Sunday, April 28, 2013

Shifting Asian pivot (US- China)

 Shifting Asian pivot

 By Munir Akram | 4/28/2013

OVER a year ago, President Obama announced America`s strategic pivot to Asia, away from its century-old Eurocentric focus. The rationale offered for the pivot was to counter the presumed challenge from a rising China.

The case made in Washington was that China had not responded to President Obama`s early attempts at engagement on political and economic issues. The Chinese armed forces were engaged in a massive, non-transparent build-up that would threaten US and regional stability.

The Pentagon`s strategy review identified China as America`s adversary.

The consequent US assertiveness towards China became quickly visible.

US secretary of state Hillary Clintondeclared at an Asean forum that the US was an interested party in maritime disputes between China and some Southeast Asian states. This encouraged Vietnam and the Philippines to press their claims to disputed islands more aggressively.The Pentagon announced that the majority of US naval forces would be deployed in the Pacific. Australia accepted the stationing of US troops on its territory. The US held joint military exercises with several Asian countries. The US delved into China`s internal affairs, offering support to dissidents and human rights activists. The `threat` of cyberwar from China was highlighted.

Recent events indicate that the US decision to challenge China`s rising power is being modified. Secretary of State John Kerry, visiting Beijing in the midst of the latest Korean crisis, conveyed a call for Sino-US cooperation to build Asian and global stability. Kerry reportedly emphasised China`s responsibility as the world`s second and soon to be the first economic power. China was assured the US did not seek to threaten its vitalinterests.It had not taken sides on the islands dispute with Japan.

Kerry`s overtures found a responsive chord in Beijing. His trip was followed last week by the visit of US Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Gen Martin Dempsey who explained the US sought to be a `stabilising` factor (in Asia) and that its absence would be `destabilising` for the region. China`s chief of the People`sLiberation Army`s general staff repeated President Xi Jinping`s view that `the Pacific Ocean is wide enough to accommodate` both the US and China.

Although the US naval deployments in the Pacific and cyber-security were raised in the discussions and media, the visit was free of the open differences that have marked previous high-level Sino-US military exchanges. An agreement was announced for joint military exercises to combat maritime piracy and conduct humanitarian operations.

The proximate catalyst for the nascent Sino-US rapprochement was the crisis created by North Korea`s nuclear tests and its irresponsible threats of war, including the use of nuclear weapons.

The new Chinese leaders have affirmed China`s commitment to zero nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula. There is anger in Beijing at the `ungrateful andirresponsible` behaviour of Pyongyang`s young leader.

Apart from the Chinese position on North Korea, the freshly friendly US approach is probably the result of a closer look at the negative consequences of challenging China. Over the past year, Beijing`s responses to Vietnam, the Philippines and Japan have demonstrated China`s determination to defend its maritime claims. The humiliation suffered by the Philippines was not lost on others. No Asean state, apart from Vietnam, supports the `internationalisation` of the maritime disputes, as advocated by Hillary Clinton last year.

The US has also no doubt learned that India is unlikely to play by Washington`s rule book. New Delhi considers itself to be `too big to be used` by the US. If anything, India would like to utilise the American desire for collaboration to promote its own agenda of South Asian dominance. At the same time, India is unwilling to confront China. To win Beijing`s goodwill, New Delhi has offered assurances to the Chinese that they desire a stable and prosperous Pakistan.

In contrast to America`s narrowing strategic options, China has the choice to collaborate with Russia, as signified by President Xi`s selection of Moscow as the venue for his first visit abroad. This can shift the balance of power not only in Asia but also in Europe. Nato, already to be weakened by the US pivot to Asia, would become even more vulnerable to Russia`s still considerable military power.

And, China can build the BRICS grouping into a credible counterweight to US dominance of international financial and political institutions. A first signal was Beijing`s agreement at the recent BRICS summit in South Africa to the establishment of a BRICS bank.

Some group members are anxious to give the forum a political and strategic dimension. China has resisted so far; but could accede to this plan if strategically challenged by the US.

It is too early to predict which way the pivotal Sino-US relations will tilt. Today, the road to a `balance of cooperation`between the world`s first and second power is open. This could enhance the prospects of stability in a complex multipolar world that faces multiple threats from unresolved disputes, nuclear and conventional arms escala-tion, growing poverty and inequality, climate change and terrorism. President Obama, in his second term, has the domestic flexibility to build such a cooperative relationship with a rising China.

