Nature denied Bhutto and Zia’s mission

By Syed Foaad Hassan

Under the light of Quaid’s words, “Minorities to whichever community they may belong; will be safeguarded. Their religion or faith or belief will be secure. There will be no interference of any kind with their freedom of worship. They will have their protection with regard to their religion, faith, their life, their culture. They will be, in all respects, the citizens of Pakistan without any distinction of caste or creed”. Even here Quaid meant Hindus, Sikhs or Christians and tried to give a message that we should get out of this minority/majority thing because now we have a free state where everyone is free. But very soon after his death some religious communities tried to convert Pakistan into a theocratic Islamic state and most of these communities were against the creation of Pakistan like Jammat e Ahrar, a group of Deoband Ullema and Jammat-e-Islami.
Their first target was Ahmadiyya community and somehow after violent struggles and uniting dictators of Islamic countries Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto declared Ahmadis non-Muslims with a constitutional amendment on 7th September 1974 and he proudly stated, “We have solved the Ahmadi problem once and for all.” So afterwards Pakistan became a Kafir factory, where State can decide someone’s religion and impose its laws by violating basic human rights. It was the start of persecution and later on General Zial ul Haq joined the club and imposed ordinance XX to further restrict freedom of Ahmadis to practice their religion that outlaws “posing as Muslims”. The law imposes three-year jail terms on Ahmadis “who directly or indirectly, poses himself as a Muslim, or calls, or refers to, his faith as Islam, or preaches or propagates his faith, or invites others to accept his faith, by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representations, or in any manner whatsoever outrages the religious feelings of Muslims”.
It also makes it illegal for Ahmadis to refer to their places of worship as “Mosques”, or their calls to prayer as “Azaan”, in addition to other restrictions.
The 1984 law opened the door for an increase in attacks on the community by mobs and anti Ahmadi groups. Since then hundreds of Ahmadis have lost their lives and laws are being misused against the community. Every year on 7th September Mullahs and state celebrate the declaration and arrange conferences against Ahmadi community and I don’t know where is the Government and security forces who are acting against hate speech? In major cities like Lahore or Rawalpindi you can see banners, stickers on shops and join any conference or Jalsa to witness hate speech against Ahmadis.
But destiny did not support Bhuttoism and Zia’s mission as he stated “I will not rest until I eradicate the cancer of ‘Qadianiyyat’ (Ahmadiyyat) from the world.” Recently during an annual convention of Ahmadis in London it was claimed that more than 500,000 people have entered in the community from across the world and they are spread in 205 countries and every year almost same amount of people joins community from all over the world.
Recently Legislators from both ruling and opposition benches in Pakistan’s Punjab Assembly have severely criticised the statement of former Pakistani diplomat to UK Wajid Shamsul Hasan in which he said that the decision to declare Ahmadiyya a minority in Pakistan was wrong.
An annual convention organized by the Ahmadiyya Community has quickly become a new venue for diplomacy and peace talks. The convention which is called the “Jalsa Salana” takes place in London, U.K., the United States, Germany, and other places around the world. This year Jalsa Salana Canada took place at the International Centre in Mississauga from Aug. 28 to 30. The three-day event was attended by Prime Minister of Canada Stephen Harper, leader of the Canadian Liberal Party Justin Trudeau, Consul General of Pakistan Asghar Ali Golo, Consul General of India Akhilesh Mishra and many local politicians. The audience included thousands of people from Canada, the US and other parts of the world. Slogans of Takbeer were raised in front of Pakistani counsel general and he responded to that and said “It’s very encouraging for me to see such a large number of Pakistanis, all ambassadors of Pakistan making such a marvelous contribution in a country like Canada, and i am proud to represent my my Pakistani community who have been extremely respected all over the world, especially in Canada.”
So “swords can bend heads but not minds, force can win territories but not hearts”, we stopped a community, persecuted them and still persecuting by all means and they are growing all over the world, now we are targeting Ismaili community, many members of Hazara community have left Pakistan, target killing of Shias is common after all what is our need? We were treated like a persecuted minority in sub-continent and we fought for freedom and gained this beautiful country but this religious extremism is a big shame and failure of State. We claim too much about stopping hate speech and persecution but practically there is nothing like that; those who dare to speak get killed like Salman Taseer, Sabeen Mahmud or Shahbaz Bhatti. Nature opposed Bhutto’s and Zia’s Pakistan and God will make Pakistan a peaceful place but it needs our role in it, we are afraid to speak and scared from extremists. We should help educating new generation and negotiate with Mullahs that this attitude will cause destruction but nothing else. Is there anyone among us who can discuss unjust laws by State? HRCP or Supreme Court of Pakistan? I end my opinion with a question.

The writer is a Lahore based Journalist, Human Rights Activist and Bureau Chief Lahore at Weekly Education Informer

  • ALI

    Would you like to remove this law? and declare them as Muslims again??

    I see the law is that they are not Muslims but still they are respected Pakistanies.

  • Ali

    Bhutto did to appease clerics as he was loosing support.

