There is need for a turnaround before the state reaches a point where it becomes absolutely dysfunctional and comes to a point of no return. The chief characteristic of a dysfunctional state can be described as one where there is cognisable ‘growth’, but unfortunately, the growth is in corruption, ineffectiveness or paralysis of the administrative, legal, extractive and coercive institutions.
The Balochistan province is a front runner in this aspect where the policy of the British East India Company is still being followed since they first took Bolan and Quetta on lease in 1876 from the State of Kalat. One of the main factors was patronising the sardars but unfortunately this strategy has very badly backfired, with the province now embroiled in disarray and being vulnerable to terrorism, backwardness and nepotism. This country was made for the people, by the people and belongs to the people. But even after 67 years of independence, democracy is still in its infancy and has not been allowed to mature.
A fateful meeting happened in 1928 when all the Indian leaders were invited for the Unity Conference while Jinnah was in London. The amendments proposed by the Muslim League for separate reserved seats in the legislatures for Muslim minorities were ignored. Much later, around 1938, Jinnah spoke significantly of the Muslim ‘nation’ that would emerge from the struggle with the majority community (Hindus).
In March 1940, at Lahore, the All-India Muslim League passed the historic Pakistan Resolution calling for the divorce of the Muslim-majority provinces from the rest of India, which would then be fused together as a separate nation. This Pakistan Resolution was the foundation of Pakistan and is engraved in the Minar-e-Pakistan in Lahore. But unfortunately, it has lost its sanctity and now only remains a souvenir. None of the clauses form part of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
The sacrifices for Pakistan were not just made by those people who migrated from India. Those who accepted them with an open heart, welcomed them, rehabilitated them and accepted their language as the common language in the newly-formed state of Pakistan made sacrifices of an equal measure.
Jinnah had a dream and a very clear concept of what Pakistan was supposed to be. His dream so profusely communicated in his various speeches was eventually abandoned. He was a man of stature and principles and when the British, at the behest of Nehru, made him decline the agreement that he had made with the Khan of Kalat and the Kalat State, the Quaid became very upset. Nehru’s contention was that if this agreement between Pakistan and Kalat State was implemented, then all the princely states in India would want a similar mode of accession. The dejection and disappointment led the Quaid to spend the last few days of his life at the Ziarat Residency in Balochistan where he breathed his last.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 14th, 2014.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (35)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@ antanu antanug@gmail.com: Where I said the Noble Book is not relevant for present day world. For that matter all religious literature are relevant for today's world and that is why they are revered and read around the world. Problem is that people having little knowledge follow them blindly.
The present state of kalat happens to be a result of the people within the state. And what corruption are you talking about? Where the people of kalat robbed the place of the riches themselves; the ever so popular families, such as the great Khan of kalat clan, choose to flee off the rpovince and live elsewhere. I didnt quite understand the idea of your piece. you either picked up a history book and stated the obvious-or were too confused otherwise.
@BruteForce: yu are right, Jinnah was a confused person with regards to Pakistan. Pakistanis are still confused a they dont know whether to implement sharia or fight taliban.
Thank God Pakistan was created. In a United India, Muslim would have contitued 40% of the Population today!
Indians should thank Jinnah for making India Hindu majority, with large, continuous land, with almost unlimited resources.
Lets also thank Nehru for rejecting Cabinet Mission Plan, which basically split India into 3 parts, but with the Hindu majority part being much smaller than it is today.
In the game of Poker, Jinnah got in his words "a moth eaten" Pakistan. While Nehru got a place he can implement his vision of India - Secular, Democratic Republic, with Centralised power, where land reforms would be implemented.
Jinnah's ideology is confusing. He talks about implementing Sharia and another time says Pakistan should be Secular.
Nehru was a better visionary than Jinnah and History has proved this.
@Zeeshan: @Bewildered:Poorly informed Indians commenting on Hindus of Pakistan is worse than Paks talking of Muslims of Ind..Anyway, you will agree selective reading,like being selective in highlighting instances, defeats dialogue. I have used the phrase "Real & Imaginary" in my earlier post. You have chosen to read only the second word. Of Muslim deaths what Pakistanis pointedly express is truth, of Hindu deaths what they unintentionally suppress is also truth. Your priority is only Muslim. Mine is Muslim Plus. Pakistanis don't have enough first hand knowledge of India to make an informed assessment of life of the Muslim & Hindu poor. Vested interests merely make it appear as if Muslims are dying daily in droves & Hindus are in perpetual slaughter mode. I am not questioning your right to comment on Muslim situation in India. I am wondering on its effect & questioning the motives which could be less than honourable.. If you were to show inquisitiveness wanting to know from an Indian Muslim how he feels about Hindutva, you would be respected for your humility, honesty & curiosity. Problem starts when you condescendingly introduce India to him; & paint pictures of what he has lived thru & seen in real time. For some Muslims at some point your concern becomes a burden, an embarrassment. Do leave behind what you left behind..
