The same people? Surely not

[Contrarian]

A VERY interesting article. Please read in entirety.


The same people? Surely not
Vir Sanghvi, Hindustan Times


Few things annoy me as much as the claim often advanced by well-meaning but woolly- headed (and usually Punjabi) liberals to the effect that when it comes to India and Pakistan, "We’re all the same people, yaar."

This may have been true once upon a time. Before 1947, Pakistan was part of undivided India and you could claim that Punjabis from West Punjab (what is now Pakistan) were as Indian as, say, Tamils from Madras.

But time has a way of moving on. And while the gap between our Punjabis (from east Punjab which is now the only Punjab left in India) and our Tamils may actually have narrowed, thanks to improved communications, shared popular culture and greater physical mobility, the gap between Indians and Pakistanis has now widened to the extent that we are no longer the same people in any significant sense.

This was brought home to me most clearly by two major events over the last few weeks.

The first of these was the attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team on the streets of Lahore. In their defence, Pakistanis said that they were powerless to act against the terrorists because religious fanaticism was growing. Each day more misguided youngsters joined jihadi outfits and the law and order situation worsened.

Further, they added, things had got so bad that in the tribal areas the government of Pakistan had agreed to suspend the rule of law under pressure from the Taliban and had conceded that sharia law would reign instead. Interestingly, while most civilised liberals should have been appalled by this surrender to the forces of extremism, many Pakistanis defended this concession.

Imran Khan (Keble College, Oxford, 1973-76) even declared that sharia law would be better because justice would be dispensed more swiftly! (I know this is politically incorrect but the Loin of the Punjab’s defence of sharia law reminded me of the famous Private Eye cover when his marriage to Jemima Goldsmith was announced. The Eye carried a picture of Khan speaking to Jemima’s father. “Can I have your daughter’s hand?” Imran was supposedly asking James Goldsmith. “Why? Has she been caught shoplifting?” Goldsmith replied. So much for sharia law.)

The second contrasting event was one that took place in Los Angeles but which was perhaps celebrated more in India than in any other country in the world. Three Indians won Oscars: A.R. Rahman, Resul Pookutty and Gulzar.

Their victory set off a frenzy of rejoicing. We were proud of our countrymen. We were pleased that India’s entertainment industry and its veterans had been recognised at an international platform. And all three men became even bigger heroes than they already were.

But here’s the thing: Not one of them is a Hindu.

Can you imagine such a thing happening in Pakistan? Can you even conceive of a situation where the whole country would celebrate the victory of three members of two religious minorities? For that matter, can you even imagine a situation where people from religious minorities would have got to the top of their fields and were, therefore, in the running for international awards?

On the one hand, you have Pakistan imposing sharia law, doing deals with the Taliban, teaching hatred in madrasas, declaring jihad on the world and trying to kill innocent Sri Lankan cricketers. On the other, you have the triumph of Indian secularism.

The same people?

Surely not.

We are defined by our nationality. They choose to define themselves by their religion.

But it gets even more complicated. As you probably know, Rahman was born Dilip Kumar. He converted to Islam when he was 21. His religious preferences made no difference to his prospects. Even now, his music cuts across all religious boundaries. He’s as much at home with Sufi music as he is with bhajans. Nor does he have any problem with saying ‘Vande Mataram’.

Now, think of a similar situation in Pakistan. Can you conceive of a Pakistani composer who converted to Hinduism at the age of 21 and still went on to become a national hero? Under sharia law, they’d probably have to execute him.

Resul Pookutty’s is an even more interesting case. Until you realise that Malayalis tend to put an ‘e’ where the rest of us would put an ‘a,’ (Ravi becomes Revi and sometimes the Gulf becomes the Gelf), you cannot work out that his name derives from Rasool, a fairly obviously Islamic name.

But here’s the point: even when you point out to people that Pookutty is in fact a Muslim, they don’t really care. It makes no difference to them. He’s an authentic Indian hero, his religion is irrelevant.

Can you imagine Pakistan being indifferent to a man’s religion? Can you believe that Pakistanis would not know that one of their Oscar winners came from a religious minority? And would any Pakistani have dared bridge the religious divide in the manner Resul did by referring to the primeval power of Om in his acceptance speech?

