Happy Diwali to the thousands of persons languishing in jail for years on end on fabricated charges, many of whom do not even know what those charges are, as President Murmu said in her speech ( see below ).
Happy Diwali to the thousands of sick persons waiting for long hours, or even days, at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi ( which looks like a railway station ), and other hospitals in India, usually with perfunctory care, if at all.
Happy Diwali to the Muslims beaten for not saying ‘Jai Shri Ram‘, or jailed on false charges, and the families of those lynched, and Christians whose churches were vandalised in Delhi or persecuted in Odisha.
Happy Diwali for the construction of the ‘bhavya’ Ram Mandir at Ayodhya ( which will no doubt wipe out poverty and unemployment in India ), and the upcoming and imminent reconversion of the Gyanvapi mosque at Varanasi and Shahi Masjid in Mathura as Hindu temples.
And finally, Happy Diwali to the great people of India who will not cast their vote but vote their caste ( or religion ) in elections, despite skyrocketing prices of foodstuffs including grains, cooking oil, vegetables, meat and other basic commodities which have risen sharply in the last five years, record and rising unemployment, almost total lack of proper healthcare and good education for the masses, steep rise in air pollution, etc
The great Hindu festival of Diwali will be celebrated this year on 12th November.
Diwali Celebration
On this occasion I appeal on behalf of Ibaadatkhana, a global organisation promoting inter faith harmony, of which I am the patron, to all non Hindus worldwide to celebrate Diwali on that date. Some details of Ibaadatkhana are given below
I am an atheist, but I respect all religions, and strongly support freedom of religion and inter faith religious amity. I keep one day roza during Ramzan as a symbol of respect for my Muslim brothers and sisters, and each year I appeal to non Muslims worldwide to do the same.
It may be mentioned that at one time Hindus would participate in Eid and Muharram, and Muslims would celebrate Holi and Diwali. Even the Mughal Emperors like Akbar, Jehangir, Shah Jahan, and the later Mughals upto Bahadur Shah Zafar, as well as the Nawabs of many kingdoms in India like Avadh and Murshidabad would celebrate Holi and Diwali.
Later, after the Mutiny of 1857 the British rulers started the nefarious practice of divide and rule, and sowed the venom of communal hatred, because of which this practice largely stopped.
It is time now to revive and renew the affable and amiable custom of celebrating festivals of all religions together. I am confident non Hindus everywhere will pay heed to this appeal on behalf of Ibaadatkhana, and celebrate Diwali on 12th November this year..
As to how to celebrate Diwali is upto you. One way you could do it is by lighting and placing a ‘diya” or earthen lamp in front of your houses ( or if that is not available, some other kind of lighting ), and greeting your Hindu friends with some sweets
Dr Vatsa and Valli have unscientific understanding of religions.
I recently saw this interview of Dr Aviral Vatsa, who is a medical practitioner living in Scotland, by Valli Bindana, a film maker who lives in California. Both are of Indian origin.
Dr Vatsa and Valli are both self proclaimed atheists ( as I am too ). However, there are two kinds of atheists, viz scientific atheists and unscientific atheists, and to my mind Dr Vatsa and Valli both belong to the second category. In other words, while they condemn religion, they have no scientific understanding about it, and the views they expressed in this interview are superficial, and lacking in any depth.
I have briefly expressed my views about religion in the articles below :
The first question that arises is how did religion come into existence ? Dr Vatsa attributes it entirely to fear and anxiety, and he rightly condemns ‘Babas’ who play on people’s anxieties and fears, and politicians who exploit religion for getting votes.
However, that is an oversimplification. No doubt fear and anxiety played a part in creation of religion, but one has to go deeper into the matter.
Religion arose initially as nature worship, and came into existence when humans evolved from lower creatures.
Animals do not have religion. But what differentiates a human from an animal is the faculty of reasoning. The early humans were surrounded by forces of nature, e.g. the sun, wind, fire, rain, etc which they could not understand. Hence they started believing they were supernatural beings e.g. Surya, Indra, Agni, and the other Vedic gods ( and similar nature gods in ancient Greece and Rome, among native Americans, who were earlier called Red Indians, etc ), These natural forces could benefit people, or harm them. Hence they had to be propitiated.
It is true that all religions are superstitions and unscientific, and obstruct critical thinking. But even today, despite all scientific advance in the world, most people are still religious. Why ? Let me explain.
