This mornings Stratfor Podcast is titled "Erdovan's Davos Walkout Lays Down the Marker". I haven't heard it yet (hoping to, on the exercise machine), but just from that title, you can see one thing: the recognition of Israel has been anathema in the Muslim world, but if you had wondered if any good could ever come out of recognizing them, this is it. The fact that Turkey is seen in the Western World as a "moderate" Muslim state and has respect for being one of very few Muslim states to recognize Israel gives Erdogan's action much more weight than, say, a Pakistani or Indonesian leader doing the same. I am not saying Pakistan should up and recognize Israel, but it's something for Pakistanis to think about in the debate of whether and when to think about "normalizing" relations.
Folks not related to Pakistan might ask: Why Pakistan, specifically? Why not Saudi Arabia, or Indonesia? Well, Pakistan IS the 2nd largest Muslim nation in the world--and it's not Arab, and it's the only nuclear power in the Muslim world. Not to mention that ideologically and socially, it's a center of much that happens and affects the rest of the world--both Muslim and otherwise. This IS the "most dangerous country in the world" if we are to believe the conventional wisdom in the West; this is the "training ground of terrorists", no? Of course, it is a country I identify with (together with the US and Nigeria), and therefore it's my job to raise the issue in its context; others can chime in with the view from their corner of the globe.
[First published at: http://blog.iFaqeer.com
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Facebook
Technorati
African-born Desis profited from white racial rule of the continent of Africa.
Even the Muslims in South Africa, for the most part were beneficiaries of white minority rule, and many have been critical of Black majority rule and the redistribution of power via affirmative action.
Even speaking to Black Muslims from Africa, they consider Muslim Desis "settlers" in the same light as white colonial rulers.
they consider Muslim Desis "settlers" in the same light as white colonial rulers>>>>>
I have always loved the term "settlers" and I too use it with quotation marks. When used, it tries to innocently imply that the land "settled" was a vast empty waste just waiting for humanity. Like the new crop of Jewish "settlers." It's a folksy old time way of distancing the truth, both from the collective imerpial memory as well as the current one. Why aren't the Chinese who have gone into Tibet been called "settlers" or the Russians when they went into Afghanistan? It must be part of that new bicategorical dictionary. The one where if you have a degree and dig up graves and cart off objects you are an archaeologist, and if you don't, you are a grave robber. Gee, come to think of it, I'd like to "settle" in a glorious palazzo on the Grand Canal in Venice.
African Desis were brought to the continent as indentured servants, but even the Muslims, where intermarriage among Muslims of various ethnic backgrounds was fairly a common practice since the time of the Rasul, was never openly embraced by the Desis.
I dated a gay South African Muslim Gujarati Desi, whose racial politics were abhorrent to this American raised Iranian/Afghan and Mexican kid. He was older, recently out of a relationship with a white South African of British descent, who didn't like my questioning the tenets of Islam and the more martial verses in the Qur'an. He didn't like me questioning the practice of slavery in Muslim cultures, even though the Qur'an gives a clear preference for emancipation over human ownership.
We can trivialize the use of the term "settler" but Desis like their colonial European counterparts in Africa, never intermarried with local African populations, intermarriage was not common as it was in Latin America.
The Spanish, unlike any other European colonizer, tended to marry local women, considering that most Spanish settlers were disproportionately male during the colonial period.
This gave rise to a "mestizaje" which is the hallmark of racial miscegenation that has come to characterize Latin America.
This doesn't mean that Latin America did not embrace white supremacy though.
