The unflattering perspective - Part I: ‘The US does not care about Pakistan’

Published: April 19, 2011
Renowned author Noam Chomsky believes Americans only serve themselves.

Renowned author Noam Chomsky believes Americans only serve themselves.


Professor Noam Chomsky sits on the eighth floor of the quirky-looking Stata Center of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge, US. Former head of the linguistics department, the author and intellectual now serves as Professor Emeritus at the university.

The man is known worldwide for his incredibly popular and polarising criticism of American foreign policy.

“The US doesn’t care about Pakistan, just like the Reagan administration didn’t care about either Afghanistan or Pakistan,” says Chomski, when asked how he sees the relationship between Pakistan and the US. “They supported Zia, the worst dictator in Pakistan’s history, and pretended they didn’t know that Pakistan was developing nuclear weapons. So basically they supported Pakistan’s nuclear weapon programme and radical Islamisation in their bid to defeat the Russians. And that has not helped Pakistan.”

According to Chomsky, the reason the Pak-US relationship hasn’t worked is because the concern of US planners is not the welfare of Pakistan, it’s the welfare of their own constituency. “But it’s not the people of US either, just the powerful sectors within the US,” he said. “If the US policy towards Pakistan happens to benefit Pakistan it would be kind of accidental. Maybe it will to some extent, but that is not the purpose.”

Chomsky believes Pakistan has serious internal problems but says there are solutions. But, he insists, these problems have to be solved from within instead of from outside. “These problems have to be dealt with inside Pakistan, and not by the US; providing them with massive military aid, carrying out drone strikes, which enrages the population rightly,” he says. “Drone attacks are target assassinations and therefore a crime. Whether they are militants or not, these people are being targeted because the US doesn’t like them. Targeted assassination is an international crime. United Nations’ special rapporteur Philip Alston, a very respected international lawyer, came out with a report which simply says that it is a criminal act.”

He also supports the 1973 constitution and believes it is suitable for Pakistan. “It looks sensible on paper. It provided a degree of autonomy within a federalised system, which makes sense for a country like Pakistan,” he says. “Devoting resources to education, development and not military will help.”

Relationship with India

Speaking about Pakistan’s relationship and outlook towards India, he said that the Pakistani military has a strategic doctrine that they have to have a military presence in Afghanistan to counter India. “That’s a losing proposition because Pakistan cannot compete with India in terms of military force. Besides, the strategic position in Afghanistan doesn’t really mean anything in case of a war,” he says. “Pakistan has undoubtedly supported terrorist groups in Kashmir and terrorism in India, which has made the situation worse.”

The Americans are avoiding the Kashmir issue, he says, which is central to the resolution of conflict in South Asia. “India has a very ugly record in Kashmir – horrible atrocities, fraudulent elections, most militarised place in the world. You can’t just ignore it,” he says.

US-India relations

Professor Chomsky says that it is a “joke” when US talks about giving aid for civilian nuclear facilities in India. “The aid for the civilian nuclear use can be easily transferred to military use. By granting India the right to import US nuclear technology, it has not only allowed India to freely develop nuclear weapons, the US has also violated the nuclear non-proliferation treaty,” he says.

Afghan war’s future

“It is a complicated situation but I think there is good evidence that the US military and political structures recognise that they cannot have a military victory,” Chomsky says.

However, he says, they [US] can conquer whatever they like, but the Russians also won every battle in the 1980s but eventually lost the war. “The Americans are therefore trying to find a way to extricate themselves in some fashion, that it can be presented as a victory. They don’t want to admit they’ve lost the war, like the Russians.”

Published in The Express Tribune, April 19th,  2011.

Facebook Conversations

Reader Comments (80)

  • mona
    Apr 19, 2011 - 1:20PM

    Excellent article!!!!!!!!!Recommend

  • sabk
    Apr 19, 2011 - 1:52PM

    superb article………..truth as it stands .Recommend

  • Fahad Raza
    Apr 19, 2011 - 2:08PM

    I’ll believe blindly to what American strategy Noam Chomsky points out. Absolutely american care are one of most the self-centered nation walking this earth. Recommend

  • ehabs
    Apr 19, 2011 - 2:36PM

    Chomsky has finally lost his mind. How anyone can take him seriously surprises me.Recommend

  • Khalid Rahim
    Apr 19, 2011 - 2:40PM

    Mona, Chomsky is not the only american who feels that they only think of their interest first!
    I have had americans working with different US agencies quietly say, look we all work for our interest, so do you. The only difference that we(americans) have the upper hand. The reason they prefer a strongman in developing countries is to avoid waste of time and get the
    job done. In present situation under the Parliamentary system the use the method of patting
    or greasing to get whatever they require. The Americans will only withdraw after the Taliban
    leadership gives them the guarantee to maintain two bases in SouthEast and SouthWest of
    Afghanistan facing Iran.How large the force in each base is another matter? In the next few months we should also watch who gets the better of the other at the WhiteHouse; Admiral Mullen of General Patereus or vice versa.Recommend

  • Qasim
    Apr 19, 2011 - 2:57PM

    Must read for our policy makers. If honest and really concerned about Pakistan, Government should consult him frequently; it would at least be sound and independent advice and not the kind of garbage they are used to getting.Recommend

  • Dr.Habibullah Chaudhry
    Apr 19, 2011 - 3:06PM

    Every nation is to watch her own interests, USA is doing the same. Mr. chemsky has called a spade a spade.Recommend

  • Salman
    Apr 19, 2011 - 3:16PM

    Finally, a piece on the Tribune worth reading. Recommend

  • Naveed
    Apr 19, 2011 - 3:20PM

    Americans remain to be the most democratic and peace loving people.( the govt and military’s role in current crisis set apart). only a century ago when the blacks were enslaved and were looked down upon with disgust, they have him as one of their presidents today. professor Chomsky is one example. they know how to find the truth and they know how to stand firm in face of adversaries. I just hope they would be wise and capable enough to stop their anarchist govt which is showing no mercy to extend its imperialist regime for the next 100 years.Recommend