  • kaalchakra

    “Nature denied?”

    The argument we used to hear was that Allah Himself, personally, took the pains to destroy anyone who came in the way of His true deen.

    Are we moving toward Nature worship now?

  • timely

    Even Jinnah’s death is said to be untimely. Have muslims lost faith in god’s wisdom? God did not want a lawyer-liar like Jinnah to be the leader of Pakistan and he in his grace took him away to protect Pakistan from further damage by his lies.

  • Majumdar

    Masadi sb,
    .
    ZAB was no Islamist
    .
    Are you implying that ZAB was a secular?
    .
    Regards

  • Jamshed

    Majumdar,
    Yes, both Bono and CM are highly knowledgeable and intelligent and perhaps superior to most of the regulars here, but I am taking about their attitude towards others on this board, who, according to them are inferior to them. This is the clear sign of inferiority complex. Sooner they realise this and introspect is better for them, specially for CM, who is still very young.
    —-
    Knowledge and intelligence doesn’t makes one wise.

  • Majumdar

    Masadi sb,
    .
    Strictly speaking an Islamist is someone who believes in Islam and running societies and states based on Islam, no. And you have yourself argued that Islam is the same as communism echoing what Iqbal said (Islam= Bolshevism + God). That being the case a Muslim and a socialist (which is what ZAB was) wud make him an Islamist, no?
    .
    Regards

  • bonobashi

    Only to some, Jamshed, only to some.

  • yasserlatifhamdani

    This is with reference to Masadi sb’s comments which I completely disagree with and find to be historically naïve.

    The politics of religion can be traced back to Khilafat Movement which Gandhi and the Congress supported against the British. It was the Khilafat Movement that created the link between Muslim religious orthodoxy and the Congress movement. It coincided with the ouster of secular Muslims like Jinnah from the League.

    The anti-Ahmaddiya sentiment also can be traced back to Majlis-e-Ahrar a pro-Congress Indian nationalist but retrogressive Muslim reactionary group that exploited the anti-Ahmadi feeling to divide Muslim vote bank. Majlis-e-Ahrar attacked the Muslim League for allowing Ahmadis in the League. Ahrar’s politics of divisive sectarianism was encouraged by the Congress Party in Punjab and in Lucknow.

    After being defeated by the Muslim League and after the creation of Pakistan, the Ahrar regrouped in Punjab and began agitating against Pakistan Muslim League. At this time certain ambitious members of the League in Punjab like Mumtaz Daultana sided with the Ahrar to bring down the government of Khawaja Nazimuddin at the center. To the credit of Nazimuddin and the Muslim League, they refused to countenance any demand for expulsion of Ahmadis from the fold of Islam.

    Masadi sb can accuse Ahmadis of being pro-imperialist and what not (the pet theory of right wing extremists in Pakistan) but he cannot explain why Zulfikar Ali Bhutto relied so heavily on Ahmadis in the 1970 campaign. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto unfortunately was too unscrupulous to see the damage he was doing with his cynical use of Islam later.

    It is amazing that Masadi wants to blame Jinnah, Muslim League and also the British for Islamization of Pakistan, when neither Jinnah nor his successors ever introduced a state religion into the constitution. Meanwhile Zulfikar Ali Bhutto not only introduced a state religion, he also barred Non-Muslims from being the Prime Minister of Pakistan. His shameless surrender to the Jamaat-e-Islami and Ahrar (both of which had opposed the creation of Pakistan mind you) in 1974 on the Ahmadi issue pretty much destroyed the ideal of Pakistan as a democratic and inclusive state. General Zia took that logic to its conclusion with the retrogressive Islamization introduced by him.

    It is a very popular but lazy and un-academic view to continuously say that this happened because Pakistan was the result of “Religious identity” politics. Pakistan was the consequence of Congress refusing to cater to legitimate and just demands of the Muslims and instead Congress’ pandering of right wing Mullahs and religious ideologues of Majlis-e-Ahrar. This lazy and un-academic view – which is the hallmark of those who haven’t read history deeply – does not stand the test of facts – primarily the fact that the forces behind Islamization of Pakistan and the forces behind Ahmadi exclusion were the same forces that had opposed Jinnah and the Muslim League and which Jinnah and his successors had kept at bay. Bhutto merely surrendered to them and in the end it cost him his life.

    Only a most dishonest person would absolve Bhutto who not only introduced state religion but banned gambling, alcohol and night clubs in Pakistan. It was Bhutto who presided over the modern day witchhunt of Ahmadis. These are the failings of a man who might well have been a great man had his human weakness and lust for power not driven him to make the worst kind of bargains with the Mullahs.

    Obviously pointing this out to Masadi sb is akin to painting a bulls eye on your head as Masadi sb is going to come back with the choicest abuses and allegations. This unfortunately is one drawback of operating on the internet because craziest fools have all the license in it.

