Articles Comments

Pak Tea House » Uncategorized » Two Nation Theory and Creation of Bangladesh

Two Nation Theory and Creation of Bangladesh

Raza Habib RajaThis article is not a “defense” or repudiation of the two nation theory (TNT). Rather it tries to critically evaluate the argument that creation of Bangladesh in fact proved that the two nation theory was not valid. Those who claim that the two nation theory has proven to be a failure cite creation of Bangladesh as an example. It is claimed that ethnic nationalism trumped religion and therefore the two nation theory has proven to be a failure. I do not intend to prove that the two nation theory is wrong or right but just evaluate it with reference to creation of Bangladesh.

Frankly speaking I am not a history expert and do not claim any command on minute details of partition and its various narratives. However, as a student of political thought and comparative politics, I have often been fascinated by the two nation theory. Now for someone who calls himself a “Pakistani Indian”, it may appear that I will be a staunch opponent of the “two nation” theory. The way, it is often interpreted is that Hindus and Muslims are two distinct nations who would have found it impossible to live together and therefore Muslims who were the minority at that time would need a separate politically autonomous state. I do oppose this version and I think that it is highly debatable. If being a Muslim is the criteria of a separate state then why stop at India? Why not also include all the Muslims of the world and merge them into one nation state?

We know such a thing is not possible and is in fact laughable. The two nation theory would start making sense if only we understand the fleeting concept of identity. We are not just Muslims, but are also have ethno linguistic identities which at times may be competing with each other and at times complimenting each other. Everything revolves around a complex phenomenon known as identity and in politics that is often the most important factor in mobilization. Identity itself may be constructed or at times may simply be something you are born with. Moreover, identity may be dormant and can become active. It is when an identity becomes active, political expression follows.

How a particular identity becomes active often depends on the perceived benefits as well as drawbacks associated with it. It also becomes active, if there is a perception that you are being victimized on the basis of that particular identity. Once an identity is activated, it can form various political expressions which range from political mobilization to demand greater rights to outright demand s for a separate nation state. What determines the exact form of political expression depends on many things. For example gender identity can form a political expression but it is not possible ( at least has not happened ever) for women to demand a separate country! Demand for equal pay and improved civil rights are expressed largely through civil society and do not aim to change the geographical and administrative structure of a particular country.

On the other hand ethnic identity can form various political expressions ranging from formation of political parties on ethnic lines to demands for a separate state. Ethnic nationalists can demand a separate state particularly when an ethnicity views that it is possible to secede and the secession will lead to better standard of living and greater rights. The demand for a separate nation state is also hugely dependent on actual geographical dispersion of the population belonging to that ethnicity. If there are geographical concentrations then the demand for secession is more likely compared to a situation where the ethnicity is evenly dispersed all over the country.

Religion like ethnicity is an identity though compared to ethnic identity is less “rigid”. It is generally said that religion is merely set of believes, but at least in political literature, it has always been considered much more than that. In fact, some have gone to the extent of calling religion of birth as a form of ethnic identity. Yes theoretically speaking it could be changed, but religious identity is a powerful identity particularly in circumstances where discrimination or perceived discrimination is conducted on religious lines.

Put simply religion can also be an effective political identity provided certain conditions are there. And like other identities, it can form a political expression of demanding a separate state.

Demand for Pakistan ( whether we consider it as an actual demand or as bargaining ploy by Jinnah) was a consequence of an activated political identity. There were incidences which activated the Muslim identity and Congress is equally responsible for that as much as the Muslim elites.

Like ethnicity, religion can be a politically potent factor leading to possible demands of a nation state. In Pakistan’s case Muslims were also concentrated in two geographical zones (present day Pakistan and Bangladesh). While a substantial number was also dispersed all over the country there is no denying of the fact that areas forming West Pakistan ( Present day Pakistan) and East Pakistan (Bangladesh) were Muslim majority areas.

It is true that ethnic identity on its own is often a stronger motivating factor though at the time of independence there were no mass movements demanding independence on ethnic lines. In fact if demand for a nation state is only justified on ethnic lines then India itself should have been divided into many parts as there are so many languages spoken there.

Moreover, the term “partition” is misleading because India has rarely been politically a single unit. Throughout its history, there was just a loose geographical continuity which has always enabled this land to be called India. Within this geographical unit, there have been various political configurations. The right question is not whether there should have been a “partition” but rather whether the areas coming under present day Pakistan and Bangladesh should have joined Indian federation ( as visualized by Congress) or not.

