On several occasions during the recent past, various circles in society have argued whether Jinnah’s Pakistan is possible in the current chaotic circumstances. More than pragmatic folks in this debate go to the extent of questioning if Jinnah’s Pakistan is even relevant after six decades of turbulent existence. These arguments have two factors in common – ignorance about how Jinnah had conceptualized the Pakistan state and policy and how he wished the people of Pakistan to achieve it in the times after independence.

A purposeful and disciplined struggle towards realizing national goals; selfless input to build the country and aspiration of high public ideals in contrast to individual gains were some of Jinnah’s core expectations from his people.

However the reality was otherwise. Almost all cadres in this country began attempting to build their individual selves – at times at the cost of the nation! Images of Jinnah’s vision were routinely used by many as cheap rhetoric, especially by the rulers.

In conventional strides, ascending governments have routinely proclaimed nation building as foremost priority. Although the details, complexion and sometime the components vary, but the core statements are punctuated identically. To make Pakistan an ‘Asian’ tiger in economic performance; to make it a respectable country in the comity of nations; to extend the fruits of development to each and every citizen and to make the country secure against all sorts of internal and external threats. It reads as an extremely tall and perhaps romantic agenda. Sometimes, the ruling cliques proclaim success in nation building objectives even before taking the first step! The reality normally depicts otherwise. For example, devastating impacts that evolved during the term of previous government have crippled the economy and shaken the foundation of state due to mal-governance, inaction and poor control of corruption. If nation building is realistically made the goal of national performance, it shall require many pre-requisites to be fulfilled before any nearness to success is even thought about. Real time efforts to create a welfare state with corresponding public institutions; appropriate governmental intervention in all walks of life to safeguard public interest; acts to institute distributive justice in wealth and resources; an overall recourse to democratic principles in the true sense of the term and above all moulding the society to be frugal, modest and conservative so that egalitarianism eventually prevails, are a few to mention! Contrary to these old fashioned dictums, the images of success painted by the power wielders are entirely skewed from the so-called nation building agenda. And this is true for all levels and layers of the society.

Jinnah was clear about the Pakistan he wanted. He communicated his clarity as much as he could through communiques, discourses and speeches. Non sincere elements in power and polity preferred to fuel confusion to serve their selfish interests. The process continues even today. Pseudo liberals interpret that this country was founded for the Muslims of the subcontinent to live in peace and away from the exigencies of Hindu domination. Thus it defined Muslims as a pluralistic and essentially diverse community which had all the liberty to frame the objectives, statutes, rules, codes, customs and norms of life in accordance with their consensus, or at least collective wisdom. In support of their argument they quote Jinnah’s speeches and other leaders of the freedom movement delivered from time to time. In other words, the liberals subscribe to the classical segregation of religious doctrines from the state practice. In contrast, the right wingers assert the notion that this country was made in the name of Islam and Islam alone. In an attempt to secede from an overwhelming political, cultural and religious denomination of Hindus, the Muslims of the subcontinent decided through ballot to carve a homeland wherein life could be organized according to the divine principles of Islam. Since Islam is not merely a set of rituals but a complete system of running a state, it is obvious to apply the same here in a bid to create an Islamic society reinforced on its principles.

These streams of arguments have been continuing eversince the country was founded. However there is hardly any conciliation or accommodation found from either side. They run parallel like the rail road lines never to meet. With the possibilities of settling this issue in an intellectually valid and peaceful manner becoming remote, the citizens are confused, which has led to the creation of anarchic splinter groups, who off late have become violent and intolerant. In this ideological chaos, even those who genuinely aspire to serve and help build the nation get confounded about the veracity of their paths. Unless this fundamental riddle is resolved, nation building efforts shall remain a fallacy.

A divided foray of perceptions evolves from this continuing confusion. Existing political parties view the nation as an adaptable entity in situations where they have access to power and gainful returns from their various political schemes. The whole edifice of nation falls apart during rival rule – be it the military or opponent groups. The military perceives nation/state as an object which must be kept shackled all the time. Any attempt to let it move freely could prove too dangerous for its interests and existence. For them, the so called dissenters on Balochistan are no less than ‘rebels’ – hence have to be dealt with an iron hand. Businessmen and traders consider it as a market space. Till such time the profits rise, the taxes evaded and the labour squeezed to its last without government interference, this remains the best state in the world. When otherwise, the situation is termed dangerous, dollars are packed and people leave quietly. For clergy this is a nation turned into infidel almost close to the status where drastic reforms are needed. Elite are worried that the nation is too backward – has too many encumbrances to bother. Poor keep lamenting the fact that the state is too unjust – it has given them nothing. One of the core problems is that everyone paints the image of the nation/state according to his own private desires. In a rational sense, even that is not a sin! People may perceive differently. But under civilized circumstances there is a core space where there is no ambiguity – basic rights and essential responsibilities. When the nation – state fails to articulate them and when the various societal groups remain myopic about the rights and responsibilities, the national context turns into blazoning anarchy. Obviously this end situation hardly provides a field of operation where sincere minded folks could focus on any worth while nation building pursuit.