  • saadhafiz

    http://www.outlookindia.com/article/the-future-of-india-as-a-democratic-country-is-at-risk/295251

    “The Future Of India As A Democratic Country Is At Risk” Professor emeritus of law at Princeton University, Richard A. Falk, on why he’s a signatory to the petition against Modi. Pranay Sharma Interviews Richard A. Falk

    Prime Minister Narendra Modi will visit Silicon Valley later this month. But over 137 US-based academics and intellectuals have already filed a petition to the Silicon Valley Enterprises expressing concern about Modi and his ‘Digital India’ campaign. It is not surprising that Richard A. Falk is one of the petitioners. The professor emeritus of law at Princeton University, a highly respected academic, has always been an outspoken critic of governments and policies that violate human rights and civil liberties. At 84, he has authored and co-edited more than 40 books and is a well-known commentator on his own. As former UN rapporteur on Palestine, Falk is also one of the few Jews who was denied a visa by Israel for his outspoken views about Israeli atrocities and occupation of Palestinian territory. He tells Pranay Sharma why he’s a signatory to the petition against Modi. Excerpts:

    What is the prime concern you have against Narendra Modi’s ‘Digital India’ campaign?

    I and others on the list have questions about Narendra Modi’s record on religious tolerance, freedom of religion, and freedom of expression. Some of those who signed the letter have also been subject to a campaign of harassment from Hindu nationalist followers, which raises particular worries about academic freedom. “Digital India” as an initiative has enormous potential to affect positive social change, but it simultaneously poses dangers for abuse under the Modi administration that can make use of digitalization to target members of minority communities or those who are critical of its policies. It is my impression that the Modi government has been particularly sensitive to criticism and unfriendly to critics, making our concern more credible.”

  • Majumdar

    Yasser Pai,
    .
    …..Obviously pointing this out to Masadi sb is akin to painting a bulls eye on your head…..
    .
    In our part of the world they say, playing a flute in front of a buffalo.
    .
    Regards

  • timely

    to ylh

    you wrote:

    “These are the failings of a man who might well have been a great man had his human weakness and lust for power not driven him to make the worst kind of bargains with the Mullahs.”

    This is what can be said of Jinnah too.
    He made compromises with mullahs secretly.
    And he used islam for his personal ambitions, but islam used him for its ambitions of territorial and demographic imperialism/extermination upon/of non-muslims.

  • timely



    “Jinnah was a charlatan who used Islam.”
    and vice versa…
    who used whom?
    2 tricksters each trying to get the maximum advantage out of the other.

  • sta

    This article examines Jinnah, then Bhutto, and then Zia. Gandhi once remarked, “…Jinnah is incorruptible and brave…“. With or without any prejudice, one can hardly differ with Gandhi on this, at least. “Incorruptibility” and “bravery” was indeed the stuff that Jinnah was made of. Now, let’s skip a couple of decades and examine the 70s. We land upon another class of leaders, who displayed another kind of “incorruptibility” and a different type of “bravery”. According to an eye-witness, during the 1970 Election campaign, Bhutto was driving through Multan, with his supporters flanked on either side of the road, shouting slogans, “Socialism Aaway hee aaway!“. Bhutto waved to the cheering crowd, which responded with even louder slogans in favour of Socialism. Bhutto rolled up his window and turned and said to his aide who was accompanying him, “We may not mean it, but they mean it”. In 1972, Bhutto was offered handsome amounts by King Faisal of Saudi Arabia, in return for two tiny services: (1) that provisions for latter “Islamization” be kept in the constitution of Pakistan, which was under way, and (2) that the Ahmadis be declared “Non-Muslims” constitutionally. Bhutto, of course, provided both the services duly and was, in return, paid duly for a job well done. The constitution of the country was literally sold for Saudi Riyals. Around the same period, 1970 – 1971, a brigadier of the Pakistan Army, named Brig. Ziaul Haq, who was later to head the Pakistan Army and eventually become the country’s president, was serving in Jordan. There, he planned and led an assault against the Palestinians, in which thousands of Palestinians were killed, including a staggering number of unarmed women and children. This was perhaps the bravest general of our Army, second only to the Gen. Niazi of the 1971 war, the general who fought till death – his country’s – not his own.

  • Arun Gupta

    Which one is it – most Pakistanis are religiously moderate only, and religious parties never got more than 5% of the vote, or the religious parties managed to impose major constitutional provisions on Pakistan?

