Articles Comments

Pak Tea House » Colonialism, History, North-West Frontier Province, Peshawar » History is Not a Farce: The NWFP Referendum

History is Not a Farce: The NWFP Referendum

Pak Tea House’s contributor Yasser Latif Hamdani has been posting articles on the Pakhtuns and NWFP province. In response to his latest piece, Shaheryar Ali, looks back at the NWFP referendum held in 1947 and presents an alternative view- We welcome myriad points of view at this forum only to ensure that history’s linearity and constructed versions are unpacked for a better understanding of the past and the present. (Raza Rumi-ed)

“History is the memory of states,” wrote Henry Kissinger in his first book, A World Restored, in which he proceeded to tell the history of nineteenth-century Europe from the viewpoint of the leaders of Austria and England, ignoring the millions who suffered from those statesmen’s policies. From his standpoint, the “peace” that Europe had before the French Revolution was “restored” by the diplomacy of a few national leaders. But for factory workers in England, farmers in France, colored people in Asia and Africa, women and children everywhere except in the upper classes, it was a world of conquest, violence, hunger, exploitation-a world not restored but disintegrated.
My viewpoint, in telling the history of the United States, is different: that we must not accept the memory of states as our own. Nations are not communities and never have been, The history of any country, presented as the history of a family, conceals fierce conflicts of interest (sometimes exploding, most often repressed) between conquerors and conquered, masters and slaves, capitalists and workers, dominators and dominated in race and sex. And in such a world of conflict, a world of victims and executioners, it is the job of thinking people, as Albert Camus suggested, not to be on the side of the executioners”

Howard Zinn

This is my favorite passage from one of my favorite books, “A Peoples History of United States”. Pakhtoon territory has been a victim of this “statist” history which has served to further the imperialist goals in this region. First British Empire used it to divide Pakhtoons, and later, American Imperialism adopted the same policy.

Under the British, a vast scholarship appeared on Pakhtoons which to this day is serving its purpose. All such scholarship must be re-examined under light of Edward Said’s “Orientalism”.

What happened in Pakhtoonkhawa is not the memory of State, its lament of a people, those who  are the  direct victims  o f two imperialist powers, and whose case, history, sociology, anthropology all acted in the same as Edward Said says, in aid of the White Man.

History is Not a farce

A fellow writers at the Pak Tea House has started this beautifully crafted series of articles on Pakhtoonkhawa, this latest article on the referendum. It demands a response. The article presents a partial, unilateral  view. Over time, in the mainstream discourse, the official position of the democratic representatives of the area has been largely ignored and colonial version of history along with Muslem league’s view point have been projected.

I would indicate here the position of Khudai Khidmatgars , the precursors of NAP and ANP to balance the issue -

Why Referendum??he historian must ask a simple question: why referendum was called by the colonial masters in NWFP, when an elected assembly was in place. NWFP, was a province of India, it had an elected assembly. Its counterparts like Bengal and Punjab were divided, their geography was changed but referendum was not called. Though the situation demanded it, whether Bengalis or Punjabis wanted to be partitioned or join any state as whole. But NWFP was asked to go to polls. Why? because NWFP had progressive assembly, and there was a need to subvert the public opinion. Muslim League and their British masters wanted a democratic cover for their action.

Khan Abdul Wali Khan writes in “Facts are Facts”

” Khudai Khidmatgars’ first objection was that since the Congress and the Muslim league had both agreed on Partition, and since they considered themselves bound by the congress decisions (Bacha Khan himself used to represent Khudai Khidmatgars in the Congress working Committee), and since the congress had accepted that NWFP had to be part of Pakistan, then why hold a referendum? The exercise would only exacerbate the existing communal and political tension and political tension and create an atmosphere of confrontation.