Even today perhaps 75% people of the world, particularly in underdeveloped countries, are poor. Poor people need religion as a psychological support, as their lives are so miserable that they would go mad without this psychological support.
And even most of the better off people are also religious because the chance factor is still very powerful in their lives. They plan something, but very often something else happens. For instance, a businessman can start an enterprize, but despite all his planning it may fail ( due to a variety of reasons ). In other words, we often cannot control our lives.
The chance factor is powerful because of the low development of science even today, compared to what it will be in say 100 years from now. Then science will have developed so tremendously that poverty will have been abolished, and we will able to largely control our lives, and then there will be no need of religion.
Dr Vatsa says that if one is religious he/she has a licence to be immoral. I do not know how he has come to this conclusion. I know a large number of religious people who are also highly moral.
However, there are more fundamental objections to religion.
In his famous novel ‘The Brothers Karamazov’ the great Russian writer Dostoevsky asks ( through one of his characters ) if there is a God, why do so many children in the word suffer ?
If there is a God who is all powerful, merciful and all good, then why do millions of children in the world suffer from hunger, cold, lack of shelter, disease etc ? Why does God, who is said to be merciful, not have mercy on them and give them food, clothes, shelter, medicines, etc ?
Why is there so much poverty, unemployment, malnourishment, sickness etc in the world ? If God is powerful and merciful, why does he not abolish these and give everyone a decent life ?
When 6 million European Jews were being sent to gas chambers by the Nazis, why did God not save them ? Religious people have no answer.
As regards the dispute between creationists and evolutionists, I have already dealt with it in my article above. Religion is based on faith and divine revelation, science is based on observation, experiment and reasoning. Religion says there is a supernatural being called God, who is permanent and immortal. Science does not believe that there are any supernatural beings, and does not believe that anything is permanent. Science believes that the only reality is matter ( or rather matter-energy, as Einstein proved by his formula e=mc2 ), which is in different forms, and is in motion, in accordance with certain laws which can be discovered by scientific research. If one asks where did matter come from, the answer is that matter came from matter, in other words it always existed. If it is assumed that everything must have a Creator, then God too must have a Creator, i.e. a super God, and he too must have a Creator i.e. a super super God, and so on. This is known as the fallacy of the infinite regress.
Religion will disappear when the social basis which gives rise to religion, i.e. poverty, ignorance and exploitation of man by man, disappears. But that is still a far way off.
Though a confirmed atheist, I read books like Mahabharat and Ramayan not as religious books but as sociological ones. For instance Draupadi had 5 husbands ( the Pandava brothers ), which proves the existence of polyandry at that time. Now Draupadi is a respected lady, but when her ‘cheer haran’ was taking place publicly in the durbar, Karna says there is nothing wrong in disrobing her since she is like a prostitute, having 5 husbands.
This shows that at that time society was passing through a transitional stage, since polyandry is a feature of matriarchal society, but is abolished in the subsequent patriarchal society, which has polygamy ( i.e. a man can have many wives, but a woman can have only one husband ). So when that portion of the Mahabharat was written ( Mahabharat was evidently written over centuries by many persons, collectively known as Vyas, which only means a writer ) remnants of matriarchal society still existed, though it was rapidly being transformed into patriarchal society. So social values were clashing ( as they are today ).
I have also explained that Ram was a human, not a god, in the original Ramayan of Valmiki, but becomes a god 2000 years later in Tulsidas’ Ramcharitmanas. Unfortunately most people have not read the former, which is in Sanskrit, which most people do not know, and have only read the latter.
This shows how religion evolves according to people’s needs.
To give another example, Indra was a war god, and was the most important god in the Rigveda, which was written probably when the Aryans were entering India as warriors, and Indra was their chief. Later, he became a rain god, when Aryans had settled in India, and agriculture, not war, became their main activity. Indra then became a minor god, the more important becoming Ram, Krishna, Hanuman, Kali and Durga ( in Bengal ) and Murugan ( in Tamilnadu ), none of whom find mention in the Rigved
I conclude by showing how I am a confirmed atheist and yet a Hanuman bhakt
The godi media says ‘Hindu, Hindu, Hindu’, while Arfa Khanum Sherwani says ‘Muslim, Muslim, Muslim’, all the time. Thus they are two sides to the same coin, dividing and polarizing society, like the Hindu Mahasabha and Muslim League before Partition.
Neither godi media nor Arfa talk much of massive poverty in India, record and rising unemployment, appalling level of child malnutrition, almost total lack of proper healthcare and good education for the masses, etc.
