What do you think?
Rate this book
Pakistan: A Hard Country
In the past decade Pakistan has emerged as a country of immense importance. Large, heavily populated, strategically placed between Iran, Afghanistan and India, Pakistan has since its creation just over sixty years ago been pulled in several different, irreconcilable directions. In the wake of Pakistan's development of nuclear weapons, Osama Bin Laden's presence in its unpoliceable border areas, its shelter of the Afghan Taleban, and the spread of terrorist attacks by groups based in Pakistan to London, Bombay and New York, there is a clear need to understand this remarkable and highly contradictory place. Far from seeing Pakistan as the failed state often portrayed in the media, Lieven's extraordinary new book instead treats it as a viable and coherent state that, within limits and by the standards of its own region rather than the West, does work. Lieven argues strongly against US actions that would risk destroying that state in the illusory search for victory in Afghanistan. This work is based on a profound and sophisticated analysis of Pakistan's history and its social, religious and political structures. Lieven has interviewed hundreds of Pakistanis at every level of society, from leading politicians and soldiers to village mullahs and rickshaw drivers. In particular, his examination of the roots of popular sympathy for the Taleban in Pakistan draws on the testimony of people whose views are rarely consulted by Western analysts.
576 pages, Paperback
First published April 1, 2011
619 people are currently reading
6958 people want to read
About the author
Anatol Lieven
23 books96 followersAnatol Lieven currently reports from Central Europe for the Financial Times. In 1996-97 he was visiting senior fellow at the U.S. Institute of Peace in Washington, D.C. He is the author of The Baltic Revolution: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and the Path to Independence, published by Yale University Press.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 265 reviews
June 21, 2011
It is almost obligatory these days to subtitle books on Pakistan with some conjunction of 'failed', 'dangerous', 'lawless', 'deadly', 'frightening' or 'tumultuous'. Pakistan is a 'tinderbox', forever on the brink, in the eye of the storm, or descending into chaos. It is an 'Insh'allah nation' where people passively wait for Allah.
In the narrow space 'between the mosque and the military', there is much 'crisis', 'terrorism', 'militancy' and 'global jihad.'
British author and policy analyst Anatol Lieven's refreshingly understated title 'Pakistan: A Hard Country' eschews emotion for description, which is fitting because the book is a 519-page myth- busting exercise.
Lieven, currently a fellow at the New America Foundation, argues that some of the alarmist claims about Pakistan are indeed true - it is a corrupt, chaotic, violent, oppressive and unjust country. But it is also a remarkably resilient one. It is not nearly as unequal as India or Nigeria, or for that matter the United States.
Its security is beset by multiple insurgencies but they affect a smaller proportion of its territory than the ones India faces. Its cities are violent, but no more so than those of comparable size in Latin or even North America.
It has an abysmally low rate of tax collection, but, at five percent of the GDP, it also has one of the world's highest rates of charitable donations. It is no doubt corrupt, but this is due less to the absence of values than to the enduring grip of the old ones of loyalty to family and clan.
Beneath the chaotic surface, the country is held together by the underlying structures of kinship and patronage which account for its relative stability. Leaders of kinship networks derive their legitimacy from property ownership and the capacity to provide protection and patronage to followers.
This creates a degree of accountability and wealth redistribution since in order to retain the followers' loyalty, leaders have to secure and distribute patronage - and in a country endowed with modest resources and decrepit industry, much of it is stolen from the state.
However, the same forces that ensure Pakistan's stability also impede its progress. The primacy of clan loyalty over civic responsibility has served as a barrier to the development of modern democratic institutions.
Both civilian and authoritarian military governments have been frustrated in their attempts at reform. Little changes whether the country is ruled by a dictator or a democrat, because both have to sit atop and draw support from the same pyramid of kinship networks. The military, which functions relatively more efficiently than other institutions, has insulated itself against these forces by turning itself into the biggest kinship group of them all, securing itself the largest share of the state's revenues.
The economy (to which Lieven unfortunately gives very little space) becomes yet another victim of this system. Indeed, 'the most economically dynamic sections of the Pakistani population are those which have to a greater or lesser extent been shaken loose from their traditional cultural patterns and kinship allegiances by mass migration,' he writes. These include the Muhajirs of Karachi and the migrants from East Punjab.
Pakistan, writes Lieven, is a 'highly conservative, archaic, even sometimes quite inert and somnolent mass of different societies, with two modernizing impulses fighting to wake it up' - the Westernised liberals and the Islamists. Both have been stymied by the nature of Pakistani society as much as by the liberals' identification with the deeply-loathed United States and the Islamists inability to overcome the political quietism of the conservative, highly superstitious Islam practised by most Pakistanis.
In their confrontation with each other, both 'see the battle between them as apocalyptic, ending with the triumph of good or evil', yet their chances of success are equally grim.
Lieven carefully unravels the various strands of Islamism and gives a measured assessment of their relative influence in Pakistan. What is notable, he writes, is less the strength of Pakistan's Islamists than their weakness. The same kinship networks, loyalty to hereditary saints, and the potpourri of sects and sub-sects are barriers which also prevent the spread of Islamism. With the partial exception of the Jamaat-e-Islami, he notes, Islamists have themselves been swallowed up by the patronage system.
Lieven is concerned with the treatment of women in Pakistan, and some of the incidents he describes are horrific indeed. But unlike other Western commentators, he is careful to note that contrary to popular myth, the worst abuses against women are sanctioned by the traditional customary law rather than the Sharia.
The case of Mukhtar Mai's gang rape and the lesser known (at least in the West) story of the Baloch girls who were shot and buried alive for choosing to marry out of clan are instructive in this regard. Both were sanctioned by tribal customary law.
However, Lieven notes that the murder of the Baloch girls somehow elicited far less outrage from Pakistan's liberal elite than an incident that happened around the same time involving the public flogging of a girl in Swat. The outrage around that incident proved one of the catalysts for the subsequent military operation there.
But Lieven fails to pursue the implications of this comment further. Of course the reason why the Swat incident attracted more attention is that it had entered the 'war on terror' narrative where a whole industry has flourished, thriving on exaggeration and fear.
Lieven rejects the alarmist claims which portray Pakistan as on the verge of Islamist takeover but warns that things would be less certain if the U.S. were to intervene directly on Pakistani soil, potentially triggering a military revolt. The insurgency at present only affects a very small stretch of Pakistani territory and, as demonstrated by the offensive in Swat, it can be crushed when the state makes a determined effort.
Lieven considers the Swat campaign a success but acknowledges that the terrorist threat in the rest of the country has increased. But these are not simply parallel developments; there is a causal relationship between them.
There was never any doubt that the Pakistani army had the capacity to crush the Taliban but the real question was always the costs and consequences of such an operation. Predictably, the use of blunt force has turned a geographically delimited insurgency into an amorphous terrorist threat against which the state can do very little.
Lieven is categorically opposed to military intervention in Pakistan and marshals some eminently reasonable policy recommendations in his brief conclusions.
For Lieven, Pakistan is resilient enough to survive the terrorist threat, but the danger which could really precipitate its collapse is climate change. A country which receives at an average only 240mm of annual rainfall and is overly dependant on the Indus will be seriously at risk as its already large population grows further and water tables drop unless it makes efforts to better preserve its water resources and prevent waste.
Unlike most Western writers who go looking for interlocutors in their own image - secular, liberal, Westernised - Lieven's research includes a remarkable range of voices, including soldiers, Islamists, policemen, peasants, a president, and taxi drivers. He is sympathetic, but rarely credulous. He is particularly sceptical of the Pakistani elite - 'even, or especially, when their statements seem to correspond to Western liberal ideology, and please Western journalists and officials'.
Lieven brings an anthropologist's rigour, a journalist's intuition and a travel writer's descriptive power to a book which is perceptive, nuanced, and eminently readable. The book is illustrated with telling, sometimes amusing, anecdotes. But its greatest strength is that it shakes Westerners and Pakistanis alike from the complacent assumptions that underlie their respective political discourses.
In the narrow space 'between the mosque and the military', there is much 'crisis', 'terrorism', 'militancy' and 'global jihad.'
British author and policy analyst Anatol Lieven's refreshingly understated title 'Pakistan: A Hard Country' eschews emotion for description, which is fitting because the book is a 519-page myth- busting exercise.
Lieven, currently a fellow at the New America Foundation, argues that some of the alarmist claims about Pakistan are indeed true - it is a corrupt, chaotic, violent, oppressive and unjust country. But it is also a remarkably resilient one. It is not nearly as unequal as India or Nigeria, or for that matter the United States.
Its security is beset by multiple insurgencies but they affect a smaller proportion of its territory than the ones India faces. Its cities are violent, but no more so than those of comparable size in Latin or even North America.
It has an abysmally low rate of tax collection, but, at five percent of the GDP, it also has one of the world's highest rates of charitable donations. It is no doubt corrupt, but this is due less to the absence of values than to the enduring grip of the old ones of loyalty to family and clan.
Beneath the chaotic surface, the country is held together by the underlying structures of kinship and patronage which account for its relative stability. Leaders of kinship networks derive their legitimacy from property ownership and the capacity to provide protection and patronage to followers.
This creates a degree of accountability and wealth redistribution since in order to retain the followers' loyalty, leaders have to secure and distribute patronage - and in a country endowed with modest resources and decrepit industry, much of it is stolen from the state.
However, the same forces that ensure Pakistan's stability also impede its progress. The primacy of clan loyalty over civic responsibility has served as a barrier to the development of modern democratic institutions.
Both civilian and authoritarian military governments have been frustrated in their attempts at reform. Little changes whether the country is ruled by a dictator or a democrat, because both have to sit atop and draw support from the same pyramid of kinship networks. The military, which functions relatively more efficiently than other institutions, has insulated itself against these forces by turning itself into the biggest kinship group of them all, securing itself the largest share of the state's revenues.
The economy (to which Lieven unfortunately gives very little space) becomes yet another victim of this system. Indeed, 'the most economically dynamic sections of the Pakistani population are those which have to a greater or lesser extent been shaken loose from their traditional cultural patterns and kinship allegiances by mass migration,' he writes. These include the Muhajirs of Karachi and the migrants from East Punjab.
Pakistan, writes Lieven, is a 'highly conservative, archaic, even sometimes quite inert and somnolent mass of different societies, with two modernizing impulses fighting to wake it up' - the Westernised liberals and the Islamists. Both have been stymied by the nature of Pakistani society as much as by the liberals' identification with the deeply-loathed United States and the Islamists inability to overcome the political quietism of the conservative, highly superstitious Islam practised by most Pakistanis.
In their confrontation with each other, both 'see the battle between them as apocalyptic, ending with the triumph of good or evil', yet their chances of success are equally grim.
Lieven carefully unravels the various strands of Islamism and gives a measured assessment of their relative influence in Pakistan. What is notable, he writes, is less the strength of Pakistan's Islamists than their weakness. The same kinship networks, loyalty to hereditary saints, and the potpourri of sects and sub-sects are barriers which also prevent the spread of Islamism. With the partial exception of the Jamaat-e-Islami, he notes, Islamists have themselves been swallowed up by the patronage system.
Lieven is concerned with the treatment of women in Pakistan, and some of the incidents he describes are horrific indeed. But unlike other Western commentators, he is careful to note that contrary to popular myth, the worst abuses against women are sanctioned by the traditional customary law rather than the Sharia.
The case of Mukhtar Mai's gang rape and the lesser known (at least in the West) story of the Baloch girls who were shot and buried alive for choosing to marry out of clan are instructive in this regard. Both were sanctioned by tribal customary law.
However, Lieven notes that the murder of the Baloch girls somehow elicited far less outrage from Pakistan's liberal elite than an incident that happened around the same time involving the public flogging of a girl in Swat. The outrage around that incident proved one of the catalysts for the subsequent military operation there.
But Lieven fails to pursue the implications of this comment further. Of course the reason why the Swat incident attracted more attention is that it had entered the 'war on terror' narrative where a whole industry has flourished, thriving on exaggeration and fear.
Lieven rejects the alarmist claims which portray Pakistan as on the verge of Islamist takeover but warns that things would be less certain if the U.S. were to intervene directly on Pakistani soil, potentially triggering a military revolt. The insurgency at present only affects a very small stretch of Pakistani territory and, as demonstrated by the offensive in Swat, it can be crushed when the state makes a determined effort.
Lieven considers the Swat campaign a success but acknowledges that the terrorist threat in the rest of the country has increased. But these are not simply parallel developments; there is a causal relationship between them.
There was never any doubt that the Pakistani army had the capacity to crush the Taliban but the real question was always the costs and consequences of such an operation. Predictably, the use of blunt force has turned a geographically delimited insurgency into an amorphous terrorist threat against which the state can do very little.
Lieven is categorically opposed to military intervention in Pakistan and marshals some eminently reasonable policy recommendations in his brief conclusions.
For Lieven, Pakistan is resilient enough to survive the terrorist threat, but the danger which could really precipitate its collapse is climate change. A country which receives at an average only 240mm of annual rainfall and is overly dependant on the Indus will be seriously at risk as its already large population grows further and water tables drop unless it makes efforts to better preserve its water resources and prevent waste.
Unlike most Western writers who go looking for interlocutors in their own image - secular, liberal, Westernised - Lieven's research includes a remarkable range of voices, including soldiers, Islamists, policemen, peasants, a president, and taxi drivers. He is sympathetic, but rarely credulous. He is particularly sceptical of the Pakistani elite - 'even, or especially, when their statements seem to correspond to Western liberal ideology, and please Western journalists and officials'.
Lieven brings an anthropologist's rigour, a journalist's intuition and a travel writer's descriptive power to a book which is perceptive, nuanced, and eminently readable. The book is illustrated with telling, sometimes amusing, anecdotes. But its greatest strength is that it shakes Westerners and Pakistanis alike from the complacent assumptions that underlie their respective political discourses.
August 29, 2020
Oh boy,trying to read this book was such hard work.It is essentially aimed at a non Pakistani audience.Its sheer size is rather daunting,and had I read the hardback version,it would surely have made my arms and hands ache.So,I was glad for the digital version.
It's just way too long,starting from the conception of Pakistan and trying to encompass each and every thing about the country, and full of too much very familiar recent history.
No doubt,a lot of research has gone into it,and many of its observations ring true,but I found myself skimming through much of it.Not that I'd agree with everything that is written here.The writing style is that of a dry,academic thesis,which only occasionally becomes lively
But yes,I agree with the title,it is a hard country,and the conclusion,it is a tough country,which has seen so many crisis,and still survived.
Three stars for the research,two for the writing style.A hard book for anyone looking for an easy introduction to Pakistan.Would take too long to read in its entirety.
It's just way too long,starting from the conception of Pakistan and trying to encompass each and every thing about the country, and full of too much very familiar recent history.
No doubt,a lot of research has gone into it,and many of its observations ring true,but I found myself skimming through much of it.Not that I'd agree with everything that is written here.The writing style is that of a dry,academic thesis,which only occasionally becomes lively
But yes,I agree with the title,it is a hard country,and the conclusion,it is a tough country,which has seen so many crisis,and still survived.
Three stars for the research,two for the writing style.A hard book for anyone looking for an easy introduction to Pakistan.Would take too long to read in its entirety.
March 16, 2020
Some people are immune to chaos I guess. Or may be sometimes it is the only way. Only way to maintain a smile on your face.
I agreed at times and at times i disagreed with the book. Now finally i have developed a different theory.
In a country where, few years ago, suicide bomb blasts were routine. Where daily a new funeral invitation was waiting for you. Where, a country who initially begged us to give access, so that they can attack his enemies betrayed us and started bombing us back.
In that country i never saw any one in without hope.
Why?
Let me tell you a story. During a freedom fight, a man lost his 6 brothers and finally reached Pakistan with nothing but a hope to love a better life. A hope to have love and spread love. And in the end he was loved so much.
This man and millions like them cannot loose hope ever. So its not a hard country. But actually a hard, long struggle gave us this country. And we can never loose hope.
I agreed at times and at times i disagreed with the book. Now finally i have developed a different theory.
In a country where, few years ago, suicide bomb blasts were routine. Where daily a new funeral invitation was waiting for you. Where, a country who initially begged us to give access, so that they can attack his enemies betrayed us and started bombing us back.
In that country i never saw any one in without hope.
Why?
Let me tell you a story. During a freedom fight, a man lost his 6 brothers and finally reached Pakistan with nothing but a hope to love a better life. A hope to have love and spread love. And in the end he was loved so much.
This man and millions like them cannot loose hope ever. So its not a hard country. But actually a hard, long struggle gave us this country. And we can never loose hope.
July 19, 2025
This was an excellent analysis of Pakistan. Anatol Lieven researched this topic starting in the 1980s and up though post-9/11. This book was published in 2011 yet has great information up to that date. The opening was great at starting with the history of the region from the Mughal Empire, the British Empire, breaking away from India, and up to more recent history. Pakistan is a nation that weaves between religious fundamental appeal, conservatism, militancy, and extremism. The author explained unbalanced structures of power, property, patronage, and kinship that dominate Pakistani politics and government have prevented Pakistan from gaining traction in becoming a serious threat.
Pakistan has consistently intrigued and terrified the international stage although its weak political platforms have been typically ousted by military takeover. "General Ayub Khan and Musharraf Pervez, military rulers in 1958-69 and 1999-2008 respectively, took to the great secular modernizing nationalist of the state. Gerenal Zia-ul-Haq, military ruler from 1977 to 1988, took the very different course, trying to unit and develop Pakistan through enforced adherence to a stricter and more puritanical form of Islam mixed with Pakistani nationalism. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, founder of the Pakistani People's Party and civilian ruler in the 1970s, tried to rally the masses behind him with the program of anti-elitist economic populism and nationalism. They all failed. (pg. 23)".