Under such an umbrella of Sino-US strategic cooperation, peace and stability in Asia, and elsewhere, would be easier to achieve. A number of local disputes among and within Asian countries could be more effectively addressed, first and foremost, the danger arising from North Korea`s adventurism. Even maritime disputes may become more amenable to solutions. And, Sino-US economic cooperation could accelerate global trade and growth and end the prolonged financial crisis.

The question is whether the process of Sino-US strategic cooperation will be allowed to happen. Large military budgets can be justified by highlighting the possible military threats to national security, however improbable. Great power cooperation and rational foreign policy choices may once again become a victim of the `military-industrial complex`, as that great general, president Dwight Eisenhower, eloquently warned.

Friday, April 26, 2013

Sects and sectarianism

 Sects and sectarianism( Dawn Friday Feature)

 By Jan-e-Alam Khaki | 4/26/2013

SECTS and sectarianism have been an enigma for almost all world religions, and the cause of much strife.

Almost all religions comprise sects and sub-sects, which appear to be a historical phenomenon, quite common across history.

More often than not, sects and sectarianism have posed a great challenge to world faiths, leading often to intellectual debates but also to physical entanglement.

So if this is a historical fact, is there a way to approach this problem more constructively? Or do we have to continue to fight for another millennium over these issues? Historically, sects have been seen as anathema to a faith/community, and therefore as a negative development. In the postmodern world, however, there is an alternative approach that focuses on multiple narratives rather than focusing on one standardized view of a set of interpretations taken from a certain period of time.

In the postmodern world, alternative or multiple interpretations of basic beliefs, tenets of faith, values, rituals, cultures and histories are seen as the richness of faith, not as a weakness. People having different interpretations are not hated but appreciated, encouraged to coexist and even celebrated.

If we were to take the word `sect` to mean deviation or heterodoxy, it would lead us to a totally different attitude. For a long time in history, this attitude has often prevailed. This is one more reason why sectarian fighting has been takingplace among different groups.

As a consequence of this attitude, one sect claims the `ultimate truth` or having God only on its side or only their party going to paradise and the rest destined for hell.

Members of one`s own sect are commonly seen as `brothers` in faith and the `others` as enemies.

Such attitudes then regard the interpretations held by others as `deviant` or `heterodox` (deviating from the `true` faith). This attitude may be called sectarianism or communalism. The key features of this attitude may include exclusivity and a `win-lose` attitude.

The other attitude, in which other sects are seen as having an `alternative` belief or opinion (unless they are extremists or militants, hell-bent on destruction), leads to a positive approach towards the `other`.

One of the words used to refer to sects in Muslim societies has been firqa, which literally means a branch. This is a powerful metaphor, connoting a branch of a giant tree.

A gigantic tree is expected to have numerous branches as it grows further. Similarly, a rich faith or tradition is always potent with numerous interpretations. Any tradition having only one interpretation for centuries will be a very poor tradition. Unity in this context is not necessarily a good quality of the tree; in fact it can be a debatable one.

This metaphor works beautifully when seen in the context of great world religions which have tended to be split, acquiring multiple interpretations, each one rich in its own way. Many Muslim thinkers and mystics have grappled with this question of unity and diversity in Muslim societies with immense wisdom. Rumi has addressed this issue in multiple ways. In the Mathnavi he uses the metaphor of an elephant and blind men to help us appreciate how human experiences can be subjective and therefore the need to respect others` experiences and their interpretations.

The world of scholarship, fortunately, is moving towards understanding sectarian divisions, (not sectarianism), in a positive vein. Many scholars are building bridges among communities and across communities, and even across civilisations by initiating meaningful dialogue through analysing histories and traditions in a way that promotes better understanding among members of the same faith or across faiths. Dr Farhad Daftary, a renowned contemporary Muslim scholar, rightly regards the ummah as `communities of interpretations`. He argues that these communities are entertaining differing interpretations of the same faith due to many factors including historical, political, economic and cultural.

For one reason or another, a community has been holding an interpretation of its own background, but within the same faith. So, instead of seeing this diversity as a blessing, for reasons political, economic, racial and parochial, the diversity of interpretations has been regarded as something bad. We know what consequences this attitude has had.

Yet the notion of pluralism is, happily, gaining momentum and brings with it greater promise of avoiding clashes among sects or religions by ending ignorance.

For centuries, communal wars among communities have taken a huge toll on human life and it would be a pity if we were to continue to fight over interpretations of the same or other faiths. Communities, rather, should come together to solve their problems by pooling their resources to help raise the standard of life of their people.