It's truly amazing all these names and distinctions. And believe me, I am not belittling or minimalizing ehtnicity and identity at all. But the terms that seem to be a full time hobby creating and keeping up with. There is a project I was working on a while back that I talked about on another list today that was a focus group talking about discrimination and race. Several of the "women of color" referred to Italians as "people of color" too and were talking about their solidarity with women of color in the Italian community in the workplace. When asked if these Italian women considered themselves people of color, they said no. I have never known an Italian, and I have know a lot, who considered themselves to be people of color. I am not demeaning it or thinking they should deny it if it's true. But unless all people are people of color, Italians really are not a race "of color." I have known Italian families with extremely light skin and blue eyed children as well as darker skinned Mediterranean types. And I have never known Spaniards raised in Spain to call themselves people of color, and a lot of them are fair and blue eyed as well. So where are we at? Is it a desire to find numbers and solidarity? I don't know. And in the Iranian history class I had a couple of semesters ago, the teacher, from Tehran, was as white as I am and some of the dark skinned Iranian students in the class acused him of not accepting his "brownness" when in fact, he wasn't brown at all other than in a political sense. If that works, then I want to be Eurasian so that my skin doesn't show up every detail and flaw and my hair won't fit into a pinky ring as a scrunchy like it does now. We have a long way to go with this as the flood gates are open and peoples who previously were confined to rural agrarian and hedring and village subsistance lifestyles are all coming to the table. And that's cool, it really is. I am a globalist in the hippiest sense of the word. Mercan Dede and MIDIval Punditz rule.
I was exposed to Black cultural nationalism when I was younger, and though I would be considered "white" by many people of Black African descent, I embraced the concepts of cultural nationalism espoused by peoples of the African Diaspora.
Muslims have been subjected to anti-colonialist nationalism, socialism, and now the current crop of neo-purist Islamism.
All three -isms have a common root, a political objective rooted in anti-colonial struggles and one where people recreate and reformulate for themselves a political identity that is novel.
Desi Muslims have embraced white supremacy from their cherishing the caste system, a Sayed is the Muslim equivalent of a Hindu Brahmin.
Iranian/Persian peoples have also embraced elements of Western white supremacy.
Many Iranians take pride in being "Aryan" and even the name Iran is indicative of this fact.
When we first met my Persian husband constantly ranted about his Aryan roots. I had to tell him the hard way, "those words will get your A-- kicked here in America embrace those ideads if you want, but you better understand that this country people who use that language are considered skinheads and racist." He is learning, I think. Some African americans don't understand the colorism in the world. While they would like to think that Italians are "people of color" unless you find an Italian who has been raised in a black neighborhood and environment, that person won't be too happy to be called that. I saw a video of a Persian singer, a woman who had an afro so big and bushy it was almost comical. When I was done laughing I wanted to cry, because I know that afro bush made her life hell in Iran, But my point is that Persians, as quiet as its kept have a good large dose of African blood, look past those people who want to look white to the ones who are satisfied with their noses and skin color and you'll see it. Those were the days of the Shah of course. There are persians who look like me, and Persians who look like Russians. Every country and every people have their dark side and lighter side. We all understand why the lighter side gets the buttered side of the bread.
We all understand why the lighter side gets the buttered side of the bread>>>>
I don't. And my study of history goes back well beyond the beginnings of European colonialism. And I don't get it. Why is it that even a thousand years ago people were trolling for the "fair skinned" slave for the cherry spot in the harem, and that's in the Middle East, in China, all over. And maybe someone else has done the ethnographic research on where and why this trend started and probably who started it, might even trace it to one ancient king and his little fetish that got taken up and people forgot the hell why. And let's face it, unless the white person is particularly beautiful and quite young ...... where's the big hub bub? And I know that power has entrenched itself along the white line in the mdoern world, but where did it start way back? As of the 17th century and earlier in some places, the racial divide has come via a very white and fragmented definition of what a "civilization" is. That definition has changed in the last 200 years. But that's another story.
Muslim Desi men marry white women in America.
But why didn't they marry local Black elite women in say Nigeria's Hausa region or Mandingo women in Mali?
It would have been interesting had Persians immigrated to Africa in large numbers. However, Afghanistan and Iran escaped direct colonialism. The Afghans fought three Anglo-Afghan wars and even ceded land (Pakistan's Pathan territories) for peace. However, the land was leased for only a century, and Pakistan has failed to give it back.
I've known a number of Persian men who have married Black women.
I know more Iranians to have married women of any ethnicity regardless of actual skin color or pigmentation. With the Desis I encounter, the occasional East Asian, but rarely anyone whose skin color is not pasty.
I'm Iranian/Afghan but of Turcomen, Mongol, and Kurdish heritage.
Interracial marriage has always been common among Middle Easterners.
