CPEC is yet another manifestation of Pakistan's strategic ties with China-2

Note: Due to the length of the article. This is the continuation of the first part.

Seeing increasing tensions between USSR and China, Washington wanted to capitalize the development by approaching China secretly. China asked US to come through Pakistan. This was the paramount example of friendship and trust. This adds to the global image of Pakistan. Washington approached Islamabad and asked to play its role of good office and Pakistan did respond it well. Henry Kissinger went to China on Pakistan International Airline (PIA) on July 9, 1971. This trip accomplished an agreement that President Nixon would visit China in 1972.[1] Pakistan was praised internationally and US congratulated Pakistan for its services. Not only US, China also approached Muslim countries through Pakistan and relation between Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and China is an eminent example of the diplomatic assistance that Pakistan provided to China. 1970’s is important in Sino-Pakistani relation because Pakistan decided to acquire the great neutralizer, atomic bomb, after the fall of East Pakistan. International community was against Pakistan’s ambitions except China. On several visits to Beijing, China assured Pakistan of assistance. Diang Xioping expressed Chinese policy in 1975 in following words:[2]

“[China does] not advocate nuclear proliferation at all, but we even more oppose nuclear monopolies.”

Chinese rational on assisting Pakistan in acquiring nuclear bomb was not only based upon Pakistan’s balancing role in the region but China was also in need of assistance of the high enrichment technologies for its nuclear program.[3] Therefore, both Pakistan and China, proved vital for each other and a strategic relation was reaffirmed as both were deprived of certain Western technologies. Chinese nuclear program was not capable to counter US and Soviet threat as it was nowhere near to their technologies. Therefore, Pakistan offered China to share the technologies, particularly the designs of centrifuge that Dr. A.Q.Khan had bought from URENCO’s facilities in Netherland.[4] Such an offer was not made to China by any country. Hence, this cooperation between China-Pakistan was two way and strategic relation is the one that entails the benefit of both the parties. Dr. A.Q.Khan also handed over his work on centrifuge rotors to Chinese scientists, to strengthen the China-Pakistan defense cooperation.[5] China helped Pakistan whole heartedly by providing five lead-lined, stainless steel boxes each containing 10 single-kilogram ingots of highly enriched uranium (HEU) enough for two atomic bombs in 1982. China had already given 15 tons of uranium hexafluoride (UHF) to ensure that Pakistan’s nuclear program continued according to schedule.[6] This was the first time when a nuclear country proliferated HEU to a non-nuclear state but not the last time, as China again exported five thousand ring magnets in 1994, which helped Pakistan to double its production of highly-enriched uranium.[7] Andrew Small describes this cooperation:

“If military relationship lies at the heart of China-Pakistan ties, nuclear weapon lies at the heart of the military relationship.”

Though China faced international isolation followed by two-year freeze of high technology sale to Beijing but this did not stop China in helping Pakistan to pursue nuclear bomb and in May 1998 Pakistan emerged as a seventh nuclear country in the world with nuclear tests in Chaghi, Baluchistan. This defense cooperation continued to achieve new milestones in the form of JF-17 Thunder, in response to American refusal of F-16s to Pakistan, in November 2009, Al-Khalid tank in 1990s and Pakistan’s first cruise missile manufactured in 2005 based upon Chinese model of DH-10 [8] are examples of Sino-Pakistani strategic relation.  Pakistan and China have cooperated with each other in all aspects except in commercial economy, aspect of economy that is tied with the exchange of goods and services[9], and Andrew Small quote Ye Hailin[10], in this context:

The objective [of Pakistan-China relation] has not been to strengthen the two countries welfare interests but to strengthen them against common threats.”

 Realizing that economy now plays a greater role in strategic relations of countries, leaders of two strategic partners felt the need to enhance their relations in commercial economy as well, so as to strengthen their strategic relations.