So there were in reality various identities emerging out of Indian subcontinent. There was a broader Indian identity, religious identities, and ethnic linguistic identities. In other words there have always been nations within a nation. And then there is a concept of hybrid identity. It is not important for many to be just Muslims but rather they want their religious freedom as well as their ethnic and cultural independence. So I may be Muslim but at the same time I would prefer that my Punjabi cultural freedom is also safeguarded.

When Bengali and Sindhi Muslims voted for Pakistan (after all let’s not forget that these two provinces clearly voted for Pakistan), the idea was not merely preservation of their religious freedom but a combination of both religious as well ethnic/cultural freedoms. Thus when Bengali Muslims (who were also geographically concentrated) voted for creation of Pakistan, it was also for the preservation of their Bengali identity along with religious identity.

The choice was to join Indian federation or join Pakistan. Those who voted for Pakistan joined Pakistan with the view that perhaps their ethnic and cultural freedom would be better safeguarded in Pakistan rather than India.

The reason why Bangladesh came into being is less to do with fallacy of two nation theory but more with how actually West Pakistan treated East Pakistanis. It is not the idea itself but the way Pakistan tried to over centralize and negate Bengali culture and their ethnic identity. Pakistan superimposed Urdu over Bengali and adopted a policy of sustained repression. Bengalis seceded mainly because of the way we treated them. The discrimination activated the Bengali nationalism and led to secession. But once again it was the hybrid identity of both Islam and Bengali ethnicity which dictated the choice of independence rather than merger with India. What had earlier prompted them to opt for Pakistan, once again led them to become an independent state.

The two nation theory would have been discarded IF Bengalis had opted to join India in 1971 rather than opting for going independent.

Personally I think history is yet to give its verdict about the two nation theory. We cannot just say that just because Bangladesh came into being therefore it is wrong.

Written by

Filed under: Uncategorized · Tags: , , ,

559 Responses to "Two Nation Theory and Creation of Bangladesh"

  1. calculus United States Safari Mac OS says:

    1. Great Game is the reason Pakistan was created.
    2. Jinnah and his party were Loyalist party to the British.
    3. They didn’t lift a finger for independence.
    4. Pakistan spent 65 years trying to regain Red Fort.
    5. Jinnah never wanted East Pakistan. He just didn’t say no.
    6. Selling to the highest bidder. Whether it is US or KSA or China will
    not give Pakistan anything but continuation of the same.
    7. Whether you are friends with India (cultural friend) or Ferengis that
    your choice.
    8. India has moved on because First Gulf War destroyed India isolation.
    9. Fact India is doing better shouldn’t change any of your calculus whther
    you go alone or with your masters.
    10. Bangladesh relationship shows that you can’t get along with anyone but
    someone with money. That is why you are looking at India because MFN with China
    didn’t do anything for your economy.

  2. side question United States Safari Mac OS says:

    On Side Question.
    If the Prophet is final one.
    Why do Muslims keep taking about Return of Jesus.
    How will he not considered blasphemous.
    How will you recognize him.

  3. ss Qatar Google Chrome Windows says:

    “Moreover, the term “partition” is misleading because India has rarely been politically a single unit”

    India was nearly one political unit under Ashoka and Aurangzeb. It does not matter what was Indian political configuration historically what matters is that India was one political unit under British when Pakistan was created and hence it is perfectly ok call it a partition of British India.
    Fortunately for India partition has proved to be a blessing in disguise. United India would have proved to be a mess with one third muslim population. Sooner or later another Jinnah with separatist tendencies would have arrived on Indian Political scene and could have inflicted more damage then Quaid e Azam.
    Today most Indians would like to say thank you Quaid e Azam.

  4. akb Pakistan Safari Unknow Os says:

    @RHR

    ISRAEL,FOR example, was not created because of ethnicity. Pak too. Bangla desh erupted due to social injustice . Central Asia n Balkan states evolved due to religious reasons. Now ppl want self govt n seek independence within or without not only bcoz of religious differences but language n ethnicity as well. Hard to stop this trend……birds of a feather want to flock together..and humans are like birds with different plumage.

