Jinnah’s dream now a nightmare

Published: October 13, 2010
The writer has served as director-general of the FIA and retired as an inspector-general, police

The writer has served as director-general of the FIA and retired as an inspector-general, police wajahat.latif@tribune.com.pk

In Pakistan, survival is a constant question. For 62 years we have lived in insecurity, the fear of India leading to obsession with building a strong army.

Armed conflict with India started soon after the creation of Pakistan with the two countries going to war over Kashmir in 1948. Relations remained hostile to very hostile till 1965 when Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, the firebrand foreign minister of Pakistan, and some hawkish generals in the army convinced Field Marshal Ayub Khan to annex occupied Kashmir from the Indians by force.

But all the war achieved was a “line of control” replacing a “ceasefire line” in Kashmir. Hatred and arms build-up intensified on both sides and their defence budgets escalated, in the face of abject poverty.

Both countries started with parliamentary democracy. India stuck to it. But in Pakistan the army took over in a coup in 1958 followed by more military coups in 67, 77 and 99. In spite of all the underpinnings of democracy today, the army remains a power broker.

Pakistan came into being in August 1947 but Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the “sole spokesman” of the Muslims of India, did not live long after. He died in Karachi on September 11, 1948. Gandhi, the most venerated Hindu leader, died of an assassin’s bullet early the same year in India. Thus both countries lost their national father figures right at the beginning. Successors of Jinnah, all ordinary mortals, were not nearly as able and high-minded as he was. This desideratum was mainly responsible for retarding a democratic political evolution. On the other hand, the impact of Gandhi’s absence was minimised by the presence of Nehru, Azad and many more who continued to implement the Congress Party manifesto.

Whereas the freedom of India was the result of a long political struggle led by a political party, Pakistan was the result primarily of the will, dedication and extraordinary leadership of just one man.

Jinnah struggled for a homeland for the Muslims of the subcontinent without the role of Islam in the running of the state. A secular person by temperament, he did not see Pakistan as a theocratic state. Addressing the Constituent Assembly in Karachi in August 1947, when he was elected as its president, he declared religion to be a personal, not public, issue in the new state; to be practiced freely by citizens of different faiths, all equal before the law.

But Jinnah’s legacy has been destroyed by self-seeking politicians, religious extremists and military adventurers. The sense of sovereignty all but gone from this nation, a handful of corrupt rulers are sitting over all instruments of political power, as poverty spreads. Pakistan is well on its way to becoming the most corrupt country (placed 101 in 130 countries in last year’s Corruption Perception Index) of the world and Jinnah’s dream is becoming a nightmare.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 14th, 2010.

Facebook Conversations

Reader Comments (52)

  • Oct 13, 2010 - 11:46PM

    Fine, we know all this. But what is the point? There is no insight offered in this article by Wajahat Latif. My point: Once a bureaucrat always a bureaucrat; useless through and through… Recommend

  • saher
    Oct 13, 2010 - 11:59PM

    sad truth.. the real vision was dumped yeas ago by the power hungry… who wanted to use the logo of Islam even after independence even though it held no meaning anymore!… the irony is that maulanas and scholars of Islam had very little part in the independence movement… Pakistan was the idea of Iqbal and was realized by Jinnah, both individuals are still considered controversial in the strict Islamic perspectives followed by most today.. Recommend

  • Talha
    Oct 14, 2010 - 12:13AM

    You are incorrect in stating that Jinnah did not leave any successor or they were not as able. Similarly you are incorrect in stating that Pakistan was the result primarily of the will, dedication and extraordinary leadership of just one man.

    Jinnah left behind two brilliant and forward thinking successors by the names of Liaqat Ali Khan and Choudhari Zafarullah Khan. The first was also assassinated and the second one sidelined because he belonged to a different sect.

    You have to understand that by 1951, all the people who had actually worked for Pakistan were either dead or were ran out. Though some stuck it out for a little while longer, it was only a matter of time before all of them were sidelined.

    Even then, Pakistan was on the correct path until Bhutto’s era which initiated the pan-Islamic card to much negative effect in Pakistan.Recommend

  • Mubarik Ali
    Oct 14, 2010 - 12:19AM

    Pakistan has transitioned from Jinnah’s Pakistan to Mullah’s Pakistan, all these ‘blessings’ are due to Mullah. God bless Mullah for destroying this beautiful land. Recommend

  • M M Malik
    Oct 14, 2010 - 12:20AM

    Secular Pakistan died with Jinnah. Subsequent leaders were and are being held to ransom in the name of religion. Complete separation of state and religion is the only way forward.Recommend

  • Najaf Afghan
    Oct 14, 2010 - 12:22AM

    the actual summary!Recommend

  • Farooq Khan
    Oct 14, 2010 - 12:26AM

    Imran jattla has a right to criticize anyone but all bureaucrats should not be measured with the same yardstick.
    I know many honest bureaucrats have said that Wajahat Latif was one of the best police officers to have worn the uniform.(no wonder he was never made an IG in a province)Recommend

  • Omar Z
    Oct 14, 2010 - 12:56AM

    With all due respect sir, we already heard all of this. What we need is a more reasoned focus on the solutions rather than a restating of the obvious.


