Minar e Pakistan

Source: Daily Times

By Yasser Latif Hamdani

The result is that instead of having an organic unity, we have an imposed one. The basics of the federation have not been worked out. Resultantly, the centrifugal forces are always at work, with a shadow of doubt being cast over the very existence of the country

We began celebrating March 23rd as the Republic Day after we became a republic. Just as India had in 1950 chosen January 26 to declare itself a republic to commemorate the declaration of full independence as its goal in Lahore 20 years earlier, Pakistan chose to promulgate its first constitution on March 23rd, commemorating of course the historic Lahore Resolution 16 years earlier. Some two years later in 1958, Pakistan was under military dictatorship and the constitution was abrogated. The day, however, continued to be celebrated, coming to be known as Pakistan Day instead. Now after a break of seven years, Pakistan has reinstituted the military parade that most of us remember well from our childhood. I have no problems with parades of course; indeed it is a fond memory. What I find utterly distasteful though is how the three salient features of the Lahore Resolution have been repeatedly undermined by Pakistan to its own detriment.

What are these three salient features of the Lahore Resolution, you might ask? First, the resolution contains no reference to Islam or an Islamic state being the goal of the Muslims of the subcontinent. It instead begins by rejecting in no uncertain terms the Government of India Act, 1935 as being unsatisfactory and calling for the reconsideration of the Act in consultation with all stakeholders. It then goes on to state its demand for independent states in the Muslim majority areas. The idea was never to create a theocratic religious order. Indeed, the main supporters of the theocratic religious order were conspicuous in their opposition and not in support of the idea. They denounced the Muslim League as an un-Islamic organization, which had built its case around nationalism. Second, the protection and safeguards of minorities was to be made part of this constitutional plan for all of India. Significantly, the Lahore Resolution seemed to envisage one constitutional plan for all of South Asia but that is not the point I wish to make here. For the purpose of this article let us assume that by independent states, it is meant sovereign independent states of the like that we have today in the form of Pakistan and Bangladesh. I cannot presume to speak for Bangladesh, but have we in Pakistan provided minorities the freedoms and safeguards promised to them by the Lahore Resolution? On the contrary, we have always bulldozed by brute majority their aspirations in Pakistan, negating in no small way the basic principle of Pakistan, which is that no permanent majority should be allowed to bulldoze a permanent minority. The third and final feature of the Lahore Resolution was that it envisaged constituent units that were autonomous and sovereign. This feature of the Lahore Resolution was the basis of the six-point demand put forth by Sheikh Mujib-ur-Rehman, whom we denounced as a traitor instead of accepting his mandate. Even today we view with suspicion smaller provinces that speak of the autonomy and sovereignty of smaller provinces. Pakistan has negated all three features of the Lahore Resolution by, in the first instance, declaring itself constitutionally an Islamic state, in the second instance by persecuting minorities and having a shameful record vis-a-vis human rights and in the third instance by attempting to superimpose a centralised, quasi-authoritarian state on a diverse people.

The result is that instead of having an organic unity, we have an imposed one. The basics of the federation have not been worked out. Resultantly, the centrifugal forces are always at work, with a shadow of doubt being cast over the very existence of the country. Despite 67 years of existence the question before Pakistanis still is whether they will wake up one morning to find their country dissolved. This insecurity breeds the national security state, which in turn is forced to rely on centralisation, authoritarianism and an intolerance for all forms of dissent. There is no room for disagreement with the insufficiently imagined state narrative. The ideology of Pakistan is the state’s holy cow and it has no legs to stand on. The ambiguous ideal, adopted post hoc by a military regime has been used to stifle debate, debate and reasoned discourse that is the hallmark of any modern democracy.

In many ways the story of Pakistani cricket is a parable for Pakistan the country. Like Pakistani cricket, Pakistan is a country of immense potential and talent. Yet it is always the country’s inability, both in cricket and as a state, to work out the basics that hinder its progress. There are always bright spots but time and again we fail to capitalise on those bright spots, much like Rahat Ali dropping that schoolboy catch during that superb spell of fast bowling by Wahab Riaz in the quarter final of the World Cup. This country, which has produced geniuses like Dr Abdus Salam, continues to suffer woefully in all walks ranging from education, law, health, to science. While individual brilliance always shines, there is no institutionalisation of talent. Similarly in politics, Pakistan’s failure to build on its basic principle of the right of self-determination has sapped the vitality of the country. There is never a game plan to play the long innings. Pakistan’s batting line up always crumbles under the weight of its contradictions.

More:

Follow us in Twitter to stay informed about current affairs, human rights, universal brotherhood, Separation of Mosque-Church and State, and much more