Latest news with #LiaquatAliKhan
Business Recorder
3 days ago
- Politics
- Business Recorder
14th August Independence Day: The PyaraParcham of Pakistan
The Pakistan Flag is dark green in color, with a white vertical bar, a white crescent in the center, and a five-pointed star. Although the green represents the Muslims and the white is for Non-Muslims, one can also say that the white and green field represents peace and prosperity, the crescent means development, and the star denotes light and knowledge. On 11 August 1947, Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan presented the flag to the Constituent Assembly for its formal approval. In his speech, he observed '. . . the flag is not the flag of any one political party or any one community. The flag is the flag of the Pakistan nation. . . . The flag of every nation is not merely a piece of cloth, but it is what it stands for, and I can say without any fear of contradiction that this flag which I have the honor to present to this House, will stand for freedom, liberty, and equality for those who owe allegiance to this flag of Pakistan." That, of course, was 1947, and since then a lot of water has passed under the bridge. The flag has taken on a different status. It is also now in strong competition with other flags, not only outside the motherland, but here too. Today, this nation has so many flags that it is practically a Herculean task to keep track of them. The various political parties, whether they are national, provincial, local, or even tonga, have a flag. The politico-religious parties also have their standards. The ethno-political organizations need a flag to identify themselves. Student organizations proudly display their own brand of flags. It seems that flags now play a prominent role in this nation's political opera. What has become of the green and white that was visualized by the Founding Fathers as the symbol of equal privileges, equal opportunity, and equal freedom? What has become of the banner under which hundreds of thousands lost their lives and millions of Muslims migrated to a land they could proudly call their home? What has become of the standard for which the valiant armed forces sacrificed themselves in order to protect the citizens of this country? The flag is still ever-present and symbolically and ritually raised up and down on the poles outside the official buildings. The flag is very much desired by political aspirants who want it on their cars, so the world and the traffic cop can distinguish between an ordinary citizen and an unelected advisor to the Chief Minister. The flag is still on the table where the billions of dollars worth of MOUs are signed and where one always see the signatories clumsily get up in unison and exchange the documents. However, it seems that the people are not satisfied with just one flag. What they want is a two-flag the example of the "rulers". In Pakistan, those elected or selected become undisputed title-deed holders, or rulers, of the country until they are unceremoniously chucked out, legally or through extra-constitutional means. The national flag and the party flag are in equal importance on the car, in the office, in the garden of official or non-official residences of the party leadership from the top to the lower in the hierarchy. The party jalsas are full of these party flags. Of course, there, the country's flag may be spotted if one looks real hard all around. There have been many episodes in this nation's history where the other flags were more in motion. At the World Cup in Australia, many moons ago, where the Pakistan team emerged as the World Champions, the viewers witnessed a harrowing spectacle. Here too, tri-colors belonging to a Pakistani political party were fluttering side by side with the PiyaraParcham of Pakistan. Unfortunately, both the timing and the place for this kind of exhibition were way, way out of line. The patriotic people of Pakistan have become used to the disrespect shown to the flag by many in the audience who frequent the cinemas and are impatient to get on with the show, rather than standing in attention for a couple of minutes. The younger generation craves to hold and to wave the flag on important national days. One can see the gleam in their eyes when they do that. They truly show their love for the flag, even though they may not yet know what the Muslims of the sub-continent went through so that today they could proudly raise their very own national flag. Alas, the day they come into their late teens or adult life, they may switch their allegiance to another flag. What this country thus needs is to introduce the love for the flag in the minds of the populace. There is an imperative need to get rid of the flags of all parties, and have only one flag under which they would all stand and to which they will pledge their loyalty and allegiance. The time has arrived to donate all these flags to the rag boys who clean the trucks and the buses. The moment has arrived to ban,once and for all, any other flag. The citizens of Pakistan should and must salute, respect and fight for the green and white that is recognized all over the globe as the flag of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Has anyone ever seen any other flag other than the Old Glory at American political programs and rallies whether they are Democratic, Republican, or Green Party? Has anyone ever seen any flag except the Stars and Stripes at US sports events? No sir, that country has become the World Power because the citizens in the land of Uncle Sam undauntedly prove their loyalty by standing up, facing the flag, right hand over the heart, and in a strong voice filled with patriotic fervor, recite: "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." This is one super way to make a great country and a great people! When will the day come when we would all say in unison – Pakistan First! Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
