Pak Tea House » Politics » Break Up To Keep Together!
Break Up To Keep Together!
By Behzad Taimur:
The 72nd anniversary of passage of the historic Lahore Resolution of 1940, which is widely credited with formalization of the idea of a “Pakistan”, as a separate state for Muslims of the Indian subcontinent, passed recently, and one must draw attention to its relevance today.
Contrary to popular belief, the Lahore Resolution proposed formation of not one but several states for the Muslims, saying: “That the areas in which the Muslims are numerically in 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.”
Today, when calls for more provinces are growing louder, it should be of pertinence to us to note that our founding fathers had proposed a number of states, and not a singular state entity. They understood that the Indian subcontinent was a land of divided, localized sovereignties.
For thousands of years, the concept of a territorial state did not exist in the subcontinent, and the central state ruled through a system of patronage. The center established a system of patronage of regional power structures, which would then, in turn, afford patronage to the traditional – and tribal – structures such as panchayats and jirgas, which would deal with local-level power brokers, such as the village Maliks or Sardars. The central state, then, never had an overarching grass-roots-level reach, affording regional and local power structures extensive, internal autonomy from central rule.
It, thus, may be said that granting regional and local-level autonomy by devolving power to smaller, more localized federating units would be closer to the nature of the peoples of this land, and their historical tradition.
Our own history bears testament to the autonomy-oriented aspirations of the people. The Bengalis of East Pakistan struggled for autonomy for quarter of a century, before splintering off and forming an entirely separate country. The Balochis, similarly, have for long fought for autonomy in a string of insurgencies, the latest of which is still ongoing. Other ethnic groups such as the Pakhtuns and the Sindhis have been calling for autonomy for themselves, as well.
Today, smaller ethnic groups such as Seraikis and Hazarwals are increasingly exerting their identity demanding that they be allowed to form their separate provinces, with autonomy from the center, and freedom from dominance of larger ethnic groups – the Punjabis and Pakhtuns, respectively – which they view as exercising undermining influence, and preventing adequate exertion, promotion and blooming of their cultural identities.
The lack of regional and local-level autonomy has heightened the sense of alienation and disempowerment felt by various ethnic groups of Pakistan, amplifying manifold their feeling of exploitation and deprivation, leading to disenchantment with the federation of Pakistan. This general disillusionment and dissatisfaction felt by several ethnicities has reached a point where calls for a cessation from Pakistan are gaining unprecedented steam, and the reluctance of the central state to give autonomy has only served to strengthen cessationist elements, and driving an increasing number of people to their folds, thereby severely straining the federation.
The present times, then, demand that something substantial be done about the sorry state of affairs. One recommends that the central state go back “to the roots” and heed what our founding fathers understood, foresaw and indicated in such foundational documents of Pakistan as the Lahore Resolution of 1940, make a clear break from its six-decade-old policy of highly centralized rule, and only limited provincial and regional autonomy.
The state must now swiftly break the unreasonably large provinces which compartmentalize a smaller ethnic group with a larger, thereby allowing for dominance of one group and, for the lack of a better term, subordination for the other, and create smaller provinces which should enjoy total autonomy, as espoused by not only our constitution, but also the very concept of a federation.
The Pakistani federation in its present state is, in any case, far too cumbersome to allow good governance, since people live hundreds of kilometers away from centers of power, which contributes to a growing sense of alienation, and the distance between the political leadership in distant provincial centers is enhancing a disconnect between the rulers and the ruled. Resentment in the masses is, therefore, growing at an unprecedented pace, straining the fabric of Pakistani federation.
The state must break up the present large and unmanageable provinces into smaller ones, thereby assuaging the concerns of smaller ethnicities, and preserving the federation of Pakistan, before one or another of the embittered ethnic groups manages to have its way – and chances of staying together are lost once and for all.”
Filed under: Politics · Tags: ethnic, Pakistan, provinces, state
30 Responses to "Break Up To Keep Together!"
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
- AHMAD KHAN
said @PMA thanks for comment and critical review - Rashid
said @Sunny
Sunny bhai, why you are always so upset wit... - PMA
said Ahmed Khan: What is “Cold Start Doctrine?... - Rashid said @Sunny
Sunny bhai, can we meet at the parking lot...
- Rashid said @Sunny
You can never defeat Muslims, no matter how...
- sunny
said To praise islam in front of muslims means to push... - sunny said criteria of fascism
…
what are the criteria...
- sunny said to M Ali Khan
…
My conclusions about islam a...
- L’Ambiance Resort Bodrum
said Hi there, simply turned into aware of your weblog... - sunny said to jamal
……
You asked 3 questions. Tha...
You sound like Imran Khan, although wiser. Much wiser.
a well written piece.. it offers different perspective on the new provinces issues.. different from the usual discourse that goes on the issue..
feel educated.
kudos to the blog for posting such illuminating articles which spur such good debate..!
perspective given in interesting
never seen before
the proof we need greater provinces gorwing day by day
Interesting, I like the tone and the approach towards the agenda. Nice in all.
