The Two Nation Theory And Its Aftermath

The Two Nation Theory And Its Aftermath
An Analysis
Debate on such diverse issues as Two Nation Theory, mistakes made by Pandit Nehru, causes of Partition, nature of Communal riots in 1947,Jinnah’s intentions, nature of Pakistan Movement, perfidy of the British, causes of instability & poverty in Pakistan, Kashmir dispute, riots in Karachi, need for peace in the subcontinent, continued need of dialogue between India and Pakistan, good will between people of the two countries, the necessity to move on rather than dwell on the past is still relevant.
I would like to tackle the last point first. History, its knowledge and understanding are of supreme importance. “ Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it”.
People of different races, color, creed, and religion were able to live together in India for several millennia before the advent of the British. The reason they could no longer live together when the British had to leave was not entirely due to their machinations “divide & rule” policy etc as the Nationalists are fond of believing, though the rulers did fan the smoldering fire.
All the people who invaded India before the British did, stayed on, intermarried with the locals, got assimilated and eventually became Indians for all practical purposes, although they often kept links with their erstwhile home lands This was especially true of Muslims as the annual pilgrimage to Mecca, daily prayers, month of fasting etc gave them a sense of belonging to an International polity. A vast number of Indians converted to Islam for all kinds of reasons too complex to go into here and incorporated allegiance to the creed as a part of their life. Further concept of exclusive nationalism had yet to develop. People accepted any ruler who could conquer and hold their region regardless of the faith the victor followed. Rulers on their part left the ruled alone as long as they paid their dues, were loyal and were law abiding, joined the army in times of need and fought for the sovereign. The law generally was whatever the ruler said, though lip service was paid to religious dogma. Religious coercion was rare, in fact Hindu rulers often built mosques, and Muslim rulers had Temples constructed. After Sufis arrived both professed allegiance to them.
Society was divided along strict class lines, a Hindu Rajah would socialize with a Muslim Nawab and both would disdain any intimacy with lower classes, Hindu as well Muslim. There was little to distinguish between peasants adhering to either creed. In fact it the Punjab it was not till the British introduced general census in the late nineteenth century that Muslims in the province reluctantly agreed to be classifies as such.
Initially the British followed in the same foots steps. They took Indian women as consorts, learnt Urdu and Farsi, (there were several notable British Urdu Poets-please refer to the book White Moghals), frequented the parlors of dancing girls and adopted Moghal dress and lifestyle. A few took the title of Nawab and their servants were only too happy to address them as Huzoor e wala.
But technology changed everything drastically. With advent of Steam Ships, the British could visit their native land in weeks rather than months and travel became safer. Men could visit British Isles to find wives for themselves and hopeful girls, having heard of the lavish life style in the East descended on India in hordes to find husbands. The lure of culture and language would naturally make British women more attractive.
The UK took an unassailable lead in mercantilism. Industrial revolution created a great demand of raw material. It was no longer just the spices to suppress the foul odor of rotting food, but raw cotton, indigo, iron ore and other natural resources Europeans had their eye on. There was little was to be found in their own countries. India on the other hand had an abundance of them hence the necessity of controlling the country, and the determined onslaught of all the worthwhile European powers on India. They could not nativize themselves and capture the wealth of the East at the same time.
The British worked stealthily, gradually defeating local chieftains, conquering more and more territory, but the fiction of the over lordship of the Moghal emperor was still maintained. A few years before the cataclysm of 1857, the British Governor-General requested that he be excused from presenting annual tribute to the King in person, or at least be allowed to sit during the audience and to walk with his back to the emperor at the end of the audience. Bahadur Shah whose rule was confined to the Red fort indignantly turned the request down. Persons much more exalted, potentates of states larger than his native land dare not sit in front of him. He was only a humble servant of a trading company beholden to Moghal Emperor for permission to conduct business.
After the British had effectively sidelined other Europeans, it became necessary to do away with the over lordship of the Moghal Emperor. They were actively looking for an excuse. The 1857 war of Independence was just such an opportunity The British rule was oppressive. Indians missed the paternalistic behavior and attitude of their erstwhile ruling class. The new rulers were insensitive and had been goading all Indians, Hindu and Muslim to rebel, so they could be put in their place and further territory captured. Grease on cartridges was not incidental. But they had grossly under estimated the passion with which Indians wanted them out. Indian rulers, and the public, Hindu and Muslim alike united as never before or since, tried to wrest power back from the British and thrust leadership on a very reluctant Bahadur Shah.