Pakistan and China are natural trade partners. The current boarder between two nations is a part of traditional Silk route used for the trade of spices, cotton and porcelain. This trade route has been revamped in the form of China’s One Belt One Road Initiative and of which China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a $62 billion project, is a flagship project. CPEC fills the gap of commercial economy in China-Pakistan strategic relations. CPEC is a corridor from Kashgar, Xianjiang, China to Pakistan’s port city of Gwadar. It has three routes; Western, Central and Eastern route. Along its way from Kashgar to Gwadar there will be industrial and economic parks.  CPEC will make both countries strategically important for each other. China sees CPEC as an important gateway for its transformation from regional to global power and an opportunity to extend its reach from Indian Ocean to Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean Sea.[11] Moreover, 40% of China’s oil comes from Gulf States and currently it has to cover 16,000 km to reach Eastern China’s ports of Shanghai and Shenzhen, crossing Straits of Malacca and South China Sea. With the control of its global competitor, US, on Strait of Malacca and increasing tensions in South China Sea, China cannot afford to remain dependent on any other force in order to accomplish its aims of global power. Moreover, CPEC will reduce 16,000 km of distance to only 5,000 km.[12] It will also provide China access to African states, in order to fulfill requirement of raw material for its increasing industry. CPEC will also give China a strategic depth in the Indian Ocean, as Gawadar port is a part of Chinese policy of “String of Pearl”, a string of sea ports in Indian Ocean.[13]  However, Pakistan is a potential beneficiary in this project. It will enhance the stagnant economy of Pakistan by increasing its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to about 1.5-2% annually.[14] Currently, Pakistan has a shortfall of 7000MW and it shed 2-2.5% of its annual GDP[15]. CPEC will reduce the energy shortfall  as 71% of the total amount has been allocated for energy projects [16]and notable projects include Sahiwal 2x660MW Coal-fired Power Plant, Punjab, 2×660MW Coal-fired Power Plants at Port Qasim Karachi and Thar Mine Mouth Oracle Power Plant ( 1320MW) & surface mine.[17] Accumulatively it will add 12,610MW electricity to Pakistan’s national grid. Moreover, 21% of CPEC investment is in the infrastructure sector[18], which includes the extension of Karakoram Highway (KKH), Capacity Development of Pakistan Railways and Peshawar-Karachi Motorway (Multan-Sukkur Section).[19] The rest of 2% is invested to cater Pakistan’s requirement of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG).[20] CPEC will not only help China to eradicate militancy in Xinjiang province but will also help Pakistan to counter insurgencies in Baluchistan. CPEC, will increase the diplomatic relations between China and Pakistan. Rejecting India’s concerns over the CPEC going through Gilgit Baltistan, condemning Indian backing of Baluchistan insurgencies, supporting Pakistan’s inclusion in Nuclear Supplier Group in response to Indian application and vetoing bid to black list Masood Azhar of Jaish-e-Mohammad are events that occur after the approval of CPEC and are prime examples of enhanced diplomatic support between Beijing and Islamabad.[21]                                     

            Consequently, Pakistan and China relation is a paramount example of strategic relations. Unlike, US relations with European countries, Pakistan and China do not share same civilizational and cultural background but still their friendship is no less than US-EU nexus. Beijing-Islamabad partnership has defined the geo-politics of the South Asia and has played a major role in balancing relations in the region. Though, both countries had strong security and diplomatic relations but lacked economic relations and have bilateral trade of $16 billion, even less than China-Vietnam trade of $64 billion where Vietnam has economy half the size of Pakistan.[22] However, this missing brick has been placed in the form of CPEC and has strengthened the existing strategic relations between China and Pakistan by giving their relation a new direction.

Total Words Including footnotes: 2689

Bibliography

Business Dictionary. http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/commercial-economy.html

CPEC official Website. CPEC-Energy Priority Projects. http://cpec.gov.pk/energy

CPEC official Website. CPEC-Infrastructure Priority Projects. http://cpec.gov.pk/infrastructure

Ebrahim, Zofeen T.  China-Pakistan Economic Corridor: A boon for the economy, a bane for locals. 12 May 2016. https://www.dawn.com/news/1236159

How will CPEC boost Pakistan economy? https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/pk/Documents/risk/pak-china-eco-corridor-deloittepk-noexp.pdf

Indo-Soviet relations. http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/16826/8/08_chapter%201.pdf

Kiani,Kaleeq. Power cuts return as shortfall touches 7,000MW.8 May,2017. https://www.dawn.com/news/1331738

Naseem,Imran and Khan, Jawad. Impact of Energy Crisis on Economic Growth of Pakistan. Vol.7, 2015. http://iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JAAS/article/download/19574/19442

Riffat, Hamza and Maini, Tridivesh Singh. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor: Strategic Rationales, External Perspectives, and Challenges to Effective Implementation.

