Chaudhry Rehmat Ali - Pakistan at the Dawn of History

 

Chaudhry Rehmat Ali, Pakistan, The Fatherland of the Pak Nation, Third Edition, 1946

Pakistan - World Happiness Report 2019

There is an outfit that publishes the World Happiness Report.  The primary measure is the "Cantril Life Ladder" (from Hadley Cantril, Patterns of Human Concern, 1965).

As far as I can tell, some 1000-odd people of age 15+  in each of 156 to 158 countries are asked by Gallup polling each year the following question, which in English reads:

“Please imagine a ladder, with steps numbered from 0 at the bottom to 10 at the top. The top of the ladder represents the best possible life for you and the bottom of the ladder represents the worst possible life for you. On which step of the ladder would you say you personally feel you stand at this time?”

The average for the country is supposed to reflect its level of happiness. The report also includes measures that one might think affects the answers given on the Cantril Life Ladder, such as per capita income and life expectancy, and survey measures such as perceived freedom to make life choices, perceived corruption, and so on.

Pakistan's scores on the Cantril Life Ladder are shown below, and the world rank, out of some 156 countries, in the report issued in the next calendar year.

---
GWP = Gallup Worldwide Polling
waves = rounds of polling
Data and captions taken from the World Happiness Report 2019.

GDP per capita is in terms of Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) adjusted to constant 2011 international dollars, taken from the World Development Indicators (WDI) released by the World Bank on November 14, 2018.  The equation uses the natural log of GDP per capita, as this form fits the data significantly better than GDP per capita.

The time series of healthy life expectancy at birth are constructed based on data from the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Health Observatory data repository, with data available for 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2016. To match this report’s sample period, interpolation and extrapolation are used.

Social support is the national average of the binary responses (either 0 or 1) to the Gallup World Poll (GWP) question “If you were in trouble, do you have relatives or friends you can count onto help you whenever you need them, or not?”

Freedom to make life choices is the national average of binary responses to the GWP question “Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with your freedom to choose what you do with your life?”

Generosity is the residual of regressing the national average of GWP responses to the question “Have you donated money to a charity in the past month?” on GDP per capita.

Perceptions of corruption are the average of binary answers to two GWP questions: “Is corruption widespread throughout the government or not?” and “Is corruption widespread within businesses or not?” Where data for government corruption are missing, the perception of business corruption is used as the overall corrup- tion-perception measure.

Positive affect is defined as the average of previous-day affect measures for happiness, laughter, and enjoyment for GWP waves 3-7 (years 2008 to 2012, and some in 2013). It is defined as the average of laughter and enjoyment for other waves where the happiness question was not asked. The general form for the affect questions is: Did you experience the following feelings during a lot of the day yesterday?

Negative affect is defined as the average of previous-day affect measures for worry, sadness, and anger for all waves.

It's the economy, stupid!

Ali Hasanain writes in the Dawn:

In the five-decade period between 1963 and 2002, India generally grew slower than Pakistan, yet there were six instances of India’s annual economic growth exceeding the size of Pakistan’s entire economy.

More worryingly for the strategist, in the 15 years since 2003, India has achieved this feat nine times.

and

Simply to return to our relative strength with respect to India to 1990 levels, we need to grow at an average of 10pc for the next 30 years — achievable, but a feat accomplished only by Ireland, China and Vietnam in the past.

The key out of this mess lies in understanding that this is as much a story of our stagnation as it is of India’s rise. Since the 1980s, every major South Asian economy has improved its citizens’ health, and since 1990 its wealth, faster than Pakistan.

Pakistan Senate approves of Mandarin as an official language - fake news

ANI reports: (turns out this is fake news, this reinforces longstanding doubts I have had about ANI)

The Pakistani Senate on Monday approved a motion to declare Mandarin as one of the official languages of Pakistan. The motion said the step was necessary in view of ties between Pakistan and China, AbbTakk News reported. It said the relation between Islamabad and Beijing would deepen further and help the people connected with the China Pakistan Economic Corridor communicate easily if Mandarin was made the official language of the South Asian nation.