The  Muslim League and the British had their own purpose behind the design. Muslim league was keen to convey the impression that Pakistan was formed its demand and its demand alone; and that the Khudai Khidmatgars had opposed Pakistan which was why a referendum had become necessary. There was another purpose in singling out NWFP for a different treatment from other provinces. In the rest of India, only the assembly members of the Muslim majority provinces were asked to give their vote. Bengal and Punjab assemblies voted for the partition and thus the provinces were divided. Sindh assembly was asked to vote for Pakistan. Why not then NWFP assembly also? The reason was obvious. Here the Khudai Khidmatgars were in Majority in the assembly. If they opted for Pakistan the decision would have been that of the Khudai Khidmatgars. The Muslim League was not prepared to concede that credit. Nor were the British.”hy the progressive forces boycotted the dubious referendum. As Wali Khan has mentioned, BachaKhan considered himself bound by the Congress decision. There was no need of a referendum. The elected assembly was being subverted to give Muslim League political advantage in future government in Pakhtoonkhawa. The only meaningful  purpose of this referendum would have been if it would have included the option of “Pakhtoonistan”. When the elected representatives of a state were demanding it , such an option should have been considered. A referendum is only meaningful if it gives a genuine choice to the electorate. But when its clear that its purpose is to bypass the public opinion, it becomes a futile exercise . Which it became. It was boycotted by the elected representatives of the state.
Khan Abdul Wali Khan further writes:

Why Boycott:

” For their part the Khudai Khidmatgars decided that if the British were insistent on holding the plebiscite despite the general acceptance that NWFP would go to Pakistan, then following the same principle of self-determination the province should also have the freedom to a third option, of an in dependent Pukhtoonistan. Mountbatten, however, refused to include this alternative. The Khudai Khidmatgars then decided that since between the available two options the decision had already been taken and the referendum was there fore pointless they would boycott it”have already mentioned that any referendum is only meaningful if it gives a meaningful valid choice to the electorate. Here we are seeing that the demand of the most popular political party who had won an election and was in government in the state was ignored. It was solely being conducted to give the Muslim League a political credibility in NWFP. It was boycotted by a major political force. It was any thing but fair. It was to use the standard British term a “White Wash”.

The Referendem : Fair or Farce

A farce and a shameful farce , this referendum was. And the key reasons were:

A: It was not based on adult franchise, Voting was restricted
B. Not all Pakhtoons were allowed to participate in the referendum that would seal not only their fate but that of their brothers in Afghanistan
C. The tribal Pakhtoons were not allowed to vote. In the population of 3.5 Million only 0.6 Million were allowed to vote
D. 6 Tribal agencies were barred from it
E. The States of Sawat, Dir,Amb, and Chitral were also not allowed to participate

Any referendum that disenfranchises such a large number of population can never be called a legitimate exercise of “self determination”. It has no political, legal and moral authority whatsoever.

Progressive Position on Referendum:ali Khan writes:

” Anyway, the government of India started preparing for referendum. Olaf Carore was replaced by Sir Robb Lokhart as the NWFP governor and the vote was held under his supervision. Although the Khudai Khidmatgarshad announced boycott of the exercise and its result had been a foregone conclusion,yet the Muslim Leaguers made extraordinary efforts. They brought their leaders from all corners of the country including students from the Aligarh University, who all fanned out in the province to incite hatred against the Pukhtoons.

For all that, on the polling day they resorted to such rigging that it is hard to find a parallel. Ballot boxes were freely stuffed and even the votes of Khudai Khidmatgar leaders were cast. Let me cite two instances, one told to me by Sikandar Mirza himself who was former deputy commissioner in Hazara. Touring the polling booths he reached the one at the gullies. The staff proudly told him: “This is mountainous area. We have just 200 voters on the list here. But, Sir, we have already polled 210.”espite a virtually unopposed Referendum , and monumental effort by the Moslem League what was the result?

The Results:
Number of votes 5,72,799
Polled votes (51%) 2,92,118
For Pakistan (51.5%) 2,89,244
For India 2,874

51.5% of the allowed Voters , Voted for Pakistan.Is this the result of a referendum that sealed the fate of Millions of Pakhtoons? With the disenfranchisment, it can’t even be called a majority vote.

My honorable and learned friend, Ysser Hamdani, has written that the referendum was free and fair unlike those conducted by the Military dictatorships in Pakistan. Alas, it was the same story.

Wu referendem tha ya jin tha shaher mein hoo ka alam tha—-emocracy is about “equal opportunities”. Here the elected representatives were suppressed, and an escape route of “referendums” was taken. Why?

