Is this Jinnah’s Pakistan?

Published: September 10, 2012
The writer is professor of political science at LUMS

The writer is professor of political science at LUMS

Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the father of our nation, must be turning in his grave if angels were to carry the news and pictures of today’s Pakistan to him — targeted killings of Shias, persecution of Christians and public conversion of Hindus on live media. This is not the Pakistan he or other founders powered by a dream of an independent country envisioned. Were they around today, they would have launched another independent movement — this time, to liberate the country from three powerful influences that have taken the form of institutions and have, in many ways, established their control over the soul of the country. They are the mullahs, the military and the feudal elites.

The capacity they have acquired and the impact of their power over the state and society, run counter to the founding vision of Pakistan. This vision was about a real democracy, placing faith and power in people and working towards the common good of all citizens, regardless of one’s religion, sect or place of residence. The early founders believed in rule of law, supremacy of the constitution, pluralism and equality. Two themes that define the founders’ ideology or the ideology of Pakistan are constitutionalism and pluralism — nothing else. All other definitions of Pakistan or its ideology are only self-serving political tools that have subverted Pakistan’s true identity beyond recognition.

With the subversion of democracy four times, the mullah, military and feudal elites have emerged as dominant players. They have created a structural problem in the way of realising the vision of Jinnah. By character and self-interest, they cannot be democratic, respect rule of law, or allow the society to express itself. With their dominance, they have created a climate for anti-democratic forces.

Perhaps, we cannot imagine how much damage just one cleric in the capital has done to the entire nation by falsely accusing a child, Rimsha Masih, of blasphemy, an act he himself is accused of committing by adding false evidence to the accusation. The news struck the chord of world media, which is already so sceptical about our present and future. They are not wrong on this.

Can a society and state fall so low that a girl from a persecuted religious minority is hauled and locked up in prison for weeks without bail? It is not the first case of false implication of a minority person; it has happened hundreds of times before, for motives other than religion. The question is: Where is the state and where is the society? What has our sovereign parliament done in rectifying the wrongs against innocent persons?

Their inaction makes me angry and utterly disappointed in everyone associated with the system of power in this country. I have watched the electronic media and read a good amount of print media but to my dismay, I haven’t seen any youth organisation protesting, any political party marching out, or any political leader coming out strong in support of Rimsha Masih. Our silence against injustice, expediency and narrow self-interest promotes and strengthens the climate of fear in Pakistan. The mullahs, military and feudal elite thrive on our fear because it encourages them to rule the country the way they want — with impunity.

To prevent further decline in the ditch of darkness and to create some hope of coming out, we need to recapture the vision of our founder — of a democratic, tolerant and pluralistic Pakistan. For that to happen, we need the courage to speak up, protest and march. And, when we have the opportunity, we must vote them out.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 11th, 2012.

Facebook Conversations

Reader Comments (59)

  • Raw is War
    Sep 10, 2012 - 9:47PM

    i can feel your pain.


  • lalai
    Sep 10, 2012 - 9:49PM

    No sir, Jinnah’s Pakistan officially came to an end on Dec 1971. For the past 61 years of independence, this country was plundered in the name of Islam, patriotism and perceived Hindu enmity and for the last four years we have got a new bunch of exploiters denying us our rights in the name of law and constitution. Recommend

  • Acorn Guts
    Sep 10, 2012 - 9:56PM

    Just a glance at ET frontpage tells the whole story
    – Malik Ishaq bailed out
    – Head cleric of Lal Masjid along with his staff acquitted
    – Khatm-e-nabuwat reckons Ahmadis need to be further persecuted
    – More Shias martyred in a bomb blast

    Wish I could post a screenshot here. The land of pure is no more.


  • Falcon
    Sep 10, 2012 - 10:01PM

    @author –
    I agree that nexus of mullah, feudal elite, and military is one of the worst things to have occurred to this country. But may I ask where is the civil society, which is supposed to be leading the pack of intellectuals across the nation. Why is that everyone is blaming everyone else but absolving themselves of responsibility?