  • Arzu

    Gupta ji,
    Very cleverly put…
    now paki nationalist will blame you for not accepting pakia existence…

  • Mohan

    I got this in my email box from one of my friends. This is in response to the article posted by Saad Hafiz.
    .
    Dear Professors,

    Your letter says “Silicon Valley highlights the role of a country that has contributed much to the growth and development of Silicon Valley industries”.
    .
    Nope. Let me correct you. Silicon Valley was built by American startup companies and few great universities like Stanford and Berkeley. India as a country, did not play any role in the birth or growth of Silicon Valley. Much after the birth of Silicon Valley, Indians joined the companies and were instrumental in the growth. India as the motherland of these successful Indians gets the credit. But India as a country did not contribute much to the Valley. So please stop false statements.
    .
    You further say “Digital India” seems to ignore key questions raised in India by critics concerned about the collection of personal information and the near certainty that such digital systems will be used to enhance surveillance and repress the constitutionally- protected rights of citizens. “
    .
    You seem to have no idea how the Digital India is supposed to work. I understand your limitation. One cannot expect professors from History, Anthropology, India Studies and Religious Studies, Women and Gender Studies, Theology & Religious Studies to understand how a citizen governance software works. What you have studied and what you teach is far removed from what Digital India entails. Baring Mr. Sampath Kannan, who happens to be Professor of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania, the rest of you probably will have tough time telling a ‘cookie’ from a cookie and a ‘chip’ from a chip. Mr. Sampath Kannan may be too busy with real work to teach you the intricacies of digital privacy. Let me help you.
    .
    What is Digital India?

    It’s a connected software for governing citizen centric services. It includes citizen services from both the central government and the state government projects. It’s not meant for only BJP ruled states, but all states are part of it. The beneficiaries are Indian citizens. Citizen services in Agriculture, land records, health, education, passports, police, courts, municipalities and commercial taxes will be streamlined based on common data and demographic information. The collection of personal information has to be completed before Indian government or NSA (Yes that can happen too if we are not careful) spy on Indian citizens. India is in the process of completing it. All citizens are yet to obtain that unique AADHAR card. Along with AADHAR card, other personally identifiable information has to be digitized. In USA, the demographic data like last name, first name, Social Security number, date of birth are part of the government systems. From tax filing to court docket numbers, just about any government service is tied with one of these identity information. India is not there yet and cannot be compared to USA. Even if this initiative gets completed before Mr. Modi’s present term ends, there is something called integration of the systems. You will recall how your social security number is used to pull your tax evasion record or your contribution to the churches or non-profits. That same social security number is part of your driver’s license, which is a state agency as well as IRS, which is federal government agency. Oh wait, the telephone companies are there too. One cannot make sense of the data if the data from these three different entities is not correlated. That takes long time. When did the National Security Agency (NSA) come into existence? In the 50s? Thank you. Was there internet when they started? The NSA worked on phone data initially then moved on to the emails and online data. It will take time, and it will evolve.
    .
    Assuming that the current government will work hard to integrate all of the data so that they can spy on the NGOs you funded or sympathized, even then there are policies and procedures on how to manage this data. It is certainly not like searching for people on Ashley Madison. How this information will be released to the courts or shared among other government agencies will be dictated by policies. There is a plan to appoint CIO (Chief Information Officers) to the ministries for managing this. It is not like Modi is burning midnight oil to write the policies himself. That is not how governments work. There is a team, there are state governments involved, and there is collaboration with private companies. So stop crying wolf.
    .
    You further go on to say “We urge those who lead Silicon Valley technology enterprises to be mindful of not violating their own codes of corporate responsibility when conducting business with a government”
    .
    Sorry folks, urging CEO’s of Silicon Valley companies does not cut mustard. You have come with tall allegations on the Indian government. So please reach out to the Office of Foreign Assets Control which is part of Department of State. Those guys have previously put sanctions on Cuba, Iran and Syria. Please send a letter (since you love writing letters) to that agency requesting to add India to the list. You and your ilk were successful in blocking Mr.Narendra Modi’s entry to USA in the past so your old connections in the State Department may come in handy. You can contribute to the Hillary Clinton’s presidential bid, she might put in a word for you. Once India is added to the list, Silicon Valley will listen to State Department. By approaching the CEOs directly you just showed your ignorance about the issue. If anything these CEOs will laugh at your ignorance. And seriously, they have no time for you. Their Outlook, Gmail or Yahoo Mail trash can is big, this will go along with the Nigerian Scam e-mails. Just a caution, your phone calls and emails are a click away for the NSA, unless you use Gmail. And I am sure there is a new folder created somewhere “Professors who opposed Modi’s Visit”!
    .
    Dear Respected professors, Digital Privacy is a big issue for America even more than India. There is a movie that was released in 1998 called “Enemy of the State”. (Can’t believe a serious guy like me is giving movie recommendations) but do watch it. It is 101 on the government snooping of citizen’s communication. Robert Clayton Dean (Played by Will Smith) is targeted by some rogue in NSA. A telecom engineer Edward Lyle (Played by Gene Hackman) tells Will Smith that the Feds listen to everything, anything that gets transmitted on the phone. The movie is available on YouTube, for free, please spare some time to watch it. I have provided the YouTube link at the bottom too. (Finding correct You Tube links can be tricky sometimes you know)
    .
    That movie was released in 1998, the internet was just getting started. No Google, Facebook or No Snowden had emerged on the scene. Fast forward 2015, we have seen Germany’s chancellor Angela Merkel complain about her phone being tapped by the Americans. The NSA trying its best to get into Google’s network. The police authorities asking online information from big corporations. We have seen how privacy is violated here in America. By the way, get your hands on that Sony Pictures scandal. It is fun to read the private emails of the Hollywood executives.
    .
    You have no idea how powerful the American surveillance system is. The CIA is just another matter. If you insist, let me tell you this. Do you know that the CIA, with the help of Siemens put a worm inside the nuclear centrifuge used by the Iranians? Yup they have the reach, both physical and virtual! Last year, Apple, Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Yahoo the same companies whose CEOs you wrote to, sort of revolted against the US government when the government asked to provide online data of citizens. These companies want proper procedures to be followed. If I remember Google’s Chief of privacy wrote a blog on it. Google yourself to read it.
    .
    This silly act carried by bunch of your cohorts from left, liberal, evangelical Christians has one common goal- to go after anyone who unites India. Forget uniting India, the man you hate so much is fast becoming a world statesman. The UN announcement of Yoga day must have hurt you. I am sure the email traffic between all of you might have been all time high since that Yoga day to do “Something” to the upcoming visit. I get it. You are now worried that Mr.Modi will get even closer to the Silicon Valley CEOs, so that he can read your emails personally forwarded by the CEOs themselves!!!.
    .
    Dear professors, get a life, publish another paper or do something, How about Yoga ?
    .
    P.S:- As a side note, whoever wrote this, I suspect it is Indian, was in a hurry. I noticed cut paste work. The way it looked most of you have not read it. You just signed it because you love to hate the man. It is ok. I understand. Hatred does pretty weird stuff.
    .

