Did Two Nation Theory Die in 1971 After Creation of Bangladesh?

[RiazHaq]

Haq's Musings: Quaide-Azam's Death Anniversay: Is Two Nation Theory Dead?

Some argue that the Two Nation Theory died with the 1971 partition of Pakistan that led to the separation of East Pakistan and the creation of Bangladesh. Others say that the TNT (Two Nation Theory) was dead the day Pakistan's founder Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah passed away on Sept 11, 1948.

As Pakistanis observe the 65th anniversary of the Quaid-e-Azam's passing, let's examine the state of the Two Nation Theory which gave birth to the Pakistan movement on March 23, 1940.

The key question that needs to be answered regarding the events of 1971 is as follows: Did the Awami League in East Pakistan fight to create their own country later named Bangladesh? Or did they shed their blood to re-unify the eastern wing of Pakistan with India?

These questions are answered by French historian Christophe Jaffrelot in his book "A History of Pakistan and its origins".

Jaffrelot cites British-Pakistani history Prof Samuel Martin Burke rejecting the notion that the Two-Nation Theory died in 1971 with Pakistan's split into Pakistan and Bangladesh. Burke says that the two-nation theory was even more strongly asserted in that the Awami League rebels had struggled for their own country, Bangladesh, and not to join India. In so doing, they had put into practice the theory behind the original resolution to form Pakistan, which envisaged two Muslim states at the two extremities of the subcontinent.

Here's an excerpt from the Pakistan Resolution passed in Lahore in March 1940:

"Resolved that it is the considered view of this Session of the All-India Muslim League that no constitutional plan would be workable in this country or acceptable to the Muslims unless it is designated on the following basic principle, viz. that geographically contiguous units are demarcated into regions which should be so constituted with such territorial readjustments as may be necessary, that the areas in which the Muslims are numerically in a majority as in the North-Western and Eastern Zones of India should be grouped to constitute "Independent States" in which the Constituent Units shall be autonomous and sovereign"

Clearly, the Pakistan Resolution called for "Independent States" of Muslim majority areas in the "North Western and Eastern Zones of India" in which the "Constituent Units shall be autonomous and sovereign".

What happened in 1971 with the creation of Bangladesh essentially put into practice the theory behind the original resolution to form Pakistan, which envisaged two Muslim states at the two extremities of the subcontinent.

Haq's Musings: Quaide-Azam's Death Anniversay: Is Two Nation Theory Dead?

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

It didnt die but made stronger by Bangladesh. I thank India for fullfling original two nation theory

 

[MM_Haider]

The two nation in a broader picture still exists.. if BD was made part of India after 1971.. then one could argue..

 

[Cyberian]

No, it increased to a three-nation theory in 1971. However, the Soviet Union was killed and forced to accept a fourteen-nation theory for not respecting the two-nation theory.

 

[scorpionx]

With all due respect to Mr.Jinnah,it is a subject of intense query that how much he believed in two nation's theory himself. Two nation Theory,crippled with certain severe flaws can never be a proper justification to divide this subcontinent.

 

[my2cents]

Haq's Musings: Quaide-Azam's Death Anniversay: Is Two Nation Theory Dead?

Some argue that the Two Nation Theory died with the 1971 partition of Pakistan that led to the separation of East Pakistan and the creation of Bangladesh. Others say that the TNT (Two Nation Theory) was dead the day Pakistan's founder Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah passed away on Sept 11, 1948.

As Pakistanis observe the 65th anniversary of the Quaid-e-Azam's passing, let's examine the state of the Two Nation Theory which gave birth to the Pakistan movement on March 23, 1940.

The key question that needs to be answered regarding the events of 1971 is as follows: Did the Awami League in East Pakistan fight to create their own country later named Bangladesh? Or did they shed their blood to re-unify the eastern wing of Pakistan with India?

These questions are answered by French historian Christophe Jaffrelot in his book "A History of Pakistan and its origins".

Jaffrelot cites British-Pakistani history Prof Samuel Martin Burke rejecting the notion that the Two-Nation Theory died in 1971 with Pakistan's split into Pakistan and Bangladesh. Burke says that the two-nation theory was even more strongly asserted in that the Awami League rebels had struggled for their own country, Bangladesh, and not to join India. In so doing, they had put into practice the theory behind the original resolution to form Pakistan, which envisaged two Muslim states at the two extremities of the subcontinent.

Here's an excerpt from the Pakistan Resolution passed in Lahore in March 1940:

"Resolved that it is the considered view of this Session of the All-India Muslim League that no constitutional plan would be workable in this country or acceptable to the Muslims unless it is designated on the following basic principle, viz. that geographically contiguous units are demarcated into regions which should be so constituted with such territorial readjustments as may be necessary, that the areas in which the Muslims are numerically in a majority as in the North-Western and Eastern Zones of India should be grouped to constitute "Independent States" in which the Constituent Units shall be autonomous and sovereign"

Clearly, the Pakistan Resolution called for "Independent States" of Muslim majority areas in the "North Western and Eastern Zones of India" in which the "Constituent Units shall be autonomous and sovereign".

What happened in 1971 with the creation of Bangladesh essentially put into practice the theory behind the original resolution to form Pakistan, which envisaged two Muslim states at the two extremities of the subcontinent.

Haq's Musings: Quaide-Azam's Death Anniversay: Is Two Nation Theory Dead?

Well I have some issues with this two nation theory that was proposed by the Great Quaide Azam.