Again lets ask those who were debarred , whose parliament was subverted:

Wali Khan writes:

” In the ends, thus, one keeps coming back to the same conclusion that the British were keen on putting an Islamic halter round the socialist order in the north and were not prepared to permit any hurdle,Khudai Khidmatgars’ or whatever, in their way. In fact they were convinced that unless they removed all the nationalist and anti imperialist forces from their path would not be able to consummate their design.”

This all was to block progressive forces in the area, to make NWFP a“Petri dish”for imperialist agenda to block Socialism. The Saur Revolution was snuffed out using NWFP, the Islamists madness was spread, the Frankenstein that  is now playing havoc from New York, from Islamabad to Bara.

All this was result of this “Referendum”.

“Lamhon ne Khata ki , sadiyon ne saza payi”

History is Not a Farce——

Written by

Filed under: Colonialism, History, North-West Frontier Province, Peshawar · Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

37 Responses to "History is Not a Farce: The NWFP Referendum"

  1. hunainsaani Norway Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Thanks for the great work done by Raza Rumi….
    I couldn’t understand,why some people when heard of some demands asked by the provinces which felt deprived in the current Pakistan Federation…they were slapped by our writers….
    This behaviour has its consequences…we are facing most parts of the country…we should be open hearted…hear the views of people from all part of the country…and from every section of Society….come on man forget about all the biases..

  2. YLH Canada Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Here is the problem: the article I have written is based on primary sources and none of the issues I wrote about have been addressed by Mr. Ali. Instead he has resorted to rhetoric and undue emotionalism.

    The fact is that Congress and KK were all in agreement that the said referendum was being held under a governor of their choice ie Robert lockhart.

    Lockhart had replaced Caroe on specific request of the president of the Congress Party Mr. Nehru.

    I strongly suggest that both the author of this piece and the readers read my article again and evaluate evidence available on merit instead of resorting to baseless allegations and an “appeal to authority”.

    I frankly have reserved my own opinion about bacha khan etc but needless to say my articles were specifically targetted by the ANP regime and to me there is not a single progressive bone in that party.

    However I purposely have refrained from giving my own view on the matter and have relied on primary sources alone.

  3. YLH Canada Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Ps. All the issues raised by ali about electorate are also untenable simply because there was no change in electorate from 1946 elections and the referendum. So if you are going to question the electorate then you ought to also question KK victory.

    Secondly the referendum was agreed upon by the Congress and Dr. Khan sahib ministry. It was only at the eleventh hour that they raised the issue of the “third option” ie afghanistan or pustunistan at the prodding of the Afghan government after (and even the Congress leadership in Delhi was aware of it) they realized the League was going to win the referendum.

    There was nothing ethical, noble or progressive about the actions of the KK and its leaders and no amount of distortion of history can change that.

  4. Harris Azhar Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Well written sir,its always been a source for our knowledge.
    Those who dont learnt from the History are the culprits of repeating it!

  5. aliaqram Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Waaaw…..good piece of work from Rumi…..
    As for as YLH has said,
    “However I purposely have refrained from giving my own view on the matter and have relied on primary sources alone.” is a cruel Joke….When someone put a specific issue and get refrences from all that sources having a particular opinion of history and then insist of being unbias….amazing
    But if someone wanna show the other aspect he is blamed of “rhetoric and undue emotionalism” and
    “baseless allegations and an “appeal to authority”.

  6. Raza Rumi Philippines Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Thanks for the comment
    Let me clarify that the article has been written by Shaheryar Ali and not Raza Rumi..

    cheers
    Raza

  7. aliaqram Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Well thats great Shahreyar Ali……Thanks for pointing to my mistake Rumi

  8. sherryx Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    With all due respect i fail to understand the response of my learned friend. “The primary sources”, this is what i intended to show by referring to Howard Zinn and Edward Said.
    Knowledge and History, their foundations have been examined by philosophers during past 50 years and have shown a bias in technique of knowledge itself.
    What is meant by original sources, memoir of Colonial masters, their stooges and elitists institutions. or does it include the trade unions, the discourse of ordinary people, the perspective of the progressive parties?the resistance poetry, the papers of revolutionaries?
    Dr Mubarak Ali has recently written on this historical farce.
    The scholarship that has emerged on the imperialism their policies in third world, how can these be ignored in writing history of a region which is main focus of imperialism for 100 years.
    Noam Chomsky, Edward Said and Eqbal Ahmad have developed a very coherent theory regarding age of empire.
    How empire forwarded its interest in NWFP, how does it intervene, how did it manipulated ? this question cant be understood till one looks at the other side, the inhibited discourse.

