Dawn News

March, 29 2015
e-paper

The Two-Muslim theory

-Illustration by Tahir Mehdi.

I am not referring to sectarian differences within Islam as these are much more than two. Sects are not unique to our religion. All religions have these. The followers of one sect are not a completely homologous group either, as they may differ on other counts like economic class, cast, language, culture etc. These attributes have an impact on way people behave and act in spheres of economy, politics, culture and even faith. To me, it's only natural to consider that all these factors make one what he or she is.

So when someone says 'Muslims of Indo-Pak subcontinent' with reference to our history, does this refer to one unanimous, monolithic block of people with no shades and diversity? I think it's a big folly to ignore how divergent the political interests and ambitions of Muslims were in the period that ended on this day 65 years ago. A reintroduction to these groups and how the new state of Pakistan responded to their political aspirations might help us understand where we stand now.

Pre-partition Muslims can be classified in many ways. For now I would put them into two larger groups and instead of laboring over an academically-sound definition of each, I will demonstrate my point by offering example of one person from each of these two groups.

Abdul Ghaffar Khan was born in 1890 to rural middle-class Pakhtun parents of Utmanzai, a small town in the present day district of Charssadda. At the age of 20 he opened a school in his village. He had woken up to the fact that his people have no future if they don't educate themselves and their children. The tall, young man proved to be a zealous missionary. He would walk for miles from one village to the other with his simple message – educate yourself and abstain from violence. He was a devout Muslim, a five-timer namazi parhaizgar and would draw heavily from Islamic history and the Prophet's sayings to rally fellow Pakhtuns. People joined him in droves. His arcane appeal matured into charisma, some would even give him a halo.

In his 30s, he founded a social reform movement named Khudai Khidmatgar (Servants of God). By now he was named Badshah Khan or Bacha Khan. The movement, like many others of that era, gave its volunteers a uniform that was red and organised them on the pattern of a militia that was, in his words, armed "with the weapon of the Prophet – that is, patience and righteousness. No power on earth can stand against it." It was only Bacha Khan who could unarm Pakhtuns who otherwise were considered quarrelsome and trigger-happy.

The Red Shirts, as the volunteers of the movement were known as, were against the British rule and demanded self government. For the British, the then province of NWFP had great strategic importance. It was a so-called buffer against the Afghan government that was not friendly with the Raj and also against the Russians whom the British dreaded as their rivals.

The Bolshevik revolution of Russia in 1917 was emerging as a huge challenge for Imperialism. It had a natural affinity with the nations oppressed by the British. The Russian revolution was colored red. The sight of a Red Shirt in the Peshawar valley gave the British a fright. At Qisa Khani Bazar in 1930, the frenzied British forces fired directly at a protest rally of unarmed Khudai Khidmatgars killing many hundreds. The movement and its committed cadre did not budge. They stood fast. Many estimate that at its peak there were as many as a hundred thousand Red Shirts.

When the British adopted a cautious policy of sharing power with local political forces and initiated limited franchise elections, the group allied with Indian National Congress. It contested successive elections, won majority and formed governments in the province. As the British hated them, they would conspire against the Red Shirts and jailed Bacha Khan frequently and for long periods but could not undo the politicisation of the Pakhtun middle class that he had initiated.

Pakhtun Muslims felt comfortable with Congress and that didn't bear out of some personal friendship between the top leaders. Congress accommodated politics of budding smaller sub-national groups, offered them space for growth and opportunity to integrate with others without giving much consideration to religion. On the other hand, Bacha Khan did not owe his 'fearlessness' vis a vis Hindus to Pakhtun chivalric traditions, instead he had earned this confidence through successive electoral victories. He had a large constituency where Muslims were in majority. There were Hindus too but Pakhtun Muslims did not see Pakhtun Hindus as threat to their religion or politics.

Despite its vociferous campaign Muslim League could not ignite fears of Hindu domination in the support base of Bacha Khan. His comrades won the land mark elections of 1946 with a thumping majority. He opposed the Partition on the basis of religion, but it happened. His democratically elected government was dismissed 8 days after the independence, on 22 August, 1947 when Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah was the Governor General and Liaqat Ali Khan was the Prime Minister.

Nawabzada Liaqat Ali Khan was five-years younger to Bacha Khan. He was born in 1895 to a Muslim aristocrat family whose jagir starting at the eastern edge of Punjab (now Haryana) stretched into Uttar Pradesh. His family had cordial relations with the British. Some say the family gained fortunes and earned intimacy with the Raj, when his grandfather extended support to the British during the hard times of 1857. His father earned many a titles and honors too.

Liaqat Ali went to Aligarh and then to Oxford. On his return from London in 1923, he joined Muslim League. He contested his first elections in 1926 on a seat reserved for Muslims in the UP Assembly (Muzaffarnagar constituency) and comfortably won. He grew into an eloquent parliamentarian, pleading mostly for the causes of Muslim landlords who were a minority in that province.

He became one of the most important members of the Muslim League's vanguard. Nawabzada is, in fact, credited to have convinced a dejected and disappointed Muhammad Ali Jinnah to end his 'self-imposed exile' in London and lead the movement for a separate homeland for Muslims. Liaqat Ali Khan was made the General Secretary of the Muslim League in 1936.

The party's parliamentary committee did not award him the ticket for the 1936 elections for his home constituency which he valued highly. Despite holding a high office in the Muslim League, he contested as an independent from his home constituency and faced criticism of fellow party men.

He contested the 1946 elections for the Central Legislative Assembly on the Muslim seat of Meerut that is situated in Uttar Pradesh. Following this victory, Nawabzada won a place in the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan and at independence was made the first Prime Minister with the additional charge of Foreign Affairs and Commonwealth Relations and Defense. He remained the longest serving prime minister in the history of Pakistan till Yousuf Raza Gilani exceeded him by a few weeks recently.

Prime Minister Liaqat Ali is accredited with a number of ground breaking contributions. He decided to ally with the US in the Cold War divide; quashed a coup attempt by communists; promoted General Ayub to the highest rank and fought a war with India over Kashmir to name just a select few. His government ruled on ad hoc basis under temporary laws as it could not formulate and build a consensus on a constitution for the country.

Reasons were simple. They could not dig out a monarchy to rule the country nor could they install a Caliph. The constitution has to be based on democracy. But the problem was that Meerut was now in India. The most powerful Prime Minister serving for one of the longest periods in the history of Pakistan had no constituency in the country to contest elections from. A committed democrat and an active parliamentarian, he  knew well that he and his political class had no, or at best a very shaky, future under a democracy. In contrast, Bacha Khan's was a completely secure political position. It was impossible to democratically uproot him from his constituency. He had voters, volunteers and diehard loyalists.

The ad hoc powers were thus used to change the rules of the game.

Six months after the death of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Prime Minister Liaqat Ali Khan moved the Objective Resolution in the Constituent Assembly that introduced Islam as the raison d'être of the new country. Religion was pitched against ones linguistic and cultural identity and faith was made to rival political interests. Those loving their culture, defending their language and demanding their democratic and political rights on these bases became heretics conspiring against the last citadel of Islam in the Subcontinent. Ideological boundaries of the country became more important than the limits of electoral constituencies and principles of democracy were contrasted to injunctions of Islam as defined by the select ulema.

Bacha Khan who enjoyed a hard earned and unflinching popular support in a vast constituency went down in our official gazettes as an anti-Pakistan traitor. Red Shirts were hounded and hunted. Politicians were jailed and elections were rigged.

By declaring the entire country as one constituency and setting ones perceived Islamic credentials as the only qualification, Liaqat Ali Khan tried to create a constituency for his class – the politically insecure Muslim elite that had migrated from the Muslim minority provinces of India. But ironically, they could not sustain their hold on this constituency for long. Within a decade they were outdone by the Army in the game they had pioneered. They were declared incapable of defending the citadel of Islam. The army took over the 'responsibility' of keeping the country united in the name of Islam and secure from the conspirators who had strong democratic constituencies in the country.

The army did not feel the need to redraft the national narrative that was scripted in those initial years. It was found to be in perfect harmony with the Army's own scheme to block or cripple democracy and sustain its direct or indirect rule for decades to come. The narrative persists with all its detail and corollaries and insists on its refusal to recognise Bacha Khan as a great national hero.


The writer works with Punjab Lok Sujag, a research and advocacy group that has a primary interest in understanding governance and democracy.


The views expressed by this blogger and in the following reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Dawn Media Group.


Email news tips and feedback to News Desk, submit blogs to Blog Desk and share photos and Videos with Special Projects Desk.


Tahir Mehdi works with Punjab Lok Sujag, a research and advocacy group that has a primary interest in understanding governance and democracy.

He tweets @TahirMehdiZ


The views expressed by this blogger and in the following reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Dawn Media Group.