05-08-2025
- Business
- Business Recorder
Pakistan-US trade and economic relations
There are around 1 million people in the Pakistani diaspora living in the United States of America (USA). From 3 to 5 May 1950, Pakistan's first Prime Minister, Liaquat Ali Khan, visited Washington. It was a clear demonstration of Pakistan's loyalty to the anti-Soviet bloc. The US responded well and provided economic aid to the tune of US USD 20 billion from 1953 to 1970. This was a very big sum in those periods. Republicans such as Eisenhower, Johnson, and Nixon remained US President during that period except for a slightly less than three years' term for Kennedy being a Democrat. Pakistan was the second or third-largest recipient of financial support from the US. Republicans were close to Pakistan on account of their internal semantics in the US. The Colombo Plan of 1950 was for Commonwealth countries; however, the USA supported it. The Plan was the first international help to Pakistan. Pakistan's industrial base is the product of that support from the US. The institutions like Pakistan Industrial Credit & Investment Corporation (PICIC), Institute of Business Administration (IBA) in Karachi and Pakistan Institute of Development Economics (PIDE) are the products of US collaboration. Pakistan remained the major partner of the US in its Cold War in the pre-1970 period. Pakistan's stable foreign policy led the USA to establish the Regional Cooperation for Development (RCD) involving Iran and Turkey. Pakistan became an ideal country in Asia as a model for economic development. Per capita income of Pakistan reached US USD 175 in 1970 from 85 USD in 1947. Up to that period economic relations with the US were moving in the right direction. However, domestic political and economic power was wholly concentrated in the western wing. There was no industrial group from the Eastern wing and even the industries in that area were owned by persons belonging to the Western wing. Resultantly, there was a sense of economic deprivation. India in collaboration with Soviets took advantage of the same and Bangladesh came into existence. The US, due to international compulsions, tacitly succumbed. Perceived good relations of General Yahya with Nixon and Kissinger could not save Pakistan. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, though popular in Pakistan, was not able to carry the US. Accordingly, the economic aid from the US reduced substantially. Pakistan developed political and military relations with China at the cost of displeasing the US. In 1979, the then Soviet Union came to Afghanistan. Then everything changed. From that time to the fall of Kabul in 2021 the commitment and interest of the US were different. The US paid money; however, the use and purpose was different. Furthermore, in 1979 Iran also became anti-US. This is a long period of forty years. These are the forty (40) lost years of Pakistan. During this period Pakistan became a market of cheap Chinese goods which were imported under a heavy under-invoicing system. The country's workers' remittance increased from USD 14 billion to USD 30 billion in 2024. These remittances exceeded the tangible exports in real sense. This all resulted in a consumer oriented society without any tangible base for exports. Pakistan had a perennial shortage of foreign exchange as there was neither any foreign aid nor investment. There were IMF programmes before 1970 also; however, the borrowing was very nominal. Out of SDR drawn, about 95 percent were after 2008. Since US and Western investment had dried up, Pakistan, therefore, as a last resort, looked towards China to meet foreign exchange requirements for industrial development. Pakistan became part of China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) in 2015. The author always had reservations on the validity of economic assumptions of CPEC. However, Pakistan continued with that by the end of 2024 the investment by Chinese companies, especially in power projects and infrastructure to the tune of around USD 40 billion. This was all loan payable over the time. Later on, it transpired that terms of repayment and pricing of products were not suitable for the country. Under that unplanned system there was an investment in generation to the level of around 40,000 MW whereas the sustainable demand was never more than 30,000. Furthermore, the trade from Gwadar could not materialise, and infrastructure development also remained fruitless. As a result, by the end of 2008 and after then Pakistan has drawn 10 billion million SDR from the IMF, out of which 5 billion SDRs are still outstanding. One SDR is equal to around 1.4 USD. The IMF protected Pakistan from default. Now the time has come to review the economic paradigm and priorities of Pakistan. Pakistan needs immediate investment in exploration of oil and gas. This is technology as well as funds. It is a fact that the same can only be provided by the US and the rest of West. Not China. At present all the major oil drilling companies of the world include SLB, Halliburton, Baker Hughes, Transocean, and Noble Corporation, while integrated majors like ExxonMobil and Chevron are also major players in the sector. All these are or in the West. Pakistan has significant oil and gas potential due to its large, underexplored sedimentary basins, particularly the offshore Indus Basin, which is considered one of the world's largest submarine fan systems. While recent discoveries offer the chance to