Roche, Elizabeth. China again blocks bid in UN to list Masood Azhar as a global terrorist. 2 Nov. 2017. https://www.livemint.com/Politics/ABEmOW05luaAgJjaVcrfqI/China-says-no-consensus-over-listing-Masood-Azhar-as-global.html

Small, Andrew. The China-Pakistan Axis: Asia’s New Geopolitics. Hurst & Company, London,2007.

US-China Institute. Getting To Beijing: Henry Kissinger's Secret 1971 Trip. 21 July 2011. https://china.usc.edu/getting-beijing-henry-kissingers-secret-1971-trip

Zeb, Rizwan. PAKISTAN-CHINA RELATIONS: WHERE THEY GO FROM HERE? UNISCI Discussion Papers, Nº 29, May 2012. https://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/UNIS/article/viewFile/40659/38981.

---

[1] US-China Institute,Getting To Beijing: Henry Kissinger's Secret 1971 Trip, 21 July 2011, https://china.usc.edu/getting-beijing-henry-kissingers-secret-1971-trip.

[2] Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 27

[3]  Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 32

[4] Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 33

[5] Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 34

[6] Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 34

[7] Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 41

[8] Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 41

[9] Business Dictionary, http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/commercial-economy.html

[10] Director of the Center for International Strategic Studies of the Research Institute

[11] Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 1

[12] Zofeen T. Ebrahim, China-Pakistan Economic Corridor: A boon for the economy, a bane for locals,12 May 2016, https://www.dawn.com/news/1236159

[13] Hamza Riffat and Tridivesh Singh Maini, The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor: Strategic Rationales, External Perspectives, and Challenges to Effective Implementation, Page 8.          

[14] Riffat and Maini, The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, Page 4

[15] Riffat and Maini, The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, Page 4

[16] Riffat and Maini, The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, Page 7

[17] CPEC official Website, CPEC-Energy Priority Projects, http://cpec.gov.pk/energy

[18] Riffat and Maini, The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, Page 7

[19] CPEC official Website, CPEC-Infrastructure Priority Projects, http://cpec.gov.pk/infrastructure

[20] Riffat and Maini, The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, Page 7

[21] Elizabeth Roche, China again blocks bid in UN to list Masood Azhar as a global terrorist,2 Nov. 2017, https://www.livemint.com/Politics/ABEmOW05luaAgJjaVcrfqI/China-says-no-consensus-over-listing-Masood-Azhar-as-global.html

[22] Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 96

CPEC is yet another manifestation of Pakistan's strategic ties with China-1

Note: Due to the length of the article, it is divided into two parts. This is the first part of it.

"Pakistan is China’s Israel."

General Xiong Guangkai, February 2015.[1]

This statement from China’s People Liberation Army (PLA) General[2] is a result of 53 years long Sino-Pakistani strategic relation, a vital relation, which both states claim to be higher than Himalayas, deeper than the deepest ocean, sweeter than the honey and stronger than the steel. This relation has survived China’s transition from Maoism to market economy, shifting cross-currents of the two countries relationships with United States and India and the rise of Islamic militancy in the region.[3] This strategic relation was established on the common enmity with India. Though, this enmity started as a result of Pakistan and China’s conflict of interest with India on border demarcation. But with the passage of time China needs a stabilizing factor to counter India in the region so as to continue its transformation from regional power to a global power and there was no other country suitable for this purpose in the region except Pakistan. Moreover, Pakistan also needs military, moral and diplomatic support in the region, so as to secure its territorial integrity from its inherited foe, India and to counter Indian hegemony in the region. Therefore this common enemy, India, has provided a strong foundation stone for Sino-Pakistani strategic relation to progress over a period of 67 years.  With each passing year new manifestations has been defined in security, diplomatic and economic sectors in this strategic relation but CPEC adds a new dimension, commercial economy, that will not only increase this cooperation but will also strengthen the existing one.