The same people?

Surely not.

Most interesting of all is the case of Gulzar who many Indians believe is a Muslim. He is not. He is a Sikh. And his real name is Sampooran Singh Kalra.

So why does he have a Muslim name?

It’s a good story and he told it on my TV show some years ago. He was born in West Pakistan and came over the border during the bloody days of Partition. He had seen so much hatred and religious violence on both sides, he said, that he was determined never to lose himself to that kind of blind religious prejudice and fanaticism.

Rather than blame Muslims for the violence inflicted on his community — after all, Hindus and Sikhs behaved with equal ferocity — he adopted a Muslim pen name to remind himself that his identity was beyond religion. He still writes in Urdu and considers it irrelevant whether a person is a Sikh, a Muslim or a Hindu.

Let’s forget about political correctness and come clean: can you see such a thing happening in Pakistan? Can you actually conceive of a famous Pakistani Muslim who adopts a Hindu or Sikh name out of choice to demonstrate the irrelevance of religion?

My point, exactly.

What all those misguided liberals who keep blathering on about us being the same people forget is that in the 60-odd years since Independence, our two nations have traversed very different paths.

Pakistan was founded on the basis of Islam. It still defines itself in terms of Islam. And over the next decade as it destroys itself, it will be because of Islamic extremism.

India was founded on the basis that religion had no role in determining citizenship or nationhood. An Indian can belong to any religion in the world and face no discrimination in his rights as a citizen.

It is nobody’s case that India is a perfect society or that Muslims face no discrimination. But only a fool would deny that in the last six decades, we have travelled a long way towards religious equality. In the early days of independent India, a Yusuf Khan had to call himself Dilip Kumar for fear of attracting religious prejudice.

In today’s India, a Dilip Kumar can change his name to A.R. Rahman and nobody really gives a damn either way.

So think back to the events of the last few weeks. To the murderous attack on innocent Sri Lankan cricketers by jihadi fanatics in a society that is being buried by Islamic extremism. And to the triumphs of Indian secularism.

Same people?

Don’t make me laugh.

The same people? Surely not- Hindustan Times

 

[DarkStar]

Bharatias have started believing their own hype.

Bharat is as much secular as George Bush is a peacenik.

The article is full of conjecture, hope and plays to bigotted preconceptions of Pakistanis in the Bharatia psyche.

Tha author has obviously never visited Pakistan, otherwise we'd see more sense in this lengthy diatribe. It's all about the oh so secular and innoecent Bharatias, and the violent, devilish fanatics of Pakistan. Unfortunately, the reality is much different to what has been described above.

The attacks on the crickiters were done by faceless criminals, the identities and motivations still a matter of debate.

The slaughter of minorities in Bharat is done by known religious fanatics, who boast about their killings in the media, who go around torching homes, raping women, kiling men under the watchful eye of local officials and police, the latest case in point being Gujarat.

The one thing the author got right was that Bharat and Pakistan are nto one people, but not for the reasons mentioned.

As for Gulzar having an Urdu pen name, that is the norm for Urdu shairs, of which Gulzar is one. Many urdu poets of Hindu/sikh/christian descent have had urdu pen names or takhallus, as this is a tradition of ghazal writing.

Unless the 'esteemed' author thinks that urdu as a language is restricted to use by Muslims.

 

[Omar1984]

Good that you realize it, we were telling you all along that we are not the same people and we dont want to be like indians (a.k.a hindustanis, bharatis).

 

[Contrarian]

Bharatias have started believing their own hype.

Bharat is as much secular as George Bush is a peacenik.

The article is full of conjecture, hope and plays to bigotted preconceptions of Pakistanis in the Bharatia psyche.

Tha author has obviously never visited Pakistan, otherwise we'd see more sense in this lengthy diatribe. It's all about the oh so secular and innoecent Bharatias, and the violent, devilish fanatics of Pakistan. Unfortunately, the reality is much different to what has been described above.

The attacks on the crickiters were done by faceless criminals, the identities and motivations still a matter of debate.