The following chapters included in-depth explanations of Pakistan's political climate, justice system and national military, and the value of Islam. Lieven explained the religious component:
I throughly enjoyed this and learned a great deal. The author gave the information clearly without detail overkill. I would definitely recommend this on learning about Pakistan and Taliban spill over into the region. Thanks!
Pakistan has consistently intrigued and terrified the international stage although its weak political platforms have been typically ousted by military takeover. "General Ayub Khan and Musharraf Pervez, military rulers in 1958-69 and 1999-2008 respectively, took to the great secular modernizing nationalist of the state. Gerenal Zia-ul-Haq, military ruler from 1977 to 1988, took the very different course, trying to unit and develop Pakistan through enforced adherence to a stricter and more puritanical form of Islam mixed with Pakistani nationalism. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, founder of the Pakistani People's Party and civilian ruler in the 1970s, tried to rally the masses behind him with the program of anti-elitist economic populism and nationalism. They all failed. (pg. 23)".
The following chapters included in-depth explanations of Pakistan's political climate, justice system and national military, and the value of Islam. Lieven explained the religious component:
The Islamic character of the state would be a real issue for the most of the population if that state were to imitate Saudi Arabia or Iran and try to impose one monolithic version of Islam... Pakistan is too weak to achieve this even if it wanted to... pg. 125Lieven explained the complex intricacies of the ethnic demographic of the state to include the Panjabi, Balochistan, the Sindhi, and the Pashto-speaking Pathan peoples along the border of Afghanistan. The last part explained the Taliban and their involvement in the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and the Province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. These areas historically disregard the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Pakistan in the recent decades has had tremendous difficulty policing and containing extremist support and recruitment for the Taliban in all regions of the country.
I throughly enjoyed this and learned a great deal. The author gave the information clearly without detail overkill. I would definitely recommend this on learning about Pakistan and Taliban spill over into the region. Thanks!
March 24, 2022
It always fascinated me how a country inhabited by more then 200 million people, with one of the biggest/strongest armies in the world and which also happens to be a nuclear power, was so structurally undercovered in the international media. Even when Pakistan appears on the front page, it is often caricatured as nothing else but a hotbed of fundamentalist Islam which is gearing up to start a nuclear war with India at any given moment.
With this in the back of my mind, reading Anatol Lieven's book felt like a breath of fresh air. Lieven provides the reader with a nuanced overview of Pakistan's (recent) history and society in a very structured manner. The regions, ethnic groups, socio-economic issues and religious differences are described in a very detailed and clear manner.
I would describe my reading experience like watching a documentary and an advanced university course on Pakistan through a book. Lieven has really succeeded in taking away the stereotypes surrounding Pakistan and replacing them with the nuanced and (above all) interesting image which the country deserves.
With this in the back of my mind, reading Anatol Lieven's book felt like a breath of fresh air. Lieven provides the reader with a nuanced overview of Pakistan's (recent) history and society in a very structured manner. The regions, ethnic groups, socio-economic issues and religious differences are described in a very detailed and clear manner.
I would describe my reading experience like watching a documentary and an advanced university course on Pakistan through a book. Lieven has really succeeded in taking away the stereotypes surrounding Pakistan and replacing them with the nuanced and (above all) interesting image which the country deserves.
October 11, 2025
It’s Complicated
I have wanted to read this book for a while. For personal reasons the country hold a special place and fascination in me. I am also able to travel there, so it was only right that I pulled Anatol Lieven’s Pakistan: A Hard Country off the shelf sooner or later. I have to say I was impressed. First published in 2011, the book is a well rounded and nuanced study of the current state of Pakistan and goes beyond the sensationalist headlines that often dominate Western media coverage of ‘The Land of the Pure’, such as terrorism, extremism, or political instability. It instead offers a layered portrait of a nation that is deeply complex, resilient, and, as the title suggests, extraordinarily ‘hard.’
I am not familiar with the Lieven’s work (although I have read several excellent books by his brother Dominic), so didn’t know what to expect from this mix of history and current affairs. He is journalist and an academic who has spent considerable time in South Asia, and as a result approaches Pakistan not simply as a security problem for the West but as a living, breathing society shaped by history, geography, and culture. This is exceptional insight to be honest. His central argument is that while Pakistan faces enormous challenges such as, weak institutions, corruption, sectarian tensions, and insurgency, it also possesses powerful forces of resilience rooted in kinship networks, patronage systems, religion, and a strong sense of identity. These structures, while often criticised for enabling corruption and inefficiency, paradoxically also prevent total state collapse.
Pakistan: A Hard Country is structured thematically, addressing issues such as the military’s central role in politics, the influence of Islam, regional diversity, and the rural patronage systems that shape everyday life. This really works, as the subject matter is extremely complex and hard to comprehend. Lieven balances his analysis between Pakistan’s flaws and its strengths, making the case that predictions of the country’s imminent failure are overly simplistic. Instead, he portrays Pakistan as a society that muddles through crises by relying on deeply entrenched traditions of loyalty and obligation.
Lieven’s writing is what you would expect of a journalist. It actually reads better than an article, which shows care in the editing. He weaves historical context with anecdotes from his fieldwork, what he has seen on the ground and through his hundreds of interviews. He is particularly strong in capturing the paradoxes of Pakistani society: a military that dominates politics but is also one of the few functioning institutions; religious movements that are both sources of division and providers of social services; and rural structures that are both oppressive and stabilising.
One downfall of the book however, is that as it was written in 2011, the story has now moved on over a decade, with no real updated version and as such is at risk of being frozen in time. Another thing to say is that Lieven sometimes appears too sympathetic to Pakistan’s dysfunction and presents patronage and corruption as stabilising forces without fully addressing their costs to development and democracy. Moreover, while his focus on resilience is refreshing, it occasionally underplays the dangers posed by extremism, climate change, and economic stagnation.
In spite of this, Pakistan: A Hard Country remains a seminal text for anyone seeking to understand Pakistan beyond clichés. It avoids simplistic binaries of ‘failed state’ versus ‘strategic partner’ and instead presents Pakistan as a country with its own internal logic: frustrating, contradictory, but enduring. If you are interested in Pakistan or South Asia you cannot miss out on this book. The complexities and huge challenges are laid out to bear and even though one might think it will collapse, Pakistan in fact continues to survive. Leiven does place a caveat on this however, of the USA and the West do no get this right going forward, it could and this would be a huge disaster for the region and as such the world.
I have wanted to read this book for a while. For personal reasons the country hold a special place and fascination in me. I am also able to travel there, so it was only right that I pulled Anatol Lieven’s Pakistan: A Hard Country off the shelf sooner or later. I have to say I was impressed. First published in 2011, the book is a well rounded and nuanced study of the current state of Pakistan and goes beyond the sensationalist headlines that often dominate Western media coverage of ‘The Land of the Pure’, such as terrorism, extremism, or political instability. It instead offers a layered portrait of a nation that is deeply complex, resilient, and, as the title suggests, extraordinarily ‘hard.’
I am not familiar with the Lieven’s work (although I have read several excellent books by his brother Dominic), so didn’t know what to expect from this mix of history and current affairs. He is journalist and an academic who has spent considerable time in South Asia, and as a result approaches Pakistan not simply as a security problem for the West but as a living, breathing society shaped by history, geography, and culture. This is exceptional insight to be honest. His central argument is that while Pakistan faces enormous challenges such as, weak institutions, corruption, sectarian tensions, and insurgency, it also possesses powerful forces of resilience rooted in kinship networks, patronage systems, religion, and a strong sense of identity. These structures, while often criticised for enabling corruption and inefficiency, paradoxically also prevent total state collapse.
Pakistan: A Hard Country is structured thematically, addressing issues such as the military’s central role in politics, the influence of Islam, regional diversity, and the rural patronage systems that shape everyday life. This really works, as the subject matter is extremely complex and hard to comprehend. Lieven balances his analysis between Pakistan’s flaws and its strengths, making the case that predictions of the country’s imminent failure are overly simplistic. Instead, he portrays Pakistan as a society that muddles through crises by relying on deeply entrenched traditions of loyalty and obligation.
Lieven’s writing is what you would expect of a journalist. It actually reads better than an article, which shows care in the editing. He weaves historical context with anecdotes from his fieldwork, what he has seen on the ground and through his hundreds of interviews. He is particularly strong in capturing the paradoxes of Pakistani society: a military that dominates politics but is also one of the few functioning institutions; religious movements that are both sources of division and providers of social services; and rural structures that are both oppressive and stabilising.
One downfall of the book however, is that as it was written in 2011, the story has now moved on over a decade, with no real updated version and as such is at risk of being frozen in time. Another thing to say is that Lieven sometimes appears too sympathetic to Pakistan’s dysfunction and presents patronage and corruption as stabilising forces without fully addressing their costs to development and democracy. Moreover, while his focus on resilience is refreshing, it occasionally underplays the dangers posed by extremism, climate change, and economic stagnation.
In spite of this, Pakistan: A Hard Country remains a seminal text for anyone seeking to understand Pakistan beyond clichés. It avoids simplistic binaries of ‘failed state’ versus ‘strategic partner’ and instead presents Pakistan as a country with its own internal logic: frustrating, contradictory, but enduring. If you are interested in Pakistan or South Asia you cannot miss out on this book. The complexities and huge challenges are laid out to bear and even though one might think it will collapse, Pakistan in fact continues to survive. Leiven does place a caveat on this however, of the USA and the West do no get this right going forward, it could and this would be a huge disaster for the region and as such the world.
March 10, 2012
Undoubtedly the best analysis on Pakistan since a while by a serious British journalist. I have thoroughly enjoyed the experience and eagerly digested most of the arguments and facts with relish.
Just one little story from this gem of a book is....
- When informed that suttee was an ancient Rajput custom General Sir Charles Napier CIC India answered, 'You say it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And we will follow ours.
Just one little story from this gem of a book is....
- When informed that suttee was an ancient Rajput custom General Sir Charles Napier CIC India answered, 'You say it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And we will follow ours.
March 15, 2016
Anatol Lieven is his highly acclaimed book, Pakistan : A Hard Country, takes every reader whether familiar with the cultural,social and anthropological dynamics of Pakistan or total ignorant on a journey which tries to understand how Pakistan does not move forward to progress and a question similarly opposite but often asked why Pakistan does not fail. Questions and claims from the lens of western media has often portrayed a country strong with 200 million peoples about to collapse often asking 'Can Pakistan Survive' or bit more 'World's Most Dangerous Nation' but still astoundingly it moves on and in some instances better than the other countries in the region.
Credit must be given to the writer in examining in depth the social nuisances and kinship ties which forge the state and stop it from falling into the hands of religious fanatics and at the same time hamper it's progress and makes corruption rampant! As Anatol puts it the very reason Pakistan continues to survive in wake of other failed states with similar problems , are the reasons it cannot progress!
A brilliant analysis which does not shy away from recognizing military's role in the country in it's many failings as seen by political eyes to the very reason the country stays stable and moves on. Anatol must be given credit for his first hand account of many analysis and interviews forming the premise of book , a breath of fresh air from the myopic western analysts writing from the comfort of their safe homes abroad.
Pakistan : A Hard Country, recognizes the successes and failure of a country full of dichotomies which keeps on surprising the west yet again through it's resilience , survival and relative success ! A must read!
Credit must be given to the writer in examining in depth the social nuisances and kinship ties which forge the state and stop it from falling into the hands of religious fanatics and at the same time hamper it's progress and makes corruption rampant! As Anatol puts it the very reason Pakistan continues to survive in wake of other failed states with similar problems , are the reasons it cannot progress!
A brilliant analysis which does not shy away from recognizing military's role in the country in it's many failings as seen by political eyes to the very reason the country stays stable and moves on. Anatol must be given credit for his first hand account of many analysis and interviews forming the premise of book , a breath of fresh air from the myopic western analysts writing from the comfort of their safe homes abroad.
Pakistan : A Hard Country, recognizes the successes and failure of a country full of dichotomies which keeps on surprising the west yet again through it's resilience , survival and relative success ! A must read!
June 4, 2013
In addition to the subtitle “A Hard Country” could also be added a “Complex Country”. Mr. Lieven gives us Pakistan from that country’s viewpoint and that is the great strength of this book.
We are presented with a turbulent multi-layered portrayal of a country surrounded by enemies (like India), unfriendly countries (like Iran) or failed states (like Afghanistan). Within Pakistan (with a population of close to 200 million) there are so many diverse groups competing with each other (sometimes violently) that it sometimes puts Pakistan’s very survival in jeopardy.
As Mr. Lieven points out there are so many disparate Islamic groups and ethnicities that it is a misconception of Western countries that Pakistan is on the verge of becoming an Islamic State like Saudi Arabia. In fact, Pakistan is a veritable marketplace of different brands of Islam. At this stage the Taleban (spelt in this book with an “e” instead of an “i”) would be unable to overthrow the government. They may be powerful in the ungoverned FATA and NWFP provinces, but aside from terrorist attacks they have not made significant inroads in the main provinces of Punjab and Sindh – actually the army has taken significant containment steps. The Talebans’ austere brand of Islam would not sit well with the abundant Islamic groups who worship saints and shrines.
But this book still gives a gloomy view of the country – a state befuddled by corruption, patronage and an inept judicial system (that inadvertently promotes Taleban quick justice). It is also a state swept up in delusional paranoia that believes, among other delusions, that the Sept. 11 attacks were done by Israel, the Bush administration…
It is a state that since its inception in 1947 is ruled by fear – fear outside its borders – particularly of India and at one time of communism. It is ruled by fear from within – there is a separatist faction in Balochistan, the growth of fundamentalism in the Frontier areas. It’s largest city Karachi, has several feuding ethnic groups. Also, all ranks of the population hate the U.S. for their presence in Afghanistan – for fighting other Muslims. Pakistan views Afghanistan as its own proxy state and fears any Indian influence their.
As per Mr. Lieven the only operative success in Pakistan is the army – to use a Prussian term “it is an army with a state”.
This is not a pretty picture – it is an extremely volatile mix. As I remarked at the beginning, we are given a view from the Pakistani perspective. Unfortunately, we on the outside, view Pakistan as a breeding ground for global terrorists – terrorists who move easily between Afghanistan and Pakistan. If Pakistan cannot control this, along with the madrassa schools of religious indoctrination, the West will likely continue to intervene militarily in this area. This also needs to be coupled with humanitarian aid for both countries.
I learnt much from this book. We are provided with a wide scope of vivid portraits. The outlook given the illiteracy (particularly of women) and lack of broad-based education does not look promising. Mr. Lieven also warns us of the ecological disasters awaiting Pakistan, in a sense much more critical than the Islamic one, due to the rapidly expanding population.
We are presented with a turbulent multi-layered portrayal of a country surrounded by enemies (like India), unfriendly countries (like Iran) or failed states (like Afghanistan). Within Pakistan (with a population of close to 200 million) there are so many diverse groups competing with each other (sometimes violently) that it sometimes puts Pakistan’s very survival in jeopardy.
As Mr. Lieven points out there are so many disparate Islamic groups and ethnicities that it is a misconception of Western countries that Pakistan is on the verge of becoming an Islamic State like Saudi Arabia. In fact, Pakistan is a veritable marketplace of different brands of Islam. At this stage the Taleban (spelt in this book with an “e” instead of an “i”) would be unable to overthrow the government. They may be powerful in the ungoverned FATA and NWFP provinces, but aside from terrorist attacks they have not made significant inroads in the main provinces of Punjab and Sindh – actually the army has taken significant containment steps. The Talebans’ austere brand of Islam would not sit well with the abundant Islamic groups who worship saints and shrines.
But this book still gives a gloomy view of the country – a state befuddled by corruption, patronage and an inept judicial system (that inadvertently promotes Taleban quick justice). It is also a state swept up in delusional paranoia that believes, among other delusions, that the Sept. 11 attacks were done by Israel, the Bush administration…
It is a state that since its inception in 1947 is ruled by fear – fear outside its borders – particularly of India and at one time of communism. It is ruled by fear from within – there is a separatist faction in Balochistan, the growth of fundamentalism in the Frontier areas. It’s largest city Karachi, has several feuding ethnic groups. Also, all ranks of the population hate the U.S. for their presence in Afghanistan – for fighting other Muslims. Pakistan views Afghanistan as its own proxy state and fears any Indian influence their.
As per Mr. Lieven the only operative success in Pakistan is the army – to use a Prussian term “it is an army with a state”.
This is not a pretty picture – it is an extremely volatile mix. As I remarked at the beginning, we are given a view from the Pakistani perspective. Unfortunately, we on the outside, view Pakistan as a breeding ground for global terrorists – terrorists who move easily between Afghanistan and Pakistan. If Pakistan cannot control this, along with the madrassa schools of religious indoctrination, the West will likely continue to intervene militarily in this area. This also needs to be coupled with humanitarian aid for both countries.
I learnt much from this book. We are provided with a wide scope of vivid portraits. The outlook given the illiteracy (particularly of women) and lack of broad-based education does not look promising. Mr. Lieven also warns us of the ecological disasters awaiting Pakistan, in a sense much more critical than the Islamic one, due to the rapidly expanding population.
October 8, 2019
This book belongs to the category of current affairs. Written in 2010, talks about almost all the issues prevalent in Pakistan at that time.
Anatol Lieven did thorough research. He stayed in Pakistan for some years and personally conducted interviews all over the places. Being a journalist he presented all the issues in a simple way, so the readers belonging to all the categories could get the fair idea what was happening in Pakistan. If you don't know anything about Pakistan or Pakistani society, this book can give you information about all the things, from political system to culture, from cities to small towns, everything to can think of.
