90s Class Reunion

Sequels are never better than the original, apart from a couple of exceptions that come to mind. Which begs the questions, whomsoever is directing the current thriller does he intend to keep the ending the same as the original one? 

The roles have shifted, slight changes made in the cast, mainly due to some actors/actress not being present due to Covid or have unfortunately left the world in terrible incidents. An introduction of a third force was made a couple of years ago, which was generally greeted well by the audiences but twist and turns have left many confused. As always, the villain is portrayed as everyone involved, while who actually may be the real evil genius is still a million dollar question, or is it? That's the beauty of this universe, you can turn any fanfiction into reality because of the parallel storylines that are at play. For those who have watched Flash, a DC television show, they will find that far simpler to comprehend than this magnificent piece of production. 

The 2020 edition of this ever continuous production is set in the utopian Pure Land, which by now many fans of the show understand is to be understood as mockery on the behalf of the directors. A third world nation, still confused with its national identity, overgrowing with poverty and despair, divided along all lines with little or no morality in its people or leaders, but no lack of moral policing in all divisions of society. As set in 2020, Pure Land is again in the midst of a political crisis with an introduction of a new political movement termed as PLDP. We've still not been told what PLDP stands for but its representation is filled by A-list star studded performers. The alliance would shock probably anyone who is new to the production, which is why it is recommended to watch all seasons prior to watching the 2020 edition. The question is yet to be addressed as who will be the poster boy or girl to this movement, but in contention is a religious cleric, a foreign educated boy backed by his resourceful father, one of our favorites from past seasons Mr. Brick and the daughter of another of our favorites Mr. Why. Mind you the directors intentionally skipped showing the transition of power to the two children from their fathers but it can be presumed that the transition was smooth considering blood is the main requirement when it comes to passing down of power and rarely if ever have we seen power passed to someone who is not a blood relation. On paper the son represents a secular and a leftist ideology to an extinct, while the daughter again on paper shall move on with a religious, pro-businesses rightist ideology. It is strange to see the left and right align but anything can happen in Pure Land. Another confusion among viewers is how long lasting this alliance may be considering the religious leader has in the past seasons made it clear that he is not comfortable with a woman leading Pure Land, whereas the daughter and son have baggage because of history of their fathers. But we leave that for the directors to decide. PLDM is shown to be challenging the status quo, though it will be an interesting watch to how can the status quo challenge themselves. To give you a better understanding on how to understand and love this production, always remember the people of the Pure Land have short and long term memory loss disorder. Something even the viewers of the show have to install in themselves if they plan on continuing with this. 

As for the current forces in power, our third force from a couple of years ago Justice League, pardon me DC, have consolidated power and surely through help from heavenly powers. It did not make sense when it happened and fan fiction predicted that heavenly powers were used in removing the political elite, who had ruled for over 30 years, (now in PLDM) but now we are being led by the directors towards that narrative. One aspect that I truly loved was the way the power was divided, it surely did not give away right off the bat that heavenly powers were in play. 

It is a show down now, and a ton of action is to be seen in the coming episodes. From one angle it looks as if the dysfunctional partnership of the elite have reunited to take back the power which they rightly believe to be theirs for their own gains, but that's an extremely simplistic view. On the other hand it looks as if the new blood has atone for their sins and wants to rid away the heavenly powers and the third copy Justice League. I would not bet a penny on either, but it surely will be fun to watch.


To get a better idea of a possible ending watch the 90's edition of the show. 

Love to all. 

Flash Point

On Friday, the UN Security Council convened an informal closed door session on the Kashmir issue. This is the first time this issue has been discussed at the UN Security Council in five decades. The outcome though of the UNSC meeting will not be a formal pronouncement as the consultations are informal in nature.

India and Pakistan did not attend the meeting, which was open only to the five permanent members and 10 non-permanent members

Speaking to the media, The Chinese ambassador to the United Nations, Zhang Jun, said on Friday that members of the Security Council generally feel India and Pakistan should both refrain from unilateral action over Kashmir.

Indian envoy to the UN Syed Akbaruddin said India's position was and remains that matters related to Article 370 of the Constitution are entirely an internal matter of India and these have no external ramifications.

India told Pakistan that it has to stop terrorism to start talks

"Stop terror to start talks," Syed Akbaruddin asserted.