  • Apr 19, 2011 - 3:28PM

    Who actually thought that the US was some benevloent overlord?Recommend

  • S Chopra
    Apr 19, 2011 - 3:30PM

    Any sane country would be expected to care for its own interest foremost. If Pakistan doesn’t care about its own interests first then its Pakistan’s insanity. Although I don’t think that is the case. Its just that Pakistan doesn’t know whats in its best interest. Islamic Caliphate (Army Dictatorship) or Islamic Democracy focusing on economic progress rather than India and Kashmir. A secular democracy is not even an option for Pakistan. Pakistan just finds an excuse to swing from one to another every 10 years or so.
    Chomsky is a sick man. He thinks Indian soldiers in Kashmir faced with brutal Islamist terrorists and violent blood thirsty mobs worked up by Pakistani paid Mullahs need to behave like Gautama Buddha when he met Angulimal. I challenge Mr. Chomsky to stop preaching from his high chair at MIT and go confront a violent mob in Afghanistan. Oh.. and don’t forget your yamaka. Lets see how much compassion Mr. Chomsky can muster.Recommend

  • dextor
    Apr 19, 2011 - 3:31PM

    Sir does anyone reads your article in USA… yes or not…if yes then do they value ur words…yes or no….there r lots of questions…but no answersRecommend

  • Zahid Hussain Khalid
    Apr 19, 2011 - 3:31PM

    Does an elite group of journalists, columnists, analysts, anchors and contributors understands what Noam Chomsky says? To them friend of America is my friend and any group, religion or country America is enemy of is my enemy.


  • Najib Khan
    Apr 19, 2011 - 3:37PM

    Looks like a part of carrot & stick policy of US Government , this stance of the aforesaid Professor is a Carrot side of the US foreign policy .

    However, if this is what he really thinks then still no use because this he would have been thinking ever since these issues are happening but what is the end result & the end result is :

    AMERICANS getting more arrogant , brutal & ruthless day by day .

    So all my friends going through article should come out of any misconception if they have that Americans / Zionists care about others , no they care about themselves, only & that s because of the ancient Zionist beliefs instilled in them that only JEWS are humans , rest all of the humanity are like beasts or other creatures made by God to serve them. Recommend

  • amoghavarsha.ii
    Apr 19, 2011 - 4:16PM

    is USA/PAkistan/India are charity houses, to take care for others benefit.
    even chomsky will not take care of others houses.Recommend

  • Tanweer Ahmed
    Apr 19, 2011 - 4:47PM

    In one of my recent comments I have expressed exactly the same facts. US in its foreign policy is no one’s ally or friend. They are friend to themselves only, not even the Ameriacan people, as stated by Chomsky.

    This is the real face of so called democracy. Many readers will find it strange and difficult to digest that democracy is bacically a flawed or corrupt way of governance. Principally, you can not separate democracy with corruption.

    Just take the example of Pakistan and similar democracies; where people spend billions to get themselves elected to public offices. Its simple to understand what would be the first priority of an indivudual after geeting into the office? Recover the investment and earn profit on top of it. Here the situation is little bit worse because they are not sure for how long they are in office. Therefore, all the efforts are to realize the returns in shortest possible time and continue at the same pace to make more and more.

    Whereas in other parts of the world they have legalized corruption. Big companies and corporations sponsor or say fund the election candidates before and after elections. In return, those in public offices push implementation of the policies that benefit these corporations, irrespective of the impact on people whom they claim to represent.

    In US, the election sponsors since last many years are the military and finance industries. That is why, the governments there are adamant to implement a policy in which the whole world remains in a war like situation and those military industries can sell trillions of dollars of killing machines. Likewise, to servce the banking/finance industry they are trying to destablise the stable economies. Libya is one of the most recent examples. Libya does not owe money, (not a cent) to anyone. Thats what they don’t like about it. Democracy or dictatorship is just another pretext. Otherwise, there are dictatorships worse than Libya in this world (say Mayanmar). But a war there is not likely to bring similar benefits to their sponsors. Won’t you call is corruption???Recommend

  • Apr 19, 2011 - 5:27PM

    Another feather in the cap of ET. Prof. Chomsky is the most sought after intellectual alive and the ET gets an interview from him. Each word of his needs to be digested and understood with great care. Just great. Waiting for the next part.Recommend

  • M.Asad
    Apr 19, 2011 - 5:37PM

    what is new in this?Recommend

  • G. Din
    Apr 19, 2011 - 5:48PM

    Dr. Chomsky is an eminent scientist and has been a leading light in the area of linguistics. He would have helped humanity at large if he had concentrated his attention and life goals to that area. Having said that, it is good for every country to have a cross to carry. For America that cross is Dr. Chomsky, for India it is Suzanne Arundhati Roy. Some say that such persons suffer from subconscious self-loathing. Nothing that their countries do is acceptable to them. A democracy flourishes when we have contrary persons voicing their opinions. Their opinions, all articulated with disproportionate force, are taken into account when people make their decisions in the solitude of a ballot booth. The fact that neither Dr. Chomsky nor Arundhati Roy has carried the day in either country, on any issue is testament to the fact that they have been proven to be largely irrelevant. Nevertheless!