The slaughter of minorities in Bharat is done by known religious fanatics, who boast about their killings in the media, who go around torching homes, raping women, kiling men under the watchful eye of local officials and police, the latest case in point being Gujarat.

The one thing the author got right was that Bharat and Pakistan are nto one people, but not for the reasons mentioned.

You have conveniently forgotten about the rest of the points of the article.

The attacks on Cricketers-all things are indicating that it was LeT type groups, ie Pakistani themselves.

The peace deals, the militancy in Pakistan, the increasing extremism in Pakistan and other issues.

 

[Omar1984]

You have conveniently forgotten about the rest of the points of the article.

The attacks on Cricketers-all things are indicating that it was LeT type groups, ie Pakistani themselves.

The peace deals, the militancy in Pakistan, the increasing extremism in Pakistan and other issues.

The investigation hasn't been complete yet. Why are you so quick to point the finger at LeT when anything happens.

Wait for investigations to be complete then make a judgement, this is not one of your mumbai attacks.

Lahore belongs to Pakistan not india so butt out of our business.

 

[DarkStar]

You have conveniently forgotten about the rest of the points of the article.

The attacks on Cricketers-all things are indicating that it was LeT type groups, ie Pakistani themselves.

The peace deals, the militancy in Pakistan, the increasing extremism in Pakistan and other issues.

Bharat has done plenty of peace deals with rebels, even incoporating them into the security services.

Bharat gives jobs as policemen to former terrorists, yet y ou are secular and democratic.

We try to make peace by getting terrorists to lay down their arms, and we are castigated for it?

You seem to have a different criteria for judging Pakistani and Bharati actions.

The RSS and VHP has infiltrated RAW, Army, police, civil administration esepecially in nothern states like gujarat. Yet still, you are secular? While we are actively fighting the extremists.

 

[DarkStar]

Lashkare Tayba has never attacked on Pakistani soil. There is no history of it.

They were a kashmiri sepratist organisation, long since disbanded.

 

[Rafael]

^^^ surely the author does not know anything or very little about pakistan...
some pointss that I would like to clear here:

Deepak Parwani is the most famous/popular and most paid faishion designer in pakistan and is winning Lux style awards (pakistan's oscar) for the last 5 years.

Dinesh Prabha Shankar Kaneria is a front line pakistani spinner and is the first choice of pakistani selectors as a leg spinning option.

Yousuf Youhana, before converting to Islam ( and still is) one of the most successful batsmen after Inzamam-ul-haq and has a world record for highest runs in a calender year.

Begum Nawazish Ali, despite being technically male...dresses like a female and nobody bothers about him and never he has been threatened by fundamentalists.

These are a few examples and I can post a lot of them..Its not that minorities in pakistan are sidelined and they cannot be successful just because they are minorities.

 

[ANDUBYLL]

The thing that annoys me with liberal Indians is that everything about India is great and everything Pakistan is a cesspool of hate. India is not a first world nation, its not a great nation.

The English speaking Indian minority looks at everything with rose tinted glasses.
When outsiders remind them about slumdog millionaire, they rattle of GDP figures of 8% and how bangalore is shining. No one talks about the Bemaru states of UP, Bihar , Orissa. No one talks about the Hindu rate of growth from 1947-1990. No one talks about the fact that 70% of Mumbaikars live in slums. That the majority of Indians do not access to clean drinking water and that , India accounts for half of the worlds absolute poor. No one talks about Naxal dominated central and southern India (40% of India )

Also the inferiortiy complex of Indians are amazing. Winning Oscars make them look good in front of the gora. Talking in English to each other makes them feel superior like a white man. Indians try to compete to be as westernised as possible. I have seen in Fiji, how embarrased they are to speak in Hindi and try to be as aloof about Indian culture as possible. Also they try too hard to speak in English and with their heavy accent , become more of a laughing stock than anything else. Same goes to Pakistanis as well. Try to hard to become a Kala gora !!

Indians take satisfaction in comparing themselves with the Pakistanis. IMHO, Pakistanis, with their limited resources compared to India have managed to do much more , even giving a good kick in the backside to the Indian military in 1965. Not bad for a nation, 7 times smaller. Vir Sanghvi and his ilk should compare India with China and not Pakistan. Then only they will see , how far behind the 8 ball, that they really are !! Anyone can trash talk, Pakistan can talk about how far ahead Afghanistan, it is but it is self-defeating.