    Para 2 “of a country that has contributed much to the growth and development of Silicon Valley industries”
    .
    Para 4 “of a country that has contributed much to the growth and development of Silicon Valley industries”
    .
    I REST MY CASE.
    .
    By Bhanu Gouda

  • Kamath

    When somebody post-fixes two letters “sb” in Urdu to a name, what does it mean? Any body explain?
    Example: Liaquat sb .. Does it mean Liaquat. …. Liaquat is a Son of a bitch.
    OR
    Liaquat is ……… Liaquat Sahib

  • bonobashi

    Good question, Kamath Sb.

  • Ranger625372

    Great question Kamath Sb.

  • tajender

    Rakesh Maria will continue to investigate the case despite transfer to Home Guards and a new CP in charge. Defence counsel must be smiling.

    under bjp rule u become from sahib to sb in no time.

  • Arun Gupta

    Don’t be stuck in a time-warp, understand this from Koenraad Elst:
    http://koenraadelst.blogspot.com/2015/09/how-west-looks-at-india-debating-hindu.html

    “While this trend is still marginal, it is already very visible on the media front, where internet papers have become the arteries of new communities shedding the Sangh baggage and trying to serve the Hindu cause through new analyses: VijayVaani, India Facts, Hindu Human Rights, Swaraj, Bharat-Bharati, the India Inspires Foundation. These people have no power yet, but they do have ideas. More up-to-date and more aware of international trends in political thinking than the gerontocratic Sangh, their thought is far more interesting. It also is more rooted, more Hindu than the Hindutva current, which is stuck in the 1920s’ borrowed nationalist paradigm. If “debate” with the Hindu side is what you want, it is they who are the ones to talk to.”

  • bonobashi

    Arun Gupta

    Have you yourself read that particular Koenraad Elst piece, and do you, explicitly, agree with it and support its conclusions?

  • timely

    to PTH


    The word hindu is very old.
    The iranians refered to the people living in the Sindhu river basin as hindus.
    that was way back in the 5 century bc.

    The Greeks spoke it out as indoi

    Later in the latin language it became India.

    In those days it had no religious connotation.

    The muslim invaders and their quislings used it as a religious word.

    the muslims’ intention was to humiliate the hindus by making the word into a word of abuse and degradation.

    this proves the evilness of islamic education and propaganda.

  • Parliament certified Muslim

    @masadi (September 8, 2015 at 9:51 pm)

    …you can find anything in the so-called history BS…

    .
    Thank you brother for your scholarly and saintly commentt. To even suggest in an implying manner that Jinnah was “incorruptible” and “brave”, and that Hazrat Bhutto Shaheed was “corruptible” and Hazrat Zia was “not brave”, is an act of unpardonable vulgarity.
    .
    All the religious clauses in the Aasmani Kitab-e-Tihattar (The Revealed Heavenly Constitution of 1973) were revealed actually, in exchange for, the blessed Zakat that was to flow from the Holy Mumlikat al Arabia al Saudia al Wahabia al Salafia to the Holy Mumlikat-e-Khudadad-e-Pakistan. This cannot be termed “corruption”. This is “Zakat”, which is a Pillar of faith. It was the sheer benevolence of Hazrat Bhutto that he accepted this Zakat. In recognition of the Saudi services to the poor parliamentarians of Pakistan, Hazrat Bhutto added the religious clauses and made arrangement for the Second Amendment of 1974 to be enacted. Now, who says this is “Corruptibility”?.
    .
    About our Top 2 Bravest Generals too, you are spot on, Sir. The fact is that Gen Tiger Khan Niazi and Hazrat Gen Zia Shaheed both, were very “brave” men. The first one defeated the Indian Army in 1971, in Dhaka and the second one defeated Palestinian women and children around same time.
    .
    We don’t want reckless generals like the Qadiani Maj. Gen Iftikhar Janjua (Maqtool), who foolishly got himself killed on the Chamb Front, while fighting. We want cautious Certified Muslim generals like Gen Niazi who returned home alive.
    .
    Yours in the service of Certified Islam

  • tajender
  • tajender

    mohan,.. The shiv sena is back with its oft practiced anti gujarati campaign. So much to remain politically relevant .