It was written for the western audience, so for me at some points the book became boring because there were many things which we know in everyday life. Like the number of provinces or the biggest political party. H e tried to conver everything and tried to keep it as simple as possible, but things on the ground aren't that simple. He tried to cover the whole British era in a chapter. The cherry picking made him skip many important (and apparently contradictory) details about the events. I felt I should have read this book some years ago when I started reading the history of Pakistan. The book is good for beginners, but at intermediate or advanced level, it can be tedious.
Anatol Lieven did thorough research. He stayed in Pakistan for some years and personally conducted interviews all over the places. Being a journalist he presented all the issues in a simple way, so the readers belonging to all the categories could get the fair idea what was happening in Pakistan. If you don't know anything about Pakistan or Pakistani society, this book can give you information about all the things, from political system to culture, from cities to small towns, everything to can think of.
It was written for the western audience, so for me at some points the book became boring because there were many things which we know in everyday life. Like the number of provinces or the biggest political party. H e tried to conver everything and tried to keep it as simple as possible, but things on the ground aren't that simple. He tried to cover the whole British era in a chapter. The cherry picking made him skip many important (and apparently contradictory) details about the events. I felt I should have read this book some years ago when I started reading the history of Pakistan. The book is good for beginners, but at intermediate or advanced level, it can be tedious.
January 20, 2018
A sympathetic and ground-level portrayal of Pakistan. The author approaches the study Pakistan with a fresh look and without any patronising tone that is common to many western writers. The best part of the book is where he presents a realistic picture of the ground realities of Pakistan's legal, economic, social, and cultural power structures and the opposing forces at work in this complex society.
But there are plenty of flaws and blind spots in this work too. He presents an incomplete picture especially regarding the Pakistan army and its history of asymmetric warfare. I had to laugh when he calls Pakistan army an "honest" force. He downplays the ideological fanaticism and the state of denial of the Pakistan army and the ISI, and the various strategic decisions that it led to with brutal repercussions.
But still a very insightful book as he portrays a flesh and blood picture of the Pakistani society based upon many ethnographic and first-hand sources, that destroys many stereotypical myths. And as he says, "Pakistan is in fact a great deal more like India – or India like Pakistan – than either country would wish to admit".
But there are plenty of flaws and blind spots in this work too. He presents an incomplete picture especially regarding the Pakistan army and its history of asymmetric warfare. I had to laugh when he calls Pakistan army an "honest" force. He downplays the ideological fanaticism and the state of denial of the Pakistan army and the ISI, and the various strategic decisions that it led to with brutal repercussions.
But still a very insightful book as he portrays a flesh and blood picture of the Pakistani society based upon many ethnographic and first-hand sources, that destroys many stereotypical myths. And as he says, "Pakistan is in fact a great deal more like India – or India like Pakistan – than either country would wish to admit".
June 17, 2016
Would have given it complete 5 but there are few things which i cant just digest so. 4.5 it is.
This is one of the most refreshing books I have read on Pakistan affairs. Well one can say it is one of the best written books in that department. That certainly does not mean everything is accurate or agreeable at times. The writer who however was not biased or wrote with “western prejudice” especially being a British. This book really well, sums up Pakistan till 2010. Nothing much has changed since except that maybe time of early 2000s may be returning, regarding our relations with India and USA. The terrorism situation since then has improved in some ways, in others, it probably has not. But morale definitely has improved and so has trust in army.
The most highlighted problems are ecological ones in the first few chapters. Especially water problems in Pakistan. The constantly decreasing water table, the floods and lack of dams and reservoirs in face of it. He also shows his surprise at water wastefulness of Pakistanis, considering water shortage is drastically increasing. When an English tells you, you are wasting water considering he comes from country were it rains nearly one third of the year, we need to listen because he might have a point.
He also runs comparison between, traditional law and Shariah. Something I was pleasantly surprised by. As he states:
“The population of Pakistan by contrast has a choice between the law of the state, law of the religion (The Shariah), and local folk, tribal or community law.
People move between these three codes depending on circumstances and advantage, often pursuing their goals through several of the simultaneously as well as through violence or more often threat of it. The authorities which are supposed to implement the state law in conjunction with Shariah, very often end up following community law or even turning blind eye to violence. Often this is because they have been corrupted or intimidated but often, too, it is because the police concerned share the cultural attitudes of the populations from which they are recruited. So the sorry nature Pakistan as a ‘negotiated state’, in which authority is a matter of negotiation, compromise, pressure and violence, not formal rules, is exemplified by the area of law and justice."
What a sorry state of affairs that is, unfortunately he could not have put it in better words.
He also kind of denies the western views that Pakistan might suffer from Islamic revolution or some people who are afraid that Pakistan might me liberalized. In words of a young Lahore man Ali Hasan, he sponges off all these assumptions
“If I were to jump on a box and preach revolution with the best programme in the world, you know what would happen? First, people from all the other provinces would say that we can’t follow him, he’s a Punjabi. Then most of the Punjabis would say, we can’t follow him, he’s from such and such biradari. Even in my own village, half of the people would say something like, I can’t follow him, his grandfather beat my uncle in a fight over land. If you preach Islamic revolution most people won’t follow you they practice different kinds of Islam and worship different saints. So you see we can’t unite behind a revolution because we can’t unite behind anything.
It covers more or less all the plights of this nation on provincial level. This book is solely about Pakistan and its coordination, within a province and between provinces. Also the provincial parties and their damaging roles. I mean they hardly ever play any other kind.
The thing that most shocked me in this book was his take on MQM. It was most surprising. He nearly seems to be in awe of MQM. Which is little weird. Maybe they were not that bloody pre 2010, I don’t know. However I think his tilt towards MQM might be because, they are, unlike PPP and PMLN not feudal or big family run party. It is more of a middle class party to him. What he termed as modern urban politics. I still can’t understand how that is better in wake of what they do but he did play down their open killings in Karachi “a lot”. Again maybe at that time period they were not so active. Also he does not believe in any speculations and against MQM, real evidence is hard to come by or did before Rangers.
There is this reference which sort of describes a lot about our society,
Imran Aslam of Geo described what he called ‘the Sharifs’ Pakistan as
“Conservative with small ‘c’. It is a form of religion that gives stability and comfort but is not fanatical, and is peace with itself – unlike our psychologically and culturally tortured liberals, and equally tortured Islamists.”
It might make more sense in the context he was speaking, but still kind of does, doesn’t it?
This book is worth a read. Highly recommended, very well written done and one gets the feeling he gets Pakistani mentality, well he really tried to at least.
This is one of the most refreshing books I have read on Pakistan affairs. Well one can say it is one of the best written books in that department. That certainly does not mean everything is accurate or agreeable at times. The writer who however was not biased or wrote with “western prejudice” especially being a British. This book really well, sums up Pakistan till 2010. Nothing much has changed since except that maybe time of early 2000s may be returning, regarding our relations with India and USA. The terrorism situation since then has improved in some ways, in others, it probably has not. But morale definitely has improved and so has trust in army.
The most highlighted problems are ecological ones in the first few chapters. Especially water problems in Pakistan. The constantly decreasing water table, the floods and lack of dams and reservoirs in face of it. He also shows his surprise at water wastefulness of Pakistanis, considering water shortage is drastically increasing. When an English tells you, you are wasting water considering he comes from country were it rains nearly one third of the year, we need to listen because he might have a point.
He also runs comparison between, traditional law and Shariah. Something I was pleasantly surprised by. As he states:
“The population of Pakistan by contrast has a choice between the law of the state, law of the religion (The Shariah), and local folk, tribal or community law.
People move between these three codes depending on circumstances and advantage, often pursuing their goals through several of the simultaneously as well as through violence or more often threat of it. The authorities which are supposed to implement the state law in conjunction with Shariah, very often end up following community law or even turning blind eye to violence. Often this is because they have been corrupted or intimidated but often, too, it is because the police concerned share the cultural attitudes of the populations from which they are recruited. So the sorry nature Pakistan as a ‘negotiated state’, in which authority is a matter of negotiation, compromise, pressure and violence, not formal rules, is exemplified by the area of law and justice."
What a sorry state of affairs that is, unfortunately he could not have put it in better words.
He also kind of denies the western views that Pakistan might suffer from Islamic revolution or some people who are afraid that Pakistan might me liberalized. In words of a young Lahore man Ali Hasan, he sponges off all these assumptions
“If I were to jump on a box and preach revolution with the best programme in the world, you know what would happen? First, people from all the other provinces would say that we can’t follow him, he’s a Punjabi. Then most of the Punjabis would say, we can’t follow him, he’s from such and such biradari. Even in my own village, half of the people would say something like, I can’t follow him, his grandfather beat my uncle in a fight over land. If you preach Islamic revolution most people won’t follow you they practice different kinds of Islam and worship different saints. So you see we can’t unite behind a revolution because we can’t unite behind anything.
It covers more or less all the plights of this nation on provincial level. This book is solely about Pakistan and its coordination, within a province and between provinces. Also the provincial parties and their damaging roles. I mean they hardly ever play any other kind.
The thing that most shocked me in this book was his take on MQM. It was most surprising. He nearly seems to be in awe of MQM. Which is little weird. Maybe they were not that bloody pre 2010, I don’t know. However I think his tilt towards MQM might be because, they are, unlike PPP and PMLN not feudal or big family run party. It is more of a middle class party to him. What he termed as modern urban politics. I still can’t understand how that is better in wake of what they do but he did play down their open killings in Karachi “a lot”. Again maybe at that time period they were not so active. Also he does not believe in any speculations and against MQM, real evidence is hard to come by or did before Rangers.
There is this reference which sort of describes a lot about our society,
Imran Aslam of Geo described what he called ‘the Sharifs’ Pakistan as
“Conservative with small ‘c’. It is a form of religion that gives stability and comfort but is not fanatical, and is peace with itself – unlike our psychologically and culturally tortured liberals, and equally tortured Islamists.”
It might make more sense in the context he was speaking, but still kind of does, doesn’t it?
This book is worth a read. Highly recommended, very well written done and one gets the feeling he gets Pakistani mentality, well he really tried to at least.
April 15, 2013
Superb analysis of Pakistan's history, politics, social norms and even insight into Pakistanis. Have I missed anything? It's basically all one needs to know about about Pakistan. Lieven seem to know Pakistan than us Pakistanis. It's a shame that no Pakistani has written a neutral and candid analysis of Pakistan like that before.
June 18, 2017
Writer' choice of words is stinging some times, yet amusing. Anatol ,knows how to grasp readers' attention. On most accounts I agree with writer because of my sheer ignorance towards the matter or because of my personal liking i.e I highly support the revival of Jirga system.
One really enjoys laughters while learning methods of forensics implied by Local SHO ..Lamyian Paa loo, chitrool karo sab bolay ga.
. Its actually a mockery to non existent forensic system in Pakistan.
I disagree with writer's definition of development where he has praised motorways ( motorway always connects two economic hubs to boost the trade i.e it should have been between Karachi and Lahore , if I were to call it a development things). Around these Fine , carpeted motorways, people are living in the same muddy houses with malarial gutters at their despise. Life of medieval London I dare say.
I strongly disagree with views on killing the prostitute , Does a woman selling her meat for living must reach that fate?
Good Thing - Sea drop in a desert
A social researcher telling the direction where the country is headed. An eye opener that we seriously lack sociologists to study our own society or to persevere our cultural trends.
Bad thing- A Flaw
As writers says , I learn nothing and I learn everything in my stay of 7-years in Pakistan.
With hand lens of just 7years , issues and solutions cant be magnified.
June 20, 2012
I recommend this book to anyone who is tired of hearing about Pakistan as a failed state. This book gives a realistic snapshot of what the recent political, social, and cultural situations are in Islamic Republic of Pakistan. I highly enjoyed reading a journalistic account of Pakistan with a sprinkle of history. For a non-Pakistani, or anyone not interested in political parties of Pakistan, it may feel like a bit of a drag. In my opinion, the author does both Pakistan and the West justice. He is not particularly biased towards one view.
This should serve as an excellent guide for anyone trying to look at Pakistan objectively, and as a primer for modern history of the South Asian region.
This should serve as an excellent guide for anyone trying to look at Pakistan objectively, and as a primer for modern history of the South Asian region.
November 13, 2022
What do you get when a Cambridge Educated researcher and historian lives in Pakistan for more than 15 years and decides to share his educated insights ? You get a masterpiece.
Anatol Lieven's current book is basically a compendium , a synthesis, a very very intense one, of years upon years of travelling throughout Pakistan and interviewing people from all walks of life from tribal chieftains, policemen , peasantry, taliban fighters, political party members to senior officials , army generals , officers, mayors down to the mere private , ISI(Pakistan secret services) operatives , police intendents , constables to businessmen , shop keepers, blue collard workers, laywers, judges, mullahs, pirs...you get the idea.
So on one hand you have this dimension of such a wide and varied range of people telling their stories and how they see things and on the other you also have each province/region of Pakistan being firmly delimitated , explained by all accounts be it poltiical , military, exonomical , religious , social, and the cherry on the cake , how each province interacts and views the other and all internal tensions that appear whenever there is a ecological disaster or an insurgency both of which can displace millions of people.
This book has totally rocked me , and i will be forever grateful that such people still exist , people that do the hard meticulous work of writing first grade non-fiction literature, people that research and research and research more across multiple years, just to synthetise everything in a mere 600 pages. I was wrong believeing everything contemporary is trashy self development non-books and easy-to-sell-buzzword bonanzas.
This one is one of those rare ones so treat it with care and don't rush through it !
A couple of ideas that stuck with me:
- Pakistan is a working chaos, a negotiated state, a state where you need to take into consideration each party of the transaction,a state where patronage, prestige and above all clan affiliation is everything. For example: on one hand you have a city like Karachi, a pearl of modernity at the Indian Ocean, a city founded by Mohajirs(muslim that fled India) on the other you have the NWFP (north western frontier province) where people are at peace only when they wage war on anybody that represents authority, be it US on their relatives in Afghanistan or the Police and Pakistani Army.
In one city you have modern IT and Road infrastructure while in the other crime is negociated via a community assembly and does not result in punishment but in compensation, girls are killed for choosing suitors outside their clan and Taliban can always find a safe heaven and a regrouping ground while running from US forces.
-Everything appears to point that nothing is working , the state services are abysmal , there are insurgencies upon insurgencies , there are 3 juridical codes: state law, sharia law and local law (e.g Pashtunwali) , huge portions of the country are subjected to tribal feuds and mediated via Jirgas (community gatherings act as both the law givers and enforcers). Despite all this, despite a this chaos, Pakistan manages to negotiate and keep the state flowing, by using negotiation, bribery as well as brute force whenever it needs to.
-Sharia is basically a written law code , the code that Muhammad placed upon the tribes to unform and get rid of local barbaric customs. Sharia is not primitive compared to what local traditions can be , like in Pakistan. Sharia is actually a sign of modernity of uniformity.
- We do not realize the importance of having a single supreme judicial authority in the country, a single organ that can change and keep tabs of the law code. Pakistan has 3: sharia , state law (based on former british administrations) and local law. Everybody is exasperated that the state does nothing and solves nothing (including delivering justice to criminals) while the typical Pakistani follows whichever code benefits him in any given situation.
- Pakistan helps the Talibans from Afghanistan even if that means supplying weapons and intelligence , hsoting them , despite US warnings, because its main fear is a non-taliban India- friendly gonverment in Afghanistan , a gonverment that could (backed by India) attack Pakistan from the west , while India does it from the East in a two pronged assault.
There are too many things to add but i will stop here. The book is beyond terrific and i recommend it wholeheartedly !
-
Anatol Lieven's current book is basically a compendium , a synthesis, a very very intense one, of years upon years of travelling throughout Pakistan and interviewing people from all walks of life from tribal chieftains, policemen , peasantry, taliban fighters, political party members to senior officials , army generals , officers, mayors down to the mere private , ISI(Pakistan secret services) operatives , police intendents , constables to businessmen , shop keepers, blue collard workers, laywers, judges, mullahs, pirs...you get the idea.
So on one hand you have this dimension of such a wide and varied range of people telling their stories and how they see things and on the other you also have each province/region of Pakistan being firmly delimitated , explained by all accounts be it poltiical , military, exonomical , religious , social, and the cherry on the cake , how each province interacts and views the other and all internal tensions that appear whenever there is a ecological disaster or an insurgency both of which can displace millions of people.
This book has totally rocked me , and i will be forever grateful that such people still exist , people that do the hard meticulous work of writing first grade non-fiction literature, people that research and research and research more across multiple years, just to synthetise everything in a mere 600 pages. I was wrong believeing everything contemporary is trashy self development non-books and easy-to-sell-buzzword bonanzas.
This one is one of those rare ones so treat it with care and don't rush through it !
A couple of ideas that stuck with me:
- Pakistan is a working chaos, a negotiated state, a state where you need to take into consideration each party of the transaction,a state where patronage, prestige and above all clan affiliation is everything. For example: on one hand you have a city like Karachi, a pearl of modernity at the Indian Ocean, a city founded by Mohajirs(muslim that fled India) on the other you have the NWFP (north western frontier province) where people are at peace only when they wage war on anybody that represents authority, be it US on their relatives in Afghanistan or the Police and Pakistani Army.
In one city you have modern IT and Road infrastructure while in the other crime is negociated via a community assembly and does not result in punishment but in compensation, girls are killed for choosing suitors outside their clan and Taliban can always find a safe heaven and a regrouping ground while running from US forces.
-Everything appears to point that nothing is working , the state services are abysmal , there are insurgencies upon insurgencies , there are 3 juridical codes: state law, sharia law and local law (e.g Pashtunwali) , huge portions of the country are subjected to tribal feuds and mediated via Jirgas (community gatherings act as both the law givers and enforcers). Despite all this, despite a this chaos, Pakistan manages to negotiate and keep the state flowing, by using negotiation, bribery as well as brute force whenever it needs to.