    Historians job is not “calculation of data” alone, his main role is how to analyze such data, he can either do it like Kissinger or like Zinn, Like Safdar Mehmood or like Mubarak Ali.
    The other side can say what ever they want to but we will keep on pointing that 4 million Pakhtoons are dead , and they were never given a say in their destiny .

  9. sherryx Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    My friend is a lawyers, i dont claim expertise in Law, but arnt these issues of jurisdiction.
    The electorate of 46 election was for the defined terrotry, but we are talking bout a referendem that was for self determination

    Will my learned friend accept a referendum on Kashmir that does not include , Jammu, Ladakh, Gilgat and Aksai Chin??

    Those regions which were not allowed to vote, under what legal authority are they under Pakistan now??

    I do accept charges of emotionality and rhetoric especially since Quine has demonstrated that the foundations of science and Myths is similar, but what objectivity and rigour is this where opinion of the most popular represntative is not even mentioned , even for refutation?
    All the progressive bones may have migrated to Jamate Islami, EX servicemen and Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan but unfortunately, history keeps on haunting——-

  10. sherryx Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Thanks Ali Aqram , Hunnainsaani, Harris and Raza
    Thanks YLH for taking time to read and respond
    SA

  11. Hunainsaani United States Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    American think tanks have issued a new map drawn new boundries of south asia and gulf……and good news is for those who think that in Pakistan only that viewpoint is accepted,which is approved by Punjab….baaqi sab..sindhu desh,greater balouchistan,jinaahpur and Pakhtunistan…
    Good news…is for those..who think Pakistan is just Punjab…In the new drawn map Pakistan is consisting the same boundries as of Punjab….Allah bachay us waqt sey…God Bless Pakistan

  12. Moin Ansari United States Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    I found the discussion interesting. Yassar Latif Hamdani’s (YLH) article is scholarly, well researched and has quotes from the right players. His thesis is well founded and makes sense, especially because he discusses Punjab and Bengal and brings out the facts about Gandhi’s Patahnistan.

    Shaheryar Ali response “History is Not a Farce: The NWFP Referendum” based solely upon Wali Khan’s diatribe is just 8th grade rhetoric which regurgirates the emotionalism that comes from defeated leaders.

    The Subcontinent was being given independence under the “1947 Indian Act of Independence”. The status of more than 570 states was to be decided. Each state was given only two choices–India or Pakistan. Bengal was not given a thrid choice, neither was Assam, nor Hydrabad, nor Junagarh….the list is 570 long…and available on http://www.rupeenews.com

    The states were not given a third choice becuase this would have led to 570 states–obviously none of the princes really wanted to give up their authority to New Delhi or Karachi.

    If The Duran Line was not valid, then the answer is simple…all of today’s Afghanistan is part of Paksitan…or if it helps the ego of Kabul..then all of Paksitan belongs to Afghanistan. According to Gauhar Ayub, this Pakistani-Afghanistan union was not only proposed but also accepted by King Zahir Shah and Liaqat Ali Khan. According to Gauhar Ayub this union was in advanced stages with Zahir Shah as the titual king of the new state. The assassination of Liaqat Ali Khan (some say he was assassinated for the crime of trying for a Pakistan-Afghan union) and other events took over and the union never actually happened.

    YLH elequently quotes the crux of the problem in the following paragraph:

    “The External Affairs department itself denied Afghan claim in its letter to Earl of Listowel dated 30th June 1947 when it declared that all Afghan arguments were equally applicable on an Indian claim on Afghan territory and that such arguments would only lead to “reductio ad absurdum“. It went on to say: “The fact that what is now India is soon to be succeeded by two sovereign Federal states cannot affect the strategic importance of the territory in question… A small independent state like the North West Frontier Province cannot (possibly) safeguard its own security and therefore must be a source of weakness to India. It can legitimately claim to exercise the fullest autonomy within the framework of one of the two Federal Dominions which will replace the present Government of India. This measure of self determination the plan of 3rd June does not exclude.” (L/P&S/12/1811, cited in Jinnah Papers Volume III, Annex IV.8 Page 866, alternative citation No.431, Transfer of Power Papers, Volume XI, Page 799)”