Arabs have intermarried with Black Africans, provided in most cases that they assimilated culturally to Arab mannerisms, customs, language, and culture.
The "Arabs" of the Sudan are the product of cultural assimilation, though they forget in their conflict with the non-Arab Darfurians that they are also Black.
I have a love-hate relationship with Desis.
I can't stand the Pakistanis monopolizing the Sunni mosques I attend.
I hate when they try to pass off South Asian culture as "Sunnah" and therefore something the Prophet did. NOT!!!!!!!
I have antipathy for Pakistan and Pakistanis, part of my Afghan tribalism, but love India and will gladly chant "Hindustan Zindabad!"
I love Bangladeshi and Bengali Muslim culture. Rock on girl with a sari!
I hate when I see a Pakistani film taking Pathan (Afghan) culture and dance, and passing it off as Pakistani!
Pathans are Pakistan's "Palestinians" and we will never relinquish our territorial land claims.
The Qur'an states those who exhibit patience in the cause of God are blessed.
The hour may not be ripe, but Islamabad should fear the people in its Northwest and Baluchistan than India.
Only God knows the hour when we will reclaim our independence and end Desi occupation.
Karen,
I think Pakistan will go the route of Yugoslavia. The Indo-Muslim commonwealth will implode into separate ethno-religious fiefdoms based on some idealized homogeneity.
Of course, this may lead to population transfers but a nation created solely on the basis of Islam cannot survive, and should be a dire warning to anyone hoping for a pan-Muslim caliphate.
Muslims may face the Kaaba five times a day, may fast for a whole month, make zakat, and pilgrimage, but beyond that, we are not politically united.
Faqeer seems insecure whenever he post another topic relating to Pakistan.
I don't care for Pakistan, except for issues related to Pathan nationalism.
I support India's stance on Kashmir, though Indian human rights violations are not limited to Kashmir and Muslims alone.
South Asia in general, regardless of the country, has corrupt law enforcement, intelligence gathering, and military organizations.
I don't know I am not anthropologist. Could it just be that "people"taken in slavery, from
Briton, and further north were novel, different, strange.... Yes, becoming the pet of some
prince, some princess, and maybe even having particular skills or something made one or two popular. It's sort of like Pet rocks, or even better high heels. Why would anyone want to wear something that is dangerous, deforms your feet and makes you walk like you have a rod stuck somewhere, well high heels became popular in Europe and we still have the things around today. So this is a trend no one questioned or even tested. The real truth is that the most powerful people of the ancient times were white, Greeks, Romans. Greeks went into Eygpt and Egyptians mixed and spoke a Greek like language and embraced the culture, its the same everywhere. So Eygptians began to look more white in some places. Why was this better? Because its always better to resemble the conquerer than the conquered. Have you noticed that since Obama has become president there are more black men of power? You see more commercials with black men? I think the tide is changing very quickly and Hollywood is the girl with her finger in the dike. If it wasn't for Hollywood blondes would not be popular. That's my belief at any rate. Even in the Hadiths when they speak of slaves in general, its up to the reader to decided what color that slave was, but occasionally they will say, "Ethiopian" or "black" that tells me that they had many more slaves of all colors among the Sahabah and their
families. And we know they mixed with slave girls liberally of all races.
Or look at the Chinese imperial princess and nobility who had their feet broken and bound as small girls so their feet would always be tiny and precious. That's what a woman's feet are supposed to be. Tiny and precious. So tiny and precious that they could not walk and had to be carried around in a liter and hand carried from the liter to their sitting places. Very precious. Give me my size ten's any day. When the Manchurians invaded central China and eventualy conquored, they forbade this foot fetish thing. Their forbears were Mongols and people of the steppes who couldn't spare anyone as precious and unable to work, and to them, a woman had to know how to ride.
yes the foot binding was bizarre. Actually it was designed to keep women from "running" away. Some chinese men developed a fetish for the smell of the cheesy stuff that oozed from the rotting flesh of the bound foot. A bound foot took years to make and once made had to have a certain look. The cleansing and unwinding of the foot and rebandaging was a ritual. The Koreans bound feet as well but nothing as severe as the Chinese. The Japanese were more practical and left the foot alone. They are very earthy people. I recall as a child laughing at the National Geographic photos of people from Africa, the unclothed nakedness and scars of beauty of the equatorial people. The platter lips was
actually very pleasing to a childs sense of silliness. As I got older and experienced more, and knew more people personally I began to enjoy diversity and to love people.