Pakistan's Ambassador to the US Hussain Haqqani tweeted: "In a short span of 70 years, Pakistan has flirted with promoting four languages that were not the mother tongue of many people in the country - English, Urdu, Arabic, and now Chinese -- ignoring native languages." Punjabi, which is widely spoken in Punjab province of Pakistan, Pashto and many other native languages have not been declared official languages of the country.

Pakistan Census 2017

Provisional census results put Pakistan’s population at 207.774 million

Shown below are the Pakistan census results over the years (the dots) and the low(blue), red(high) and constant-fertility(green) variants of the United Nations population projects for Pakistan made in 2012.

 
 Pakistan's annual population growth rate is said to be 2% - 2.4%.
(2% comes from the Google compilation of data as the rate in 2016; 2.4% is the growth rate averaged from 1998 to 2017.)

At a 2% growth rate, and at 207.774 million in 2017, Pakistan in 2020 will be 220.5 million strong. This is above the constant-fertility variant of the 2012 UN population projection.


The 2012 UN table is here:

Low variant		High variant		Constant-fertility variant
Year	Value	Year	Value	Year	Value
1950	37542	1950	37542	1950	37542
1955	41109	1955	41109	1955	41109
1960	45920	1960	45920	1960	45920
1965	51993	1965	51993	1965	51993
1970	59383	1970	59383	1970	59383
1975	68483	1975	68483	1975	68483
1980	80493	1980	80493	1980	80493
1985	95470	1985	95470	1985	95470
1990	111845	1990	111845	1990	111845
1995	127347	1995	127347	1995	127347
2000	144522	2000	144522	2000	144522
2005	158645	2005	158645	2005	158645
2010	173593	2010	173593	2010	173593
2015	187919	2015	191378	2015	192422
2020	200540	2020	210189	2020	213758
2025	211629	2025	229589	2025	237213
2030	221103	2030	247779	2030	261599
2035	228766	2035	264967	2035	287169
2040	234396	2040	281781	2040	314904
2045	237695	2045	298374	2045	345569
2050	238538	2050	314272	2050	379242
2055	237045	2055	328856	2055	415670
2060	233311	2060	341769	2060	454747
2065	227493	2065	353298	2065	496968
2070	219755	2070	363895	2070	543245
2075	210376	2075	373869	2075	594497
2080	199757	2080	383325	2080	651358
2085	188372	2085	392285	2085	714296
2090	176629	2090	400837	2090	783759
2095	164873	2095	409175	2095	860368
2100	153363	2100	417464	2100	944843

Self-defeating practices of liberals

Taimur Rahman on the self-defeating practices of Pakistani liberals:

1) Liberals are unable to develop an awami (popular) culture.
2) Liberals elevate the principle of individualism to a dogma.
3) Liberals support an apolitical form of politics.
4) Conclusion: The main strategy of liberals is to convince the ruling class to become liberal.

 Detailed read at the link, or below:

Pakistan's CNIC: cannot exit Islam

Pakistan has a national identity card (CNIC - Computerized National Identity Card).

A checklist for applicants for the card, or for those who have a card but need to make changes, is available here from a Govt. of Pakistan website.  (PDF)
https://www.nadra.gov.pk/docs/cnic_checklist.pdf

For a modification in CNIC, due to change in religion, there is a note:

Note: Change of religion from ISLAM to any other religion will not be entertained.

What did Modi say in Bangladesh?

At an event at the Jinnah Institute, it was said that:

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s most recent statements against Pakistan in Bangladesh reflected New Delhi’s new provocative posturing.

What did PM NaMo say in Bangladesh?  From the published text of the remarks, not much.

1. Text of the PM’s statement to media in the Joint Press Briefing with Prime Minister of Bangladesh

Pakistan does not feature there.

2. Text of PM’s acceptance speech at the conferment of Bangladesh liberation war honour on Former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee

The text is in Hindi.  But the video is there, Urdu speakers can understand most of it.  Certainly there is mention of the Bangladesh war of liberation; but there is no mention of whom it was fought against.