Comments (277) Closed



vidyadhara
Aug 14, 2012 10:01am
really funny, babri masjid demolition - 2000 dead. Gujarat riots 2000 dead. Partition - 2million dead. Which was the greater evil.
junaid
Aug 14, 2012 10:06am
khan wanted nwfp to become part of afghanistan,which was not acceptable to ML thats why he joined hands with congress.khan was confused ,he selected two great qualities of Prophet (SAW) righteousness and patience and used them for his ulterior motives.it would be a fallacy to call him a leader as leader has vision.was that his vision to live in the united india.division was in the best interest of both muslims and hindus which he never realised.donning others silly people with red hats and bringing them in front of hostile soldiers to sacrifice them in the name of nationalism ,was that his political maturity.he did not receive bullet as the rally which he ignited was without him.things which low character politicians do ,use people and deceive people but do not let them know the real motives
Abhishek
Aug 14, 2012 09:59am
@Raja. Come on, everyone knows religion is the root cause.
Shax
Aug 14, 2012 10:12am
his intention is to open the eyes of the the sleepy nation, who could not recognise in 65 years who is his friend and who is a foe.
illawarrior
Aug 14, 2012 10:07am
Yet, with all the anti British feelings running rife, Pakistan still chose to retain cricket.
Fahad
Aug 14, 2012 10:23am
At this time of crisis in Pakistan the only thing the writer is promoting is negatively. Diluting our vision of our great leaders which migth be one of the few things that hold us together, thus making the reading question their. Almost seems like these people are workings against their own mother land, all I can say is shame on you! Pakistan Zindabad!
Jit
Aug 14, 2012 12:07pm
Why do u feel muslims are not given their rights in India ? Is there any personal experience attached to this conclusion or is it driven by newspaper reading?
Krish
Aug 14, 2012 10:11am
Gandhi had called it nothing but the vivisection of India.
Vineeth
Aug 14, 2012 12:13pm
It is my personal opinion that the Two-Nation theory was flawed on following two counts. First, religion cannot be the only, or even the most prominent, identity of a person. There are many other factors at play like ethnicity and language which are far more powerful as unifying factors, as the separation of Bangladesh from Pakistan has shown. In India too, it is the language and ethnicity which are the prominent identities of its people, not religion. Second, the argument that Muslims would have been a persecuted minority in a united India does not seem convincing in the light of demographics. India, Pakistan and Bangladesh have nearly 200 million Muslims each now. Despite all the allegations of discrimination and riots, the percentage of Muslims has only increased steadily in India. By this pattern, if the partition had not happened, there would have been nearly 600 million Muslims against 900 million Hindus, and I would not call that exactly as a 'persecuted' minority. But I do admit that the partition is a reality now, whether for good or bad. The two countries need to find a way to relax their antagonistic attitudes and learn to live with each other as good neighbours.
n.qureshi
Aug 14, 2012 12:14pm
the objective resolution started the downward sprial that we are facing today.it was not what jinnah envisioned.
Akbari
Aug 14, 2012 11:14am
Mr. Nawaz may be right with his sentiments. However, what does he think of Sir Syed Ahmad, Sir Dr. Muhammad Iqbal, Sir Chaudhry Zafarullah Khan and some others. These names can not be ignored as they were among the founders of Pakistan, idealogically and practically.
rehan
Aug 14, 2012 11:53am
perhaps the writer could also explain the reason why bacha khan even opted afghanistan as the place of his final rest. well he may have been a NATIONAL hero if there was one other nation, PASHTONISTAN.
Bahawal
Aug 15, 2012 10:34am
Maybe He wants a free ticket to the next Bollywood Award. Or maybe he wants to outshine Veena Malik.Difficult to comment on his true intentions.
Vineeth
Aug 15, 2012 02:49pm
To Bilal and the rest of Pakistanis still swearing by the two nation theory.... I live in the state of Kerala in India where non-Hindus number nearly half of its population (20% Christian,30% Muslim). If you come and see the sheer number of magnificent churches and mosques here which dwarf the Hindu temples you would be forced to swallow your own words. If you come here and lecture the 'Two nation theory' to an average Keralite Muslim, he will scoff at you. There has never been any religious riots in this state worth mentioning. The existence of the multi-religious Keralite society itself is proof enough for me the that the 'Two-Nation theory' was just a product of intolerant, myopic vision. When you decide that you cannot live in peace with someone different, you will not be able to live even with your own. Its a matter of attitude, nothing more..
Imran
Aug 14, 2012 10:26am
"Liaqat Ali Khan tried to create a constituency for his class
Vineeth
Aug 14, 2012 12:43pm
Dear Fahad, the color of truth is grey, not white and black. When you recognize this reality, you will begin to see things in a new light.
ahmad butt
Aug 14, 2012 11:13am
But has the creation of Pakistan done wonders for the muslims of the sub-continent? I have read Maulana Abdul Kalam azad book India wins freedom and am amazed on how accurate his account of the partition aftermath will be. are the muslims of then and now Pakistan and Bangladesh happy, have the remaining muslims in india be fairly given their rights as India touts itself as a secular democratic country? If only the people of Pakistan had themselves taken the initiative that education from day 1 would rid the society of most ills, and had it been implemented by the democrats, mullahs and army back then, and the court system worked, at least things wouldve been better. And as for current Pakistan portraying as a force of the islamic world, how many issues affecting muslim minorities around the world has it voiced its opinion? The patriotic fervour doesnt last long along with the religious zeal unfortunately.
raja
Aug 14, 2012 11:02am
Fantastic article!!! This is the kind of substance that should be produced and presented to the public through blogs and columns by those who wish to make a (positive) difference
Fahad
Aug 14, 2012 10:33am
Alhamdulillah we have Pakistan else our fate might be the same as currently being faced by muslims of assam. Indian muslims are persecuted and racially abused. The reason Pakistan could not become what it was supposed to is solely because we did not implement the laws of Quran and Sunnah to its full spirit. InshaAllah Pakistan will emerge as a global power soon and these Hindus would be wishing that how good it would be if their grandparents migrated to Pakistan in 1947!
Krish
Aug 14, 2012 10:25am
Maulana Azad was first and foremost an academic, a Maulvi born in Mecca, and used his intellect to reassure the Muslims of India that they had a future by remaining undivided. Frontier Gandhi was more heart than head ( Dil-waala ) , and opposed the division too. Both these stalwarts of Islam failed. In fact, Frontier Gandhi was disgusted with the INC when they accepted the partition plan, and told them " You have thrown us to the wolves "
manoj
Aug 16, 2012 09:34am
Akil bhai, The population of India is one billion plus. If a 100 people out of the SAME one billion comments on Every ET article on Pakistan...what is the percentage of Indians interested in Pakistan? Do the Math.
Jan, MB
Aug 15, 2012 02:15pm
I cannot agree with you more
ashfaque ahmed
Aug 15, 2012 01:59pm
you know nothing about india or indian muslims
Jan, M
Aug 15, 2012 01:52pm
Hamood I salute you. Pakistan is a dream come true.Keep it up
AKhan
Aug 15, 2012 01:51pm
Finally, we will clear Bacha Khan name as a "Traitor" from the books of history in the eyes of unmature politicians. Thanks for eye opening article. Pakistan Zindabad.
Kiwi/Paki
Aug 15, 2012 01:10pm
Very good article. At least some has spared time to write about this forgotten and real hero. Most of Pakistani consider him as a traitor and Indian agent and they should not be blamed for it, that is what they have been taught. Hate everyone who talks about the right of their people and their culture. Their narrow mindedness and hatred towards other cultures and religions has brought their own country to this level but the worst thing is that they don't realize it and blame it on others.
Arshad Ali
Aug 15, 2012 12:57pm
"Meerut was in India", this phrase clearly describes the biased mindeset of this author. If Liaquat Ali Khan wanted, he could have easily won from any area of both East and West Pakistan. He was so popular among masses of Pakistan. Proof. My own parents and teachers, who always remembered like a family member and grieved for his shahadat. I don't know why Dawn prints these prejduced and one sided views.
kaka
Aug 15, 2012 12:54pm
read the book by Farigh Bukhari in orderto know the truth about Bacha khan. Bacha Khan was not a Nawab, but a land owner, just a little bit more than the subsistence level of land owning.
@RKzoy
Aug 15, 2012 12:00pm
What's ur version.
@RKzoy
Aug 15, 2012 11:59am
Ask the Indian Muslims.
Krish
Aug 15, 2012 11:33am
@Lakhar: Sorry, and thanks for correcting. You speak of one of the truly great people of our sub-continent, unfortunately not known well enough internationally.
Krish
Aug 15, 2012 11:45am
@Shriram: I thought we always called Nehru, fondly as Chacha, and his birth anniversary is celebrated as Childrens' Day.
Fahad
Aug 15, 2012 11:13am
Yeah mate ;)
Fahad
Aug 15, 2012 11:12am
What do you think is the definition of moving forward? Is it having the first indian women (Sherlyn Chopra) in playboy magazine? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-191761... I believe you dont think that is the case rather technological advancement and the safety & wellbeing of your people. Explain why one in five children that are currently suffering malnutrition in India? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-192190...
Nabarun Dey
Aug 16, 2012 01:11pm
Excellent piece. my congratulations to both the writer and great DAWN
Tauqeer Mustafa
Aug 27, 2012 12:05pm
Well-written article. Sad to see that almost none of the commentators have tried to read between the lines. This is not a comparison of two personalities or two political parties. This is an account of class system, a comparison of two schools of thought, two streams of the society, and should please be seen like that.
AB Jaff
Aug 14, 2012 11:16am
Writer himself is not clear about the context of the article and trying to malign the Heroes of Pakland. YES Liaqat ali jagir starting at the eastern edge of Punjab (now Haryana) stretched into Uttar Pradesh. But Do the author know how Much he gave to Pakistan (A newly independent country with nothing in the reserves)?? These were the elite class of that time who devoted ALL their reserves to this country. We should praise these Leaders rather then object them.
haris
Aug 14, 2012 10:54am
Does anybody inform the author that what this The Nawabzadah has left for his family? Does the author knows that despite having a wealth that spread across Punjab The Nawabzadah died wearing a torn west under his shirt. His own wealth accounts more than the wealth of all migrated Muslims of India. To dear Author: Hypocrisy at your best. I can't find a harsh synonym of word "Shame" to describe your slant.
sharif
Aug 14, 2012 10:53am
Bharat ratan not pak ratan
akhter husain
Aug 14, 2012 10:48am
Bacha Khan was a pakhtoon leader,having no sympathy with others.His struggle for united India was in fact to have a greater space expand and rule like Mughals. Alas and thank god it did not happen.
Kawaljeet
Aug 14, 2012 11:30am
Very nicely writen article. thanks dawn. If we have one modern khan abdul gafar khan in parkistan today, situation will improve. It is not possible to correct the greatest folly of Mahatma gadhi and jinnah who created pakistan on religious grounds but at least there will be better relation between the country and both nation will progress.
Gulap
Aug 14, 2012 11:22am
Bacha Khan spent 33 years in prison (Paki and british) - every 3rd minute of his life.
Gulap
Aug 14, 2012 11:20am
the new is AfPak :)
Gulap
Aug 14, 2012 11:19am
and guess what? It was not the PM but the foubder of Pakistan who dismissed the elected government in NWFP. Thats why the Army loves Jinnah for this.
Silajit
Aug 14, 2012 12:54pm
Any basis for this opinion?
Amir Saeed
Aug 14, 2012 09:56am
A very ineresting article. Challenges and takes apart the neat official narrative about the creation of Pakistan as a united struggle of the Muslims of India. The situation in fact was far more complex and sits inconveneintly with what we tell our kids at school.
Holynickers
Aug 14, 2012 09:56am
Why do you have to tell all of us that you are a Capt? Many of us reading this article, I am sure, are highly educated and well to do but do not have to announce it. Only in Pakistan..... Agree with your point though
Jam
Aug 14, 2012 07:08am