The causes of failure of 1857 struggle have been thoroughly researched and documented and need not be gone into. The British emerged victorious, perpetrated an orgy of wanton murder, loot and rapine and wreaked vengeance on those who were active in the struggle. (True retribution is in the lap of gods). They had already been developing a subservient class which of necessity was essentially of the Hindu upper caste as Muslims were averse to being supplanted. Bengal which had been under their effective control since 1757 saw the most wide spread of replacement of Muslim agents of the Nawab with Hindu rent collectors. They eventually made the appointment hereditary creating a hitherto non-existent non-Nawab-Raja feudal class. Muslims in the Punjab and NWFP had already been subjugated by Sikh rule of Ranjeet Singh. The process was accelerated and the British did work actively to sow the seeds of Hindu Muslim discord.
Indians in general thoroughly demoralized and disheartened collaborated or sulked and indulged in self-pity. Some did realize that open revolt would not succeed, decided to get educated and beat the British at their own game. The more liberal among the rulers helped them. Indian National Congress owes its birth (1885) to an English man. Very loyal (to the crown) Muslim grandees Muslim league was organized by some years later (1905).
At this time, Indian leaders worked on constitutional lines. Some curried favors from the rulers and presented petitions and memoranda. Many, however, stood up to the British, Jinnah perhaps the foremost among them, who once snubbed the Governor of Bombay and walked out of a formal dinner party as the Governors wife had slyly offered a shawl to a bare- shouldered Mrs. Jinnah.
Things progressed at a slow parliamentary pace till WWI. Having bested the British & Boers in South Africa and honed his political skills, advent of Gandhi on the Political scene did not usher in non-cooperation, Satyagraha and other extra-constitutional campaigns. He active helped the British war effort by working in drives to recruit Indians into the army and was awarded a rather “Kaiser e Hind” medal. Disappointed and disillusioned that the British had not come through with rapid advancement of Indian participation in governance of India he came to the conclusion that constitutional measures would take too long, civil disobedience and flouting the law non-violently would bring quicker results and made himself ready to take on the British. Associating the common man, worker and peasant, would nourish and revolutionize the national movement and defeat the colonial power with out firing a shot. To galvanize masses he needed to use religion. An armed conflict was a non-starter; the overlords were too powerful to confront.
Jinnah, hither to lionized by Congress and Muslim league alike, called an ambassador of Hindu Muslim unity by such luminaries as Gokhle and Sarojini Naido disagreed. He had had the unique distinction of presiding over a league as well as congress session in Lucknow in 1917 and had engineered an agreement on protection of minority rights called Congress-League pact. But the tide had turned against him. Indians had been carried away in a tide of emotionalism Gandhi had mesmerized the educated and illiterate alike. He had for tactical reasons co-opted the movement to restore Khilafat in Turkey. When Jinnah stood up to oppose a non-cooperation resolution presented by Gandhi in the congress annual session of 1921, he was hooted down. Shaukat the brawnier of the two Ali brothers threatened to break his bones.
Disgusted, Jinnah left for England where he developed a highly lucrative law practice and could afford a chauffer driven car and live the life of an upper class English man. He joined the Labor party, was proposed as a parliamentary candidate in a North England working class constituency. During a get acquainted visit, local politicians were put off by his intellectual aloofness and cold behavior. They protested they could not accept a “Toff” for the constituency. “Toff” is an English term for an upper class, pretentious person! During his voluntary exile Muslim league broke into disparate factions. Congress had things all its way.
There are divergent opinions about Gandhi’s ’ role in the fast widening Hindu-Muslim divide. Some nationalists feel that by introducing religion into politics, though he was able to mobilize the masses, as no one had been able to do before, yet by alienating the minorities he dealt a body blow to Hindu-Muslim relations. His meetings used to start with recitation of Bhagvat Gita, Bible and the Quran. He also called for establishment of Ram raj. I recall Muslims proclaiming that Bible and Quran recitations were only to hoodwink the Christian and the Muslim and the real purpose was to indoctrinate Hindu thought and Philosophy. Ram raj was the real agenda.