-Sharia is basically a written law code , the code that Muhammad placed upon the tribes to unform and get rid of local barbaric customs. Sharia is not primitive compared to what local traditions can be , like in Pakistan. Sharia is actually a sign of modernity of uniformity.
- We do not realize the importance of having a single supreme judicial authority in the country, a single organ that can change and keep tabs of the law code. Pakistan has 3: sharia , state law (based on former british administrations) and local law. Everybody is exasperated that the state does nothing and solves nothing (including delivering justice to criminals) while the typical Pakistani follows whichever code benefits him in any given situation.
- Pakistan helps the Talibans from Afghanistan even if that means supplying weapons and intelligence , hsoting them , despite US warnings, because its main fear is a non-taliban India- friendly gonverment in Afghanistan , a gonverment that could (backed by India) attack Pakistan from the west , while India does it from the East in a two pronged assault.
There are too many things to add but i will stop here. The book is beyond terrific and i recommend it wholeheartedly !
-
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 30, 2019
Going through it, the book seems to be authored by a Pakistani official writer if analyzed critically.
The writer explains that neither religious extremism nor Islamist Jihadists with their gross-root level supports, nor population explosion nor other factor, but climate change will knock out Pakistan... The fact is that Islamist extremism is eroding the foundations of the country more dangerously and rapidly than climate change.
Apologetic and sympathetic book.
Anyhow, a book should be read by anyone who will proceed to work in Pakistan.
The writer explains that neither religious extremism nor Islamist Jihadists with their gross-root level supports, nor population explosion nor other factor, but climate change will knock out Pakistan... The fact is that Islamist extremism is eroding the foundations of the country more dangerously and rapidly than climate change.
Apologetic and sympathetic book.
Anyhow, a book should be read by anyone who will proceed to work in Pakistan.
February 5, 2012
An interesting read, especially timely after the Bin Laden killing. The book makes what seems like strange and perverse behavior on the part of the Pakistani government understandable. Pakistan is not a nation in the way we in the west understand the term, but more a collection of competing groups, separated by ethnicity, tradition, and politics, and lacking the traditional legal framework we associate with modern governments.
November 26, 2021
Book: Pakistan: A Hard Country
Author: Anatol Lieven
Publisher: Public Affairs; 1st edition (12 April 2011)
Language: English
Hardcover: 592 pages
Item Weight: 885 g
Dimensions: 15.24 x 5.72 x 22.86 cm
Price:
এ দেশের জন্মেই গলদ।
তবুও দেশ অর্থাৎ একটি বিরাটাকার জনগোষ্ঠীর কালেকটিভই তো -- হেরে যাওয়া দেশ পাকিস্তান। কত বিচিত্র, বিভিন্ন নামে ডাকা হয় তাকে - 'failed', 'hazardous', 'ungovernable', 'toxic', 'terrifying'!! এম যে আকবর বলেছেন 'tinderbox', কেউ কেউ বলেছেন 'forever on the brink', 'in the eye of the storm', কিংবা 'downhill into anarchy and bedlam'.
তবুও দেশ অর্থাৎ মানুষ। পাকিস্তানের মানুষের দীর্ঘশ্বাস মিশে রয়েছে এই বইয়ের প্রত্যেক ছত্রে। ভূমিকায় লেখক বলছেন : This book is intended to describe and analyse both Pakistan’s internal problems and the sources of Pakistan’s internal resilience. In consequence, it of course deals extensively with the threat from the Pakistani Taleban....
শুরু করা যাক মৌলানা আজাদের পাকিস্তানের জন্ম ও ভবিষ্যৎ প্রসঙ্গে উক্তি দিয়ে।
১৯৪৬ সালের ১৭ই জুলাইয়ের একটি প্রেস রিলিজে পাকিস্তানে বসবাসকারী মুসলমানদের উদ্দেশ্যে মৌলা���া লিখছেন:
'Muslims would awaken overnight and discover that they have become aliens and foreigners, backward industrially, educationally and economically; they will be left to the mercies of what would become an unadulterated Hindu Raj...'
মৌলানা আরও লিখছেন:
'In the Hindustan State there will remain three-and-a-half crore Muslims scattered in small minorities all over the land. With 17 per cent in U.P. 12 per cent in Bihar and 9 per cent in Madras, they will be weaker than they are today in the Hindu majority provinces. They have had their homelands in these regions for almost a thousand years and built up most well-known centres of Muslim culture and civilization there.
On the other hand, their position within the Pakistan State will be vulnerable and weak. Nowhere in Pakistan will their majority be comparable to the Hindu majority in the Hindustan State. In fact, their majority will be so slight that it will be offset by the economical, educational and political lead enjoyed by non-Muslims in these areas.....'
পাকিস্তানের অস্তিত্বের কূটাভাস ও জটিলতা প্রসঙ্গে আলোচনার সূত্রপাত করেছেন লেখক আনাতোল লীভেন।
কেমন সে অস্তিত্ব? কেমনই-বা এই রাষ্ট্র? লেখক তাঁর সন্ধানে ফিরে গিয়েছেন ১৯৪৭-এ পাকিস্তানের জন্মলগ্নে, কিংবা ১৯৪০-এ, যখন মুসলিম লীগ সুস্পষ্টভাবে দ্বিজাতিতত্ত্বের ভিত্তিতে মুসলিমদের জন্য আলাদা রাষ্ট্রের দাবি জানালো।
জন্ম ইস্তক দ্বিত্ব।
ব্যারিস্টার মোহাম্মদ আলি জিন্নাহ কখনও, এমনকি নিজের ঘনিষ্ঠতম সহকর্মীদের কাছেও তাঁর পাকিস্তান দাবির স্পষ্ট ব্যাখ্যা দেওয়ার প্রয়োজন বোধ করেননি। জনগণের কাছে অতি পরিচিত 'লাহাের প্রস্তাবে'ও দেশভাগের ন্যূনতম উল্লেখ করা হয়নি।
বস্তুত ‘পাকিস্তান’ ধারণার অস্পষ্টতাই এই স্লোগানকে নিরতিশয় শক্তিশালী ও সম্ভাবনাসূচক করে তুলেছিল। জিন্নাহর যত অনুগামী, পাকিস্তান সম্পর্কে প্রায় ততগুলােই ধারণা। একাধারে জিন্নাহর কাছে ‘পাকিস্তান’ শব্দের অর্থ হল, ভারত ফেডারেশনের মধ্যে সব কিছুর ঊর্ধ্বে মুসলমানদের জন্য ব্যাপক মাত্রায় রাজনৈতিক ক্ষমতা। সম্পূর্ণ বিপ্রতীপে তাঁর অধিকাংশ অনুসারীদের কাছে 'পাকিস্তান' হল একটা 'ধর্মীয় আদর্শ'; 'পাকিস্তান' অর্থাৎ ‘দার-উল-ইসলাম’-এর স্বপ্ন, একটি প্রত্যাদেশপ্রাপ্ত ভূমি, এমনই এক বেহেশ্ত যেখানে ইসলাম তার মর্যাদা পুনরুদ্ধার করে বিকশিত হবে।
সুতরাং জন্মলগ্নেই উত্থাপিত হলো একটি প্রশ্ন - মুসলিমদের জন্য রাষ্ট্র? না কি মুসলিম রাষ্ট্র?
পাকিস্তানের কনস্টিটিউয়েন্ট এসেম্বলির বিবরণ ঘেঁটে লীভেন দেখিয়েছেন কীভাবে জন্মলগ্ন থেকেই আপাত আধুনিকতাবাদী জিন্নাহ আর ধর্মীয় নেতাদের মধ্যে এ প্রশ্ন নিয়ে টানাপড়েন চলেছিল। তা ছাড়া কেমন হবে এই নতুন রাষ্ট্র, এই প্রশ্ন নিয়েও পাকিস্তানের কেন্দ্রীয় সরকারের সঙ্গে অঙ্গ রাজ্যগুলির বিবাদ।
এই বিবাদ বালুচিস্তান থেকে অন্য প্রান্তে পূর্ব পাকিস্তান আজকের বাংলাদেশ পর্যন্ত বিস্তৃত এবং যার ফলে বিদ্রোহ কখনো বালুচিস্তানের, কখনও সিন্ধের মোহাজিরদের এবং অবশেষে পূর্বপ্রান্তে ১৯৭১ সালে পাক-ভারত তৃতীয় যুদ্ধ এবং বাংলাদেশের জন্ম।
লীভেন বাংলাদেশের উদয়কে পাকিস্তান রাষ্ট্রের সবচেয়ে বড় পরাজয় বলছেন ও এর জন্য দায়ী অবশ্যই ভারত সম্বন্ধে পাকিস্তানি রাষ্ট্র-পরিচালকদের তীব্র বিদ্বেষ।
লিভেন তাঁর বইটি মূল চার অধ্যায়ে বিভক্ত করেছেন। প্রথম অধ্যায় Land, People and History-তে লেখক বর্ণনা করেছেন পাকিস্তানের ভূগোল, রাজনৈতিক উদ্ভবের ইতিহাস, অর্থনীতি ইত্যাদি। দ্বিতীয় অধ্যায়ের শিরোনাম Structures। এই অধ্যায়ে লীভেন আলোচনা করেছেন পাকিস্তানের রাষ্ট্রব্যবস্থা, গণতন্ত্র, সামরিক ব্যবস্থা প্রসঙ্গে। তৃতীয় অধ্যায় অর্থাৎ The Provinces-এ লেখক আলোচনা করেছেন মূলত পঞ্জাব , সিন্ধ , বালুচিস্তান ও পাক-পাখতুনওয়াড়া সম্পর্কে। চতুর্থ ও শেষ অধ্যায়ের শিরোনাম The Taleban। তালিবানের উত্থান, পাকিস্তানের রাজনীতি ও সমাজজীবনে তালিবানের প্রভাব, উত্থানের বৈশ্বিক প্রেক্ষিত, ইত্যাদি প্রসঙ্গে আলোচনা করা হয়েছে এই অধ্যায়ে।
প্রথম অধ্যায়ের একটি বৃহদাংশ লেখক ব্যয় করেছেন পাকিস্তানে গণতন্ত্রের প্রসঙ্গে।
গণতন্ত্রের প্রাতিষ্ঠানিক রূপ নিয়ে আজও বিতর্কের শেষ নেই। কিন্তু এ বিষয়ে অধিকাংশ পন্ডিতই একমত যে গণতন্ত্রের আদর্শ গ্রীক দার্শনিকদের মনেই প্রথম রূপপরিগ্রহ করে। যে যুগে চারপাশের সভ্য সমাজে কোনও না কোনও ধরনের স্বৈরতান্ত্রিক ব্যবস্থা অত্যন্ত সুপ্রতিষ্ঠিত, সেখানে গণতন্ত্রের ধারণা গড়ে ওঠে কীসের জোরে? গণতন্ত্রের মূল প্রত্যয় ব্যক্তিস্বাতন্ত্র্যর্, যুক্তিশীলতা, পারস্পরিক সহনশীলতা এবং সহযোগিতা। এগুলো ব্যতীত যথার্থ মানবীয় সভ্যতা অকল্পনীয়। আর এর প্রায় একটিও পাকিস্তানের রাষ্ট্রব্যবস্থায় দূরদূরান্ত অবধি খুঁজে পাওয়া যায় না।
লীভেন পর্যালোচনা করে প্রমাণ করছেন যে পাকিস্তানে গণতন্ত্র কোনওদিনই জমি খুঁজে পায়নি। নিকটতম প্রতিবেশী ভারতের সাথে তুল্যমূল্যের প্রশ্ন স্বভাবতই এসে গিয়েছে।
১৯৭০ সালের ৭ ডিসেম্বর পাকিস্তানের প্রথম সাধারণ নির্বাচন সংঘটিত হয়। ভারতে ইতিমধ্যে চারটি সাধারণ নির্বাচন হয়ে গিয়েছে, এবং পঞ্চমটি হওয়ার অপেক্ষায়। এই নির্বাচনে পাকিস্তানি সংসদের মোট আসন ছিল ৩০০টি। লীভেন দেখিয়েছেন যে সমস্যার বীজ লুকিয়ে ছিল এখানেও। জনসংখ্যার ভিত্তিতে আসন পূর্ব পাকিস্তানে ১৬০টি ও পশ্চিম পাকিস্তানে ১৪০টি। নির্বাচনে সবাইকে অবাক করে মুজিবুর রহমানের আওয়ামী লীগ পেয়ে গেল পূর্ব পাকিস্তানে ১৫৮টি আসন। অর্থাৎ, একক ক্ষমতায় পাকিস্তানের প্রধানমন্ত্রী হবেন শেখ মুজিব এবং সরকার গড়বে আওয়ামী লীগ। অবশ্যই তা পছন্দের নয় পাকিস্তানের জন্মলগ্ন থেকে শাসনক্ষমতায় থাকা সামরিক বাহিনীর এবং পশ্চিম পাকিস্তানের প্রধান দল জুলফিকর আলি ভুট্টোর পিপিপি-র। সুতরাং, কী ভাবে আওয়ামী লীগকে বাগে আনা যায়, তারা সেই চেষ্টা চালাল কিছু দিন; এবং তা না পেরে সামরিক বাহিনীর হস্তক্ষেপ, গণহত্যা এবং হিন্দু বিতাড়ন।
এই বইয়ের একটি পরিপুষ্ট অংশ জুড়ে রয়েছে পাকিস্তানের সেনাবাহিনী ও তার প্রভাব। রয়েছে তাদের অত্যাচারের নানা গল্প। পাকিস্তান আমলে হিন্দুদের উপর আক্রমণ, অত্যাচার, হত্যা, ধর্ষণ ও চরম বৈষম্য— সবই চলছিল এক সঙ্গে। একই সঙ্গে ছিল ভারত সরকারের ও পশ্চিমবঙ্গের নির্লিপ্ততা, ফলে পাকিস্তান সৃষ্টি থেকে ১৯৭০— এই ২৩ বছরে ১৯৫১-র ২২% হিন্দু ১৯৭০-এ নেমে এসেছিল প্রায় ১৫%-এ। কিন্তু ১৯৭০-এর নির্বাচন দেখিয়ে দিল, জনসংখ্যার কিছু আধিক্যের জন্য পূর্ব পাকিস্তানে জাতীয় সংসদে বেশি আসন থেকে যাচ্ছে এবং তার সুফল পেয়েছে আওয়ামী লীগ।
পাক প্রশাসনের মদদপুষ্ট সেনাবাহিনীর মতানুযায়ী এই সমস্যার আশু সমাধান: হিন্দু বিতাড়নের কাজটিকে দ্রুত সম্পূর্ণ করে পূর্ব পশ্চিমের জনসংখ্যার বৈষম্যকে দূর করা। তা করার একটি পথ যথেচ্ছ গণহত্যা, নারী নির্যাতন, ধর্মীয় স্থান ধ্বংস, সম্প্রদায়ের সম্পত্তি ধ্বংস, সমাজের বিশিষ্ট ব্যক্তিদের হত্যা— এই সবকেই এক কথায় রাষ্ট্রপুঞ্জের সংজ্ঞায় বলা হয় গণহত্যা বা জেনোসাইড।
এই কাজটিই পাকিস্তানি সেনাবাহিনী প্রায় সম্পন্ন করে ফেলে কয়েক মাসের মধ্যেই।