I was lucky enough to attend a high school that for its time was extremely diverse, we had Japanese students, Chinese students, Jewish, Greek, Italians, Blacks, you name it. And this was Dayton Ohio. I recall falling in love with a Greek co student, his name was Dimitri and he was gorgeous, to me that is. He had this sandy colored hair, blue eyes and this profile that was unbelievable, but at the same time there was an African american guy on the football team that was equally hot. How can this be? Beauty is not one thing, its many things. Racist and colorist would have you believe beauty is "one" thing. We are just getting to the point in America were we can say all colors and looks are beautiful. I think its the rest of the world that has to catch up. But they are getting there I think. But the major thing is you have to challenge yourself and be brutally honest
about how you perceive things. Are you coming from authenticity in your feelings? Or is it manipulation by marketers? Its usually the latter.
@Gustavo
You write:
"Arabs have intermarried with Black Africans, provided in most cases that they assimilated culturally to Arab mannerisms, customs, language, and culture.
The "Arabs" of the Sudan are the product of cultural assimilation, though they forget in their conflict with the non-Arab Darfurians that they are also Black."
This is not strictly true. My wife is a Sudanese Arab, who also is Black.
To be an Arab is a complex rather than a strictly ethnic identity. One depiction is that an Arab is one who self-identifies as an Arab and shares in the use of cultural practices common to others who also self-identify as Arabs - in particular and most acutely, the Arabic language.
Self-identity in Sudan is deeply complicated. A Sudanese may self-identify at one and the same time as an Arab, a Black African, and also by reference to her tribe, clan and family. Incidentally, the whole notion of being "Sudanese" is relatively recent - until about 100 years ago, to be of Sudan meant to be a Southern Sudanese (who are, in the main, non-Muslim and do not self-identify as Arabs) - indeed, it was a dialect term for slave.
My wife's tribe, the Hamar, are traditionally camel and sheep herding nomads (bedu) from the Central Kurdufan deserts. They trace their origins to a group from the south side of the Atlas mountains in what is today the border lands between Mauritania and Morocco; a group that migrated into East Africa some three hundred years since. They regard themselves as an Arab tribe, but also see themselves as Black Africans.
This being said, one should not confuse such fine distinctions with the crude and most often racist "Arabism" of Sudan's less than delightful rulers, which seeks to target and discriminate against the many peoples of Sudan to the profit of the elite.
Greetings from al-Khartuum.
Cry the Beloved Country.
You go out of the way to dump on anything I post that even mentions Pakistan and *I* am the one who is insecure?
As the brother from Khartoum just told you very politely, don't make sweeping generalizations. You mention desi "settlers" in Africa. What you are describing is limited to East Africa, which had settler populations. In fact, most of them were poor labourers. Of course, not all of them were that way.
Where I grew up, in Nigeria, there were no settlers. In the last 38 years (15 years living there and through friends since), I have heard of only three or four foreign families that "settled" and applied for citizenship--and one of them, at least, was Lebanese and another Greek. We were expats; pure and simple. Yes, we faced some resentment from people who thought the jobs my parents had--teachers--should have gone to locals. And, yes, eventually--when there were people who qualified for them--the jobs did, and my parents came home. One of the reasons my parents' generation of desis were recruited in their hundreds by people like Alhaji Ahmadu Bello ("the Sardauna"; see http://blog.ifaqeer.com/2006/01/muslims-and-democracy-but-not-usual.html) was to show his own people that one could be a practising Muslim and be part of a modern system run in English.
Read that post in the parenthesis, by the way; you might find something that's not related to South Asia in my writing. I'd love to discuss West African and African issues some time. Or Indian society that you so love; outside of my immediate family, on my father's side my closest Pakistani relative is a second cousin of my father--I bet your family is no different. I am married to an Indian. I keep real close watch on India and Indian society, too.