    “India has a very ugly record in Kashmir – horrible atrocities, fraudulent elections, most militarised place in the world….”
    No, Dr. Chomsky, India does not. Compare India’s conduct of Kashmir operations to America’s conduct in Viet Nam or its own deep south, and more recently in Iraq and Afghanistan. If American conduct was considered an undesirable necessity, so is India’s. As far as fraudulent elections are concerned, there was just one -during Indira Gandhi’s dispensation. Well, how about your own presidential elections of J. F. Kennedy and George Bush II where fraud was not a non-issue at all. Both their opponents, being disciplined men, yielded to the larger national good by not contesting them. So, once a while an aberration does occur in the noble process of elections, be it in the world’s oldest or in the world’s largest democracy. We, the people, are not perfect anywhere. Why, even democracy as an institution is not perfect yet there is no other better institution yet devised. You are right. Kashmir is a militarized place although I would dispute your characterization of its severity -“most”. But consider this! Was it always like that? What about Kashmir before 1989? It was peaceful and Kashmiris enjoyed their serene, calm life. But then a violent, raging militancy intruded. What do you suggest India do – abdicate its responsibility -to defend peace and all those who want to live a peaceful life. India will calibrate its military presence in Kashmir according to the intensity of militancy, no matter how distasteful it may be to you or Arundhati Roy! India has THAT right!

    “You can’t just ignore it,”
    You said it!Recommend

  • Tanweer Ahmed
    Apr 19, 2011 - 6:47PM

    @Zahid Hussain Khalid:
    They are just words….Recommend

  • Yousaf
    Apr 19, 2011 - 6:54PM

    To my mind Chomsky analysis is a ground reality and US will abandon Pakistan leaving in lurches again as previously did in Ussr war in afghanistan.Recommend

  • Cherish Raj
    Apr 19, 2011 - 7:20PM

    Who cares about Noam Chomsky in the first place? ET went to Chomsky because it knows that Chomsky is a critic of the American foreign policy. When anti Americanism rages in Pakistan, Chomsky’s words are music to the ears of the population. But nobody in America pays any attention to Chomsky, neither the government nor the American people. He is a great linguist but in shaping the American public opinion he is nothing more than an irrelevant old timer.Recommend

  • Erfan
    Apr 19, 2011 - 7:33PM

    Common Sense:

    Why would America care about Pakistan? Would you care about America? No you wouldn’t. Recommend

  • Babloo
    Apr 19, 2011 - 9:06PM

    Why should USA or any country should care about Pakistan ? We care about someone who has something positive to offer. Its Pakistanis who should care about themselves. I am shocked when Pakistanis and Pakistan government complain about being ‘abondoned by USA’. Pakistan is not the responsibility of USA.Recommend

  • Ravi
    Apr 19, 2011 - 9:50PM

    @Professor Noam Chomsky
    “India has a very ugly record in Kashmir – horrible atrocities, fraudulent elections, most militarised place in the world. You can’t just ignore it,” he says.
    Professor Chomsky says that it is a “joke” when US talks about giving aid for civilian nuclear facilities in India

    Hahahaaaaaa good one……..
    i can gauge the reality from that fact that a recent report stated that US congress advised Govt of US to deal with india and leave pakistan to fend for itself………
    Some body has rightly said……..
    Be A Roman While In Rome………….Recommend

  • Apr 19, 2011 - 11:17PM

    Prof. Chomsky is one of the most sought after speakers in the United States and elsewhere. His books are read all over the world. Recommend

  • Apr 19, 2011 - 11:26PM

    @Tanweer Ahmed:
    Your comments are appreciated. It is wrong, however, to blame democracy as a system of government. Does democracy say that your elected representatives be corrupt? No. If the elected use their position for corruption the system does not require them to be corrupt. The solution I think lies in more education for the masses so that they only err once and do not re-elect the corrupt. And all this can only happen gradually by holding elections after elections. There is no magic wand. And what are the alternatives? Monarchy, dictatorship, oligarchy, military rule or what?Recommend

  • faraz
    Apr 19, 2011 - 11:34PM

    Chomsky is absolutely impartial in his analysis. For Indians who disagree with his views on Kashmir would love to know that according to Chomsky, only ony two occasions in the recent past a military intervention lead to prevention of genocide. First is the Indian intervention in Bengal 1971, and other is the Vietnamese intervention in Combodia. Recommend

  • Laughing Loudly
    Apr 19, 2011 - 11:54PM

    ET’s taste is getting better.
    And yeah Prof. Chomsky has no right to talk about India-Kashmir situation, which every human being who has a heart would condemn, but Indian has every right to comment about every Pakistani issue even if doesn’t have anything to do with them, even if it has to be in a Pakistani newspaper. And since when did Prof. Chomsky have justified American invasion of Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq? Most of the people who’ve commented here are ignorant of Prof. Chomsky or his stance about general issues, and its never wise to comment on something you’re ignorant of. I respect people like Prof. Chomsky a great deal, not only that they’re brave and speak truth but they also stand the ground for their own beliefs…………Recommend

  • Apr 20, 2011 - 12:00AM

    @G. Din:
    It probably hurts when ones own shortcomings are mentioned. Prof. Chomsky has never defended the U.S. actions in any of the places you mention so he perfectly right when he refers to Kashmir. Why do you forget that it was Prime Minister Nehru who promised a free and fair plebiscite to the people of Kashmir and that too at the United Nations. And please do not distort history; Kashmir has never been at peace with India and the Kashmiris have never accepted Indian hegemony even though India has gone to the extent of amending it’s Constitution to try and placate them. And when you mention the fraudulent elections of Mr. Kennedy and George Bush II to justify the ‘one’ fraudulent election under Mrs. Gandhi (an aberration) you are saying that 2 wrongs make a right! What about Junagadh, Manavadah and last but not least Goa? Did not India annex these territories by military might alone? And is Kashmir the only place where there is a popular uprising against India? I need not mention them as you will surely know what I am talking about.
    Prof. Chomsky has always maintained that all countries – Russia, Britain, America – now and throughout history seem to behave in the same manner if they know they can get away with it. International law, treaties, UN resolutions will never stand in the way of the powerful countries. But public pressure from within, later rather than sooner, does have an impact. For America the ANC of President Mandela was high on the list of terrorist organizations when the US was supporting the Apartheid regime in South Africa. It carried on trade with South Africa even though the UN had imposed sanctions. But gradually pressure from the public forced America to give up support for the racist regime and recognize the ANC of President Mandela. And how does Ms. Arundhati Roy (one of India’s finest living authors) come into all this? Probably because she was in Kashmir and reported the facts as they appeared to her. She has also recently visited one other place where Marxists are fighting for independence from India. Sorry I forget the name of the place as there are so many of them.Recommend