@Zeeshan:
In case you haven't read history, all of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh was Hindu lands for over 5000 years. Using your logic, don't you think you should go back to Arabia, Persia, Turkey, Central Asia etc., your original land?
while talking about last days of partition and creation of two New States one must remember Act of 1947, (qanoon e azady e Hind). it was passed by Britsh parliament in July 1947 and it was prepared under #rd June agreement signed by both congress and league leaders. If one read it along with its appendices than she/he will not write in such a way. i have in my record an interview of Nawab Ahmad Yaar Khan, Nawab of Qallat at august 1947 who stayed for 22 days after 14th august 1947 with Jinnah in his residence at Karachi. according to the Act, every State had two, only two options.Either to join Pakistan or India. There was not any 3rd option. As it was an act passed by British parliament so it superseded all previous agreements automatically. States like Hyderabad daccan, Kashmir, tried unsuccessfully to coin a mid way and became independent but it failed terribly. If Khan of Qallat was with Jinnah in late august than there is no question of its acceptance at all. what happened in 1948 is a different story, donot mix it with accession at all. Qalat khan was not any elected leader notr there was a representative assembly in qallat. Qallat did not represent whole Baluchistaqn. So why we always love to twist facts? it high time one should revisit her/his thoughts with patience.
@Rakib,
Look's who talking about "patronising" and "false concern" . Do you see the Indians here talking about how grateful Muslims of India should be because how terrible Hindus are suffering in Pakistan? So, are the Indians imagining suffering or are they grounded in reality, unlike Pakistanis?
The tone of the article implies that balochistan is going the way of Kashmir and Bangladesh. A laundry list of excuses is being prepared. Patriotic Pakistanis need to get a handle on what exactly is going on there.
@Imtiaz,
Why would we need your permission to create Pakistan? Are you a colonizer of our land?
"Muslims of India will soon be asked to go to their homeland Pakistan and Muslims of Pakistan seems to not aware of this coming Mohajir wave where over crores of Muslism will be pushed across Punjab border to test Pakistan”s islamic credentials. Acting Ignorant or pretending otherwise will not help when the need of the hour is to make preparation and arrangement for safe lodging and boarding for them."
Why would "Muslims of India" leave their homeland and move to Pakistan? What about you Indians moving back to India?
Zeeshan, Indians' argument is Muslim wanted, demanded Pakistan in 47 and got it. They have no more card to play. Muslims of India will soon be asked to go to their homeland Pakistan and Muslims of Pakistan seems to not aware of this coming Mohajir wave where over crores of Muslism will be pushed across Punjab border to test Pakistan"s islamic credentials. Acting Ignorant or pretending otherwise will not help when the need of the hour is to make preparation and arrangement for safe lodging and boarding for them.
@vinsin:
"If Indian Muslims are unhappy they can always move to Pakistan. After Partition Indian is not responsible towards them."
You've already proved this, don't have to say.
Prior to partition the Pakistani Punjab was ruled by unionist party a pro-united india party headed by Sardar Sikander. The present KP was ruled by khudai khidmat gar or these days ANP another pro congress party. Balauchistan had a tribal system and princely states. Sindh was entirely feudal. It was actually nehru who made pakistan by declaring that all princely states will be abolished and all feudals would return their lands when british leave. Even quite a few hindu princely states wanted annexation with pakistan to save their states.(junagarh,manavadar and state of hyderabad actually declared it). It was congress who made Pakistan so all Indians point your fingers somewhere else and stop prejuidicing muslims.
@Rakib:
"They have a right to seek vicarious satisfaction, to feel happy, in others’ imaginary & real unhappiness."