  • observer
    Sep 10, 2012 - 10:02PM

    Is this Jinnah’s Pakistan?

    And why not? From Muslims are a ‘separate nation’ to, dark Bengalis are a separate nation, to Ahmadis are a separate nation, to Shias are a separate nation, to those with knee high pajamas are a separate nation, is only a logical progression.


  • Ben
    Sep 10, 2012 - 10:06PM

    It is Bhutto’s Pakistan. It never was Jinnah’s.


  • Vikas
    Sep 10, 2012 - 10:07PM

    Some one should pen a book. Pakistan: From Quaid’s to Qaeda’s


  • ashok
    Sep 10, 2012 - 10:11PM

    Jinnah’s TWO-NATION theory and ideology of Pakistan in action at full speed.

    Trickle down of the TWO-NATION ideology was converted into TWO-RELIGION theory which then morphed into TWO-SECTS theory and finally reaching at individuals in the shape of TWO-NEIGHBORS theory.

    Those who pursue 2-nation theory will hound anyone who does agree with them, if not checked.


  • Sep 10, 2012 - 10:12PM

    Jinnah’s Pakistan died on 7th September 1974 when Pakistan government took upon itself to define who is a Muslim or not (regardless of the fact that in 1953 Munir Inquiry Report it was concluded that no two religious scholars agree on a definition and still they do not). I wonder why the author failed to mention Ahmadiyya community in the list of persecuted communities in Pakistan who were at the forefront of Pakistan movement with Muhammad Ali Jinnah? May be you need a bit more courage.


  • BlackJack
    Sep 10, 2012 - 10:31PM

    The lack of original thought in Pakistan is the problem, and not whether you have lived up to whatever Jinnah or Zia or Musharraf thought. There are umpteen examples to show that Pakistan has been cast in the mould that its founder designed. Let me share a few areas where I disagree with the op-ed:
    1. This vision was about a real democracy, placing faith and power in people and working towards the common good of all citizens, regardless of one’s religion, sect or place of residence. That was the vision of India. The vision of Pakistan was based on the 2-nation theory, which means that some people cannot live with other people. Today you are getting rid of the few that remain.
    2. Two themes that define the founders’ ideology or the ideology of Pakistan are constitutionalism and pluralism – Unlike Nehru, Jinnah declared himself Governor-General, which was as good as calling himself King or Caliph. All that subsequent military dictators have done is follow his lead.
    3. This is not the Pakistan he or other founders powered by a dream of an independent country envisioned. ‘We shall have India divided or we shall have India destroyed’, said Jinnah. He managed the first half, and bequeathed the second half as legacy to the future rulers of Pakistan who destroyed their own country in the process.


  • John B
    Sep 10, 2012 - 10:37PM

    Yes, because the events of today were argued in Indian press when the cry of Pakistan was raised. The rest is history.


  • Ejaaz
    Sep 10, 2012 - 10:40PM

    “The early founders believed in rule of law, supremacy of the constitution, pluralism and equality”

    Unfortunately that is not true, and that has been one of the key problems for Pakistan. Right from the very beginning, it set on a path that flouted the contract that between the people and their leaders. Objective resolution of 1949 did not come from no where. It was negating the basic rights of 33% of people in East Pakistan and at least 20% of the people in West Pakistan at that point in time. Those people were ignored because they were non-Muslims, but the precedent had been set. The negation of pluralism and equality are obvious in that resolution. It became clear that the people did not have to be consulted or even mattered when writing the constitution. Rule of law and the constitution were just paper as Zia said and could be torn up as he wished, because the consent of the governed had never been sought or given in the first instance. The only time it was ever asked for was before 1947 by the British when they asked the Muslims if they desired a separate Homeland. After that, no one ever bothered asking the Pakistani Muslims, at least, anything. At present our PCO CJ is showing how he can tear up the laws and constitution without any problems. So nothing has changed. We still live under the rule of Man and not laws.