Does anyone understand what this writer is talking about? What is his intention?
Ravi
Aug 14, 2012 07:10am
May be time to look for how to rebuild the nation than dwell in the past which anyway cannot be undone.
Nawaz
Aug 14, 2012 07:15am
see the difference between two personalities and decide who was pro and anti british?
Capt C M Khan
Aug 14, 2012 07:20am
Good article but what is the point of this article???? What do you want to tell us.???
Indian
Aug 14, 2012 07:28am
Looks like only one portion of what the write has written has appeared on website. Is there a Part 2?
Bobby Srinivas
Aug 14, 2012 07:30am
Absolutely factual! Badsha Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan was a tall outstanding Muslim leader in the Indian National Congress. A close associate of Mahatma Gandhi, the Khan was one of the four in the in the negotiations with the British administration for transfer of power. The other Muslim was the Congress President Maulana Abul Kalam Azad. The Congress delegation consisted of these two Muslim stalwarts besides Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel.
ahmed
Aug 14, 2012 07:32am
excellent.
Nawaz
Aug 14, 2012 07:35am
the point and purpose of this article is reality of our so-called heroes.British awarded the titles of ,KHANZADA,KHANBAHADER,SIR and many more who rendered the services for them and against their fellow muslims so now you can find out who were awarded these titles.
murali
Aug 14, 2012 07:36am
Author has been too diplomatic to terminate the article at Likhahayt Ali khan's accession to power. any ways, thanks for all the good words about Khan Adul Gafar Khan, we still fondly remember him as "Frontier Gandhi"
Nawaz
Aug 14, 2012 07:37am
yes i do understand .his intention is to give true picture which our people dont want to see.
A K Dutta
Aug 14, 2012 07:38am
The author expressed no views in the article, he only narrated the history of Abdul Ghaffar Khan who was a secular person and Nawabzada Liaqat Ali Khan who was communal to the core. Pakistan was created against the forces of nature, that is, against the wishes of God Allah, that is why, after 65 years of its birth it is still restless - politically and economically, its society is violent in nature and its peple nurture a hate culture againt the people of other relgion.
Shoaib
Aug 14, 2012 07:42am
I think he is talking about Liaqat Ali khan, and his struggle for the Pakistan movement._
Sadiq Khoja
Aug 14, 2012 07:46am
He is trying to say that Muslim was not a single entity in 1947 neither it is today.
balach
Aug 14, 2012 07:51am
writer has no clue what is he trying to convey.
Silajit
Aug 14, 2012 12:55pm
Clearly facts are not going to get in the way of your opinion. :-)
Indian
Aug 14, 2012 07:55am
How was Jawaharlal nehru different from the said personalities? I think Nehru hijacked INC for his personal gains, sidelines Gandhiji, contributed to partition by his non compromising nature and lust for power. Nehru in my views stands to be blamed equally for this massive bloodshed and partition of " The Country".
Afee
Aug 14, 2012 07:56am
The attempt is simple, cutting with both ends; author is trying to de-characterize one of the icons of Pakistan movement dear to many Pakistanis while at the same time glorifying the man whose whole life spent working against Pakistan. This had been a trend in Pakistan lately. First we refute the idea on which the nation stands, then one by one malign its founders as selfish opportunists power grabbers.
anil
Aug 14, 2012 07:57am
"Frontier Gandhi" was more active in independence and even more secular than Mr.Azad . But he hasn't got his due and has been overshawded by Others .Just imagine a person from backward pashtun tribe of Afghanistan(back in 1900) was so secular and a visionary , but some leaders who were educated in UK couldn't match him .So the moral point is Education is not the only X factor and politics played a key role in partition .
Indi_Pop
Aug 14, 2012 07:59am
If you insist on calling the Indian Subcontinent as Indo-Pak Subcontinent why not call it a Indo-Pak-Bangladesh-Nepal-Bhutann& so on ...Subcontinent? Only in Pakistani newspapers do I see invention of new geographical terms.
raja
Aug 14, 2012 07:59am
Thanks God Pakistan was created otherwise what happened after demolition of Babri mosque and massacre in Ahmedabad by hindu extremists, all the muslims of subcontinent would have suffered. If pakistan is restless as you claim, contributing factors are other than creation of pakistan on the basis of ISLAM. We are proud of pakistan.
Raoul Ciao
Aug 14, 2012 08:07am
Interesting article, I read it with interest. It added to my knowledge of this phase of history and my personal respect for Frontier Gandhi,/ Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan has increased...i googled some more and the red shirts and their movement was actually a very key phase in subcontinental fight for independence history, something i learned only now. Sad that such a movement and such grassroots democrac was killed by elitist rulers from day one else maybe Pakistan would today have been a greater nation. Thanks to author and Dawn.
AKhter
Aug 14, 2012 08:07am
the title of this article is two-Muslim theory but i couldn't understand the main point of writer what does he want to tell?????
Fuzail Z. Ahmad
Aug 14, 2012 08:13am
It is indeed another view of the history. Is the writer implying that the Muslim League did not represent the "other Muslims"? So, what gave the right to the British to negotiate with Quaid e Azam about "Muslims' separate homeland?
Pradeep
Aug 14, 2012 08:19am
I know Bacha Khan Story as ‘Frontier Gandhi’ who went on with non-violent ways of struggle for freedom; he was still revered as a great person and a Gandhian in India. I am shocked to know that he was shunned by present day Pakistan and even more shocked to find that you were able to find reasons for doing it.
roshan tahiliani
Aug 14, 2012 08:29am
" its founders as selfish opportunists power grabbers" . That is exactly what the founders of Pakistan were . Most of them !
dhiraj garg
Aug 14, 2012 08:43am
"It was not partition of India but partition of Muslims of India" - Road to Sangam, Movie.
anil
Aug 14, 2012 08:51am
It's immature to blame Mr.Nehru . Nehru had been imprisoned for 14 years for independence , not a single leader including Jinnah from Muslim league did it . If I am not wrong and my historical facts are right then Mr.Jinnah had first given the concept of 2 nations , later he had withdrawn his idea (according to some theories from across border) , but Mr.Jinnah had given this idea , both of us accept it . Mr.Nehru didn't compromise ,yes you are right . He didn't compromise because he had majority then , including majority hindus and some sections of muslims (stated by author) and It is the basis of democratic set up. Mr.Nehru and Mr.Jinnah were persons like us , not gods . Just use your logic and try to determine who was wrong and who was right .
Haider
Aug 14, 2012 08:54am
.... and therefore we must persecute all Pakistani Hindus, Christians, Shia Muslims, and Ahmedis [whom the law of the land of the pure bars me from calling Muslim]. I hope you know that more muslims live in India than in Pakistan.
Rana Amir
Aug 14, 2012 08:55am
This is a wholly mischaracterisation of the author's intention. It is a fact that Liaqat Ali Khan was an inept leader, beholden to the interests of the aristocracy that came from the the United Provinces. Secondly, the nation was NOT formed to be a citadel of Islam, but to safeguard the interests of the muslims, who incidentally were the minority of India. It is ironic that those professing to hold the flag of Islam in Pakistan, i.e. the mullah brigade was the most vociferously against the establishment of Pakistan.
S Sundar Kumar Iyer
Aug 14, 2012 08:57am
I commend the author for writing this article that conveys ideas that will be difficult to say in public in Pakistan - considering that the country was founded on the principle of differentiating people on the basis of religion and that somehow belonging to a religion made you another 'nation'. It is heartening that groups like 'Punjab Lok Sujag' still exist. It gives hope that may be in a decade or two, we will be able to celebrate the independence day (the that commemorates when British stopped being rulers of what is today India-Pakistan-Bangladesh) as single political unit - a secular entity, autonomous states, and with robust grass roots democracy. That is the only long term hope for the people of the sub-continent for a stable and prosperous existence..
EmMoosa
Aug 14, 2012 09:02am
You should be ashamed. You are taking breath freely because of those heroes. I know sarhadi gandhi is your hero but he is and never has been for true Pakistanis.
usama
Aug 14, 2012 09:12am
if u are annoying go to ur place buddy why here..:p
usama
Aug 14, 2012 09:14am
i like ur thinking we want more indian to think this way..!! thanks budy with love from PEHLWAN GOTH Karachi:p
hamzakhan
Aug 14, 2012 09:15am
the writer has every clue and knows what he is trying to say..he has an audience to target and when ever you read any thing be impartial then you will know every single word of any column or history.
MAC
Aug 14, 2012 09:18am
Perhaps you should try to understand how Muslims have been living during all these years. How many have been killed almost regularly through riots etc. I do not how it is the against the wishes of God Allah, perhaps you can explain a bit more. If Pakistan is where it stands today, it is our fault, it is us Pakistanis, I mean every Pakistani, who is just trying to loot this country. It could be a punishment from Almighty Allah for our bad deeds and hypocracy.
qudsi
Aug 14, 2012 09:18am
I agree with you. The writer him self is not clear. But Allhamdulillah we are satisfied with Pakistan. We have great respect for all those leader who struggled for Pakistan. Salute to Jinnah, Liaqat Ali and All other contributing leaders.
ali
Aug 14, 2012 09:25am
Its out bad luck that we have been divided from India otherwise we would have been enjoying freedom and prosperity that most of Indian middle class
aaa
Aug 14, 2012 09:32am
In pakistan this term indo pak is always used atleast as long as remember it. Our history books had these headings even in my childhood som 25 years ago. So this is not something new.
jalal khan
Aug 14, 2012 09:33am
very true......
aaa
Aug 14, 2012 09:37am
I agree this trend is present in many people who want to prove themselves to be liberal but it is creating many problems. 1)A false message is being given to everyone out of the country that this is how common pakistanis think. 2)Truth is not being brought forward rather getting twisted. 3)People are not willing to believe that someone can be a great leader and people who made pakistan had a vision. That is too much for them to swallow. They want to bring every leader to their own level and believe that ''they were just like the rest of us. Nothing special about them. '' If they got a country there were something more than special about them.
Talha_Ali
Aug 14, 2012 10:42am
Poorly written. Doesn't convey the point. Writer try to convey one side opinion by accommodating other side to neutralise the article. "His democratically elected government was dismissed 8 days after the independence, on 22 August, 1947 when Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah was the Governor General". So it means Quaid-e-Azam was also the conspirator against Bacha Khan with Liaqat Ali Khan? What a rubbish. Writer intention is to Malign our great leaders and Pakistan.
Jalal khan
Aug 14, 2012 09:41am
He has tried to convey that who were the real heroes and who were made, ready made heroes by their masters in the UK like Jinna , liaqat ali etc...........
gulzar
Aug 14, 2012 09:48am
He want to say that after its creation the country was not governed on democractic basis but to serve the purpose of a some elites leadead by liqat ali khan. and the same is going on and on and on
azmat Shah
Aug 14, 2012 01:49pm
the only thing that concerns me is, Why did the writer compaired Ghaffar Khan to Liaqat Ali khan instead of pitching him against Mr jinnah who was a proponent of the same two nation theory and was more secular in his thinking then gandhi, Ghaffar khan and liaqat ali khan- all put togeather. It seems as the sole purpose of this article is to elevate bacha khan and negate the two nation theory which is teh very foundation of Pakistan. I can smell some biase here. Not very balanced
Jawwad
Aug 14, 2012 02:15pm
Jinnah never spent a day in jail because he was a law abiding citizen of India and "believed" in the rule of law, albeit a fault one as compared to Gandhi or other leaders of Congress who encouraged agitation. So much for the Ahinsa Ke Pujari. Do you research buddy. Read some books on Partition, Jinnah and Gandhi and specially Stanley Wolpert's Jinnah and you would come to appreciate how great of leader Jinnah was for "India" and service he did to the country. Also, did you know it was Jinnah who in the capacity of drafting first constitution of dominion India to propose 8 work work day, labor and equal employment rights which were picked by US Congress and adopted as their own law by mid 40's?