One if it is true that Muslims cannot live with other faiths then what about all the muslims who have been living side by side with hindus in India for past one thousand years. Does it not contradict the basic assumption???

Two the bengali identity proved to be more stronger than muslim identity by the formation of Bangladesh.

Or the crux of the matter is that they don't want to be subjugated by the majority hindus and made it all up.

 

[Side-Winder]

No not at all,
we still have a separate homeland and so do the bangladeshi muslims,

 

[Side-Winder]

With all due respect to Mr.Jinnah,it is a subject of intense query that how much he believed in two nation's theory himself. Two nation Theory,crippled with certain severe flaws can never be a proper justification to divide this subcontinent.

depends on the angle you look from,
from our point of view,it was the proper justification,

We had to protect our ideology/religion,language plus the hindu extremism (shuddi,sangthan,aryan samaj,barhman samaj,riots upon slaughtering of cow,urdu-hindi language conflict)
forced us to do that,

that's another issue how much we have been able to actually obtain the objectives of creation of pakistan,
but pakistan was the need of time,

now i don't care which angle you are looking from,

 

[JattPunjabi]

Yes, it became the three nation theory.

 

[S.U.R.B.]

The two nation theory didn't die down.

Why?
Because it was based on solid ground realities.The facts that the people of that age were able to realize in their due course of close existence.Though now we do have the facility to judge them based on the results that we are getting out of it.(Which of course they didn't have back then)
One can call into question the theory if the population dynamics got changed extraordinarily after East Pakistan became Bangladesh.More and less those are the same.East Pakistan is now Bangladesh, an Independent Muslim country. Yes, they did cut their connections with Pakistan ,which shows that the experiment wasn't successful.

As i see at it, probably the execution of the plan was not very ideal (to make it look good in the map as well).

You had two zones of concentration of Muslim population, so they thought philosophically it'll be feasible to bring them together under one flag.They did an experiment which was never done in the history.And at the end it couldn't show the ideal results.
Had they gone with the design of leaving the Bengal to India, this would have risen a bigger headache for the state of India later on.It would have cause a sweet change in population dynamics of the state of India in favor of us in the west.With that Mr.Jinnah could have concentrated on more in annexing the states of Punjab and area enjoying a majority of Muslim population with the West Pakistan as a bargain, leaving little room for India to meddle in Kashmir ( or fancy about it at the start) , keeping her hands off the Pakistan in the West and on the issues inside her.

But in anyway you put it, we should give them the credit that the intentions were not to play the politics,rather it was to care about the rights of the Muslims of the subcontinent.

 

[KingMamba]

It is still a two nation theory even after 1971, the theory was Muslims and Hindus cannot live together. In 1971 Banglas were mistreated and had a right to secede but they didn't join India either so two nation theory is still intact.

 

[Luffy 500]

No it didn't die rather I believe it was reinforced more strongly in 1975 by the sepahi-janata revolution (popular civilian-military uprising) in BD. Its because of 2 nation theory that BD is still a separate country and not part of a hindutva India albeit suffering numerous Indian ****** nose-poking and destructive activities. Its one of the main reasons why India always tries to impose hindu dominance and secularism in BD by awami maggots with a long term aim of annexing. A stronger BD & PAK is something chanakayns absolutely don't want. A strong BD will permanently destroy Indian hegemonic ambition in S.Asia and that's why they always poke their ****** noses here. They know it and they fear it. The inherent hate they have towards muslims in BD & PAK is pretty apparent in their policies.

 

[Skies]

TNT, Two Nation Theory, was the demand of time. It was success at that time. And still it is. BD was cut off from PK based on 6 points, where the ideology of TNT was not the issue. As you see, still BD populace is divided into two today - in secular vs. moderate Muslim debate. In fact, the ideology of moderate Muslim Bangladesh is a derivative of Two Nation Theory.

And even if total BD population rejects TNT or embrace secularism like India in future, it does not mean that TNT was unsuccessful, as it was the demand of that time. Time changes, so everything can change, and that does not mean that our past changes were unsuccessful, but demand of that particular time.

 

[scorpionx]

As I have said earlier that It is a subject of sheer analysis of how much Mr.Jinnah himself believed in Two nation Theory.A brilliant politician of his caliber and foresight would definitely had the foreboding of the vulnerability of East Pakistan mainly due to three reasons,geographical detachment,Absence of Calcutta literally making East Pakistan a rural slum and most importantly the lack of preservation of ethnic identities.

Hindus and Muslims have lived together peacefully in towns,villages,hamlets in India for centuries in amicable manner till 1857.People from both the religion were equally destitute and being deprived of the economic exploitation by Rajas,Nawabs and the Honorable company. If at all,the concerns and safety of the Muslims were to be guaranteed by some means,for the obvious dissimilarities between a Muslim merchant of Punjab and a poor peasant of Bengal, dividing the region based on ethnic/Lingual identities would have been much more appropriate rather than inclining on religious dogmas.

Also from a Muslim point of view,how much it goes with the actual Islamic teachings to divide the world into pure and Impure? Does not it coincide or go parallel with the orthodox Brahmanical concept of dichotomize the Nations into holy and unholy,people into touchable and the Untouchables?
@Aeronaut

 

[Iggy]

Two nation theory was flawed on the day of partition itself because, lot of Muslims decided to stay in India rather than going to Pakistan and other religion's people decided to stay in Pakistan rather than coming to India..