Archive for the 'Mohammed Ali Jinnah' Category

Pakistan of 2007: What Would Have Quaid Wanted?

Understanding Pakistan Project Team September 11th, 2007

By: Athar Osama
 
pk-b4.jpgToday, Pakistan solemnly observe Quaid-e-Azam’s 58th death anniversary. I am taking on the challenge of writing this piece with great trepidition, but utmost sincerity, and would like to state upfront that I truely believe that all of us, Pakistanis, including myself, owe a mountain of debt and gratitude to Qauid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah for giving us our freedoms in this country we call our homeland. Having said that, though, I would also beg to venture a bit further to say that while it was our solemn duty to establish the Pakistan of Quaid’s

dreams in 1947–for that was the Pakistan for which hundreds of millions rallied behind him and over a million of us died, it is perhaps time now to dispassionately re-evalute that aspiration and take a more realistic view of our circumstances.
 
In the intervening 60 years, the reality of Pakistan’s politics and society has turned out to be everything but Quaid’s dream. We, as a nation and as people, have wandered around aimlessly looking for an identity and a raison detre for our existence and our quest to find our destiny has often been hijacked by unscruplous politicians, religious leaders, and miltiary dictators luring us with their own versions of Quaid’s dream. All political leaders–from the extreme right to the extreme left, from the theocrats to the democrats, from Islamists to the secularists–claim to be the custodians of Quaid’s Pakistan.
 
While nobody really knows what Quaid’s vision for Pakistan actually was for he said many things, on many occasions, and for many different audiences and it is easy to distort what he said to support one’s own version, we know one thing for sure. Quaid’s vision could not be all of what it is claimed to be at the same time. The struggle to interpret and re-interpret what Quaid may have said continues to this day… 
 

Continue Reading »

Aza’adi Special-Pakistan at the Crossroads: To be, But What to be? That is the Question!

Athar Osama August 14th, 2007

By: Athar Osama

Today is the Sixtieth Anniversary of the Independence of Pakistan. Today, sixty years ago, Pakistan came into being as a state established for the Muslims of the subcontinent to fashion their lives according the requirements of their own religion. Sixty years have gone by and Pakistan has a come a long way from a weak and fragile–almost by design–state that was declared a geographical absurdity to one that has not only survived but, in some ways, thrived as well. In other ways, though, Pakistan continues to struggle to define itself till this day. It is a state where power belongs to a small elite group of individuals and not to the people. It is state where it cannot be said with surety and conviction that the govern-ors govern with the consent of the governed. It is a state where extreme poverty still exists for as many as half of the country’s population and a country that continues to score among the lowest in the world on key indicators of human development whether it is education, health, mortality or economic and political freedom–alongside countries of sub-Saharan Africa.

pk11-UPPPollonGovernanceSystems.JPGWhile we should all be thankful to Allah Almighty for giving us this piece of land, that we can call our home, and its people, our people, we should also not leave any stone unturned to make this piece of land the envy of the world. We are far from that aspiration and there is a long way to go. In fact, some of us may argue that we aren’t even moving in the right direction. Ironically, Pakistan is a country that has not yet come to terms with some of the most important questions that must define a country’s march into the future:

  • What is the purpose of its existence (e.g. Whether it was created as a state for the Muslims or an Islamic State?)
  • What should be the system of governance that would be put into practice (e.g. Democracy or Dictatorship), and
  • And how do we, Pakistanis, see Law and Constitution, whether the latter is a mere piece of paper to be followed, if convenient, and discarded, if necessary or defines “rules of the game” that must be adhered-to to bring order and stability to our lives.

No wonder then, that every now and then, we, Pakistanis, find our country at a crossroads. It is also no surprise then that on this–the 6oth Anniversary of Pakistan’s Independence–a lot of Pakistanis are asking themselves the same question. What was Pakistan created for and why does it exist? Understanding Pakistan has engaged with this debate before (here, here, and here) as we looked at the passage of the Objectives Resolution (here). We add two new perspectives to this debate in this Aza’adi Special Edition of Understanding Pakistan.