  • Jat
    Sep 10, 2012 - 10:47PM

    @Falcon: This is where leadership is required. Someone who is strong in their belief and conviction, someone who is bold enough to take on the Mullah-military alliance.

    Pakistan has so far failed to produce a single such leader.


  • you are right
    Sep 10, 2012 - 10:47PM

    people who breaks their nation (india) met the same fate


  • sabi
    Sep 10, 2012 - 10:48PM

    “we must vote them out”.
    We must route them out
    Excellant ,regards


  • Logic Europe
    Sep 10, 2012 - 10:57PM

    the only way these problems can be confronted is for all to SUPORT a democratically elected government ,This has been lacking, thanks to opposition and press who have criticised and devoured the government so much that it is virtually paralysed
    How can a single party face this menace ALL are happy to take advantage of people’s feelings
    Suporting your government for its term is the only solution .


  • BlackJack
    Sep 10, 2012 - 11:00PM

    No one can argue that Jinnah was the outright leader of the Muslim League and nothing moved without his consent. Direct Action Day was his call to action. Recommend

  • Abbas from the US
    Sep 10, 2012 - 11:13PM

    Mr Rais:

    Thanks for the reminder that what we see today is certainly not Jinnah’s Pakistan as envisioned by the founding fathers. There is a need for constant reminders to this nation in this respect.

    When Pakistan was in the process of being created, the issue that was foremost in the approaching independence of the two societies as outlined by Jinnah, was economic rights and the fear of being economically left behind the majority, Which unfortunaely has proved true in the economic layering of current Indian society.

    In the effort to create an Islamicized utopion society the greatest amount of mental suffering unknowingly has been heaped upon the minorities and those that happened to be labeled as minority to keep in line with the thinkiing of the most vociferious Mullahs that could influence majority public opinion.

    If Pakistan were to redefine its goals to restore the original objective of achieving the same economic rights for all Pakistanis, irrespective of their religious or sectarian affiliation, it is possible that Pakistan may be able to overcome the shortcomings accumulated towards a significant number of its citizens over the decades and return to the visiion of its founding fathers.


  • gp65
    Sep 10, 2012 - 11:16PM

    @Falcon: “I agree that nexus of mullah, feudal elite, and military is one of the worst things to have occurred to this country. But may I ask where is the civil society, which is supposed to be leading the pack of intellectuals across the nation. “

    Good question.A couple of questions back to you. You are part of civil society also. From what I have observed, you are a strong supporter of PTI which represents itself as a paty of change. Why do you not through your party forum, which I am told is very democratic bring up the idea of fight against intolerance and radicalism fanned by hate filled textbooks, Imams and many bigoted media persons? Granted the primary responsibility is with the executive but clearly the executive is not delivering. Surely PTI can make itself counted as civil society in such matters?SOmething to consider. Good luck.


  • gp65
    Sep 10, 2012 - 11:24PM

    @Logic Europe: I often agree with you but in this case I am unable to. Was PPP led Bhutto not the one who refused to allow Mujib Ur Rahman to come to power despite winning majority in entire Pakistan as it stood then? Was he not the one that declared Ahmadiyas non-Muslim?


  • BlackJack
    Sep 10, 2012 - 11:25PM

    90% of my second comment has disappeared! Why did you spare the rest?


  • gp65
    Sep 10, 2012 - 11:30PM

    ET where is my original comment whereby I provided reference to Jinnah’s actions for each of the ills the author is complaining about in current society i.e. intolerance, no support for democracy, using violence as a tool for intimidating majority to get your way and ofcourse the fact that he defended a man who murdered another by accusing of blasphemy.


  • Ali Khan
    Sep 10, 2012 - 11:49PM

    …and who do we vote in?


  • Menon
    Sep 10, 2012 - 11:56PM

    Jinnah’s Pakistan is a myth. Jinnah made speech about secularism and did everything exactly opposite or nothing. Nothing is more like it because the man was sick, frail and alomost bed ridden by the time Pakistan seperated from India.

