THIS is apropos the letter ‘Why free for all’ (Dec 6), which, among other things about the martyred prime minister, Nawabzada Liaquat Ali Khan, stated that “he had the guts to demand in return from the US to declare its unconditional support for Pakistan on the Kashmir issue, and when the US refused to do so, he had shown his fist, meaning we are sovereign”.

However, to set the record straight, I must say the reason for Liaquat Ali Khan’s waving of his fist is totally different. We have been reading and hearing since our childhood that when in 1951 India threateningly mobilised its forces on our borders, Liaquat Ali Khan waved his famous fist to warn India that if it dared attack Pakistan, it would get a matching response.

If this time-honoured understanding is flawed, any other narrative will have to bear some irrefutable evidence to have a case. The Truman story appears to be totally out of context, if not a figment of imagination.

More so, Liaquat Ali Khan had gone to the United States on the invitation of President Harry Truman, and, as a guest, he could not be so rude as to show a fist to his host. Also, he had ignored the invitation of the Soviet Union and instead went to the US to cultivate the much-needed cordial relations with the superpower to get military as well as economic aid to act as a counterforce to India.

The US was interested in ensuring that Pakistan stayed away from the much-dreaded communism/socialism of the erstwhile Soviet Union. And the visit by the Pakistani prime minister was a good occasion to promote bilateral ties. Who would wave a fist in such a scenario? A suave, gracious, sophisticated and refined person like the Nawabzada could have never imagined doing what the letter says he did.

Name withheld on request
Karachi

Published in Dawn, December 26th, 2021