We now come to

3. Text of PM’s address at Bangabandhu Convention Centre This too is in Hindi.

"हम Asian countries आज भी दुनिया के कुछ देशों में महिला के प्रमुख के रूप में स्वीकार करने की मानसिकता कम है, ये भू-भाग दुनिया में ऐसा है कि जहां पर नारी को राष्ट्र का नेतृत्व करने का अवसर बार-बार मिला है। चाहे हिंदुस्तान हो, बांग्लादेश हो, पाकिस्तान हो, इंडोनेशिया हो, आयरलैंड हो। अब देखिए इस भू-भाग में श्रीलंका, ये विशेषता है हमारी लेकिन फिर भी हम कहीं और होते तो दुनिया में जय-जयकार होता लेकिन हम गरीब हैं, हम पिछड़े हैं, कोई हमारी ओर देखने को तैयार नहीं, हम सम्मान से, गर्व से खड़े हो कि दुनिया को दिखाने के लिए हमारे पास ये ताकत है, दुनिया को मानना पड़ेगा कि women empowerment में भी हम दुनिया से कम नहीं हैं।"

Here he is talking about women's empowerment and that Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, etc. have had women leading the nation.


This is the second mention:
और इतिहास देखिए 90 हजार जिन लोगों ने बांग्‍लादेश के नागरिकों पर जुल्‍म किया था, ऐसे 90 हजार सेना को आत्‍मसमर्पण के लिए भारत की सेना ने मजबूर किया था। आप कल्‍पना कर सकते हैं जो पाकिस्‍तान आए दिन हिंदुस्‍तान को परेशान करता रहता है, नाको दम ला देता है, terrorism को बढ़ावा की घटनाएं घटती रहती है। 90 हजार सैन्‍य उसके कब्‍जे में था, अगर विकृत मानसिकता होती तो पता नहीं निर्णय क्‍या करता। आज एक हवाई जहाज को कोई हाइजैक कर दे न, तो 25, 50, 100 Passenger के बदले में दुनिया भर की मांगे मनवा ले सकता है। भारत के पास 90 हजार सैनिक पाकिस्‍तान के कब्‍जे में थे, लेकिन यह हिंदुस्‍तान का चरित्र देखिए, हिंदुस्‍तान की सेना का चरित्र देखिए। हमने बांग्‍लादेश के विकास की चिंता की, बांग्‍लादेश के स्‍वाभिमान की चिंता की, बांग्‍लादेश की धरती का उपयोग हमने पाकिस्‍तान पर गोलियां चलाने के लिए नहीं किया। हमने बांग्‍लादेश के स्‍वाभिमान के लिए, मुक्ति यौद्धाओं के लिए लड़ाई लड़ी लेकिन उन 90 हजार का blackmail करके पाकिस्‍तान के खिलाफ लड़ने के लिए हमने बांग्‍लादेश की भूमि का उपयोग नहीं किया है। क्‍यों? हम चाहते थे कि बांग्‍लादेश बंगबंधू के नेतृत्‍व में आगे बढ़े, विकास की नई ऊंचाईयों को पार करे। यह हमारा सपना था और इसलिए हमने हमारे सपनों को चूर कर दिया। हमारी मुसीबतों को हमने दफना दिया। और हमने 90 हजार सैनिक वापस दे दिए, 90 हजार सैनिक वापस देने की एकमात्र घटना की ताकत इतनी है कि पूरे विश्व ने भारत की शांति के प्रति प्रतिबद्धता कितनी है, विश्व शांति के लिए प्रतिबद्धता कितनी है, इसको नापने के लिए ये एक घटना काफी है और भारत को permanent membership के लिए रास्ते खुल जाने चाहिए. लेकिन मुझे मालूम है गरीब देशों को, developing countries को, हम जैसे इस इलाके में दूर-सदूर पड़े हुए लोगों को मिल बैठकर के लड़ाईय़ां पड़ेंगी। विश्व के रंगमंच पर हम सबको एक ताकत बनकर के उभरना पड़ेगा, हमारी समस्याओं का समाधान करने के लिए हम अपने आप कंधे से कंधा मिलाकर के समस्याओं का समाधान कर सकते हें।



The key part is around minute 50.  My rough translation is:  NaMo talks about how the world does not pay attention to the poor countries of the world; about how the 70th anniversary of the United Nations is coming up; but how the United Nations has not kept up with the times. Despite contributing a million men to fight in World Wars I & II, despite contributions to peace-keeping forces today, despite every one in six of humanity being Indian, India does not have a permanent seat on the UN Security Council.