    There is nothing more to be said. QED

    The more the enemies of Pakistan and Afghanistan talk about partitioning Pakistan or partitioning Afghanistan the movement towards the inevitable union between Pakistan and Afghanistan gains momentum

    http://rupeenews.com/2007/12/29/it-is-time-to-erase-the-duran-line-pakistan-manzil-nahin-nishan-e-manzil-hai/

    …more on this after I dig out my book “The Pathans”

    http://rupeenews.com/2007/11/27/the-pathans-the-western-pathans-the-abdalis-durranis-the-ghaljis/

    Moin Ansari
    Editor Rupee News
    http://www.rupeenews.com

  13. Aliarqam Norway Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    I have studied Mr. Ansari’s articles…on rupeenews….his Own view of pathans…himself is based on Sir Olef Caroe’s book..The Pathans….and he belongs from the mentality of those…who edit JOKES ON SARDARS…..And replace SARDAR by PATHAN….And laugh on it….I dont understand if speaking a particular language is a problem then the same formula should be applied to Sardars…panjabi speakers…or if it belongs to religion then Pathan’s are known to be the most firm believers….

  14. null France Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Sometimes I wonder if is progressivism is code word for being a ‘soviet’ satellite the ‘socialist and anti -imperialist’ utopia !!!

  15. sherryx Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    8th grade emotionality lol . what a height of elequance.
    Third rate copying of colonial discourse, Mr editor, i rather pitty your reading and editing skills, in your rather petty defence of the honourable writer, you failed to read the article , it quotes only Wali Khan because the article says in the begining that
    “It gives the opinion of Khuadi Khidmatgar Tehreek”. because their opinion has been ignored.
    At least stick to the standard practices of academic writing, when invoking reason as defense, and condemning “emotionality” and “rhetoric”, one must not utilize the condemned techniques, the 8th grade emotionality, and height of elequance are not very objective, un emotional and non rhetorical phrases

    Cheers
    Shaheryar Ali

  16. sherryx Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Ah Mr Null, thanks for dropping by, this utopia is better than delusions created by opium of the masses lol

  17. Aliarqam Norway Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Null is Wondered…haaah
    NO now the flag of Progressivism is raised by the ones having American satellites and the men of imperialist Shenshah Aala hazrat G W Bush….
    Progressivism is as said by sherry…all migrated towards jamate islami…ex-servicemen and and Aitizaz Ahsan(recently had a successful trip of America)

  18. kafir Canada Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    I am not going to respond here. Part 3 of my series is coming up and will show that history is indeed not a farce as wali khan tried to make it.

  19. sherryx Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    thi khaber germ ke ghalib ke uren ge purze
    dekhne hum bhi gaye pur wu tamasha na hua

  20. aisha-sarwari Canada Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Somebody point out that that khan brothers were continously acting cahoots with the Afghan govt. and with the faqir of ipi. Bacha Khan and his brother had the frontier congress pass the pathanistan resolution. How can we accept Wali Khan’s assertions?

    And also the franchise argument is weak: it was this franchise that elected Dr. Khan sb. In the first place.

  21. YLH Canada Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Since we are quoting Howard Zinn on biased sources etc etc here is a quote from Juma Khan Sufi (editor of facts are sacred in pushto and a comrade of Bacha Khan and Wali Khan) about Wali Khan’s history:

    “Wali Khan has made these allegations in press and in his books. His is not real history. His history is directed to mislead the gullible followers…”

    Page 82- random thoughts published by khost independent cultural society.

    I recommend Juma Khan Sufi’s biography of Bacha Khan to everyone. Remember Juma was the guy who helped Bacha Khan write his biography. In so far as perspectives go his perspective is very important because it paints Bacha Khan in a way that is not too pleasing to the self designated progressives.

  22. null France Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    sherryx
    I doubt the dissidents in soviet gulags would have agreed to your assertion.
    Well atleast the deen will lead to a good outcome on the Day of Qiyamah as compared to loss both in this world and next while following communism. Compare “socialist”north korea and south korea which is one better ?
    The USSR was truly a prison of nations – it was yet another imperialist nation although it tried to cloak itself under the garb of “anti-imperialism”

  23. YLH Canada Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    I think there is no difference between the two ideological forms of imperialims : soviet or Islamist which is why in context of NWFP the “progressives” got along well with the islamists like Mufti Mahmood- another committed opponent of Pakistan and the Muslim League.