reduce dependence on imports, challenges remain, including security concerns in exploration areas and the need to balance development with environmental and climate goals. Pakistan has a large sedimentary basin covering over 880,000 sq. km, with significant portions remaining unexplored both onshore and offshore. There is information in the international press that there is some major discovery in offshore concession. However, the same is to be confirmed. Pakistan has reportedly discovered the world's fourth-largest oil and gas reserves in its offshore territory, a development that could transform the country's energy sector and economic future. According to news reports, top security officials have revealed that a geological survey conducted over three years in collaboration with a friendly country has successfully identified the location and estimated size of the reserves under Pakistan's sea, which stretches over 3,000 kilometres. The US and the West have a very positive history in oil and gas exploration. Pak-Stanvac, a joint venture of Esso Eastern Inc US formed in 1954, discovered gas at the Mari Field in Pakistan in 1957, which led to the production of natural gas beginning in 1967 and was later instrumental in the creation of Mari Petroleum Company Limited. The Sui Gas field, Pakistan's largest natural gas field, was discovered in 1952 in Balochistan. Commercial drilling and exploration began in 1955. It was a project of the UK-based Burmah Oil Company Limited. In this context the message of US President Donald Trump makes a lot of sense. US companies are fully aware that there is huge potential in Pakistan. What they require is stable economic cooperation between two countries, which is not disturbed by unconventional steps. Donald Trump is a 'practical businessman' who would evaluate the new economic relationship with Pakistan wholly on a commercial basis as now such a relationship is not based on any mission to fight the Cold War or Al-Qaida. It is a simple economic equation where Trump rightly feels that the Chinese are not the competitors and goodwill with Pakistan people may create an atmosphere, which is essential for the US in this region. Now it is the duty of Pakistanis not to miss that opportunity. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
10-07-2025
- Politics
- Business Recorder
Know thy enemy
In the recent Iran-Israel conflict the Islamic Republic of Iran was able to withstand the combined onslaughts by the two bullies. Israel was the un-disputed bully of the Middle East while the USA holds international ranking in this field. There were major security breaches, but the people were able to defend themselves. The government could not be toppled as there was no enemy within. Iran's Missile Technology and the resilience of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards prevailed against all odds. Unfortunately, in most Islamic countries there are both internal and external enemies which must be balanced out for common good. There are vested interests that strike from within to weaken the nation. Iran as a country has suffered heavily on this count. Mohammad Mosaddegh was elected Prime Minister (PM) of the Iranian Republic in 1951. When he decided to nationalize the British owned Anglo Persian Oil Company together with the Abadan Refinery the West came after him. The then PM of Pakistan Liaquat Ali Khan was asked to intervene but on his refusal, he was assassinated followed by the removal of the Iranian PM. There was a military coup in 1953, Mosaddegh was captured and imprisoned. Reza Shah Pahalvi was installed as the Shah of Iran who ruled with an iron hand as an agent of the Western powers. Finally, Shah was toppled in an Islamic Revolution led by Imam Ruhullah Khomeni in the year 1979 thus ending royal dominance of Kings and Monarchs for all times to come. After Israel today Iran is the only democratic country in the Middle East (ME). Elections are regularly held for the Majlis and the President, but candidates must be cleared by a council of elders to stop undesirables from entering the corridors of power. In 1953, the enemy within succeeded in regime change but in 2025 it failed despite the massive external support. When the US decided to enter WW II (World War II) the balance tilted in favour of the allied forces. General Dwight D. Eisenhower played a key role in the war. Finally, after the fall of Berlin, the hostilities came to an end and the victorious forces went home to a hero's welcome. The heat of popularity of the men in uniform was felt by the civilian quarters. Very thoughtfully it was decided to include the Generals in the mainstream of politics. In the year 1953 Eishenhower was elected the 34th President. He completed his two terms in office and went home in 1961. As head of state, he strengthened the democratic process and was very sensitive to the emerging power of the Military-Industrial Complex. His exploits in the battlefield and in the corridors of civilian authority are revered till today, he remained loyal to both. As a General he led the men in uniform, as President he served the people to the best of his abilities. Richard Nixon served under him as Vice President. In his second term of office as President when Nixon was facing impeachment by the Congress, the Chief of Staff of the White House General Alexander Haig advised the President to declare emergency as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces and send the Congressmen home. Instead, Nixon decided to resign and go home to save the democratic order. General Mustafa Kemal, a graduate of Ottoman Military College, led the Ottoman forces to victory against the Allied Forces in the battle of Gallipoli in 1916. At