Pakistan's ambassador to the UN, Maleeha Lodhi said the voices of the people of Jammu and Kashmir were heard at the meeting of the UN Security Council, the highest diplomatic forum of the world.

Lodhi said the very fact this meeting had taken place is "testimony to the fact that this is an internationally recognized dispute".

Russia's deputy permanent representative, Dimitry Polyanskiy told reporters that Moscow's view is that it is a "bilateral issue" between India and Pakistan.

The Curfew

After India revoked article 370 & 35-A, Jammu & Kashmir have been on lock down. No internet or telephone access to the valley, with a strict enforcement by the Indian Security Forces has completely blocked the area from the world. No news is coming out, except for bits and pieces. India maintains there position that this was a due to security concerns and precautionary measures to safe guarding civilian lives rest with the federal government and local administrators on ground.  India's UN envoy Syed Akbaruddin urged the international media to let the administrators and law enforcement, who are on ground to make the decisions and give India the time needed to ensure peace in the Jammu & Kashmir.

There is great uncertainty in the international community as to how long this curfew and communications blackout will remain. The OIC has issued a statement calling for an end to the curfew and stressed concerns over the human rights violation in the region.

Flash Point

Pakistan's Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi, in a press conference held yesterday stressed the importance and the gravity of the current ongoing situation in Indian Occupied Kashmir, terming it as a possible flash point between to nuclear armed neighbors.

This statement came after India's defence minister Rajnath Singh tweeted, “Pokhran is the area which witnessed Atal Ji’s firm resolve to make India a nuclear power and yet remain firmly committed to the doctrine of ‘No First Use’. India has strictly adhered to this doctrine. What happens in future depends on the circumstances.”

Earlier this week, Pakistan's Prime Minister while addressing the legislative Assembly of Pakistan's Kashmir said that we will respond to any form of India's aggression with a stronger show of power, raising the temperature of the situation.

What's next?

Pakistan considers the UNSC meeting on Kashmir as a diplomatic achievement, though it does understand that this the beginning of a long diplomatic battle, where it will have to face many obstacles, considering how strong India currently is diplomatically and economically compared to Pakistan.

India, on the other hand feel that the international community understands and respects their position and that Jammu & Kashmir is an internal matter.

Unfortunately, as the curfew continues there is concern that people in the valley will get frustrated. That will lead to a rise in protest and a rise in the security measures from New Delhi. If New Delhi continues with this approach and the people of the valley come out to the streets, the situation will get extremely dire, and causalities are likely to happen. In that situation it will be interesting to see how long New Delhi can continue to convince the international community that they have everything under control. Islamabad also does not want the situation to break lose. The commitment to the diplomatic approach will be tested if there is chaos in the valley.

By no exaggeration, the issue of Kashmir can become a possible flash point between Pakistan and India, if the temperatures are not lowered. The international community, while keeping an eye on this will have to address this issue one way or the other before it blows up.

Has India Gone Into Panic Mode?

On Monday afternoon in Washing D.C, President Trump managed to create a panic 7,481 miles away in New Delhi with a revelation: "I was with Prime Minister Modi two weeks ago. He actually said, ‘Would you like to be a mediator or arbitrator?’ I said, ‘Where?’ He said, ‘Kashmir.’”

Sat next to him was Prime Minister Imran Khan of Pakistan, who couldn't wash the smile of his face and to be fair, I doubt he tried.

Trump then added: “I’d love to be a mediator.”

Across in New Delhi, where night had set in, everyone was taken back by what had just happened. In a matter of seconds, Raveesh Kumar, a spokesman for India’s Ministry of External Affairs tweeted, "No such request has been made".

For a time being calm set in when the official press release of the meeting between Prime Minister Imran Khan and President Donald Trump was released. There was no mention of Kashmir, neither was there any mention of India. Cross boarder terrorism on the other was included.

Unfortunately for New Delhi, the calm didn't last long. The morning after the press conference, the opposition in the lower and upper house of India's parliament, took the Indian government to the cleaners. They repeatedly asked for a clarification on the matter. The country’s external affairs minister, S. Jaishankar, read out a statement in the upper house of parliament, identical to what his spokesman had tweeted earlier: “I repeat, no such request was made by the prime minister to the U.S. president.”

