قصے کو تمام کرنے کا ارادہ بنایا تھا مگر کن کے امدادی فقدان کے سبب قانون سازی نہ ہوسکی!
پچھلے دنوں ہمارے بچپن سے شباب کے ہم عصروں تک نے کہا کہ آپ کے صریر خامہ سے بلاول بھٹو کی گونج ہے دیگر اپوزیشن کی کیوں نہیں؟ ہم نے کہا قطعی غافل نہیں : ’’اپوزیشن کی پولی پولی ڈھولکی احسن اقبال بھی بجا رہے ہیں مگر نون لیگ کی توانا اور بےخوف و خطر آواز محض شاہد خاقان عباسی ہی کی بازگشت ہے۔
روز چیلنج دینے والے شاہد خاقان عباسی کا ایک بھی چیلنج حکومت نے تاحال قبول نہیں کیا ، اسے کہتے ہیں اپوزیشن لیڈر‘‘ (14جون 2020) ۔۔۔ رہی بات مریم نواز شریف کی تو جب وہ اور اس کا ٹویٹر خاموش ہوگا ’’حکمت‘‘ کے پیرہن میں ہوگا کہ آنے والے وقتوں میں مخصوص سہاروں کو قابل استعمال بنانے کیلئے خاموشی ہزار نعمت ہے۔بلاول بولے گا تو بلاول کی بات تو ہوگی۔
پیپلزپارٹی کی خوبی ہی اس کا’’المیہ‘‘ ہے کہ قانون سازی میں یہ ماہر ہے، بات 1973کے آئین کی کریں یا 2010 کی 18ویں ترمیم کی، کچھ کیلئے یہ سب ناقابلِ برداشت ہے۔ پیپلزپارٹی جب کبھی 100 سیٹیں جیتنے کی پوزیشن میں ہو تو 50 جیت پاتی ہے کیونکہ مقابل کیلئے جو ہموار ریس ہوتی ہے اس کیلئے وہی رکاوٹوں کی دوڑ ہوا کرتی ہے۔
ہمیں جن پر ناز تھا وہ شاہد خاقان عباسی تھے لیکن پرویز رشید کی ووٹنگ کے حوالے جو اقوال عباسی سامنے آئے کہ’’ اُن سے استعفیٰ لے لینا چاہیے‘‘ ۔اس پر ہم اپنا تبصرہ فی الحال ’’محفوظ‘‘ ہی رکھتے ہیں کیونکہ 14 جون والے رشحات قلم کا ذائقہ بےمزہ ہو گا۔ جانے اسے قول و فعل کو تضاد کہیں یا لڑائی کے بعد والا مکا؟ اوپر سے ہمارے شیر ببر نے بھی کلیئر کردیا کہ وہ ’’مخلوق‘‘ والا بیانیہ ہمارا تھا ہی نہیں۔ اجی وہ ووٹ کو عزت دو والا بیانیہ تو آپ ہی کا تھا نا جس پر بلاول نے کھل کر نون لیگ کی حمایت کی۔
بلاول نے تین دن قبل پھر پارلیمنٹ کے مشترکہ اجلاس میں مریم کا تذکرہ یوں کیا ہے کہ’’ مودی کوئی واجپائی یا من موہن نہیں، یہ بُچر آف گجرات کے بعد بُچر آف کشمیر ہے، پلوامہ واقعے کے بعد بھی وزیراعظم کہتا ہے کہ مودی الیکشن جیتے گا تو مسئلہ کشمیر حل ہوگا، پلوامہ عمل کے بعد کہا کہ مل کر نماز پڑھیں گے جبکہ انہوں نے مریم نواز کو گرفتار کر کے مودی کی نقل کی‘‘۔
بلاول کی اس بات میں دم خم ہے اور پیغام بھی۔ گویا گلوبل اور لوکل چیلنجز تقاضا کررہے ہیں کہ رنجیدگیوں کی ڈگر چھوڑ کر سنجیدگیوں کی شاہراہ پر گامزن ہوا جائے مگر حکومتی اہلکار سنجیدگی کا دامن تھامیں تو ہی یہ سب ممکن ہے۔
دو باتیں رہ رہ کر دماغ ہر دستک دیتی ہیں: (1) ضروری ہے ملک میں نوجوان قیادت ہو مگر تاریخ اور کلچر سے آشنا، خواتین بھی میدان سیاست میں آئیں مگر انہیں اپنے حلقہ و شہر کا جغرافیہ معلوم ہو، یہ نہیں کہ سسٹم پر پیراسائیٹس ہوں۔ (2) جمہوریت ہی ریاست کا حسن ہے مگر ہم اہلِ حکم کو بھی ریاست کا رومانس سمجھتے ہیں۔
ان دونوں اہم باتوں پر غور یہ کہتا ہے نوجوان وہ نہیں جو ایک دن میں تین تین پیپر کا امتحان پاس کرلیں بلکہ وہ جو جوش کے برعکس ہوش اور ڈیجیٹل گلوبل ولج کی نزاکتوں اور تعصب سے پاک تحقیق کے علاوہ شبانہ روز محنت کے عادی ہوں۔ نیوزی لینڈ سے فن لینڈ اور کینیڈا تک کئی ممالک میں نوجوان اور جوان قیادت کا عمل قابل تحسین رہا۔