All I can say to Indians is .. to take that rose tinted glasses away from your faces , and see for yourself what India really is , the largest 3rd world nation and the largest poor nation that ever existed on this planet.

 

[Khajur]

The thing that annoys me with liberal Indians is that everything about India is great and everything Pakistan is a cesspool of hate. India is not a first world nation, its not a great nation.

The English speaking Indian minority looks at everything with rose tinted glasses.
When outsiders remind them about slumdog millionaire, they rattle of GDP figures of 8% and how bangalore is shining. No one talks about the Bemaru states of UP, Bihar , Orissa. No one talks about the Hindu rate of growth from 1947-1990. No one talks about the fact that 70% of Mumbaikars live in slums. That the majority of Indians do not access to clean drinking water and that , India accounts for half of the worlds absolute poor. No one talks about Naxal dominated central and southern India (40% of India )

Also the inferiortiy complex of Indians are amazing. Winning Oscars make them look good in front of the gora. Talking in English to each other makes them feel superior like a white man. Indians try to compete to be as westernised as possible. I have seen in Fiji, how embarrased they are to speak in Hindi and try to be as aloof about Indian culture as possible. Also they try too hard to speak in English and with their heavy accent , become more of a laughing stock than anything else. Same goes to Pakistanis as well. Try to hard to become a Kala gora !!

Indians take satisfaction in comparing themselves with the Pakistanis. IMHO, Pakistanis, with their limited resources compared to India have managed to do much more , even giving a good kick in the backside to the Indian military in 1965. Not bad for a nation, 7 times smaller. Vir Sanghvi and his ilk should compare India with China and not Pakistan. Then only they will see , how far behind the 8 ball, that they really are !! Anyone can trash talk, Pakistan can talk about how far ahead Afghanistan, it is but it is self-defeating.

All I can say to Indians is .. to take that rose tinted glasses away from your faces , and see for yourself what India really is , the largest 3rd world nation and the largest poor nation that ever existed on this planet.

Let me say ppl of ur ilk are exact of opposite of those liberal Indians who find everything about India is great.

From ur detailed knowledge about india ,i am sure u are an indian passport holder.Its nice to see ur left india and if possible pls make it permanent.

As u say,we should compare india with china to see the drastic difference.Then let me remind with all its problems india is still a free open tolerant democratic society whose GDP growing now at 8% per annum where as china with all its rapid growth still is communist country with no individual freedom .And if u were a chinese with such negative opinion about china like u have for india who would have been in jail for rest of ur life.

"IMHO, Pakistanis, with their limited resources compared to India have managed to do much more , even giving a good kick in the backside to the Indian military in 1965."

yaa,go refer to some neutral source for purge knowledge of 65 war.
But that might u too uncomfortable for ur taste.I know where indians like u come from and their background.

 

[ANDUBYLL]

Let me say ppl of ur ilk are exact of opposite of those liberal Indians who find everything about India is great.

From ur detailed knowledge about india ,i am sure u are an indian passport holder.Its nice to see ur left india and if possible pls make it permanent.

As u say,we should compare india with china to see the drastic difference.Then let me remind with all its problems india is still a free open tolerant democratic society whose GDP growing now at 8% per annum where as china with all its rapid growth still is communist country with no individual freedom .And if u were a chinese with such negative opinion about china like u have for india who would have been in jail for rest of ur life.

"IMHO, Pakistanis, with their limited resources compared to India have managed to do much more , even giving a good kick in the backside to the Indian military in 1965."

yaa,go refer to some neutral source for purge knowledge of 65 war.
But that might u too uncomfortable for ur taste.I know where indians like u come from and their background.

I am not an Indian , so dont even go there !! My grandfather came from the part of British India that became Pakistan in 1947. I have never set foot in India and no one in my family has been there for 80 years !!

I was waiting for people like you to qoute your 8% growth rate !! Conveniently forgetting the fact that you guys still are the worlds largest poor nation in absolute numbers and none of the 8% growth rate makes an iota of difference to slumdogs struggling in Mumbai and landless villagers in Orissa and Bihar !!