the peak of his popularity after the victorious campaign he was given the title of Ataturk (Father of the Turks). He then founded the Turkish Republic and remained President till his death in the year 1938. In his constitution he gave the Armed Forces an upper hand to take control of the country at will. The Ottoman Empire was dismembered. Turkey remained a 'sick man of Europe' under the hybrid system introduced by the General. Finally, there was resurgence of civilian authority led by Recep Tayyib Erdogan. His Justice and Development Party first took control of Istanbul in 1994. There was no looking back. He turned around the historic city of Istanbul. Based on his performance he was elected Prime Minister (PM) and then President. To restore civilian authority, he introduced constitutional amendments to end the role of the Armed Forces in running the country. Those who resisted were dealt with. In July 2016 a military coup was attempted to topple the civilian government but the brave people of Turkey took to the streets to block the takeover. As President, Erdogan decided to change the name of the Republic from Turkey to Turkiye. Today the country is a constitutional democracy under civilian control where religion and modernization have been balanced. Since 1994 till today the country has been turned around and continues to prosper. In US it is widely believed that there must be an enemy for direction and build-up. In the decade of the fifties the Soviet Union was declared an 'Evil Empire'. The focus of the nation was to bring it down. Finally, after the collapse of the mighty Socialist Empire (1922 to 1991) the target moved towards Islamic Fundamentalism. It was called the clash of civilizations. The entire Islamic World has suffered because of this phobia. Israeli Armed Forces are built around territorial integrity/expansion. Generals after retirement follow the democratic order to serve in civilian capacity. The Islamic Republic of Iran seeks resurgence of Islam. It is perhaps the only Islamic country that believes that Israel has no right to exist while others have reconciled to the idea of two states (Israel, Palestine). Iran prepared itself to take on the enemy. As ground war not possible they used technology to face their foe. Their missiles were able to penetrate the Israeli defences. Israel and then USA were able to bomb Iran by flying over neighbourly countries. I am sure some lessons have been learnt to develop better air cover and not to trust Indians. Pakistan decided to build the nuclear device after the break-up of the country in the year 1971. Technology is a key component of our defences. Originally, the plan was to reduce the size of the troops and rely more on the technological strength. Unfortunately, it has not happened. Nation's resources have been consumed by both. It is time to reevaluate priorities. Traditional defence paradigms have now become obsolete. Enemy must be targeted and dealt with. For Iran, Israel is the enemy. It is prepared to take it on. Despite all its under-hand tricks and external support Israel had to bite the dust in the recent war. The regime in Tehran has not only survived it has come out stronger. For Israel it's beginning of the end starting with creation of a Palestinian state. The message is loud and clear, know thy enemy both internal and external to thwart its evil designs. Force must have clear direction to be beneficial in meeting national objectives otherwise it can become a menace. (The writer is Ex-Chairman Pakistan Science Foundation; email: [email protected]) Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Time of India
12-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Myth, military and militancy: Why Pakistan is incorrigible
Ceasefire, but no real peace Though on May 10, India and Pakistan reached a consensus for a 'full and immediate ceasefire' after four days of intense military engagements, the hostilities are not going to end in the near future. Pakistan cannot and should not be trusted. Pakistan sought non-conventional ways to challenge India's dominance—especially in Kashmir after losing wars to India in 1947, 1965, and 1971. Supporting insurgency and militant groups became a 'low-cost, high-impact' strategy to internationalise the Kashmir issue. Pakistan's involvement in supporting and enabling terrorism—particularly in the context of its regional policies—can be traced to a mix of historical, strategic, and ideological reasons. The ideological dilemma This foundation of Pakistan itself creates inherent contradictions. The very creation of Pakistan was driven by a religious identity. While the so-called 'Two Nation Theory' provided the ideological justification, the actual process was shaped by political negotiations, regional dynamics, and the realities of colonial rule. The result was a new nation-state, unique for being founded primarily on the basis of religion rather than ethnicity or language. The rise of Islam in the early 1950s was largely due to the efforts of political activists and religious scholars who had migrated to Pakistan. The notion of present Pakistan as an ideological state is often linked to the era of General Mohammed Zia -ul- Haq. However, its origins are much older and both Liaquat Ali Khan and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, for political reasons, created the groundwork for the subsequent institutionalization of Islamization under the General Zia regime. Distorted history, strategic blindness Since the 1980s, the early history of Pakistan has been largely omitted from the educational curriculum, with the national historical narrative predominantly centred on the arrival of Muhammad bin Qasim in Sindh in 711 CE. This