I for one do not impute any nefarious design to Gandhi Ji. He was a man of high integrity, a humanist and tolerant of opposing news. But perception is as important as reality and often counts for more. Right wing Hindus are known to proclaim that without Gandhi Ji independence might have been delayed by another 15-20 years but would have been purer with India undivided. I know of conservative Muslims grudgingly pay him tribute for having opened their eyes. He tried to back track that by Ram raj he meant “insaf”-justice raj, but it was too late. Fanatics ran away with it. Lost ground could never be regained.
By repudiating the 1917 agreement on safeguards for minority rights congress, in my opinion, committed a grave and in retrospect an unforgivable blunder. It appointed a committee headed by Motilal, father of PM Nehru to look into and resolve the issue. The committee ostensibly paying homage to the concept of one nation rejected all the provisions painstakingly worked out by Jinnah and left the decisions to the will of the majority.
Muslims felt that they were being overwhelmed by the congress machine, although Maulana Azad, Rafi Ahmad Qidwai and a few other Muslims were in the top congress hierarchy.
Be as it may, Muslim leadership felt that only Jinnah could save them. Prince Agha Khan and Nawabzada Liaquat Ali Khan traveled to England to beg him to return and take over the leadership of Muslim league. He returned in early nineteen thirties to face an uphill task, to reconcile the differences between different league factions and control the more recalcitrant ones. He had not had enough time to unify the Muslims when elections were held in 1937. League did poorly in elections; its only respectable performance was in the U.P.
Jinnah was not universally acceptable to all Muslim leaders yet and the local UP leaders made overtures to the congress to be allowed to join the Government. Local congress leaders were agreeable.
But Nehru the presiding genius of congress, liberal and idealist, nationalist, rather self centered (he made a confession to the effect in an anonymous article) vehemently secular, socialist by conviction, wanted to demolish the league and asked the UP leaders to dissolve the party and join the congress as the price of joining the ministry. This was too much for even the opportunist among them. (Lucknow had a tradition of alternating Muslims and Hindus in the Mayor’s office. The league leader Chaudhury Khaliq uz Zaman had built a Temple in Lucknow during his term as “Muslim” mayor. Hindus returned the compliment by nominating him for the mayor’s job when it was their turn)
This episode has been made much of by Maulana Azad and nationalist Muslims. Nehru was a politician and not a prophet. He could not see into the future nor could he know that the episode would energize and revitalize the league. And who would countenance demands from a faction which did not have balance of power and whose avowedly communal party had done so poorly even in the constituencies reserved for the community. Congress formed governments in all the provinces, British Governors behaved like constitutional heads, did as they were told to, and the leadership became confident and even complacent.
Congress functionaries once in office behaved as petty tyrants and alienated Muslims further. Jinnah took full advantage of the failure of vision of the congress leaders. He appointed a commission under the raja of Pirpur to investigate and report on the discrimination and victimization Muslims had been subjected to under “Hindu” raj. The findings were scathing of mid-ranking officials and ministers alike. Congress disdainfully rejected it. Jinnah was further empowered.
Come the shadows of World War II, congress demanded that the British agree to independence as the price of their support and India that would join the war as an equal partner or would be neutral etc. They had overplayed their hand. The British viceroy was reportedly to be agreeable and wanted to make appropriate noises. But the crusty imperialist Churchill had taken over as the head of a war time grand coalition and grandiloquently declared that he had not accepted the office of the first minister to his majesty to preside over the dissolution of the empire and ordered the viceroy to dismiss all the ministries and put the congress leaders in jail.
Jinnah the tactician par excellence that he was, exhorted Muslims to celebrate a day of deliverance and offered cooperation to the Government. He now had a free hand and the time he needed to break heads of local chieftains together and build up his party. He was immensely successful and in time was able to parley as an equal with congress and the British alike. But he did not want an independent country for Muslims. All he wanted was adequate safeguards and autonomy for Muslims in their majority areas. Communal bias was repugnant to him. He was married to a non-Muslim, though she had converted, his life style conformed more to upper class England than to the masses in India and he had never been known to discriminate on the basis of religion.