Ansari
Aug 14, 2012 02:15pm
How many muslim teachers did India have before 1947 in the what is now Pakistan? How many industralists?For a long time, Jinnah was known as the Ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity. What made him change his mind? Why was the Muslim political leadership of Punjab- but not the Muslims of Punjab- opposed to the idea of Pakistan? Why has feudalism not been disbanded in Pakistan to-date? Why did Liaqat Ali Khan give up his privileges and chose to migrate ? Only someone steeped in History could give sensible answers to these basic questions.
Jawwad
Aug 14, 2012 02:18pm
Pakistan was created for the minorities of India not for Muslims only. Now, that's another debate whether it was the right move or not but there is a farce out there that Pakistan was created only for Muslims. At least this is what I have learned after reading books on Jinnah, Gandhi and Partition.
does not matter
Aug 14, 2012 02:24pm
I don't think Pakistanis will ever see that new light. They have been blindfolded with religion and anti india sentiments for so many years that if these blindfolds are removed, they will turn blind by the new light.
GoodDeedsLeadTo
Aug 14, 2012 02:27pm
North West Frontier Province joined Pakistan on the basis of the same democratic process (referrendum), muslims of other majority areas joined Pakistan. Please do not ignore NWFP into Pakistan was based on democracy, It appears Liaqat Ali Khan went through a rapid transformation. He belonged to the nawab familty that side with the raj, and all of sudden he invited Mohammad Ali Jinah to return from England and lead the movement to make Pakistan.
GoodDeedsLeadTo
Aug 14, 2012 02:40pm
Pakistan came into being as a result of deomcratic process, referrendum, when Muslim all over opted (voted)for separation as Muslim nation based on Muslim majority areas, NWFP was no exception. .
Avtar
Aug 14, 2012 02:58pm
Thoughtful piece. True regarding the Frontier Gandhi. Not well informed to comment on Liaquat Ali. The contributions of Maula Azad should not be ignored in understanding the Muslims of the subcontinent - India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Bhutan and Sri Lanka.
Gullg
Aug 15, 2012 10:23am
Truth hurts a bit, isn't ??? Shermeen and the Author telling the world the true face of our Present and Past, face it,its help alot.
Ali Sadozai
Aug 14, 2012 03:11pm
Jinnah represented Muslim Leage which had its obvious constituency and engaged the British on that account. But it would be historically wrong to say that Jinnah or PML represented the entire Muslims everywhere in Indian subcontinent.
Ali Sadozai
Aug 14, 2012 03:13pm
Right on Vineeth!
Tanvir
Aug 14, 2012 03:20pm
So it was the power politics of our leaders which divided the Indian subcontinent, not the religions of Islam or Hinduism! It shows that mere politics even dominate the powers of religions.
Tanvir
Aug 14, 2012 03:30pm
Thanks for pointing out Pakistan's basic problem with Frontier Gandhi -- Take NWFP to Afghanistan. That's why India is still mentoring Afghanistan for such a separation of Pakistani province.
nadeem
Aug 14, 2012 03:34pm
Interesting and probably based on facts to me it seems like Ghafar khan had a different view of the situation than the founders of pakistan. Being in a Muslim majority area armed with weapons he probably didnt see what the bigger picture was or saw it but didnt care. Jinnah till the last moment was lobbying for indian independence only when he realized there is no hope is when the struggle was shifed for a new state for indian Muslims.
GoodDeedsLeadTo
Aug 14, 2012 10:50pm
Muslims of NWFP like all the rest opted for Pakistan through a referendum. Creation of Pakistan did go through a democratic process. Pakistan was made on the basis of Muslim majority area to become Pakistan, across the subcontinent.
nadeem
Aug 14, 2012 03:44pm
@Vineeth "Second, the argument that Muslims would have been a persecuted minority in a united India does not seem convincing in the light of demographics." This isnt an argument but a fact based on the events that transpired pre-partition. this ugly truth also keeps repeating itself time after time to this date.
GoodDeedsLeadTo
Aug 14, 2012 03:45pm
Pakistan has teh potential to come out of its current state much faster due to smaller population & vast reasources, and the right leadership (Scandinavian contries is the current model. Norwegians know about Omer law), it would be much faster for Paksitan to turn around
Laeeq, NY
Aug 14, 2012 03:54pm
What was done 60 years ago was right for that time, but if there was a fortune teller, he would have stopped this division. Seeing the current state of the country, we and the majority muslims were bette off living with majority Hindus. Muslims and other minorities are living much peacefuly and enjoying the freedom or religion in India then in Pakistan. Few incidence in Indis does not make India worse tha Pakistan wher state sponsored extremism is on the rise.
ROHIT PANDEY
Aug 14, 2012 03:57pm
Very interesting piece...I think the troubles in Pakistan is making them more and more introspective...would be interesting to read many more articles like this..throwing light on what was ex North West India!
SAMAR
Aug 14, 2012 04:05pm
Forget why partition happened?who was responsible? GOD ALMIGHTY GAVE US A COUNTRY AND IT IS UP TO US TO MAKE IT STRONG OR DESTROY. And un ke moon mein khak/g-- who have ill feelings about this country from its first day of birth.Please swallow this bitter pill.Thanks. And for the people of so called shining country pls compare it with first two deacdes of Pakistan much much better than ----- Aaj nahin lekin kal(past) hamara tha aur kal(future) hamara hoga.We will come back. INSHALLAH AMEEN. PAKISTAN PAINDABAD.
Hamood
Aug 14, 2012 04:23pm
A very confusing and disjointed article. This has been the trend among the good for nothing liberals of the country who bash the founding fathers at every opportunity while stting in their living rooms sipping on fine vine or whisky. Just one thought for the author to ponder... Currently Indian Muslims have an average income which is less than the Indian untouchables or Dalits and most ghettos there have Muslim populations. Thank God we have Pakistan.
Bilal
Aug 15, 2012 10:51am
read the indus saga by atizaz ahsan .. the argument on two nation theory is much deeper than just religion. Read the book and you will know what I mean.
@shams96
Aug 14, 2012 04:37pm
Shame on you for being a Pakistani
@shams96
Aug 14, 2012 04:39pm
Yes! he is talking about how Liyaqat Ali Khan hijacked Pakistan for his own gains
@shams96
Aug 14, 2012 04:42pm
Afee, you need to read the real history books, not ones that we are thought in schools.
@shams96
Aug 14, 2012 04:44pm
You have blinders on buddy, you are forgetting the Indians rulers at that time. They were all in it together. Just like Bhuto when he refused to let go and devided Pakistan.
@shams96
Aug 14, 2012 04:46pm
Muslims that migrated from India and the Muslims that lived in Pakistan. So the migrants imposed the rule on the Muslims of the land. To this day KPK people feel subjugated and ruled upon.
Hasaan
Aug 15, 2012 10:49am
Excellent article! Thanks for busting some "national myths".
Singh
Aug 14, 2012 04:57pm
One way to determine persecution of Muslims in India and Hindus and Sikhs in Pakistan is to give them choice. Let us see how many Muslims in India would opt to go to Pakistan and how many Hindus and Sikhs from Pakistan would opt for India. You will get your answer.
Avik Roy
Aug 14, 2012 05:03pm
Thank you Tahir Mehdi for enlightening us.
Baseer
Aug 14, 2012 05:07pm
There used be Pakistan bashing. Now founding fathers bashing started. Well done DAWN news. The authors are making there majority readership (Indians) very happy and don't even care that there word might be hurting many Pakistanis. But hey this the fashion of today and it increases the rating of the author. By the way what was the two-muslims THEORY. Sorry, got it defame founding fathers and glorify its opponents who did not even liked to be buried in their homeland (CHARSADDA).
JP Singh
Aug 14, 2012 05:09pm
What it appears is that the very people who conceived Pakistan did not know what to do with it when they got it. For them Pakistan was a fantasy, a dream but that dream could not be translated in reality for the lack of Vision and experience. Jinnah perhaps got dragged into it grudgingly and perhaps died regretting that he should have stuck to his guns and not get carried away. The people of Punjab, Sind and the NWFP were people that were highly traditional and having their own cultural status of which they were fiercely proud. And quiet flowed the Indus. The creation of Pakistan suddenly sucked them into a violent vortex that scarred a whole generation. Jinnah and Liaqat had got their Pakistan,but they failed to provide it direction. One was an Anglophile and other an Indian Elite and an Indian Politician. They had no understanding of the people that lived in the land of Indus. So true that Liaqat was a leader without following. He took a shortcut to give the country an Islamic charter rather than a democratic one. People of different ethnicities with which they identified for centuries were suddenly asked to shed away their identity and wear the mask of Islam as a means for existence. That was social hara-kiri. The very fault lines lay in the very foundation of a nation. They were just visionaries.
Muhammad Ahmed Mufti
Aug 14, 2012 05:26pm
Both Ghaffar Khan and Maulana Azad were wrong! One should read Sacchar commission’s report to get the idea of where Muslims were destined had they followed Azad. Today you don't have to go too far to see how right Muhammad Ali Jinnah was just see the number of Indian Muslim students in US Universities! they are not even 1% of rest of Indian students. The author forgets to mention what Liaquat left behind after he was assassinated by an Afghan terrorist. What were his last words?
Rakesh Razdan
Aug 14, 2012 05:34pm
I thank from the core of my heart great leaders of Pakistan like Jinnah and Liaqat Ali Khan for creating Pakistan. Just shudder to think what would have been became of India if Pakistan and Bangladesh would have also been part of it. Rakesh Razdan
Saad
Aug 14, 2012 05:36pm
Killings at Partition only show cased the hatred Hindu Community held towards the Muslim Community
EmMoosa
Aug 14, 2012 05:43pm
Don't care Fahad and other true nationalist Pakistanis. All those who have thumbed down here are actually hindus.
EmMoosa
Aug 14, 2012 05:50pm
I advise Dawn not to publish such kind of material which has a sole purpose to create doubts in the hearts of Pakistanis about our country and their devoted leaders. It is a planned attack which should be understood. Enemy is always ready to disintegrate Pakistan by all means. Be careful please. Money can buy all these kind of clueless authors.
Raza (Bahrain)
Aug 15, 2012 09:08am
Wish the successors of Bacha Khan party i.e. the Current leaders of ANP and rulers of KPK province could follow their leader's Tehrik (Khudai Khidmatgar) footpaths and end the Terrorism and Extremism in the province and in the country. War can't end a war, it's peach only than can mend a war.
Mustafa Razavi
Aug 14, 2012 06:07pm
The author did not have the moral courage to put Quaid-e-azam or Allama Iqbal's picture as the opponents of Ghaffar Khan's ideology. Ghaffar Khan of course had a right to his ideology, we have a right to ours. Reading all the comments from Indians, it is very clear that we Pakistanis are very lucky that we are not subservient to these hateful malicious people.
kaly
Aug 14, 2012 06:17pm
Zindabad Zindabad karne se kaya hoga, fact remain is you are a failed state...
kaly
Aug 14, 2012 06:18pm
Now I can understand how Pakistan is going backward, it is people like you who are responsible..
Lakhkar Khan
Aug 14, 2012 06:40pm
Just to put things in perspective, I grew up not too far from the birth place of Bacha Khan baba and have some knowledge of his achievements. He promoted education for girls as much for boys.
Munawar
Aug 14, 2012 06:48pm
Longer than Nelson Mandela. And without charge I may add.
Murtaza
Aug 14, 2012 06:50pm
Maulana Abul Kalam Azad warned Jinnah about that. Clearly he was no visionary. M Iqbal was. Maulana Azad was. They could foresee things as is. That clarity of thought is only blessed on a select few. M Iqbal did say later after his 1930 address that he didn't necessarily want the partition-- he wanted autonomy for the "minority" Muslim populous. Maulana's argument was there was no need for an autonomy as Muslims were second largest population in the sub-continent, and not a minority..
Arya
Aug 14, 2012 06:57pm
Fahad, unfortunately its excatly the reverse today. And unfortunately it's excatly the same folly on which Pakistan was created. The house is already in a dipliated state, awake and arise before its too late.
Jay k Raman
Aug 14, 2012 07:03pm
THE TRAGEDY IS LIAQAT WON AND GAFFAR LOST UNFORTUNATELY IN HISTORY THE VIRTUOUS DO NOT WIN ALWAYS
fast.wolf
Aug 14, 2012 07:14pm