Very cruel of you to say the least, but I can understand that this is the only way for Indian Muslims to make them acceptable for 'Hindutva' fanatics currently in power in India. Regarding the "imaginary" part of your comment, perhaps you didn't check the links in my comments. If these photographs of the atrocities are "imaginary" (read captions as well), then the blame should go to Human Rights Watch International, not to me. God keep you very happy, always. One last thing, common Pakistanis, accept some midgets on Indian payroll, don't need, and will never need, to reassure themselves about the decisions their great Quaid made 70+ years ago. Pakistan is a reality, and will always be, tough I wish we had good relations with India if she had not tried to harm us on every singly opportunity.
@vinsin, "If Indian Muslims are unhappy they can always move to Pakistan"
Why should they? They cannot demand azadi for their homeland from you Indians?
The article should have dwelt deeper to very point of the Kalat state ascending into Pakistan and how it actually ascended into Pakistan almost 8 months after Pakistan's azadi. Perhaps that would solve the conundrum Indians have here.
@Raj: @vinsin: It is natural, almost de rigueur, for a Pakistani to speak with patronising, false concern about an Indian Muslim. The real & imaginary miseries of poor Muslims of India (not that poor Hindus are any better) is extremely important for a Pakistani to reassure himself at regular intervals that his forefathers made the right choice. Let them be. They have a right to seek vicarious satisfaction, to feel happy, in others' imaginary & real unhappiness.
@Bewildered: Indian Muslims went/going through in Mumbai - what they went into. Gujarat - Muslims burned the train Indian Occupied J&K - Muslims thrown Kashmiri Pandits. If Indian Muslims are unhappy they can always move to Pakistan. After Partition Indian is not responsible towards them. They are still better than Pakistani Hindus.
@Bewildered You ARE bewildered indeed. Try asking Indian Muslims if they would like to migrate to Pakistan:-)) Especially if they are ..... I didn't fill in the blanks to escape sensors hip from the moderator. But you know who all I'm referring to.
@Truth teller:
"The people of Kalat had nothing to do with Pakistan movement or Pakistan demand, but were bystanders and victims."
You mean they wanted to join Indian union so that they could also go through the "massacres, rapes", "oppression, isolation, and discrimination" like the Indian Muslims went/going through in Mumbai, Gujarat, and Indian Occupied J&K? Hats off to your truthful character.
Political leaders rise and fall based on the events at their time. The thought leaders may have intended one and sometimes the outcomes are not necessarily consistent as times change. Nehru, Jinnah, Gandhi, etc. did what they felt was right at that time...however...the nations have shown what they wanted to do after these individuals passed away.
Then why are we stuck with poor institutions and the corresponding institutions in India are doing significantly better. Yes...I can remind my Indian friends of the state of affairs in Kashmir and they do the same by reminding me of Balochistan...so what...our country is being increasingly infested with terrorists and we have no way to rid of them.
So...Nehru and the British did what they wanted to back then...what have we done to ourselves since then...we continue to blame everyone else other than ourselves for the problems we face today...could blaming Jinnah for the partition justifiable? Would we be enjoying the same prosperity that our neighbors are enjoying?
@SKChadha: Mr. Chad ha little learning is a dangerous thing.please don't venture into a domain of which you are pathetically misinformed .copying others to prove your point makes you a laughing stock.if you really had read the noble book. ..you would find it immensely relevant for today's world also.
@Soldier:
"let me just say that on the very contrary, this article also proves conclusively that it was not Quaid-I-Azam but Nehru who wanted partition, because he was afraid of Quaid-I-Azam’s stature. If he really wanted to keep his akhund bharta he would have sabotaged formation of Pakistan..."
Please read about the "Cabinet Mission Plan of 1946" which was formulated by the British to keep the sub-continent united. Quaid-e-Azam accepted the plan, but Nehru and Patel rejected it, and even threatened to undo the plan after getting power if imposed by the British. The plan was simply giving more powers to provinces and was very similar in nature what Nehru and Patel later agreed to in the "Accession Instrument of the State of Jammu & Kashmir". It is as clear as bright day light that Congress was the one to be blamed for the division of the sub-continent. Jinnah simply wanted to protect the rights of the Muslim minority in a Hindu majority dominion where both communities had a history of hostilities towards each other.
"The dejection and disappointment led the Quaid to spend the last few days of his life at the Ziarat Residency in Balochistan where he breathed his last". Wrong. The Quaid reached Karachi alive, and died in Karachi.