There is indeed hope as we see today many people working across communities and borders without letting their sectarian interpretations become an obstacle.

In sum, sects have been an integral part of Muslim societies for over 14 long centuries. We cannot just wish them away.

What we need to do is to look at them with a positive attitude which may lead us to be inclusive and respectful of the multiple interpretations of the Muslim faith.

What needs to be discouraged, however, is sectarianism, which often leads us to exclusiveness, arrogance and violence against those who happen to have a different interpretation of faith.•

Monday, April 22, 2013

Rupee resists pressure (Dawn EBR)

 Rupee resists pressure


THE rupee came under slight pressure against the dollar and euro in the local currency market this week, as the foreign currencies managed to bounce back from their recent lows.

However, the rupee resisted any sharp declines, and the spread between the buying and selling rates of the dollar was restricted to three paisa in interbank dealings and 20 paisa in the open market.

The difference in the dollar rates in the two markets, however, increased from 67 paisa to 78 paisa on the buying counter, and from 90 paisa to 95 paisa on the selling counter. The spread between the buying and selling rates, which had narrowed down to 10 paisa last weekend, hit the maximum limit of 25 paisa allowed by the central bank in the open market in the first session of the week.

On the interbank market, the rupee mostly traded flat against the dollar, with its lowest level for the week at Rs98.39/Rs98.41 and the highest at Rs98.33/Rs98.35.

After closing last week at Rs98.26 and Rs98.28, the rupee drifted lower against the dollar in first three successive sessions of the week. It lost seven paisa to close at Rs98.33 and Rs98.35 on April 15 in the first session of the week. It shed another five paisa in the second trading session to close at Rs98.38 and Rs98.40 on April 16, before declining by one paisa to close the third trading session at Rs98.39 and Rs98.41.

After a 13 paisa cumulative decline against the dollar in the first three sessions, the rupee gained a paltry two paisa on the buying counter and one paisa on the selling counter in the fourth trading session, to close the day at Rs98.37 and Rs98.40.

In the last session of the week on April 19, the rupee traded unchanged on the buying counter, and inched up by one paisa on the selling counter, to close the week at Rs98.37 and Rs98.39. On a week-over-week basis, the dollar appreciated by 11 paisa against the rupee in interbank dealings.

In the open market, the dollar extended its weekend firmness against the rupee in the first trading session of the week. The rupee lost 10 paisa on the buying counter and 25 paisa on the selling counter on the day to last trade at Rs99.00 and Rs99.25, against the previous weekend`s level of Rs98.90 and Rs99.00.

The rupee continued its downslide against the dollar into the second trading ses-sion, as it lost 20 paisa on the buying counter and 15 paisa on the selling counter. The dollar gained to Rs99.20 and Rs99.40 for the day. The consecutive two-day losses amounted to 40 paisa.

However, the rupee rebounded against the dollar in the third trading session, and gained five paisa to trade at Rs99.15 and Rs99.35. The dollar, however, traded unchanged at Rs99.15 and Rs99.35 in the next two trading sessions, and the parity stayed at that level at the close of the week. On a week-overweek basis, the dollar appreciated by 35 paisa against the rupee in the open market.

Meanwhile, the rupee continued its downward slide against the euro this week. It touched its highest level at Rs128.75 and Rs129.00 on April 17, and the lowest of Rs129.50 and Rs129.75 on April 18.

The rupee suffered a 20 paisa loss in the first trading session of the week, pushing the euro up to Rs129.20 and Rs129.45 against the previous week`s close of Rs129.00 and Rs129.25. The rupee lost another five paisa against the common currency in the second trading session to trade at Rs129.25 and Rs129.50.

The euro hit its highest level against the rupee in the third trading session of the week, after it gained 25 paisa to trade at Rs129.50 and Rs129.75. The rupee had suffered a cumulative loss of 50 paisa in the week in the first three sessions.

The rupee, however, managed to bounce back against the common currency in the fourth session, and pulled back by 75 paisa to trade up at Rs128.75 and Rs129.00.

However, it ended the week with a 50 paisa loss to trade at Rs129.25 and Rs129.50. On a week-over-week basis, the rupee shed 25 paisa against the euro.

On the international front, the yen rose from recent multi-year lows against the dollar in the first trading session, as it gained 1.86 per cent to trade at 96.55 yen against the dollar.