I wish you could get past your allergy to the word "Pakistan" so maybe we can discuss the shortcomings and evils of South Asian societies (of which Afghanistan is a part) and the evils of Pakistani foreign policy. And maybe the beauty of the culture(s) we share, with roots in Persian, Sanskrit, and Arabic cultures. Quite frankly, "Gustavo", I am getting tired of your juvenile outbursts. You are making it very difficult to stay engaged with something that I had a major hand in getting started.
The only thing I know about "Indians" in Africa is Mississippi Masala, and that wasn't very flattering. And of course the fact that Gandi himself lived in South African but had very little to say about apartied to my knowledge. I would love an education on the history of Indians in Africa. I am very interested in Muslim Indians in Africa.
Again, Lailah; that's the problem. What you are describing--and most probably want to know about--is East and Southern Africa. I grew up in West Africa. Very different dynamics going on in both places. A good place to start is the Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coolie
The most amazing thing you might once you start studying that topic is that there's a US connection to the topic; especially in California and the West.
... and to Afghans/Pakhtuns/Pathans in Australia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Australia#History_of_Muslims_in_Au...
[you listening, GM?]
IFaqeer,
I'm a cultural nationalist inspired by the Bengali move for political independence from Pakistan.
Most Pathans look to Bangladesh as a model for acquiring political independence, and for some, eventual reunification with Kabul.
We are the "Palestinians" of the country of Pakistan, we feel aggrieved and for some of us, Pakistan is simply the province of Punjab.
We see the frontier between Afghanistan and Pakistan as artificial remnants of British colonialism, we also would like to remind Pakistan that southern Afghanistan was leased, the lease was time-limited though.
The Taliban never relinquished claim to the disputed territory that sorely divides Afghans and Pakistanis. Our culture has been appropriated by Pakistan, the apparent differentiation between Indian culture and a created Pakistani culture is rooted in a nationalism predicated in political Islam. However, Pakistan shows rifts and divisions.
Perhaps the animosity I express towards Pakistan is rooted in Afghanistan's own political failures. Afghanistan, diverse and rich in plurality, has never fully embraced its cultural dynamism.
However, just like Hong Kong, Kowloon, and Macao were returned to Chinese control, Goa was returned to India, nationalist Afghans and Pathans feel the same about the NWF.
Pakistan is a frontier of South Asia.
Afghanistan is more squarely "Persianized" but its "Indic" character is evident. The northern part of the country is "Turkic" in nature, Afghanistan is a blend of the various major cultural influences of inland Asia.
I apologize for my strongly worded criticisms.
However, you have posted many articles concerning Pakistan.
Let's watch the Bollywood film "Saawariya" and forget about our issues. :o)
I can haz lolcatz? We can haz peace in the Holy Web Directory?
I offer an olive branch, my anti-Pakistan rhetoric has been as harsh as a member of India's Hindutva.
Pakistan is like Israel to me, it is a reality that I can not dismiss. After six decades of existence, both nations have the "right to exist" even if their frontiers and borders are somewhat controversial and dicey.
Pakistan, like Israel, were created as a homeland for a ethno-religious group of people. In this case, Pakistan, was to be a Muslim Indian homeland but was also to be home to a non-Muslim minority.
During the time of partition, 1/3 of Pakistan was non-Muslim, now that figure is 3%, most being Christians in and around the city of cosmopolitan Karachi.
Pakistan, like Afghanistan, has favored one ethnic group over others. In Afghanistan, Pushtuns get preferential treatment and in Pakistan, Punjabis dominate the nation.
Both nations have flirted with a rigid and inflexible interpretation of tribal/martial Islam, that does not allow Shariah to convey compassion or rehabilitation.
You might consider these sweeping generalizations, but in all social science literature, generalizations are often made to convey information about a complex situation. This does not mean that there are not exceptions.
This is where I come from iFaqeer.
Muslims cannot dismiss what divides them, perhaps that is why Muslims only talk about Palestine, it is the only conflict in the Muslim world where people can vaguely agree on the principle of Palestinian self-determination. How to achieve that goal though, is also controversial.
But when it comes to Kurdistan or Darfur, forget it.
My family frequently travels to Lahore and Karachi when we go to India or Iran. I love crossing the checkpoint between Lahore-Amritsar. The military pomp and pageantry, an interesting show of national rivalry and co-existence. Of course, my mother and I wave Indian flags.
