ishtiaq ahmed
Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed is a Professor Emeritus of Stockholm University, who was born in Lahore, Pakistan,and has been living for long in Sweden. He often speaks and writes on issues relating to the Indian subcontinent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishtiaq_Ahmed_(political_scientist)
After an online video discussion anchored by Dr Hassan Zafar of Lahore in which both Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed and I appeared, I wrote an article on Dr Ishtiaq’s views, which is given below
I sent the article to Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed, in response to which he sent me this rancorous and acrimonious message by whatsApp :
Thank you Justice Sahib for sharing your views. I don’t think you you read either my The Punjab Bloodied, Partitioned and Cleansed or Pakistan the Garrison State or the recent Jinnah: His Successes, Failures and Role in History. If you had you would not assert that I in any remote sense even approve or support the two-nation theory. I have scores of video talks in which I have said this. Having said that, my standpoint is based entirely on how states which come into being do all to retain their territorial integrity and the expenditure on defence is justified just for that. Pakistan is a classic case of that. It is surprising that this self-evident truth escapes your grasp. I think that is the only point on which we actually disagree. If your ideal idea of a united India is accepted then you have to explain why more than 30 states have emerged in the Arab world when once they were all part of the Ottoman Empire. And above all your position on the existence of states is identical to Hamas and Iran’s position that they want to liquidate Israel because it is an artificial imposition (which is true). I think you need to reflect on such comparative examples.
The basic flaw in Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed’s thinking, which makes him superficial ( like almost all so called ‘intellectuals’ in the Indian subcontinent ) is his total lack of understanding of what I am stating below :
There are, in fact, two worlds in the globe: the developed world of North America, Europe, Japan, Australia and China and the underdeveloped world of Asia (except China and Japan), Africa and Latin America.
The developed countries have a secret, unwritten rule ( which they will never openly talk about ) viz not to allow underdeveloped countries to become developed, as that would gravely damage them. To understand this one must go into economics, for politics is concentrated economics.
Cost of labour is a big chunk of the total cost of production, and so if cost of labour is less, the cost of production is less, and then one can sell one’s goods at a cheaper price. There is competition in the market, and one businessman eliminates another not by guns or bombs but by underselling him i.e.selling the same high-quality goods at a cheaper price.
Thus, China, which was before 1949 a very poor country, built up a massive industry after its Revolution of 1949, and thereby captured much of the markets in the world because it has much cheaper labour than in western countries. Western supermarkets are packed with Chinese goods, because they often sell at half the price at which western manufacturers can sell them ( because of the expensive western labour).
If underdeveloped countries like India set up a massive industry, with their cheap labour they will undersell the products of western industries, which will then collapse, throwing millions out of employment. Will the developed countries easily permit that? Will they let their industries collapse, throwing millions out of employment? No, they will oppose it tooth and nail.
And how do they oppose it? They oppose it by making people in underdeveloped countries, like India, fight each other on the basis of religion, race, language, caste, etc., instead of waging a united people’s struggle for emancipation from their socio-economic plight. This they do through the local politicians, of all parties, who are all objectively their agents.
Thus there is a direct conflict between the interests of the developed countries, which do not want underdeveloped countries to become developed, and the interests of the underdeveloped countries whose enlightened sections realise that unless their country becomes developed it can never escape from abject poverty, massive unemployment, malnourishment, lack of healthcare, etc
https://indicanews.com/justice-markandey-katju-lies-damned-lies-and-statistics-in-india/
https://indicanews.com/justice-markandey-katju-the-truth-behind-indias-explosive-gdp-growth
https://indicanews.com/justice-markandey-katju-there-are-two-indias-in-india
Partition of India in 1947 was done by the Britishers precisely because the British ( and other developed countries ) were far sighted, and realised that united India will one day emerge as a modern industrial giant, like China, and if it does so, with its cheap labour, destroy Western industries, which will not be able to face the competition. This has been explained below :
All the above is beyond Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed’s understanding
The people of the Indian subcontinent have to launch a mighty united people’s struggle, under patriotic, selfless, modern minded leaders. This people’s struggle will be long drawn ( perhaps stretching over 15-20 years ), in which the people will have to make tremendous sacrifices, and it will culminate in a historical people’s revolution, which will create a political and social order under which the standard of living of our people steadily rises, and they start enjoying decent lives.
Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed has no inkling of all this, and instead he indulges in pretentious talk, empty rhetoric, claptrap, and hot air like the one in the video discussion below
In his book ‘Jinnah, his successes, failures, and role in history’ Dr Ishtiasq Ahmed writes :
” The decision to partition India and to create Pakistan was reached because the volatility, insecurity and violence which was surrounding the negotiations over the future of India sealed the fate of a united India ”.
This reveals the superficial mind of Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed. He does not delve deeper and enquire who created this volatility, insecurity and violence in the first place ? It was created by the Britishers, using their agents, the rascals Gandhi and Jinnah, as explained by me to the eminent Pakistani journalist Moeed Pirzada
It has also been explained in my article below :
https://www.nation.com.pk/02-Mar-2013/the-truth-about-pakistan
Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed is like most of the so called superficial ‘intellectuals’ of India and Pakistan who have since long been strutting around the public stage like peacocks, applauded by an ignorant and gullible audience. His words remind me of a line in Shakespeare’s Macbeth ” It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing ”