NaMo then goes further into India's credentials.  He talks about how Indians and Banglas fought together for the liberation of Bangladesh.  He says, India forced a surrender of an army of 90,000 of those who had committed crimes against Bangladeshis.  You can imagine, India had 90,000 captives of that Pakistan that has been annoying India  (परेशान - Google translation is "upset", "disturb", "perturb", "annoy" -  the English press used "nuisance"), harasses India (नाकों दम लाता है), incidents of terrorism keep occurring, if India had a perverted (विकृत)mentality, who knows what would have happened?  Today if someone hijacks an airplane, in return for 25-50-100 passengers, they bring all kinds of demands.  India had in custody 90,000 Pakistani soldiers, but witness the character of Hindustan, of Hindustan's army, we were concerned about Bangladesh's progress, about Bangladesh's self-respect, we did not use Bangla soil to wage war on Pakistan.  We fought for the freedom fighters of Bangladesh, not to capture 90,000 Pakistani soldiers and blackmail Pakistan.  Why, we wanted Bangladesh to develop, with the leadership of BangaBandhu (Sheikh Mujibur Rehman), to reach new heights, that was our dream, and so we put aside our own issues, put aside our own difficulties and sent the 90,000 soldiers back to Pakistan.   This one incident is enough for the world to see how dedicated India is to peace, to world peace; and a permanent seat for India in the Security Council should have opened up.  So, we poor countries, we developing countries, have to work together to solve our problems and to make an impact on the world stage.

 PS: from speech #2 above, Modi's memory of 1971:

और तीसरी एक बात जो शायद मैंने पहले कभी बताई नहीं है वो मुझे आज बताते हुए जरा गर्व होता है। मैं राजनीतिक जीवन में तो बहुत देर से आय़ा। ’98 के आखिरी-आखिरी काल खंड में आय़ा लेकिन एक नौजवान activist के नाते, एक युवा worker के रूप में जो कि मैं राजनीतिक दल का सदस्य नहीं था, मैं भारतीय जनसंघ का कभी कार्यकर्ता नहीं रहा – लेकिन जब अटल जी के नेतृत्व में भारतीय जनसंघ ने बांग्लादेश के निर्माण के समर्थन के लिए एक सत्याग्रह किया और जिसका उल्लेख इस annotation में है, उस सत्याग्रह में एक volunteer के रूप में मैं मेरे गांव से दिल्ली आया था। और जो एक गौरवपूर्ण लड़ाई आप लोग लड़े थे और जिसमें हर भारतीय आपके सपनों को साकार होते देखना चाहता था, उन करोड़ों सपनों में एक मैं भी था, उस समय उन सपनों को देखता था।

and his quote of Modi:

आज मैं इस अत्यंत पवित्र अवसर पर वाजपेयी जी ने 6 दिसंबर 1971 को भारत की संसद में एक विपक्ष के एम.पी. के रूप में जो भाषण दिया था, उसका एक पेराग्राफ मैं पढ़ना चाहता हूं। दीर्घदृष्टा नेतृत्व क्या होता है, यह 6 दिसंबर के 1971 के उनके भाषण से हमें याद कर सकते हैं। उनके भाषण से मैं उनका ही quote बोल रहा हूं – “देर से ही सही बांग्लादेश को मान्यता प्रदान करके, एक सही कदम उठाया गया है। इतिहास को बदलने की प्रक्रिया हमारे सामने चल रही है। और नियति ने इस संसद को, इस देश को ऐसे महत्वपूर्ण क्षेत्र में रख दिया है जब हम न केवल मुक्ति संग्राम में अपने जीवन की आहूति देने वालों के साथ लड़ रहे हैं, लेकिन हम इतिहास को एक नई दिशा देने का भी प्रयत्न कर रहे हैं। आज बांग्लादेश में अपनी आजादी के लिए लड़ने वालों और भारतीय जवानों का रक्त साथ-साथ बह रहा है। यह रक्त ऐसे संबंधों का निर्माण करेगा जो किसी भी दबाव से टूटेंगे नहीं, जो किसी भी कूटनीति का शिकार नहीं बनेंगे। बांग्लांदेश की मुक्ति अब निकट आ रही है।“

Rule of the Congress

Supposedly it was the experience of Muslims under the first Congress provincial governments that led them to seek Pakistan.