  • Ahmed
    Oct 14, 2010 - 1:45AM

    Religion is criticized because it is being used for personal benefits.Factually there has been no real application of religion in Pakistan.I suggest all those supporting the separation of religion from state to please at least one time,read Quran and try to understand the message of your Creator.You will surely end up equipped with knowledge of what must be done.

    Allama Iqbal never thought of any secular state.Still righteous Islamic scholars regard him as one the the greatest people who understood and presented true picture of it.

    Secularism is not the solution.It is exactly going against what Creator commands.The real and accurate application of the commands of Almighty is the only solution.

    How correctly IQBAL quoted :

    “In gulaamoon ka yeh maslak hai kay naaqis hai Kitaab
    Kay sikhati nahin moomin ko gulaami kay tareek.”

    Now call me an extremist.But before doing so,at least open and read that Kitaab.
    Land has been destroyed by those who misunderstood religion and then presented themselves as Maulvis and Mullaas…and what we did ? We,the ignorants of truth,because of our lack of knowledge about religion,accepted whatever they said.Recommend

  • Oct 14, 2010 - 1:51AM

    How immature we have gone ? How immature ? We want to abandon religion only and only because some shameless species misinterpreted and misrepresented it ? This theory must be lauded ! Recommend

  • Ahmed
    Oct 14, 2010 - 2:25AM

    How much Islam we do understand that we start a whole debate on it ?
    Don’t we feel like knowing it first and then making our mind sets about it ?
    Do we really know how much freedom it does provide to people belonging to other religions ?
    Why do we try to learn Islam from those who misinterpret it ?
    Don’t we have our own senses to understand it ?
    We can’t even identify the right sources to learn something and then we are the educated people ?
    Is it the creation of any human ? that we can invent something (i.e. secularism here ) better than that (i.e. Islamic code of government) which was created by our Creator ?

    We can’t even understand the message of our God and then have visions of bringing change.
    How funny and baseless approach !Recommend

  • Mubarik Ali
    Oct 14, 2010 - 2:45AM

    “How immature we have gone ? How immature ? We want to abandon religion only and only because some shameless species misinterpreted and misrepresented it ? This theory must be lauded !” This shameless species is very very powerful now. You go against their interpretation of religion and you are wajib ul qatal, thus it is better to separate state and religion for the time being. Wait for the time when there is no Mashkeeza-tul-Ulma left any more then we can bring back religion into state affairs.Recommend

  • Oct 14, 2010 - 10:28AM

    Mr Wajahat has quitely forgotten the role of our bureaucracy, trained by the British to control and run an occupied country, which played a domiant role in intrigues with the khakis to destroy the legacy of our Quaid e Azam. This bureaucracy both civil and khaki, so called brown sahebs, was created by their colonial masters to look down upon the citizens, live in exclusive housing societies, squander the scarce assets of the land and allot to themselves valued real estate at subsidised rates, continue to play their negative role. Mr Wajahat Latif you need to speak the bitter truth. Recommend

  • Sonam Shyam
    Oct 14, 2010 - 11:10AM

    It’s interesting to read that Pakistanis are lamenting the fact that their country led down Jinnah in the last 63 years. We in India, despite the usual propaganda, believe that Jinnah was, (a) By and large secular and (b) a liberal democrat. But there are certain things which even great men are not able to foresee and Jinnah was no exception. Jinnah, perhaps could not envisage two very pertinent scenarios.
    1. Pakistan declared itself an Islamic state in spite of the fact that Jinnah was totally secular in his vision. Jinnah probably did not realize that when a state has an official religion, then the first casualty in such a state is, “Secularism”. Almost every Islamic country in the world is not secular. Not just minorities of other religions but also Islamic minorities like Shias are persecuted right from Saudi Arabia to Pakistan. Therefore, for Pakistan, to become a secular nation, would require the change in its name from “Islamic Republic” to “Secular Republic”. Only then Jinnah’s vision will be realized.
    2. Another important factor, which perhaps Jinnah didn’t envisage, was that religion alone cannot make a “Nation State’ and bind it together. The partition of Pakistan is a case in point. Although they read the same holy Koran, but the Bengali Muslims of erstwhile East Pakistan were culturally completely different from Punjabi dominated West Pakistan. The sense of “Bengali Pride” gelled them more than Islam did. Although Pakistanis would cite Indian interference in East Pakistan as the reason for all the trouble but one cannot wear blinkers and completely overlook the fact that Bengali Muslims were subjected to terrible atrocities and Sheikh Mujib-ur-Rehman, was denied his rightful chance to be PM of combined Pakistan. Further the Hamoodur Rahman Commission, report, although not entirely balanced according to Bangladeshis, still highlights the atrocities of Pakistani army on hapless Bengali men, women and children. Even today, in Pakistan, Islam is not able to bind people together. Pakistan, land of pure Islam, has the dubious distinction of witnessing the horrible spectacle of Muslims bombing fellow Muslims praying in Mosques, all in the name of Islam. There is sectarian violence in Karachi where again Muslims are killing each other and the tribal areas in Pakistan, have their own primitive interpretation of Islamic laws and they are by and large, ungovernable.
    We in India believe that more than the Mullahs, it is the Pakistani army which has radicalized Islam in Pakistan and arguably the biggest culprit was Gen. Zia. In a liberal democratic state, which Jinnah envisaged, the army has to be subservient to the civilian government and should have no political role to play. Therefore the “Army-Mullah” nexus has totally destroyed the secular-liberal vision of Jinnah. Recommend