গোটা বইয়ে বারে বারে এসেছে বালুচদের রক্তক্ষয়ী সংগ্রামের প্রসঙ্গ। লীভেনের আলোচনা শুরু হয়েছে ১৮৫৭ সাল থেকে। ১৮৫৭ সালের মহাবিদ্রোহ ব্যর্থ হয়ে গিয়েছে। গোটা ভারতীয় উপমহাদেশে ব্রিটিশ শাসক জাঁকিয়ে বসেছে।
কিন্তু বালুচ অঞ্চল তখনও নিজেদের মতো করে স্বাধীন। ব্রিটিশ বাহিনীর কাছে বালুচরা প্রথম নতি স্বীকার করল অনেক পরে। ১৮৭৬ সালে। কালাত চুক্তির মাধ্যমে চার জন স্বাধীন শাসকের (খান) হাতে থাকা চারটি বালুচ অঞ্চল কালাত, খারন, মাকরান এবং লাসবেলা ব্রিটিশ রাজত্বের বশ্যতা স্বীকার করে। এই চারটি অঞ্চলই ছিল বালুচিস্তানের মূল অংশ।
গোল বাঁধল স্বাধীনতার পর।
বালুচিস্তানের চার স্বাধীন রাজ্য ব্রিটিশের কাছে বশ্যতা স্বীকার করলেও, আত্ননিয়ন্ত্রণের অধিকার কখনোই ছেড়ে দেয়নি। বালুচিস্তানের যে ���ংশ সরাসরি ব্রিটিশদের হাতে ছিল, ১৯৪৭ সালে পাকিস্তানের জন্মের পর সেই অংশ ব্রিটিশরা পাকিস্তানের অন্তর্ভুক্ত করে। যে চারটি স্বাধীন বালোচ রাজ্য ব্রিটিশের বশ্যতা স্বীকার করেছিল, তারা পরে ধীরে ধীরে পাকিস্তানে যোগ দেয়। কিন্তু শর্তসাপেক্ষে। কালাতের শাসক বা খানের সঙ্গে ১৯৪৮ সালে পাক সরকারে যে চুক্তি হয়েছিল, তাতে স্বাধীন বালোচ অঞ্চলটিকে আত্মনিয়ন্ত্রণের অধিকার বা স্বশাসন দেওয়ার কথা হয়েছিল।
জিন্নাহ নিজে সে প্রতিশ্রুতি দিয়েছিলেন।
অর্থনীতি, বিদেশনীতি এবং প্রতিরক্ষা— শুধু এই তিনটি বিষয় ইসলামাবাদের নিয়ন্ত্রণে থাকবে বলে চুক্তি হয়েছিল। বাকি সব কিছুই বালোচদের নিজেদের নিয়ন্ত্রণে থাকবে বলে স্থির হয়েছিল। কিন্তু জিন্নাহ কথা রাখেননি। পাকিস্তান পরবর্তী কালে সে চুক্তির শর্ত আর মানেনি। বালোচ মুলুকের সঙ্গে আরও নানা অঞ্চলকে যুক্ত করে, বালুচিস্তান নামে একটি অখণ্ড প্রদেশ গঠন করে তাকে পাকিস্তানের অন্য প্রদেশগুলির সঙ্গে একই আসনে বসিয়ে দেওয়া হয়।
বালোচদের আত্মনিয়ন্ত্রণের অধিকার দেওয়া হবে বলে যে চুক্তি হয়েছিল, তা ইসলামাবাদ মানতে অস্বীকার করে। পাক সরকারের এই বিশ্বাসঘাতকতাই বিশ্বাসঘাতকতাই বিদ্রোহী করে তোলে বালোচদের। সেই থেকে শুরু হওয়া লড়াই পাকিস্তানে আজও চলছে।
স্বাধীন পাকিস্তান গঠনের পর থেকে এ পর্যন্ত অনেক বার বিদ্রোহ হয়েছে বালুচিস্তানে। পাকিস্তানের নিয়ন্ত্রণ থেকে মুক্ত হওয়ার জন্য ১৯৪৮ সালেই প্রথম বার চরমে পৌঁছেছিল ক্ষোভ। শুরু হয়েছিল বিদ্রোহ। তার পর ১৯৫৮ থেকে ১৯৫৯, ১৯৬২ থেকে ১৯৬৩ এবং ১৯৭৩ থেকে ১৯৭৭ পর্যন্ত বার বার পাক সেনার বিরুদ্ধে দীর্ঘ রক্তক্ষয়ী লড়াই করেছেন বালুচ বিদ্রোহীরা।
বার বারই নির্মম দমননীতি চালিয়ে, বলপ্রয়োগ করে, বহু প্রাণ কেড়ে নিয়ে বিদ্রোহ দমিয়ে দিয়েছে পাকিস্তান।
২০০৩ সাল থেকে ফের আত্মনিয়ন্ত্রণের লড়াই শুরু করে বালোচরা। পাকিস্তানের সেনাশাসক জেনারেল পারভেজ মুশারফ বালোচ বিদ্রোহ সম্পূর্ণ শেষ করে দেওয়ার পরিকল্পনা নেন।
বালোচদের নেতা নবাব আকবর বুগটিকে ২০০৬ সালে একটি পাহাড়ের গুহার মধ্যে ঢুকে খুন করে পাক সেনা। মুশারফ ভেবেছিলেন বালোচ নবাবকে খুন করতে পারলেই শেষ হয়ে যাবে বিদ্রোহ। কিন্তু বিদ্রোহের আগুন তার পর থেকে দাবানলের মতো ছড়িয়েছে বালুচিস্তান জুড়ে। বুগটির হত্যার পর থেকে আত্মনিয়ন্ত্রণের দাবি বদলে গিয়েছে সম্পূর্ণ স্বাধীনতার সংগ্রামে।
লীভেনের আলোচনায় এসেছে মোহাজিরদের প্রসঙ্গ। পাকিস্তানের জন্ম পৃথিবীর ইতিহাসে অন্যতম বড় বাস্তুচ্যুতির সূচনা করেছিল। বাংলা ও পাঞ্জাব ভাগ হয়ে গেলে এই অঞ্চলের অধিবাসীদের জন্মভিটা ছেড়ে ঠাঁইনাড়া হয়েছিল। একইভাবে ভারতের বিহার, রাজস্থান, বোম্বে ও উত্তর প্রদেশের বহু মুসলিম ভিটা ছেড়ে পাকিস্তানের দিকে যাত্রা করে।
এর মধ্যে একটি বড়সংখ্যক অধিবাসীর ঠিকানা হয়েছিল করাচি। ১৯৪৮ সালের মে মাস নাগাদ করাচিতে প্রায় ৪ লাখ ৭০ হাজার মানুষের প্রবেশ ঘটে, যার ফলে পরার রাতারাতি করাচির ডেমোগ্রাফি বদলে যায়। এঁরাই মোহাজির।
বসবাসের প্রাথমিক পর্যায় থেকেই সরকারিভাবে মোহাজিরদের নানা সুযোগ-সুবিধা দেয়া হয়। প্রধানমন্ত্রী লিয়াকত আলী খান ছিলেন কারিগর। লিয়াকত দূরদর্শী ছিলেন এমন অপবাদ ওঁর চরম শত্রুও দেবে না।
লিয়াকতের বদান্যতায় মোট চাকরির ২১ শতাংশ মোহাজিররাই অধিকার করেছিল। এক ইউনিট নীতির কারণে সিভিল সার্ভিসে মোহাজিরদের অংশ্রগ্রহণ ক্রমে ৪৭ শতাংশে উন্নীত হয়। করাচির ১২টির মধ্যে সাতটি শিল্পপ্রতিষ্ঠানই গুজরাটি মোহাজিরদের অধিকারে ছিল।
স্বাভাবিকভাবেই মোহাজিরদের এ প্রাধান্য স্থানীয়রা বেশি দিন সহ্য করতে পারেনি।
পঞ্চাশ থেকে ষাটের দশকে সিন্ধি ও পশতুনদের সঙ্গে মোহাজিরদের বিরোধ তীব্র হতে আরম্ভ হয়। সত্তরের দশকে পাকিস্তানের পূর্বাংশের মতো পশ্চিম অংশেও বেশকিছু রাজনৈতিক সংকট উপস্থিত হয়। জুলফিকার আলী ভুট্টো ক্ষমতা লাভ করলে তিনি মোহাজিরদের প্রাধান্য হ্রাস করার সর্বাত্মক চেষ্টা করেন।
নানাভাবে হিসাব করে মোট প্রায় ১০ হাজার উর্দুভাষীর চাকরিচ্যুতি, বাধ্যতামূলক অবসর ও পদাবনতি করা হয়। পাশাপাশি একটি ভাষা-নীতি গ্রহণ করা হয় এবং এর মাধ্যমে উর্দুর পাশাপাশি সিন্ধিকে সমমর্যাদার দাপ্তরিক ভাষা হিসেবে গ্রহণ করা হয়। ভুট্টোর করা কোটা নীতি অনুসারে সিন্ধিরা মোহাজিরদের তুলনায় চাকরিবাকরিতে অধিক সুযোগ লাভ করে। একটি দীর্ঘমেয়াদি সমস্যার জন্ম হয়।
শুরু হয় আলতাফ হোসেনের আন্দোলন।
বইয়ের শেষাংশে , লেখক কাশ্মীর সমস্যা থেকে নিয়ে শুরু করে তালিবানের উত্থান অবধি বিবরণ দিয়েছেন।
এতে নতুন তথ্য যে অনেক আছে তা নয়, যেটা আছে তা হল নিরপেক্ষ দৃষ্টিভঙ্গি আর ঐতিহাসিক তথ্য নির্ভরতা। এই বইয়ের সবচেয়ে বড় গুন্ , তথ্য আছে , তত্ত্বের জটিলতা নেই। বইয়ের এই চতুর্থ অংশে লেখক তালিবানের উদ্ভব ও প্রভাব বোঝাতে গিয়ে আলোচনা করেছেন যে বিষয়গুলি নিয়ে, সেগুলি মূলত;
১) পাকিস্তানে ইসলামি জেহাদিদের অবস্থান ,
২) রাষ্ট্র পরিচালনায় ইসলামি জেহাদিদের প্রভাব ,
৩) গণতন্ত্রের সঙ্গে সামরিক শাসকগোষ্ঠীর দ্বন্ধ ,
৪) তালিবানের আঁতুরঘর পাকিস্তান ,
৫) ভারত পাকিস্তান সম্পর্ক।
স্বাধীনতার পর থেকেই গণতন্ত্রের ভিত মজবুত হয়ে ওঠার সুযোগ পায়নি পাকিস্তানে। তারই জন্য সেনাবাহিনী আগাগোড়া পাক প্রশাসনের মাথায় চড়ে বসেছে। আর পাকিস্তানের নাগরিকরাও তাতে আস্থাশীল হয়ে উঠেছেন।
কিন্তু সামরিক শাসন যে কোনওদিনই পাকিস্তানকে এক উন্নত সমাজব্যবস্থার দিকে নিয়ে যেতে পারবে না এই আশংকায় শেষ হয়েছে ২০১১ সালে লিখিত এই বই।
বইয়ের লেখক ৯/১১ দেখতে পাওয়ার আগেই এই বই প্রকাশ পায়। তারপর সিন্ধু নদী বেয়ে বয়ে গিয়েছে অনেক জল।
আগ বাড়িয়ে কাশ্মীরের নিয়ন্ত্রণরেখায় উরির ভারতীয় সেনা-ছাউনিতে হানা দিয়ে ঘুমন্ত সৈন্যদের হত্যা করেছে পাক সেনাবাহিনী। উরি হামলার প্রেক্ষিতে পাক-অধিকৃত কাশ্মীরে জঙ্গি-ঘাঁটি নির্মূল করতে ভারত ‘সার্জিক্যাল স্ট্রাইক’ করেছে।
জঙ্গি হামলা হয়েছে পাঠানকোটে। সমগ্র বিশ্ব দেখেছে যে পাকিস্তান হঠাৎ করে একা হয়ে গিয়েছে। পঠানকোট জঙ্গি হামলার পর কোনও দেশ ইসলামাবাদের পাশে দাঁড়ায়নি। এমনকী ঘনিষ্ঠ মিত্র চিনও কড়া ভাষায় নিন্দা করেছে পঠানকোট হামলার। তার মধ্যেই আচমকা পাকিস্তানের উপরেই উপর্যুপরি হামলা শুরু হয়েছে। আফগানিস্তানের জালালাবাদে পাক দূতাবাসে হামলা হয়েছে। পাকিস্তানের কোয়েটায় বড়সড় জঙ্গি হানায় পাকিস্তানের নিরাপত্তা বাহিনীর জওয়ানদের দেহ ছিন্নভিন্ন হয়ে গিয়েছে। পাকিস্তানের সংবাদমাধ্যমের দফতরে গ্রেনেড হামলা হয়েছে।
নওয়াজ শরীফ সরকার সরে গিয়ে এসেছে ইমরান খানের সরকার। আফঘানিস্তানে পুনরায় বহাল হয়েছে তালিবান।
এবং কালের অমোঘ নিয়মে ভারতে এসেছে নাগরিকত্ব সংশোধনী বিল। ইতিহাসের দ্বারস্থ হওয়ার তাগিদের লীভেনের বইটি অমূল্য।
পাকিস্তান আমাদের প্রতিবেশী। তাদের উত্থান পতনের সঙ্গেই জড়িয়ে রয়েছে আমাদের উপমহাদেশের geopolitics।
আলোচনায় ইতি টানবো ভারত পাকিস্তানের মধ্যে দুটি চুক্তির কথা বলে।
প্রথম চুক্তিটি (নেহরু-লিয়াকত চুক্তি) স্বাক্ষরিত হয়েছিল ৮ এপ্রিল ১৯৫০। পরবর্তী কালে ভারতের প্রধানমন্ত্রী নেহরু এবং পাকিস্তানের প্রধানমন্ত্রী ফিরোজ খান নুনের মধ্যে নেহরু-নুন চুক্তি হয়েছিল। দুটি চুক্তিতেই বলা হয়েছিল স্ব স্ব দেশে ধর্মীয় সংখ্যালঘুরা অত্যাচারিত হল�� যে দেশে তাঁরা প্রবেশ করবেন সেই দেশে তাঁদের শরণার্থীর মর্যাদা দেওয়া হবে।
প্রসঙ্গত , এই চুক্তির বিরোধিতা করেছিলেন শ্যামাপ্রসাদ মুখোপাধ্যায়-সহ হিন্দু মহাসভার নেতারা। দুই পঞ্জাবের মতো তাঁরা পূর্ব পাকিস্তান ও পূর্ব ভারতের মধ্যে ধর্মভিত্তিক জনবিনিময় করার দাবি করেছিলেন। আর পাশাপাশি তাঁদের অনেকের দাবি ছিল পূর্ব পাকিস্তান থেকে আরও জমি— যাতে এ দেশে জায়গার অভাব না হয়। পাকিস্তান এই প্রস্তাবে আপত্তি করলে নেহরু সরকারের যুদ্ধ ঘোষণা করা উচিত, এই দাবি করেন হিন্দু মহাসভার নেতারা। যুদ্ধ বা জনবিনিময়ের পথে না হেঁটে যখন নেহরু সরকার এই চুক্তি সই করে, শ্যামাপ্রসাদ অবিলম্বে মন্ত্রিসভা থেকে পদত্যাগ করেন।
উপরোক্ত দুই চুক্তি অনুযায়ী, পূর্ব বাংলা থেকে অত্যাচারিত হয়ে ভারতে আসা হিন্দু বৌদ্ধ খ্রিস্টান ইত্যাদি সম্প্রদায়ের মানুষদের শরণার্থী হিসাবে গণ্য করতে হবে। কিন্তু পূর্ব বাংলা থেকে কোনও মুসলমান ধর্মীয় অত্যাচারের কারণে ভারতে আসেননি, এসেছেন অন্য কারণে। রাষ্ট্রপুঞ্জের সনদ অথবা উপরোক্ত দুটি চুক্তি অনুযায়ী বাংলাদেশ থেকে ভারতে আগত মুসলমানরা তাই অনুপ্রবেশকারী।
১৯৭১ সালে বাংলাদেশ স্বাধীন হওয়ার পর এ সংক্রান্ত আরও একটি চুক্তি হয় ভারত ও বাংলাদেশের মধ্যে, যা ইন্দিরা-মুজিব চুক্তি নামে পরিচিত।
ভারত চুক্তির ধারাগুলি মানলেও পাকিস্তান ���র বাংলাদেশ এগুলি কখনও মানেনি।
লীভেনের বইয়ের মতোই এই পর্যালোচনা শেষ করছি এক গভীর প্রশ্নচিহ্ন দিয়ে।
অলমিতি।
Author: Anatol Lieven
Publisher: Public Affairs; 1st edition (12 April 2011)
Language: English
Hardcover: 592 pages
Item Weight: 885 g
Dimensions: 15.24 x 5.72 x 22.86 cm
Price:
এ দেশের জন্মেই গলদ।
তবুও দেশ অর্থাৎ একটি বিরাটাকার জনগোষ্ঠীর কালেকটিভই তো -- হেরে যাওয়া দেশ পাকিস্তান। কত বিচিত্র, বিভিন্ন নামে ডাকা হয় তাকে - 'failed', 'hazardous', 'ungovernable', 'toxic', 'terrifying'!! এম যে আকবর বলেছেন 'tinderbox', কেউ কেউ বলেছেন 'forever on the brink', 'in the eye of the storm', কিংবা 'downhill into anarchy and bedlam'.
তবুও দেশ অর্থাৎ মানুষ। পাকিস্তানের মানুষের দীর্ঘশ্বাস মিশে রয়েছে এই বইয়ের প্রত্যেক ছত্রে। ভূমিকায় লেখক বলছেন : This book is intended to describe and analyse both Pakistan’s internal problems and the sources of Pakistan’s internal resilience. In consequence, it of course deals extensively with the threat from the Pakistani Taleban....
শুরু করা যাক মৌলানা আজাদের পাকিস্তানের জন্ম ও ভবিষ্যৎ প্রসঙ্গে উক্তি দিয়ে।
১৯৪৬ সালের ১৭ই জুলাইয়ের একটি প্রেস রিলিজে পাকিস্তানে বসবাসকারী মুসলমানদের উদ্দেশ্যে মৌলা���া লিখছেন:
'Muslims would awaken overnight and discover that they have become aliens and foreigners, backward industrially, educationally and economically; they will be left to the mercies of what would become an unadulterated Hindu Raj...'
মৌলানা আরও লিখছেন:
'In the Hindustan State there will remain three-and-a-half crore Muslims scattered in small minorities all over the land. With 17 per cent in U.P. 12 per cent in Bihar and 9 per cent in Madras, they will be weaker than they are today in the Hindu majority provinces. They have had their homelands in these regions for almost a thousand years and built up most well-known centres of Muslim culture and civilization there.
On the other hand, their position within the Pakistan State will be vulnerable and weak. Nowhere in Pakistan will their majority be comparable to the Hindu majority in the Hindustan State. In fact, their majority will be so slight that it will be offset by the economical, educational and political lead enjoyed by non-Muslims in these areas.....'