  • YLH

    Masadi sb,

    I am afraid that logic is strained. Muslim identity as propagated by Muslim League was inclusive of Shias Ahmadis Ismailis Sunnis etc. The proponents of the anti Ahmaddiya movement were without exception opposed to Muslim League and Pakistan precisely for the reason that Muslim League did not cater to dogma.

    A corollary of your argument seems to be that Muslim identity is source of all evil… That wherever Muslims come into power such situation would naturally follow. If not then the generality of your argument suggests that the same could be applied to any identity … by that logic Modi’s right wing politics of Hindutva becomes a logical extension of Nehru’s Indian identity. This would be an absurd proposition.

    I think we should remain logical. Jinnah stood for an inclusive Muslim identity and after Pakistan an inclusive Pakistani identity. To attempt to justify Bhutto’s historic mistake by putting it on Muslim identity is extremely lazy and flies in the face of reality.

  • Majumdar

    YLH Pai,
    .
    A corollary of your argument seems to be that Muslim identity is source of all evil
    .
    At least on one point, Masadi sb and ModiGee are on the same page….
    .
    Regards

  • yasserlatifhamdani

    Timely,

    The issue is that Jinnah did not bargain with the Mullahs. Repeatedly the Ahrar offered him support in return for his compliance on the Ahmadi issue. He refused.

    He also said:

    “I have been asked a disturbing question, as to who among the Muslims can be a member of the Muslim Conference. It has been asked with particular reference to the Qadianis. My reply is that, as far as the constitution of the All-India Muslim League is concerned, it stipulates that any Muslim, without distinction of creed or sect, can become a member, provided he accepts the views, policy and programme of the Muslim League, signs the form of membership and pays the subscription. I appeal to the Muslims of Jammu and Kashmir not to raise sectarian questions, but instead to unite on one platform under one banner. In this lies the welfare of the Muslims. In this way, not only can Muslims make political and social progress effectively, but so can other communities, and so also can the state of Kashmir as a whole.”

    “Mr. M. A. Sabir tried as hard as he could to persuade the Quaid-i-Azam to declare Qadianis as being out of the fold of Islam. But the Quaid-i-Azam stuck resolutely to his principle and kept on replying: `What right have I to declare a person non-Muslim, when he claims to be a Muslim’.

    (23rd May, 1944, Srinagar)

    Even on other issues, a resolution was sought to be passed whereby future Constitution of Pakistan would be based on the Quran – and Jinnah put his foot down. This was at the Delhi session in 1943. AH Kazi had moved the resolution. Jinnah described it a censure on every leaguer and said that the constitution will be what the people of Pakistan would decide.

    Indians view Jinnah as an evil man because in the last decade of his life he took up the cause of Muslim identity, but it is forgotten that he did so only after exhausting all opportunity of compromise. You should read his speeches at the roundtable conference. He was the bane of the Muslims and Princes then. But he wanted a consociational compromise for India’s secular future. One can disagree with him but no one can claim that Jinnah ever bargained with the Mullahs. Quite the contrary even those Mullahs – like Shabbir Ahmad Usmani- joined him at his own terms and could not force him to comply with their sectarian policy.

    Bhutto too could have been that leader but he chose to out-mullah the Mullahs and that too unsuccessfully losing his head in the end.

  • Majumdar

    Masadi sb,
    .
    the guy is a certified mass murderer.
    .
    Indeed- who has issued the certificate- MNI sb?
    .
    we know very well that the dominant narrative on Muslim and who is one wins out when there is ideological conflict
    .
    So, are you arguing that only Sunnis are Muslims and that Shias and Mirzais are not. In that case Hindus will be appropriately the inverse of “Sunnis” and not “Muslims”.
    .
    Regards

  • bonobashi

    Majumdar

    You are quite right to put Masadi sharply in his place. It is beyond doubt that Modi is an uncertified mass murderer.

  • Majumdar

    It is beyond doubt that Modi is an uncertified mass murderer.
    .
    That seems to be a more reasonable state of affairs.
    .
    Regards

  • NICE Writing I regular top blog readers, and your blog is in my one of top blog reading list, I really love and like reading your blogs! And I really liked this post as well.. All the best keep writing.

  • timely

    to ylh


    Jinnah was a changing personality.
    So no judgement can be passed on that.
    We have to judge Jinnah by his actions as GG of Pakistan – everything else is waste of oratory.