But I love Karachi, it reminds of Mumbai. Plus being Shia, I feel safe there generally speaking, and going to fashion shows. I love sunsets in Karachi.
"Muslims cannot dismiss what divides them, perhaps that is why Muslims only talk about Palestine, it is the only conflict in the Muslim world where people can vaguely agree on the principle of Palestinian self-determination."
Actually, in the Arab world there are fantastic divisions on exactly this issue - divisions that have been heightened by the assumption of an Islamist dimension to the national liberation struggle that is the essence of the Palestinian struggle.
As you write: "How to achieve that goal though, is also controversial." Quite.
"But when it comes to Kurdistan or Darfur, forget it."
Principally because in both cases one set of Muslims is in the vile business of murdering another set of Muslims. One must not talk of such things appears to be the agenda. That is, of course, entirely shameful and strikes to the heart of what is amiss in so much of the Muslim world.
But I make no apologies for my Pushtun nationalism. Just like you are a proud Pakistani, that is fine iFaqeer.
I am mixed, half Mexican (hence the name "Gustavo") and on my mother's side Persianized Kurdish, Pushtun, Turcomen, and Uzbek. My grandfather is from Kabul, my great-grandparents from Iran. We have ties in both the Iranian and Afghan diaspora communities in America. Farsi/Dari is my family's language.
Being mixed, I have never fit in. Being gay and being "out" I have felt strange in the Muslim community, feeling the need to conceal myself, and continually lie about why I'm not married. The Muslim community seems more interested in my matrimonial state of affairs, I have been presented with offers for a "lovely, compliant Muslimah."
There was a time when I considered marriage, as a means, to cast away the glares I feel concerning my single status.
My mother is a "rebel" with having me out of wedlock. She was molested by a family member in my immediate family, a crime of the flesh commonly hushed in Muslim circles. She was single mother with two failed marriages, and now she has a common law marriage with a man who she loves, but will not marry or enter into a state of "holy matrimony."
She never had a Muslim partner.
My Muslim Shia family is not terribly religious at all. Islam is more about culture and less about religious practice and observing "namaz" (salaat).
My "conversion" to Islam and introduction to Islam were along the neo-purist Sunni strand of "missionary Islam."
I flirted with the Tablighi movement, even changed my wardrobe and started wearing "Sunnah" clothing and modified hygiene practices to fit in, and even flirted with a group that some say receives funding from a religious party in Pakistan operating out of NYC/NJ.
Ironically, my "allergy to Pakistan" could have less to do with land disputes around the Khyber Pass and more to do with conflicted feelings with some Pakistanis who played a huge part in my self-identification as a Muslim.
In my quest to fit in, I disappointed them. Eventually, I wore on their patience, and they shunned me.
I was hurt, and so I lashed out against them and anything linked to their "watan."
Gustavo, My Pakthtun brother, my frustration is that you have been dumping, if you will excuse the strong language, on me just because I discuss Pakistan. If I may say so, that's like dumping on a Jewish civil rights activist for all the white supremacist evil of the last several centuries. I am what, in the context of Pakistan, we like to call a "Muhajir". And if Pakhuns are are the Palestinians of Pakistan, Muhajirs are the Jews. Yes, I feel an allegiance to Pakistan. And to being a Muhajir, and to being a Muslim and a human. And to using Macs. Oh, and I am a Sunni born amongst the Hausa-Fulani in Nigeria. But in each case, I can also list to your where the bodies are buried and what I think each group does and thinks that is just plain evil. Want to watch me get Sohail M all worked-up as I point out the holes in the Apple Mac experience? Or describe how the elite of the Muhajirs--who now, and with pretty good reason, complain about getting the short end of the stick in Pakistan--lorded over and nepotistically ran things in the early days in Pakistan? Or why it is that the Hausa-Fulani are often so detested by some of their Nigerian compatriots for the same of reasons you give as a Pakhtun?