focus led to the exclusion of significant historical elements such as the Indus Valley civilization and later sites like Taxila, Hakra-Gagger, and Kot Diji from the curriculum. The intertwining of Pakistan's history with that of Muslim rule in India has further strengthened the narrative. This historical context is believed to have played a role in the formulation of geo-political strategy of Pakistan. The military's iron grip Pakistan has been under direct military rule for nearly half of its existence and even during civilian rule, the military retained de facto power over defence, foreign policy, and internal security. The chief of the Pakistani Army possesses an unmatched level of power and influence, rendering the position one of the most formidable in the world. Having exerted influence over Pakistan both overtly and covertly, army often manipulates events from the shadows. It removes elected administrations, creates pressure groups, and instigates divisions within political parties. Through organizations like Fauji Foundation, Army Welfare Trust, and Defence Housing Authorities, the military controls vast economic assets in agriculture, real estate, and industry and this economic entrenchment provides both incentive and ability to shape politics. It provides financial support to opposition parties to destabilize elected governments, thereby preserving its grip on political authority. No surprise, the politicians seek to align themselves with the armed forces to share power. For this the term 'hybrid regime' has been introduced to describe the ongoing military influence over civilian governments. Terror as statecraft During General Zia's rule the military began to view its role as not only protecting Pakistan's territorial integrity but also upholding the state-endorsed ideology. Numerous mosque schools that proliferated during this period were characterized by a strong sectarian focus and a commitment to a transnational jihadist perspective. These advancements were significantly facilitated by the United States' requirement for Pakistan's assistance in the fight against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Most significantly, Zia's enduring influence fostered an environment conducive to the social acceptance of terrorism as a state policy. Subsequent leaders, whether civilian or military, followed the same policies. Political dynasties, such as the Bhuttos and Sharifs, dominate politics, often prioritizing personal power over national development. No end in sight So, over the years Pakistan has been harbouring and supporting terrorist groups, particularly those targeting India, Iran and Afghanistan. Pakistan's internal reliance on Islamist narratives and its long-standing military policy toward 'bleeding India by a thousand cuts' means it cannot easily abandon support for terrorism against India. In close coordination with the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Pakistani army groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), and the Haqqani Network have been operating from Pakistani soil. Recently Pakistan's Defence Minister Khawaja Asif himself admitted on Sky News to Pakistan's history of 'supporting, training, and funding terrorist organizations.' The Army remains the true centre of power. The primary and essential prerequisite of peace in the region demands a thorough reform of the Army framework in Pakistan with a transition towards a governance system that is more civilian-oriented. Unfortunately, it's not happening in the near future. Peace on the Western Front will remain elusive. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
India.com
27-04-2025
- Politics
- India.com
Pakistan Army once sent a warship to capture this scenic Indian island in..., but Pakistani soldiers ran away due to...
Representational Image/AI-generated India-Pakistan war: India and Pakistan have essentially been at war since the latter was carved out after India's independence from the British in 1947. But did you know that shortly after the partition, Pakistan Army made an effort to capture Lakshadweep, the scenic island located in the Arabian Sea? When Pakistan tried to capture Lakshadweep island? After the 1947 partition which led to the formation of Pakistan, India focused its efforts to integrate the numerous princely states which had given the right by the British to join either country, and almost all of these small monarchies chose to become a part of the Indian Union. But, while India was focused on integrating major princely states into the Union, the tiny little island of Lakshadweep went unnoticed, and Pakistan found an opportunity to try and capture it, as the majority population was Muslim. In late 1947, Liaquat Ali Khan, the then Prime Minister of Pakistan, plotted to capture Lakshadweep and sent a warship accompanied by Pakistani Army and Navy to the remote island. The Pakistan Navy had orders to plant the Pakistani flag in Lakshadweep and claim the island if no Indian troops were present. Pakistani warship returned after… But, India got wind of Pakistan's plans, and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, the then Home Minister and Deputy Prime Minister of India, decided that Pakistan cannot be allowed to capture Lakshadweep, and ordered the Revenue Collector of Travancore to immediately take some soldiers and hoist the tricolour on the island. The collector did as ordered and hoisted the Indian flag in Lakshadweep. A Pakistani warship arrived at the island shortly after but returned after seeing the tricolour flying on the isle. Thus, Patel's quick-thinking saved Lakshadweep from falling into the hands of Pakistan, and this serene island is now a proud part of the Indian union.