  5. Rex Minor Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    Let me give a good news to RHR! Partition is the right word for what occured in the sub-continent, two nation theory has remained a theory but instead three administrative areas have sprung up with three inepenent Govts. with three different militaries each responsible for their owned marked territories.
    A pakistan woman blogger writes in ET after learning about the saga of women gang rapes in India, which the Indian police do not register, on the orders of their political leaders that,” Thank God that my grand mother left India after partition” otherwise we would be also the rape victims”. End of quote.

    Being very close to Nehru and Gandhi family did Mr Jinnah know more about their culture than what todays generation is becoming aware of? India is last in G20 woman rights an behind Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

    Rex Minor

  6. Rex Minor Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    SS has a point,India partition has placed a blessing in disguise! For muslims, however, there is a challenge and a task to extricate themselves from the administration control of the Indian fundamental hindus! The clever PR moves of the congress to appoint muslims for specific posts which provide visiblity in the international arena is no longer going to work since the cat of gang rape culture has sprung out of the bag. The patch up repair work will not hold.

    Rex Minor

  7. Majumdar India Internet Explorer Windows says:

    Skeptical mian,
    .
    The creation and more importantly continued existence of BD as a separate nation validates rather than contradicts the TNT, as you have rightly argued. Had the TNT not been correct, BD wud have chosen merger with India or alternatively West Bengal cud have wanted to opt out of India and join BD. That neither happened more than ever justifies TNT.
    .
    Regards

  8. Truthful United Kingdom Google Chrome Windows says:

    “We cannot just say that just because Bangladesh came into being therefore it is wrong.” Of course it is not wrong. It is the other way round. Creation of Bangladesh proves TNT. It is a timeless theory as Pakistan itself has been proving it. Bangladesh was created as the 2nd nation in 1971. Next in 1974 the TNT was applied to create a new nation of Ahmadis. Having completed this job, now the TNT is being applied to found a new nation of Shias. Once this is completed, a new group viz. nation will be found to ensure the validity of TNT. So the author need not be defensive. TNT is still strong and valid in Pakistan and nothing will ever change that as more and more nations, who cannot live with each other, will sought to be created in Pakistan.

  9. Rex Minor Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    It will take time, years, decades and perhaps centures at least more than two for the people of the sub-continent to change their psyche and think in terms of common values, cultures and not always of territories, geographical divide. Soviet Union broke into many independent countries and European Union was formed from 27 separate countries into ONE, Scotland, Northen Irel and probably Wales will leave the British Union and are destined to join the European Union, not to mention the catlonians and Basques leaving Spain but remaining a part of The European family. Nothing stays static, never has over time.

    What belongs to one another grows together. we have a saying that trees do not grow in the Sky.

    Rex Minor

  10. Ppaktea United States Safari Mac OS says:

    RHR,

    The entire approach of attempting to justify the TNT based on subsequent events is flawed. The validity of otherwise of the two-nation theory needs to be judged based on the validity or otherwise of the principles that underlie it, not on events that subsequently happened in India or Pakistan. Events that subsequently happened were profoundly influenced by the fait accompli that partition presented, and there has been significant divergence in their paths since then as well. East Bengal had diverged from West Bengal to a sufficient enough degree that the fact that it would be a different country was inevitable. The option of merging with India was not on the table. Even as the Pakistani army was surrendering, the declaration was made by India that the objectives of the war had been achieved and that after orderly transition of power, the Indian army would leave the country fully. There was no desire on the part of the Government of India, or indeed any widespread sentiment amongst the Indian masses either to have East Bengal merge with India. Thus, the fact that Bangladesh became an independent country in 1971 was no proof that the two nation theory was valid. It was an inevitable outcome – the people of Bangladesh desired it, but so did the people of India.

    The claim that is sometimes made by some that the liberation of Bangladesh negated the two nation theory has some basis not on the fact that Bangladesh seceded from Pakistan, but on the fact that the liberation movement was overwhelmingly based on secular, liberal principles. That Bangladesh went on to enact its Constitution on lines similar to that of India, and with little derived from the Objectives Principles that the Pakistan Constituent Assembly adopted very early in that country’s existence. Thus, Bangladesh, at least for some time after it was liberated (and perhaps again now in light of some recent decisions of the Bangladesh Supreme Court) did, through its adoption of secularism as the guiding principle of its polity, negate the principles that underlie the two nation theory. It put a lie to Jinnah’s claim in the speech that outlined the two nation theory clearly and laid the foundation for Pakistan. I quote

