http://www.thehindu.com/features/metroplus/interview-with-tv-paul-on-his-latest-book-the-warrior-state/article6245397.ece?homepage=true
SHILPA NAIR ANAND
Academician T.V. Paul’s The Warrior State is a crossover book on Pakistan
An academic book on Pakistan by an Indian, which examines its position in the contemporary world, is bound to arouse curiosity. One would expect the usual narrative with a slant towards India. But T.V. Paul’s take on Pakistan, The Warrior State – Pakistan in the Contemporary World, which is a hotbed of international terrorism, is objective and is, as he calls it, ‘a bitter pill to swallow’ for Pakistan. The James McGill Professor of International Relations at McGill University, Canada, takes a comprehensive look at what ails the country. Paul, who belongs to Kerala, was in the city recently for the South Asia release of the book. It has been published in India by Random House India.
Excerpts from an interview.
Why a book on Pakistan?
I have been trying to understand the conflict dynamics in South Asia for a long time. Since I have been trained in conflict studies, security studies, general international relations...I have tried to apply some of that knowledge while writing this book. To my knowledge, not a single book exists, in the contemporary period, which comprehensively explains why this country became the way it did. Most of the popular journalistic works describe what is happening in Pakistan or Afghanistan. I felt the need for an explanation – a diagnostic work. I cannot claim complete knowledge of Pakistan in a very micro sense but the macro understanding I have is enough to provide a historical, sociological explanation but in a comparative sense. And perhaps in some respects, it is my most important work, a crossover book – academic plus popular book. The policies Pakistan has adopted have neither made it secure, nor more integrated, unified, or prosperous. A nation state exists for these purposes. Why isn’t that happening in Pakistan? It is a puzzle. And I am a puzzle-driven scholar.
What is your diagnosis? What prevents it from reaching its potential?
One argument is that they have become too focussed on a narrow understanding of national security. Their focus has been territorial defence, practising competitive international relations, and a quest for status equivalence and power parity with India which is 7 to 8 times bigger in many parameters of national power. In the past it was possible to maintain parity given the great powers, the United States (US) and China, treated India and Pakistan as co-equals. But since 2000 a noticeable change has been that the US treats India as a rising power, which Pakistan cannot accept.
But the US was responsible for creating this situation in Pakistan...
Quite a bit of the criticism goes to the US, but I am not happy with that line of reasoning. Most Pakistanis place the blame on the US or other outside powers for the mess they are in. My contention is that similar to Korea and Taiwan Pakistan had a choice...how they made use of the alliance relationship with the US. During Ayub Khan’s period Washington did play a positive role in the economic arena. Since Zia-ul-Haq’s time Pakistani leaders used the alliance to make it a nuclear-armed Islamic state, while ignoring trade and investment, unlike US allies such as Japan, Korea and Taiwan. They played double games – they wanted to acquire as much military resources and aid as possible and using that alliance to compete with India. That is why I ascribe the main cause for their underdevelopment to a “geostrategic curse.”
What will work?
Pakistan wants to resolve all territorial disputes before they get into a trade relationship with India which is a mistake. They need to rethink their strategy and work around this, but India has to help. They need to grow out of the military focus and think about an economic competition. They need land reforms; they have to make sure that the top brass of the military doesn’t get too much compensation. It needs a strong economic base and a national strategy that help productive sectors. They went in for a military-first goal.
Islamisation...
As far as the common people are concerned Islamisation has been taking place; largely as a result of educational curriculum, constitutional amendments and Zia’s blasphemy laws, making it difficult for any civilian leader to change Pakistan. Change has to be multi-faceted - get rid of the blasphemy laws or make their application stringent – the conditions under which somebody can be arrested or prosecuted. Secondly the biggest change is needed
in educational – curriculum which is somewhat of pre-medieval character as it does not encourage learning of Math or Science. This creates a society which doesn’t know what is going on in the outside world or a workforce capable of making use of the opportunities an economically globalized world offers.
Which way are they headed, according to your reading?
I do worry, for demographic reasons. Today this country is 180 million people strong, and it is the sixth largest country. It will be 300 million by 2050 or even more. And it is not doing the right things to make its youth employable. Pakistan should think of setting up technical institutions, engineering colleges, special economic zones and divert people’s attention from sectarian and military issues. It is a Herculean task, although Nawaz Sharif may be a better person to accomplish this because he is a businessman. They should engineer policies to befriend India - a friendly India is more likely to settle disputes than a hostile India.
Will this book be published in Pakistan?
Yes, supposedly soon. I have heard that Oxford University Press has a contract for Pakistan. Editors were very interested; as they felt Pakistanis should read the book. My Indian origin might come in the way but I have written it objectively – I believe you sometime must call a spade a spade, as a scholar I have to be responsible. I don’t have to placate anybody. I have nothing to gain by placating India or Pakistan.
How do young Pakistanis you encounter as a teacher and speaker feel about Pakistan? Their reaction to the book.
Young people of Pakistani origin I meet in North America– children of expatriates, lawyers, military officials – are confused by Pakistan. Many of them want to go back to help the country, to start NGOs for instance. But there are others who feel that the moment they land in Karachi they will be robbed. In Washington D.C., I met a Baluch who said, ‘I am glad you mention our problems in the book. Nobody says much about us in the West. Scholars and journalists have an agenda. Our struggles are not represented’. It is a bitter pill, for those who believe in a particular narrative but I suggest that they read it a second time. At the universities in the West, Pakistani youngsters have been sympathetic to my arguments.