Arfa says that the voice of 20 crore Muslims in India has been suppressed.
She does not add that the voice of 100 crore poor Hindus has also been suppressed, because poverty is destructive of all rights.
Please see these videos of Arfa. Is there any mention of the massive socio-economic evils which plague 80% of our entire population of 1400 million people, not just Muslims, like poverty, hunger, unemployment, etc ? No, Arfa only highlights and focuses on the plight of Muslims, which is a half truth ( or rather a one sixth truth, because Muslims are only one sixth of the population of India ).
I too condemn atocities on Muslims. But I believe that there are people other than Muslims who also live in India. And the solution to the basic problems of all ou people is a mighty united people’s struggle led by modern minded leaders determined to give our people a high standard of living and decent lives.
I wonder who finances Arfa’s foreign trips ? She may say they are some foreign organisations. But what is the real aim of these foreign organisations ? Is it to keep India polarised so that India does not emerge as a modern Indian giant, like China, as explained in this video ?
When she goes abroad Arfa keeps ranting about atrocities on Muslims ( which no doubt is the truth ), but never about poverty, unemployment, malnutrition, etc which afflict all in India, not just Muslims ( which is a far greater truth ).
Is she not behaving like Jinnah, who was a British agent responsible for Partition ? And are her financers not like the British who relentlessly pursued a divide and rule policy ?
The Senior Editor of the portal thewire.in, Arfa Khanum Sherwani, recently spoke at the Dr Ambedkar International Centre, New Delhi
In her speech she spoke of the atrocities on Muslims in India, hate speeches against Muslims, voters being polarised, etc
It is true that atrocities on Muslims have increased after the BJP came to power in 2014. However, Arfa did not mention a word that this was the inevitable and logical outcome of Partition of India in 1947 on the basis of the bogus two nation theory, as I have explained in this article :
Arfa has never condemned Partition. What she advocates is more Muslim representation in legislatures, local bodies, etc. She said in her speech ” Jo hamaara haq hai hamein dila deejiye ”.
She also said that Muslim representation ” Inmein jaan baksh deta hai ”.
Everyone knows that persons in legislatures and local bodies in India, whether Hindu or Muslim, are mostly a set of rogues and rascals who have no genuine love for the country, but are there only for power and pelf. So according to Arfa, looting of the people should not be done by Hindus alone, but also by Muslims, and this will solve the country’s problems.
Arfa says that the voice of 20 crore Muslims in India has been crushed. What she deliberately does not say is that the voice of 100 crore poor Hindus in India has also been crushed, because poverty is destructive of all rights.
Arfa said that being identified as a Muslim journalist ” ab main taaj ki tarah pahanti hun ”.
While the godi media keeps harping on atrocities on Hindus, Arfa keeps harping on atrocities on Muslims. I submit that these are two sides of the same coin.
In India there is massive poverty, record and rising unemployment, appalling level of child malnutrition ( Global Hunger Index has said that every second child in India is malnourished ), skyrocketing prices of food and other essential commodities, almost total lack of proper healthcare and good education for the masses, etc.
These socio economic evils are common to both Hindus and Muslims, and not to Muslims alone.
To abolish them a mighty historical united people’s struggle, led by patriotic, modern minded leaders, is needed, which will be protracted, and in which tremendous sacrifices will have to be made.
As to who will be those patriotic leaders determined to raise the standard of living of our people and give them decent lives, how will that struggle be conducted, how much time will it take to achieve success, what will be the alternative to parliamentary democracy under which India will rapidly industrialise and modernise, etc no one can predict. One cannot be rigid about historical forms. The enlightened sections of the people will have to use their creativity in solving these problems.
Arfa has no understanding of all this, yet, like the godi media, she keeps strutting around like a peacock dispensing to the public her pearls of wisdom.
I have the highest respect for former Prime Minister Imran Khan‘s wife Bushra bibi
But first I must make a confession. I had in the past ridiculed her on twitter etc by calling her ‘pinky peerni’, who does ‘jaadu tona’, and by saying that she has two djinns in a bottle which she takes out at midnight to feed meat to them, that she roasts live chicken at midnight to feed these djinns, that one cannot see her face in a mirror ( implying she is a vampire ), and similar poppycock.
Though all this was said as a joke, yet I am ashamed of saying such nonsense. I am guilty of throwing mud and casting aspersions on the character of a noble lady, which I should never have done, and I can never forgive myself for saying all this rubbish and baloney..