    When one considers the fact that Jinnah was merely a puppet at the hands of Zamindars from Punjab and Sindh, he could not have done anything even if he was healthy and wanted. Zamindars knew very well their feudal lordship would not last with Nehru and Gandhi and wanted a puppett and who better than Jinnah? A megalomaniac.

    Stop perpetauting the myth of Jinnah being secular and being the father of Pakistan, zamindari cult were te fathewrs then and the fathers lording over Pakistan today.

    Just answer one question for yourself, how many national or provincial level political leaders have risen up in Pakistan since seperation? How many? Names please?

    It is better to admit the mistakes to move on. Most unfortunate thing that hyappened to Pakistan was there were no selfless statesmen in Pakistan since its birth and still doesn’t. On the other hand India was lucky, Pandit Nehru, Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, V V Giri, Vallabhai Patel, V K Krishna Menon, Raja Gopalachari, Rajendra Prasad, Indira Gandhi, Abdul Kalam, Man Mohan Singh. All contributed in different ways.


  • Tilsim
    Sep 11, 2012 - 12:25AM

    “Our silence against injustice, expediency and narrow self-interest promotes and strengthens the climate of fear in Pakistan.”

    Not sure. I don’t recall Pakistanis protesting much about things that affect them on a daily basis such as lack of employment, lack of law and order etc. The fear factor is there but the larger reality is that we have an apathetic and fatalist political culture. We are not prone to positive political action. Deferrence to our elders (religious or otherwise) or the moneyed classes is the natural order of things. Culture is not easy to change when it is fatalist. I think the media can help here but there are many agendas at play (sections of the media favour greater obscurantism/hyper religious nationalism because it taps into a strong current in Pakistani society). Look at the case of Shia Pakistanis – how many of them are protesting or taking action against the brutal killings that have been going on for a couple of decades now. The Christians are doing a better job by bringing the world’s attention to their plight. The Ahmedis don’t have friends and are the most threatened.


  • Logic Europe
    Sep 11, 2012 - 1:58AM

    the problems facing Pakistan were different in bhutoos time but i will agree with you that he had a role in disintegration of Pakistan .however it was most unlikely mujib would have agreed ? his agenda was free Bangladesh as per his mandate
    Ahmadis declaration of non Muslims was entirely justified but he didn’t mean to deny freedom of their faith,rejection and insecurity for them @gp65:


  • Mirza
    Sep 11, 2012 - 2:54AM

    While I agree with most of this Op Ed there is a small problem about the blame game. While there is no dispute that mullah/military alliance has been the cause of our most serious problems, the feudal do not come in the same dubious league. The fact is Jinnah’s Muslim League was initiated and dominated by feudal does not speak well for the party. However they were never as powerful as the deep state and have been cut down to size several times. Many of these feudal were even killed by the army generals and should not be held as much responsible as the mullah/military alliance supported by the judges. ZAB and Akbar Bugti’s murders are case in point where the feudal have been no match for this alliance. What I am saying is feudal can be blamed for many things but they are not as big a problem as the other two.
    I do agree with you last para and it summarizes the whole solution of our problems.


  • shahid
    Sep 11, 2012 - 3:17AM

    I have watched the electronic media and read a good amount of print media
    but to my dismay, I haven’t seen any youth organisation protesting, any political
    party marching out, or any political leader coming out strong in support of Rimsha Masih.

    Tahir Ashrafi and his supporters have come out openly against the treatment met to Rimsha. He has been on the electronic media several times and also a group of ulema from Karachi have offered to keep Rimsha in their protection.


  • Falcon
    Sep 11, 2012 - 3:42AM

    Your advice is certainly welcome. That’s part of the reason I am trying to work with PTI so that we can put country back on track. We don’t have a choice, we have to fix things. Lastly, on a side note, following is a tweet from Imran Khan that even one of the his popular critics (Huma Yousaf in Dawn on 08/27/11) appreciated on the issue (and I have seen similar messages from rest of the PTI leaders as well)…”Shameful! Sending an 11-year-old girl to prison is against the very spirit of Islam which is all about being Just and Compassionate”.