  • Makdoom Humza Sufi
    Oct 14, 2010 - 11:41AM

    The author seems a novice so for as both history and vulnerability of Pakistan to its neighbors is concerned. I would suggest to read Ayub Khan by Altaf Gowhar. The 1965 operation Gibraltar was authored Z.A.Bhutto and Aziz Ahmed. This was Bhutto’s reaction to Tashqand Agreement and Ayub Khan was totally unaware about. This resulted in War between India and Pakistan. Quiad-e-Azam undoubtedly did not want a theocratic state but equally did not look for an irreligious and un-Islamic state. The author perhaps does not known vulnerability of Pakistan on its Eastern borders- one may not like General Musharraf for his role after 2007 but one cannot challenge his understanding of strategic importance of Eastern borders- he told an television that out of twenty seven Indian brigades twenty five were stationed on Eastern borders. I am disappointed with publication of such article in your newspaper. Recommend

  • Sonam Shyam
    Oct 14, 2010 - 1:26PM

    I think people like Makdoom Humza Sufi are again getting their facts wrong regarding the role of the Pakistani army. No civilian leader, including Z.A.Bhutto was ever strong enough to take on the Pakistani army and defy it diktats. Operation Gibraltar was undertaken by duo of Bhutto and Ayub Khan and the subsequent operation Grand Slam was also launched by them. As far as Parvez Musharraf’s comment about deployment of Indian army is concerned, he was wrongly quoting the figures. Firstly the deployments he was talking about in that interview were of Indian army infantry divisions and not brigades. Musharraf alleged that 80% of Indian army divisions were deployed against Pakistan and that actually is wrong. The interviewer, Maroof Raza, who is former Indian army officer himself, rightly said that 60% of Indian army is on Pakistan borders and rest is to take care of the Chinese. But Musharraf ,in his typical commando style, got hot under the collar and refused to accept the facts. Moreover the Pakistani army always exaggerates the Indian threat to maintain its larger than life image among the masses and that not only helps them to stage illegitimate coups but also they manage to take the lions share of modest Pakistani resources and that too without any accountability. If India is such a big threat to Pakistan, then how come it is always Pakistan which initiates wars against India? 1947-48, 1965, 1971 and 1999 Kargil, all these wars were started by Pakistan. I must remind my Pakistani friends that he is the same Musharraf who even refused to take the dead bodies of martyred Pakistani soldiers in Kargil and called them Mujahideens. It was the Indian army who performed the last rites of these young men of the Northern Light Infantry according to full Islamic principles. Only during the fag end of the Kargil war did Musharraf started to take the bodies of Pakistani soldiers and that too when there was tremendous public pressure. The Pakistani soldiers remained unsung in the war and the credit of inflicting damage on Indian army, went to the Mujahideens. Musharraf was responsible for the death of at least 800 Pakistani soldiers in the Kargil war while Nawaz Sharif said that the figure was around 3000 dead. I think Nawaz Sharif is not wrong when he says that Musharraf should be tried for treason. How can any right thinking Pakistani ever support a man like Musharrraf?Recommend

  • Ahmed
    Oct 14, 2010 - 2:40PM

    @ Sonam Shyam

    Thanks for your kind advices ! But we as Muslims,know those times when Islam was being followed in true spirit and it was providing a much better way of life and freedom than secularism.
    You don’t know Islam.You simply know the times when Islam began to be misinterpreted and used for personal benefits.So according to you,secularism might be a solution.But not for us.You are talking about Jinnah’s vision.Do you know what was IQBAL’s vision ? We know.