Continue Reading »

Aza’adi Special: Jinnah and the Islamic State – Setting the Record Straight

Understanding Pakistan Project Team August 14th, 2007

By: Pervez Hoodbhoy

This essay originated from my lecture in Karachi in 2007, delivered at the invitation of the Jinnah Society in cooperation with the Oxford University Press of Pakistan. 

What did Quaid-e-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, want for the country he was destined to create in 1947? Surely I cannot say anything new on this venerable and much-discussed historical subject; the experts know much more. But, as we approach Pakistan’s sixtieth anniversary, the matter of Jinnah and the Islamic State is still a hot one. It is confounded both by the wishful thinking of my well-meaning liberal friends, as well as conveniences invented at different times by Pakistan’s military, political, and religious establishments. Therefore, it seems to me that objectivity, honesty, and clarity are still desperately needed if we are to clean out old cobwebs and chart a new course for the future of our country.

What is Pakistan all about? For decades, Pakistani school children have grown up learning a linguistically flawed (but catchy) rhetorical question sung together with its answer: Pakistan ka matlab kya? La illaha illala! [What is the meaning of Pakistan? There is no god but Allah!]. They have been told that Pakistan’s raison d’etre was the creation of an Islamic state where the Sharia must reign supreme.

Surely this has had its effect. A recent survey by the World Public Opinion.Org (April 24, 2007) found that 54% of Pakistanis wanted strict application of Sharia while 25% wanted it in some more dilute form. Totaling 79%, this was the largest percentage in the four countries surveyed (Morocco, Egypt, Pakistan, Indonesia) .

But was sentiment for Sharia and the Islamic State strong in 1947 among those who fought for Pakistan?

Mr. Jinnah’s thoughts inevitably enter the argument. This, of course, does not necessarily mean that Pakistan was, or is, obligated to become the fulfilment of his vision. Pakistan is much more than Jinnah and it will eventually go in the direction that its people want it to go.  But it certainly is of the greatest intellectual and historical interest to ask two key questions:

a) Did Jinnah want Pakistan to be a Muslim majority state where individuals, whether Muslim or otherwise, would be free to live their lives more or less as they do in countries in the rest of the world?

      Or,

b) Did Jinnah want an Islamic state? And, if so, what was his understanding of such a state.

Continue Reading »

Aza’adi Special: Jinnah’s Vision of Pakistan

Understanding Pakistan Project Team August 14th, 2007

By: Yasser Latif Hamdani

Today being the 60th anniversary of Pakistan’s independence is an opportunate moment to look at Quaid-e-Azam’s vision of Pakistan delivered 60 years ago, by Mr. Jinnah, Pakistan’s undisputed Leader, Governor General and elected President of the Constituent Assembly elaborated his vision for the future of Pakistan.

Jinnah’s vision is unambiguous.

  • The state would be completely impartial to religion of the individual.
    The state where every citizen would be equal and there would be no distinction between citizen on the basis of faith or caste or creed.

A lot of controverey has emerged about this speech. Any student of political science would tell you that is the classic exposition of a modern secular democratic state. However, the issue of whether this constitutes a “secular” state or an “Islamic” state is besides the point. A rose by any name is after all a rose.