The British government under public pressure from allies especially the USA and urged by the viceroy who was apprehensive of the swell of anti-British sentiment among the masses, and rattled by the Indian National army that Neta Ji Subhash Bose had been able to organize from among the Indian prisoners of war held by the Japanese who were knocking at the doors of Bengal, sent commissions to parley with Indian leaders. The final effort was the cabinet mission in 1944. Jinnah agreed to the plan offered by the mission in which Federal structure would be weak, most of the powers would be vested in the three wings: 1) the present Pakistan and East Punjab 2) Bangladesh, West Bengal and Assam 3) rest of India. Status of princely states was left for future negotiations. Congress also signed on to the deal. It was decided that an INC/ML coalition cabinet with rough parity between Muslims and non-Muslims presided over by the viceroy be formed at the center.
Jinnah had been riding high and the league had swept the Muslim constituencies in 1945 Elections. After initial demurral on the question of the league being allowed to nominate all the Muslim members Jinnah agreed to let the party join the government under a face saving formula under which the league would nominate a non-Muslim in its quota. He himself disdainfully declined to join the coalition government, instead nominating Liaquat Ali Khan to head his faction in the cabinet. The league had to be given two major portfolios. It wanted home and foreign affairs ministries held by Patel and Nehru respectively. Neither were inclined to surrender their cherished territory and working under the delusion that Muslims could not count (they were not far wrong; finances had been handled by the Hindus under the Moghals and all trade was conducted by Hindu banyas) they committed the mortal error of offering finance to the league. Liaquat demurred; he was a Nawabzada and finance was beneath him. He was reassured by two Muslim finance bureaucrats Ghulam Muhammad and Chaudhury Muhammad Ali and with their help of presented a budget, which levied high taxes on business and industry. That made the congress leaders scream. Not withstanding the egalitarian noises they made, INC was funded by Hindu moneymen. Liaquat also made life intolerable for the Congress Ministers in other ways as well. Patel pitiably complained that he could not even appoint a chaprasi (porter) in his ministry without the approval of Liaquat's finance ministry.
I believe Nehru and Patel came to the firm conclusion that they could not co exist with Jinnah. Nehru while addressing a press conference declared that the sovereign constituent assembly of India would not be bound by any pre-conditions and would approve a constitution according to the will of the majority. Patel probably goaded him. For all practical purposes that scuttled the tripartite British, Congress and League agreement on sharing Power and pre- agreed safeguards. Maulana Azad attributed that to Nehru’s impetuous behavior. The episode was also made much of by him and his nationalist cohorts. The Maulana was very fond of Nehru and presumably gave him the benefit of the doubt. It was most likely by design; Nehru and Patel felt and probably rightly so that in any joint central Government, they would be reduced to impotence as Jinnah would have a veto over everything. And once Jinnah made up his mind not even the most powerful imperial servant could sway him as Mountbatten would ruefully confess later.
Jinnah, on his part felt the same way and turned down with contempt Gandhi’s informal proposal to make him the Prime Minister of United India. He did not relish the idea of being a puppet either. Nehru and Patel, furious at Gandhi Ji’s desperate gesture openly defied him for the first time).
Gandhi Ji and Maulana Azad were the only ones left among congress notables who still clung to the idea of a United India.
It is not known precisely what made Gandhi Ji accept partition shortly afterwards. It is conjectured by many that he was out voted-it would be uncharitable to say that it was a failure of Gandhi’s moral leadership, he probably felt that Nehru, Patel and others would not listen to him any way- by others that Patel convinced him that Pakistan would collapse in a few months and would come begging to be re-admitted into the Indian Union. There was thus not much wrong with accepting Pakistan as a transient and ephemeral phenomenon. They would accept it back in fold on their and not Jinnah’s terms. Patel made public speeches predicting the collapse of the land of the pure with in weeks or at the most months.