  • Apr 20, 2011 - 12:02AM

    @Cherish Raj:
    Why then is he the most sought after speaker all over the world?Recommend

  • Grace
    Apr 20, 2011 - 1:32AM

    Pakistan has to care for itself and stop letting itself be abused by bigger powers. Right now, we have to stand firm in the face of criminal terrorism sponsoring from India and sent across from Afghanistan. Nations only have their own interests in their heart. We Pakistanis need to learn this lesson.Recommend

  • G. Din
    Apr 20, 2011 - 3:36AM

    @Naushad Shafkat:
    Please read my post once again. This time analyze every argument and every context of every statement made. If you try a little harder, leaving aside your preconceived prejudices against India, even if temporarily, you will find that, every argument connects. I said people of India and US are imperfect and the democracy they follow is imperfect, too. So, it should not be hard for an American to understand the imperatives which govern Indians. Of course, Pakistanis and Muslims are outside this discussion and you certainly practice your own brand of democracy different from what Americans and Indians do, so it is not at all difficult to understand why you don’t agree with my post and I respect that.

    “And how does Ms. Arundhati Roy (one of India’s finest living authors) come into all this? “
    You don’t read much, do you, if you consider a one-book wonder as “one of India’s finest living authors”? India has produced legions of prize-winning authors, quite a lot of them are also currently enjoying good health. Today’s news: Indian author Mukherjee wins the latest Pulitzer prize on his landmark work on the “biography of cancer”.Recommend

  • AnIndian
    Apr 20, 2011 - 3:41AM

    @ Naushad Shafkat

    First of all, Nehru who promised a plebiscite on the condition that Pakistan withdraws its troops from the Kashmir territories it illegally occupied. Then under the joint monitoring of the Kashmir government under Sheikh Abdullah and the UN a plebiscite was to take place. Well, Pakistan did not do it. End of the story.

    Second of all, Jammu & Kashmir is not Kashmir valley. Jammu & Kashmir is approx. 90000 sq miles. Kashmir valley is only 5900 sq miles. It is only in the Kashmir valley that there is a “situation” because of cross-border terrorism. And, the situation will be “addressed as necessary within the constitutional limits” and brought back to normalcy.Recommend

  • maynotmatter
    Apr 20, 2011 - 5:24AM

    @Naushad Shafkat – I am seriously interested in knowing what other popular uprising India is facing,please share and not just your words please also paste the links and references. About Kashmir, hmmm…….lets do a simple experiment and I am sure it is pretty fair. Feel free to comment back. Lets do this. Pakistan should stop sending terrorists to India side. India will remove the army from Kashmir. Let normalcy return in Kashmir. And lets say after 5 yrs held plebiscite in entire Kashmir. The chances of Indian Kashmiri thriving in Kashmir is so high that they will not want to join Pakistan. if they still want you are a winner. But Pakistani establishment is afraid of that hence, it is into this easy bad game, send terrorists, knowing indian will keep army, kashmiris will suffer, and use this as a playing card to beg UN and others to intervene. Can you seriously get any lower ?Recommend

  • Pagal Mulla
    Apr 20, 2011 - 8:14AM

    We need more bombs and everyone should vow to eat grass henceforth.Recommend

  • Apr 20, 2011 - 8:25AM

    I think that the interview is datelined as ‘New York’. Has New York been annexed by Pakistan?Recommend

  • Anwar
    Apr 20, 2011 - 10:01AM

    I commend the USA government for one thing. For looking after its own people at all cost. I wish the Pakistani government looked after us, Pakistanis the same way.Recommend

  • shafi
    Apr 20, 2011 - 10:10AM

    @ naushad shafkat cant agree more with u Recommend

  • Pagal Mulla
    Apr 20, 2011 - 11:15AM

    @Naushad Shafkat: No But Pakistan certainly has been annexed by New York. So it is understandable he is talking to his POOR LIL SUBJECTS. Recommend

  • Malik
    Apr 20, 2011 - 1:37PM

    Professor saying very right as an American and Independent American, but as Pakistani we have concern that if we not spend too much on military then what will our position with so big enemies like USA and India. We tried our best but both are blaming Pakistan. President Zardari want good relations with USA & India but are not supporting in actions. USA sounds a opponent of Pakistan which is not useful nor for USA and neither for Pakistan. This is also truth Pakistan miltarily or socially not so week that cannot live without foreign aid.Recommend

  • Tony Singh
    Apr 20, 2011 - 2:04PM

    All countries ought to put their national interest first. Its commonsense.Recommend

  • ashok sai
    Apr 20, 2011 - 2:06PM

    India has now begin to show keen interest to improve the livings of Indians living in Kashmir,
    a) Tata building a huge luxury hotel which had already given employment for around 100 Indians living in Kashmir
    b) Recently concluded local body election polled 80%, which shows that Indians living in Kashmir has got full belief to be part of India.
    c)Terrorists intrusion from Pakistan to Indian Kashmir has been phenomenally decreasing by our efforts.
    d)No sane country wants to jeopardise the relationship with India because of Kashmir, which we are witnessing now.
    e)Finally, whole of India now began to pay attention to Kashmir and Indians living there, so past wrongdoings said to be committed is no longer possible and Indians living in Kashmir also begin to realise it.Recommend