Here is what Mr. Jinnah said on that fateful day. It is worth reading in the full:

“I know there are people who do not quite agree with the division of India and the partition of the Punjab and Bengal. Much has been said against it, but now that it has been accepted, it is the duty of every one of us to loyally abide by it and honourably act according to the agreement which is now final and binding on all. But you must remember, as I have said, that this mighty revolution that has taken place is unprecedented. One can quite understand the feeling the exists between the two communities wherever one community is in majority and the other is in minority. But the question is whether it was possible or practicable to act otherwise than has been done. A division had to take place. On both sides, in Hindustan and Pakistan, there are sections of people who may not agree with it, who may not like it, but in my judgment there was no other solution and I am sure future history will record its verdict in favour of it. And what is more it will be proved by actual experience as we go on that that was the only solution of India’s constitutional problem. Any idea of a United India could never have worked and in my judgment it would have led us to terrific disaster. May be that view is correct ; may be it is not; that remains to be seen. All the same, in this division it was impossible to avoid the question of minorities being in one Dominion or the other. Now that was unavoidable. There is no other solution. Now what shall we do? Now, if we want to make this great State of Pakistan happy and prosperous we should wholly and solely concentrate on the well-being of the people, and especially of the masses and the poor. If you will work in co-operation, forgetting the past, burying the hatchet you are bound to succeed. If you change your past and work together in a spirit that every one of you, no matter to what community he belongs, no matter what relations he had with you in the past, no matter what is his colour, caste or creed, is first, second and last a citizen of this State with equal rights, privileges and obligations, there will be no end to the progress you will make.”

Continue Reading »

Aza’adi Special: Iqbal and Jinnah’s Idea of Pakistan as an Islamic State

Understanding Pakistan Project Team August 14th, 2007

By: Allama Ghulam Ahmed Parvez 

(This is an abridged-excerpted version of a larger piece published on this website before - here.)

pk2-IQAllamaIqbal5.jpgAccording Allama G. A. Pervez Allama Iqbal was the real intellectual force behind the notion of an Islamic state and Jinnah was merely an agent to implement Iqbal’s idea. In the above-cited piece, this how he explains: 

Iqbal’s Notion of an Islamic State

This state of affairs prevailed throughout the Muslim countries for centuries together where Mazhab was accepted as true Islam. We should, however, consider ourselves fortunate in as much as a voice was raised in our time and from our own country, to distinguish between Deen and Mazhab, and the Ummah was called upon to revive true Islam in the light of the Quran. This was the voice of Iqbal, the great thinker, and still greater scholar of the Quran. This, he said, was possible only if we had a piece of land in which a State was established purely on the lines indicated by the Quran, thereby wiping out completely the rule of man, in any form, be it capitalism or priestcraft. This scheme of his he pronounced in his Presidential Address of All-India Muslim League Session at Allahabad, in 1930. Such a State, he said:

“Would mean security and peace for India resulting from an internal balance of power, and for Islam an opportunity to rid itself of the stamp that Arabian Imperialism was forced to give it, to mobilise its law, its education, its culture, and to bring them into closer contact with its own original spirit and with the spirit of modern times.”  (Speeches and statements of Iqbal–p.15)

Two years later, while addressing the nation at the Annual Session of the All-India Muslim Conference at Lahore, on 21-3-1932, he said:

“The possibilities of the faith you represent are not yet exhausted. It can still create a new world where the social rank of man is not determined by his caste or colour, or the amount of the dividend he earns, but by the kind of life he lives; where Capital cannot be allowed to accumulate so as to dominate the real producer of wealth. This superb ideal of your faith, however, needs emancipation from the medieval fancies of theologians and legists. Spiritually, we are living in a prison-house of thoughts and emotions which, during the course of centuries we have woven round ourselves. And be it further said to the same of us– men of older generation– that we have failed to equip the younger generation for the economic, political and even religious crises that the present age is likely to bring. The whole community needs a complete overhauling of its mentality in order that it may again become capable of feeling the urge of fresh desires and ideals.” (Ibid p.55)

Continue Reading »

Understanding Pakistan: RIP Pakistan (1947-1974)

Understanding Pakistan Project Team July 2nd, 2007

Guest Column* By: Yasser Latif Hamdani

When I was first asked to contribute to the “Understanding Pakistan” effort I was not sure what it meant:  What Pakistan were we talking about or what Pakistan were we trying to understand? The country, the state, the people or the historical ideal which led to its creation?  But as the project has progressed it has become clear that this is a serious effort to understand why and how a country named Pakistan actually came into existence and what it is all about. 