The euro was down 0.63 per cent to $1.3028 against the dollar, off of its one-month high of $1.3138 it had hit last week. In London, sterling also fell against the dollar, down 0.2 per cent at $1.5306, pulling away from last week`s peak of $1.5412, which was its highest since February 20.

On April 16, the yen tumbled against the dollar, which rose to a session peak of 98.15 yen before pulling back slightly to close the day up 1.5 per cent at 98.13 yen. The euro rose 0.7 per cent against the dollar to close at $1.3122. In London, sterling was up 0.1per cent at $1.5302, as it edged away from a low of $1.5269, and remained well below last week`s peak of $1.5412.

On April 17, the euro suffered its biggest daily decline against the dollar since last June, as it fell 1.1 per cent to $1.3026, after having hit a seven-week high overnight. The dollar rose 0.5 per cent to trade at 98.04 yen, but remained well below its fouryear high of 99.94 yen it had reached last week. In London, sterling fell 0.9 per cent against the dollar to $1.5219.

On April 18, the euro edged higher against the dollar, bouncing up from its biggest daily drop in 10 months in the previous session, rising 0.15 per cent to $1.3048. It hit a session peak of $1.3096.

Meanwhile the dollar rose 0.13 per cent to 98.22 yen. In London, sterling fell to a day low of $1.5218, before rising 0.3 per cent to close the day at $1.5281. It has steadily retreated from a two-month high of $1.5412 hit last week.

At the close of the week on April 19, the euro rose 0.5 per cent against the dollar to $1.3111. However, on a weekover-week basis, it slipped 0.3 per cent against the greenback, its first weekly loss in three weeks. The dollar rose 1.2 per cent to 99.27 yen, after having hit a session peak of 99.35 yen. Offers were reported around 99.50 yen, which may stem its rise in the very short term. On the week, the dollar fell 0.3 per cent against the yen, also its first weekly loss in three weeks. Sterling in London edged up 0.1 per cent against the dollar to $1.5289, paring gains after earlier climbing to as high as $1.5368.

Friday, April 19, 2013

Value of human dignity

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

Should we be complacent? ( Suffering of the Minorities)

Should we be complacent? 

By: By Zubeida Mustafa | 4/17/2013

THE report prepared by Zeenat Hisam and Yasmin Qureshi on Religious minorities in Pakistan for the Pakistan Institute of Labour Education and Research (Piler) and launched last Tuesday at the South Asian conference on the subject does not really come as a revelation.

Pakistan has earned notoriety for its ill-treatment of nonMuslim communities who are the so-called religious minorities in the country. The report is, however, timely, as also the conference was, on two counts.

First the authors have highlighted the socio-legal constraints the non-Muslim communities face in a state that is supposedly democratic and constitutional. Even the society they live in comprises people who profess to follow a religion that is said to be tolerant vis-à-vis all communities even if they are not Muslim. The report should come as a reminder to the people of Pakistan that it is time for them to shake themselves out of their complacency.

This complacency can be disturbing. At another group discussion I was invited to two days later, a sociologist claimed that the faith-based minorities faced no problem in Pakistan as her personal experience was that the media fabricated many of the reports and the minorities were content with their status.

Probably she had never heard of the members of minority communities being charged under the blasphemy laws. She also seemed unaware of tragedies like Shantinagar, Gojra and Joseph Colony.

Secondly, Piler`s conference which brought activists from Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, India, Nepal and Pakistan together, clearly established that this intolerance towards the `other` issomething that is not typical of Pakistan alone. This is a problem shared by South Asia. Of course, the intensity and nature of intolerance varies from country to country, but it exists all across the region.

The speakers dwelt at length on the sufferings of the minorities in their own country.

This underlines some interrelated issues. One is the need for a democraticand secular political set-up that should not discriminate against a section of the population described as a minority by virtue of its own faith and the law and constitution in operation. The other is the need to promote education and awareness of human rights and tolerance in order to create a democratic culture in society.

Both these features go together and one without the other does not solve any problem. The fact is that a state with a democratic and secular constitution, as India, has experienced communal riots and carnage as in Ahmedabad and the demolition of the Babri Masjid.

And yet India is a state where seven years ago, as Mazhar Hussain, the delegate from India at the Piler conference, pointed out, the president was a Muslim, the prime minister was Sikh, the chief justice a Dalit, the commander-in-chief of the air force a Parsi and an Italian Christian was the Congress leader managing state affairs from behind the scenes.