পাকিস্তানের অস্তিত্বের কূটাভাস ও জটিলতা প্রসঙ্গে আলোচনার সূত্রপাত করেছেন লেখক আনাতোল লীভেন।
কেমন সে অস্তিত্ব? কেমনই-বা এই রাষ্ট্র? লেখক তাঁর সন্ধানে ফিরে গিয়েছেন ১৯৪৭-এ পাকিস্তানের জন্মলগ্নে, কিংবা ১৯৪০-এ, যখন মুসলিম লীগ সুস্পষ্টভাবে দ্বিজাতিতত্ত্বের ভিত্তিতে মুসলিমদের জন্য আলাদা রাষ্ট্রের দাবি জানালো।
জন্ম ইস্তক দ্বিত্ব।
ব্যারিস্টার মোহাম্মদ আলি জিন্নাহ কখনও, এমনকি নিজের ঘনিষ্ঠতম সহকর্মীদের কাছেও তাঁর পাকিস্তান দাবির স্পষ্ট ব্যাখ্যা দেওয়ার প্রয়োজন বোধ করেননি। জনগণের কাছে অতি পরিচিত 'লাহাের প্রস্তাবে'ও দেশভাগের ন্যূনতম উল্লেখ করা হয়নি।
বস্তুত ‘পাকিস্তান’ ধারণার অস্পষ্টতাই এই স্লোগানকে নিরতিশয় শক্তিশালী ও সম্ভাবনাসূচক করে তুলেছিল। জিন্নাহর যত অনুগামী, পাকিস্তান সম্পর্কে প্রায় ততগুলােই ধারণা। একাধারে জিন্নাহর কাছে ‘পাকিস্তান’ শব্দের অর্থ হল, ভারত ফেডারেশনের মধ্যে সব কিছুর ঊর্ধ্বে মুসলমানদের জন্য ব্যাপক মাত্রায় রাজনৈতিক ক্ষমতা। সম্পূর্ণ বিপ্রতীপে তাঁর অধিকাংশ অনুসারীদের কাছে 'পাকিস্তান' হল একটা 'ধর্মীয় আদর্শ'; 'পাকিস্তান' অর্থাৎ ‘দার-উল-ইসলাম’-এর স্বপ্ন, একটি প্রত্যাদেশপ্রাপ্ত ভূমি, এমনই এক বেহেশ্ত যেখানে ইসলাম তার মর্যাদা পুনরুদ্ধার করে বিকশিত হবে।
সুতরাং জন্মলগ্নেই উত্থাপিত হলো একটি প্রশ্ন - মুসলিমদের জন্য রাষ্ট্র? না কি মুসলিম রাষ্ট্র?
পাকিস্তানের কনস্টিটিউয়েন্ট এসেম্বলির বিবরণ ঘেঁটে লীভেন দেখিয়েছেন কীভাবে জন্মলগ্ন থেকেই আপাত আধুনিকতাবাদী জিন্নাহ আর ধর্মীয় নেতাদের মধ্যে এ প্রশ্ন নিয়ে টানাপড়েন চলেছিল। তা ছাড়া কেমন হবে এই নতুন রাষ্ট্র, এই প্রশ্ন নিয়েও পাকিস্তানের কেন্দ্রীয় সরকারের সঙ্গে অঙ্গ রাজ্যগুলির বিবাদ।
এই বিবাদ বালুচিস্তান থেকে অন্য প্রান্তে পূর্ব পাকিস্তান আজকের বাংলাদেশ পর্যন্ত বিস্তৃত এবং যার ফলে বিদ্রোহ কখনো বালুচিস্তানের, কখনও সিন্ধের মোহাজিরদের এবং অবশেষে পূর্বপ্রান্তে ১৯৭১ সালে পাক-ভারত তৃতীয় যুদ্ধ এবং বাংলাদেশের জন্ম।
লীভেন বাংলাদেশের উদয়কে পাকিস্তান রাষ্ট্রের সবচেয়ে বড় পরাজয় বলছেন ও এর জন্য দায়ী অবশ্যই ভারত সম্বন্ধে পাকিস্তানি রাষ্ট্র-পরিচালকদের তীব্র বিদ্বেষ।
লিভেন তাঁর বইটি মূল চার অধ্যায়ে বিভক্ত করেছেন। প্রথম অধ্যায় Land, People and History-তে লেখক বর্ণনা করেছেন পাকিস্তানের ভূগোল, রাজনৈতিক উদ্ভবের ইতিহাস, অর্থনীতি ইত্যাদি। দ্বিতীয় অধ্যায়ের শিরোনাম Structures। এই অধ্যায়ে লীভেন আলোচনা করেছেন পাকিস্তানের রাষ্ট্রব্যবস্থা, গণতন্ত্র, সামরিক ব্যবস্থা প্রসঙ্গে। তৃতীয় অধ্যায় অর্থাৎ The Provinces-এ লেখক আলোচনা করেছেন মূলত পঞ্জাব , সিন্ধ , বালুচিস্তান ও পাক-পাখতুনওয়াড়া সম্পর্কে। চতুর্থ ও শেষ অধ্যায়ের শিরোনাম The Taleban। তালিবানের উত্থান, পাকিস্তানের রাজনীতি ও সমাজজীবনে তালিবানের প্রভাব, উত্থানের বৈশ্বিক প্রেক্ষিত, ইত্যাদি প্রসঙ্গে আলোচনা করা হয়েছে এই অধ্যায়ে।
প্রথম অধ্যায়ের একটি বৃহদাংশ লেখক ব্যয় করেছেন পাকিস্তানে গণতন্ত্রের প্রসঙ্গে।
গণতন্ত্রের প্রাতিষ্ঠানিক রূপ নিয়ে আজও বিতর্কের শেষ নেই। কিন্তু এ বিষয়ে অধিকাংশ পন্ডিতই একমত যে গণতন্ত্রের আদর্শ গ্রীক দার্শনিকদের মনেই প্রথম রূপপরিগ্রহ করে। যে যুগে চারপাশের সভ্য সমাজে কোনও না কোনও ধরনের স্বৈরতান্ত্রিক ব্যবস্থা অত্যন্ত সুপ্রতিষ্ঠিত, সেখানে গণতন্ত্রের ধারণা গড়ে ওঠে কীসের জোরে? গণতন্ত্রের মূল প্রত্যয় ব্যক্তিস্বাতন্ত্র্যর্, যুক্তিশীলতা, পারস্পরিক সহনশীলতা এবং সহযোগিতা। এগুলো ব্যতীত যথার্থ মানবীয় সভ্যতা অকল্পনীয়। আর এর প্রায় একটিও পাকিস্তানের রাষ্ট্রব্যবস্থায় দূরদূরান্ত অবধি খুঁজে পাওয়া যায় না।
লীভেন পর্যালোচনা করে প্রমাণ করছেন যে পাকিস্তানে গণতন্ত্র কোনওদিনই জমি খুঁজে পায়নি। নিকটতম প্রতিবেশী ভারতের সাথে তুল্যমূল্যের প্রশ্ন স্বভাবতই এসে গিয়েছে।
১৯৭০ সালের ৭ ডিসেম্বর পাকিস্তানের প্রথম সাধারণ নির্বাচন সংঘটিত হয়। ভারতে ইতিমধ্যে চারটি সাধারণ নির্বাচন হয়ে গিয়েছে, এবং পঞ্চমটি হওয়ার অপেক্ষায়। এই নির্বাচনে পাকিস্তানি সংসদের মোট আসন ছিল ৩০০টি। লীভেন দেখিয়েছেন যে সমস্যার বীজ লুকিয়ে ছিল এখানেও। জনসংখ্যার ভিত্তিতে আসন পূর্ব পাকিস্তানে ১৬০টি ও পশ্চিম পাকিস্তানে ১৪০টি। নির্বাচনে সবাইকে অবাক করে মুজিবুর রহমানের আওয়ামী লীগ পেয়ে গেল পূর্ব পাকিস্তানে ১৫৮টি আসন। অর্থাৎ, একক ক্ষমতায় পাকিস্তানের প্রধানমন্ত্রী হবেন শেখ মুজিব এবং সরকার গড়বে আওয়ামী লীগ। অবশ্যই তা পছন্দের নয় পাকিস্তানের জন্মলগ্ন থেকে শাসনক্ষমতায় থাকা সামরিক বাহিনীর এবং পশ্চিম পাকিস্তানের প্রধান দল জুলফিকর আলি ভুট্টোর পিপিপি-র। সুতরাং, কী ভাবে আওয়ামী লীগকে বাগে আনা যায়, তারা সেই চেষ্টা চালাল কিছু দিন; এবং তা না পেরে সামরিক বাহিনীর হস্তক্ষেপ, গণহত্যা এবং হিন্দু বিতাড়ন।
এই বইয়ের একটি পরিপুষ্ট অংশ জুড়ে রয়েছে পাকিস্তানের সেনাবাহিনী ও তার প্রভাব। রয়েছে তাদের অত্যাচারের নানা গল্প। পাকিস্তান আমলে হিন্দুদের উপর আক্রমণ, অত্যাচার, হত্যা, ধর্ষণ ও চরম বৈষম্য— সবই চলছিল এক সঙ্গে। একই সঙ্গে ছিল ভারত সরকারের ও পশ্চিমবঙ্গের নির্লিপ্ততা, ফলে পাকিস্তান সৃষ্টি থেকে ১৯৭০— এই ২৩ বছরে ১৯৫১-র ২২% হিন্দু ১৯৭০-এ নেমে এসেছিল প্রায় ১৫%-এ। কিন্তু ১৯৭০-এর নির্বাচন দেখিয়ে দিল, জনসংখ্যার কিছু আধিক্যের জন্য পূর্ব পাকিস্তানে জাতীয় সংসদে বেশি আসন থেকে যাচ্ছে এবং তার সুফল পেয়েছে আওয়ামী লীগ।
পাক প্রশাসনের মদদপুষ্ট সেনাবাহিনীর মতানুযায়ী এই সমস্যার আশু সমাধান: হিন্দু বিতাড়নের কাজটিকে দ্রুত সম্পূর্ণ করে পূর্ব পশ্চিমের জনসংখ্যার বৈষম্যকে দূর করা। তা করার একটি পথ যথেচ্ছ গণহত্যা, নারী নির্যাতন, ধর্মীয় স্থান ধ্বংস, সম্প্রদায়ের সম্পত্তি ধ্বংস, সমাজের বিশিষ্ট ব্যক্তিদের হত্যা— এই সবকেই এক কথায় রাষ্ট্রপুঞ্জের সংজ্ঞায় বলা হয় গণহত্যা বা জেনোসাইড।
এই কাজটিই পাকিস্তানি সেনাবাহিনী প্রায় সম্পন্ন করে ফেলে কয়েক মাসের মধ্যেই।
গোটা বইয়ে বারে বারে এসেছে বালুচদের রক্তক্ষয়ী সংগ্রামের প্রসঙ্গ। লীভেনের আলোচনা শুরু হয়েছে ১৮৫৭ সাল থেকে। ১৮৫৭ সালের মহাবিদ্রোহ ব্যর্থ হয়ে গিয়েছে। গোটা ভারতীয় উপমহাদেশে ব্রিটিশ শাসক জাঁকিয়ে বসেছে।
কিন্তু বালুচ অঞ্চল তখনও নিজেদের মতো করে স্বাধীন। ব্রিটিশ বাহিনীর কাছে বালুচরা প্রথম নতি স্বীকার করল অনেক পরে। ১৮৭৬ সালে। কালাত চুক্তির মাধ্যমে চার জন স্বাধীন শাসকের (খান) হাতে থাকা চারটি বালুচ অঞ্চল কালাত, খারন, মাকরান এবং লাসবেলা ব্রিটিশ রাজত্বের বশ্যতা স্বীকার করে। এই চারটি অঞ্চলই ছিল বালুচিস্তানের মূল অংশ।
গোল বাঁধল স্বাধীনতার পর।
বালুচিস্তানের চার স্বাধীন রাজ্য ব্রিটিশের কাছে বশ্যতা স্বীকার করলেও, আত্ননিয়ন্ত্রণের অধিকার কখনোই ছেড়ে দেয়নি। বালুচিস্তানের যে ���ংশ সরাসরি ব্রিটিশদের হাতে ছিল, ১৯৪৭ সালে পাকিস্তানের জন্মের পর সেই অংশ ব্রিটিশরা পাকিস্তানের অন্তর্ভুক্ত করে। যে চারটি স্বাধীন বালোচ রাজ্য ব্রিটিশের বশ্যতা স্বীকার করেছিল, তারা পরে ধীরে ধীরে পাকিস্তানে যোগ দেয়। কিন্তু শর্তসাপেক্ষে। কালাতের শাসক বা খানের সঙ্গে ১৯৪৮ সালে পাক সরকারে যে চুক্তি হয়েছিল, তাতে স্বাধীন বালোচ অঞ্চলটিকে আত্মনিয়ন্ত্রণের অধিকার বা স্বশাসন দেওয়ার কথা হয়েছিল।
জিন্নাহ নিজে সে প্রতিশ্রুতি দিয়েছিলেন।
অর্থনীতি, বিদেশনীতি এবং প্রতিরক্ষা— শুধু এই তিনটি বিষয় ইসলামাবাদের নিয়ন্ত্রণে থাকবে বলে চুক্তি হয়েছিল। বাকি সব কিছুই বালোচদের নিজেদের নিয়ন্ত্রণে থাকবে বলে স্থির হয়েছিল। কিন্তু জিন্নাহ কথা রাখেননি। পাকিস্তান পরবর্তী কালে সে চুক্তির শর্ত আর মানেনি। বালোচ মুলুকের সঙ্গে আরও নানা অঞ্চলকে যুক্ত করে, বালুচিস্তান নামে একটি অখণ্ড প্রদেশ গঠন করে তাকে পাকিস্তানের অন্য প্রদেশগুলির সঙ্গে একই আসনে বসিয়ে দেওয়া হয়।
বালোচদের আত্মনিয়ন্ত্রণের অধিকার দেওয়া হবে বলে যে চুক্তি হয়েছিল, তা ইসলামাবাদ মানতে অস্বীকার করে। পাক সরকারের এই বিশ্বাসঘাতকতাই বিশ্বাসঘাতকতাই বিদ্রোহী করে তোলে বালোচদের। সেই থেকে শুরু হওয়া লড়াই পাকিস্তানে আজও চলছে।
স্বাধীন পাকিস্তান গঠনের পর থেকে এ পর্যন্ত অনেক বার বিদ্রোহ হয়েছে বালুচিস্তানে। পাকিস্তানের নিয়ন্ত্রণ থেকে মুক্ত হওয়ার জন্য ১৯৪৮ সালেই প্রথম বার চরমে পৌঁছেছিল ক্ষোভ। শুরু হয়েছিল বিদ্রোহ। তার পর ১৯৫৮ থেকে ১৯৫৯, ১৯৬২ থেকে ১৯৬৩ এবং ১৯৭৩ থেকে ১৯৭৭ পর্যন্ত বার বার পাক সেনার বিরুদ্ধে দীর্ঘ রক্তক্ষয়ী লড়াই করেছেন বালুচ বিদ্রোহীরা।
বার বারই নির্মম দমননীতি চালিয়ে, বলপ্রয়োগ করে, বহু প্রাণ কেড়ে নিয়ে বিদ্রোহ দমিয়ে দিয়েছে পাকিস্তান।
২০০৩ সাল থেকে ফের আত্মনিয়ন্ত্রণের লড়াই শুরু করে বালোচরা। পাকিস্তানের সেনাশাসক জেনারেল পারভেজ মুশারফ বালোচ বিদ্রোহ সম্পূর্ণ শেষ করে দেওয়ার পরিকল্পনা নেন।
বালোচদের নেতা নবাব আকবর বুগটিকে ২০০৬ সালে একটি পাহাড়ের গুহার মধ্যে ঢুকে খুন করে পাক সেনা। মুশারফ ভেবেছিলেন বালোচ নবাবকে খুন করতে পারলেই শেষ হয়ে যাবে বিদ্রোহ। কিন্তু বিদ্রোহের আগুন তার পর থেকে দাবানলের মতো ছড়িয়েছে বালুচিস্তান জুড়ে। বুগটির হত্যার পর থেকে আত্মনিয়ন্ত্রণের দাবি বদলে গিয়েছে সম্পূর্ণ স্বাধীনতার সংগ্রামে।
লীভেনের আলোচনায় এসেছে মোহাজিরদের প্রসঙ্গ। পাকিস্তানের জন্ম পৃথিবীর ইতিহাসে অন্যতম বড় বাস্তুচ্যুতির সূচনা করেছিল। বাংলা ও পাঞ্জাব ভাগ হয়ে গেলে এই অঞ্চলের অধিবাসীদের জন্মভিটা ছেড়ে ঠাঁইনাড়া হয়েছিল। একইভাবে ভারতের বিহার, রাজস্থান, বোম্বে ও উত্তর প্রদেশের বহু মুসলিম ভিটা ছেড়ে পাকিস্তানের দিকে যাত্রা করে।
এর মধ্যে একটি বড়সংখ্যক অধিবাসীর ঠিকানা হয়েছিল করাচি। ১৯৪৮ সালের মে মাস নাগাদ করাচিতে প্রায় ৪ লাখ ৭০ হাজার মানুষের প্রবেশ ঘটে, যার ফলে পরার রাতারাতি করাচির ডেমোগ্রাফি বদলে যায়। এঁরাই মোহাজির।
বসবাসের প্রাথমিক পর্যায় থেকেই সরকারিভাবে মোহাজিরদের নানা সুযোগ-সুবিধা দেয়া হয়। প্রধানমন্ত্রী লিয়াকত আলী খান ছিলেন কারিগর। লিয়াকত দূরদর্শী ছিলেন এমন অপবাদ ওঁর চরম শত্রুও দেবে না।
লিয়াকতের বদান্যতায় মোট চাকরির ২১ শতাংশ মোহাজিররাই অধিকার করেছিল। এক ইউনিট নীতির কারণে সিভিল সার্ভিসে মোহাজিরদের অংশ্রগ্রহণ ক্রমে ৪৭ শতাংশে উন্নীত হয়। করাচির ১২টির মধ্যে সাতটি শিল্পপ্রতিষ্ঠানই গুজরাটি মোহাজিরদের অধিকারে ছিল।
স্বাভাবিকভাবেই মোহাজিরদের এ প্রাধান্য স্থানীয়রা বেশি দিন সহ্য করতে পারেনি।
পঞ্চাশ থেকে ষাটের দশকে সিন্ধি ও পশতুনদের সঙ্গে মোহাজিরদের বিরোধ তীব্র হতে আরম্ভ হয়। সত্তরের দশকে পাকিস্তানের পূর্বাংশের মতো পশ্চিম অংশেও বেশকিছু রাজনৈতিক সংকট উপস্থিত হয়। জুলফিকার আলী ভুট্টো ক্ষমতা লাভ করলে তিনি মোহাজিরদের প্রাধান্য হ্রাস করার সর্বাত্মক চেষ্টা করেন।
নানাভাবে হিসাব করে মোট প্রায় ১০ হাজার উর্দুভাষীর চাকরিচ্যুতি, বাধ্যতামূলক অবসর ও পদাবনতি করা হয়। পাশাপাশি একটি ভাষা-নীতি গ্রহণ করা হয় এবং এর মাধ্যমে উর্দুর পাশাপাশি সিন্ধিকে সমমর্যাদার দাপ্তরিক ভাষা হিসেবে গ্রহণ করা হয়। ভুট্টোর করা কোটা নীতি অনুসারে সিন্ধিরা মোহাজিরদের তুলনায় চাকরিবাকরিতে অধিক সুযোগ লাভ করে। একটি দীর্ঘমেয়াদি সমস্যার জন্ম হয়।
শুরু হয় আলতাফ হোসেনের আন্দোলন।
বইয়ের শেষাংশে , লেখক কাশ্মীর সমস্যা থেকে নিয়ে শুরু করে তালিবানের উত্থান অবধি বিবরণ দিয়েছেন।
এতে নতুন তথ্য যে অনেক আছে তা নয়, যেটা আছে তা হল নিরপেক্ষ দৃষ্টিভঙ্গি আর ঐতিহাসিক তথ্য নির্ভরতা। এই বইয়ের সবচেয়ে বড় গুন্ , তথ্য আছে , তত্ত্বের জটিলতা নেই। বইয়ের এই চতুর্থ অংশে লেখক তালিবানের উদ্ভব ও প্রভাব বোঝাতে গিয়ে আলোচনা করেছেন যে বিষয়গুলি নিয়ে, সেগুলি মূলত;
১) পাকিস্তানে ইসলামি জেহাদিদের অবস্থান ,
২) রাষ্ট্র পরিচালনায় ইসলামি জেহাদিদের প্রভাব ,
৩) গণতন্ত্রের সঙ্গে সামরিক শাসকগোষ্ঠীর দ্বন্ধ ,
৪) তালিবানের আঁতুরঘর পাকিস্তান ,
৫) ভারত পাকিস্তান সম্পর্ক।
স্বাধীনতার পর থেকেই গণতন্ত্রের ভিত মজবুত হয়ে ওঠার সুযোগ পায়নি পাকিস্তানে। তারই জন্য সেনাবাহিনী আগাগোড়া পাক প্রশাসনের মাথায় চড়ে বসেছে। আর পাকিস্তানের নাগরিকরাও তাতে আস্থাশীল হয়ে উঠেছেন।
কিন্তু সামরিক শাসন যে কোনওদিনই পাকিস্তানকে এক উন্নত সমাজব্যবস্থার দিকে নিয়ে যেতে পারবে না এই আশংকায় শেষ হয়েছে ২০১১ সালে লিখিত এই বই।
বইয়ের লেখক ৯/১১ দেখতে পাওয়ার আগেই এই বই প্রকাশ পায়। তারপর সিন্ধু নদী বেয়ে বয়ে গিয়েছে অনেক জল।
আগ বাড়িয়ে কাশ্মীরের নিয়ন্ত্রণরেখায় উরির ভারতীয় সেনা-ছাউনিতে হানা দিয়ে ঘুমন্ত সৈন্যদের হত্যা করেছে পাক সেনাবাহিনী। উরি হামলার প্রেক্ষিতে পাক-অধিকৃত কাশ্মীরে জঙ্গি-ঘাঁটি নির্মূল করতে ভারত ‘সার্জিক্যাল স্ট্রাইক’ করেছে।
জঙ্গি হামলা হয়েছে পাঠানকোটে। সমগ্র বিশ্ব দেখেছে যে পাকিস্তান হঠাৎ করে একা হয়ে গিয়েছে। পঠানকোট জঙ্গি হামলার পর কোনও দেশ ইসলামাবাদের পাশে দাঁড়ায়নি। এমনকী ঘনিষ্ঠ মিত্র চিনও কড়া ভাষায় নিন্দা করেছে পঠানকোট হামলার। তার মধ্যেই আচমকা পাকিস্তানের উপরেই উপর্যুপরি হামলা শুরু হয়েছে। আফগানিস্তানের জালালাবাদে পাক দূতাবাসে হামলা হয়েছে। পাকিস্তানের কোয়েটায় বড়সড় জঙ্গি হানায় পাকিস্তানের নিরাপত্তা বাহিনীর জওয়ানদের দেহ ছিন্নভিন্ন হয়ে গিয়েছে। পাকিস্তানের সংবাদমাধ্যমের দফতরে গ্রেনেড হামলা হয়েছে।
নওয়াজ শরীফ সরকার সরে গিয়ে এসেছে ইমরান খানের সরকার। আফঘানিস্তানে পুনরায় বহাল হয়েছে তালিবান।
এবং কালের অমোঘ নিয়মে ভারতে এসেছে নাগরিকত্ব সংশোধনী বিল। ইতিহাসের দ্বারস্থ হওয়ার তাগিদের লীভেনের বইটি অমূল্য।
পাকিস্তান আমাদের প্রতিবেশী। তাদের উত্থান পতনের সঙ্গেই জড়িয়ে রয়েছে আমাদের উপমহাদেশের geopolitics।
আলোচনায় ইতি টানবো ভারত পাকিস্তানের মধ্যে দুটি চুক্তির কথা বলে।
প্রথম চুক্তিটি (নেহরু-লিয়াকত চুক্তি) স্বাক্ষরিত হয়েছিল ৮ এপ্রিল ১৯৫০। পরবর্তী কালে ভারতের প্রধানমন্ত্রী নেহরু এবং পাকিস্তানের প্রধানমন্ত্রী ফিরোজ খান নুনের মধ্যে নেহরু-নুন চুক্তি হয়েছিল। দুটি চুক্তিতেই বলা হয়েছিল স্ব স্ব দেশে ধর্মীয় সংখ্যালঘুরা অত্যাচারিত হল�� যে দেশে তাঁরা প্রবেশ করবেন সেই দেশে তাঁদের শরণার্থীর মর্যাদা দেওয়া হবে।
প্রসঙ্গত , এই চুক্তির বিরোধিতা করেছিলেন শ্যামাপ্রসাদ মুখোপাধ্যায়-সহ হিন্দু মহাসভার নেতারা। দুই পঞ্জাবের মতো তাঁরা পূর্ব পাকিস্তান ও পূর্ব ভারতের মধ্যে ধর্মভিত্তিক জনবিনিময় করার দাবি করেছিলেন। আর পাশাপাশি তাঁদের অনেকের দাবি ছিল পূর্ব পাকিস্তান থেকে আরও জমি— যাতে এ দেশে জায়গার অভাব না হয়। পাকিস্তান এই প্রস্তাবে আপত্তি করলে নেহরু সরকারের যুদ্ধ ঘোষণা করা উচিত, এই দাবি করেন হিন্দু মহাসভার নেতারা। যুদ্ধ বা জনবিনিময়ের পথে না হেঁটে যখন নেহরু সরকার এই চুক্তি সই করে, শ্যামাপ্রসাদ অবিলম্বে মন্ত্রিসভা থেকে পদত্যাগ করেন।