The journey of all-weather friendship has been tortuous but Pakistan has the distinction to be among the first country to recognize People’s Republic of China and also the first Muslim country.[4] However, in 50’s Pakistan did not share brotherly relations with China and making ideological differences as base, as a declarative policy, Pakistan became part of Western pact SEATO, particularly signed to counter China. As Francis Pike reports Quaid-e-Azam’s statement in his book “Empires at War-A Short History of Modern Asia Since World War II”.

“Pakistan is a democracy and communism cannot flourish in the soil of Islam.”  [5]

Though the statement was for Russia but it does have a message for China. In the same era, China and India were having close relations and an Indian phrase ‘Hindi Chini Bahi Bahi’, meaning ‘Indians and Chinese are brothers’ gained importance.[6] As Andrew Small in his book “The China-Pakistan Axis: Asia’s New Geopolitics” narrated the warmness of India-China friendship in following words: “Beijing’s bed-fellow in the early 50’s was India, its anti-colonial, non-aligned neighbor across the Himalayas.” However, Beijing and New Delhi friendship could not last long due to Soviet-Sino separation and China-India failed negotiations over their border. This lead to Ladakh skirmishes between India and China in 1959. Initially, Pakistan kept itself aloof from the Sino-Indian developments and President of Pakistan, Ayub Khan, considered it to be solely Indian problem. But Mr. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, head of Pakistan’s delegation to UN, realized the importance of relations with China and asked Ayub Khan to take this development as an opportunity.[7] Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto also abstained from voting against Beijing’s membership to UN, though previously being a member of western camp, Pakistan had been voting against mainland China. Later on, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto used his discretionary powers and sends a signal to China to question New Delhi’s standing over the Ladhak skirmishes.[8] It was 1962 Sino-Indian war that provided Pakistan an opportunity to reconsider its policy towards China. This development created two opinions in Pakistani camp; with or without China. But Pakistan availed this opportunity and approached China. Pakistan negotiated its border demarcation with China and signed an agreement in 1963 that was clearly in the favor of Pakistan.

This agreement formed the basis of strategic relations between China and Pakistan, as with this agreement Pakistan secured its territories along the Pakistan China border, which included six of seven passes that were close to Line of Actual Control.[9] This development was against Indian interest, as it has not only made India’s north-western frontier insecure but has also diverted its attention from Pakistan. Pakistan and China strengthened their relations by signing Air Aviation Agreement in March 1963 and for the first time a non-communist airline landed on a communist land.[10] This was indeed a pragmatic approach from Pakistan that immediately benefited Islamabad two years after in 1965 .1965 was the year to test the Pakistan-US friendship but it proved to be untrustworthy and United States cut off military aid to both Pakistan and India. Being a US partner in containing communism, Pakistan was not expecting this policy of neutrality from US. Unlike United States, China emerged as a true friend of Pakistan. China not only deployed its troops along the China-India Sikkim and Ladakh border in order to put pressure on India but also went one step ahead and decided to intervene on Pakistan’s behalf if India entered East Pakistan and that Pakistan has asked China to intervene.[11] In the initial days of war Chinese Foreign Minister, Chen Yi, came to Karachi and has ensured that China backs Pakistan’s ‘just Actions’.[12] Moreover, China also reached agreements with Pakistan and Indonesia for the joint supply of military equipment for Pakistan’s need of tanks, recoilless guns, shells and aircraft.[13] According to Andrew Small, 1965 war proved as a catalyst for Pakistan- China friendship but in 1971 China did not play the same role due to Indo-Soviet Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation in August 9, 1971 and border skirmishes that China had with USSR in 1969.[14] Though US were in support of China’s intervention and has ensured Beijing to back militarily in case of Soviet intervention. Andrew Small wrote that President Nixon said to Henry Kissinger: “He “strongly” wanted to encourage Chinese action-I am convinced that if the Chinese start moving the Indians will be petrified”. He also gave his assent to Kissinger on 8 December to convey to Zhou Enlai stating: “If you are ever going to move, this is the time.”[15] But despite these assurances Chinese remain pragmatic and did not take any serious steps against India. However, Beijing continues to supply arms to Pakistan. Though, 1971 was not a pleasing year for Pakistan, with the fall of Dhaka, but the developments in the following years, added to the Pakistan-China strategic relations.