In Pakistan, the constitution itself is full of contradictions and discriminates against the non-Muslims even though it speaks of all citizens being equal. With the mullah culture and Talibanisation on the rise, extremism and intolerance which was not such a problem before is now making life difficult for many, and that includes Muslims of different sects.

In the wider South Asian context, the problem spills across boundaries with the minorities in one country feeling the impact of violence in a neighbouring state. As Mazhar Hussain pointed out, when the Hindus in Pakistan are attacked, the Muslims in India have to bear the brunt of the anger sparked in the Hindu majority in that country.

It therefore makes sense to approach the problem in a regional perspective. It calls for greater political understanding among the various member states of Saarc because mistrust and suspicions among governments promotes animosities among their populations while preventing bonds of friendship at the people-to-people level.

Lack of contact and interaction among people of different states does not promote inter-faith dialogue or understanding among them. Most important of all, it allows unscrupulous elements to use religion for narrow political gains. In that context, the suggestion put forward at the Piler conference made eminent sense. It was recommended that a South Asian institute be set up to propagate the message of love and peace that is the essence of all religions.

While an organisation of this kind would institutionalise an on-going inter-faith dialogue among all communities, governments should also play a role in this respect. The commonality in the ethical values of all religions makes it possible for their followers to live in harmony.

The fact is that democracy is such a new phenomenon for the countries of this region that they have not had the time to develop a democratic culture which took centuries to evolve in the democracies of the West. The colonised world inherited the political structures of its colonial masters when it won its independence. But it missed out on the long evolutionary experience that had endowed Europe with its rich democratic and political traditions that enabled it to run its political system so smoothly.

It amounts to transplanting a system in an alien environment without the existence of the preconditions needed for its successful working. Thus many political scientists such as Harold Laski and John Strachey say that a measure of literacy and education in the voters is necessary for the successful working of a democracy. That presupposes that education teaches them tolerance and respect for diversity and plurality.

Thursday, April 11, 2013

Sunday, April 7, 2013

Busting trade myths ( MFN Status to India)

Busting trade myths 

 
By Michael Kugelman | 4/7/2013


DECEMBER 31, 2012: this was the deadline for Pakistan to phase out its `negative list` of goods that can`t be traded with India.

Riding on the coattails of Pakistan`s decision in 2011 to grant Most-Favoured Nation status to India, the move was meant to be a major step in transforming 65 years of modest, haphazard, and often informal trade into a formal commercial partnership emblazoned with the MFN label.

Four months later, however, the negative list remains in place.

Islamabad insists that trade normalisation will occur after the May elections. Whether it does or not, it`s imperative that political parties and the general public have a clear understanding of where things stand particularly given the misconceptions surrounding Pakistan-India trade.

A new Wilson Centre report, Pakistan-India Trade: What Needs To Be Done? What Does It Matter? edited by myself and Robert M.

Hathaway, highlights four myths in particular.

1. Current bilateral trade is stagnant:
Observers often note that formal trade which is less than $3 billion barely exceeds the value of informal trade. If normalisation were to ensue, they argue, official trade could truly take off.

This narrative, however, underplays how official trade volume has already increased in recent years, even without the perks of MFN. In 2001-02, trade was just over $200 million; by 2007-08, it had soared to $2.2bn. Though the 2008 Mumbai attacks caused a brief decline, trade volume eventually picked up, climbing to $2.6bn in 2010-11. And between April and December of 2012 a period that saw the launch of a new integratedcheckpoint at Attari-Wagah and a milestone visa agreement Pakistan`s exports to India increased by two-thirds.

Such achievements without MFN suggest that economists` lofty projections of trade with MFN some say it could soar to $40-50bn are not unfathomable.

2. Pakistan`s agricultural lobby is the chief obstacle to normalisation:
Many food producers are indeed infuriated about the prospect of cheap, subsidised Indian products flooding Pakistani markets. With agricultural lobbies warning that farmers will be economically devastated and threatening to impose blockades on food imports from India, it`s little surprise that Islamabad is rightfully singling out the obstructionism of the agriculturists.

However, a glance at the negative list`s 1,209 items yields some revealing insights.

The sector boasting, by far, the largest number of items isn`t agriculture (with 16) it`s the car industry (with 385).

Some car-parts makers fear that imports from India will ruin their industry and that Pakistani exports won`t be purchased by an Indian industry that prefers to buy parts domestically. The report also highlights major opposition within the pharmaceutical and chemical/synthetic fibre sectors.