Allow me to start off by saying that you cannot understand Pakistan until and unless you understand how the demise of the ideal of Pakistan was brought about by its own people.  I will venture so far as to say that Pakistan has ceased to exist and what exists in its place is an imposter at best, kept alive by forces which need this part of the world for their own agendas. 

However unlike other self styled arm chair analysts, I will not pin point 1971 as the death of Pakistan- partly because history tells us that Jinnah was ready to concede an independent Bangladesh in 1947 and that it was Nehru who had insisted on there being two countries instead of one (See “Shameful Flight” by Stanley Wolpert on this issue). 

In my opinion it was 1974 which was to Jinnah’s 1947 what 1984 was to Orwell’s 1948 for 1974 marked the same end of idealism and beginning of perversion in its name that was depicted so brilliantly by Orwell both in 1984 and the Animal Farm.  For all the oaths taken in order to preserve the ideology of Pakistan, it was this tragic events of this year, coming so soon after Pakistan’s first unanimous constitution, that dealt a deathblow to the true ideology of Pakistan.  Make no mistake about it.

The real Pakistan no longer exists.  It died at the very young age of 27.  What it needs is another Messiah with the power to raise the dead.

Continue Reading »

Early Challenges Under Jinnah (1947-48)

Athar Osama June 18th, 2007

By: Athar Osama 

The rushed and haphazard manner in which the plans for the division of British India were devised and executed left so much to be desired, caused immeasurable suffering to the people on both sides of the border, left a crushing social and economic burden on the two countries—more so on Pakistan than on India, though—and a legacy of mutual rivalry and armed conflict that they continue to struggle with even to this day.

For the citizens of the nascent state, however, there were important and pressing matters to attend to. Pakistan had arrived and, with it brought a “promised homeland” for at least a major section of the Muslims of India. It also came with great opportunities and tremendous challenges.  

Yet, with their Quaid-e-Azam at the healm, Pakistanis believed that they could beat all odds and, having secured the country, wouldpk3-image001.jpg now secure their future as well. Unfortunately, that feeling did not last for too long. M. A. Jinnah–the frail leader almost on his deathbed–presided over a tumultous year for the country and, while being a source of great strength for his followers, he left a legacy as the first Governor General that could be described as mixed or “incomplete”, at best. Several questions may be raised of this first year of the country’s existence:

  • What were the factors in Jinnah’s mind that led him to adamantly deny Mountbatten’s desire to become the first Governor General of Pakistan (jointly with India)? What kind of cost-benefit analysis was made for taking that decision?
  • Did Jinnah’s insistence on becoming the first Governor General of Pakistan against Mountbatten’s desire cost Pakistan to the point of becoming crippled? Would Pakistan have fared better–in terms of share in assets, Kashmir etc.–had Mountbatten been allowed to become the Governor General instead?
  • Did Jinnah’s assumption of the office of the Governor General as well as President of Constituent Assembly and the President of Muslim League leave a tradition of personalization of power that afflicts Pakistan to this day?
  • What was the precise role of second-tier politicians in the post-independence Pakistan? What did Jinnah think of them and how did he (or did he?) groom them to becomes future leaders of Pakistan?
  •  What were Jinnah’s views about democracy in Pakistan? And how did he view events such as dissolution of assemblies in Sindh and NWFP, and imposition of direct rule in Baluchistan in the light of that?
  • Being the ”constitutionalist par excellence” that he was, what was Jinnah’s role toward the formation of the first Constitution of the country?

It is hard to look at Jinnah’s first and last year in office as anything other than the struggles of a dying man clinging on to life because he thinks, and rightly so, that the nation needs him most, only to lose this battle between life and death–that he has fought so hard for so many years– within a matter of months. These and many other questions highlight the critical issues confronting the country at that time. They may have also left deep legacies that continue to affect the nation today.

Continue Reading »