    “It is extremely difficult to appreciate why our Hindu friends fail to understand the real nature of Islam and Hinduism. They are not religions in the strict sense of the word, but are, in fact, different and distinct social orders; and it is a dream that the Hindus and Muslims can ever evolve a common nationality; and this misconception of one Indian nation has gone far beyond the limits and is the cause of more of our troubles and will lead India to destruction if we fail to revise our notions in time. The Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs, and literature[s]. They neither intermarry nor interdine together, and indeed they belong to two different civilisations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspects [=perspectives?] on life, and of life, are different. It is quite clear that Hindus and Mussalmans derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, their heroes are different, and different episode[s]. Very often the hero of one is a foe of the other, and likewise their victories and defeats overlap. To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent, and final. destruction of any fabric that may be so built up for the government of such a state.”

    Note that Jinnah was not pointing to multiple identities that compete with each other. He was not pointing out that Hindus and Muslims could come together in nation formation even as they asserted their own unique identities. He was not even saying that they had not yet evolved to that stage. He said that it was “a dream that Hindus and Muslims can ever evolve a common nationality”. His statement was for all time to come.

    Bangladesh showed this to be the lie that it was and will always remain.

  11. RHR United States Google Chrome Windows says:

    @Ppaktea

    I love your extremely brilliant response..

    It is comments like this which made PTH a brilliant website ( sadly the trolls have ruined it)…

    Brother..

    Since you have so brilliantly said it ( and it seems that you are one of the brilliant commentators ( may be someone who comments with a different nick otherwise wink wink ..and I am forced to answer..

    Ok What makes you think that I “like” TNT..

    My mere argument was that creation of Bangladesh is not enough to discard it.

    You say that Hindus and Muslims have different heroes..ethics…

    Well…does it surprise you that conditions in late 1930s brought those so called “differences” into prominence..

    Identity….and it is a fleeting concept not a static concept..

    The whole article was not a “justification” of TNT…..but trying to throw light that nations, identities are not “permanent” but acquire shapes and political expression in changing circumstances..

    TNT…no matter what Jinnah said for political mileage was the result of an activated identity..

    For some one who calls himself a Pakistani India, defense of TNT as an all time universal truth is not possible..

    No that was never my intention…

    But creation of Bangladesh at least does not discard it.

    Ok…I may not like TNT..ok may be if I was living in 1947, I would have been behind Azad rather than Jinnah…

    But to throw TNT outside window, you need a better evidence than creation of Bangladesh..

    The question is nit what was “in cards” when the war broke out..

    The question is that today or even when West Pakistan was raping East Pakistan, was there ever a public demand to merge with India….

    Regards

    Raza

  12. Ppaktea United States Safari Mac OS says:

    By the way, I do not disagree with you about the reasons for the formation of Bangladesh. It was mistreatment that led to the formation of Bangladesh, not a disagreement about the two nation theory. Any consequences of the Bangladesh liberation movement on the validity of the two nation theory are incidental.

  13. RHR United States Google Chrome Windows says:

    And yes..

    I never tried to “justify” TNT..
    Merely tried to say that creation of Bangladesh is not enough because ironically both TNT and Bangladeshi nationalism of 1950s and 1960s are a case of activated identities…

    For that matter “Indian” identity from 1860s to 1947, itself was an identity formed by circumstances..and the development of a concept known as “nation state”

    With best regards

    Raza

  14. Ppaktea United States Safari Mac OS says:

    RHR,

    There was no widespread public demand by East Bengalis to merge with India. But my point is that this is not relevant. The two nation theory would not be valid even if India (i.e. post partition India) were to split, as long as such a hypothetical split led to countries that continued to believe that diverse people can live together and forge a common nationality. The basis of the two nation theory was that diversity on religious grounds made such a forging of a common nationality impossible – not now not ever. That was the gist of the two nation theory.

    Just like you, I am not making a case for or against the two nation theory. All I am saying is that you are destroying a straw man argument. The claims that are made (and BTW, I am not making them) about 1971 proving the TNT wrong are not based on the argument that “ethnicity trumps religion” as you have assumed the basis to be. They are based on the fact that liberation movement for Bangladesh espoused the principle that diverse people belonging to different faiths can forge a common national identity.