---

[1]  Andrew Small, The China-Pakistan Axis: Asia’s New Geopolitics, (Hurst & Company, London,2007),Page 1

[2] General Xiong Guangkai, Retired Deputy Chief of Staff of Peoples Liberation Army, Chairman of Chinese Institute of Security Studies.

[3]  Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 2

[4]  Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 19

[5] Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah while addressing cabinet on September 7,1947

[6]  Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 20

[7]  Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 24

[8] Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 24

[9] Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 24

[10] Rizwan Zeb, PAKISTAN-CHINA RELATIONS: WHERE THEY GO FROM HERE? (UNISCI Discussion Papers, Nº 29, May 2012), Page 49, https://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/UNIS/article/viewFile/40659/38981.

[11]  Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 18

[12] Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 18

[13] Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 18

[14] Indo-Soviet Relations, Page12,http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/16826/8/08_chapter%201.pdf

[15] Small, The China-Pakistan Axis, Page 11

New Game Plan

United Nations passed a resolution that according to many, is against Israel. But this is just one side of the picture or should I say the side that US and Israel wanted us to see. The reason behind the claim will be evident shortly.

On this year 23rd December, UN security council has passed a resolution. It concerns the Israeli settlements in "Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem". The resolution states that Israel's settlement activity constitutes a "flagrant violation" of international law and has "no legal validity". It demands that Israel stops such activity and fulfills its obligation as an occupying power under the Fourth Geneva Convention. It is after the adaptation of this resolution that Israel opened fires on all those who voted for this resolution. But the one that disappointed Israel the most , according to Benjamin Netanyahu, was United States. But it is still to decide that whether United States disappointed Israel or they do what they were appointed for.

The other side of the picture that most of us are unable to see could be the one that it is the Israel that wanted to resolve the issue. Yes, it is the Israel that wanted to resolve it, but on its own conditions.

As Israel now occupies most of the Palestine and the holy sites therefore they must have asked United States to not to vote for it and let the issue be resolved in a way that suits Israel. 

Now the question arises that what suits Israel and why they wanted to resolve it? Israel Ideological aim is to have regional domination and then world domination by dragging World's Economic center from Wall Street to Israel's capital.This is only possible when the Arab countries ,that constitute the region surrounding Israel, open their doors for Israel. Most of the Muslim countries and specifically Arab countries will have stable relations with Israel only when Israel resolved the Israel-Palestine issue. This was also stated by John Kerry in his yesterday statement ,that in his talks with Arab leaders they made it very clear that if Israel is keen to resolve the issue they are also keen to join hands with Israel. John Kerry in his statement highlighted the "Arab Peace Initiative" endorsed by Arab league in 2002 with regard to the relation of Arab countries with Israel.

There arise another question that why United States after 14 years felt a need to highlight Arab Peace Initiative? Why did they not accentuate it before? Israel's occupation is not new and that United States backed their occupation before, then why they are not backing it today. This is because Israel want United States to back them a bit differently this time, in a way that can make Israel a part of world community once again so as they can work on their ultimate agenda without any hindrance.

 We need to understand that relations between countries are not like childhood friendship rather they are stitched with Ideology and economies. United States Ideology perfectly lies parallel with Israel and as far as their economy is concerned then it is already in the hands of Israel. Therefore, United States cannot take this risk of going against their long lasting friend.
Many may consider this side of the picture to be fallacious but it is indeed blur today and time will come when it will not be blur anymore.May Allah save Muslims and all humans from all such traps.