    @ Mubarak Ali

    Indeed they are powerful.But why we are weak ? Because of our lack of knowledge about religion.That is not something very complicated.The need is only to understand it rather than running behind so called scholars.Recommend

  • saher
    Oct 14, 2010 - 3:20PM

    The religion should not be seperated from the state, secularism doesnot mean following the anglo-saxon law :P… if it does than no one is more secular than us…

    the trouble of pakistan is that it was hijacked by the mllahs and maulanas never came with us.. we wanted an independent state for Muslims, where they could live in harmony and peace and that is only possible if islamic law is followed.. religion is the base of all.. but the thing is that u need to understand that there is no space for extreme and terroristic views in Islam Jinnah was Muslim and so was Iqbal their views should be studied and followed to actually have the real islamic state. we need to discard the extremist views where one says no ijtihad and the other says no religion in state. Recommend

  • lalit
    Oct 14, 2010 - 4:20PM

    it is nothing but an irony that a nation built upon the foundations of religion is today lamenting upon its side effects.it is a truth that mullahs played no role in the formation of Pakistan ,but they soon high jacked the infant nation.initially they were pampered by fulfilling their hateful demands and later they dictated the terms.even a so called secular and open minded leader like ZAB could not resist the temptation of appeasing them. but the real onus lies on Zia who played into western hands and acted as mercenary in a war against former USSR.that was a turning point in the history of Pakistan,when religious indoctrination of Pakistani youth created a harvest of religious fanatics and jihadis who after becoming unemployed in Afganistan turned their attention to back home.they brought ruin and a fake version of Islam along with them which was tailor made for Afgan war.
    so much talk of religion and so less of substance.going by the public discourse,it seems Pakistan is the most religious country of the world following all the tenets of Islam to the core,but it surprises when you see it almost topping the charts ,when its the issue of corruption or failed nations . today almost every Pakistani is cocksure about the importance of religion in public life,but confused about the true version.during the whirlwind past 63 years Pakistan’s image has touched the abyss,and religion or lack of it has definitely played a prominent role.Recommend

  • tahira
    Oct 14, 2010 - 4:43PM

    I agree with the writer, Jinnah;s beautiful dream is now a living nightmare all because of the self indulgent self centered politicians and extremists of all sort. It’s more about awareness but as a nation we have just become too numb to realize that we have hit beyond rock-bottom…. Recommend

  • faraz
    Oct 14, 2010 - 5:07PM


    Tashkent aggrement was signed after the 1965 war, it didnt cause the war. Bhutto wasnt a general in the army; entire resposibility for failure in 1965 war lies on the army. Operation Gibraltor was launched on the false assumption that it would lead to a general uprising in Kashmir. Inaccurate ISI reports lead to this assumption. Later, the army launched the Operation Grandslam based on another false assumption that it wont lead to war. It was Ayub who concluded that an attack by 15000 men at Akhnur wont lead to war!

    Whoever feels that we face a threat from India should study the Indian campaign at lahore. The 3 divisions which attacked lahore couldnt even cross the BRB canal. They had no equipment or training to secure a bridgehead across this narrow wate barrier. Their entire plan was based on the ridiculous assumption that the Pakistanis wont blow up the bridges over the canal! Really, who was the genius behind this indian plan?

    The armies of both Indian and Pakistan lack the skill needed to conduct a successful offensive operation. 25 brigades make no difference because there is no room for deployment and maneuver; will the Indians deploy them in a deep echelon? Both armies are just milking their governments in the name of defense against imaginary external threats, while people are dying of hunger and disease.

    And for this religious/secular debate; it is also linked to our imaginary external threats. The 80 percent poor only want food and shelter, whether it comes from a secular or religious regime, its none of their business. Real issue is that of haves and have nots. Why dont we attack mullahs for their opposition to land reforms rather than pondering over petty issues like burqa and naqab? Recommend

  • parvez
    Oct 14, 2010 - 6:22PM

    Extremely accurate and well written.
    Pakistan was formed as a Muslim State, today it stands as an Islamic State and the debate continues. Recommend

  • Kamal Khan
    Oct 14, 2010 - 6:25PM

    this is the reason people say “think twice before asking anything to GOD,he may grant it”.Partisan was never a good idea…Recommend

  • Oct 14, 2010 - 7:55PM

    These sensational titles and then content has nothing to support it.

    Tribune really needs to do SOMETHING about its opinion section.Recommend

  • Humanity
    Oct 14, 2010 - 8:26PM

    @ saher “we wanted an independent state for Muslims, where they could live in harmony and peace and that is only possible if islamic law is followed.. religion is the base of all.. but the thing is that u need to understand that there is no space for extreme and terroristic views in Islam Jinnah was Muslim and so was Iqbal their views should be studied and followed to actually have the real islamic state. we need to discard the extremist views where one says no ijtihad and the other says no religion in state.”

    Who is a Muslim? Saher, please elaborate for the benefit of the readers.

    If Muslims can live in peace and harmony among non-Muslims outside of Pakistan, why can’t non-Muslims and Muslim live in peace and harmony in Pakistan. Why a country was needed, where only Muslims could live in peace and harmony? The non-Muslim minorities have been reduced from about 20% to 4 %. With such an overwhelming Muslim majority, why don’t they live with peace and harmony among themselves.

    My dear, please read Jinnah’s August 11, 1947 address to understand the crux of Nazriah-e-Pakistan and to realize what his vision of state was.

    Jinnah’s dream was turned into a nightmare because the mullah and the leaders politicizes Islam for their worldly goals. Mixing deen with duniya is a fatal recipe. The result is in front of every one’s eyes to see.