    I don’t bother about Jinnah before August 1947.
    He wanted to satiate his ego or megalomania or his late-turn-itch to islamicity or muslim-ness whatever.

    It would be better if you judge Jinnah by what he did or failed to do after 14. August 1947.
    —- as follows:
    – genocide on Hindus
    – invasion of Kashmir by pakistani army
    – collaborating with US
    – incapable of appointing a successor
    – not writing a book or political will to put down his final ideas in unambiguous words (a lawyer should know that, the how and why of it)
    – denigrating the bengalis
    – making ugly remarks about India and hindus in private
    – remaining silent about the mistakes and idiocies in the kuran
    – incapable of analysing the kuran and its evil/dangerous contents
    – opportunism to please muslims and other primitives
    – cowardice towards islamic fascists
    – glorifying muslim past like the typical low-intelligence muslim guys do
    – Jinnah had zero idea about managing economy, finance, ecology, population control, muslim machoism, islamic braggartry
    – know objective knowledge of history of mankind

    and so on…

    so judge him on that instead of keeping up rotating the prayer wheels with the name Jinnah encoded on them.

    You want to do something good for Pakistan?… then stop eulogizing Jinnah and concentrate on his follies from a secular standpoint.

    I wonder why a man of your intelligence (that you surely are) does not comprehend this.
    Jinnah’s resurrection will not help Pakistan a whit. Quite the contrary – it will only lead to more useless time-wasting debatory and resource-trampling debauchery.

  • timely

    correction
    .
    know objective knowledge of history of mankind
    .
    to
    .
    no objective knowledge of history of mankind

  • yasserlatifhamdani

    Timely,

    Thank you for your advice. Your comments are based out of an utter and total ignorance of history and the facts.

    – genocide on Hindus

    Jinnah did more to stop the killings than Nehru or Gandhi combined. I suggest you should read about the massacres of 1947 a little more impartially. Most of the massacres happened in East Punjab under Congress rule.

    – invasion of Kashmir by pakistani army

    Jinnah was not involved per se with the invasion by the raiders- that much is now clear. However the policy generally to support the Poonch uprising against the Maharaja was the right one. It certainly was no vicious invasion of the kind India launched in Hyderabad, Junagadh Tripura etc. So basically the charge is ridiculous given that India killed 100,000 people in Hyderabad alone through invasion.

    “– collaborating with US”

    Collaborating? As a sovereign state Pakistan had every right to pursue a foreign policy of its choice. I am not sure how that becomes collaborating.

    “– incapable of appointing a successor”

    Then why was there a smooth transfer of power in Pakistan after Jinnah’s death? Was there a power struggle?

    “– denigrating the Bengalis”

    He did not denigrate Bengalis at any point. He in fact was the first person to do away with the martial race theory by organizing Bengalis in the Pakistan Army. So saying that he “denigrated” the Bengalis is historically inaccurate.

    “– making ugly remarks about India and hindus in private”

    Again this is not true. He never made any comments against India and Hindus. His ire was against the Congress leaders alone.

    “– remaining silent about the mistakes and idiocies in the”

    Oh we are so sorry that Jinnah was not a self-hating Muslim. I suppose that bothers you. I can hardly comment on such stupid and idiotic

    – opportunism to please muslims and other primitives
    – cowardice towards islamic fascists
    – glorifying muslim past like the typical low-intelligence muslim guys do

    Same as above.

    “– Jinnah had zero idea about managing economy, finance, ecology, population control, muslim machoism, islamic braggartry”

    Again you have to read Jinnah’s speeches in the Indian legislative assembly. He was far more knowledgeable than most legislators and politicians on issues of economy, finance and governance. But if you are not going to read and merely invent nonsense what can I say to you? Jinnah’s contributions to finance bills and other bills to relating to economy are part of the record and cannot be denied.

    In short your comments are based on ignorance and nothing else. Therefore I reject your advice in toto. Thank you for consideration.

  • yasserlatifhamdani

    Masadi sb,

    Hindutva cannot be the inversion of Muslim identity because Muslim identity was formed as a reaction to Hindu politics of 1900-1925 and secondly because Muslim identity was a minoritarian identity not a majoritarian one.

    You obviously did not get the analogy. Nehru – whatever his faults – stood for an inclusive Indian identity (albeit on shaky premises). Yet Indian identity itself was dominated by what many describe as “Hindu cultural life”. Now that Hindu cultural life has become dominant. Isn’t that your narrative vis a vis Muslim identity also… that it did not matter that Jinnah’s idea of Muslim identity was inclusive of Shias, Ahmadis etc but that the dominant narrative took over.

    I recommend very strongly that you read Changing Homelands by Neeti Nair which navigates the development of Hindu identity and how former champions of an inclusive identity like Jinnah were forced to take up the Muslim cause.