উপরোক্ত দুই চুক্তি অনুযায়ী, পূর্ব বাংলা থেকে অত্যাচারিত হয়ে ভারতে আসা হিন্দু বৌদ্ধ খ্রিস্টান ইত্যাদি সম্প্রদায়ের মানুষদের শরণার্থী হিসাবে গণ্য করতে হবে। কিন্তু পূর্ব বাংলা থেকে কোনও মুসলমান ধর্মীয় অত্যাচারের কারণে ভারতে আসেননি, এসেছেন অন্য কারণে। রাষ্ট্রপুঞ্জের সনদ অথবা উপরোক্ত দুটি চুক্তি অনুযায়ী বাংলাদেশ থেকে ভারতে আগত মুসলমানরা তাই অনুপ্রবেশকারী।
১৯৭১ সালে বাংলাদেশ স্বাধীন হওয়ার পর এ সংক্রান্ত আরও একটি চুক্তি হয় ভারত ও বাংলাদেশের মধ্যে, যা ইন্দিরা-মুজিব চুক্তি নামে পরিচিত।
ভারত চুক্তির ধারাগুলি মানলেও পাকিস্তান ���র বাংলাদেশ এগুলি কখনও মানেনি।
লীভেনের বইয়ের মতোই এই পর্যালোচনা শেষ করছি এক গভীর প্রশ্নচিহ্ন দিয়ে।
অলমিতি।
June 3, 2024
Definitely the first book I would suggest to anyone looking to understand this country even it's own citizens
August 7, 2021
Western language about ‘corruption’ in Pakistan suggests that it can and should be cut out of the political system; but in so far as the political system runs on patronage and kinship, and corruption is intertwined with patronage and kinship, to cut it out would mean gutting Pakistan’s society like a fish.
To understand Pakistan, one mustn’t look at it through a preconceived ‘western’ lens. In fact, no country or society is as magnificently complex as Pakistan’s. Pakistan faces a myriad of grave problems that threaten its survival; the most significant one is climate change. Yet Pakistan survives due to and despite its political structure. It has four provinces and each province has its own unique culture, traditions, norms. To make it stand united is a herculean task; to destroy it is more difficult. The characteristics that make our system bad are also the ones that have maintained the status quo and made this country resilient.
The author describes the structures of Pakistan namely Justice, The Military, Religion, Politics. How the justice system works in Pakistan, how the police in small towns or countryside of almost all provinces constantly negotiate justice based on the legal system and local tribal customs. The role of the Military in Pakistan’s internal and external politics and survival. This book is exquisite.
Honestly, the reason I loved this book was it so different from the usual bland history books we’ve all read through our high schools, colleges, and universities. Even in a university lecture we read something and discuss something entirely else; what I mean by this is that the national curriculum is strongly biased and you can’t find a history book on Pakistan that leans to the objective on the bias spectrum. This was a change, a wonderful one at that. Even though the terrorist or religious extremism that was on the rise in 2011 - when this book came out - today after almost 10 years we’ve changed the course of our history by almost eliminating the threat of militancy in Pakistan through large-scale military offensives in tribal areas.
Anyone who wishes to understand the Pakistani state and society - quirks and all - must read this book!
October 10, 2016
At the same time highly informative and infuriating in its structure, Lieven's look at Pakistan is one of those frustrating books that you can't help admiring for the extent of his footwork and sympathy to a very misunderstood place. The reason I give this 3 stars rather than something higher has mostly do to with his chosen structure and waywardness, rather than the content itself. First points first, since it informs whether I'd recommend this to someone else as a good introduction to Pakistan.
The book is haphazardly structured. It lacks any kind of real chronology and tends to jump about ticcily, with discussions of things seemingly taken as read by the author on the part of the reader, only to be formally introduced and discussed hundreds of pages later (e.g. the Red Mosque debacle). Lieven discusses Pakistan's "structures" first (religion, military, politicians) and then the provinces--well, sort of--one by one. The result is pretty messy and there's little historical background except where he thinks it matters most (the British sources of policing and military structure; Swat). So the structure leaves a lot to be desired.
On the other hand, it's a highly commendable work. Lieven spent a lot of time in Pakistan, wandering around talking to people and conducting interviews (it's very elite-heavy if that sort of thing bothers you) and comes across more polemical than it should. A lot of the text is directed at pooh-poohing the idea that Pakistan is a failed state or in any danger of collapsing into Islamist-nuke chaos. He makes a good point for this, so for the person focused on policy it holds more value there than it would for someone just wanting to learn about Pakistani history.
The book is haphazardly structured. It lacks any kind of real chronology and tends to jump about ticcily, with discussions of things seemingly taken as read by the author on the part of the reader, only to be formally introduced and discussed hundreds of pages later (e.g. the Red Mosque debacle). Lieven discusses Pakistan's "structures" first (religion, military, politicians) and then the provinces--well, sort of--one by one. The result is pretty messy and there's little historical background except where he thinks it matters most (the British sources of policing and military structure; Swat). So the structure leaves a lot to be desired.
On the other hand, it's a highly commendable work. Lieven spent a lot of time in Pakistan, wandering around talking to people and conducting interviews (it's very elite-heavy if that sort of thing bothers you) and comes across more polemical than it should. A lot of the text is directed at pooh-poohing the idea that Pakistan is a failed state or in any danger of collapsing into Islamist-nuke chaos. He makes a good point for this, so for the person focused on policy it holds more value there than it would for someone just wanting to learn about Pakistani history.
February 25, 2021
A very thorough, well researched book. A great read indeed. On the back cover of the book in praise of this book Pankaj Sharma of Guardian has stated that "Over turn many prejudices, so manifolds and obdurate are the cliches about Pakistan that you need a whole book periodically to shatter them, Lieven's Pakistan (a hard country) is one such blow", and after reading this I couldn't agree more with the assessment of Pankaj Sharma, absolutely spot on, a very revealing book, and particularly the analysis of the authors makes sense and are well researched and articulated and this book tackles the core questions regarding Pakistan in great depth.
The book consists of four part. The first part is basically about the genesis of Pakistan, it discusses the land, people, and history. It discusses in great length the rule of Muslims in South Asia, the arrival of east India company, the fall of Mughal Empire and with this the decline of Muslims prestige in South Asia, the British Raj and then the struggle of independence. This part discussion mainly focuses on the basis of foundations of Pakistan as a separate homeland for Muslim, the role of Sir Syed ahmed Khan, Muslim league and Muhammad Ali Jinnah in creation of Pakistan.
The second part of the book has great significance as it is about the structures, it is the very part which describes and analyzes the functioning and working of Pakistan.
In structures it covers Justice, Religion, Politics, and Military.
In this part Lieven's described the functioning and non functioning of those structures, it analysis where and why the problems lies in Pakistan structuring, the main problem as the book discuss is that Pakistani has a choice, they can choose between the state's law, religion law, or the local or communal law, the very thing that is at the root of the modern state is the uniformity of the laws and codes, and here the state is unable to enforce the common codes through out the country, the customs in Pakistan varies hugely, the kinship structures is at the very heart of these things it is the very reason that Pakistani state is so weak, and the most problems in country aren't because the state is strong but because it is weak.. The one exception that this book talks are the Urdu speaking or Mohajirs of karachi, as the book notes that they migrated from different parts of India so the structures of kinship and other local or communal customs which bounds any ethnicities are not in the case of this nationality of Pakistan, this is at the very heart that first the Jamat and then more ruthless MQM rose from the Karachi and shook the very foundations of the country, it was the most ideal party and too good for the country like Pakistan, because of its background it was alienated from the patronage politics of Pak as seen in all other major Political parties, it was organized, well structured, and MQM was the only mass Political party of the western style in Pakistan. Anatol Lieven has written that whatever the social and economic progress the Pakistan has was because of the progressive and educated Mohajirs.
The book further discusses the provinces of Pakistan, it analysis all the four key provinces, Punjab, Balochistan, Sindh, Pathans(Kpk) in great depth and meticulously sheds the light on various ethnicities of the provinces. This book also takes in detail the four main rulers of Pakistan, it discusses the rule of General Ayub Khan(57-69) and Musharraf (99-07) jointly as they were the only secular rulers of Pakistan, the rule of both of these is well discussed, the reforms that country went through this period and the modernization and the liberalization of the economy of the era, Ayub's period was rather more successive as at that time west was more proselytizing the industrial revolution so Ayub Khan also took on this path, whereas by the time of Musharraf, the Soviet Union had collapsed, the communism was faded and there was no any challenge to liberal world so at that time west was branding their liberal economic policies of Lassie's fair so Musharraf followed this path, which brought some boom to the Pakistani economic but that didn't last for too long, despite the personality and the secular vision of Musharraf his rule was not up to the mark with his own standards. Could have done a lot better.
The book discusses the rule of Zia ul haq and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, Bhutto did some land reforms but because of his background he soon had to back off, as. Bhutto's power weakens the feudals and landowners were the very class that he needed to have their support so with this their were compromises, whereas Zia ul haq hasn't done any good to Pakistan either, even today his menace of islamization is rooted in society and the society is deeply intolerant, extremists, and very narrow minded..
In last part the book discusses the Taleban, it talks about the rise of Afghan Taleban and then the Pakistan Taleban, as this book is written in 2010 so it provided the Analysis and recommendation of dealing with the talebans how they can be defeated and what should the Pakistan and USA should do to deal Taleban.
Overall a great book, very thought provoking at times and revealing, however sometimes the tone of the author is very soft where I think it should have been hardliner and whereas at other moments where it needed to be soft it goes all out with all gun blazing. Some subjective description aside the book is a gem.
The book consists of four part. The first part is basically about the genesis of Pakistan, it discusses the land, people, and history. It discusses in great length the rule of Muslims in South Asia, the arrival of east India company, the fall of Mughal Empire and with this the decline of Muslims prestige in South Asia, the British Raj and then the struggle of independence. This part discussion mainly focuses on the basis of foundations of Pakistan as a separate homeland for Muslim, the role of Sir Syed ahmed Khan, Muslim league and Muhammad Ali Jinnah in creation of Pakistan.
The second part of the book has great significance as it is about the structures, it is the very part which describes and analyzes the functioning and working of Pakistan.
In structures it covers Justice, Religion, Politics, and Military.