While the Indian opposition is trying to pressure the government on this matter, the Indian media has called out President Trump as a liar, clearing Prime Minister Modi of inviting a third party into talks between Pakistan.

Trump's Chief Economic Advisor Larry Kudlow told reporters at the White House when a journalist following up on the president's remarks asked if it was made up, "It is a very rude question". He added, "The president doesn't make things up".

Unfortunately for the White House, a number of U.S. lawmakers, came out against President Trump's statement and tried to smooth waters between India and United States.

Rep. Brad Sherman, a Democratic member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, tweeted,
"Everyone who knows anything about foreign policy in South Asia knows that India consistently opposes third-party mediation in Kashmir. Everyone knows PM Modi would never suggest such a thing. Trump’s statement is amateurish and delusional. And embarrassing. I just apologized to Indian Ambassador Harsh Shringla for Trump's amateurish and embarrassing mistake."

And Alice Wells, the acting assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asian affairs, took back Trump’s comments through a tweet, “Kashmir is a bilateral issue for both parties to discuss.”

All this raises a number of questions.

What did Prime Minister and President Trump discuss when they met at the G-20 summit earlier this year? 

The rational argument that can be made is that Trump may have exaggerated the discussion he had with Prime Minister Modi. Unfortunately, the reality does not matter now. It is an extremely difficult situation that the two countries (India and United States) find themselves in. It also makes sense, considering the situation and the intensity of the relations why Prime Minister Modi has till now mot commented on this. It'll be hard to see how the two can get out of this without damaging the relationship between the two countries, considering this revelation will stay relevant in time till it is properly addressed.

Will this affect the current relationship between India and United States, considering they are already in a trade war?

It most definitely will have an affect. What will be interesting to see will be the nature and the level of the said affect. Unfortunately, the remarks were made in a press conference regarding Kashmir, an issue that Pakistan is keen on making relevant internationally. How India and United States deal with this and how much can the India media continue to target President Trump before the United States gets annoyed, time will tell. It also will be interesting to observe whether President Trump sticks to his statement or finds a political answer to what he said. In the latter case, things will settle down, though President Trump is not much known for settling things down.

Is India's panic warranted?

It most certainly is. Kashmir has been a concern for the two nuclear arm neighbours since Independence but India has stuck to its stance of bilateral talks and no third party involvement since the Shimla agreement took place. The reason for that is, if a third party was to get involved, it may prove to be disastrous for India. The Human Rights Commission as well as many organizations have repeatedly called out India for their human rights abuse in Kashmir. India also doesn't recognize Kashmir as disputed but considers it as a part of itself. To have a mediator on this issue would be India accepting that this is indeed a disputed territory. And any solution but Kashmir being a part of India, is not acceptable to India, which becomes highly unlikely as the only solution with a third party mediator present.

Can this be considered as a win for Pakistan?

The only obvious winner from this is Pakistan. It is hard to see if Pakistan had anything to do directly with this, but they've come out from that press conference unscathed, but have made Kashmir a talking point once again in the international community and have possibly poked a hole in India-US relations that are already in a trade-war between each other.

Back to Square One

What do we mean by progress?  

"To Improve or develop over a period of time".

All of us yearn for this phenomenon in the competitive times that prevail today. We say, Pakistan is left behind in the world race. That is it. We merely state the obvious and do nothing about it. Now, what does that say about us as a nation? Are we so pessimistic that we give up all hope or are unwilling to see this land prosper or do we simply put the blame on governments?

Currently our economy is unstable, our business community is struggling, and people are losing jobs or simply not getting paid enough to make ends meet. A significant proportion of our people are earning less than Rupees 20,000 a month. People do not have a roof over their head and even three meals a day is a luxury. Do not be alarmed because that is how most of our populace are leading their lives in Interior Punjab, Sindh, Khyber PakhtunKhwa and Balochistan.

Poor nutrition and sanitation have led them into deteriorating health and the condition of public hospitals is right before our very own eyes.  Imagine the state of mind these unfortunate families might be having, can we blame them for being pessimistic about the future? Can we blame them for not progressing or do we blame the government for not providing them with their basic rights as citizens?