The (Re)construction of a liberal Pakistan

David Igntius's Washington Post column, "Our high-maintenance relationship with Pakistan",

Why did it take Washington more than seven months to apologize for the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers? But you know the answer: It’s because the United States and Pakistan have the most neurotic, mutually destructive “friendly” relationship in the world.

provoked this response from a reader, indianobserver:

See, till May 1 2011, Pakistan Army was a liberal moderate army of professional soldiers whether on CNN or in far reaches of left and right wing blogs. May 2 after Bin Laden was killed it was difficult for Pak Army to be moderate and liberal but everyone tried, whether on CNN or in far reaches of left and right wing blogs. But plausible deniability Humpty Dumpty fell off the wall. Here's a suggestion on how to get the plausible deniability Humpty Dumpty together again. Write a couple of articles iin WP/NYT on attending a private party in Lahore where you meet all these well speaking Ivy League returns quoting the Greek classics especially a impeccably dressed young nubile one who speaks eloquently on moderation in Islam and running a business/teaching Faust(all ingredients are required). Or you could go to Karachi and report on a fashion show or TV studio where you meet all these well speaking Ivy League returns quoting the Greek classics especially a impeccably dressed young nubile one who speaks eloquently on moderation in Islam and running a business/teaching Faust(all ingredients are required). Do a couple of those articles, and Pakistan Army can go back to being liberal moderate and professional on CNN and in far reaches of right and left wing blogs. I am sure making this sound authentic is within your creative reach. Mr Haqqani will help you get the details right.

Pakistan Day

There has been some controversy in the Pakistan press about just when Pakistan Day began to be celebrated.  The correct answer is that Pakistan Day was celebrated March 23, 1941 and every year since till 1947 as the anniversary of the Lahore Resolution.  I do not know if Pakistan Day was observed in 1948. (Jinnah was in East Pakistan arguing with them about Bengali and other issues.)

Photographs of the source documents are below the fold.  Clicking on them should lead you to flickr, where larger sizes should be available. One day, I may transcribe them.

Note: 1942 is the only case where we can quibble about whether "Pakistan Day" is inferred from the date rather than from Jinnah's statements.

On the jihadi threat from Pakistan

Anujan on BRF.

Something Sardar Patel said

The then- Director of the Intelligence Bureau of the (British) Government of India, Sir Norman Percival Arthur Smith, prepared an assessment in January 1947 on the situation in India.  It was rather gloomy.  Smith thought that India needed a strong center which would not be conceded by the Muslims; the weak center envisioned by the Cabinet Mission Plan "carries within itself the seeds of disruption.  It is difficult to foresee a joint policy in foreign affairs, and consequently in defence and finance".   Smith thought that the Indian leadership was too inept to overcome these inherent difficulties and therefore Pakistan was very likely; though Pakistan would not advantage the Indian Muslim.  Smith thought that the Congress should establish a strong center in the areas of Hindu preponderance, and exclude the North West, but was doubtful of their ability to do even that much.

This note, we are told was sent to the Private Secretaries to Atlee, Alexander and Sir S. Cripps.  Of course the Viceroy Wavell and others saw it as well.  The purpose of recording this note however is for the excerpt below.