  • Maria
    Apr 20, 2011 - 6:10PM

    @ashok sai: If this is the case, perhaps India can now hold the United Nations mandated referendum to allow the Kashmiri people to show their allegiance. You don’t fool anyone except yourself. Kashmiris know their destiny is not with India. In terms of culture, geography religion etc, we still feel connected to Pakistan.Recommend

  • YA
    Apr 20, 2011 - 9:28PM

    Whatever policy makers in countries think and plan to benifit their nations and countries; objective should be the broad benifit and welbeing of mankind…. otherwise it will not be sustainable and will harm the world…..Recommend

  • Sam
    Apr 20, 2011 - 9:53PM

    @S Chopra: Whatever you have said you know yrself it to be not true! Indian Army is facing “Mullah’s”? Oh Com’n! But, ok, sleep well — the way you have been writing it looks you don’t even know the facts!

    KASHMIRI’s are fighting against Indian Army and thats a fact. If you want to turn a blind-eye to it, your choice! Recommend

  • Highly Opinionated
    Apr 20, 2011 - 10:31PM

    Robert Spencer is 100 times more perspicuous than Noam Chomsky.Recommend

  • Khurram Shad
    Apr 21, 2011 - 1:28AM

    Well whenever any american (writer) put something on a show, they blame “SOME AMERICANS from STRONG POLITICAL INFLUENCES” to be the reason behind everything the mighty america is doing. Come on, why don’t you just point out “THOSE FEW AMERICANS” ?
    However, nice stuff to waste 5-7mins.Recommend

  • syed Yousaf
    Apr 21, 2011 - 9:29AM

    @ G Din– Two wrongs doesnt make one right- India has been violating UN resolutions on Kashmir. Whats wrong is carrying out a plebisite in Kashmir.Recommend

  • Roger
    Apr 21, 2011 - 10:45AM

    @syed Yousaf:
    Don’t talk non sense,first take back kashmir territory you given to China.Your record of Human Right is very bad in Balochistan.So world want plebiscite in Balochistan.Do it urgently. Recommend

  • Ashutosh
    Apr 21, 2011 - 11:59AM

    I would like to call spade a spade…There is no OIL in Kashmir…US wont come…N if Kashmir gets freedom from India either it will be slave of Pakistan or China..Recommend

  • fahim
    Apr 21, 2011 - 1:36PM

    chomsky lives in dream world of morality,perfection!!

    nations are built on their core interests!!

    pakistan is a confused country with no goal!!

    India will never yield an inch on kashmir despite 3 million of sunni kashmiri muslims in valley wanting to have a free state!!

    Pakistan can continue to sing kashmiri song and live in dark age for century!!”

    we are already widening the gap ,and in few years pakistan will look like mosquito infront of us !!’Recommend

  • G. Din
    Apr 21, 2011 - 4:48PM

    “…India will never yield an inch on kashmir despite 3 million of sunni kashmiri muslims in valley wanting to have a free state!!”
    Not to take away anything from your post. My contribution to it would be that it is fallacious to presume that all Muslims, or even all Sunnis, in Kashmir valley want ‘Azaadi”. They do not.
    Then the obvious question that has been raised and will continue to be raised is “why doesn’t India allow UN Security Council resolutions to take effect.” The answer to that is simple:” Let Pakistan fulfill all conditions that were clearly spelled in those resolutions, then only it has a right to ask India to fulfill its obligations under those resolutions”. Plebiscite was not required to be carried out only in what is now the Indian Kashmir.
    Much water has flowed in the river Vitasta (Jhelum) since and it just is not humanly possible to restore the conditions which form the basis of a plebiscite.Recommend

  • chupbechompsky
    Apr 21, 2011 - 5:39PM

    The tribune from karachi, pakistan got hold of “most sought after” person! This shows how much “sought after” chompsky is!! LOL.
    BTW, how come the author did not ask chompsky’s opinion about the great friend china and her treatment of her own people, let alone the muslim and buddhist minority? The inquiring minds wants to know what he thinks of the pak’s best friend and the people of tibet.Recommend

  • Harsh
    Apr 21, 2011 - 6:27PM

    Here are a few historical and legal facts about Kashmir:

    The muslim inhabitants of Kashmir are not indigenous “Kashmiri”, but migrants from Central Asia during the last 4-5 centuries. So morally, the question of them having a claim on or determining the status of the territory of Kashmir does not arise. Only Kashmiri Pandits who are indigenous people and inhabited the territory before anyone else for 5,500 years have that right.
    Legally, the territory of Kashmir became part of the union of India, when the king who was the sole legal owner of the territory, voluntarily acceded to India.
    The act of Nehru to take the matter to the UN or the promise of plebiscite can at best be regarded as good intentions, not mandated actions.
    The matter of UN resolution/plebiscite became irrelevant when the Simla pact of 1972 overrided those issues.
    Since Kashmir legally belongs to India, as evidenced by the charter of accession by King Hari Singh, PoK is illegally occupied by Pakistan.
    Inhabitants of Kashmir have a choice: be part of India or leave India.