Pleading for Kashmir

It has been 70 years that United Nations is unable to resolve issue of Kashmir. Some say it to be the failure of United Nations but there lies a failure of an "Advocate". Yes, it is Pakistan,Pakistan's stance is superior than India in terms of human rights,law and desires of the majority of Kashmiri's- many people do have concerns over this, except the Kashmiri's themselves. The world in which we all happen to live always show concern over the human rights and to the right of self determination but Pakistan has failed to gain world's attention over human righ s violations in Indian occupied Kashmir.

This failure is becuase of  two reasons

1. Pakistan never had a permanent policy on Kashmir.

2. India had a strong diplomatic channel.

As far as Pakistan's policy on Kashmir is concerned it has never been adopted as a national policy but has always dependent upon the mood of the government of that time and at times on the mood of the opposition. Therefore the kind of work that is required for this case is incomplete. For example Pakistan never highlighted the issue the way it should be highlighted in UN. Pakistan ,in-spite of having evidences of the violations of the human rights in Kashmir, never presented them in UN. And above all they never did diplomacy over Kashmir issue. 

Today diplomacy is very important for the foreign affairs and one can imagine the efforts of Pakistan that it does not have a foreign minister at present.

On the other hand India is very smart in most of the aspects, especially in diplomacy. Although they had a UN resolution against them declaring Kashmir to be a disputed territory and that it should be resolved through plebiscite but they never gave worth to it because world is not pressurizing them and world is not pressurizing them because they have good diplomatic relations with India. Their economies are stitched along with India's economy.

But this does not mean that Pakistan has lost the case. Pakistan is now taking steps to rebuild their case by sending 22 members of Parliament in different parts of the world to highlight this issue. Moreover Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif met the Kashmiri leaders so as to give a strong message in UN upcoming session.

May Allah help Pakistan and Kashmir.

Peace

Peace

The word peace means, “a period of harmony between different social groups that is characterized by lack of violence or conflict behaviors, and the freedom from fear of violence.” But it can be characterized into two types

·         External peace

·         Internal peace

World is well aware of its external condition of peace while, this blog is mostly concerned with internal peace.

 In the recent Juma prayer, I heard Imam saying following words in his dua…

“Ae Allah Pakistan ko aman ka ghewara bna….(O Allah make Pakistan as a cradle of peace…)

“hum sub ko sakoon aata farma…(Grant peace to all of us…)

I was also a part of this prayer while, my lips stitched and did not allow me to say “Ameen” with my all other fellows in this dua.This was because, at that moment a hadith came to my mind that I want to share with all of you and want to put another aspect on the table.

Nu'man b. Bashir reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The similitude of believers in regard to mutual love, affection, fellow-feeling is that of one body; when any limb of it aches, the whole body aches, because of sleeplessness and fever

(6258'The Book of Virtue, Good Manners and Joining of the Ties of Relationship (Kitab Al-Birr was-Salat-I-wal-Adab)' of Sahih Muslim)

Surely, this is a famous hadith and we heard it a lot of times but did we ever think about its meaning?

I don’t know how can we have peace if our brothers and sisters ,part of our body as stated in above hadith, are living under the dark clouds of oppressors, who used to cut them into pieces, put them into fire, just because they are Muslims, just because they are our brothers, just because their names start with “Muhammad” .

There is no need to give stats again and again; the above hadith is enough to make one release about the relation of Muslims and our role in this respect. Just want to make clear to Muslims that we cannot live in peace if our mothers used to sleep with tears in their eyes, our sisters without scarfs on their dignified heads and our brothers lying beheaded in the streets of Kashmir, Burma, Bosnia, Chechnya and Palestine. Moreover for the non-Muslims, you used to do a lot other things for the sake of peace for example meditation, yoga etc. but you even cannot have peace in yourself, if you are part of the murder of millions of innocent Muslims,as silence over brutality is a “war crime”. But here I made a mistake, that some of you don’t even consider Muslims to be innocent.

I didn’t say Ameen just because I came to know the reason of why we are not having peace, as our other brothers are not having peace. As I know we all, altogether are the reasons of why we are not having peace, of why we are not able to flourish in our lives, of why we are not able to live in comfort, so I did not feel comfortable to ask for something if I’m not able to remove the shortcomings.  I am very much hopeful that one day we will be able to consider this aspect as well.