    The experiment of politicizing Islam has never worked in 1,400 years. It is caused immense misery and suffering, as is seen from the state of the nation. The idea of mixing state with religion can not work because politics in Islam pollutes the sublime religion with worldly ambitions.

    The smart choose not to re-invent the wheel. Democratic-secular systems are working well in other country. Pakistan should adopt that model and re-write its constitution based on the guidelines in Jinnah’s August 11, 1947 address.Recommend

  • Humanity
    Oct 14, 2010 - 8:55PM

    @Ahmed “Do you know what was IQBAL’s vision ? We know.”

    No you don’t. If the supporters of polluting religion with earthly state affairs really knew Iqbal’s vision, they would know that like oil does not mix with water, the goals of deen and duniya also do not mix. The country would not be hanging by a thread at the edge of a cliff.

    Here is what Iqbal’s view of the mullah, the self-proclaimed saviors of Islam, is:
    Deen-e-kafir fikro tadbeer’e jihad
    Deen-e-mullah fi sabil-illah fasad

    Iqbal’s vision of Deen is miles apart from the mullah’s peddling of the Deen for the worldly gains. Iqbal’s concept of Deen is fully reflected in Jinnah’s address of August 11, 1947. Read it:


    Get out of denial and wishful thinking. The country needs to be re-build on democratic secular where all citizens regardless of their faith or sect can live with harmony and dignity. Once on this platform, the nation has the talent to move mountains through unity, faith, and discipline. The Chilean mine rescue is a good example of a democratic-secular nation that is wise enough to differentiate the needs of this world from the needs of the Herefater.

    Actions speak louder than words. A picture is worth a thousand word. Recommend

  • Anoop
    Oct 14, 2010 - 9:40PM

    “Gandhi, the most venerated Hindu leader, died of an assassin’s bullet early the same year in India. ”

    Gandhi was not a Hindu leader, but an Indian one. Jinnah may be a Muslim leader, that is why he is not given the kind of iconic status in the world over compared to Gandhi.

    There is a persistent trend among Pakistani writers to separate Indian Freedom Struggle into a Hindu one and a Muslim one. Many of the leading Muslim intellectuals stayed in India, for example Azad. Why? Because, they didnt like the idea of Pakistan.Recommend

  • Behram Khan
    Oct 14, 2010 - 11:08PM

    Japan was destroyed in 2nd world war. They started to build their nation from the scratch and now they are amongst developed nation. We have to accept that we are a failed state.Two nation theory went wrong after the assassination of Liaquat Ali khan, language identity problem in Dhaka on 21st February, creation of Bangladesh, arrival of Ziaul Haque, and so on….the common citizen of Pakistan do not enjoy freedom of anything…they pay taxes and in return the corrupt politicians, with the help of Waderas, Jagirdars loot the country’s wealth and keep it in foreign banks. the people are left to struggle for their life support system. Now we have nuclear bomb but no electricity, we are self sufficient in wheat, milk and other agricultural product but awaam is committing suicide….Pakistan is a land ruled by corrupt elements (like Andher nagri chaupat raja, taka ser bhaji taka ser khaja..(mobile call charges are 1 rupee and roti is 6rs.) Do we deserve a country like this….It could have been much better if it was given on lease to America…Recommend

  • Ali Jan
    Oct 14, 2010 - 11:55PM


    how will the knowledge of deen give you supremacy over mundane affairs?? Do you think Muslims had not known their religion over the past 1400 years? If they would know it now, will it solve their multifarious problems? i think the problems created by modern world could only be solved through modern day people, not by following mythical figures who might not have even existed.

    As far as Iqbal’s concept of state or the idea of pakistan is concerned, historically is very well known that pakistanis foisted this idea on him. he never ever talked of pakistan or any such thing like that. For details read Dr. waheed-uz-zaman’s “Towards Pakisatn, 1928-9140”.Recommend

  • Ashutosh
    Oct 15, 2010 - 12:07AM

    Jinnah, who lost his leadership (supremacy) to Gandhi, tore India into two so that he can rule a part if not the whole! In the process, Jinnah went too far, steering up communal passion that it was (and is) impossible to get back. So, we get Pakistan and explains why is it so.
    Muslims were inseparable part of India, so the wound was (and is) not only deep but also “not heal-able”!
    Also, “to justify Pakistan” means “not to be India”. Therefore, we often see Pakistan doing everything that is not India. This makes it very unreal as it is India or a part of India at soul.

  • Meekal Ahmed
    Oct 15, 2010 - 2:29AM

    @Humza Sufi

    Do you seriously believe for one minute that two CIVILIANS (or “Bloody Civilians” as we are called by the army) Bhutto and my late father Aziz Ahmed convinced Ayub Khan, a military man, to go into Kashmir and guarantee that India would not respond without a strike across the international border (in desperation) as our army was looking at Akhnur with their scopes?

    Which planet do you live on, Sir?

    Bhutto and Aziz Ahmed may have given their opinion when asked.


    The final decision has to be and was that of the army. The bucks stopped with them in these matters.