SHILPA NAIR ANAND
Academician T.V. Paul’s The Warrior State is a crossover book on Pakistan
An academic book on Pakistan by an Indian, which examines its position in the contemporary world, is bound to arouse curiosity. One would expect the usual narrative with a slant towards India. But T.V. Paul’s take on Pakistan, The Warrior State – Pakistan in the Contemporary World, which is a hotbed of international terrorism, is objective and is, as he calls it, ‘a bitter pill to swallow’ for Pakistan. The James McGill Professor of International Relations at McGill University, Canada, takes a comprehensive look at what ails the country. Paul, who belongs to Kerala, was in the city recently for the South Asia release of the book. It has been published in India by Random House India.
Excerpts from an interview.
Why a book on Pakistan?
I have been trying to understand the conflict dynamics in South Asia for a long time. Since I have been trained in conflict studies, security studies, general international relations...I have tried to apply some of that knowledge while writing this book. To my knowledge, not a single book exists, in the contemporary period, which comprehensively explains why this country became the way it did. Most of the popular journalistic works describe what is happening in Pakistan or Afghanistan. I felt the need for an explanation – a diagnostic work. I cannot claim complete knowledge of Pakistan in a very micro sense but the macro understanding I have is enough to provide a historical, sociological explanation but in a comparative sense. And perhaps in some respects, it is my most important work, a crossover book – academic plus popular book. The policies Pakistan has adopted have neither made it secure, nor more integrated, unified, or prosperous. A nation state exists for these purposes. Why isn’t that happening in Pakistan? It is a puzzle. And I am a puzzle-driven scholar.
What is your diagnosis? What prevents it from reaching its potential?
One argument is that they have become too focussed on a narrow understanding of national security. Their focus has been territorial defence, practising competitive international relations, and a quest for status equivalence and power parity with India which is 7 to 8 times bigger in many parameters of national power. In the past it was possible to maintain parity given the great powers, the United States (US) and China, treated India and Pakistan as co-equals. But since 2000 a noticeable change has been that the US treats India as a rising power, which Pakistan cannot accept.
But the US was responsible for creating this situation in Pakistan...
Quite a bit of the criticism goes to the US, but I am not happy with that line of reasoning. Most Pakistanis place the blame on the US or other outside powers for the mess they are in. My contention is that similar to Korea and Taiwan Pakistan had a choice...how they made use of the alliance relationship with the US. During Ayub Khan’s period Washington did play a positive role in the economic arena. Since Zia-ul-Haq’s time Pakistani leaders used the alliance to make it a nuclear-armed Islamic state, while ignoring trade and investment, unlike US allies such as Japan, Korea and Taiwan. They played double games – they wanted to acquire as much military resources and aid as possible and using that alliance to compete with India. That is why I ascribe the main cause for their underdevelopment to a “geostrategic curse.”
What will work?
Pakistan wants to resolve all territorial disputes before they get into a trade relationship with India which is a mistake. They need to rethink their strategy and work around this, but India has to help. They need to grow out of the military focus and think about an economic competition. They need land reforms; they have to make sure that the top brass of the military doesn’t get too much compensation. It needs a strong economic base and a national strategy that help productive sectors. They went in for a military-first goal.
Islamisation...
As far as the common people are concerned Islamisation has been taking place; largely as a result of educational curriculum, constitutional amendments and Zia’s blasphemy laws, making it difficult for any civilian leader to change Pakistan. Change has to be multi-faceted - get rid of the blasphemy laws or make their application stringent – the conditions under which somebody can be arrested or prosecuted. Secondly the biggest change is needed
in educational – curriculum which is somewhat of pre-medieval character as it does not encourage learning of Math or Science. This creates a society which doesn’t know what is going on in the outside world or a workforce capable of making use of the opportunities an economically globalized world offers.
Which way are they headed, according to your reading?
I do worry, for demographic reasons. Today this country is 180 million people strong, and it is the sixth largest country. It will be 300 million by 2050 or even more. And it is not doing the right things to make its youth employable. Pakistan should think of setting up technical institutions, engineering colleges, special economic zones and divert people’s attention from sectarian and military issues. It is a Herculean task, although Nawaz Sharif may be a better person to accomplish this because he is a businessman. They should engineer policies to befriend India - a friendly India is more likely to settle disputes than a hostile India.
Will this book be published in Pakistan?
Yes, supposedly soon. I have heard that Oxford University Press has a contract for Pakistan. Editors were very interested; as they felt Pakistanis should read the book. My Indian origin might come in the way but I have written it objectively – I believe you sometime must call a spade a spade, as a scholar I have to be responsible. I don’t have to placate anybody. I have nothing to gain by placating India or Pakistan.
How do young Pakistanis you encounter as a teacher and speaker feel about Pakistan? Their reaction to the book.
Young people of Pakistani origin I meet in North America– children of expatriates, lawyers, military officials – are confused by Pakistan. Many of them want to go back to help the country, to start NGOs for instance. But there are others who feel that the moment they land in Karachi they will be robbed. In Washington D.C., I met a Baluch who said, ‘I am glad you mention our problems in the book. Nobody says much about us in the West. Scholars and journalists have an agenda. Our struggles are not represented’. It is a bitter pill, for those who believe in a particular narrative but I suggest that they read it a second time. At the universities in the West, Pakistani youngsters have been sympathetic to my arguments.
No comments:
Post a Comment