  • kumail
    Sep 11, 2012 - 3:54AM

    Jinnah’s Pakistan is Dead…. We are living in Zia-ul-Haq’s Pakistan….


  • Kafir
    Sep 11, 2012 - 4:13AM

    YES IT IS !!!! Any doubt ?


  • Kumail
    Sep 11, 2012 - 5:34AM


    Answer to your question, no its not Jinnah’s Pakistan. But if you ask me is there hope for the future, I answer yes there is!.


  • Falcon
    Sep 11, 2012 - 6:09AM

    Since we don’t have that leader now, so let’s all drink Nyquil (or Valium) and go to sleep and get up in 1000 years with the hope that the most awaited leader (mighty / wise / superman) that every Pakistani has been waiting for has been born by then? How much more fatalist could we be?


  • Aarvey,india
    Sep 11, 2012 - 7:54AM

    Why is it not surprising that regular comments from religious right wingers like Kaalchakra are missing. I think they realize that they or their comments don’t belong here.


  • F
    Sep 11, 2012 - 9:00AM

    Yea, this is Qaid’s Pakistan. He wanted a Pakistan based on arguments of religion. He incited Direct Action day and gave legitimacy to violence. He got Pakistan. His fellow countrymen since then are taking his argument to its logical conclusion – a full fledged theocratic state. You in the English liberal media can keep harping on his one speech in 1948. The masses have it right and they are aligned with the founding father’s real actions.


  • Moolchand Kolhi
    Sep 11, 2012 - 10:28AM

    Jinah says that “You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State.”—Address to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, August 11, 1947
    So how can you say that this is Qaid’s Pakistan….?


  • Alyan
    Sep 11, 2012 - 12:09PM

    Why are you afriad to talk about the damage done to Pakistan by the rich liberal elite who live in the country like a leech and have never recognised the nation. The 2.5% have never had allegiance Pakistan and have been assisting US & India to cut our roots.. Prof sahib by not mentioning them you have lost credibility in your article.


  • Abbas
    Sep 11, 2012 - 12:20PM

    @ columnist
    Donot expect such things from such people, bcoz its madness. write something for the next general election to vote wisely and bring change.


  • Yuri Kondratyuk
    Sep 11, 2012 - 12:37PM

    The short answer is, “yes, this is in fact Jinnah’s Pakistan”.


  • Sep 11, 2012 - 12:39PM

    mahatma gandhi a true humanbeeing who led the non voilent freedom strugle was never in favour of partition of india on relegious basis. the thosands of martyers who laid down thier lives for freedom of india had never visioulised that india will be partioned on relegious basis. the selfish and shortsighted leaders like j.nehru and mohamad ali jinnah did not heed to the advise of mahatama gandhi and other secular leaders.after 65 years of independance both countries are still amonst the poorest and under developed countries in the world. partition of india has lost the way as power in both the countries have gone in the hands of rascals and people of low caliber promoting corrupr feudal democracy for only name sake.partition of india on relegious basis was a biggest blunder of our history not to be forgiven unless masses in both countries do not bring in social,cultural,economic revolution to taste the true freedom. peace has no alternative other than peacefull coexistance.


  • Sharjeel Jawaid
    Sep 11, 2012 - 3:00PM

    Jinnah’s Pakistan burnt on the streets of Dacca; early morning March 26, 1971!


  • Leopard
    Sep 11, 2012 - 4:00PM

    Thanks for sharing your views. However you missed Ahadmiyya community the worst affected lot in Pakistan. Hope it was not out of some fear or you did it intentionally?


    Sep 11, 2012 - 4:25PM

    No Sir, its not Jinnah’s Pakistan and neither this nation to whom Jinnah addressed..


  • Hunter punter
    Sep 11, 2012 - 5:32PM

    @ Author,
    No country remains the same over the ages. Pakistan of 2012, should be different from pakistan of 1947. that is process of growing up, and changing in a very rapidly changing world. RToday iof anyone does not adapt to change, he gets left behind. Unfortunately , pakistan started emulating the arabs. they however changed, while pakistan remained chained. So pakistan is indeed the same as it was in 1947 and still trapped in its 1947 ethos, and obsessions.