And this would probably have come to pass, Indian Government withheld Pakistan’s share of assets under the patently unfair pretext that it will use them to promote the insurgency in Kashmir. The perfidious Mountbatten went along. Pakistan Government had no money to pay its employees or as a wit put it even to buy stamps to post a letter to India to ask for its share. Pakistan Government was virtually on the verge of collapse when the Nizam of Hyderabad came to the rescue and “lent” a billion rupees (equivalent to 10 billion or equivalent to two billion US dollars now). Patel was cut to the quick. Many believe that if he had not bailed Pakistan out he would still be the Nizam. Then Gandhi Ji went on hunger strike to force Indian government to release Pakistan’s share of assets.
Indian Government was further bolstered in their resolve by Mountbatten who openly sided with them. Jinnah had spurned his desire to become the joint Governor General of India and Pakistan. Many on both sides of the divide believe that if Jinnah had acceded to his desire Mountbatten would not have been able to be so openly partial, border may have been demarcated with more deliberation and not with such indecent haste and dishonestly as it was, he may not have advised India to demand accession from the Kashmiri ruler as the price of intervention; Nehru mindful of law had demurred. But Pakistan would have lost some semblance of sovereignty, which Jinnah feared the most. There are no limits to conjecture.
Mountbatten behaved in many ways as a jilted courtesan, manipulating the Government machinery to thwart Jinnah. What role did the affair of Pandit Nehru with his wife play-she confessed to the affair in her letters released posthumously- in all that happened, the way he altered Radcliff boundary awards, the way announcement of awards was with held up till several days after independence, it is impossible to say. (I recently read a book in which it was strongly implied that Mountbatten was bisexual and was aware of the many and frequent amours of wife Edwina. Nehru’s affair was only the most known one. Jinnah offered a bunch of letters Nehru and Edwina wrote to each other contemptuously rejected the proposal to publish them as beneath his high principles. I wonder what would have been the aftermath. Mountbatten would have been discredited and almost certainly sacked. Pakistan would have benefited, but may be not even formed. I also read a rather off color joke. Sirdar Abdur Rab Nishtar told of the sexual orientation of the viceroy offered to “bend” him towards Pakistan. Jinnah was not amused).

In any case Pakistan survived. In the meanwhile, the ruler of Kashmir had been vacillating between a). Joining India b) joining Pakistan c) becoming independent- the options all the major rulers had been given. He was veering towards independence when his hand was forced by the invasion of his state by tribal fighters. He asked for help from India, Nehru and Patel hesitated, and as noted earlier Mountbatten advised them to demand accession to India as the price of support. The ruler gave in. Jinnah ordered his British army chief to intervene who refused to obey the orders of the head of the state. India appealed to the U.N. The rest is history.
I have given this brief outline of the event leading to Partition of India, as with out understanding this history one cannot explain the genesis of the Two-nation theory. Jinnah was left with no choice but to accept even a “moth eaten” Pakistan, as he was to put it ruefully. Gandhi though had a valid point when he asserted that one doesn’t become a separate nation by adopting a different religion. Hundreds of thousands of Europeans and Americans have converted to Islam. Should they be stripped of their citizenship?
But the problem facing Muslims of India was not just the religion. It was a profound feeling of uncertainty. They had lost their primacy to the British whom they had come to regard as their protectors and to whom their leaders had submitted petitions. Now the prospect loomed of being subservient to their one-time subjects. Should they passively accept this ultimate humiliation? Would they not be relegated to the lowest class in a society, which openly professed and practiced a caste system? Wont they lose their culture, language and eventually their religion? For all kinds of reasons, which would form a separate study, they had been left far behind Hindus in Education and could not compete on a playing field, which was obviously not level. They needed tangible safeguards. True or not this was the perception and I clearly recall my elders subscribing to the notion, though we had close and cordial relations with Hindus and lived in U.P. where Muslims had more jobs and assets than their number warranted.
This is the perception that congress failed to come to grips with. Nehru the visionary liberal had a firm conviction that once Indians had complete control, they would deal justly with each other. Patel the pragmatic Tammany Hall type politician gleefully expressed the view that Muslims would get what they deserved. Gandhi Ji a rare mix of saint and shrewd politician regarded good observance of religious rites as the solution. Maulana Azad patrician and scholarly adhered to the sublime belief that there would be a tremendous ground swell of good will, which will overcome all problems. Congress leaders could not breach the wall of Jinnah’s supreme self-confidence. They were also tired of the struggle and wanted to settle into governing even at the cost of conceding Pakistan.