  24. Shaheryar Ali Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Well, i dont deny gulags or the oppression under Stalin, our view is based on criticism of Stalin and USSR from Left. we totally reject, the unilateral criticism and distinction between the “iron curtain” and “free world”.
    As Noam Chomsky has written, we dont believe in legitimacy drawn from counting corpses, but if we count the corposes , free world has killed more people than communist. In a single night in Indonesia more than a million people, were murdered by USA backed General Suharto, and his islamist thugs.
    The free world killed millions in third world, in name of red scrare, whose expression in Pakistan we will demonstrate in our response to my friend’s article.
    i am down with flue these days, thats why not able to respond. we have noted the criticism and will respond in our article

    Cheers!

  25. YLH Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    This “our” and “we” business is a throwback to the feudal-tribal ANP mindset is it?

  26. Shaheryar Ali Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    This again shows my friend’s lack of understanding of the progressive parties in Pakistan. In all discourse on politics, i have never seen any one referring ANP or NAP as “feudal”.

    “we”, be cause i am not ego obsessed with “I”.

    Like “I” know all attitude of my learned friend

  27. YLH Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    They say little knowledge is dangerous… now we see practical application of it. ANP is not equal to the historical NAP.

    No one is referring to NAP as feudal. Though the Khan family hijacked the NAP it did include a lot of genuine left wing progressives. One of the founders of NAP was Mian Iftikharuddin- the left wing stalwart of the Pakistan movement. It also had Habib Jalib.

    ANP is merely a family affair and is feudal. Bacha Khan’s politics was extremely conservative and his family kept that up no matter what the pretences are. The “left wing” ANP was perfectly happy aligning itself with

    1. RIGHT WING PNA in 1977.

    2. RIGHT WING IJI in 1990

    3. RIGHT WING Nawaz League in 1997.

    So lets drop the mask shall we… and give up this fraud… Bacha Khan and his followers had as much to do with “progressive politics” as Jinnah had to do with Sunni Islam.

    As for “we”… so in other words you are talking about you and a group of your friends or are you referring to we the “progressives” … or are you referring to yourself?

  28. Majumdar India Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Yaar Yasser,

    ANP is merely a family affair and is feudal.

    Sounds pretty much like PPP, no?

    Regards

  29. YLH Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Yes… with one difference… PPP speaks for the federation.

  30. aliarqam Norway Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Dr Khan is replaced by Qayyum Khan….
    One who let the tribesmen in Kashmir…to conquer his own peoples…And bring their women to sell them….
    The tribesmen adventure has weakened our case for Kashmir…Which was on the way of political solution…Their invasion has given an opportunity to Maha Raja Kashmir…to ask for the help to India…Who was ready to come to Kashmir…

  31. YLH Pakistan Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    Read Maulana Azad’s “India Wins Freedom”. He says very clearly that the referendum was fair, that the Khans had lost popularity … and that the Khans had raised the independent Pakhtoonistan issue because that was the only way they could have remained in power.

  32. Zarak Canada Unknow Browser Unknow Os says:

    My dear friend Yahya Hamadani Sahib, things have gone far beyond “Pakistan” now and Central-South Asia is on the verge of witnessing another transition in geopolitical order in which India would rise as regional hegemon under US patronage.

    Your obcession with Pashtun-ANP seems to be an intellectually degenerative influence from official Pakistani history called “Mutalia Pakistan”…

    Wake up now to new realities and stop repeating the motor/muslim league style old mantra, which brought Pakistan to this phase that it is now slowly going down the drain as common with all colonial-artificial constructions.