جمہوریت کو جمہوریت ہی کی کسوٹی پر رکھ کر دیکھیں گے تو انسانی حقوق کی پاسداری نظر آئے گی اگر جمہوریت کو انجینئرنگ اور ٹیکنالوجی کی لیبارٹریوں میں لے جائیں گے تو ممکن ہے اسے مکینیکل تو بنالیں مگر یہ بے رنگ، بے بو، بے ذائقہ اور بد روح ہو جائے گی۔ مایوسی کا یہ عالم ہے کہ ووٹ کو عزت دینے والے بھی تھک گئے اور یہ حکومت بھی وعدوں کے بالکل برعکس نکلی تاہم بلاول نے جس سنجیدگی اور وسیع القلبی سے 2018 سے جو پارلیمانی سفر شروع کیا ہےاگر وہ اپنے رخت سفر میں پارٹی تعلق سے ہٹ کر انسانی حقوق کی پاسداری، تعلیمی انس، امورصحت، آئین فہمی ، اسٹیٹس مین خوبی اور خالص جمہوری فکر کو لازمی حصہ بنائے رکھیں تو ملک و قوم انہیں جی آیاں نوں کہے بغیر نہیں رہ سکے گی!
#Pakistan - A single curriculum is no solution
It is a dark alley we are entering. I hope I am wrong but this is my honest opinion.
Now I come to what I find alarming: there is a greater burden of learning on all students; no incentive for critical thinking and an increase in intolerance, sectarianism and discrimination against religious minorities.
Let us look at the learning burden first. What children were taught at the maktab (the junior schools in the madarsa system), namely, Quran nazira (i.e reading without translation or memorising), will now be taught in all schools. In addition to that, the hadith, which was taught in the madrasa but not in the maktab, will also be taught.
Muslim children have always been taught reading of Holy Quran at their homes. So the basic change here is to transfer this obligation to the schools. Will this have any unintended consequences? Yes, it will increase memorisation since children will be asked to memorise the texts from both the Quran and the ahadith.
When parents teach children the Quran there are no examinations to test the children’s memory. Moreover, parents can space out the learning of the sacred texts over as many years as they think appropriate whereas the schools will allow no flexibility.
The ahadith were never memorised by children; now that they will be examined, it will be required. Lest anyone should imagine that only the children of secular schools will face this additional burden, I should add that the madrasa children will also suffer. If they take the matriculation and intermediate examinations, they will have to learn their own subjects besides mathematics, Urdu, English and general knowledge, including science.
The maktab ends at Class 8 and the Dars-i-Nizami starts with Oola (9th) followed by Sania (10th).The Arabic courses in the Oola and Sania alone include several medieval books on grammar: Mizan as Sarf, Munsha’ib, Nahw-i- Mir and so on.