  15. RHR United States Internet Explorer Windows says:

    I am not desroying a “strawman” argument..Bangladesh is actively stated as a case..

    For me identities are fleeting and keep on relgating and coming into prominence as the circumstances change..

    Lets not forget there was also a movement in 1980s of Khalistan ( yeah we may just blame ISI)..

    Identities becomne activated and can assume various political forms..

    You have to discard TNT…Ok I am with you..but Bangladesh’s creation…sorry..give me a better argument..

  16. Rex Minor Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    Ppaktea,

    Excellent piece, Very well said.

    Rex Minor

  17. Ppaktea United States Safari Mac OS says:

    Raza sb,

    I am not making the claim that Bangladesh negates TNT. What I am saying is that the basis of the claim (by those who made it) is not that the Bengali ethnic identity came to the fore and trumped the Islamic identity. It is that the founding principle of Bangladesh was secularism (and the country’s Supreme Court has once again held it to be the case). So if you wish to make the argument that the claim is not supported by the facts, argue against the claim as it was made. Not a misunderstood version of it.

  18. RHR United States Internet Explorer Windows says:

    First of all this article was not written in response of what you think but what is a common perception.
    Second, since when did supreme court of any country become the true “reflection” of what common people think..

    Secularism..ask taslima nasreen…wink wink

    There are many who cite that since ethnic identity trumped the religious identity therefore TNT is discarded..

    Now this article was a specific response to THOSE who think like that…

    But since you decided to comment..therefore I am answering..

    What makes you think that article was written in response to your perception????

    No it was written in response to a common perception ( which you do not share) in Pakistan..

  19. Ajit Canada Safari Unknow Os says:

    @RHR and ppakteÀ

    As long as there are such brilliant exchanges, this website will survive!

    BrillÍant arguments from two brilliant minds on a mind blowing topic.

    I hope people like Kaal, No Çommunal, Hayyer, VÀjra, YLH etc also chip in

  20. Ajit Canada Safari Unknow Os says:

    And also romain, fÍnglofin, raj,bade miyan, heavy petting ,PMA, Tilsim,

    In fact all those who made PTH a great site

  21. Romain United States Google Chrome Windows says:

    Ajit,

    Romain sucks. Me THinks RHR and P Paktea (who I think is Kaal) really rock. Thats why I came here. Dont forget some brilliant writing by Saad Hafiz.

  22. Ppaktea United States Safari iPhone says:

    I am not Kaal.

  23. Ppaktea United States Safari Mac OS says:

    Ajit,

    I have been an observer at the site for a while (and had even stopped coming for some time). But somehow, a large number of people who post here have been driven away, either by the moderators’ high handedness, or by the excessive trolling that goes on in the guise of commenting on articles. There is still a decent quality of articles from time to time, RHR being a case in point, and that is what brings me here.

  24. Mohan United Arab Emirates Safari iPad says:

    RHR,

    Very good article and it is good to see the regular knowledgeable and intelligent people are comming back on this website who had stopped visiting for sometime. I hope others also will join soon. It was nice to read discussion between you and Ppaktea.

  25. gp65 United States Google Chrome Mac OS says:

    @Rex Minor : It is unclear how the gang rape in Delhi proves that Indian Musims want out of India? Gang rapes happen in Pakistan too. In fact the Delhi gang rape victim was Hindu and her worst tormentor who was a minor was a Muslim. What does that prove Nothing. Rape is a heinous crime whoever the perpetrator and whoever the victime. Please do not bring religion into it.

    @Author: Qaid-e-Azam said that Hindus were one nation and Muslims were another nation. That in essence is the two nation theory. The fact that Islam failed to hold together Pakistan does disprove the theory of TNT.
    The only reason I do not believe that creation of Bangladesh proved the TNT wrong is that the theory was dead ab initio since 85% of the Muslims in the geography that constitutes present day India chose to not migrate to the country created for Muslims. They were not even included in the referendum to begin with. Thus the fact that they chose not to migrate proves that they did believe that even if Hindus and Muslims do not intermarry or interdine, they can live together. Over a period of time, in India at least Hindus and Muslims do interdine and intermarry – once again proving the 2 nation theory wrong.

    The only thing that the creation of Pakistan did is push out non-Muslims from present day Pakistan forcibly and on pain of death. That is not the theory Jinnah had claimed for sure.