  • Hafeez.Indian
    Apr 21, 2011 - 6:27PM

    @syed Yousaf:
    Yes. It can be done based on 1947 Voters list.Recommend

  • Apr 21, 2011 - 6:46PM

    To your first query first: Please type ‘Separatist Movements of India’ on Google and you will find at least 8 listed on Wikipedia alone. You might know of the Assamese separatist movement, the Maoists fighting in the Dandakaranya forest. You might also know of the Sikh movement and the Indian attack on the Golden Temple as a backlash to which you lost your Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Quote from Wikipedia: “The Assamese Separatist Movement is a result of Assamese nationalism. The alleged neglect and economic exploitation by the Indian state are the main reasons behind the growth of this secessionist movement.“. Want more references?
    What you suggest as a solution to the problem is the problem itself. You want to play Monopoly with the destiny of the people of Kashmir. I buy Amritsar, Delhi, Chennai and you buy Lahore Rawalpindi and Peshawar; we roll a dice and see who gets what. I am sorry but this is exactly the attitude that has gotten us here. It is not a game. It is the destiny of millions who have sacrificed for over sixty years now. For you it ‘may not matter’ but for the Kashmiris it is a question of life and death.Recommend

  • RK
    Apr 21, 2011 - 7:42PM

    Glad to see so many Pakistanis see the reality as it is depicted in the article…Now when will Pakistanis start caring for Pakistanis only?Recommend

  • Mohammed Saleh
    Apr 21, 2011 - 9:49PM

    With the number of problems an average Pakistani is dealing with on a day to day basis, the ever increasing prices, the lack of jobs, the corrupt police, the bias politicians, the organ stealing doctors, the blood sucking system, I would be surprised if even the Pakistanis would care about Pakistan. We all know that this country is F*ed up, but we’re even tired of speaking about it now. It’s a depressing country. I remember when I landed in Karachi 4 years ago from the UK, my most prominent observation was the depressed look on 99.99% of the peoples’ faces in the crowds, and I use to find it strange. The overwhelming majority of the common public has accepted the fact that ‘we hate everything that is going on, but we can’t do anything about it attitude’. They’ve given up. I suggest you do the same.Recommend

  • Tanweer Ahmed
    Apr 21, 2011 - 10:16PM

    No, it does not. Read my comment above.Recommend

  • Tanweer Ahmed
    Apr 21, 2011 - 10:19PM

    @Naushad Shafkat:
    And what are the alternatives? Monarchy, dictatorship, oligarchy, military rule or what?
    What about Islamic rule of governance? Like those of Prophet (S.A) and Khulafa-e-Rashideen.Recommend

  • Apr 22, 2011 - 12:36AM

    @G. Din:
    I have no preconceived prejudices against India! India has a great past and I greatly admire so many things about it. I admire its traditions, its culture, its history, its arts and crafts and above its people; the toiling masses who have yet to see the benefits of its current economic upsurge trickle down to them. And they, we must all remember, make up 80% of India. And I never said that your arguments don’t connect. What does not connect is your glossing over the points raised by me. You had accused Prof. Chomsky of not saying anything about America’s role in various conflicts and I had just set the record straight by pointing out that he has been a consistent critic of its actions. On Kashmir let me remind you and others who asked what one of the greatest Prime Ministers of India, Jawaharlal Nehru said:
    1. The question of Kashmir’s accession should be “decided in accordance with wishes of people and we adhere to this view.”
    2. “We are anxious not to finalise anything in a moment of crisis and without the fullest opportunity to be given to the people of Kashmir to have their say. It is for them ultimately to decide.”
    3. “We have declared that the fate of Kashmir is ultimately to be decided by the people.”
    4. We have always right from the beginning accepted the idea of the Kashmir people deciding their fate by referendum or plebiscite.”
    All these can be found at:
    I am aware that India has produced many great writers. But I am also aware of the furore caused by Mr. Jaswant Singh’s book about Mr. Jinnah and the recent controversy over an as yet unreleased book about Mr. Gandhi’s sexuality. Ms. Roy and Prof. Chomsky will continue to be recognized by the world as leading writers no matter what you think about them. Ms. Roy displayed rare courage by visiting the Dandakaranya forest recently for which she is to be prosecuted. And you know why she went there?
    By trying to ridicule Pakistan and Muslims in one go you display an arrogance that is unbecoming of an educated person. And I refuse to stoop so low by talking about the ‘dalits’, the untouchables and the Muslims in India.Recommend

  • Apr 22, 2011 - 12:52AM

    @G. Din:
    You say: it is fallacious to presume that all Muslims, or even all Sunnis, in Kashmir valley want ‘Azaadi”. They do not.
    Reminds one of Alice in Wonderland; I’ll be judge and I’ll be jury and I will sentence you to death!
    Could I too be allowed to say; All Brahmins, all untouchables, even all Hindus do not want to live in India. They do not!Recommend

  • Apr 22, 2011 - 12:56AM

    @Tanweer Ahmed:
    First let us produce an Islamic Society and then we can find people like the Khulafa-e-Rashideen.Recommend

  • akash
    Apr 22, 2011 - 7:00AM

    Since when Pakistanis get a right to talk about Kashmir… look at your house first.
    And how come you talk about Kasmir when you gift a part to China and occupy rest illegally.
    it is funny and hypocritical..
    Yes there can be millions of mutinies going on in India and we can deal with that…(googling and finding link will lead to no where as we can find millions about pakistan..)

    We are a democracy and are regularly criticised by our own people and institutions and we do listen to it.. but pakistanis telling us what to do… give me a break.

    India and the idea of India is bigger than one religion.. state.. caste.. etc.. unlike pakistan its not about religion in India.Recommend

  • Cherish Raj
    Apr 22, 2011 - 9:59AM

    @Naushad Shafkat:
    Chomsky lives in an idealistic cocoon. He might be sought after because there are enough failed states and proponents of anti Americanism around the world who wants to hear him speak. They know before hand what is gonna come out of his mouth. Like G.Din posted, every country has a cross to carry. For you guys it is Nadeem Paracha (though unlike Roy, he is not against the Pakistani state and is a more interesting writer). And about India, you were talking about the Maoist ‘separatists’. Please note that the Naxalites are not separatists. They do not want a separate state though they do not accept our economic policies. They do not even attack civilians. The Naxals want to make India a communist state. Pakistanis might not understand the idea because leftist politics have been completely exterminated by the state and the Mullah brigade in your country. The separatism you are talking about are all in the north eastern states in India and in the Kashmir valley, which together do not even make up 5% of India’s population.The Punjab insurgency is dead and the state is the richest in India. India has all the problems of a developing country and there is no magic wand to eliminate poverty which has been there in India since the time of Akbar and Jahangir. India’s entrepreneurs and the hard working middle class and its ambitious companies will take India out of poverty. Inshallah
    About Kashmir, no force on earth can take it away from India. The people of India will defend it against aggressors till the last man. You guys can keep on trying. All the best.Recommend