    What you need to ask is, whatever the assessment of these “Bloody Civilians”, why the general in charge of that operation was changed and the new person told not to attack and take Akhnur which would have severed India’s jugular.

    When my father was still alive but retired, Altaf Gauhar said about the same thing in a newspaper article. My father, never to challenge people openly in a newspaper because he thought it was bad form (he would have preferred to write a polite private note instead) responded to Mr. Ghauhar in print. Mr. Gauhar it may be recalled was Auyb Khan’s propaganda secretary — like Gobbels was to Hitler. No doubt a brilliant man as my father acknowledged himself.

    Altaf Gauhar apart from writing Ayub Khan’s book (as his son wrote Mush’s book!) was the same person busy putting “Decade of Development” on every piece of government stationary that he could find as Ayub Khan’s regime was crumbling and people were being shot at. I was there. In the Planning Commission, in Islamabad.

    On another newspaper, someone said that East Pakistan was lost because of the “haughty” attitude of people like Aziz Ahmed. Oh, it had nothing to do with the army’s brutal rape and murder of countless East Pakistani’s ordered by Yayha Khan, another military man?

    Aziz Ahmed’s posting after Partition was in Mymensing District (and one or two other districts that I forget) where the only mode of transportation was by horse (he learnt horse riding in Cambridge, England) and then he went on to become Chief Secretary, East Pakistan. He spoke fluent Bengali and so did we as children. The Quaid stayed at our house on 35, Hare Road, Dacca. The Governor General at the time was Sir Fredrick Bone and we kids thought his name was very funny.


    Pakistan’s civil service at the time were made of GIANTS — as opposed to the corrupt, spineless pigmies today — with, of course, a handful of notable exceptions.

    The old guard were all ICS.

    Do you know how many seats the Hindu’s offered the Muslim’s in all-India in the ICS exam?

    I could rattle off names of those truly great ICS/CSP’s some of them my own uncles (like the Chairman, Planning Commission, G. Ahmed) but you perhaps will not recognize them. Sure, they made have been stern and stiff-lipped (as indeed the English taught them to be).

    But they were, all of them, bloody competent and bloody honest. They were the best Pakistan has ever produced. All of them are gone now which goes a long way to explain where we are today.

    Today, amongst other images on YouTube, we have the Chairman, FBR dancing like a “hijra” while Mush and Shauka smile and clap and the chamcha’s in the audience, taking their cue, clapping as well.

    A picture — as they say — is worth a thousand words.

    And you, Sir, are hung-up on Aziz Ahmed?! Recommend

  • Ahmed
    Oct 15, 2010 - 2:53AM

    @ Ali Jan

    Mythical figures ? The Caliphs and Prophet Muhammad PBUH are mythical ?
    If you hold these views,then we can’t debate.It will be another debate about religions and atheism.
    It is the core belief in Islam that Holy Quran is the creation of Almighty and Muslims hold this belief very firmly.You must not comment on it before knowing about it first.So your comments are starting another debate.

    @ All supporting the idea of unified sub-continent.

    We in Pakistan,know what Iqbal and Jinnah wanted.”They wanted a secular state” is a huge misinterpretation and blunder in understanding history.What you are presenting is another version of history which Pakistanis don’t accept and they will never.We know the treatment of Muslim in today’s India and of Muslims in Kashmir.So let’s stop spreading hatred about our leaders and let’s put our attention on interracial peace and harmony.Sir Syed Ahmed Khan,Iqbal and Jinnah,they all had views of unified sub-continent at the very beginning,but then they all inclined on creating a separate state and it is completely apparent from their speeches.They profoundly examined the faiths and way of life of people and then stated unification to be a disaster.

    What we have achieved till now of all this debate ? We have just poured Pakistan,Islam and its leaders with criticism with our dozens of conflicting interpretations.
    We have not achieved anything so far in this debate.Recommend

  • Humanity
    Oct 15, 2010 - 3:08AM

    @Ahmed Sir, you are absolutely right but I suggest you not use that language! That we don’t know anything about Islam and yet try to run the state under the banner of Islam, is scary. We don’t want to laws that we do not understand and end up committing injustice. I am sure you would agree with me on this point.

    The state is hanging by a thread and there is no time to wait while people sort out what Islam is. It only makes sense to make a sharp turn back and run the country based the nazriah-e-Pakistan as articulated in Jinnah’s August 11, 1947. Bangladesh has realized and corrected its mistake. So can Pakistan, if it is to survive.