Besides the traditional books, the children have to learn Arabic from more modern texts with emphasis on memorisation. If anyone thinks this will leave them sufficient time to tackle modern subjects also—and this makes me think of the overladen satchels of our children and the loads of homework they are given—I would politely ask that person to go study in a madrasa.
Another real-life aspect of the matter which the architects of this single curriculum never thought about is that it simply is not ‘single’ anyway. The children of religious minorities will still be taught other subjects during the time Muslim children are made to memorise what the teachers order. Whether what these children study is as difficult, as demanding and how they are taught is one problem.
I am most concerned with the ‘othering’ these children will be subjected to. Their class fellows will see them going out and will be told by insensitive teachers that they are ‘unbelievers’. Thus, the minorities will be further alienated and ostracised in our schools. There is already a study by the SDPI called, Connecting the Dots, which makes it clear that Hindu children are forced by teachers to study Islamic studies. Some teachers even taunt them calling them ‘idol worshippers’ and ‘kafir’ and so on. Will this discrimination be extended now to Christians, Sikhs and Ahmadis? Incidentally, the last mentioned religious minority revere the Quran as their holy book, so what will they study?
If the present trend of including large parts of madrasa education continues, another consequence of the policy of single curriculum in senior classes will be creating the potential for further religious polarisation. While there may be some sectarian undertones even in teaching up to Class 5, the senior classes will have more amplified versions of those.
The madaris teach refutation of other points of view (radd). Indeed, the debates (munazara) in all schools of thought—Deobandi, Barelvi, Ahle Hadith, Shia, etc—teach students how to refute the beliefs of the other sects and sub-sects. So, at this stage, even the teaching of Islamic history (Jang-i-Jamal, for instance) and hadith will lead to controversies. Moreover, even if the exegesis of the Quran is not formally taught, the maulvis will refer to it and their interpretations of verses will vary.
Let me be blunt for a change: I think this pursuit of sameness in the name of equity and justice is a blunder; I think it has the potential to increase religious and sectarian controversy and increase intolerance: I think it will not help children become more gender-sensitive.
The traditional Sunni exegetes, the modernists (progressives) and the radical Islamists (among whom there are some militant groups) will interpret the same verses in different ways, leading to controversy. The Pakistan Army has already experienced this state of affairs when fighting the Taliban in what used to be the FATA. Initially, some of our soldiers got seduced by the militant interpretations they heard from radical Islamist preachers. Some even defected but the army succeeded in containing this tendency. Will we be able to control the preachers we recruit for our schools and colleges? Suppose some students prefer the more radical interpretations they hear or read?
The government claims that students will develop critical thinking. The instructional model of the madrasa system is based upon memorisation because the system is based on preservation and respect for the past and not on questioning. Modern science, on the other hand, is based on questioning the past not revering it; on critical thinking not on uncritical acceptance of authority. The two paradigms are based on different ways of responding to the world and if we want critical thinking to increase, then we would have to develop analytical skills and questioning. Will this aim be served by this large dose of memorisation and the basic premise of unquestioning acceptance of what the teacher tells us?
Yet another factor which nobody seems to have paid sufficient attention to is the huge influx of madrasa graduates in schools to teach Islamic studies. As it is, our society is critical of those who are different from the majority or the fashionable normative framework. Teachers of religion, no matter what sect they belong to, will probably be critical of girls who dress differently from what they prescribe. As they will operate in the name of the sacred, they will be difficult to refute or ignore.
Girls and women teachers will either be forced to change their lifestyle or bear the guilt of appearing as sinners. Indeed, with so many religious teachers in all institutions the very atmosphere of these institutions will change. We will have less tolerance for Western dresses, liberal ideas, religious minorities and even certain sects and sub-sects. So, how can we employ madrasa graduates? Well, they are specialists in theology and there are places for them in the mosque and seminary system. However, the state should not abandon poor children so that they are forced to study in the free madrasas. State schools should teach all children so that only those committed to a clerical life study the Dars-i-Nizami and graduate from a madrasa.
From a personal point of view, the whole thing is ironical for me because some of my work (Denizens of Alien Worlds, 2004 for instance) has been quoted in support of the present policy. What I was interested in was justice and equity, not sameness.