3. India`s copious non-tariff barriers spell disaster for Pakistani exports:
Our report highlights the findings of IBAled focus group consultations with Pakistani businessmen who identify 17 such barriers from anti-dumping to the lack of testing labs at border crossing points. They suggest that unless India addresses them, India-bound Pakistani exports will face a raft of problems.

Indians openly acknowledge these problems, but theyalso offer a more nuanced picture. Some measures described by Pakistan as discriminatory are in fact permitted by the World Trade Organisation on safety and health grounds.

Others represent what were once legitimate grievances, but have now been addressed by New Delhi.

4. The storminess of the Pakistan-India relationship makes trade normalisation unlikely:
Certainly, trade is often a casualty of the enmity that afflicts Pakistan-India political relations. From the 1965 war to the 2008 Mumbai attacks and this year`s border clashes, security developments have caused bilateral trade to decline or even cease altogether.

Yet there are just as many if not more examples of trade relations withstanding the pressures and tensions of the fraught security relationship. During the initial years following each country`s independence a period of uneasy political relations India was Pakistan`s largest trading partner. In 1972, just months after the devastation of another subcontinental war, the two sides signed an agreement that produced a resumption of limited trade.

More recently, the Samjhauta Express train blasts failed to derail trade. In fact, in the months following the attack, trade volume rose and benefited from a new trade facilitation measure that intensified cross-border truck movement.

In short, political tensions need not be an obstacle to cordial trade ties. The flourishing commercial cooperation of China and India is a stark example.

Confronting and correcting these misconceptions can provide more clarity to the trade normalisation debate, and help move the process forward. Yet much more must be done as well.The report`s recommendations call for Pakistan to craft a more comprehensive and strategically focused trade policy one that promotes open commerce, not protectionism; that emphasises improvements in transit trade, transport infrastructure, and cross-border banking; and that regards India`s economic growth as an opportunity, not a threat.

At the same time, Islamabad should use its increased revenues from tariff collections, customs duties, and other outcomes of expanded legal trade to compensate the losers of trade liberalisation.

India has a role to play as well. New Delhi should make its trade rules and procedures more transparent in order to reduce confusion in, and miscommunication with, Pakistan about non-tariff barriers (real or perceived).

Ultimately, however, trade normalisation is a two-way street and Pakistan and India must work collectively to consummate it. Together, they should ensure that their private sectors (whose actionoriented, proactive approaches strongly benefit economic relations) are on the front lines; engage their powerful private media to amplify the advantages of trade; loosen transit restrictions and enhance trade route efficiency; and establish a bilateral commission to oversee the economic relationship.

If such steps are taken, Pakistan`s next government will be well-positioned to score a major achievement one that goes a long way toward easing the country`s economic crisis.

Saturday, April 6, 2013

PAKISTAN AFFAIRS SOLVED MCQs 2013



PAKISTAN AFFAIRS SOLVED MCQs

1. Who was the governor of Sindh after Muhammad Bin Qasim?
b. Yazid Bin Muhallab

2. who was the mughal emperor who accepted the british pension firstly?
b. Shah Alam-II

3. Ahmad Shah Abdali launched his early invasion against:
b. Marhatas

4. The British fought Plassy war against:
c. Sirajuddula

5. Dars-i-Nizami was named after:
c. Mullah Nizamuddin

6. Before 1857 how many Universities on Western pattern were established in India?
d. None

7. When the MAO College at Alligarh was started?
b. 1877

8. Anjuman-i-Himayat e Islam was started in:
b. 1884

9. The constitution of All India Mulim League was written by:
b. Muhammad Ali Johar

10. The first session of Muhammad Educational Conference was held in
d. None (The question is wrong. The first session of Muslim Educational Conference was held at Aligarh in 1886)

11. The London branch of Muslim League was started by:
a. Syed Amir Ali

12. “Hamdard” was edited by
b. Moulana Muhammad Ali Johar

13. “Shudhi” movement was started by:
d. None (Swami Shraddhanand)

14. Majlis-ii-Ahrar was found in:
b. 1929

15. In Kashmir the ceasefire between Pakistan and India was signed on:
b. 27th july 1949

16. Islamabad was declared capital of Pakistan in:
d. None. (1967)

17. Majority of Southern Pakistan population lived along the:
a. River Indus

18. The Aryan arrived in South Asia in :
d. None (1500 BC)

19. The most ancient civilization is:
c. Mehargarh

20.The author of “The Case of Pakistan” is
d. None