    BTW, my long response addressing some of the points you raised was censored. I don’t know why .Knowing what is the moderation policy would be good. I assure you there was no personal attack or foul language. That is simply unfair to not allow Humanity to speak for itself. I hope they will allow this response. Please.. pretty please :)Recommend

  • Oct 15, 2010 - 5:03AM

    Jinnah was a great person indeed!Recommend

  • Rajat
    Oct 15, 2010 - 6:40AM

    @All supporting the idea of unified sub-continent.
    People of India, a generation or two ago would have liked the idea of a unified subcontinent. But now we are better off separated, Pakistan is plagued by problems that it created itself. That problem would have been ours had we been united. We are definitely fortunate not to have disillusioned youths suicide bombing each other simply because they belong to a different sect in the same religion. The rampant misuse of funds which is already a big issue here would have been exacerbated had Pakistan been a part of our country. The floods would have taken a toll on our economy. Finally we wouldn’t have two faced politicians going all around the world begging for money yet having the audacity to dictate terms to the donors and the rich upper or upper-middle class silent to the shame Pakistan is facing globally.
    Mr. Ahmed, I fully agree that we are better separated. Recommend

  • Sadia Hussain
    Oct 15, 2010 - 9:43AM

    There is a dire need for reviving Jinnah’s dream, as Jinnah environed a Pakistan which was free from radical elements and allowed space to liberal and progressive elements. We need to revert back to our roots of pluralism and coexistence.Recommend

  • saher
    Oct 15, 2010 - 9:57AM

    @humanity.. :) i am a big supporter of jinnah’s dream of a state where what he actually wanted was to have a dream realized, (and the speech u are talking abt.. i agree with it totally!!) dream that muslims and hindus can co-exist and his dream was based upon the almost 800 years rule of muslims in sub-continent. the trouble was he wanted to have a separate state to show it because he had seen what had happened in the 2 yr rule of congress and had backed out from the his initial goal of muslim hindu unity in a united subcontinent. he wanted Pakistan to be a response to that.

    and my dear humanity, islam is the most tolerant religion of all if we practice it, you just have to go thru how madina was ruled to know it, how the minorities were given their rights and privileges. i think we both agree on the point of jinnah’s dream, but i believe Islam is the way to achieve it, the real Islam the real law where Islam is given its real meaning, its tolerance and pluralisitic vision. We wont be able to achieve it if the present meaning of Islam, the hijacekd version is continued to be used, where we have full authority to burn temples and churches :(Recommend

  • Singh
    Oct 15, 2010 - 10:14AM

    @ Ahmed,
    What you know about condition of muslim in India. Do you know how many president of india were muslim. Do you ever visited India after partition. do you know India has more muslim than pakistan whole population. More muslim murder, raped, looted etc in one day in pakistan than in india in whiole year. Why do care more about indian muslim more than your own. Shame on you & your logic.Recommend

  • Rizwan T Khan
    Oct 15, 2010 - 11:13AM

    Whats the point of this article? When would we end the cry over a spilled milk. Lets start looking forward.Recommend

  • Ali AMEEN
    Oct 15, 2010 - 12:34PM

    I think all is not lost and Jinnah’s dream could still be realized. Lets be positive folks and start making what ever contribution(s) we can make on an individual level. All we have to do is to stop the blame game and become RESPONSIBLE PAKISTANIS for a change, as it is said that national character is the sub total of individuals’ character. Once that happens, I am sure that Pakistan will be through all glitches of past, present and the future. Inshallah. Recommend

  • Anon
    Oct 15, 2010 - 2:25PM

    I find the combination of the article’s title and the picture of the author ironic. Especially the article’s title and the smile on the picture.

    Afterall it was the writer’s generation which took mantle of pakistan from Jinnah’s generation in 1960s…

    Ok I agree one cannot generalize.. but still look at the performance of that generation…Recommend

  • Meekal Ahmed
    Oct 15, 2010 - 3:26PM


    If you want me to read your censored comment, here is my e-mail and it is a valid one: meekalahmed2@aol.com.

    I will be happy to respond.


    I have no idea what you are talking about.

    I just made the point that there were very few (don’t know the exact number) seats offered to Muslims in the ICS exam. This is a factual statement as was told to me by my late father.

    What has that got to do with the price of eggs?

    No need to go off on how many Muslims there are in India. Recommend

  • Azeem
    Oct 15, 2010 - 5:03PM

    Wajahat Sb may I ask what your contribution to the destruction of Junnah’s dream was. You didnt become DIG- FIA and IG- POlice by not toeing the line and listening to those in power now did you?

    The degeneration of the bureaucracy has been a major contributor to the same as well. Recommend

  • Hamza Baloch
    Oct 15, 2010 - 5:18PM

    I never understand why we minmized Jinah`s vision on only “11th august” statment….. so that we mis-qout that staments?

    There are tense of statment of Jinah`s after and before 11August… Why we forget those statment.Recommend

  • Singh
    Oct 15, 2010 - 8:45PM

    @ Ahmed,
    FYI there is No limit on seat in any examination for any race or religion. 2nd every writer is obsessed with condtion of muslim in India & they spreading the lie of state propaganda. Write what you experience by your self not what you been told by other. All muslim (Shia,Sunni, Ahmedi or any sect of Islam) enjoy equal Rights. They can worship, the way they please. State is not prosecuting them because they belong to one sect or another.
    I am writing this because every one of you drag India into your own problem. Your house is in disorder since Jinah. Islamic Republic Of Pakistan Can Not Be Jinah’ Dreams Pakistan.
    Grow up, own your failure. Stop blaiming India for failure of Pakistan.
    JAI HINDRecommend

  • Rashid Saleem
    Oct 15, 2010 - 9:31PM

    It is not we who turned Jinnah’s dream for us into a nightmare. It is the religious clerics who hijacked the idea of a secular Pakistan and mould it into a state in the name of God.Recommend

  • Ahmed
    Oct 15, 2010 - 11:57PM

    @ Mr. Singh
    Yes shame on me because you don’t agree with me.Thanks a lot for this favor !
    At least we Pakistanis bring our issues up and don’t hide them.We have problems and we will surely solve them up.We don’t occupy other territories and then try to make them a part of our own country.