The funny thing is that if you look closer, it is often that the elite in each community uses its identity to live off the fat of the land and the less-privileged get exploited. Take the desis in East and South Africa, Fiji and its environs, Australia, and even California, in the early 20th Century; the vast majority were working class and basically exploited, often bonded labour that had to be imported because slavery was now illegal. They were called "Girmitye" (from the "agreement"s they signed as bonded labour) or "coolies", did the hard work and couldn't get diddly in terms of rights.
And I like to think I don't just talk; I have been working on human rights since I left college in Karachi. And at one point was a polling agent for a political party of my ethnic persuasion sitting across from a representative of the ANP ( Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan's party)--while the ANP basically threw their weight behind us in that constituency. There has been much bad blood between the Pukhtuns and Muhajirs in Karachi. And a lot of it has been as other powers pitted them against each other so their attention and energies were not turned to the feudal lords that run the country.
You want my take on the politics of Pakistan? Even as I supported my community's party (though only when they participated in civilized party politics), I was acutely aware, at the age of 18, that if there was one person that could be said to have staked his principles out and stuck to them for most of a century, it was the aforesaid Bacha Khan--whether I agreed with his politics right then or not. And that I respected, and said out loud. In fact, you could say that the only real political party Pakistan has, it is the ANP. All the others are either feudal vehicles, bands of religious goons, or small groups of Leftist idealists.
And you want to discuss Pakhtuns and other hardworking salt-of-the-earth folks? You might know this, but that town town called "Lodi" near San Fran where the FBI picked up a father and son, hounded them for a year or so and then all they could them for was "lying to the FBI"? That town consists of those working class folks I mentioned above; working class folk that moved to California to be the skilled agricultural labour that built all those orchards California folks love to wax nostalgic about. Lodi is about a third Pakhtun, a third Sikh and a third White and Hispanic. And these communities could not bring their families to the US till well into the middle of the last century and couldn't even claim citizenship till 1948. The first US congressman from our part of the world, contrary to common belief is not Bobby Jindal, but a certain Dalip Singh Saund--in the 50s! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalip_Singh_Saund) There are similar stories to be told about Pakhtuns in Australia. Take a look at this picture and then work backwards from there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_(Australia)
Why do I go on and on about this? Because, my brother, I am not the enemy; and I'd love to work WITH you to identify and work against those people and circumstances that are. Just being your punching bag might be gratifying, but we can do so much more if we work past that.
PS: how many pushtu songs can YOU sing?
Only some Hindi/.Urdu songs!
No Pushtun songs.
I love pre-Zia Lollywood films, where you see Pakistani actresses in saris.
Compared to modern Pakistani film actresses, where the sari is an endangered species, it is popular among former East Pakistani women in my local mosque.
Muslims in South Asia are influenced by Arab culture, as are all Muslims worldwide, but one should retain their own local culture. The Qur'an mandates multiculturalism and plurality among people, and commands that we should learn from one another.
The monoculture being promoted by purist Sunnis is well a tad distasteful to me.
I was involved in Tablighi Jamaat, but the man in charge of the outfit in San Diego, is not well liked in the "mainstream" Muslim community here. He seems pushy and they are quite demanding in terms of your time, money, and their demands have issues with marriages.
But I preferred them because I felt like I had a community, the young men were friendly. I even considered going back to Tablighi Jamaat, but they don't necessarily like half-devoted adherents, it is all or nothing. I actually find myself drawn to conservative Muslim circles, even though personally I'm quite liberal.
What a quagmire. I can easily understand after WW2 and everything that came before, expulsions, pogroms, that many Jews wanted their own homeland. And individuals and groups legally purchased land there. But groups like Irgun with their misplaced anger got blood on their hands. And the Palestinians had already been screwed as I recall by an Ottoman land grant program that put most of their land into the hands of absentee Arab landlords, who sold it to the Jews. Then they were driven off land their familes had been on for centuries. Now both sides have so much blood on their hands and there seems no way out. Israeli does have a large peace movement, but not large enough to counteract their hearttless warmongers. And Hamas uses religion to get political power and doesn't care if its victims are civilians, and they drown out their own peacemakers. All complicated by Hezbollah and those lunatic Christians in the SSNP and militant Phalange groups. What a mess. However do we get out of it? Pakistani recognition of Israel, I fear, would lead to all-out civil war with the lunatic fringe in the NWFP.