Bacha khan did not belong to the middle class at all. He was also a landlord (jagirdar khan). The author has accused the heroes like Liaqat ali khan for their motives but had not clearified the motives of secularists like Bacha khan and abul kalam azad. I don't want to say anything about azad here,but the bacha khan's motives were clear. He wanted to create an atmosphere where the elite pakhtoons (Khan's) enjoys a prominant status over the commoners - the typical pakhtoonwali,that actually divides human beings into sects like Brahmanism divides hindus into four sects. Myself i'm a pakhtoon, but have no pride that we had leaders like bacha khan. He was infact "the frontier gandhi"..and there is no place for "gandhis" in this land of pure.
ayaz yousufzai
Aug 14, 2012 07:16pm
I can only say that the fear of Muslims were baseless in united india as 60 crore Muslims cant be a minority , we would be the rulers as we were in past of Sub Continent , tell me the name of any Non Muslim Ruler except Ranjit singh But now May GOD prosper bith Pakistan and India and live like good and friendly neibghours
Lakhkar Khan
Aug 14, 2012 07:28pm
I can explain why he picked Jalal Abad his final resting place. He want law aw Bar (Pashtoon on both sides of the border) to remain united. As far as the name Pashtonistan, NWFP was a given name to the province given by British raj. He changed it to Pakhtoonkhwa. If you read a little about Bacha Khan, you will begin to like him.
Lakhkar Khan
Aug 14, 2012 07:30pm
I do.
Lakhkar Khan
Aug 14, 2012 07:32pm
Which heroes? The one were put in jails for 33+ years by the Brits or awarded by the Brits for their loyalties to them?
YAhmed
Aug 14, 2012 07:33pm
@ Fahad, This wishful thinking and blatant bigotry is going to destroy my country. I wish there was another Bacha Khan today..... @ Vineet - people who are blind can only see in black and white....
Dr Zafar Hayat
Aug 14, 2012 07:44pm
The article is well written and he only wants to show other side of the picture to Pakistanis who have taught (i would say engineered) history. We should admit the realities. Bacha Khan took oath of allegiance to Pakistan in1948. He wanted to reconcile with Jinnah but it was Abdul Qayyum Khan (CM of Pakhtunkhwa) who was against reconciliation (his vicious interests). Bach Khan was nominated for Nobel Peace Prize in 1985. WE Pakistanis should now look forward...things are now changing here...awareness is growing and people want to see both sides of the picture. Well done Tahir Mehdi.
Imran
Aug 14, 2012 07:51pm
I agree. 2 nation-theory is flawed. It should have been multi-nation theory.
Anwar, New Delhi
Aug 14, 2012 07:51pm
India may have been much different had Pakistan stayed together. Hindutwa fascist derive lots of justification by using partition. Without partition, very few Hindus would have paid any attention to them.
nasir
Aug 14, 2012 08:28pm
Thanks to Dawn for providing the forum. I tend to agree with wht AK DUTT said above, the spirit of the article and numerous analysis of the past and present situation in Pakistan and its relationship with intellectually rich India However, 3-4 generations have passed and Pakistan while sitting at the edge of an abysmal political and cultural drought must make the right choices for the sake of its coming generations. Having lived outside for most of my life, and awaiting to return to Pakistan with my children, we and those who are on the exodus list, should make more sacrifices for a country or home having f socio-cultural and religious tolerance, to hang our hats.
desi77
Aug 14, 2012 08:28pm
Why use such articles to vent your inherent hate for Pakistan and Pakistani people? No matter what you believe, Pakistan is here to stay. Your India is no less restless, violent, emotional, haters, poor, or poverty stricken...Since when are you the authority on the forces of Nature?
desi77
Aug 14, 2012 08:32pm
Only for color blind people. Truth comes in many colors, and not just grey....since there is no truth in this twisted history...
Muhammad Ahmed Mufti
Aug 14, 2012 08:42pm
Two nation theory is valid and alive. Just browse the comments in this section!
Jan, M
Aug 15, 2012 01:56pm
You should go and visit Kashmir. That will change your views about Hindus. It certainly did mine .
nishant
Aug 14, 2012 09:02pm
An real interesting read. it presented to me a whole new unexplored facet. The 'Frontier Gandhi' should I dare to say , has been denied the rightful stature in history and the same needs to be restored.
miramshah
Aug 14, 2012 09:03pm
Nehru loathed even Gandhi for his political stature and popularity. He eventually played poodle to the Raj to get to the top position. Jinnah had a clarity of purpose sinice day one and as an astute politician, knew what he wanted from day one. If a man as secular as Jinnah was unhappy with the treatment of Muslim by the hands of Hindus and their masters, there must have been tremendous issues for Muslims in a united India. Good fences make good neighbors, eventually.
Asif
Aug 14, 2012 09:14pm
Well I hope you dont believe that during partition 2 million hindus and sikhs were killed. Also, it was close to a million and both side suffered equally with many muslims dead too.
George
Aug 14, 2012 09:37pm
Fahad..................no harm in dreaming ! Please do not "dream" in the middle of a motorway though !! Good Lock !
Gullg
Aug 14, 2012 09:42pm
The Rally was against the illegally dismissal of a demoraticaly elected assembly of NWFP and against the illegally arrested and jailed of great Bacha khan. Your's comment is real reflection of your character and the leader you are inspired and advocating for.
Rashid Khan
Aug 14, 2012 09:49pm
Keep on dreaming.
Canadian
Aug 14, 2012 09:58pm
This is a biased article based based on a distorted interpretation of selected events. The writer seems to have little idea of the vision of Pakistan that was a dream of the majority of the muslims of the sub-continent. That vision had nothing to do with hate and a lot to do with love. In any case, look ahead and not backwards and try to live in peace and love in Pakistan and with our great neighbor India. The other Dawn article 'going from love to love---' has a much better and honest message. Please read.
azad khan
Aug 14, 2012 10:25pm
Bacha khan never did a single act against muslim and Pakistan.Dear just go through history and will come to know that he was the single person who resisted against the british.he spent most of his life in prison.
Ather
Aug 14, 2012 10:26pm
It was Nehru who was solely responsible for the partition
ACFP
Aug 14, 2012 10:40pm
You are looking for dictation just like the TV anchors give to all veiwers everyday. Use your head and analyze what happend and where we are today and why?
GoodDeedsLeadTo
Aug 14, 2012 10:50pm
Muslims of NWFP like all the rest opted for Pakistan through a referendum. Creation of Pakistan did go through a democratic process. Pakistan was made on the basis of Muslim majority area to become Pakistan, across the subcontinent.
Bharat
Aug 14, 2012 10:54pm
Good writing Now - How did Jinnah die ?
Nawaz khan yousafzai
Aug 14, 2012 11:42pm
Great work by the writer, Bacha Khan was an institution and had great respect for humans, his poltics was based on principles and values. Future of sub continent is Bacha Khan poltics. He is the solution of the problem between Pakistan, Afghanistan and India. We was born in Pakistan & has great respects here and known as Bacha Khan " King Khan". He was active politician in India and was awarded Baharta Ratna & known as Frontier Gandi, Indians respects him a lot. He is burried in Afghanistan and is known as "Fakher-e-Afghan mean proud of Afghans".
ather
Aug 15, 2012 12:03am
very well said Vineeth - too bad the 'two nation theory" is taught to us Pakistani from childhood and it has become intrinsic to our ideology and existence. I wish we can realize this mistake (of partition) and move forward as two countries with a hope (in the future) that we can be united again.
Rafia Mirza
Aug 15, 2012 12:06am
The fact that this article got printed is a good sign. We Pakistanis are brain-washed to believe in all kinds of lies & propaganda.I am grateful to the writer for telling me something I should have heard way back in school & that was several decades ago!
azeem
Aug 15, 2012 12:08am
Since Bacha Khan was a leader from a Muslim majority province he could not realize the seriousness of the issues faced by Muslims who lived as minority in the rest of India. His political domain was only limited NWFP (now KP). He was not shunned in Pakistan at all. His party is in government in KP and part of co-alition in center.
Akil Akhtar
Aug 15, 2012 12:15am
Amazed at how many indian and how qucikly jump on any article written about Pakistan or Islam to vent their negative views. While they keep telling us that they do not care about Pakistan.
uthmanmalik
Aug 15, 2012 12:21am
Seems like Indian Independence day is being celebrated in the comments section of Pakistani newspaper DAWN!
Tariq Khan
Aug 15, 2012 12:35am
The great Khans idea of a united India was a good one,both nations have spent billions of dollars fighting each other as proxy fighter for the then two world powers.Khan wanted a nation for Paktoons by a non violent movement.Yes he spent thirty three years in Jail and the rest of his life in exile in Jalalabad,I know because we have the same blood.Let me give you a line I always quote.
Asif Ansari
Aug 15, 2012 01:01am
Writer tell the story of past, good observation, Here we do not sit together for making a decision, who is good who is bad, our past leaders did well has its own cost. After reading, we students get knowledge, Hindu-Muslim entity, Pakistan is a country or Islamic Republic of Pakistan and so on, here, their is no meaning. History has been gone into the history, let all we do for the best future of Pakistan.
Haroon
Aug 15, 2012 01:54pm
brother what is the average income of muslim in pakistan?. Just go to Islamabad and find the rate of kidney. Only 80.000 thousand rupees or 550 pounds. People are selling themselves and thier honour in the land of pak. Go an visit the kidney centre hospital of Brigader XYZ in Pindi to known how many are selling are body parts for money to pay their debt to know the level of poverty. I have no doubt that you are born in cantonment and brought up in defence housing society. And listening to zaid hamad kind of agencies paid personality or gospels of the world No 1 that have won all wars expect 1965, 1971, 1999, 1983 to mentioned few
utmanzual
Aug 15, 2012 01:56am
Bacha Khan was never a secular in the western sense but he knew the importance of peace and stability in a land where he grew up (my grand dad was his red shirt follower and we hail from Utmanzai). Without peace there is no development and difference of religion even in an Islamic country/nation is widely accepted and tolerated since the time of Prophet Mohammad PBUH. Great words from a Punjabi author and I have to applaud his courage to even remembering about a so called "Enemy of Pakistan" than comparing to Liaqat Ali Khan. However, what the writer failed to mention was that Bacha Khan extended his full support to Pakistan even though he didn't agree with it in the first place. Can't keep myself without saying that the present generation of Bacha Khan family is disgrace to his legacy, though its noting to do with this essay.
ROHIT PANDEY
Aug 15, 2012 12:41pm
The secular Mohammed Ali Jinnah did not win either.....so,the present state of affairs in Pakistan!
Ahmed
Aug 15, 2012 02:05am
This article changes my understanding of Pakistan history at time of partition 180 degree. I had always known that for some reason Pakistan failed to come up with a constitution for years after independence. This was despite the fact that a constitutional, partliamentary government had already been introduced by the brits more than a decade before the british raj ended, and all that the new rulers of Pakistan had to do was take it from there rather than pretending to start writing a constitution from scratch!! This article is the first time that I have ever read a reasonable explanation of what caused this mysterious inability to keep the democratic process running after 1947 - i.e. that Liaqat Ali Khan feared he would lose in elections since the constituency that had elected him was left behind in UP, India!! And that is how Islam was first used as an excuse to deprive Pakistanis of their right to have a constitutional government!! If Pakistan is to come to grips with the many demons it faces, its free press must permit more such thoughtful and honest articles rather than continuing the "propaganda line" that we have been fed for decades that no one has dared to question.
khan
Aug 15, 2012 02:30am
Thanx for the regards you have shown to great Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan a.k.a Bacha Khan, unfortunately He is the most misunderstood loyal and charismatic personality this land would ever give birth to. He is termed Traitor and pro-Indian agent in the manipulated history taught right from the beginning in the Pakistani education system. Though whole nation now suffering is from the same elements He described at that time, even then Hypocrisy prevails here in its most polished form.