And even neutral experts will tell you that India (7 times larger than Pakistan) got a bloody nose in 1965 !!

 

[SurvivoR]

The author said celeberations in India over oscar for Slumdog was something which one can not expect in Pakistan. But wait a minute the anger and hypocracy before towards accepting the true face of India shown in Slumdog was too hard for the bhartis to accept in the first place.


Now after oscar award bhartis are trying to conceal the reality by boasting into feeling of pride for oscar. Indeed bunch of hypocrats who were burning tires over content of slumbdog and who's top film actors including mr Bachan was crying foul over slumdog screenplay now have come up with claiming credit for the oscar. Wow what a bunch of hypocrats.

 

[Vineeth]

PAKISTAN's IMPACT ON INDIAN MUSLIMS

The provocation for writing this article was some recent comments by Pakistanis accusing the Indian Muslims of being apologetic to other Indians by speaking out against Pakistan. My intention is to explore whether it is apologetics or it is a matter of the heart when the Indian Muslim speaks on these matters.

Out of some good articles on understandingpakistan.com one of the articles by Athar Osama mentioned “Under the plan of India’s Independence, Pakistan came into being on August 14, 1947 as the only country in the world established to safeguard the interests of a religious community.

This perhaps sums the whole basis on which the idea of Pakistan was pursued and achieved. I, an Indian Muslim, who was born much after partition and who is completely detached of the politics that was at that time, wants to assess that from the eyes of an Indian Muslim.

This article has nothing to do with the general Pakistani people. The Pakistanis whom I have met have mostly been very decent and some of the most courteous people. We are the same blood, similar cultures, same languages, same cuisines and similar dress. The prior statement is not from an Indian Muslim but from an Indian. If an Indian can be most closely identified with any other people in the whole world outside India it will be either Pakistan or Bangladesh – whether it be skin, language, cuisine, culture, music, arts or many other things.

This is also not an analysis of history as to what happened prior to the partition. I am too detached from the social and political conditions at that time to comment on them intellectually. This is just an analysis of the end results. The way an Indian Muslim looks at the things as they stand now. It has nothing to do with the people of Pakistan but it is to do either with the administration or the idea of Pakistan.

In India, across the Indian Muslim community it is widely accepted now that the partition of India was the biggest blunder that happened. Instead of safeguarding the interests of the Indian Muslims it reduced the ones who continued to live in India to a position of significantly reduced importance. It impacted the most those who needed the biggest safeguards, the poorest of the poor. A significant portion of the educated cream of the Indian Muslim community migrated to Pakistan; some say they chickened out when the push came to shove. Most of the remaining Muslims in India were poor who would be just fighting to make their two ends meet.

The first silver lining in this was that India was formed as a secular and democratic state. The constitution of India recognized that every citizen will be absolutely equal in his rights and will be free to profess, practice and propagate his religion. The goals were set in the clearest way and the struggle was to achieve the goal and not about the goal itself. It has often been a struggle for the Indian Muslims no doubt but the question has not been the constitution but it has been about upholding the spirit of the constitution. The same Nehru who is often held responsible in Pakistan for the inflexibility fought to uphold the secular fabric of India.

The second is the demographics of the country. India is a unique country, one of its kind. It is like Western Europe put together in a single country. That is true whether you compare it in size, population, languages, cultures, cuisines, dress, habits and many other things. This fact itself makes it a land of huge diversity and contradictions unlike any other place in the world. This structure itself demands that people of different backgrounds have different needs in their daily lives. The result of that is the number of players that have emerged in the Indian political structure. The identities are not Hindu and Muslim so much as the Muslim League would have thought or the BJP wants.

The result of this diversity has been that even after unleashing its whole might and propaganda machinery through RSS its political offshoot the BJP, at its zenith, could never get more than 25% of the votes. It is only in Gujarat that the worst fears of the Muslims have come true. Other than many of the leaders of BJP no political party questions the Muslims about their existential and cultural position. Many political parties acted as ‘messiah’ of the Muslims and paid just lip service yet perhaps no other party other than the exception of BJP pursued harming the interests of the Muslims.