  • ashok sai
    Apr 22, 2011 - 11:05AM

    @Naushad Shafkat:

    The toiling masses who have yet to see the benefits of its current economic upsurge trickle down to them. And they, we must all remember, make up 80% of India

    Sir, on what basis you are saying this, current poverty rate is around 32% in India, that means over 600 million people are either middle class or upper class, which is double the population of Pakistan for your information. Going by current growth poverty will be further reduced to 20% by 2015.Recommend

  • Apr 22, 2011 - 12:15PM

    @ashok sai:
    I had just said that as an approximation. Thank God I have the World Bank saying exactly the same thing;
    “The World Bank estimates that 80% of India’s population lives on less than $2 a day which means a higher proportion of its population lives on less than $2 per day as compared with sub-Saharan Africa.”
    Here is the link so that you can verify it yourself:

  • ashok sai
    Apr 22, 2011 - 2:23PM

    @Naushad Shafkat:

    From the same link given by you :-

    “an estimated 390 million Indians now belong to the middle class; one-third of them have emerged from poverty in the last ten years. At the current rate of growth, a majority of Indians will be middle-class by 2025. Literacy rates have risen from 52 percent to 65 percent during the initial decade of liberalization (1991–2001).”

    Now you can decide yourself, which country is heading where.Recommend

  • G. Din
    Apr 22, 2011 - 5:23PM

    @Naushad Shafkat:
    As far as Nehru’s foolish offer of a plebiscite is concerned, it was based on certain conditions to be fulfilled before the plebiscite. Read about them in the actual U.N resolution. Mind you, India has NOT reneged from that foolish commitment. I would ask you to read the posts of Hafeez Indian above. My response cannot improve upon his.
    As far as your disagreement with my post that “it would be fallacious to presume that all Muslims, or even all Sunnis, in Kashmir valley want ‘Azaadi”. They do not.”(Note the emphasis on “all” in my post) I would say it is commonsense to conclude that all Muslims, or even all Sunnis, do not want “Azaadi”. . According to today’s news, one of the key components of Hurriet, Ittehad-ul-Mussalmeen, has been suspended in the last few days from the parent organization of separatists for its leader Ansari’s meeting with some interlocutors from Delhi. Mr. Ansari’s organization is a Shia in character. Mr. Ansari has said that he is happy about this development and that it will enable him to run his party without being hampered by the obdurate policies of Hurriet. Now, Shias are Muslims, aren’t they? If they part with other Muslims whose goal is to get “Azaadi”, doesn’t it tell you that they don’t want it or at least not with the same fervour, so are willing to look at alternatives. As far as Sunnis are concerned, Kashmir state government has always been run by predominantly Sunni parties such as National Conference and PDP. Can you imagine those people who have enjoyed power and become rich and prosperous to seek to upset their apple cart. So, as you said, Q.E.D!!!!Recommend

  • Apr 22, 2011 - 6:49PM

    There may be so many people in U.S.A. Who will be having the same thoughts and views as mr. Chomsky but they are not going to make any difference to the official line thinking.The policies are made by think tanks and the govt. Of the day follows these policies.Come what may.Be it Obama or Bush.The way of implementation is different by the poliTical parties.The aims of politics is to obtain the objectivesof govt. Of the day by legal or illegal means.when it is legal they do it through the respective govts. but when it is illegal they use the forum of united nation to legalize it.They achieve their objectives by hook or by crook.What Mr.Chomsky says or what Berterand Russel wrote is of no consequence..Recommend

  • Apr 23, 2011 - 9:18AM

    Good article! I like Chomsky but he lives in a free society and can say anything. I had the courage to say the same things when I visited the United States last year. Ask my friend Tim Kennedy of Strategic Policy Group. I interviewed him in 2001 in Karachi when I worked for the Daily Times. It was a tough interview and we became friends.Recommend

  • Apr 23, 2011 - 11:36PM

    @Cherish Raj:
    Reams of paper would fill the recognition that Prof. Chomsky has earned. Puny little me can do nothing to enhance that. I agree that Mr. Nadeem Paracha is one of our finest writers. Roy is anti-state? Just because she says something that you do not like? Why don’t you try her for treason?
    Hindustan Times 23/04/11: “To make the Maoist movement more effective, better coordination with other separatist groups working in the Northeast and Kashmir is of paramount importance,” said Koteshwar Rao alias Kishenji, a politburo member of the banned CPI (Maoist).”
    Indian Express of same date : “Separatists, Maoists involved in human rights abuses: US report”
    You say that India will defend Kashmir till the last man. That is exactly the point Prof. Chomsky has been making for the last several years; a state will do what it likes if it can get away with it! Morality, territorial integrity, human rights, promises and pledges are of no consequences. Nehru has been called a fool by Mr. G. Din just for making a pledge to hold a plebiscite in Kashmir. The Prime Minister of India and that too of the stature of Mr. Nehru is called that just because you have no answer. To you morality pledges and promises do not matter to us they do as it involves the future of a people..Recommend