The recent times have subjected the country into another unwanted metamorphosis – turning the state into a market. Under the tutelage of very powerful agents of globalization, the whole set of performance indicators have changed. ‘Honesty’ seems to have been replaced by efficiency; ‘justice’ by fair share holding; ‘subsistence’ by purchasing power; ‘human rights by stakeholders satisfaction and ‘democracy’ by market performance. The act of balancing the economic input with the output reigns supreme above all gradients of morality, justice and fair play. For instance, the performance of an educational institution is judged by the fact whether it has a sound balance sheet – not by the types of morals it teaches or the character building it may engage in. This new paradigm has been pushed through by the industrialized world which normally passed through a sequential transformation in its own course of history. From sound and long histories of welfare states, where state acted in a benevolent manner and catered for the essentials of life, these nations have now adopted market doctrines only to do away the lethargy that some of the state structures had developed.

Like other countries, Pakistan has become a hapless recipient of the various outcomes of globalization without the capacity to judge their merits. A high grade fervour of consumerism, unabated and unidirectional information flow of all kinds, ingress of an overtly powerful media, exported images of alien life styles, new value systems are only a few ingredients that are a common place entity in society. Due to an intelligent strategy crafted by the market forces, these inputs are visualized by all and sundry. It has several effects. These images tailor the imaginary type of ideal life people should lead with one bottom line characteristic – to consume. A plethora of attractive goods and services generate burning desires amongst people to acquire everything shown and displayed.

Fault lines in the society are broadening fast. In religion, it is found that sects are being subdivided into sub-sects and further smaller groups. Regions are dominated by the clan affiliations and communities by ethnicities. When differences and disputes occur, violence and use of force become the tools to settle the score. Ignorance, lack of education, impoverished backgrounds (where most have nothing to lose), devious leaderships with medieval orientations all add to the social divide. In majority of cases, this social divide is so drastic that no room remains for conciliation. Inciting masses for self serving objectives is commonly pursued.

In the whole murk, this nation has experienced lone crusaders who, not fearing the lurking danger, took up to contribute in nation building in their own right and sphere of action. Obviously the attempt was extremely difficult and path very sturdy. But they carried on. Foremost amongst them were the ones who aimed at building institutions. Some of them were meted out the worst. They lost their lives in these crusades. Hakim Mohammad Said, Perween Rahman and many others while still others threatened for their good work. Dr Adibul Hasan Rizvi of Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation (SIUT) and Maulana Abdul Sattar Edhi are a few who continue with their nation building work unabated and unaffected by the threats they continue to receive.

The way forward can turn into a rewarding alley if a realistic approach towards the situation is adopted. For reaching a consensus on the ideological basis, sustenance of democratic institutions is the foremost. Jinnah had categorically referred to the wisdom of elected assemblies to establish such matters. Thus, if they function without the mutilation by the establishment, they shall develop the capacity to formulate a viable interpretation of the ideology of the nation. Lateral inputs by the intelligentsia, academia and media can help streamline and enrich this discourse. Strengthening the political process; enhancing and safeguarding civil liberties and freedom and a continuous public input in social sector issues are few basic steps that must be taken. Role models of leadership living in austerity and frugality must replace the ostentatious images of endless spending. Media shall have to accommodate the life and sufferings of the down-trodden more than symbolic coverage. Worthy recognition for unknown crusaders of nation building feats must be instituted by the state beyond lip service. It cannot be denied that as a nation state, this country has to overcome numerous hurdles – most of them tough and unconventional. Therefore an unconventional approach is needed.

Pakistan greatly suffers from the stark division of ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’! Poor governance and total loss of administrative accountability has caused public health, education and social welfare systems to collapse. But the need of these vital services is more essential than ever. The gradual but firm revitalization of these sectors must be focused on by our rulers as evidence of their commitment to nation building in a sustained manner.

The writer is a freelance political analyst