Has anyone marketed Mohammad Ali Jinnah as a secular leader who changed the course of South Asian history and
single-handedly fought for independence from the British when the odds were heavily weighed against him?
For the record, if we leave alone the italicised part which is a subject of some controversy(If you ask me Jinnah is not secular period. But there are some Pakistanis who argue otherwise citing his 11th August speech.), the bold part is entirely wrong even by Pakistani accounts. Not a single Muslim League leader went to jail for Indian independence. Jinnah was eager for India to be divided while under the British crown. He even preferred to have both countries as British dominions permanently under the Crown like Australia. So Jinnah did not fight for independence nor did his party have plans for any independent country except that Muslims will be safe and secure in it with their majorities.
But the other parts of the quote are truly remarkable achievements of Jinnah. He changed the course of South Asian history. And given that most vocal politicians with individual personalities were in Congress, numerically the odds were weighed against him. But he was not afraid to be alone and achieved what he wanted when none of his followers had any clue on alternative methods.
Coming to the topic of Obama's visit, I am sure he might have given equal weight had Pakistan invited him to its own Republic day under normal conditions. His comments on the internal situation in Pakistan are valid. Imagine what happens if Sharif got toppled while Obama is in Pakistan. It would be an embarrassment for both and there would be real danger to the US president if things move too fast out of control. Not far-fetched considering that the last time such toppling happened, Nawaz was in jail within hours.
I also disagree with the author who says Gandhi became popular because Indians studied him a lot. On the contrary, Gandhi became popular because he was more affective/popular with the West. He was a pain-in-the-as for the British right from the 1920's till the end. They simply had no appropriate response to him. He lived a saintly life and died a purposeful death. That ensured his place in history already. Then the Anti-Apartheid movement in SA and Civil Rights movement in USA revived Gandhi's methods and legacy and kept him relevant and his memory fresh. Indians would have forgotten him like they forgot Nehru's/Patel's legacy(What we hear now about these two gentlemen is mostly drumbeats of the two main parties essentially claiming that their respective ideologies(On second thoughts what is Congress ideology today, anyone?) was endorsed by the patriarchs).
But the author is right about one thing. Pakistanis cannot stop themselves from airing their dirty laundry in public, or worse, in foreign countries. Especially the PTI junkies are turning out to be senseless drones walking like zombies and doing whatever IK asks of them. Most of the time, IK himself does not have clarity on how he would achieve his goal democratically. Pakistanis regularly divide themselves on basis of ethnicity or worse caste even in countries like Canada and undercut each other. Their political party wings in countries like UK create ruckus and nuisance every few years. The radicals in their diaspora bring a bad name to the country. The insistence of burqa and reduced women rights even after their families move to the West annoys the general public and puts Governments in a spot. There is no good news at home either with school bombings and polio vaccinator killings. And finally and most importantly, Pakistanis, in acts with parallels only in countries like Egypt and Libya during Arab spring, shout down their own democratically elected PM in NYC calling out 'Go Nawaz Go'. That is the last straw for the respect of any country outside.
