Who is a Pakistani?

Most of the readers of Pakistan’s English newspapers rarely read an Urdu daily.


Saleem H Ali September 02, 2010

The recent exchange of polarised articles, following the Sialkot tragedy, have left me perplexed. Both sides have exhibited tremendous scorn for each other and questioned the authenticity of the ‘other’s’ commitment to Pakistan. The existential conflict which these articles exhibited remind me of a painting by the famous French artist Paul Gauguin which hangs in the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston titled: D'où Venons Nous? Que Sommes Nous? Où Allons Nous? Which translates as Where Do We Come From? What Are We? Where Are We Going? Gauguin painted this huge canvas in 1897 while living as a French expatriate in Tahiti.  He questioned his own identity in this colonial. The crises that are befalling Pakistan are also leading the country to ask such similar questions. So what exactly does it mean to be a Pakistani? First, let us be clear that nationalism is an inherently synthetic phenomenon and there is nothing ‘natural’ about any form of nationalism. Those who suggest that somehow a larger Indian subcontinent was “natural nationalism” following colonial departure forget the motley assemblage of bitterly divided princely states that existed during much of the subcontinent’s history.

Human rights laws and international norms are increasingly critical of nationalism along ethnic lines. At a practical level, the most defining “natural” element of nationalism is language — because communication is the most essential element of human relations. We can look different and overcome our prejudices if we can communicate effectively.

Language is clearly a fracturing factor in Pakistani perceptions of their identity. Most of the readers of Pakistan’s English newspapers rarely read an Urdu daily. Gone are the days when poets like Faiz could be professors of English but write poetry in Urdu, allowing for an exchange of ideas across social strata that had been defined by language. A few veteran journalists such as Khaled Ahmed have to translate Urdu articles for the ‘Angraizi-walas’ who stumble through an occasional headline in the vernacular press. We are further divided by supremacist views about provincial languages. The only way out is for more Pakistanis to become multilingual at levels of proficiency that allow us to interact with the popular culture of communities across the nation.

Another fracture that is apparent regarding Pakistani identity is connection to the physical land and residence within the country. Often resident Pakistanis dismiss those of us who live abroad as being unauthentic “sell-outs” and somehow lesser citizens. Yet in a world of structural inequality, diaspora communities are a seminal way of development. Consider the citizens of Lebanon — 70 per cent of whom reside outside their country but share a passion for their homeland. No doubt empathy and connection are important and getting a good dose of load shedding and local angst is often needed for an expatriate’s reality check. However, we should not question each other’s commitment and sincerity in this regard.

Perhaps the most potent fracture in Pakistan’s identity crisis remains religion. Pakistan, Israel, and East Timor are the only three countries to have been formed in modern times on the primary basis of religious nationalism. This is where we need to exert the most effort in peace-building. Such action does not mean we disparage religion, but rather that embrace a more pluralistic understanding of our dominant faith.

Going back to Gauguin’s painting, we should move beyond his first two questions and spend more time in considering his third question: Where are we going? Let’s quell the cynicism, sarcasm and innuendo and work on clear solutions for the problems that will define the future of Pakistan.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 2nd, 2010.

COMMENTS (26)

Shemrez Nauman Afzal | 10 years ago | Reply Dear Jerry Please don't say anything about the Quaid e Azam? Pwease? Pwetty pwease? Some Pakistanis still cherish their historical legacy and the leaders of the past who have done the impossible. In fact, before 1940 the only people who had a vision of Pakistan were commonly believed to be mad men in the political context of colonial-era British India. Today, there are more than 20 crore Pakistanis (200 million?) living in this part of the world, on top of which there is a huuge and vibrant diaspora in the US, the UK, and all over the world. Surely they weren't mad, and surely if we follow their examples today, we won't be mad. Of course, I do not advocate wearing monocles again (even though I find them really cool and retro). You are more than welcome to forget your "leaders of past generations", but historically speaking, your comment is also a thing of the past. As are these thoughts of mine. Instead of having a static mindset, one should rather be dynamic and see how the past can be taken towards the future, with compromises and modifications, with additions and subtractions, of course. Because if the current sociopolitical scenario is really as dynamic as you assume it to be, then tomorrow I will be Jerry and you will be Shemrez. You're Welcome.
Jerry Olson | 10 years ago | Reply One thing I like to correct ,Most of the readers here are talking about " Vision of Jinnah " for Pakistan. Well ,Leaders are human after all ,Aren't they? It is not TRUTH WRITTEN in VISION. He may ba right or completly wrong in his Vision of Pakistan. It is subsequnt generation they have to interpret his vision with current sociopolitical scenario. Leader are as good as current leaf on SPRING. As Fall comes they have to go and In next spring new Leaf will come in place to make a complet tree. By following Leader of Past generation you are not doing justice to yourself or a country. Thanks Jerry
VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ

E-Publications

Most Read