The response of the Indian Muslims has been as true citizens. The overwhelming majority of them took the path of the ballot and followed all the democratic means at their disposal. This is the reason that there were so few supporting political parties to BJP and it was able to put together NDA only when it toned down its rhetoric and agenda. When Gujarat 2002 happened and later NDA lost in the general elections some of the supporting parties found it tough to remain onboard.

As the generation that lived through or was close to the years of partition is getting replaced by those who are completely detached from it a new Indian Muslim identity is emerging. When the Indian economy was sluggish and the jobs were few, it was not meritocracy alone that was basis of governmental jobs and discrimination was easy. But now as the economy is booming and every corporation or entrepreneur wants the best hand to work for them, it is just about who has the skills to get the job done. This is evident from the recent Sachar Panel report where though Muslims are pathetically under-represented in all segments yet their best representation comes in the flagship industry of India, the IT and ITES industry.

The goals of Muslims in India are clearly cut out; safety of life and property, uprooting poverty in the community, increasing literacy and getting to the fore-front of the administrative and economic leadership of India. One of the biggest roadblocks to these is the prejudices, stereotypes and discrimination that the lowest rung of the society face. This is not because of any of the democratic institutions of the country but solely because of the people who fill them. The constitution safeguards the interests and the highest level of judiciary safeguards the interests. If the perpetrators of the Mumbai or Gujarat riots do not see the door of justice it is because of the people who shun their constitutional responsibilities.

Indian Muslims have successfully survived in India. The future only looks better. The Two Nation Theory has been falsified. India and Pakistan keep vying with each other over who has more Muslims! So what has been the contribution of Pakistan in safeguarding the Indian Muslims after the biggest blunder that had already happened in partition? In one single word: Negative. Why negative and why not zero? Because as I argue below it is negative.

The worst thing that can happen to the Indian Muslims is adding fuel to the propaganda machinery of the right wing. While Indian Muslims have their own weaknesses and moles that are responsible for this but the focus here is only on Pakistan’s contribution.

Firstly, by opposing India being a member of the Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC). In 1969, when OIC was formed and India lobbied to be included as it had the third largest Muslim population in the world Pakistan successfully lobbied against it. Pakistan looked at its strategic self-interests and not anything about safeguarding the Indian Muslims otherwise it was a significant move on the part of India to have made that move to be included in the organization as an Islamic country! If Gabon with just 10% Muslims (150,000 Muslim citizens) can be a member, it is a mockery that India with 150 million Muslims and till very recently having the second largest Muslim population on the planet is denied that status. If India was denied significant position vis a vis Muslim countries there was little incentive for her to put the strong feet of her Muslim cultural identity forward and sustain it.

Secondly, the most contentious issue of the way we look at history. The propaganda machinery of the Indian right wing does a great job in picking up all the opinions, lies and rumors against Muslim rulers and paint a picture that the presence of Muslims in India has been the biggest damage and tragedy to the Indian civilization. Whereas invaders like Ghauri and Ghaznavi are understandably condemned even the Mughals who lived in India as their own home are termed as foreigners. While Indian Muslims look at the past as a syncretic culture of great tolerance the Pakistani reading of history is music to the ears of the right wing in India. When Pakistan builds its missile programme it names these weapons as Ghauri, Ghaznavi and Babur as instruments to attack India. This just reiterates the point to every Indian listening to them and reinforcing the deep rooted prejudices.

It matters little to both the sides on this reading of history – of Hindus pitted against Muslims in the medieval ages - that Babur defeated a Muslim Ibrahim Lodhi at Delhi’s throne, Ghauri defeated Prithvi Raj’s army which was led by a Muslim and Ghaznavi had one of his top generals who was a Hindu named Tilak. It also matters little in this reading of history that when Akbar and Maharana Pratap fought at Haldighati then Akbar’s army was led by a Hindu Raja Man Singh and Maharana Pratap’s army was led by a Muslim Hakim Khan Suri. It also matters little in this reading that the Sikh Guru Arjan Dev who was executed by Aurangzeb had the foundation stone of Golden Temple laid by Mian Mir a sufi saint and had included so many sufi songs in the Sikh holy book Guru Granth Sahib. Or that Shivaji who fought with Aurangzeb had a Pathan unit and one of his most trusted aides was Didi Ibrahim, a Muslim and that Aurangzeb sent Raja Jaisingh, a Hindu to fight him. Or that when Babur defeated Rana Sanga at Panipat the latter’s army had thousands of Muslim soldiers.