The riots that followed were the result of Mountbatten’s crass indifference and incompetence, lack of fore sight and criminal negligence of his sworn duty. Uncertainty in both communities as to where they would be the next day, if their homes would be in India or Pakistan led to unprecedented blood letting as each side wanted to drive the other out and in many cases found itself on the wrong side of the eventual border. That led to further senseless slaughter. British security forces lacked clear directives and with out the support of Indian policemen were clearly not up to the job. Indian police were divided in their loyalties; their British officers did not give a damn. At times they in fact incited riots (in Quetta the British superintendent of police is known to have shot down a Muslim as a provocation). Combine this chaos with the simmering hatred between the communities, bigots on both sides ready to kill and rape in the name of their respective gods, and rapacious miscreants waiting in the wing to loot and plunder. Catastrophe was inevitable.
Mounbatten as supreme overlord failed miserably and ignominiously in organizing an orderly transfer of power, making proper security arrangements, in clearly defining boundary lines or, deploying troops in sensitive areas. On his doorstep lies the responsibility of the unprecedented carnage, bestiality and mayhem that followed partition of India. He was a small man in a big job, arrogant beyond belief, inordinately proud of his royal birth and convinced of his omniscience. He only wanted to secure his position in history-he selected August 14 as the Independence Day because the Japanese had surrendered to him on the date- as the person who had with surgical precision and expediency cut India into two countries. Instead like a novice he let India and Pakistan bleed.
In order to understand what has happened in Pakistan since requires critical analysis. Jinnah occupied a more dominant position in Muslim league than any combination of congress leaders did in their party. He followed parliamentary rules, always referring to the party executive for decisions or ratification of decisions he had taken. But the party looked up to him as a semi divine figure. He could get away with telling a public meeting in Bengal that Urdu will be the only official language. He could tell Sindhis that Karachi would no longer be a part of Sindh. After having achieved Pakistan in the name of Muslim nation and not having repudiated his followers when they invoked Islam as the reason for Pakistan, he could tell the parliament that Pakistan would not be a theocratic state, that all citizens would enjoy equal rights and that religion would be a private affair with no business in the state.
But he was dealing with material, which was in socio- historical terms, far behind its Indian counterpart. India had well developed industry, commerce, education and administration. Pakistan had little by way of industry. The only worthwhile asset at the time, Jute, was grown in Pakistani East Bengal while the mills were in Indian west Bengal. When non-Muslim teachers, bankers, shop keepers and industrialists left for India, all organized life ground to a halt till teachers and administrators could arrive from India. Congress leadership consisted of lawyers and businessmen supported by a capitalist class. Muslim league was feudal in character with only Jinnah and a few other lawyers in position of leadership. No wonder Jinnah’s vision did not survive him. Feudal lords and their henchmen in the armed forces, administration, and clergy lost little time in subverting his heritage. The latter were the most strident in demanding a religious state even though most of them had opposed the creation of Pakistan, calling Jinnah, (what else) a Kafir.
With a thousand miles of hostile territory between the two wings Pakistan was physically at a disadvantage too. Class character was a greater handicap. Bengal had the larger population and except for Khwaja Nazimuddin and a few others, had a non-feudal character. It had little representation in bureaucracy and less in the army. Immigrant army officers and bureaucrats quickly aligned themselves with west Pakistanis where the center of power lay and further distorted the tilt against the eastern wing.
Indian constituent assembly had expeditiously passed and adopted a constitution. Its Pakistani counter part could not, as West Pakistan politician were not prepared to give East Pakistan representation proportional to their population. There were no countrywide general elections. The only worthwhile attempt at electoral politics resulted in virtual annihilation of the ruling Muslim league in East Pakistan. India abolished Zamindari in 1948. It still survives, thrives and flourishes and has Pakistan in its stranglehold. Constituent assembly had lost its representative character. Instead of holding new elections the governor-general dissolved it and appointed a nonentity as prime minister. A ridiculous spectacle of politicians changing their loyalties and governments followed. Heads were actually broken during an assembly session.
A constitution was passed only after East Pakistan politicians had given up their just demand for representation in the national assembly commensurate with their numbers.