I had argued that all children, as far as possible, should be taught in their mother languages during the first three years of education. Then, I suggested, secular schools should teach English as a library language through the most innovative and interesting methods of instruction (play, drama, real-life dialogue, film, song, etc). However, the medium of instruction should be the language of wider communication (Urdu or maybe Sindhi in parts of Sindh).
Higher education, however, should be in English in all subjects. I also said that more liberal-humanist texts should be prepared in Urdu and that modern knowledge should be translated into it. My aim was to dilute the advantage rich people in English-medium schools have in South Asia. I also never envisaged that we should abandon English at the higher level as it is a world language. I did advocate making some core subjects the same. These were hygiene, basic preventive medicine, mental health, environment, human rights, women rights (anti-harassment sensitiveness) and world history.
I thought they should be taught to all students in Urdu supplanted with English videos and films. But the history and heroes of ethnic groups (Sindhi, Pashtun, Balochi, Punjabi, Seraiki, Urdu-speaking people, other ethnic and linguistic minorities etc.) would be different, not the same. I also suggested that, with schools not using English as a medium of instruction, the O- and A- level examinations will come to an end. I knew that the English-medium schools would be up in arms against my suggestion. I know now that none of the things I suggested, including an end to O- and A-level system, has been accepted in the new policy. To suggest that I recommended the idea of sameness in education is simply ignorance.
Let me be blunt for a change: I think this pursuit of sameness in the name of equity and justice is a blunder; I think it has the potential to increase religious and sectarian controversy and increase intolerance: I think it will not help children become more gender-sensitive or caring for the environment or aware of health issues. In short, it is a dark alley we are entering. I hope I am wrong but this is my honest opinion.
Islamic Republic Of Pakistan – The ‘White Part’ On The Green Pakistani Flag Is Fast Disappearing
Lower-caste Pakistani Hindus are often the victims of bonded labour. It was banished in 1992, but the practice is still widespread. The Global Slavery Index estimates that over three million Pakistanis live in debt bondage.
An article in the New York Times reported about he forced conversion of Hindu families in the Badin district of Sindh province in southern Pakistan especially during the pandemic times. Treated as second-class citizens, the Hindus of Pakistan are systemically victimized and experts fear that minorities could totally be wiped out from the Islamic Republic.Treated as second-class citizens in their own country, the Hindus of Pakistan are discriminated in almost every phase of their lives. Minorities have always been forced to convert in order to join the majority. With this, they try to escape discrimination and sectarian violence says NYT. Hindu community leaders say that the recent uptick in conversions has also been triggered by the economic crisis in the country due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Pakistan’s economy is on the brink of collapse and the pressure on the country’s minorities remains extremely high. The economy will contract by 1.3 percent in the 2020 fiscal year because of the pandemic, the World Bank predicts. It is estimated that up to 18 million of Pakistan’s 74 million jobs will be lost. The minorities will be hit the hardest. What we are seeking is social status, nothing else,” said Aslam Sheikh, whose name was Sawan Bheel until June 2020 before he turned to Islam. “These conversions are becoming very common in poor Hindu communities. There is nothing wrong with that, everyone helps the people of their faith, ” says Sheikh. Proselytizing Islamic clerics and welfare organizations add to the faith’s appeal, offering attractive incentives like jobs or land to poverty-stricken minority members if they convert to Islam. Sheikh’s family hopes to find support from, if not the wealthy Muslims, then at-least from Islamic foundations that have opened up in recent years, with the aim to luring more people towards Islam.
One of the clerics who has been spearheading the mission to erase the white colour from Pakistan’s flag (white colour in the Pakistan flag represents minorities) told NYT that he had more than 450 conversions to his credit and most of the converts were low-caste Hindus from Sindh Province. Demand was so great, he added, that his seminary had set up a separate department to guide the new converts and provide counsel in legal or financial matters.NYT writes that wealthy landlords deceive poor Hindus into subjugation by granting loans that can never be repaid. Unable to pay loans, they along with their families are put into forced labour. The women are often sexually exploited. The Islamic ‘welfare organizations’ rescues these people, releases them from bonded labour by paying off their debts, only if they convert to Islam.