The media, which only seeks ‘mirch masaala‘, made all sorts of false and fantastic allegations to malign her, alleging that she was controlling her husband, and that he only does what she orders ( as her diary allegedly revealed ).
It was alleged that she married Imran Khan before completing the perid of iddat following her divorce with her previous husband ( an allegation she denied in her interview by Nadeem Malik, to whom she said she married him 7 months after her divorce ).
Even allegations of corruption have been made against her
There were even allegations that she had deserted her husband and has left her home
I have carefully considered all these allegations, and I agree with senior advocate Sardar Latif Khosa that Bushra bibi is a very good woman, and all these allegations against her are false and figments of the imagination of some people, particularly mediapersons who only want to melodramatize and publish ‘mirch masaala’.
I am convinced that she is a simple housewife, loyal to her husband. Of course it may be that on some occasions she may have given advice to Imran Khan, but which wife does not ? This not mean that she controls him. Her interview to the eminent journalist Nadeem Malik reveals her devotion to her husband, and her desire to serve the poor
I believe she is a pious lady and would not do wrong things, and that is why Imran Khan married her after meeting her in Baba Farid dargah. Imran Khan is a mature person who has seen the world, and would not have married her unless he found her a lady of high character. Imran Khan has said that
“the character of a person and the mind is much more important than the physical aspect, because in my experience that has the smallest shelf life ”, and he has referenced his respect for his wife based on her intellect and character.
Bushra has been described as an introvert who maintains a low profile, and prefers to stay at home rather than attending social functions and gatherings ( though she often visits hospitals, orphanages etc ), to which Imran Khan admittedly has no objections, as he said he is himself “past the age of socialising”. According to Khan, his two sons have met Bushra, while he has also had time to get to know Bushra’s children following their marriage. Bushra has also clarified that she is not present on social media and any accounts attributed to her are fake.
Even her previous husband said after their divorce in 2018 “I want to clearly state about my former wife, Bushra Bibi, that I have not seen a woman as pious as her in the world”
Bushra bibi has been loyally standing by her husband in his hour of trial, and has protected his honour. This is proved by the fact that when some guards at Attock jail asked her ( when she came to meet her husband ) to give them money and they would supply good food to Imran Khan, she refused, knowing that this would later be played up as an attempt of bribery.
I salute this noble woman. Shame on those seeking to assassinate her character
I saw the recent interview by the eminent journalist Karan Thapar of Arghya Sengupta, Research Director of Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy on his book ‘The Colonial Constitution‘, and I regret to say that I found Dr Sengupta’s views totally superficial and inane
The thrust of Dr Sengupta’s argument is that the basic defect in the Indian Constitution of 1950 is that it does not devolve power to the people. In other words it gives too much power to the Central Government, which towers over the people, and therefore it is broadly a repetition of the colonial Government of India Act, 1935 made by the British rulers.
But the vast majority of the Indian people are casteist and communal, with backward mindsets. Devolving power to them really means devolving power on people with feudal mindsets ( as Karan rightly pointed out in the interview when talking of village panchayats and local bodies ). Should power be given to such people ?
The Constitution has set up a system of parliamentary democracy, but everyone knows that in India this largely runs on the basis of caste and communal vote banks. Casteism and communalism are feudal forces, which must be destroyed if India is to progress, but parliamentary democracy further entrenches them. How can India progress under this system ? Dr Sengupta simply ignores this question.
India is perpetually in an election mode. Apart from the Central Government, there are 28 states and 8 Union territories in India, and the moment one election ends preparations begin for the next one somewhere or the other. Presently focus is on the coming parliamentary elections due in 2024.
Our politicians, who are experts in manipulating elections, constantly go around polarising society, and whipping up casteism and communalism to win elections, paying little attention to the people’s welfare.
So the fundamental flaw in the Indian Constitution is that it has set up parliamentary democracy, which ensures that India remains semi feudal and backward. Dr Sengupta does not deal with this, and yet advocates modernity, which is a contradiction because parliamentary democracy ensures that India does not modernise.
To set up a modern Constitution is only possible after a mighty historical united people’s struggle, led by patriotic, modern minded leaders, which will be protracted, and in which tremendous sacrifices will have to be made.