Thirdly, it is the treatment in Pakistan to its minorities. The fuel to the Sangh Parivar is that while the Muslim percentage in India has marginally increased since partition that of Hindus in Pakistan has significantly reduced and they are widely discriminated against at all levels. They say that if Hindu discrimination is so deep in Pakistan then why should Muslims of India claim anything better?

The Two Nation Theory had no theological base. That is the reason that the Ulama were so much against the partition. The Prophet from his example of Madina showed a model of co-existence, where his city included the Muslims, Jews and Pagans as citizens of a rudimentary state. The two nation theory was propounded just from a social perspective. The Muslim League leaders got stuck in talking with a few on the opposite side and took them to be India. It was sad that they could not figure out that in a democracy while Muslims, quite justifiably, would not have had an upper hand so would any other section, as India is incredibly diverse by its very nature.

I don’t know about what the social context was in which partition happened but I now know for sure that the leaders who pursued it were shortsighted. Pakistan formed as an ‘Islamic’ country refused to acknowledge the rights of Bangla Muslims and the country split within 25 years. In its sixty years of existence it has been under military rule for a significant portion. The independent presence of judiciary is so impacted that its most famous Prime Ministers are either barred from entering their own country or hanged. A couple of weeks back Dina Wadia (daughter of Jinnah) wanted to spend her last days in Jinnah House in Bombay and not at any place in Pakistan. If today 13% Muslims can impact the political scene in India then definitely about 35% could have never been taken for a ride.

But today let us have bygones be bygones. India needs a strong Pakistan; not as an enemy but as a friendly neighbor. A neighbor that works with India in creating a South Asian super zone similar to the Euro Zone, by looking in the syncretic past and not by picking up twisted irritants from the past. The solution is not by putting Pakistan in contrast to India in everything particularly in identity but in drawing inspiration from the mutual past. Having multi billion dollar budgets to safeguard the borders in countries where still hundreds of millions of its citizens earn less than dollar a day is no way justifiable. Working on projects of recreating national boundaries will not solve anything as we have seen. But peace and respect among the largest ethnic population on the face of the earth can create wonders. It will make life easier for India’s Muslims too as the propaganda machinery of the Sangh Parivar will have lesser fuel to add to the fire.
Pakistan?s Impact on Indian Muslims | Indian Muslims

 

[Khajur]

I am not an Indian , so dont even go there !! My grandfather came from the part of British India that became Pakistan in 1947. I have never set foot in India and no one in my family has been there for 80 years !!

I was waiting for people like you to qoute your 8% growth rate !! Conveniently forgetting the fact that you guys still are the worlds largest poor nation in absolute numbers and none of the 8% growth rate makes an iota of difference to slumdogs struggling in Mumbai and landless villagers in Orissa and Bihar !!

And even neutral experts will tell you that India (7 times larger than Pakistan) got a bloody nose in 1965 !!

I know some ppl can only see poverty,backwardness,under development in india as these give them some weird pleasure.Now to each his own...

 

[abbasniazi]

well, Mr.malaymishra123
u were asking questions and giving examples, so listen their are examples, justice bhagwan das who recently retired from the supreme court is a hindu, before his retirement he went to india to offer some religeous practices, on his way home he was not suspected as a traitor and headed the tribunal who decided the fate of Chief justice of supreme court and everyone accepted his decision except those who had their intrest of retaining the power, secondly a famous film actor sudheer was a muslim with a hindu name, no one criticised him ever, thirdly Muhammad yousaf, even when he was yousaf youhana was as recpected as he is now, and lastly pakistan never claimed to be a secular state like india, we were founded as a muslim country and we'll always be proud of it, you need not worry, pakistan will never fall apart, it will remain forever INSHA ALLAH.....