    However just because the 2 nation theory itself is not one I buy into does not mean that I or for that matter most Indians would want to reverse partition. We are glad it happened and thank Qaid.

  26. avi India Google Chrome  Micromax A110 Build/IMM76D) AppleWebKit/535.19 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/18.0.1025.166 Mobile Safari/535.19 says:

    Hindus n Muslims cannot coexist….I things these were Jinnah sahabs words…I am a Hindu in India and my best friend is Muslim in India….my uncle is married to Muslim……cannot get TNT….

  27. Romain United States Internet Explorer Windows says:

    Majumdar,

    you got it wrong. The BDs did not have a choice but had to accept IG’s political compulsions of accepting an Independent BD. The WBs did not want to bcos Naokali was still fresh in the generation that made decisions.

    But look at what is happening today. Indians are building fences to keep BDs out, who are trying all sorts of tricks to move into India.

    I predict that within 25 years, the WB and BD economy wll be so interlinked that political classes will have no choice but to pay heed while BD may continue to exist as BD, all the decisions will made in Delhi.

  28. Romain United States Internet Explorer Windows says:

    RHR,

    it is emotionaly unacceptable for a Pakistani to accept that MAJ was wrong. Both YLH and Asheya Jalal have re-interpreted MAJ’s mistake as as a reaction to what Congress said or did.

    You have been in this country long enuf to get a gist of the politics in this country. Dont you think that once political egos clash, emotion doesnt take over and logic and the greater good is flushed down the toilet?

    I dont think it would have made any different whether MAJ had lived another 50 years. MAJ would have continued to be a irrelevant figurehead with real power in the hands of those who followed him after his death. They would have done exactly as they did.

    You must look into election results of Ayub vs MAJ’s sister. It should that MAJ had already been rejected by the people of Pakistan within a few years after his death… and Pakistan was flourishing economically.

    In any case MAJ was a figurehead with a team who were happy with a leader of his stature but who always wanted their own agenda – ie a feudalistic society which they were rightly convinced they were going to lose in Independent India under Congress.

    Be Cupernicus and dont censor your own thinking. But do be careful as to where you express it :)

  29. Rex Minor Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    GP65,

    Gang rapes have been institutioalised by the Indian political leaders who happen to be hindus. The Indian media have taken the role of the villain and kept quiet in the shortcomings of the hindu culture and this is currently being adopted by the Indian Govt., as one Indian woman participant said today in the BBC debate on democracy and developments in the Arab world. You are ever present on ET and have also the opportunity to read the Pakistani women views not always expressing your personal opinions about their affairs.

    Ajit,
    PTH has been and is going to remain as the source of high calibre intelectual liberal site which attracts international readers from all over the spectrum, as long as its team of editors and moderators intend it. The great bloggers and the commentrators that you have mentioned are staying away because of the earthquake of Gang Rapes which has splashed across the world press coverage, and in my opinion like the Indian Govt. they are going to stay quiet for some time and stop criticising the religion of Islam.

    Rex Minor

  30. RHR United States Google Chrome Windows says:

    @ Romain

    When did I say that I support TNT! Just that discarding something needs substantially more evidence than merely creation of Bangladesh. The entire article was weaved around that

    Regards

  31. Yazid United States Mozilla Firefox Windows says:

    Rexie-

    You are an idiot and moron

  32. Milestogo United States Safari iPhone says:

    Muslims are a separate nation from kuffar – it is a fundamental islamic concept. Daru-l-Islam needs to be established wherever Muslims are in majority.

    New Pakistans will rise in Europe, Canada and USA – that’s the power of Allah.

  33. Milestogo United States Safari iPhone says:

    TNT is perfectly halal.

  34. syed United States Google Chrome Windows says:

    The creation of Bangladesh, in my opinion, does not at all falsify the Two Nation Theory. Indian Hindus and Indian Muslims had emerged as two “political” entities towards the end of British India. Among these two “political” entities, the Indian Muslim community which was numerically the smaller of the two, found itself in a disadvantaged position as compared to the Indian Hindu community. On the eve of Independence, the undivided British India finally got divided into “Two Nations” – a Hindu-majority India named “India” or “Hindustan” or “Bharat”, and a Muslim-majority India named “Pakistan”. The Muslim-majority India, named “Pakistan”, comprised of two territories – an eastern one called “East Pakistan” and its western counterpart called “West Pakistan”. In 1971, East Pakistan became Bangladesh. It became Bangladesh, but still remained a Muslim-majority country. Even after the creation of Bangladesh, we still have a continued materialization of the “TNT”.