As to who will be those patriotic leaders determined to raise the standard of living of our people and give them decent lives, how will that struggle be conducted, how much time will it take to achieve success, what will be the alternative to parliamentary democracy under which India will rapidly industrialise and modernise, etc no one can predict. One cannot be rigid about historical forms. The enlightened sections of the people will have to use their creativity in solving these problems.
The Constitution of 1950 no doubt gave to the people certain fundamental rights, which were not there in the Govt of India Act, 1935. But these were only political rights, not economic ones. In India there is massive poverty, record and rising unemployment, appalling level of child malnutrition ( Global Hunger Index has said that every second child in India is malnourished ), skyrocketing prices of food and other essential commodities, almost total lack of proper healthcare and good education for the masses, etc.
Moreover, even the political rights often exist only on paper, as they are rarely enforced. After all, the Constitution is only a piece of paper, but the ground realities are very different. Many people who criticise the government are arrested and jailed for long periods on concocted charges. Atrocities are often committed on minorities.
Dr Sengupta is totally wrong when he advocates decentralisation. In fact we need a strong central government if we wish to solve our basic socio-economic problems, but this must consist of modern minded patriotic persons.
Karan gave the example of the Meiji Restoration in Japan in 1868 which led to modernisation and emergence of Japan as a modern industrial country. The real rulers during the Meiji Restoration was not the Emperor but his handful of advisers who were modern minded people determined to transform Japan from a feudal country under the Shoguns to a modern country. This was not done democratically by taking the consent of the people by elections.
Similarly, Mustafa Kemal, who was an army general who staged a coup in 1922 and deposed the Sultan and Khalifa, and then destroyed feudalism in Turkey forcibly, not by elections. In fact if elections had been held, most Turks, who were then feudal minded, would have opposed abolition of sharia, suppression of the clergy, and emancipation of women.
Since most of our people are backward with feudal mindsets we must have a central government which ‘towers over the people’ ( to use Dr Sengupta’s words ), but such a government must consist of patriotic modern minded persons. Devolution of power to the people means keeping India backward, semi feudal and poor..
How could 100,000 Britishers, who came from far away, conquer and rule over 350 million Indians during the British Raj ?
This happened for two reasons
(1) Indians were technically backward
(2) We were divided.
Presently we have no dearth of technical talent. In fact Indian IT engineers are largely manning Silicon Valley in California, and American Universities have numerous professors of science, engineering, mathematics, medicine, etc, and technically India is today the most developed of the underdeveloped countries in the world.
So it is the second reason which has become all important today. It is our disunity which is preventing us from becoming a modern industrial giant, like China. We are badly divided on the basis of religion, caste, ethnicity, etc, and unless we are united we will never be able to rapidly industrialise and abolish poverty, unemployment, malnutrition, and the other evils which plague us today.
Some people think that because of our tremendous diversity we can never unite. I do not agree. Diversity can be a source of weakness, but it can also be a source of strength.
It is a source of weakness if we hate each other or fight with each other, as is happening in India today.
But it can also be a source of strength. For instance, USA is the most powerful and advanced nation in the world today, and one factor which contributed to this was its diversity. People from different countries in Europe, Asia, Latin America, etc came to USA bringing with them their own technical knowledge and culture, and when these were pooled together it contributed to rapid progress.
So we need not worry too much about our diversity. There can be unity despite diversity.
Unfortunately we adopted the parliamentary system of democracy, which runs ( as everyone knows ) largely on the basis of caste and communal vote banks. Casteism and communalism are feudal forces which must be destroyed if India is to progress, but parliamentary democracy further entrenches them ( as it runs largely on that basis ). Our politicians, who have no genuine love for the country but are only interested in power and pelf, incite caste, communal and ethnic hatred for getting votes, which divides us.
So we have to devise an alternative system which unites us, and under which we rapidly industrialise and emerge as a modern industrial giant, of which we have all the potential.
How that alternative system can be created, how much time will that take, who will be the modern minded leaders who will lead the people’s struggle in creating and running it, no one can presently predict. One cannot be rigid about historical forms. The people will have to use their creativity in this connection.
But it is only by creating such an alternative system, in which people are solidly united, can we ensure that never again will a handful of foreigners rule over us, directly or indirectly
The Indian origin journalist Mayank Chhaya, who is based in Chicago, has written an article on the film star Dev Anand, published in the portal indicanews.com
The article mentions little about Dev Anand’s films, and only recounts some encounters with him.
Films are a form of art, and about art and literature there are broadly two theories (1) art for art’s sake, and (2) art for social purpose.