  • Apr 24, 2011 - 12:10AM

    @G. Din:
    To you Nehru might be a fool but to the rest of the world he was perhaps the greatest Prime Minister of India. Reminds me of an incident: Awed by being in the company of a well known poet during the time of Rabindranath Tagore, a flatterer kept on heaping praise on the poet. So much so that he said “To me you are an even greater poet than Tagore!” Shocked the poet replied; “Yes, because Tagore writes for people like me and I unfortunately write for people like you!” And by the way what does Mr. Ansari’s meeting with some interlocutors of the Indian government show? Only that there will always be quislings. RAW has always been good at this.
    I must appreciate your ability of filibustering and procrastinating so that the main issue gets muddled. India is in illegal occupation of Kashmir. To maintain that occupation it needs to have a military presence at all times. It is one of the biggest anywhere. Name any other state in India having anything compared to Kashmir as regards the number of troops? Prof. Chomsky just pointed that out and you call Nehru a fool. Fool or not it was the Prime Minister of India who promised a plebiscite in Kashmir. It is said that it “was based on certain conditions to be fulfilled before the plebiscite.” You forget that you have yourself stated that “before 1989 it was peaceful and Kashmiris enjoyed their serene, calm life.” So why was the plebiscite not held then? quod erat demonstrandum.Recommend

  • Apr 24, 2011 - 12:20AM

    Since the Indian Prime Minister made a pledge before the world at the United Nations to hold a plebiscite in Kashmir. To you it may be funny. To us it is not as the future of millions is involved. We don’t ask that the Kashmiris join Pakistan. We only ask that they be given the right to decide their own future. If India is so good, developing so fast, poverty has been eradicated rivers of milk and honey flow in every hamlet then hold a free and fair plebiscite NOW! The people of Kashmir will surely make the right choice. Why are you afraid?Recommend

  • Apr 24, 2011 - 12:25AM

    “the situation will be “addressed as necessary within the constitutional limits” and brought back to normalcy”. When? It has been more than 60 years.Recommend

  • G. Din
    Apr 24, 2011 - 3:30AM

    @Naushad Shafkat: to Cherish Raj
    “Why don’t you try her (Arundhati Roy) for treason?”
    She has been hauled up in a court of law for sedition along with Ali Geelani of “Give me Pakistan or death” fame from Kashmir. You should keep up with current affairs, my friend.
    “To you Nehru might be a fool but to the rest of the world he was perhaps the greatest Prime Minister of India. “
    This coming from a man who called Arundhati Roy as “greatest living Indian writer” is another stab at effusive hyperbole. Ah, you forget that people like me voted for him. It is our right to judge him.

    “India is in illegal occupation of Kashmir. “
    Then take your case to a court of law, such as the International Court. Why don’t you?

    “Name any other state in India having anything compared to Kashmir as regards the number of troops?”
    Indian Army has a right to be wherever it wants to be, pleases to be or wherever it feels it is needed on the entire territory of India which includes Kashmir. Neither you nor the world at large can do the damnedest little bit about it. You know that, don’t you? Or, as a grown-up man you should!

    “Fool or not it was the Prime Minister of India who promised a plebiscite in Kashmir. “
    He did indeed. But, if you go back, it was the same Prime Minister of India who withdrew that offer when Pakistan busied itself in changing the demographics of that part of Kashmir it has illegally occupied, joined military pacts such as Baghdad Pact, CENTO, SEATO instead of fulfilling the conditions required for such a plebiscite in a timely manner. Being a Mussalmaan, you only quote what helps your case, not all the facts! That is why you always lose an argument.

    to akash
    “…We only ask that they be given the right to decide their own future.”
    Who appointed you “the dada of Kashmiris”? If you indeed are or were so appointed, and you know we are not about to hold a plebiscite, where is the point in barking a tree? Go to world bodies or wherever you feel you can buy, borrow or demand justice for your client. Stop nagging us! You know we are not whites; you cannot intimidate us (we have cut you down to half your size once), wear us out, double-cross us, double-deal us or shortchange us. So go, be gone!Recommend

  • Riaz
    Apr 30, 2011 - 2:03PM

    No one can defeat America militarily. Chinese leader, Deng Shu Ping of China when adressing his generals emphasised the fact that future wars will be predominantly economic in nature. The current leadership of China have firmly adhered to this wisdom. They have continued to lend massive amounts of money to America; a long and a strong enough rope with which the USA will be finaly forced to hang herself. This policy has lead to USA drowning in a sea of debt; a burden impossible to get out of. It is just a matter of time before the massive debt servicing demands will end the imperial hegemony and the empire with a final and decesive checkmate. Unlike western hubris, bluster and arrogance, the Chinese make their moves quitely, thoughtfully and with impeccable shrewdness.Recommend

  • G. Din
    Apr 30, 2011 - 4:48PM

    “…They have continued to lend massive amounts of money to America; a long and a strong enough rope with which the USA will be finaly forced to hang herself. “
    As usual, Pakistani wishful thinking eliminates any ideas of how the real world operates. Let us hypothetically assume that America having borrowed “massive amounts of money” and deciding against being “forced to hang herself.”, says to China;”don’t have the money to repay you”. What recourse does China have? Take possession of America or to take her to a court of law? Even in civil cases, courts cannot enforce decrees on indigent borrowers. How, do you think, can any adverse judgment be enforced on America? America is the King of the world. You can’t enforce any judgment on a king!
    “the Chinese make their moves quitely, thoughtfully and with impeccable shrewdness.”
    Evidently Chinese were not as thoughtful or impeccably shrewd as your heartfelt gratitude would invest them with because if an ordinary Indian can conjure up a scenario as above, they should have been able to do so, too. Or, is it perhaps that your respectful gratitude to Chinese makes them look God-like to you ? Actually, like any lender they know the risks they are taking and are sure that eventually America will make good on its liabilities WITHOUT being “forced to hang herself.”!Recommend

  • Prado
    May 28, 2011 - 12:53PM

    India has a long history of butchering minorirties take the incidents of south orrisa where christian were burned alive and being force to covert to hindism… yet not condemnation from the free worldRecommend

More in Pakistan