sri1ram
Aug 15, 2012 02:38am
Very well put. The nation's version of the "Inconvenient truth" that the educated people comprehend and understand, but accept nevertheless, no other option, I guess.
PBV Rajan
Aug 15, 2012 02:44am
It is obvious from the comments that Dawn Newspaper has emerged as a bridge between educated Hindus around the world and some forward thinking Muslims in Pakistan much more than several Indian newspapers in spite of their secular bias. It take far more courage in Pakistan to publish a frank article like this one where mob fury is the most common denominator. No Indian newspaper has published an article on a possible scenario where Mahatma Gandhi succeeded in uniting one India and where Nehru lost his position in 1947. I think partition of India has been the biggest gift that Muslims gave to The Hindus and we thank them for it. We got the best of both worlds, a developed economy with educated workforce and also a good world image. No wonder Indian Rupee is almost twice of Pak Re.
SFA
Aug 15, 2012 03:21am
When Nawabzada shot to death in Rawalpindi, he had only Rs. 16 in his account and was wearing a torn vest.
BM Jan
Aug 15, 2012 02:06pm
May God give us strength to rise and make Pakistan a Great and Vibrant Nation. No doubt the potential is there.
khan badsha
Aug 15, 2012 03:46am
good one and keep it up
Neeraj
Aug 15, 2012 03:52am
Why don't you find out yourself ?. . .Why it was Jinnah whom the British decided to negotiate with . . .? Was it due to their concern for Muslims of India or their own Long term interest in the Region ? But i am sure you won't . Coz the truth will challenge the convenient half lies you have been fed.
virkaul
Aug 15, 2012 04:28am
@Indian: Totally unfair to Nehru. The difference between India and Pakistan is Nehru and Liaqat Ali. The former was a democrat, open to listen to criticism who built institutions in India. Who could think and visualize far beyond others for the country. Built dams, canals, industry, judicial syste, land reforms, educational institutions, decentralized power and on top followed foreign policy suited to the country. Exactly opposite happened in Pakistan.
arshad sherazi
Aug 15, 2012 05:01am
So many comments not one pakhtoon in them.
adi_87
Aug 15, 2012 05:22am
Pakistan was a righteous dream, but in reality it ended up being created for the Muslim upper class while destroying the Muslim middle and working class of the subcontinent.
ihtisham
Aug 15, 2012 05:45am
bacha khan,a man to match his mountains.
sri
Aug 15, 2012 05:50am
not to mention the % of hindus is coming down reaching zero in Pak - while the % of muslims in india is same or growing - But at the same time - Thank God Pak is created othewise - it would be 30% muslim in India - and it would be hell for the rest of us
Rational...
Aug 15, 2012 05:58am
agree.. but sad Dawn has limited its readership to people who have this radical views about Pakistan. It's obvious from the responses.
Rational...
Aug 15, 2012 05:59am
Agree .. Dawn! this not what the fact is. Readers ! this is not what Pakistan thinks
Rational...
Aug 15, 2012 06:01am
what legacy has Nawabzada left ? and what kind a politics and family party has Abdul Ghaffar left?
Sam Khan
Aug 15, 2012 06:04am
I second you Haris.......
Rational...
Aug 15, 2012 06:05am
There was Muhammad Ali Johar, Bahadur Yar Jung, Molana Zafar Ali Khan.... please write about them in your next article and how elite they were in status
Khan A
Aug 15, 2012 06:05am
He wants to take part in IPL:-)
Khan A
Aug 15, 2012 06:08am
Freedom?? Did you watch Satya Mev Jayate???
Dalbir
Aug 15, 2012 06:17am
Assam problem is the creation of Congress who allowed free migration from Bangladesh since late 60s .
@viki1983
Aug 15, 2012 06:23am
have u forgotten hindus were nearly 15% of present Pakistan in 50's now they r 2%, how did tht happen.U did it silently and dont forget Gujarat woudl not have happened if Hindus were not first attacked by fanatics. Imagine if Hindus in pakistan had done the same to Muslims what would have been the reaction i ur country?
@viki1983
Aug 15, 2012 06:28am
Find me 1 Indian Muslim family willing to take asylum in Pak first then talk. Those in Assam are bangladeshi illegals not Indian muslims and they started the violence first by attacking Bodo tribals. Dude we Hindus were active on FB & twitter to make Dr Kalam a Muslim Scientist our President so dont talk absurd when u dunno a thing abt Indian muslims
aldo
Aug 15, 2012 06:42am
Oh, puhleeeze!
Khan
Aug 15, 2012 01:16pm
Is it necessary for a politition to receive a bullet?. Come on! How old are you. be mature man. This is 21st century. If you compar current politicans with Bacha Khan, he was the man of integrity and never compromise on principals.
Aldo
Aug 15, 2012 06:47am
Wll, without his efforts you would not be free today!
World Peace
Aug 15, 2012 06:47am
THE Beginning Creation of Humans animal plant life partition = politics using religion(Christian Muslim Hindu Buddhist Jews etc) partition => violence Violence =>Chain Reaction=> more violence more Violence =>more deaths more deaths => more hatred more hatred => Conflict=>War War = conventional War more conventional War =>Unconventional War =>Biological War & Nuclear War =>Use of Hydrogen and Atom Bomb and Chemical Weapons Nuclear War => Global War(World War III) World War => Extinction of human life animal and plant life THE END The Beginning Same as above old drama continues The End
Indian
Aug 15, 2012 06:53am
Religion must not be for any country. It is the way to live peaceful life for an individual. If any country's creation and its future is based on any particular religion then it can not be developed ever and its people can not live happily. "Religion for a nation is a Diseases and for an individual it is a way of life"
Aldo
Aug 15, 2012 06:53am
Sir, your comment absolutely no sense and is devoid of logic.
rehan1975
Aug 15, 2012 07:00am
No wonder you got such a poor rating ....this is a forum for "moderates" or "seculars" that regard "two nation theory" , "partition" and "religion" with a deep frown .... acting other wise would result in you getting labelled as "extremist" , "backward" etc etc
virkaul
Aug 15, 2012 07:02am
@Khan Saheb: The author has admirably explained two personalities representing two ideologies and backgrounds leaving it to the reader to make his opinion. One was a mass leader with welfare of his people in mind. The other was a Nawab trying to carve out space for himself in new geographical area for his own survival. The result is for all to see.
Virkaul
Aug 15, 2012 07:07am
Farad seems to be watching a lot of Zaid Hamid. Lolv
P Kumar
Aug 15, 2012 07:10am
Adverse circumstances are best times to introspect and giving a new start. In fact it is the only way to "Make failures stepping stone to success". Obduracy is never good in these times. Author is giving a very good starting point to think on a new line. Kudos to him for that. It is up to readers now from the other side of the border if they are ready for radical change or not.
khan
Aug 15, 2012 07:11am
He was a great leader a great human a great Pakhtoon and he will be remembered for his greatness for ever.
Faisal
Aug 15, 2012 07:15am
The writer has presented two opinions, from two important personalities of that era. It has nothing to prove which opinion was correct or not, of course in a political situation there are different incentives and interests for those involved and so was the case of Bacha Khan and the others who wanted a separate homeland. Of course, the INC and other Hindu groups who were against the division (as they are and have been even to the current day) would like and support Bach Khan.
khan
Aug 15, 2012 07:18am
FOR your information Pakhtunkhwa previously known as NWFP is a part of Afghanistan, which was parted from Afghanistan in 1893 by the british.
virkaul
Aug 15, 2012 07:21am
Your great leaders like Liaqat Ali, Mohd Ali Bogra, Husyn Suhrawardy, Iskandar Mirza, Ibrahim Chundrigar, Sir Firoz Noon, Ayyub Khan, ZA Bhutto, Yahyah Khan, Zia ul Haq, Musharraf and the like?... Great visionaries eh?
World Peace
Aug 15, 2012 07:26am
Beginning Things and situations are tainted or colored by religion politics race ethnicity etc rather than right or wrong and good or bad. What is Good => Right What is Bad =>Wrong. What is Right => non-violence What is Wrong => violence. Non-violence => peace. Violence => War=>destruction =>loss Irrevocable loss = loss of family,loss of possessions, lose of time, lose of energy,loss of oneself. loss=> Pain physical and mental and spiritual =>Death Full of peace => love Full of love => happiness and success happiness and success=desires fulfilled Full of happiness => Joy Full of joy=>Extacy Full of extacy =>All Righteous desires fulfilled Soul rests in peace desirous of nothing. Desirous of nothing=Enlightenment and Liberation and no rebirth to the planet earth. The End
Shriram
Aug 15, 2012 07:30am
In India we call an aged Muslim Chacha with love and here we love them so much..our Vice President is Muslim, our Prime Minister is Sikh, our former President was Muslim..India as a country is a wonderful place to practice any religion with full freedom.
Bala Varadarajan
Aug 15, 2012 07:33am
Well said. Pakistanis will have to take a leaf out of what is happening in Egypt. It is really up to the people to rise up and take the power away from the military. In a democratic society, the military must be a servant of the people and not the other way around. Otherwise Pakistan will not be able to emerge from dark ages.
KSU
Aug 15, 2012 07:50am
The Deobandis and others with Islamist inclininations were also more comfortable with Congress - as we're the a Ahrars. They seem to be missing from the writers two Muslim theory.
ideologyspeaks
Aug 15, 2012 07:54am
May be it was wrong to play politics on the partition of people on basis of their religion. Communal politics always stinks. Instead of looking at our faults of past, we should focus on the future not to repeat the same, to grow as an individual but also as a country. If we can achieve that collectivism, we would emerge as a world leader.
rehan1975
Aug 15, 2012 07:56am
All about being "secular" , isn't it ...
rehan1975
Aug 15, 2012 08:00am
No wonder you are not welcome here.....the word "Alhamdulillah" must have pissed off all those "seculars" :-D
agnostic
Aug 15, 2012 08:11am
But what about the Hindus and Siks of Punjab who had to give up all their possessions and in many cases their life too. They just wanted to live in peace. They were not for partition and they never subscribed to crooked theories like that Muslims are a separate nation cannot live with non-muslims.
agnostic
Aug 15, 2012 08:16am
It was not a question of right. ML was indulging in massive violence thru Direct action and the other like Bacha Khan believed in non-violence. So the British had no choice but to listen to those who indulged in maximum tantrums.
harkol
Aug 15, 2012 08:19am
I agree, except for the numbers. At independence the undivided India had 25% muslims. Their ratio went up to current 37% due not purely due to population growth. It is because Pakistan & Bangladesh (till recently) followed discriminatory policy & law, so most Hindus in those areas converting to islam. If the country remained undivided, subcontinental muslim count would've been around 27-28% , not 37% as now.
althaf
Aug 15, 2012 08:22am
Don't forget: Bangladesh 3 million dead.
Rayaz
Aug 15, 2012 08:22am
The great Liaquate Ali Khan gave all his wealth and possessions to Pakistan and in the end he gave his life. He died a poor man. It was said then and I heard it several times that it was pathan red shirt who killed Liaquate! Why has this writer so conveniently omitted! The article says that Liaquate had no constituency, what a diabolical statement! If Liaquate stood for election anywhere in Pakistan, no one would dare to challenge him. This decimates the authors blunderous article.
harkol
Aug 15, 2012 08:23am
Except Bacha Khan wasn't a leader of Muslim league. Anil said not a single leader of Muslim league spent long time in prison. He may be wrong, but Bacha Khan was with Khudai Kidmatdar movement, that was associated with Congress.
indian
Aug 15, 2012 08:25am
It was a great loss for India, when we lost a statesman like Bacha Khan, who decided to move to Pakistan after partition. In many respect I find his personality more appealing than that of Gandhi. I am pretty sure that he would have been prime minister after Nehru, if he stayed in India. But I guess he was not looking for mortal glories and wanted to serve his people. Pakistan missed a great opportunity by not integrating him with mainline pakistani politics. With him in mainline politics of Pakistan the relation with india wouldn't have been based on lack of trust and most, if not all the issues would have been resolved.
khan
Aug 15, 2012 08:28am
For your information pakhtunkhwa is a part of Afghanistan which was parted from Afghanistan in 1893 by the British India named after Henry Duran,foreign Secretary of British India at the time. the agreement was made for 100 years which is already expired....