Lower-caste Pakistani Hindus are often the victims of bonded labour. It was banished in 1992, but the practice is still widespread. The Global Slavery Index estimates that over three million Pakistanis live in debt bondage. The brutality against minorities in addition to the dreadful times we are living in — a vulnerable economy and the global pandemic — we may see a raft of people turning to Islam to stave off injustice or hunger or just to live to see another day, said Farahnaz Ispahani, a former Pakistani lawmaker.https://eurasiantimes.com/islamic-republic-of-pakistan-the-white-part-on-the-green-pakistani-flag-is-fast-disappearing/
Opinion: #Pakistan Must Engage With Israel to Save #Pakistani Lives
By Sumeera Asghar & RoyHassan F. Virk
What has Pakistan achieved from its perpetual boycott of Israel? What has it achieved for the Palestinians? Doesn’t logic demand a reassessment, not least when Israel can help save our economy and aid our survival?Pakistan’s foreign policy has been incoherent and inconsistent since its inception. It has suffered from a chasm between policy and strategy, xenophobic tendencies, domestic politics interfering negatively with the foreign policy process, and vice versa – including the unsettling influence of the military on civilian politics and the outsize impact of religious groups.
Policy-makers, rather than focusing on the policy process and the outcomes, serially succumb to socio-religious pressures, intensifying policy volatility, and that volatility, read as vulnerability, opens Pakistan up to manipulation by stronger world powers.
The result is that on the issues that Pakistan flags as central to its foreign policy principles – the Kashmir issue and the rights of Palestinians – Islamabad’s achievements have been barely discernible.
While Pakistan ventured into the marshlands of jihad – a tryst with international terrorism which began in the 1980s and brought home a perpetual religious radicalization, sectarianism and Kalashnikov culture that continues to this day – India was laying the ground for diplomatic ties with Israel, a process which sped up after the disintegration of the Soviet Union.
Around the same time, unrest began in Kashmir, and Pakistan became involved with a new aspect of the on/off conflict with India. Militants were strategically rerouted to Kashmir to keep India at bay.
In the 2000s, the second Palestinian intifada and a surge of terrorism in Pakistan coincided. Pakistan was pre-occupied; its engagement with the Israel-Palestine conflict was muted.Today, India and Israel have celebrated more than a quarter-century of official ties. Pakistan, which focused its domestic energies and diplomatic capital in fighting for the right to Palestinian and Kashmiri self-determination, won nothing. The state of Jammu and Kashmir has been annexed by India. Israel is on the verge of annexing the West Bank.
All this begs the question: What has Pakistan achieved from its policy of a perpetual boycott of Israel? Doesn’t logic demand a reassessment, if there's nothing to show after all these decades of resentment and negligence? What about venturing out of a stagnant policy pool and into fresher waters? The choice of metaphor is not accidental. It is in the field of water, more specifically, water scarcity, that Pakistan’s obstinacy towards relations with Israel seem the most irresponsible. It would even be possible to say it threatens Pakistanis’ lives.
Currently, Pakistan is facing an acute water shortage, and it may become a water stress country in 2025, when (with an annual per capita availability of less than 1,000 cubic meters) fresh water becomes critically scarce. The International Monetary Fund ranks Pakistan as third among countries facing an acute water shortage. According to the World Economic Forum report, the biggest threat Pakistan faces, along with much of South Asia, is the water crisis.
Often unaware about the rate that groundwater is being depleted, and by what that will means for their livelihoods, Pakistanis have so far shown little concern about how they’re utilizing water.The Pakistan Council of Research in Water Resources has also warned about the gravity of the situation, reporting that Pakistan first touched the water stress line in 1990, crossed the water scarcity line in 2005, and is at the risk of a 30 million acre feet shortage in the years to come. Experts calculate that Pakistan will be the most water-stressed country in the region by 2040.