At any rate things were settling down a bit. National elections were scheduled in January 1959, political parties were campaigning vigorously and it was expected that an all Pakistan political party would win majority of seats to form a stable government.
But the west Pakistan ruling class could not stomach the idea of a freely elected stable democratic government presided over by a middle class party. A national government would focus on social services, industry, job creation and infrastructure. Bureaucrats would not be able to dismiss the orders of ministers who enjoyed public support. Mullahs would no longer be able to invoke the name of Islam at the drop of their headgear. Army was waiting in the wings. Its bloated ranks were dependent on the finances provided by a weak government. They justifiably felt that no government with a national mandate would countenance spending better part of exchequer on the military.
Aided and abetted by the other three components of the Quad, (Feudals and bureaucracy and clergy) the, army took over. There after followed ten years of intellectual stagnation. Meaningful political activity was suppressed, restricted or proscribed, newspapers taken over and even student organizations banned. There was no outlet for grievances. In the aftermath of the stolen election in 1964, the disillusionment of 1965 war Ayub regime weakened and was brought to its knees by a popular protest led by students. Not ready to give in yet, the quad engineered a coup against Ayub. Ayub Khan abdicated and flouting his own tailor made constitution handed over the reins of the Government not to the speaker of national assembly but to the army chief. It became an explosive mix Genie could no longer be contained in the bottle.
The Quad felt that a general election would be the lesser risk and the parliament would anyway be hopelessly hung. They may well have been right in their calculation but a major political party (Maulana Bhashani's NAP) withdrew from the race because they felt that dealing with the after math of hurricanes was more important. Mujib’s Awami league a middle class party swept the polls in East Pakistan winning enough seats to form a government on its own. With the support of a few smaller parties from West Pakistan they commanded enough votes to pass a constitution of their choice. Now the cat was properly among the rats.
The Quad scrambled to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. They indulged in subterfuges, procrastinated and when they had transported sufficient number of troops launched a campaign of oppression and brutalization, which far surpassed the 1947 communal riots in ferocity. A Pakistani commander Lt General Tikka Khan, better known as the butcher of Bengal publicly claimed that he was interested in the land and not the people. Another of the butcher’s infamous declarations expressed the intent to change the genetic make up of Bengalis. I have not come across even a remotely similar intent to use rape of women as a measure of public policy. And these were Muslims terrorizing other Muslims.
Untold millions fled to India. Indra Gandhi the Indian prime minister after a skillful international campaign (Pakistan sent a foreign ministry official in her wake. He had difficulty getting appointment with even mid level officials) sent her army into East Pakistan and it ended in a rout of Pakistan army.
Bhutto, who had actively aided and abetted the heinous outrage in East Pakistan, emerged as the strong man of West Pakistan and his repugnant role in East Pakistan debacle notwithstanding, worked with great finesse to restore stability and common sense in what was left of the country. He got 90,000 POWs out of India without conceding much else than that all issues between India and Pakistan would be settled bilaterally- without third party intervention.
Bhutto was the scion of a feudal house and true to his class he established a personal dictatorship reminiscent of middle ages. He emasculated the nascent Pakistani capital by nationalizing industry and commerce wholesale, crushing whatever little prospect there was of a potent capitalist class emerging and overcoming the feudal class. He had pretensions of International leadership too and was lionized by Muslim rulers during the conference of Islamic states he had convened to boost the morale of the people. That also gave him the fig leaf to cover the acceptance of Bangla Desh. In his euphoria he overlooked the cardinal rule that you may crush your subjects under your heel but may raise your head to those in higher authority at your own peril. He stood up to the International capital. Even after the drastic set back and humiliation of the army in East Pakistan the Quad aided and abetted by International capital managed to oust and hang him. This time clergy played the leading role. What followed is the sickeningly familiar pattern of weak government between military rules.
Now we come to poverty, non-development and illiteracy in Pakistan. No doubt Kashmir, debacle in East Pakistan, adventure in Afghanistan, which introduced Klashnikov and heroin in Pakistan (prior to that the only heroines Pakistanis knew were the likes of Noor Jehan and Rekha), ethnic riots in Karachi, smoldering insurgency in Sindh and Baluchistan, the medieval tribal and clan misogynist social system and general break down of law and order played havoc with Pakistan’s economy. Population explosion eroded whatever little development had been achieved.