Why the majority of Pakistani writres give/show a wrong side of Baloch and Balochistan. How can u say "princely state" You know well Balochitsan belong among the few countries what had own boundry so early in 16 th century. In this time you would find very few states but sure u find empires. Baloch never accpeted the Pakistan and will no accept it. But sure we will be good neighbors..
@Soldier : Nehru wanted partition of India
Somewhere in this disjointed piece the Congress and Nehru are blamed and directly responsible for Jinnah's depression - that is really the point of the article.
@maria if that is true why is media bring controlled when it comes to news on balochistan? Why did balochistan people march, fast and went to UN office? Why are international media and citizens barred and monitored by your powerful you know who.
"He was a man of stature and principles and when the British, at the behest of Nehru, made him decline the agreement that he had made with the Khan of Kalat and the Kalat State, the Quaid became very upset."
You have revealed shocking secrets of the conspiracy of Nehru - he was so deft a schemer that with one stroke he sowed the seeds of separatism in our largest and most mineral-rich province, poisoned the federal structure of our great nation and also caused Quaid-I-Azam, who was a man of principles, such great regret and anguish that he fell ill, and we were denied his leadership in our most formative years which also gave rise to dictators' prominence and weakening of our democratic foundations. Just imagine what shape our nation would have taken if Quaid-I-Azam had been our leader for the first 30 years.
I know some indian trolls would argue falsely that if Nehru-behested British couldn't prevail over Quaid-I-Azam to prevent partition of India, how at the behest of Nehru, they could force Quaid-I-Azam to renege on an agreement with the Khan of Kalat that Quaid-I-Azam was a personal guarantor to. To such trolls, let me just say that on the very contrary, this article also proves conclusively that it was not Quaid-I-Azam but Nehru who wanted partition, because he was afraid of Quaid-I-Azam's stature. If he really wanted to keep his akhund bharta he would have sabotaged formation of Pakistan, now that his capacity to sabotage has been revealed by this sensational article. Let that be the last and final word to all indian trolls on ET to be silent for good and leave us alone.
So the present day Baluchistan problem is actually Nehrus fault . Got it!
The reference of Mr. Jinnah here reminds me the famous utterances of the great leader narrated in “With the Quaid-i-Azam during his Last Days” by Lieutenant Colonel Dri Ilahi Bakhsh that “I acted according to my best judgment but the way things have shaped since then has made me realize that this was perhaps the greatest blunder of my political life.”
This also reminds me that after Hijra Nabi collected his followers at Madina and gave them a new way of life as a leader i.e. social cohesiveness with heavy dose of his way of perceiving Allah’s command. These commands were codified after him as Social Code (the Noble Book). Nabi succeeded to bind many of them and lead them back to Makkah. The commands of Noble Book can be divided into two distinctive parts i.e. before and after Hijra where in later part is more of a Political Islam. It is the ‘Chemical Locha’ created by eschewable Bedouin culture and rule of Idolaters in Makkah (Brahmanism) which made Nabi dictate right path to his followers. Nabi gave an opposing thought and leadership which was necessity of that time. Jinnah also to some extent acted similarly for creation of Pakistan ..... :-)
What happened to Pakistan after demise of Jinnah, is an exact replica of what happened after Nabi in desserts of Soudi Arabia ... ? The post partition era in Pakistan resulted into factions in different landlords/ politicians, army rule and Khichdi of Laws and now it is reaching to Maar Kaat. What we see today in Middle East is the same interpretations, theories and permutations to govern various societies. Nobody is agreeable to realize that there is always a need to provide social cohesiveness to take all together. I repeat again that the Noble Book is an excellent manuscript of thoughtful religious prescriptions of that time. It was helpful in leading the tribes initially at that time. However, it has limited application for democratically developed societies i.e. if we read the Noble Book separating two periods and applying only the thoughts narrated before Hijra in social governance. If the Nation had followed correct principles of the Noble Book (i.e. of before Hijra) probably the Kalat would have been the engine of growth in Pakistan.
Jinnah was a politician. Like all politicians he spoke different things to different audiences. What he really wanted, nobody knows. Thanks to Jinnah, you got Pakistan. It is up to you to either make it into a modern progressive state or sink into medieval anarchy.
Why not ask people in Kalat now - they are very proud Pakistanis. Go and ask the majority of people in Baluchistan who are also pro Pakistani. A handful of agents on the Indian payroll working out of Afghanistan won't change that.
The article is misleading. The people of Kalat had nothing to do with Pakistan movement or Pakistan demand, but were bystanders and victims.