  33. Dear Friends
    I am so happy atleast people have started listning to us (Pukhtoons), otherwise history says if u discuss disagreement we are ‘Ghadars’, is it still a secret for all these learned friends that the so called Islam Zindabad Started in 1940 from Lahore to date has killed millions of Pukhtoons with thier identity, culture, family, education, political will, killings and the gift of extremism, poverty and so on. Is it possible to deny the facts of great game played on this peice of earth? if they agree, and I hope they do so as one cannot deny even if wants to because his/her Status would not allow to, than how can the creation of Pakistan could be an isolated case.
    I am not arguing for reversal of History but can we agree on two of the one options
    if Pakistan is an Islamic COuntry based on Muslim League Ideology
    why not to distribute the population and geograpy in a way to eliminate the feeling of Punjabiet giving rights of access to government equally
    lets divide pakistan into 16 Provinces each with thier own administrative and geographic conveniances (No Punjabi, Seriaki or Pukhtoon).
    or if Punjab, is recognized than must recognize Pukhtoons as well as other nationalities and by recognition i mean give them right on thier resources. opt between two if we are nationalities, we must have rights on our soils, a confideration could lead us towards that
    if we are one nation (the joke of the Century) than we must reconsider the administrative divisions.
    the last word
    Wheat a product of soil through same ‘farmar’, is a provincial subject for taxation.
    Tobacco a product of soil through same ‘farmar’, is a federal subject for taxation
    to forget about gas and electricity or water resources.
    is there any answar to this?
    go for books and articles and search new evidence to prove ur legitimacy
    but to say simply taking Muhammad Ali Jinnah to deal with Bacha Khan is if to prove Chaudry Shujat Hussain against Chief Justice Iftikhar Choudry although the farmer was leader of a majority government that completed its 5 years of government for the first time in history of Pakistan. U can prove him better through various documents but cannot be convinced ur self with that.
    Pukhtoonkhwa tal owse, Che Dushman tal oswe

  34. I think khudai khadmadger lost his support when he brought Mahatma Ghandi to bunnu for the campain that was the reason the pashtoon nation turned against Bacha Khan

  35. [...] Originally Posted by AgNoStIc MuSliM That's completely speculative, and the plebiscite is to show the sentiments of Kashmiris, not Kashmiris from 1948-49, I fail to see where you derive that particular interpretation from. The Kashmir dispute has not ceased to be a dispute since then, and the principle behind resolving the dispute remains the same – allow the Kashmiris to decide. And only a handful of locals needed to *** out the infiltrators, that too is not indicative of whether most Kashmiris would have chosen Pakistan or not. KAGK was tremendously popular in NWFP, and he was pro-becoming a part of the Indian Union, yet despite his boycott, over 50% of the electorate showed up at the polls, and 95-98% voted for Pakistan. AM, The dispute hasn't ceased to be a dispute because apparently no plebescite was held. As I have emntioned before, even if it is in India's favor, can we seriously think that Pakistan and China will give up their parts of J&K? What about those people from Mirpur who will always be hostile to India even though in the minority. Should they be forced to join Indian Union against their will? That applies in reverse as well. If anyone seriously thinks about it. to solve the problem today – Plebiscite can't be the best option and that is particularly keeping Kashmiri interests in mind, even many Sepratists leaders realize this now. And I'm surprised you bring in NWFP, if you do some google searching and use the British govt. documents you will know the true picture. First of all there was already an elected representative Congress govt. in power. Then why the need for Plebescite, when the elected representatives were to decide this. No plebescite was conducted in any other province then why the partiality for NWFP? As for the vote count: Number of votes 5,72,799 Polled votes (51%) 2,92,118 For Pakistan (51.5%) 2,89,244 51.5% of the allowed Voters , Voted for Pakistan. Universal franchise was not there and only 8-10% voted. Moreover, Baccha Khan and Abdul Gaffar Khan ordered a boycott because the British and Nehru had already decided that NWFP will be part of Pakistan so what was the use except to create more bloodshed among their Pathan brothers. Hence following the path of non-violence he boycotted the polls although he did ask for an Independace option and was denied that. Is this the result of a referendum that sealed the fate of Millions of Pakhtoons? With the disenfranchisement, can it even be called a majority vote? Here is the first link I could find and looked like a Pakistani source, but if you search for cabinet mission plan documents you will find the same results History is Not a Farce: The NWFP Referendum Pak Tea House [...]

  36. Anonymous United States Netscape Navigator Unknow Os says:

    [...] the referendum. Jinnah also dismissed elected government of Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan. Read this:- History is Not a Farce: The NWFP Referendum | Pak Tea House Reply With Quote + Reply to [...]

Leave a Reply

*


8 − = five

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>