The implications for Pakistan’s economy when there is not enough water are dire for its 212 million people, and insufficiently recognized within the country. Nearly 20 percent of GDP is dependent on agriculture. Around 40 percent of the entire labor force is engaged in agriculture, including a full 67 percent of all working women. But Pakistan’s agriculture sector is infamously inefficient in regards to water use: 90 percent of the country’s water sources are directed towards farming, but a quarter of that water is lost through leaks and other irrigation failures.So how is water scarcity and Pakistan's foreign policy towards Israel connected? One of the key factors that have saved Israel, a country located in the relatively arid Middle East, from water scarcity and stress has been its development and adoption of technology in agriculture, based on the rigorous utilization of every drop of available water. Those advances range from national projects like desalination (converting seawater into drinking water), to state-assisted industries like agritech, to private sector enterprises specializing in drip irrigation, sprinkler irrigation system, recycling graywater and advanced fertilization mechanisms and machinery. Israel has introduced bio-pesticides, bio-fertilizers, and AI in agriculture, including robots and sensors – to the extent that plants may soon be able to "talk" to humans to convey their requirements. Israel currently recycles 86 percent of its water, by far the highest rate in the world. Israel now manages to not only fulfill its own water demand but also exports its expertise to more than 150 countries, including some in the Arab world – except Palestine, which suffers from severe shortages.
Had Pakistan been able to access this panoply of technologies and best practice, agriculture could have increased its share of Pakistan’s GDP from 26 to 36-40 percent – simply by increased production and yield. If Pakistan could swallow using Israeli weapons during the 1980s Operation Cyclone, the CIA program arming the mujahideen against the Soviets in Afghanistan, why can't it use Israeli technology for constructive purposes? Pakistan urgently needs assistance from agricultural scientists and experts to overhaul its existing outdated agricultural and water management systems, before it’s too late.
But is it really feasible to divorce politics from development aid and cooperation? Israel is almost self-sufficient in terms of agricultural products. Even with very little territory, it has always been a net exporter to countries with enormous areas under cultivation, such as India. Most of its agricultural machinery is produced domestically and not imported from China. Being based in Beijing, I've observed that in all the major universities and research institutes, there are Chinese-Israeli Cooperation Centers of Excellence in Biotechnology, agricultural development and innovation. China is Israel's third-largest trading partner globally and its largest trading partner in Asia. And China is one of the few countries in the world to have concurrently maintained warm relations with Israel, Palestine, and the Muslim world at large. As Pakistan lags behind in agricultural and scientific advancements, particularly in water and irrigation, it is high time for both countries to extend an olive branch to each other. As a country, we ses ourselves in a permanent competition with India – but India is already laps ahead in development cooperation with Israel. Pakistan has a lot of catching up to do.
Pakistan could also learn from Israel how to encourage civil society’s enthusiasm and respect for political and scientific realities. Israel celebrates its scientists and Nobel laureates. We call ours “foreign-funded agents.” Exactly this kind of conspiratorial disrespect led to the exile of Dr. Abdus Salam, the first and only Pakistani scientist to win the Nobel Prize.
China, our all-weather friend, invests in extensive agricultural research joint-ventures on with India. In Pakistan, Beijing’s priorities are infrastructure projects and luxury resorts in Pakistan. Is that difference sdue to radically different domestic priorities in India and Pakistan, or because a superpower invests according to the worth of its target states are? Until now, Pakistan has failed to be anything more than a 'frontline ally in the war against terror' or a 'massive construction site': it simply has not insisted on a focus on scientific and agricultural development. But there must be a better way.
Pakistan's exclusionary foreign policy towards Israel is based on its wrongdoings against Palestinian Muslims. But if that's the real reason, then why hasn't Pakistan boycotted America for its wrongdoings against the Muslim populations in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, arming Israel against Hezbollah and PLO; why has it not boycotted India over wrongdoings in Gujarat and Kashmir?
If Egypt and Jordan, neighboring Muslim-majority states who’ve been directly affected countries by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, can make politico-economic deals with Israel for the good of their peoples, why can't Pakistan, which is far removed from the conflict?
Pakistan could do much more for the Palestinians if it does first what it needs to do for Pakistanis.
https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/.premium-pakistan-must-engage-with-israel-to-save-pakistani-lives-1.9058526