  35. Rex Minor Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    Why implant TNT theory used for Israelis and Palastinians as a pretext used by the Zionists to legitimise the existance of a jewish state in Palestine! mr Jinnah did not follow the TNT but simply wanted a separate space for the muslim majority in India? He of all the people could not care less what occurs to the remaining Indian folks. The question which RHR or his likes should discuss whether Mr Jnnah was successful in obtaining this space from the reluctant Indian Pundits? Two main factors deter Indian might to make further inroads into former Indian muslim majority territories, namely the loly pop present from AQ Khan and the potential BtizKrieg of the Talibans which could shatter the image of the Indian military as has been experienced by major powers including the yanks. I have not yet fully analysed the potential impact of the Indian women who are now up in arm against the protein eaters Indian braves.

    Rex Minor

  36. gp65 United States Google Chrome Mac OS says:

    “GP65,
    Gang rapes have been institutioalised by the Indian political leaders who happen to be hindus.”

    Let us for the moment leave aside the completely unsupported statement that gang rapes have been institutionalised by Indian politicians. However, please do tell me how you reached the conclusion hat Indian politicians are Hindu? Indian PM is Sikh. Indian defence minister is Christian. Indian finance minister is an atheist. Indian foreign minister is a Muslim.

    Gang rapes happen both in India and Pakistan. But Musharraf tried to blame the victim (Mukhtaran Mai) by saying that she falsely claimed gang rape to get a Canadian passport and he got away with it. When an Indian politician tried a similar trick, public uproar forced him to apologize. Once again rape is a horrendous crime on women. I am glad that India and Indians are not trying to sweep it under the carpet but trying to inject a religious flavour as you have repeatedly tried to do both here and on ET is just in very poor taste.

  37. Rex Minor Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    Syed,

    The Bengalis are regrded as people of a higher intellect, very cultured and have an above average IQ in the continent, but had no choice other than to separate from the marauding Pakistan military, who were hell bent to use force against its own citizens. They are now in deep economic chaos working as slave labour, men and women, to supply their products at the wage of 20 cents an hour with inhuman workig conditions. They are so poor that they refused to allow a refuge to the Burmese muslims who were fleeing from the brutality of the Burmese military and half naked monks.

    Rex Minor

  38. Rex Minor Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    GP65,

    I am answering your question since you have claimed not to live in India as well as your statement that women in yur family house have always enjoyed a decent status. I have acquired my knowledge from the statement of a senior woman police officer who made during the BBC hard talk show. I have also seen the scene of a political legislator being dragged half naked and beaten by women villagers, who willy nilly entered a house in the village not very far from delhi and sexualy assaulted the women an her husban went out of the house shouting for help. And guess what, not men but women came to aid.

    This is not new, Sati was also an institution which is illegal now. You shouldbe ready for the names of Indian legislators appearing on the Internet who despite the police investigations and submission to the judiciary have not yet been punished. BBC moderator warned the Inian Police Officer about the potential consequences of such an act.

    Rex Minor
    PS My post ends on this subject.

  39. Khan United States Google Chrome Windows says:

    Previously, TNT stood for Three Nation Theory. Now, it stands for Three Nation Theory. It’s still TNT.

  40. Amjad Cheema United Kingdom Safari iPad says:

    Unfortunately our founding fathers did use religion for their political goals. It was a crime gainst humanity. We r now reaping its fruit, as they say , reap it so shall you sow!

  41. Amjad Cheema United Kingdom Safari iPad says:

    Correction: as you sow so shall you reap!

  42. Romain United States Internet Explorer Windows says:

    Mian RHR,

    I read both you and P Paktea (apologies for calling u Kaal – more on it later) before commenting. Please help me understand. IF creation of BD did not negate TNT then there is only one logical conclusion – TNT was not discredited. This is what I addressed not whether you believe in it or not.

    Ppaktea Mian,

    I have a lot of respect for Kaal. He is one of the smartest guys – especially when he gets into the mode of extracting the information he needs. So calling you Kaal was not meant as an insult but hi praise.