  • usman
    Sep 11, 2012 - 6:26PM

    jinnah was the greatest stateman seen by humanity in last century who won his case without taking law in hand. Unlike to many big names of his time, he never ask for any civil war or even wild protest.Pak. has problems and but it also evolving as in case of Rimsha. Its sad we initially fail but at the same time finally we caught the real culprit with system involving media, police and judiciary and common people.


  • afatqiamat
    Sep 11, 2012 - 6:52PM

    Jinnah’s Pakistan ended the day ” objective Resolution ” was passed , …and no , it were not the Punjabi or Sindhi Jagirdar , they entered the picture later , it were the AIML top leadership with UP/CP hegemony .

    they ruthlessly engineered the Punjab Holocaust of 47 , and later the Browbeat treatment to non-Muslims in Sindh .


  • shalom
    Sep 11, 2012 - 6:53PM

    Jinnah should not be projected as a secular leader just for the one speech he gave on 11 august. His motivation was to create a seperate homeland for Indian muslims and after he achieved it he declared that all religions should be protected. This was a great political move and would have paid off if he could have established a secular constitution before his death.


  • afatqiamat
    Sep 11, 2012 - 6:55PM


    Please read up the account of Direct Action day in Bengal and then the repeat of the same in Punjab after March 47 , to see what the AIML started .Recommend

  • shalom
    Sep 11, 2012 - 7:02PM

    Ya, he didn’t need to take law in his hand because other leaders like gandhi, nehru, patel etc. were fighting for independence. Read the history. Jinnah’s muslim league lost the elections in 1940 but after the congress government resigned in the wake of Quit India movement then muslim league jumped in the lap of british and formed minority governmenets in muslim dominated provinces. All the congress leadership was imprisoned and muslim league took the advantage.


  • Babloo
    Sep 11, 2012 - 7:02PM

    Mr Jinnah’s political ideology in support of the demand of Pakistan, held religious identity above all else.The muslim league also followed policies that led to Himdus and Sikhs , fleeing east and west Pakistan in droves. The fact that Hindus now make only 1-2% of Pakistan population speaks for itself. Mr Jinnah’s ideology has lot to do with the situation Pakistan finds itself in now.


  • gp65
    Sep 11, 2012 - 7:29PM

    @usman: “jinnah was the greatest stateman seen by humanity in last century who won his case without taking law in hand. Unlike to many big names of his time, he never ask for any civil war or even wild protest.”

    The freedom from British was obtained by Indian national Congress whose leaders went to jail for many years and also millions of their followers who had their way with non-violent protest. While Jinnah was involved with this movement until 1930 – he was disconnected thereafter in the key years of freedom strugle.

    If you claim that getting Pakistan (i.e. partition of India) accomplished happened without taking law into hand hen please tell me how exactly would you describe Direct Action Day?


  • Raza Khan
    Sep 11, 2012 - 7:30PM

    Very touching & honest assessment of Pakistan!


  • Anwar Hakam
    Sep 11, 2012 - 9:38PM

    Another superb article by Rasul Bukhsh Rais. The author, however, like many others, exonerate the founding fathers from any part they played in creating the mess that has gradually resulted in crippling the Republic of Pakistan. We must not forget the fact that dividing the people of the sub-continent on religious lines was a bad idea to begin with. People of all faiths had lived peacefully side by side in villages and towns across the sub-continent till the time the colonial technique of “divide and rule” was put into practice and the religious sentiment and the superficial cultural uniqueness of Muslims was shamelessly over emphasized with the objective of creating an irreconcilable divide. Were the founding fathers already not possessed by the religious demons when they passed the Objective Resolution in the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan in March, 1949? When the Constituent Assembly of India was busy framing a constitution for their new nation, our founding fathers were busy pandering to the religious right by writing the Objective Resolution. The snowball effect had started then and there and if it was not for the ten years of Ayub Khan’s dictatorship and his half-assed effort to keep the country secular, Pakistan would have reached the present state long time ago. You reap what you sow.


