What People Will Die For

I am amazed how people across the world highlight the Muslim killings in Gujarat. Everyone deliberately turns a blind eye on the event which started the entire riot - burning of train full of Hindu pilgrims in Godhara. These helpless people were not even allowed to come out of the train which was put on fire by the muslims fanatics. The unruly mob mercilessly bolted the door and massacred if anyone tried to escape from the train. What followed was retaliation by the mob. There were no Hindus or Muslims, only blind blood thirsty fanatics on loose with vengeance as their guiding force. I don???t agree at all with the violence and the blood shedding that followed but not only muslims but hindus were killed as well.
The world has decided to brand Gujrat as a communal state and what is funny is most of these columnists and writers who write so passionately about the state of affairs there have not been there themselves even once!!!

I am sorry but you are wrong. The first genuine pogrom in independent India's history was unleashed by the Congrees in 1984 following Mrs Gandhi's assassination. It was deliberate, planned and not just did it have the sanction of the state, it was executed by agents of the government. Merely because Mr Rajiv Gandhi was more acceptible to West does not make that any the less a crime.

Naraendra Modi represents the ugly face of Hindu fundamentalists, who killed Mahatma Gandhi the most ardent advocate of a secular democratic India. Modi won inspite of being guilty of being responsible for thousands of muslims in Gujerat under his watch. The fact that he appealed to the electorate gives you an insight to the mindset that prevails in rising hindu fundamentalism.

tht was an amazing story

That was an amazing story

Mr. Zakaria, i guess you are confused. How can Narendra Modi be a rabid nationalist and campaigner for regional pride (here Gujarat's) at the same time? I am no supporter of Modi but his re-election simply means that the majority Hindus can live in peace and not be treated like dirt as have the so-called secular parties (read Sonia-led Congress and the commies) done ever since 1947. We in India may vote for different political parties with varied agendas yet we are all connected to our motherland by the "Idea of India", something promoted vehemently by Narendra Modi.

Questions to Dr. Zakaria and posters: in this era of globalization, which elements of identity should be retained, and which should be discarded? How can nations form values which are national in scope and emphasis? More importantly, how can the global community form values which are transnational in scope and emphasis? Or perhaps, can one make the opposite case that the trend toward tribalism is actually beneficial?

Mr. Zakaria, excellent taqiyah in the service of the ummah. Over a quarter of the deaths in the Gujarat riots (which totaled a little over a thousand, and nowhere close to your clever hyperbolic figure of tens of thousands) were Hindus. Some "pogrom" this! You want to talk about pogroms, try the Sikh massacre (over 3,000 deaths) in New Delhi organized by the Congress party, the party that your family has long been intimately associated with. Or the ethnic cleansing of Hindus from the Kashmir valley, aided and abetted by the Muslim state government there. Now THAT is the first genuine pogrom in independent India's history!

Mr. Zakaria - a most insightful article. FYI, the United Kingdom constitutes England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Great Britain is the island that includes Englahd, Scotland, and Wales.

There is another force empowering the increasing irrelevance of the nation state. It is the presence of the American hyperpower, which means that small groups need not join not-so-friendly larger groups for protection, nor do the more powerful groups need anyone to act as the moat around the castle. Other traditional state functions are migrating upward and outward, e.g., the ECB, further reducing the relevance of the state.

There is another critical force empowering the decay of nation states. It is the presence of the American hyperpower, which drastically reduces the security argument for the state. As long as we're around, little guys don't have to join with their not-always-friendly neighbors for protection, nor do the more powerful guys need the little guys to act as the moat around the castle.

The sketchy referene o the rios in Kenya clearly shows how little you understand about the situation, its not a tribal thing its all politics and the quest for power. the only people to gain from it are not the Kenyans but the poliicians.
As for the pictur used in the print copy, oh no, please not that Kibaki supportes did not clash with the police at any one time. They just werenot rioting and havent taken to the streets yet.

The sketchy referene o the rios in Kenya clearly shows how little you understand about the situation, its not a tribal thing its all politics and the quest for power. the only people to gain from it are not the Kenyans but the poliicians.
As for the pictur used in the print copy, oh no, please not that Kibaki supportes did not clash with the police at any one time. They just werenot rioting and havent taken to the streets yet.

Excellent column, Fareed. For those who are critical of his content, try and remember that editors place word limits on such columns, and thus he chose the most recent events to make his argument--Pakistan, Modi, Kenya, and Iraq--before bringing in Europe's issues to emphasize that this isn't a problem limited to those in this world with darker skin complexions. He then explained the likely forces behind these problems. What else do you want in 750 or so words?Again, well done, Dr. Zakaria.

Fareed, very good column, however I wish there could be graphs or pie charts to further explain the divisions.
Freddif

If Musharraf is really fighting terror than his godfathers must do some extra home-work to make things work. But, from the ground realities, 12/27 is a continuation of 9/11 agenda. Benazir Bhutto's ghastly end is the new Ground Zero. Her assassination has triggered a chain reaction of destruction in Pakistan which in practical terms is much more devastating than the WTC. It is a declaration of war against Pakistan by those who want it to disintegrate. As an aftermath of 12/27, Pakistan is already on road to the stone-age. With its economy shattered, wheat disappeared, power supply on ration, rolling stock destroyed beyond subsistence, banks looted, election machinery burnt and finally, hope for survival bombed, what remains is a ghost of a country which had started and progressed most enviously to atomic power.

Important questions: Who is pulling the strings of the puppet Musharraf? What is the real terror agenda? If Ghost Saddam is killed then which and where are his re-emerged tentacles? If it is not for oil than what is the bigger than oil treasure? Nobody has seen Osama bin Ladan for over six years and he was known to be on dialysis. Even the doctors treating him were apprehended and imprisoned in Pakistan. Than, what evidence proves he is still alive and kicking around spreading perpetual terror?

Benazir Bhutto was assured and reassured of her safety by those who sent her back to Pakistan. Musharraf was made to eat his honor by agreeing to wash her dirty linen of corruption and drop all cases against her. But still, she lost her life under most perplexing circumstances. One single question is enough to over ride all other. That is, what prompted her to make the suicidal error of judgment when she emerged from her armored vehicle and exposed herself to the attackers at point blank range? Definitely, the attackers were not expected to know her impulsive actions.