Without a shadow of doubt, the latter makes more sense. Amidst such circumstances, we find political parties fighting over who is selected and who is elected. The irony, however, is that we always let them exploit us. Till date, no democratic government in our history has been able to deliver on their promises. In fact, their wealth has multiplied whereas the poor continue to become poorer and poorer.

A year earlier, I recall interacting with a person who was putting up posters of a certain candidate during the 2018 General Elections. He showed me a 5000 Rupees currency note and said his leader had promised him a job after the election. A few months ago, I saw the same person sleeping in a mosque and the look he had on his face said it all. I felt for him, for the hope he once had when he ignored the scorching July heat while tirelessly pasting posters of a candidate running for election from his constituency. That is all it takes to deceive my people.

Shall we expect progress? No. Certainly not until the common person continues to be deceived.

"Countries such as Great Britain and the United States became rich because their citizens overthrew the elites who controlled power and created a society where political rights were much more broadly distributed, where the government was accountable and responsive to citizens, and where the great mass of people could take advantage of economic opportunities." (Why Nations Fail – by Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson)

Pakistan is still a young nation, compared to western democracies that go back centuries. Our founding father, Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, achieved this country democratically and constitutionally. Destiny did not allow him to draw the socio – economic, religious and political map of a newly born state. During the first twenty one years of inception, Pakistan was governed by civil – military bureaucracy under oligarchic and authoritarian traditions. The military continue to play a role in the political affairs of Pakistan. Imposed leaders and inherited politics have brought damage to the overall system. The election campaigns of political parties may convey the message of ‘people first’ but the reality is far from it. Majority of the Pakistani people continue to live in areas with no access to proper education, health or food.

We must not expect progressive thought to be welcomed until the audience can comprehend it. The young generation of politics enthusiasts is our best opportunity to start sowing the seeds of a real democracy. 

Educate yourself and whoever you can, utilize the resources available to you, dig in to your history and read as many books as you can.  

Feel free to read "Why nations fail" by Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson. It is one of the finest books you will ever read.

Crisis Cricket

Ladies and Gentlemen, if I may have your attention, please.
Cricket is in danger, I repeat cricket is in danger!

Zimbabwe Cricket has been banned by the International Cricket Council on grounds of their government interfering with their cricket board. While, the quality of cricket Zimbabwe brought to the international level did not match the standard, this is a loss to the gentlemen's game. It has been over a hundred years, yet cricket has not grown as a major global sports in terms of the countries that play the game, now we've lost another country that won't be playing the sport. 

One of the few reasons that cricket is in crisis right now is not because of the quality of the game but because of administrative failures and monopoly imposed by key stakeholders. The two mentioned points require a detail analysis and a lot of self reflection and self correction, if we are to achieve the goal of making cricket a global sport in ten years time right now. Though, before that, we have another crisis about to hit us.

Cricket is losing on quality from multiple nations and the gap between the best teams is far extending. West Indies, Sri Lanka and Pakistan are in a state of crisis and this directly affects cricket. The current world cup, irrespective how exciting it was, was a show of proof. The top four teams were largely predictable before the start of the world cup and had it not been for rain, it would have remained predictable as well. That is not what the game deserves, neither is that what the fans deserve.

West Indies cricket has taken a dive since the past couple of years, but they are getting back on their feet. The gap is still very wide and the issues at the core remain in large, unresolved. The encouraging aspect is that, they have established a core squad and will continue to revolve around those players till the T20 world cup that is to be held later next year. The West Indies Cricket Board and players will have to create new relationships and strong policy will have to be implemented if they are to create an impact on the world stage in the long run. The question is, will they be able to do this or will short term victories hijack the road to recovery? Unfortunately, the past two decades of West Indies cricket don't give cricket and the fan's much comfort. 

Sri Lanka, on the other hand are in free fall. Losing on key players due to retirement has exposed their domestic structure. There is no quality present at the moment and with the board politically handled, it is hard to see how they can get back to glory days. The squad that played in the world cup displayed glimpses of excellence at times, but they are still lacking. They've reshuffled and reordered, chopped and changed. What Sri Lanka needs to do now is focus on their domestic cricket and allow the international team the comfort of time. When the foundations of a cricket team are weak, especially at international level, the first thing that has to be ensured on the road to recovery is security. The group of boys representing team Sri Lanka need to assured of their place. You can not have individuals playing for their place in the team, when the team has hit rocked bottom and expect positive results. This will be a painful process, but with patience, it will bear fruits. Sri Lanka need this and so does world cricket. 