    Mr. Singh let me add some illuminating facts for you !

    We did not murder 2000 people in Gujrat.We did not allow 3000 sikhs to be murdered in broad day light and their holiest place attacked.We did not allow certain people to be relegated to being untouchables.We did not make history books full of hatred against a particular race and religion.We don’t impose infinite curfews just to crush the sentiments of people who have shown the whole world what they want.What about the slogan “India Shinning” but when you look at immigration patterns in US, Canada and Australia, largest immigrant population is from India thus the slogan should more likely be “India Leaving”.

    It will be much better if we both look after our own homes.
    Pakistan Zindabad.Recommend

  • kittu
    Oct 16, 2010 - 3:47AM

    You sound like a frog in a well. It assumes what ever it sees in the well is the whole world. I don’t want to brag about whats good or bad with pakistan. We as Indians are ashamed about the Gujarat and Sikh incidents. Unfortunately we have religious extremists in India too. But I think we learned from our mistakes. Indias young generation is wiser than before. As a proof, There are hundreds of incidents that occured after Sikh and Gujarat tragedy, 26/11 attacks, bombing in pune, coimbattoor, bangalore, Kargill incident, attack on parliament and recently decision on Ayodhya . Any of these incidents could trigger communal violance. I don’t know which India history book you are refering to that fuels hatred agains’t other religions. I don’t think current generation has time to read such books. And about Kashmir, May be some kashmiris want Independence based on religion, But fact is it is very easy to lure people into a seperatist movement based on religion. And SEPERATIST leaders will use every oppurtunity to fuel hatred. And that is what is happening in kashmir.

    And finally, About immigration..Your comments show how immature you are. If my guess is right you should be very young or haven't really cared whats happening in the world. Its getting globalized, Todays young Indian immigrants send $22 billion back home every year. They are the engines of Indias recent success story. Immigration makes a man wiser. Worlds Great leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Jawahar Lal Nehru, Barak Obama, Man Mohan Singh also founder of your nation Mohammad Ali Jinnah are Immigrants at some point. Immigration made them wiser. So my suggession to you, try to travel around the world understand their culture with open mind.

  • Arijit Sharma
    Oct 16, 2010 - 4:00AM

    @Ahmed : “We did not murder 2000 people in Gujrat.”

    The Muslims started it. Well if you keep poking Hindus in the eyes, there will be backlash. Recommend

  • Arijit Sharma
    Oct 16, 2010 - 5:19AM

    @ahmed: ” … but when you look at immigration patterns in US, Canada and Australia, largest immigrant population is from India thus the slogan should more likely be “India Leaving”. “

    You fail to mention the “India returning, investing and innovation” phenomenon.

    Way back the Indian government realized that educating people and letting them emigrate is strategic investment. What has happened in the last twenty years ? Much to your discomfort, you will see Indian/Hindu names in all corridors of power in the US / Europe etc – and of course the Hindu-Jewish lobby has formed in the US.

    Another reason you see heightened immigration from India is because Western governments, as part of a strategic decision, are allowing in more Indians – both migrants and skilled people to buttress their economy and aging population. ( rather than allow immigration of people of Islamic culture ). Other European countries do not have population to spare. South American countries also do not have surplus population. Skilled migration from African countries is not encouraged to prevent draining of talent.

    “We did not make history books full of hatred against a particular race and religion”

    Oh really, so your text books say nice things about Hindus ? This is Muslims hypocrisy at best – first stop using the word “kufr” in a derogatory sense.

    No words can describe the anguish I feel at the anti-Sikhs riots in 1984. I want the people involved in the killings of Sikhs to shot and hung in public.

    But on this “It will be much better if we both look after our own homes.” I could not agree with you more. Both Pakistan and India have very serious issues to tackle. And the quicker these issues are tackled, the better for all.Recommend

  • Rajat
    Oct 16, 2010 - 7:23AM

    We did not make history books full of hatred against a particular race and religion.
    LOL, looks like you people like contradicting yourself
    Source: http://articles.latimes.com/2005/aug/18/world/fg-schools18

  • nan
    Oct 16, 2010 - 9:27PM

    @ Ahmed. Where ever they are, Indians lead a dignified life and will be loyal to the country they live in. Pakistanis take their ideology with them like Fizal Shazad and numerous others in Britain and bring shame on Pakistan. Recommend

More in Opinion