In this part Lieven's described the functioning and non functioning of those structures, it analysis where and why the problems lies in Pakistan structuring, the main problem as the book discuss is that Pakistani has a choice, they can choose between the state's law, religion law, or the local or communal law, the very thing that is at the root of the modern state is the uniformity of the laws and codes, and here the state is unable to enforce the common codes through out the country, the customs in Pakistan varies hugely, the kinship structures is at the very heart of these things it is the very reason that Pakistani state is so weak, and the most problems in country aren't because the state is strong but because it is weak.. The one exception that this book talks are the Urdu speaking or Mohajirs of karachi, as the book notes that they migrated from different parts of India so the structures of kinship and other local or communal customs which bounds any ethnicities are not in the case of this nationality of Pakistan, this is at the very heart that first the Jamat and then more ruthless MQM rose from the Karachi and shook the very foundations of the country, it was the most ideal party and too good for the country like Pakistan, because of its background it was alienated from the patronage politics of Pak as seen in all other major Political parties, it was organized, well structured, and MQM was the only mass Political party of the western style in Pakistan. Anatol Lieven has written that whatever the social and economic progress the Pakistan has was because of the progressive and educated Mohajirs.
The book further discusses the provinces of Pakistan, it analysis all the four key provinces, Punjab, Balochistan, Sindh, Pathans(Kpk) in great depth and meticulously sheds the light on various ethnicities of the provinces. This book also takes in detail the four main rulers of Pakistan, it discusses the rule of General Ayub Khan(57-69) and Musharraf (99-07) jointly as they were the only secular rulers of Pakistan, the rule of both of these is well discussed, the reforms that country went through this period and the modernization and the liberalization of the economy of the era, Ayub's period was rather more successive as at that time west was more proselytizing the industrial revolution so Ayub Khan also took on this path, whereas by the time of Musharraf, the Soviet Union had collapsed, the communism was faded and there was no any challenge to liberal world so at that time west was branding their liberal economic policies of Lassie's fair so Musharraf followed this path, which brought some boom to the Pakistani economic but that didn't last for too long, despite the personality and the secular vision of Musharraf his rule was not up to the mark with his own standards. Could have done a lot better.
The book discusses the rule of Zia ul haq and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, Bhutto did some land reforms but because of his background he soon had to back off, as. Bhutto's power weakens the feudals and landowners were the very class that he needed to have their support so with this their were compromises, whereas Zia ul haq hasn't done any good to Pakistan either, even today his menace of islamization is rooted in society and the society is deeply intolerant, extremists, and very narrow minded..
In last part the book discusses the Taleban, it talks about the rise of Afghan Taleban and then the Pakistan Taleban, as this book is written in 2010 so it provided the Analysis and recommendation of dealing with the talebans how they can be defeated and what should the Pakistan and USA should do to deal Taleban.
Overall a great book, very thought provoking at times and revealing, however sometimes the tone of the author is very soft where I think it should have been hardliner and whereas at other moments where it needed to be soft it goes all out with all gun blazing. Some subjective description aside the book is a gem.
June 27, 2014
Flattery often helps and some statements in the beginning of this book might be the reason I am so full of praises for the writer. Thing is , he manages to hit the nail on the head on so many occasions its easy to forget that he is an outsider, though maybe that grants him a license to pry and poke where locals just can't be allowed . His grasp of the concept of kinship, the complex relationship of people with democracy and Sharia and the delicate balance between them, the actual reason behind the atrocities committed against women being the local customs and traditions and above all his fair and unbiased bashing of every political force in the country make it a delight to read. The book is detailed and well written though the analysis of the Pakistani political scene pre-9/11 could have been more thorough.
December 16, 2012
I did learn a lot about Pakistan's recent history and political landscape from this book, but the author is clearly filled with a certain sense of nostalgia for the days of the Raj, which leads him to support the army, which is in some sense the successor to Raj's self-serving but 'impartial' rule. Also, this is less a book about the country per se, and more a guide to global strategists who have to deal with Pakistan. Given all these caveats, his analysis is often quite enlightening and he's clearly spent a lot of time in Pakistan, talking to people and trying to understand them. In some ways like a 21st century "orientalist" in the mould of sympathetic 19th century colonial administrators, who did often understand the subcontinent better than the anglicized native elites.
January 9, 2013
Finally an author who knows what he is talking about when it comes to Pakistan.
May 31, 2025
I'd give it 5 stars but if there were umpteen references where India & Pakistan were equated. Unfairly so. The book was published in 2011 and the years have proved that the 2 neighbours could not be on a more different trajectory. India became the 4th largest economy in the same quarter that Pakistan earned the ignominy of being the most bailed out country by IMF.
A detailed review soon.
A detailed review soon.
July 18, 2025
A fascinating country, sitting along the crossroads of conflicts old and new. This is a reasonably good introduction to Pakistan’s history that helps one understand the tortured path followed since an independence born out of the passion and violence of the partition.
October 28, 2018
Pakistan: A Hard Country by Anatol Lieven provides an unparalleled look at the complex societal and political forces inside this enigmatic but critically important country. Not only that, but it is by far and away the best book I have ever read at explaining how and why corruption and dysfunction is a rational and almost inevitable outcome of circumstances developing countries very often face.
Kinship loyalties dominate Pakistani society and patronage and protection based on these kinship loyalties dominates Pakistani politics. Most political parties in Pakistan are hereditary dynasties affiliated with particular wealthy and therefore powerful families. When a particular political party comes into power in Pakistan, those people with a connection to the associated family dynasty are rewarded with government jobs and contracts and are able to use their political connections to obtain favorable treatment in judicial conflicts. Prominent families ensure that at least one family member is a prominent politician, or, better yet, that multiple family members are prominent in different political parties, so that regardless of which party is in power, they are in a position to distribute government favors to family and tribal members and other supporters. If a political party were not to engage in such favored patronage and protection (i.e. corruption), then those who benefit from it would shift their votes to another party, thus preventing the reforming party from holding power.
The Pakistani Army is so politically powerful because it acts as its own kinship group in the country and is the best run, best funded and least dysfunctional government institution. Military personnel get generous pay, retirement and other benefits and serving in the military is seen as the best way to advance into the middle class. Its prestige results in many educated people being recruited into the military, whereas the political parties are full of uneducated people, so that the military is better run and consists of wiser administrators than the political bosses.
Much of the Pakistani people’s discontent toward the government is focused on the corrupt judicial system. The formal judicial system is inherited from British rule and is seen as foreign. Police are not paid well and there can be political consequences for law enforcement who arrest members of a powerful kinship group. Justice is also incredibly slow and cases are often decided based on who produces the largest bribes. For these reasons, most Pakistanis view Islamic law (Sharia) and local folk laws more favorably. These semi-informal judicial systems are quicker, often more fair, and based heavily on compromise and negotiated settlements, thus better at keeping the peace and avoiding escalating violence between warring kinship groups. Interestingly enough, Sharia law is viewed as more progressive / liberal than the much harsher local folk laws.
While the book’s insights into Pakistan’s internal political realities is fascinating in itself, the author’s main objective is to explain how Pakistan’s politics influences its foreign policy, its response and vulnerability to Islamic extremism, and how the “West’s” failure to understand Pakistani politics could make its reaction to terrorist threats self-defeating.
In understanding Pakistani foreign policy, it is critical to understand that Pakistani policy is primarily driven by its rivalry with India. Pakistan secretly supports the Afghan Taliban both because they believe the Taliban are engaged in a legitimate fight to drive out a foreign occupier (regardless of the Taliban’s religious ideology) and, more importantly, because they fear the Northern Alliance, which currently controls the Afghan government with U.S. backing, will ally itself with India and thus Pakistan will have hostile nations on either side of it.
Moreover, U.S., Saudi and Pakistani support for the Afghan Mujahideen’s fight against the Soviets in the 1980s encouraged Pakistani Pathans (a large tribal group) to identify with Afghan Pathans as their brother in arms and also helped to radicalize them by encouraging the adoption of Saudi Wahhabism. This solidarity and radicalism persists today and, together with the excessive amount of U.S. weapons left over from the conflict, is a major factor in the U.S. fight against the Afghan Taliban.
But the author argues that, unlike Afghanistan, Pakistan itself is not at great risk of being taken over by Islamic radicals. There is a lot of variety in the types of Islam practiced in Pakistan so it is impossible for any one group, especially extremists, to dominate Pakistan like they do in Iran or Saudi Arabia. In particular, Muslim saints and their descendants are very widely revered in Pakistan, so when extremists reject these saints, oppose worship at the shrines of saints (do yourself a favor and google videos of Dhamaal worship at Sehwan Sharif or other Pakistani Sufi shrines), and refuse to recognize the authority of descendants of saints, they greatly limit the popular appeal of their religious views. Also, the strength of tribal kinship groups and wealth landowners puts a check on extremism since it is impossible to gain political power without their support but their very power and wealth is threatened by the extremists.
The only real threat of an Islamic extremist takeover of Pakistan would be if the U.S. were to attack and invade Pakistan or Saudi Arabia (i.e. Mecca), because it would drive the majority of Pakistanis to support the extremists as a way to drive out the foreign invader. When the Pakistani Taliban rebelled in the western tribal areas in 2008, it was initially supported locally because people saw the Pakistani government as a puppet to the U.S. and because of disgust with the Pakistani judicial system, but the radicalism and brutality of the Taliban eventually turned local people against them.
If Pakistan’s government were to collapse, it will be due to ethnic rivalries, not religious fundamentalism, but most ethnic tribal leaders recognize that civil war would be disastrous for everyone.
One stress factor, however, has the potential to upend many current realities and that is the impacts from climate change. Water shortages, sea level rise and flooding have the potential to greatly destabilize Pakistan. Pakistan is almost entirely dependent on the Indus River and the combination of climate change and unsustainable rapid population growth will cause severe water shortages for people and agriculture in the coming decades. The prospects of a destabilized Pakistan, a Muslim nation with nukes, should not be ignored.
The book provides substantial detail about the various political parties, ethnic groups, and regions in Pakistan and reviews the history of conflicts between them as well as political efforts to reform the country. But perhaps most powerful is that the book demonstrates how incredibly complex society and politics in other countries can be and how we, as “Westerners,” are often blind as to how our interventions in those countries radically alter these political and societal balances.
Kinship loyalties dominate Pakistani society and patronage and protection based on these kinship loyalties dominates Pakistani politics. Most political parties in Pakistan are hereditary dynasties affiliated with particular wealthy and therefore powerful families. When a particular political party comes into power in Pakistan, those people with a connection to the associated family dynasty are rewarded with government jobs and contracts and are able to use their political connections to obtain favorable treatment in judicial conflicts. Prominent families ensure that at least one family member is a prominent politician, or, better yet, that multiple family members are prominent in different political parties, so that regardless of which party is in power, they are in a position to distribute government favors to family and tribal members and other supporters. If a political party were not to engage in such favored patronage and protection (i.e. corruption), then those who benefit from it would shift their votes to another party, thus preventing the reforming party from holding power.
The Pakistani Army is so politically powerful because it acts as its own kinship group in the country and is the best run, best funded and least dysfunctional government institution. Military personnel get generous pay, retirement and other benefits and serving in the military is seen as the best way to advance into the middle class. Its prestige results in many educated people being recruited into the military, whereas the political parties are full of uneducated people, so that the military is better run and consists of wiser administrators than the political bosses.
Much of the Pakistani people’s discontent toward the government is focused on the corrupt judicial system. The formal judicial system is inherited from British rule and is seen as foreign. Police are not paid well and there can be political consequences for law enforcement who arrest members of a powerful kinship group. Justice is also incredibly slow and cases are often decided based on who produces the largest bribes. For these reasons, most Pakistanis view Islamic law (Sharia) and local folk laws more favorably. These semi-informal judicial systems are quicker, often more fair, and based heavily on compromise and negotiated settlements, thus better at keeping the peace and avoiding escalating violence between warring kinship groups. Interestingly enough, Sharia law is viewed as more progressive / liberal than the much harsher local folk laws.
While the book’s insights into Pakistan’s internal political realities is fascinating in itself, the author’s main objective is to explain how Pakistan’s politics influences its foreign policy, its response and vulnerability to Islamic extremism, and how the “West’s” failure to understand Pakistani politics could make its reaction to terrorist threats self-defeating.
In understanding Pakistani foreign policy, it is critical to understand that Pakistani policy is primarily driven by its rivalry with India. Pakistan secretly supports the Afghan Taliban both because they believe the Taliban are engaged in a legitimate fight to drive out a foreign occupier (regardless of the Taliban’s religious ideology) and, more importantly, because they fear the Northern Alliance, which currently controls the Afghan government with U.S. backing, will ally itself with India and thus Pakistan will have hostile nations on either side of it.
Moreover, U.S., Saudi and Pakistani support for the Afghan Mujahideen’s fight against the Soviets in the 1980s encouraged Pakistani Pathans (a large tribal group) to identify with Afghan Pathans as their brother in arms and also helped to radicalize them by encouraging the adoption of Saudi Wahhabism. This solidarity and radicalism persists today and, together with the excessive amount of U.S. weapons left over from the conflict, is a major factor in the U.S. fight against the Afghan Taliban.
But the author argues that, unlike Afghanistan, Pakistan itself is not at great risk of being taken over by Islamic radicals. There is a lot of variety in the types of Islam practiced in Pakistan so it is impossible for any one group, especially extremists, to dominate Pakistan like they do in Iran or Saudi Arabia. In particular, Muslim saints and their descendants are very widely revered in Pakistan, so when extremists reject these saints, oppose worship at the shrines of saints (do yourself a favor and google videos of Dhamaal worship at Sehwan Sharif or other Pakistani Sufi shrines), and refuse to recognize the authority of descendants of saints, they greatly limit the popular appeal of their religious views. Also, the strength of tribal kinship groups and wealth landowners puts a check on extremism since it is impossible to gain political power without their support but their very power and wealth is threatened by the extremists.
The only real threat of an Islamic extremist takeover of Pakistan would be if the U.S. were to attack and invade Pakistan or Saudi Arabia (i.e. Mecca), because it would drive the majority of Pakistanis to support the extremists as a way to drive out the foreign invader. When the Pakistani Taliban rebelled in the western tribal areas in 2008, it was initially supported locally because people saw the Pakistani government as a puppet to the U.S. and because of disgust with the Pakistani judicial system, but the radicalism and brutality of the Taliban eventually turned local people against them.
If Pakistan’s government were to collapse, it will be due to ethnic rivalries, not religious fundamentalism, but most ethnic tribal leaders recognize that civil war would be disastrous for everyone.
One stress factor, however, has the potential to upend many current realities and that is the impacts from climate change. Water shortages, sea level rise and flooding have the potential to greatly destabilize Pakistan. Pakistan is almost entirely dependent on the Indus River and the combination of climate change and unsustainable rapid population growth will cause severe water shortages for people and agriculture in the coming decades. The prospects of a destabilized Pakistan, a Muslim nation with nukes, should not be ignored.
The book provides substantial detail about the various political parties, ethnic groups, and regions in Pakistan and reviews the history of conflicts between them as well as political efforts to reform the country. But perhaps most powerful is that the book demonstrates how incredibly complex society and politics in other countries can be and how we, as “Westerners,” are often blind as to how our interventions in those countries radically alter these political and societal balances.
March 17, 2013
على كل مهتم بمنطقة شرق آسيا وشبه القارة الهندية أن يقرأ هذا الكتاب. لم يوفر الصحافي والأكاديمي البريطاني القدير أناتول ليفن أي جهد في رسم صورة بانورامية وحقيقية لأبعد حد عن باكستان. الذي أحببته في الكتاب أنه كتب بإتقان وتوازن مرهف، فهو "دليل" سياسي وثقافي وتاريخي عن موضوعه بدون أن يقع في مصيدة الإختصار والسطحية وتكرار الكليشيهات المعتادة وهو مكتوب بأسلوب صحفي نابض بدون أن يصاب بشيء من بهرجة العناوين الصحفية بل أن أناتول ليفن عرف كيف يوازن مشاعره الحميمة تجاه الباكسانيين بدون أن يؤثر هذا على صرامة أحكامه، الكتاب مقسم لفصول، والفصول تدور حول محافظات باكستان الأربع وهناك كذت فصل حول أهم مؤسسات الدولة الباكستانية ومن بينها الجيش والقضاء وفصول أخرى حول الأحزاب السياسية..الخ والحقيقة أن مؤلف الكاتب ذو معرفة عميقة بباكستان ففي الفصل الخاص بالقضاء الباكستاني يشرح أناتول ليفن بإتقان أحكام الشريعة الإسلامية كما أنه ينقل للقاريء خبراته الميدانية عن مجالس القضاء الباكستانية القبلية ويشرح بتفصيل سبب تفضيل الباكستانيين البسطاء لها على قضاء الدولة. أما الفصل المتعلق بالجيش الباكستاني فهو يشرح الظروف المصاحبة لنشأة "ثقافة" الجيش الباكستاني منذ زمن الإستعمار البريطاني. هناك الكثير من التفاصيل الإنسانية الجميلة في الكتاب، فالكاتب يتحدث حينا عن لذائذ المطبخ الباكستاني وفي حين أخر عن جمال النساء الباكستاني أو عن عجائب ما شاهد في ريف محافظة السند وكل ذلك ليخفف حمل القراءة على القاريء ولذا فهو ينجح في إعطاء كتابه صفة الناقل الحي لبلد معقد وصعب كباكستان.
الكتاب جاد ومهم في مجاله وموسوعي وهو من أفضل الكتب "الغربية" عن بلد غير غربي. يستحق القراءة
الكتاب جاد ومهم في مجاله وموسوعي وهو من أفضل الكتب "الغربية" عن بلد غير غربي. يستحق القراءة
Displaying 1 - 30 of 265 reviews