Pakistan brings in a flare different to world cricket than any nation. A competitive Pakistan makes the game twice as good as it already is. Unfortunately, Pakistan has been in a rebuilding process since 2015. Stability is missing from its core and there is no sense of direction. Much has been said about Pakistan's domestic structure and the quality it produces, but the time has come to put those words in action. Pakistan's record in the previous two years shows how far they are lacking behind, but unfortunately, the unpredictability manages a few great wins and everyone forgets the underlying problems. The recent exist in the world cup would lead to chop and changes, but that's exactly what Pakistan has been doing this the past twenty years! It is time for stability in their international team, except a few unavoidable changes and direct all the focus on their domestic cricket. The idea of a six team domestic structure is a good one, but only if it is implemented in the best possible way. Pakistan, will have to invest in their domestic structure and improve the image of cricket, domestically, if they are to have any chance of being contenders for the next world cup. Changes at the international level will break current process that has been brought in place by the current captain and manager. Adjust policy at the international level and revamp at the domestic level, not vice versa.

World Cricket needs these three teams at their level best, because without these three and no other teams to replace them, world cricket will be at a severe loss.      

Political Twins Set to Meet

As the sun rises over Washington next week on Monday, the Prime Minister of Pakistan will step foot in the White House for the first time to meet his counterpart, the President of United States. This meeting is expected to be a rebuild in relations between the two countries, which since the Trump administration has roughened to a certain extent. Though it might be a difficult task to rebuild relations when there are certain nervous issues that will be discussed including Afghan Peace Process, China & CPEC and Iran; if there were to be any two individuals in the world that could achieve the impossible, the above mentioned two men of power surely can.

There's much similar about the two individuals. Both of them started outside of politics and made a name for themselves. While the Prime Minister had a successful sports career and is regarded as one of the best cricketing all-rounders of the game, the President made billions in business and entertainment. Much has been said about the two and their social life, the scandals and accusations, their political philosophy but unfortunately it has been narrated in a negative way more often than not.

Now, domestic politics aside, the two leaders have done an impressive job in the foreign relations.
The current President of United States is the first ever President of the United States to step into North Korea, the President has also kept China in a bit of a messy situation, that too after a long time. On the other side, the Prime Minister of Pakistan has in a time span of a year strengthened relations with Russia, outplayed India by the four way peace talks for the Afghan Peace process that include United States, Russia, China & Pakistan.

Though, there are always two sides to a picture, the Prime Minister of Pakistan has not had a bad encounter on the international level with anyone in this one year since he has taken office, the President of United States does have a tendency to not reciprocate too kindly, if he does not like his counterpart.

The same does apply to the character of Prime Minister of Pakistan. The underlying fact is that these two individuals decide the fate of a meeting a personal level. In simple words, for the meeting to be a success, if the two leaders manage to establish a good personal relation, that would mean a positive outcome.

The atmosphere is setting for a positive meeting as recently Pakistan arrested a controversial figure and straight after his arrest President of United States tweeted of that arrest and celebrated it. Is this an indication for what is to come? We all hope so, but it all depends on how the two "vibe" with each other, they do have a lot in common to talk about if they so choose.

While, critics would term this as unprofessional and disloyalty to the office, it is important to note that politics is about how you deal with people, nationally and internationally. It's a game that has to be played at a personal level and while the issues concerning the two countries are of immense importance and relate to not bilateral but regional issues. It would have been comforting to have a dialogue based on merits of policy, but as history shows us, the two countries have tried that approach and it has seldom worked, and the chances of that technique working in the present day are far less due to the magnitude and the variety of issues that are present in front of the two governments.

In a matter of days, this famous or infamous meeting, depending on the outcome, will take place and it will have a lasting impact on the future for both the nations. Either way it goes, these two leaders will be remembered in the history of relations between these two countries, as they have the power to take the relationship to new heights and even new lows.

Discrimination, Nationalism & Pakistan

Discrimination, according to the Oxford Dictionary is, "The unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex, recognition." 

