Assailants of Two-Nation Theory
Mohammad Jamil
9/5/2011

 

A debate is raging in the media since Mian Nawaz Sharif during his address at the SAFMA seminar on 13th August 2011 said that India and Pakistan had a common heritage of culture; even their language and eating habits are similar, which is travesty of the truth.

According to private TV channel Waqat News, Nawaz Sharif has also reportedly said that Indian and Pakistanis worship the same god. Whereas Pakistan should have good relations with all the countries of the world especially neighbouring countries, there is no need to find or contrive the commonalities that do not exist. It is true that both countries would benefit from good relations, as instead of spending on defence they would divert their resources for the welfare of their downtrodden masses. But the question is how India and Pakistan have good relations unless all outstanding disputes between th em are resolved?

A long time family friend of Sharifs, Mr. Majid Nizami, Chairman Nazaria Pakistan Trust and Editor-in-Chief took exception to Mian Nawaz Sharif’s remarks; and during his address on Pakistan Day stated: “Pakistan was achieved on the basis of Two-Nations Theory; how the culture of two nations could be the same. We worship one God and Indians believe in idols and their gods have five heads”. One does not understand how Mian Nawaz Sharif, who is head of Pakistan Muslim League that had launched Pakistan movement under the guidance of Quaid-e-Azam and carved out a state on the basis of Two-Nation theory, could negate the very basis for the creation of Pakistan. Meanwhile, detractors of Pakistan have supported Mian Nawaz Sharif’s statement and used this opportunity occasion to lash out on the Two-Nation theory. Pseudo-intellectuals, some writers and media men often distort history and logic but the fact remains that basis for the creation of Pakistan was the Two-Nation theory which was accepted by the British, Indian National Congress and the world at large.

It has to be mentioned that the concept of Two-Nation theory was relevant in the undivided India, after this concept was translated into action and implemented when Pakistan emerged on the world map on 14th August 1947, the debate should have ended. It appears that there is a systematic propaganda campaign by the enemies and so-called friends of Pakistan through palmed off media men, intellectuals and some politicians. The motivation behind this sinister scheme is to demolish founding fathers, the concept behind creation of Pakistan and also denigrate military and the ISI so that they could push Pakistan to play second fiddle to India by accepting its hegemony. It is unfortunate that some Pakistani intellectuals, politicians, and some misguided religious scholars and media men denigrate Quaid-e-Azam by giving a spin to his statements with a view to proving their respective points.

Quaid-e-Azam during his broadcast talk to the people of the United States of America had categorically stated: “The constitution of Pakistan has yet to be framed by the Pakistan Constituent Assembly. I do not know what the ultimate shape of this constitution is going to be, but I am sure that it will be of a democratic type, embodying the essential principle of Islam…In any case, Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission”. The Quaid was a great visionary, and he could visualize that scholars of different sects would go berserk if their version of Islam was not implemented. He therefore had focused on ameliorating the lot of the common people, so that they could lead their lives according to their faith. Quaid-e-Azam, in his 11th August 1947 speech had of course dwelt on almost every aspect and facet of the state.

Among other things, he had warned about the curse of corruption, nepotism and other social malaises that could eat into the vitals of society. He had assured the minorities that they would enjoy equal rights in Pakistan. Unfortunately, radicalism emerged after Afghan jihad, and there have been cases of suicide attacks on military check posts and institutions, mosques and shrines. More than five thousand military personnel and 35000 innocent people have been killed during the last ten years. A very few incidents of attacks on members of minority community have been noted, but that happens in India - the largest democracy of the world - and also in other established and entrenched democracies. It is true that inept leadership and its flawed decisions have brought Pakistan to the present pass; however people are determined to change the status quo and bring about a change in the system to end graft, corruption, social inequities and secure a respectable in the comity of nations.

However, detractors of Pakistan always find some ammo for their onslaught on Pakistan. A freelance journalist Marvi Sirmed has recently written an article in a local English daily under the caption “BAAGHI: a head-on collisions with the hawks”, after an encounter with the anchorperson of private TV channel. She appreciated Mian Nawaz Sharif’s remarks about commonality of culture and wrote: “If we still describe ourselves as a separate ‘nation’ from our own Hindu, Christian, Sikh and other religious communities and justify building borders based on this ‘separation’, just imagine what exactly we are saying. What we are saying is, every community other than Muslims is justified and entitled to demand a separate country even today”. In another article carried by the same English daily, captioned “Moving beyond Jinnah’s Pakistan”, author Fahd Ali referred to 14th August 1947 speech of the Quaid before the Constituent Assembly, and tried to disgrace the Quaid. He wrote: “In some ways perhaps Jinnah’s statement reflects the enormity of the burden that he felt by creating a nation-state that he accepted only half-heartedly; ironically making that statement Jinnah was attempting to do away with the communal politics that had brought him (and the rest of the country) to that point”. It has to be mentioned that foreigners including Indians who despite showing their aversion to creation of Pakistan have acknowledged that Congress and brute Hindu majority had pushed Muslims against the wall. One could find the following facts in many history books written by Hindu authors: ‘Medium of instructions in schools was Hindi, and despite vociferous demand by the Muslims, Urdu medium schools were not established. In schools, it was compulsory to sing Vanday Matram for all students including Muslims. And on festivals, Muslims were not allowed to celebrate with enthuse and religious fervour, which led to Hindu-Muslim riots in which mostly Muslims were killed.

It was true that Quaid-e-Azam had been trying to secure rights of the Muslim of the sub-continent. However, when Gandhi categorically stated that Congress alone represented India, and Nehru was not willing to give sterling guarantees to the Muslims, Quaid-e-Azam made up his mind that at an opportune time he would not accept less than a separate homeland for the Muslims. Jaswant Singh’s book titled “Jinnah, India, Independence and Partition” released on August 17, 2009 exposed Indian leaders’ mindset during struggle for independence, and like any other historian has put the blame for partition of India in 1947 on Jawaharlal Nehru and other Congress leaders. He wrote in the book: “However, it has to be said, and with great sadness, that despite some early indications to the contrary, the leaders of the Indian National Congress, in the period between the outbreak of war in 1939 and the country’s partition in 1947, showed in general, a sad lack of realism, of foresight, of purpose and of will.”