omer
Aug 15, 2012 08:29am
WOW PREJUDICE! the man who donated all his wealth to the newly formed state of pakistan, you think of him as a vulture? no wonder people like you only get response from india. like shermeen obaid chinnoy by humiliating our country! I think its about time you people stop selling and defaming your Pakistan and its forefathers, for your personal gratification! shame on you
Saad Ahmad
Aug 15, 2012 08:31am
I think writer is more Bacha Khan pro, article is clearly reflecting his thoughts. Liquat Ali khan was well educated and a think tank. He introduced objective resolution on the basis of Islam not because he is weak or he had left meeruth but it was the only base on which all the communities could unite. Bacha khan was representing only red shirts(Pakhtoons). Liquat Ali khan had to think for whole nation at that time also Pakistan was divided in mahajir, Sindhi, Punjabi etc to unite them the only path was Islam and it was well used. I suggest writer to think again
Bahawal
Aug 15, 2012 10:25am
Yes.it is time our researchers and social scientists stop racking their brains in their attempts to defame the founders of the country. Focus should be on social and economic setbacks to set the nation right, instead of writing such irrelevant pieces of literature which in no manner contribute constructively to this nation.Pleasing India is going to get us nowehere and we would be lost in the quigmaire of our wishful thinking and self-defeated philosophies as portrayed in this article.
saad ahmad
Aug 15, 2012 08:39am
just as indian nationals enjoying today with extremely high poverty rate and huge gap between high and low class, no place to live, government concentrating only on big cities etc etc. you want same? Moreover I am working with indians in Saudi firm. I beleive they are not wrong but we are different it is impossible to proceed with them
zafar jafri
Aug 15, 2012 08:41am
The article under scrutiny seems to be an attempt by the author to undermine the great works of other muslim elites who contributed towards the upliftment of the society at large. The fact is that the muslim majority areas had non- muslim rulers and hindu-majority areas had many muslim rulers which reflected on the progress of the mindset of the population atlarge. Please do not see the then society from today's point of view. That Hindus and muslims could have continued to live together if India was not partitioned is not a point of discussion.The important question is whether a nationality or a sub-nationality can be given the right to seccede if they so decide for whatever reason. Geographical lines keep changing. India as a monolithic political land never existed except for partly during the great Bihar Raj of the Guptas and then that of the Mughals. India has been conquered by almost every aspiring nation in its history and so it will be and new nations will keep coming and settling within its boundaries. Also,new nations will emerge from within and the boundries will keep changing as history keeps repeating itself. So dont worry, its not important. Love sans border is important.
ysk
Aug 15, 2012 08:51am
Do you need to jump into boiling water to see if its hot or is it okay to just see it boiling from a safe distance.
EmMoosa
Aug 15, 2012 08:53am
KAGK should not be in the illustrated picture with Pakistani flag. He is not a Pakistani and also has no right to be illustrated here with a hero who gave his life to the motherland and whose last words were "O' God protect Pakistan" instead of saying something about his family.
EmMoosa
Aug 15, 2012 09:01am
I have got the highest thumb down opinions by those who do not like and never liked and recognised my country. But Insha Allah Pakistan will exist for ever. "Tundeye baade mukhalif se na ghabra aye aqaab yeh to chalti hai tujhe ooncha udaane ke liye". Zindabad Pakistan Zindabad.
Feroz
Aug 15, 2012 08:59am
i can see that many just do not have the appetite to stomach the Truth. Abdul Gaffar Khan is a hero to over a billion people in India because he stood for pluralism, freedom, non violence and Democracy. For these same reasons the Pakistani state painted him a villain. Khan knew that the idea of Pakistan would be a disaster not only for the Pakhtuns but for all people of the sub continent. Today all but the blind can see that Partition did not benefit the Muslims of either Pakistan, India or Bangladesh - forget about other communities for the time being. Jinnah and Liaqat did not spend years in jail fighting for their cause like freedom fighters Gandhi, Nehru, Maulana Azad and Abdul Gaffar Khan. A million people died for what cause - just hunger and lust for Power ?
shukla
Aug 15, 2012 09:31am
I just want to add this more . Thought the muslims population , in India , steadly increased , the hindu population is pakistan decreased from 20% in 1947 to mere 3% in 2012 . This is how islamic pakistan treated its minority communities .
Taaruf
Aug 15, 2012 09:34am
True indded! The author has tried to produce some true realities of our dauntless hereos. I am flabergasted at his comments that what he wants to justify? Either he produces Liaquat Ali as a hero or a pro British and vice versa. Such ideas can give us fake information because it is they, authors, who show us true/false picture of a thing and we follow their suits without peeping into past. I fathome one thing that Badshah khan was a dauntless hero and he should not have been victimised.
Imran
Aug 15, 2012 09:43am
Sikhs were offered the permanent post of the Chief of Army Staff in Pk which they declined and decided to join India which is fair enough. And I am not maligning the Sikhs or Hindus of Punjab or elsewhere all I am saying is that the author is trying to say that Pakistan was formed by the ruling Muslim classes of India for ulterior motives when they were the ones to suffer the most. What did Raja Mehmudabad gain from all this? In fact we lost all our land in UP, Bihar to land reforms where most landowners were Muslims whereas the reforms were not carried out on the same scale in Southerm states with non Muslim ruling families. So bottom line is the migrants of North India lost the most (financially at least).
Zameer
Aug 15, 2012 03:28pm
Keep dreaming for the next 60 years.
Naveed
Aug 15, 2012 03:40pm
I think the writer is Indian. I am Pathan and i know bacha khan more than any one indian here who leave thier own news papers and come here just to comment. Go and read your own news papers. Bacha Khan was pro indian and that is why he was given highest indian award. He was against Pakistan, that is why all indians like him. All indians are portraying india as a good place to live, do you guys know that you guys dont tolerate your own hindu plp like dalits and shurders, how can you tolerate us?
masmanz
Aug 15, 2012 04:09pm
Even under Mughals there were many autonomous Rajas, MahaRajas, and Nawabs. Only a relatively small portion of the sub-continent was under direct rule of Mughals.
raza
Aug 15, 2012 04:14pm
Mr. Iyer, It is your steriotyping that you think that saying these things are difficult to say in pakistan, the publication of this blog is one demonstration that it is not at least not anymore. Official version may be different but if you sit with people you will get to hear all kinds of independent opinions on everything.
Dr. D. Prithipaul
Aug 15, 2012 04:50pm
Two minor points: (i) Nehru has made many a blunder for which India is still suffering, but he cannot be blamed for opposing the irrational, unreasonable and undemocratic demand of Jinnah that the Parliament of a free undivided India should have the same number of representatives for each of the Hindu and Muslim communities. Had this been granted the Hindus would have been a minority in Parliament, considering that the other minorities too would have hd to be represented. Further Jinnah's unrealistic demand was compounded with his insistence that only the Muslim Legue should be recognised as representing the totality of the Muslim Umma. (2) An undisputed lover of democracy based on the one man-one vote priciple, which is still the rule in present India, Nehru found no common ground with Jinnah's obdurate and irrealistic politics. Pakistan and Bangladesh are the outcomes of this dogged irrationality. history does not abide by reason but by other reasons. Note that the author of this article shies away from mentioning that the great Bacha Khan was popularly known as Frontier Gandhi. The name Gandhi is taboo for him. Thus he justifies the politics of Liaqat Ali Khan and of jinnah. So be it. After all religion was the only rationale for the Partition. Pakistan was not carved out against the British will, but with British connivance, approval and support, but with bloody opposition to a SUPPOSED future oppression by Hindus. It was the first and only success in world history of a triumph of a reversal of history, for it has always been the Muslims who did hurt the Hindus, not the other way around. Pakistan still strives with a policy of weakening and hurting India with its wars and its exercises of terror. In India by next year the Muslim Umma - which is larger than the population of Pakistan - will be voting for the 14th time on the basis of one man-one vote. The Indian Umma would be the only one doing this during the last 67 years, in the whole world. That is the reality, the paradox of a large Umma living under a liberal, Harbi constitution!. Jinnah was a blinkered dictator. He remains the politicl, religious, moral reference for the Pakistanis. That is the good fortune of the Pakistani. If Jinnah were to return today he would be showered with red rose petals.
Syed
Aug 15, 2012 04:57pm
The day Liaqat Ali Khan failed to get a constituency in muslim Pakistan, two nation theorey failed. On the contrary he would have been elected by hindus and muslim votes from Muzaffar Nagar or Meerut in UP India after partition also.Two nation theorey was good on paper not in practice.Question is why Liaqat Ali Khan did not realise this earlier.
emaan
Aug 15, 2012 05:06pm
Man,you should go and run through pages of history to clear your apprehensions about the making of separate homeland.Just ask a question from yourself,"are indian muslims as prosperous economically and socially as their counterparts?" Regarding the blog,it is merely a biased opinion on the part of writer.Should Liaqat Ali Khan and other muslims of indian part of sub continent not come to pakistan just to make sure to have their own constituency?reply is ,certainly no.and to ans every point raised by the blogger requires arduous job of typing ,so not possible for time being. Thanks
Ayub Khan
Aug 15, 2012 05:29pm
From childhood I used to be one of his follower. I still remember when I was in primary school back in seventies, my class fellows used to ridicule me that your leader is traitor . They used to call him a Hindu.
Gulbahar Khan
Aug 15, 2012 05:41pm
Great indeed...! Bacha Khan was a traitor and communist inspired. India in now trying to do in NWFP what he could not accomplish. It will not succeed either. Pakistan is here to stay.
manish
Aug 15, 2012 05:46pm
and how so, dhiraj?
Dr Zafar Hayat
Aug 15, 2012 06:56pm
I think Bacha Khan's vision was very much clear. You are ignoring the fact that you left 161 Million Muslims (2009 data) in India after Partition.
Khan
Aug 15, 2012 06:59pm
At least the author has told us something that even a Pushtoon like me never know about it. That dissolving an elected and majority govt. in the province, only after 8 days of independence. So in realty Mr.Jinnah started in the very beginning. Also, What Bacha Khan has left?, was a great leadership both in Balochistan and KP. While there came great politicians time after time in these two provinces. There has been well know politicians in both Sind and Punjab until this day, except for Sardar Shaukat Hayat Khan and Mian Daulatana. I have learn one think from this article that I'll never speak ill of any of those leaders, because they did a lot of effort to give us Pakistan.
Dr Zafar Hayat
Aug 15, 2012 07:02pm
YOu may be Pakhtun but have not studied (at least) history of Pakhtun's very well..
shehzad77
Aug 15, 2012 07:03pm
I don't know how writer has said that Liaquat Ali was afraid for his constituency . Even as it seems that writer was there in his 1940's and in the personal group of then PM. In 1952 when he was killed he could have won in Rawalpindi very easily. May be writer has some personal grudge against Liaquat Ali which I have found in some retired army officers. Bacha Khan was good for Pakhtuns as he was against this barrier which was going to be put in Pakhtuns way by the creation of Pakistan. But he was defeated in the referendum which is a part of history. Pakistan was created for the betterment of Muslims as a whole and particularly for those who were in majority in some provinces but economically dependent on Hindus. Muslims as whole want religion to be guiding principles of their lives and Liaquat Ali did the right thing at that time by passing that resolution. Lets make this Pakistan a stronger country which can not only make the lives of this part happy and can help the muslims of India also in their time of suffering.