  • suraj
    Sep 11, 2012 - 10:08PM

    It is utter waste of time.. Everybody knows it is Zia’s Pakistan and everybody (i mean majority) endorses it.. you have plenty of examples for it.. Just try to find to live in this dark society… No need n use to think whats happening..


  • shalom
    Sep 11, 2012 - 10:30PM

    Yes he did that to obtain power and tried to consolidate it by projecting himself as secular later, but this was not to happen, as after his death, politics of pakistan was hijacked by army and mullah nexus. This nexus was destroyed by Bhutto but he also took the same route of pandering to the mullahs in order to become the new leader of Islamic world. And then came General Zia who finally put in the last nail in the coffin of moderation and minority rights in Pakistan.
    Imagine only if any of them had tried anything different wat could the nation of pakistan’s potential could have achieved.


  • sabi
    Sep 12, 2012 - 7:55AM

    Black Jack,
    “The vision of Pakistan was based on the 2-nation theory, which means that some people cannot live with other people”.
    How do you attache 2-nation theory with Jinah’s struggle for freedom.Can you very kindly provide some evidence that Jinah used this notion anywhere any time?.
    I think all indians have a stereotype immage of Jinah which is extremely negative.Why yours lipps are tight about Gandhi’s and some other hindu leaders politics of exploitation.
    Why do you go and research yourself to find realities behind india’s divide instead of reproducing concocted stories of clever congress leadership.Accept the realty that it was congress leaderships decieving politics which forced Jinah to go for a seperate homeland for not only muslims but people of all faiths and that too for socioeconomic uplift of muslims.Where was religion involved in that freedom struggle.


  • Farrukh Hanif AWan
    Sep 12, 2012 - 12:08PM

    Jinnah did not get the option to forsee the world after partition. Things change globaly after the world war. The world was made to choose between two equally powerful countries. This choice has led to the shaping up of many smaller countries. If the blame is ever to put on someone it is on the shoulders of the two super powers. Though soviet union broke down almost 20 years ago but the effects of its breakdown are being felt all over the globe. Jinnah didn’t or could not have done great either but at least as we all know of him, he would have stuck to his task of making this nation something worth fighting for. People point out to mahatma being a great leader. Please read your history, as written by Jashwant singh of the days of partition. Mahtama was used by patel and nehru just as Jinnah was used by our people and in return one’s dream was shattered and the other one senselessly murdered.
    we belong to an emotional childish sentimental world. That is the subcontinent.


  • ahmed
    Sep 12, 2012 - 9:18PM

    What’s Jinnah’s Pakistan? For God’s sake let’s not live in history and learn to move forward. The world dynamics have changed so much in 65 years and we are still trying to cling on 1947. India does not call itself nehroo’s vision (socialism) china does not cling on to mao’s vision. Mao’s vision was communism. China is moving rapidly towards capitalism and on its way to become the number 1 economy in the next 50 years. Britain does not keep on talking about Churchill’s vision. All these leaders achieved a major goal at that particular time and lot of credit goes to them.

    After so many years, we still appear to be a confused nation. We’ve tried capitalism, Bhutto’s sociailism, Zia’s Islamic fantasy, musharaff’s modern islam and we still not sure of which way we want to go. Even Imran;s flawed model is mish mash. One moment it’s islamic welfare state, other times, it’s european model and then it’s neither. In Pakistan there is only 1 vision and that’s the powerful army comes in every few years. This is beyond doubt certain to happen. Since 1958, there is a set cycle 1958-1971 , 1977-1988, 1998-2007. Very preditable pattern. This has not happened in any developed country. A great visionay nation indeed !!!!


  • Mban
    Sep 21, 2012 - 10:45PM

    There is no such thing as Jinnah’s Pakistan. It is an artificially created national identity and no doubt millions more are going to die for it.


More in Opinion