|
|
|
| December 8, 2005 | Thursday | Ziqa’ad 5, 1426 |
Book sends nationalist sparks flying
ISLAMABAD, Dec 7: A book on the Sindhi nationalist leader G. M. Sayed touched off a heated debate on the question of ‘national identity’ at its launching ceremony here on Monday. Khadim Hussain Soomro, the author of The path not taken: G.M. Sayed’s vision and valour in politics summarised the late leader’s politics by observing that he had left the Indian Congress party and joined the Muslim League because Congress had opposed the separation of Sindh from Bombay.
Subsequently, he took lead in moving the Pakistan resolution in Sindh assembly but revolted and took up the flag of Sindhi nationalism when the Muslim League separated Karachi from Sindh to make it the capital of the new state.
That narration of history encouraged other speakers to talk about nationalist struggles in Kashmir and Northern Areas and the general sense of deprivation prevailing among “the oppressed nationalities” in the country.
Awami National Party leader Afrasiab Khattak, peace activist Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy and intellectual Ishfaq Saleem Mirza joined the author in questioning the relevance of the official history of Pakistan movement, the feudal culture in Punjab and Sindh and the military takeovers and their social and economic impact.
Prof Hoodbhoy said strong nationalism had emerged in the Northern Areas and Kashmir after the recent earthquake when the military virtually controlled all the relief and rehabilitation activities. He said military in Pakistan was already involved in various businesses like establishing factories and mills, occupying the post of vice-chancellors of universities and now also dealing in mineral water.
This control of the national economy and political powers since independence has created a sense of deprivation not only in the Northern Areas and Kashmir but in Sindh, NWFP and Balochistan also. He said it was ironic that the military decided where to build a hydro dam in Kashmir, not the people of Kashmir.
Afrasiab Khattak said the country badly needed an alternative history to the distorted official version. He praised the author for producing a book which could have served that need if social analysis was included in it. Prof Hoodbhoy shared the view.
Mr Khattak said it was ironic that living in South Asia “we consider ourselves to be an Arab nation”.
Similarly, he said, the history of Pakistan movement puts all the emphasis on Allama Iqbal as the dreamer of Pakistan and the man who converted the “dream” into reality, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, and ignores what happened in between and who gave sacrifices for achieving independence from British Raj.
There could be 100 other reasons for creating Pakistan but the official history only mentions that Hindus and Muslims were separate nations and that the Congress was not more than a bunch of villains, he said.
Mr Khattak said only a just federal democratic system which dispensed equal rights to people of all religions and cultures can save Pakistan from a disastrous future. He said Bangladesh happened because feudals in West Pakistan feared that the Awami League, which had swept the 1970 elections in East Pakistan, would implement land reforms. Similarly, when the Balochis demanded their rights they were crushed by the army. He said Sindh badly needed a social transformation and land reforms.
Since the “deprived provinces” felt that the Pakistan army was the army of just one province, elements like Balochistan Liberation Army were emerging. This trend could be discouraged if people were given their democratic rights which however seemed as evident from the government’s insistence on building the Kalabagh Dam despite opposition from three provinces, he said.
Criticising the government’s stand that the Kalabagh dam was technically feasible, he said: “When Hitler started making soap from human fat it was technically feasible, however, it was never socially acceptable”.
Ishfaq Saleem Mirza said culture was not a static thing and it changed with the passage of time. “We talk about threats to our culture knowing that feudalism is the culture in Punjab and Sindh which needed to be eliminated altogether.”
The question was not of culture or who were the legitimate owners of river Sindh. The issue was how to transform society into a modern, democratic, civil society by eliminating feudalism and giving people their basic rights, he said.
He also appreciated Mr Soomro for researching for more than six years before coming up with the book. He said Mr Soomro had written some good biographies supported by documented facts and events.
Sharing his reasons for writing the book, Mr Soomro said he was constantly haunted by the thought why the three great sons of Sindh were victimised?
“G.M Sayed was kept behind bars for more than 30 years. Sayed Sibghatullah Shah Pir Pagaro was sent to the gallows and Allah Bakhsh Soomro was assassinated,” he said.
|
|
|
|