EmMoosa
Aug 15, 2012 08:04pm
Well said.
XplorUrSelf
Aug 15, 2012 09:30pm
What is the English of "mere moo ki baat chheen lee"? But if that has to happen then why did not happen before in human history? Human beings are becoming more civilized and advanced rather than moving in a cycle, human progress is linear or vertical rather than going back to zero and starting again. There is one possibility that human beings will be more compassionate in future towards each other and all the things in the universe. And society will be organized in a way that some will be intellectuals, others would be administrators and the third group would be workers.
Zahid
Aug 15, 2012 10:11pm
Explains who was behind Liaquat Ali Khan's assasination.....
Ali
Aug 16, 2012 02:05am
What a coincidence, we remember Ghandi as India's Khan Abdul Ghafar Khan.
Tariq
Aug 16, 2012 03:51am
What a joke!! Liaqat Ali Khan feared he would lose in elections since the constituency that had elected him was left behind in UP, India!! And that is how Islam was first used as an excuse to deprive Pakistanis of their right to have a constitutional government!! The author should go and have his mental checkup, Deffereing the constition was not because Liaqat Ali Khan coudn't win a seat in election, but because if constitution would have established, then power would have had transfrred to East Pakistan and that's what elite of West pakistan never tolerated. Liaqat Alin Could have easily won any seat from Karachi or Hyderabad as these cities didn't have tribal culture Regarding dismisal of NWFP assembly that was executed by Jinah not Liaqat, as he was the Governer General. Why the athor is blamig Liqat for this sin, doesn't he has courage to talk straight and blame Jinah for that. Regarding Bcaha Khan, he was great man, but he was the leader of Pakhtun only, he was not national leader. Tariq I
P Setra
Aug 16, 2012 05:49am
My dear friend, India can not be indifferent about things happening in Pakistan or happening to Pakistan. Have you noticed the latest pain in India's butt-the Hindu migration. There are plenty of relatives on either side , who rue about not being able to see there near and dear ones, because of tensions.The best bet for India would be a stable friendly Pakistan, which seems to be an ambitious wish. Obsession with some age old problems, army's clout over everything in Pakistan, and more are messing your country up.
Indra
Aug 16, 2012 07:05am
'Bacha Khan'... awesome name! :-)
khan
Aug 16, 2012 07:35am
this shows that the base of this very country was not laid down on the principles of sincerity and well being of the poor.
indian
Aug 16, 2012 08:01am
@Jawwad, You are confused? Everybody in India is a minority. Hindi speaking north indian hindu's are also a minority in this country. A country for minorities would include all of undivided india. So what was the point of partition other than political greed.
World Peace
Aug 16, 2012 08:20am
let Pakistan be peaceful,prosperous and happy.Best Wishes from India and its people to peace loving Pakistani people. Most importantly thanks to Dawn News to giving picture of history objectively and allowing people across borders to share their views on history.Its is a healthy discussion and to allow the young generation to revisit history and dig deep into history and to the minds of the founders of the nations of India and Pakistan and all the politics which went in forming the two nations. The above article gives the ideas about the mindsets of the Indian National Congress(leading to India), The Muslim League(leading to Pakistan), The East India Company(British) How each one using political master mind try to get the power and to rule the people of the subcontinent. You also mentioned how Indian National congress fought against the British and got the freedom and Muslim League fought against the Indian National Congress and got freedom. We in india wish pakistan solve its internal and external problems and be a peaceful nation.
Arva Veer
Aug 16, 2012 08:48am
Well said. And very true.
malaydeb
Aug 16, 2012 09:52am
I agree 100%.
Pakhtoon
Aug 16, 2012 07:31pm
i am the follower of my beloved Bacha khan and will stand and die to serve pakhtoons. unfortunately pakistan state always created hurdles in the way of current party of Bacha khan movement Awami National party (ANP). mullahs were created to deceive again pakhtoons in the name of Islam but all the conspiracies have been crushed and one day afghanistan pakhtoons will adopt the great Bacha khan philosophy. we love every human being and religion is nt the thing which can bring development if that was the case then west dont follow any religion. systems bring change so Pakisttan should also allow afghanistan to work freely and stop supporting terrorists
Afridi
Aug 16, 2012 07:41pm
well i doubt u know what pakhtoon wali literally means as i am Afridi of pakhtoon tribe so your analysis is wrong pakhtoon wali is a part of pakhtoons traditions such as hospitality, elders deciding matter through jirga and hujra where our weddings ceremonies take place and other things such as resolving disputes elders and men sit there doing celebration and last but not least is the jumat (mosque) culture in pakhtoons society where we pray . so shame on you calling pakhtoon wali division among pakhtoons. last but not least its fact since independance of pakistan pakhtoons in pakistan tribal areas and pakhtoons in afghanistan are being ruled by punjabi army. they have not built a single university and thanks to Bacha khan ideology the current pakhtoons of KPK province has higher literacy rate .. so Paksitan has literally screwed pakhtoons in the name of religion and all educated pakhtoons have realised it. fast.wolf u r nt pakhtoon . God bless you Bacha khan for politicising pakhtoons we miss you
Agha Ata
Aug 16, 2012 08:36pm
To make a new Pakistan, we need a new flag, new national anthem, new Objective Resolution and a new constitution. But above all we need some mature men, wise, farsighted, sincere, and selfless to do all this. We don’t have them, yet! (The End)
Azmat Ansari
Aug 16, 2012 10:50pm
Continued ......He was a role model for a leader. The ‘janta’ followed him for his capacity for giving sacrifices, his altruism and his idealism. Consider this. Pakistan had no money to build an embassy in New Delhi in 1947. Liaquat Ali had a lovely bungalow there which is, indeed, a treat to behold. He donated it without giving it even a second thought to the Government of Pakistan for housing its embassy. He had about 350 big and small properties in India. After partition when the Liaquat –Nehru Agreement was signed, a bureaucrat tried to play a little smart. He drew up a list of all the personal properties of Liaquat and took it to him. Thinking that this sure would make him appear better in the eyes of the Boss and he could hope for promotion. Liaquat Ali Khan was furious. He shouted at him, “Thousands of refugees don’t have a shelter on their heads and here you have come up with a list of my properties that I can back. Get out from here”.
Azmat Ansari
Aug 16, 2012 10:51pm
In Pakistan everyone takes pride in the fact that Laiquat Ali Khan was the first democratically elected Prime Minister of Pakistan. And Mr. Researcher is trying to show us that Liaquat Ali Khan was against democracy. Continued ... Liaquat, firmly believed that for a stable democracy all political parties should be organized on sound lines. This brought him to the issue of reorganizing the Muslim League, the political party that had brought him to power. But for doing this, he had no money. Mr.Birla, an Indian industrialist was his good friend. He asked him to give him Rs. Five lakhs as a loan. It was a huge sum of money those days. Mr. Birla obliged. Muslim League was re-organized so that the democratic purpose could be served better.
Azmat Ansari
Aug 16, 2012 10:52pm
Continued .... A year or two later, Mr. Birla demanded the money back. Liaquat said to him, according to a member of his family, “A Musulman never goes back on his words. I had said that I am going to return you and I am going to do it.” Liaquat mortgaged jewelry of his first wife for one lakh rupees and of the second wife also for a lakh rupees. Two lakhs, he managed from somewhere. Now he had four lakh rupees. He was still short of one lakh rupees. Perhaps, Nawab Mamdot (tentative finding) gave him a lakh rupees. Liaquat returned five lakh rupees to Mr. Birla. He kept his promise. He didn’t spend the money on luxuries. He spent his own money to strengthen the League, the major political party in Pakistan. Liaquat nurtured democracy and democratic process in the country with his own blood.
Saifullah Khan
Aug 17, 2012 07:27am
Dear Naveed you might be a pathan but you are under the influence of Hypocrate Punjabi dominant education system, where a pro indian is considered a Kafir, please clear your mind that Bacha Khan was against the partition but he was never against Pakistan once founded, he was also against the British rule and the unjust associated with their rule, while the leaders you are inspired of are pro british pro american and hypocrates who would kill each other for power and would loot our beloved country for their own gains. You can see that our country is fully under the control of British and Americans even after 65 years of the so called independence and the same British rule is prevailing you can also see if you are not blinded that all your leaders come with the aashirbaad of their masters (US & UK). So Please i request you again to clear your mind for just once and read history, the real history not the one portrayed in our text books or the historians under the influence of Pakistan Government who would be considered traitors if they tell you the real history. I would also recommend you if affordable to visit the British National Library where you can find their legal documents which they release for public view after their objectives are achieved and their you would find the reality of your grat leaders.
World Peace
Aug 17, 2012 08:47am
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones
Devendra
Aug 17, 2012 06:24pm
Indian, You are so factually wrong that it is not worthwhile to point out your ignorance on the subject. Briefly, Sardar Patel and then Nehru both had told Mahatma Gandhi that they were not pining for the prime misnistership as Jinnah was. They however cautioned Gandhi if he made Jinnah the prime minister, the country may be ungovernable as the Muslim League had by then become pretty sectarian. Please read and get your facts right before opining.
Devendra
Aug 17, 2012 06:34pm
Badshah Khan aka Abdul Gaffar Khan aka Frontier Gandhi was one of the noblest sons of undivided India. He was the only one I compare equal to Mahatma Gandhi.....the highest praise I can lay upon the GREAT BADSHAH KHAN. He was one of the closest and absolutely trusted companion of Mahatma Gandhi. I still see the picture of him on the train station bidding Mahatma Gandhi last Good Bye as they both knew they would not see each other again. HE WAS THE ONLY TRUE MUSLIM I KNOW IN PAKISTAN. Souls like him - full of pure love, loving his religion but not hating other's, not judging others on the basis of their religion but on their humanity, at peace with himself and a great human - are rare in history. What Pakistan did to him is beyond shameful. He should have been REVERED like Mahatma Gandhi is in India because he was Gandhi's equal in every sense. ANY WONDER PAKISTAN IS SUCH A MESS?
sherbaz
Aug 17, 2012 07:23pm
its all about bacha khan and trying to prove that bacha khan was not a radical pashtun but he was better then ppl who studied from oxford. at some point he says that bacha khan had a much better political position than liaqat ali khan , and bacha arrived from a very humble family than liaqat ali khan but the fact is liaqat ali khan had the courage along with m,ali jinnah to over rule him in his very own area and win the referendum , this shows the popularity of muslim league and the love of peopl towards islam by over ruling cast and ethinity language issues..
Hameed Khan
Aug 18, 2012 02:47am
Bacha was a true humanist , and wanted to promote harmony. However, the Muslim opportunist and dictators (both civilian and others) of that time jailed him for their own personal interests. Even now, the lies are being taught in the schools there about Bacha Khan but time will uncover all these lies about Bacha Khan and Pashtoons in general.
Rafia Mirza
Aug 18, 2012 11:48pm
I agree with you 1oo%..I had a pretty good idea about the dis-information we Pakistanis have been fed on, through out our entire history. However the information about Liaquat Ali Khan is a bolt out of the blue; I still believe he lost material assets & property at the time of partition but I had no idea he had his eyes on political power & played dirty towards that end. So sorry to know this side of his story.
Rafia Mirza
Aug 18, 2012 11:56pm
And thankyou Dawn for printing the bitter truth