The Transfer of Power 1942-47, editors Mansergh and Moon,
Volume IX, #304, pages 542-544

......
(h)  If Congress were wise, they would either attempt to dissolve by a psychological approach the psychological mistrust which exists or they would establish a strong Centre for areas of Hindu preponderance and to the exclusion of the N-West.  But I doubt if Congress is wise enough to do either of these things.
...
(l) The psychological approach which I would commend to Congress would have to be one of great generosity—an offer, if necessary, of one over parity.   I suggested this to Sardar Patel and told him, moreover, that any attempt to force the Muslims would result, through the disintegration of the police and Army, in the loss of N.W. India.   His reply was that, if I thought that generosity would placate the Muslim Oliver Twist, I did not understand either the Muslim mind or the situation.   With which sentiment I am tempted to agree

N.P.A. Smith

Court's powers

The Pakistani judiciary granted the Governor-General the power to dissolve the Constituent Assembly.

Pakistan and Section 93 of the Government of India Act 1935

Yasser Latif Hamdani has articles (1, 2, 3) in the Daily Times of Pakistan, on the vexed question of how democratic in spirit Jinnah was around 1947. These articles were provoked by a journalist (probably Najam Sethi, Aapas Ki Baat, December 14, 2011, 1, 2) who wrote:

A leading journalist, who is one of the finest journalists in my opinion, recently levelled four accusations at Jinnah, which he described as the reason Pakistani democracy has not flourished. First, that Jinnah chose to be the Governor-General instead of prime minister; second, that he concentrated power in his own hands; third, that he dismissed the NWFP [now Khyber Pakhtunkhwa] Assembly; and fourth, that Jinnah chose Urdu as the ‘national’ language.

The purpose of this note is to examine one of the claims made in the Hamdani article and show it to be likely to be wrong.

SDRE

In a book, "Pakistan - A Nation" by "El Hamza", published in February 1941, (Shaikh Muhammad Ashraf, Kashmiri Bazar, Lahore), we find an SDRE (short-dark-rice-eater) reference.

American Enterprise Institute on Pakistan

http://www.aei.org/events/2011/11/30/military-reform-in-pakistan-will-the-army-allow-politicians-to-rule/

Video only, no transcript.

Gilani declares "victory"

After the then JCS Admiral Mullen made his remarks about Pakistan's support for the Taliban, there was a bit of a diplomatic dust-up. Then, e.g., here,

Prime Minister Mr Yousuf Raza Gilani has claimed “victory” in the recent stand-off with the USA, saying he has received a message from Washington that America needs Pakistan's support to win the war on terror.

Mr Gilani made the remarks while addressing a gathering in Bili Wala near his hometown of Multan in Punjab province yesterday, amidst tensions between Islamabad and Washington over ISI-Haqqani network links.

“It is due to the all parties' conference as well as the unity of Pakistan's political leaders that the USA has sent a message that they need Pakistan and that they cannot win the war (against terrorism) without Pakistan,” he said.

“They have also distanced themselves from the statement of (former US military chief Admiral Mike) Mullen. This is the victory of the Pakistani nation, political parties and the government's policy of reconciliation,” he said.

He did not say when the message was conveyed to Pakistan.

With that backdrop, this morning I read Peter Singer's review of Steven Pinker's new book, The Better Angels of Our Nature

Peter Singer observes the following:

[quote]That morality can be grounded in some commitment to treating others as we would like them to treat us is an ancient idea, expressed in the golden rule and in similar thoughts in the moral traditions of many other civilizations, but Pinker is surely right to say that the escalator of reason leads us to it. It is this kind of moral thinking, Pinker points out, that helps us escape traps like the Cuban missile crisis, which, if the fate of the world had been in the hands of leaders under the sway of a different kind of morality — one dominated by ideas of honor and the importance of not backing down — might have been the end of the human story. Fortunately Kennedy and Khrushchev understood the trap they were in and did what was necessary to avoid disaster. [/quote]

I'm pondering right now whether one of the problems is that India and Pakistan are differently gripped by this morality "dominated by ideas of honor and the importance of not backing down", and that is one reason for the utter failure to meaningfully communicate.

One more from Tharoor

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/columnists/shashi-tharoor/no-more-delusions

I do understand that Pakistan has to survive in a tough neighbourhood and it needs a capable military. And I do not expect any Pakistani government, military or civilian, to act in anything but Pakistan’s own best interest.