The proponents of the first theory believe that the purpose of art is to create a work of beauty to please people’s aesthetic feelings, or to entertain them. If art is used for social purpose it ceases to be art and becomes propaganda.
On the other hand, proponent’s of the second theory believe that apart from providing entertainment, art should also serve a social purpose, by attacking social injustices, and inspiring people in their struggle for a better life.
Since films are also a form of art, which school should be followed in making films in India ?
In rich countries there can be no objection to films like the James Bond movies, or films of Sylvester Stallone, or Terminator, which were only for entertainment, but with no social purpose.
But in poor countries, films must also have a social purpose, apart from providing entertainment. This is because in these countries most people are leading miserable lives, and art should help them in their struggle for better lives. Pure entertainment without any social relevance is really like a drug which makes people forget their miserable lives for a couple of hours.
It is for this reason that I criticised the film ‘Pathan’ as it had no social relevance, and was just to provide entertainment by sensationalism and thrills.
Films of Raj Kapoor, like Awaara, Shri 420, Boot Polish, Jaagte Raho, etc had social relevance ( apart from providing entertainment ). Similarly, films of Satyajit Ray ( like Ashani Sanket ), Charlie Chaplin ( like Limelight, The Great Dictator ), Sergei Eisenstein ( like Battleship Potempkin ), etc had social relevance, and these were hits at the box office. So it cannot be said that films having social relevance cannot be successes.
But most of Dev Anand’s films, like those of Rajesh Khanna, Amitabh Bacchan, Shah Rukh Khan, etc had no social relevance, and were solely entertainment.
I regret that Dev Anand’s ‘flamboyance’ may have impressed Mayank Chhaya and many other people who are only interested in thrills, but it hardly impresses me
Moeed Pirzada is an upright Pakistani journalist, whom I respect, as he is bravely fighting for restoration of democracy in Pakistan.
However, with respect, his recent video talk reveals his inanity and superficial understanding.
Most of his talk is a rambling discourse on Indian history, which everyone is conversant with.
Moeed does not mention anything about what I told him in his interview of me some time back.
Towards the end of his talk Moeed refers to the Pakistani diaspora, and says that they are more knowledgeable than local Pakistanis, and should play a role in the political direction in Pakistan.
I too go often to USA and Canada and have interacted with many Pakistanis settled there. I found them to be fine people, and it is true that most of them are highly qualified as scientists, engineers, doctors, etc.
But to think that they can play a role in Pakistan is a facetious idea. They are interested in making money, and leading a comfortable life in North America.
Yes, many of them contribute some money to schools, hospitals, etc in Pakistan, and many have held demonstrations demanding restoration of democracy in Pakistan.
But that is about the end of their patriotism. To expect them to give up their comforts is asking too much.
Contrast this to what happened after the Chinese Revolution of 1949. Hundreds of Chinese scientists returned to China e.g. Deng Jiaxian, who had received his Ph.D. in nuclear physics from a top American University, and returned to China in 1950, and later became a major architect of the Chinese nuclear weapons program.
These scientists and students were welcomed back in China with open arms by the Chinese Govt, and many of the returnees took key positions in the Chinese research, development, and educational systems. The cutting edge science and technology they brought back gave the Chinese leaders growing confidence that China could indeed launch its modernization drive. It may also have encouraged the Chinese leadership to pursue increasing independence from the Soviet Union.
Altogether, from 1949 to 1956, 129 of these returned students went to work in the elite Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), and 109 of them achieved the senior status of associate research fellow (equivalent to associate professor), accounting for one quarter of all such positions in the academy. Qian Xuesen became the director of the Institute of Mechanics of the academy and later organized the Chinese rocket and missile programs. In fact, the Chinese government decided to launch its missile program in large part due to the return of Qian. Both individually and as a group, it is difficult to overestimate the importance of these returned students and scientists to the Chinese nuclear weapons and space programs. Among the twenty‐three Chinese scientists who were given national medals in 1999 for their contributions to the nuclear, missile, and satellite projects, nine had returned to China between 1949 and 1957.
These scientists who returned to China after 1949 received only a tiny fraction of the salaries and other benefits which they were getting in America, yet a burning sense of patriotism and a desire to build China as a modern industrial country made them return to their homeland, giving up many of their comforts in America.
Will any of the Pakistani diaspora do that ? I doubt it. They may contribute to some charity in Pakistan, but that is about all. They will certainly not permanently return to Pakistan.