Nationalism, according to the same book is, "identification with one's own nation and its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations."

Now, it is important that we know the difference between the two (discrimination and Nationalism), because failure to do so, would lead "nationalism" towards "discrimination", as once said by London's Mayor Sadiq Khan, "Nationalism can be as divisive as bigotry and racism." 

The statement said by Sadiq Khan is a bit harsh, but to be honest, it isn't far off from the truth. But, what happens when a nation forgoes nationalism? One may argue that nationalism is innate and that a nation can never forgo the quality of nationalism. For how can a nation not identify with its own country and share the interests of the land where they live? 

It happens when fear and chaos overcome the people. When the people feel embarrassed to be linked with their country. It is when the brave turn into the cowards and the fools lead the masses. It is a sad reality. 

Pakistan, a country situated in the south east Asia, with a population well over 200 million, has a rich history, which does not start from the independence, but well before. Unfortunately, over the years, Pakistan has often fallen of track and substituted growth and prosperity for terrorism and corruption. To talk about the mistakes made since 1947 would be a repetition of many articles and debates, which to no surprise have made no difference to the country. But what has never or very little been talked and written on is the mentality of the Pakistani people. We have become a discriminating nation and we are discriminating our own people, our own efforts for growth and prosperity. 

To convey my point across, I'll use three examples. 1) Politics, 2) Army and 3) Civil Society 

Talking about Politics, the nation has become too polarized, and while that is something time will heal, the mentality that has spread from Khyber to Karachi, is alarming. I mentioned the definition of nationalism above, and one may see nationalism in Pakistani politics, but a closer look shows that all of that love and passion is concentrated to political parties and individual leaders. For a democratic society, politics should be based solemnly on issue and the responsibility of setting that narrative lies on the people, not the politicians. The politicians will sell whatever they feel gets the attention of the masses. Take for example, the recent decision of the Supreme Court, which disqualified the former Prime Minister of Pakistan, Nawaz Sharif. Now had this been any other society, the decision would have been treated with respect across the board and people would have questioned their leader (Nawaz Sharif), instead of joining the bandwagon of the party and making and promoting conspiracy theories. This is not to say that the history of Pakistan shows no indications of conspiracies being made and carried out, but considering that this is a democratic society, there are ways to deal with situations like these, though none of the ways include passing a bill that allows a criminal, convict or anyone to be a party head, yet that happened. And whose to blame for the embarrassment like that? The politicians? Not at all. The people and especially the voters of that party.  Imagine another country electing a criminal to office, we would be calling them out, yet we have done exactly the same by not questioning our politicians. We need to understand that questioning our elected representatives is a responsibility and the right to vote comes side by side it. If we will not question our representatives, what right do we have to vote? 

Here comes a sensitive topic, the army. It is no secret that even though we are a democratic society, the army has a massive say in how the country is run. The unfortunate thing about this is that we've accepted it. Instead of conveying to the military that their job is safeguarding the borders. we invite them over and over again. What kind of a democratic society are we? A son of brigadier once told me, with a smirk on his face that, "we (army) can do whatever we want and no one can say anything because we (army) are the only reason this country has any respect in the world." 

What message are we sending across? Is this the democratic society where we want our children to prosper? On one side you have the rich and corrupt and on the other you have the all powerful and unaccountable military. Where will the poor and the middle class go? And accepting this terrible terrible situation is, pardon the harsh words, the death of our nation. 

The civil society of Pakistan has for years stayed inactive, yet every now and then someone does try to raise a voice. The unfortunate and upsetting thing is that we, the people are the first to reject and shun their voice. The authenticity of their mission ends well before it could grow because instead of finding support from the masses, they find hate and distrust.. It is frighting to see how people could do this to one of their own. To reject a politician or a military personnel makes sense, but rejecting a civil rights activist and labeling them traitors and agents is disappointing to say the least.  

Malala, was a voice from within our ranks, but we, the people call her an agent. Call her story a script and a fake. The world showed appreciation and we did the complete vice versa. It's funny how when  the world does not recognize any other individual, we are the first to run to Facebook and lecture them on how they supported Malala but not this other person and call out their bigotry. Unfortunate to say, we fail to see our own bigotry and discrimination.