But — and alas, there is a but — I don’t believe it’s in Pakistan’s best interest to be the country whose military consumes the largest percentage of national resources (both GDP and annual budget) of any military in the world. I don’t believe it’s in Pakistan’s best interest to adopt a policy of seeking “strategic depth” by destabilising its neighbours.

I don’t believe it’s in Pakistan’s best interest to try to wrest Kashmir from India by financing or arming violent militancy. I don’t believe it’s in Pakistan’s best interest to be the cradle and crucible of militant Islamist terrorism. I don’t believe it’s in Pakistan’s best interest to be a country where no elected civilian government has ever served a full term. And I do believe that any Pakistani liberal worth the name (take a bow, Marvi Sirmed) should have no difficulty in agreeing with any of these propositions.

Even if they come from an Indian. Ay, there’s the rub...

Why Taseer angered Pakistani liberals

The article by Aatish Taseer in the Wall Street Journal drew angry responses from the Pakistani side.
E.g., Ejaz Haider.
Shashi Tharoor replied. Among other things, he wrote:

No, the “Indian threat” is merely a useful device cynically exploited by the Pakistani military to justify their power (and their grossly disproportionate share of Pakistan’s national assets). But Pakistani liberals are particularly prone to the desire to prove themselves true nationalists; it is the best way to ensure that their otherwise heretical opinions are not completely discredited by the men in uniform who hold the reins of power in the state.

As this otherwise minor editorial spat demonstrates, Indians need to put aside their illusions that there are liberal partners for us on the other side of the border who echo our diagnosis of their plight and share our desire to defenestrate their military. Nor should we be surprised: a Pakistani liberal is, after all, a Pakistani before he is a liberal.

 This is very perceptive.  E.g., see this item from the trial of M.M.Qadri, the killer of Salman Taseer (reproduced below).  What should be evident is that Qadri's lawyers are constructing the defence  that Taseer was insufficiently pious and so his murder is justifiable.  Since Pakistani liberals are for separation of piety and state (if not always for separation of religion and state), the one leg they have to stand on to prove that they are patriotic and not wajib-ul-qatl is their anti-Indianism.   Making anti-Indianism unrespectable will undermine them.

RAWALPINDI: Son of late Punjab governor appeared here on Saturday before Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) No-II, Rawalpindi judge Syed Pervez Ali Shah for cross-questioning and also for recording his statement.

Malik Muhammad Rafiq the lawyer of Malik Muhammad Mumtaz Qadri (alleged killer of Salman Taseer) asked hard questions from Shahryar Taseer during hearing in Adiala Jail. The court adjourned further hearing till July 9.

As Shahryar Taseer the son of late Salman Taseer appeared in the court, Malik Muhammad Rafiq the lawyer of Malik Muhammad Mumtaz Qadri asked as to how many times did his father marry in his life. Shahryar Taseer said, Four. To a question from the lawyer whether all wives were legally valid and the women were Muslim, he replied in the affirmative. But the lawyer countered him saying that his late father had gone to India in 1982, when dictator Zia-ul-Haq was in power, and he married a Sikh woman. The Sikh woman gave birth to a child named Atish Taseer in India at that time.

Do you know Atish Taseer, your brother? asked the lawyer and Shahryar answered in the negative. The lawyer presented a book titled Strange to History in court, saying that it was written by Atish Taseer, son from Sikh woman. Shahryar Taseer admitted that Atish had written a book on the life of his father which was published in India.

Malik Muhammad Rafiq, the lawyer told the court that Atish Taseer has written in the book that his father ate pork, drank excessively and had affairs with several beautiful women. Atish Taseer came to Lahore to meet his father Salman Taseer but he refused to meet him. Slahuddin Ahmed the closest relative of Salman Taseer arranged a secret meeting between Atish and his father. In the meeting Atish demanded rights of his mother and himself as well but Salman Taseer refused, said the lawyer.

When the lawyer asked Shahryar whether he or his late father had issued any clarification about the book Strange to History written by Atish about the life of Salman Taseer, he replied in the negative. Malik Muhammad Mumtaz Qadri the alleged killer of Salman Taseer was present during the hearing.