Beautiful piece. Really appreciate !
Interesting approach towards the issue…Keep it up,man!!
A very well written and an excellent piece of history described in the article.
Approaching!! Keep up the good word…
a very well written piece covered all the aspects .. a different approach indeed
Urdu has failed to unite Pakistan. Arabic or Persian could be a better solution to unite all pakIstanis. All the local languages like punjabi, Sindhi, balochis, Pashto should be banned. Revert back to allah’s language.
to milestogo
Allah’s language is (of) violence, intimidations, briberies, totalitarianism, hegemony of arabs and fascism. Pakistan is speaking only that langauge. Is it uniting them? As far as bloodbaths and lies are concerned – it is indeed uniting them to “do more of it”.
supreme indeed!
We need writers like you Behzad
Sys error 1934
@ Milestogo
//…Urdu has failed to unite Pakistan. Arabic or Persian could be a better solution to unite all pakIstanis. All the local languages like punjabi, Sindhi, balochis, Pashto should be banned. Revert back to allah’s language…//
Even “Islam” failed in uniting Pakistan. East Pakistan, which was more than half of Pakistan, inspite of being Muslim-majority, also left Pakistan and went their way. The one thing we have not tried is “Secularism”. I think “Secularism” will eventually unite Pakistan.
Secularism will conflict with Islam.
@Milestogo says:
April 16, 2012 at 4:43 pm
“…..Arabic or Persian could be a better solution….. local languages like punjabi, Sindhi, balochis, Pashto should be banned. Revert back to allah’s language.”
Milestogo, you still have milestogo before you have reached human civilization. May be you should by driving a car instead of riding a camel!
Fawad
Please don’t insult camel. Camel was prophet’s (pbuh) mode of transport. One should strive to follow sun ah.
Better solution is for Pakistani Sunnis to move to their ancestral desert land of Arabia. No language issue, no dogmatic issue and above all no water issue with indians. This one single move by Pakistani Sunnis will not only help estabslih peace all over the world and but also make Paki rich with Petro Dollars. This is plus plus for both in material and religious terms. The present Arabs are actually Jews masquerading as Muslims.Its time to wear the black turban and do Hijrat to Arabia from Pakistan and bring pure Islam there and earn the reward of junnat and avoid hellfire.
well done……just small disagreement on first paragraph…ie historical perspective.Over the centuries India was a region of hundreds of small states…fighting with each other for gains or for “choudhrahat”.Central asians like Huns,Mongols etc formed empires through force and brutality.Last was the British empire.Those centuries old tendencies,however, still exist,despite empiree….So better to follow those.
A sedentary peaceful people are attacked by invaders/marauders who are specialized in killing, looting, raping, setting up dictatorships, making quislings etc. This worked especially in olden days when means of communication were few and primitive. A band specialized in killing, looting and raping came down from the mountains or deserts and established empires of rape and fascism. That is the “bravery, divinity, success and golden promise” of islam. And muslim/pakistani children are taught to glorify these loots, rapes etc. even today as divine orders and blessings and “establishing of prayers”. If Pakistan has to be kept together then the looters and rapists must have the dominant position. That is the “logic” in the situation.
@ Miletogo (April 16, 2012 at 8:55 pm)
//…Secularism will conflict with Islam…//
Actually, Islam advocates a “Secular State”. The Quran teaches: “There is no compulsion in matters of Religion” [2:256]. Only a perfectly secular state can guarantee “zero” compulsion in matters of Religion and this is exactly what the Quran teaches. Hence, Secularism is perfectly compatible with Islam.
Dark Night,
There is no such word called Secularism in our dictionary.
Dark Knight
As they say not what it claims, say or advocate. It is all about what it does. True measures of honety, spirituality, intellectual maturity is in practice and not in declaration.
Somehow Islam is able to convince the non-muslims to convert to Islam. So secularism is irrelevant. Sooner or later we will all be Muslims. Sooner the better…
Great piece of writing.
Dark Knight and Miles
More islam means more fascism and backwardness and rule by arrogant ignorant ruthless guys.
Kuran says that there is no compulsion in religion – but it does not analyse what those words “compulsion” and “religion” mean.
Islam/kuran contains many compulsions and manipulations – some very subtle. Muslims have been so indoctrinated that they think kuranic declarations are truths.
Really very impressive! It is a logically organized & a well written quality article. You have made your points with unique thoughts & content.Set the course for the rest of us.Keep it up!!
keep up the good work
It is no doubt a very good and thought provoking article. But what you say is not all. The problem has more than one facets, you dealt with only one. We already had bifurcations in 1947 and 1971, first on religious and then liguistic-cum cultural-cum administrative reasons. Both times large scale migrations and massacres. Solution you suggest is based on race and language. It may lead to one racial/linguist group in control, others feeling deprived and insecure–result —mass migration to safer places and murders in the process. Would it not be saner to create provinces/small units as many as desirable purely on administrative basis so there is no grouse, no shout of discrimination.
Lets study Afghanistan model.
EHSAN