But these are all symptoms of an underlying disease and the disease is very chronic. It is compounded of bigotry, illiteracy, feudal system, lack of industrialization and socio/political un-awareness.
Let us tackle the prime parasite first. I call the army the prime depredator because they now control seventy five percent of commerce, trade and industry of the country and a good bit of land and real state. It needs Kashmir for its existence. It should be clear even to the meanest intelligence that the army cannot in any conceivable circumstances defeat India militarily and take over Kashmir. They could not even hold their own territory- East Pakistan. They are hard put to controlling the insurgents in Baluchistan. All they are capable of is that given an unarmed-lightly armed crowd they can mow them down-in an open field. They consume more than half the budget. Pakistan spends the least on health and education among even the least developed countries.
Feudals need the army. A truly representative government would swiftly take away their privileges and redistribute land. They were quite happy to serve under military dictators and would accept Mickey mouse as one US ambassador pithily put it, as long as they can continue with wine, women, murder and mayhem.
Bureaucrats need the feudals and army to sustain, support and nourish them. They would not in a democratic set up, be able to plunder the national wealth at will. (A few years ago Pakistan Link an expatriate UD based newspaper published the names of Dollar billionaires in Pakistan. Accompanying Benazir and Nawaz Sharif were the names of some army generals and two civil servants. Nawab Hoti had offered to swap his estates for one month’s take of Lt general Fazal Haq the military governor of NWFP’s one month take of drug and arms money).
Mullahs need all the above to impose their vision on all. A democratically elected stable Government would not let them trample upon women’s rights and permit unchecked and unregulated conversion of young men into raving maniacs. Nor would they be allowed to get millions of dollars from a degenerate Middle Eastern monarchy to run twenty two thousand schools to churn out zealots to propagate their brand of (intolerant) Islam.
True in acute conditions, one has to deal with the symptom first. If you have a fever of 106 it has to be brought down before making an attempt to diagnose the disease. Restoration of electoral process to the level it obtained after Zia’s dictatorship would be tantamount to giving aspirin for high fever and let it rise again and again. It will not even bring the social temperature down long enough for the country to recover even to a modest degree. It would not permit definitive treatment, as the disease carriers will remain in the seats of power. Drugs poured into the country would end up in the pockets of bureaucrats and army officers. Cure will depend upon diagnosis and definitive treatment.
A functional representative democracy cannot take root in Pakistan till feudal holdings are abolished, till there is far greater literacy, till there is industrialization, till fanatics and bigots are suppressed, till army is cut down to size. A representative government even as mediocre as that of Nawaz Sharif did try to develop friendship with India. India a Capitalist country would naturally be attracted to the potentially rich market that Pakistan is. It will help rejuvenate Pakistan’s capital. But would the quad accept it? Would they not fight to death? The recent show of friendship towards India is I am certain a subterfuge to ease the tremendous western pressure and an effort to escape the punishment likely to be meted out for indulging in nuclear proliferation and black market. After all the current army chief overthrew an elected government for trying to get his chestnut of Kargil out of hot coals. He of course does not say so. But Kargil was a devilishly clever plan. A military adventure, a few gains, international community forcing the civil government to order withdrawal, cries of betrayal, military coup – all finely turned and orchestrated.
A stable civilian government would have reached some kind of settlement on Kashmir many decades ago. It would hot have accepted the invitation to participate in big power clash in Afghanistan. At any rate it would not have wasted scarce national resources on a “commercial” army. It would have launched a vigorous family planning program. It would pay attention to education, health, industry and development of resource.
Confronting and overcoming the deeply entrenched and powerful interests is a tall order. It may never be filled. The quad will fight it rather than withdraw. They fought in East Pakistan to the bitter and humiliating end. They did not even tolerate the puny attempt by Karachites to develop a middle class party (it regrettably turned into a fascist group) and wiped out a whole generation of young men. When economic interests are involved religion, nationality, law and justice can all be set aside.
S.Ehtisham.







__________________________________








_________________________________