  43. Romain United States Internet Explorer Windows says:

    Dear Rexie,

    I dont think any Hindu could do well enuf as some of the Muslims do in criticizing Islam.

    One gang rape in a city of 15 Million is just not enuf to keep liberals away. BTW, I am no liberal, being a very proud card carrying member of the RSS. Long live Bajrang Dal – yep the same folks behind the Gujrat riots.

    Your posts also clearly shows that sitting in D’land you really did not understand the reason for the protests. It never was the gang-rape. The gang-rape was just a match that lit some long suppressed pent up disgust with the GOI.

    But I’ill wait to write something about it

  44. Romain United States Internet Explorer Windows says:

    Syed,

    The Bengalis are regrded as people of a higher intellect, very cultured and have an above average IQ in the continent, but had no choice other than to separate from the marauding Pakistan military, who were hell bent to use force against its own citizens. They are now in deep economic chaos working as slave labour, men and women, to supply their products at the wage of 20 cents an hour with inhuman workig conditions. They are so poor that they refused to allow a refuge to the Burmese muslims who were fleeing from the brutality of the Burmese military and half naked monks.

    Rex Minor

    Yazid you are half correct. Rexie is an idiot. Morons have a higher IQ than idiots!!!

  45. gp65. United States Google Chrome Mac OS says:

    “GP65,
    Gang rapes have been institutioalised by the Indian political leaders who happen to be hindus.”

    Let us for the moment leave aside the completely unsupported statement that gang rapes have been institutionalised by Indian politicians. However, please do tell me how you reached the conclusion hat Indian politicians are Hindu? Indian PM is Sikh. Indian defence minister is Christian. Indian finance minister is an atheist. Indian foreign minister is a Muslim.

    Gang rapes do happen both in India and Pakistan. But Musharraf tried to blame the victim (Mukhtaran Mai) by saying that she falsely claimed gang rape to get a Canadian passport and he got away with it. When an Indian politician tried a similar trick, public uproar forced him to apologize. Once again rape is a horrendous crime on women. I am glad that India and Indians are not trying to sweep it under the carpet but trying to inject a religious flavour as you have repeatedly tried to do both here and on ET is just in very poor taste.

  46. gp65. United States Google Chrome Mac OS says:

    “GP65,
    I am answering your question since you have claimed not to live in India as well as your statement that women in yur family house have always enjoyed a decent status. I have acquired my knowledge from the statement of a senior woman police officer who made during the BBC hard talk show.”

    Please provide reference to the Indian police officer who claims that gang rapes are institutionalised by Hindu politicians or that sati still exists in India. These are the claims you made.

    If the claim she made is that some legislator misused his position to not have an FIR instituted, I would never have questioned you. Such abuse of authority sadly does happen in India. If you turn around though, it also happens in Pakistan and has nothing to do with religion but with the feudalistic attitudes which need to be rooted out. If anything such feudal attitudes are less prevalent in India than Pakistan. Under the circumstances, I am surprised that you bring this up as an argument supporting TNT.

  47. Rex Minor Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    GP65,

    Kiran Bedi on BBC Hard Talk show dated 18th Jan. 2013. google it, listen to it and make your own conclusions. The now retired senior woman police officer talks in her smart Indian style and relates about how and why and about those who are responsible for this unending gang rape culture because the police is still folowing the 1871 colonial laws and report to politicians instead of to law. you can then narrate your conclusions to the RSS and bajrang dal punk as well who is talking about One incident in 15 million city. I care a damn about the perpatrators but sympathise with the victims who happen to be women.

    Rex Minor

  48. Rex Minor Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    PS
    I am an observer and am not from Pakistan. TNT did not grow in the skies but was formuated by muslm league inview of hindu cuture which is based on caste system and reflects the inequality of womaen with men.

  49. Mohan United Arab Emirates Internet Explorer Windows says:

    Romain,

    “Yazid you are half correct. Rexie is an idiot. Morons have a higher IQ than idiots!!!”
    .
    I second you.

  50. Rex Minor Germany Google Chrome Windows says:

    Indian should give up their mob instinct and accept the tenets of democracy of equal rights, freedom of expression without overriding colonial legal constraints under which the media currently operates, otherwise India’s downfall is nearer than what the individuals and groups of machos imagine; Indian women are up in arms now and nothing will prevent them from sterilizing rape perpatrators and their supporters.

    Rex Minor

Leave a Reply

*

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>