  • Majumdar

    Masadi sb/Yasser Pai,
    .
    The two of you between yourselves can debate out whether Hinduism was the inversion of Muslim identity or if it was the other way round. You can inform Kaal bhai and me once you guys are thru. Thanks in advance.
    .
    Regards

  • Gorki

    YLH:
    “I recommend very strongly that you read Changing Homelands by Neeti Nair which navigates the development of Hindu identity and how former champions of an inclusive identity like Jinnah were forced to take up the Muslim cause….”
    .
    Good recommendation.
    Regards

  • saadhafiz

    ‘If I had to listen to my dear friend Mohammad Ali Jinnah talking the most unmitigated nonsense about his 14 points … I would consider the desirability of retiring to a South Sea island where there would be some hope of meeting people who were intelligent enough or ignorant enough not to talk of the 14 points.’ Nehru

    Reacting to Jinnah’s reservations about the constitutional draft tabled at the 1931 Round Table conference in London, Nehru denounced them as an ‘amazing farrago of nonsense and narrow-minded communalism.’

    ‘But Jinnah of course, was always his perfect little bounder and as slippery as the eels which his (Jinnah’s) forefathers purveyed in Bombay (fish) market’ Nehru

    Jinnah’s one singular trait, his one unpardonable sin, was his stark and unvarnished candour which was little understood and even less appreciated by others.

    ‘The Hindus considered him a Muslim communalist, the Muslims took him to be pro-Hindu, the princes deemed him to be democratic. The British considered him as a rabid extremist with the result that he was everywhere but nowhere. None wanted him.’

    In poetic language the narrow-minded puritan took him to be a kafir (infidel), and the infidel denounced him as a Mussalman.

    Gandhi would generally be honest, forthright and soft-spoken. He struck to his Hindu faith as tenaciously as any true Hindu would. He also had no love lost for the Muslims.

    Responding to Sarojini Naidu during a discourse about his feelings for the Indian Muslims he confessed, ‘I cannot say in truth that I have any feelings of paternal love for Muslims. But if you put the matter on the grounds of political necessity, I am ready to discuss it in a co-operative spirit. I cannot indulge in any form of sentiment.’

  • YLH

    So if the Muslim identity was well formed before 1925 then your claim that Jinnah invented it falls flat on its face doesn’t it Masadi sb because till 1939 Jinnah was harping about an Indian nation and identity.

  • Arun Gupta

    Yes, I read the Koenraad Elst post that I linked here, and in his knowledge and observation of Hindu movements, Elst is way my superior, and in general, I trust him. He sees emerging Hindu movements outside of the “Sangh Parivar” (as did Shashi Tharoor on twitter today). That is the most interesting part of Elst’s article.

    The first part of the essay, on how the “Religion in South Asia” academics in the US and Europe view Hindus and Hinduism, I know that from personal experience, and the first part of the essay is not of much interest to me.

  • bonobashi

    Arun Gupta

    I had objections to both the first part and the second part. However, considering that you have apparently made up your mind about the first part, through personal experience, among other things, there is not much point in dredging that up. As for the second, I am not sure, not being a Hindutva watcher, about the new emerging Hindu movements and their antecedents. It does seem, at first blush, to be the voice of those who are not happy with the pace and direction of the Sangh’s movement, and who want to accelerate the pace and address matters that even the Sangh had shied away from.

    If somebody like you says that Elst is your superior, that puts a stop to that. Good luck. I really have nothing to say, after those two conversation stoppers.

  • yasserlatifhamdani

    I see Arjun mian being clever by half posting hatemonger Tarek Fatah’s racist and bigoted videos. I suppose this is the kind of Pakistani that is acceptable to him.

    Either way I have removed the video link and any more attempts to be clever by half by NJ Guptas will mean summary deletion of all posts by them.

  • kaalchakra

    Bono,

    Masadi will agree that the mass-murderer certificate Modi did not receive from Indian courts is an eternal shame. His grasp of history and sociology appears to be on the money as well.

    Could your university be needing someone to head its department of history or of sociology?

  • bonobashi

    kaalchakra

    If you are offering yourself for the post, we might think about it. Nothing less but the best for us.

    You might also care to look up a Roland for an Oliver.

  • YLH

    Masadi sb,

    My view on the matter is that identity politics per se is not good or bad. It is useful when a minority seeks better safeguards and economic and political benefits.

    In Modi’s case it is majoritarian identity politics that is the problem. Whatever you may say but Jinnah explicitly advised Muslims of Pakistan to refrain from majoritarianism in Pakistan.

    By the way how is Jinnah father of the identity politics when you accept that both Hindu identity and Muslim identity politics predate him?

  • YLH

    Masadi sb,

    Consociational democracy is also a form of democracy which builds on identity politics. It is a much better form of democracy. I feel you narrowly define identity politics and democracy as mutually exclusive. I am sorry but I do not accept that identity politics is antithesis of democracy.

    You are adamant in defining Jinnah as the father of identity politics when the fact is that identity politics predates him in the subcontinent.

    As for Ahmadi issue it is in no way linked to Muslim nationalism. It is the antithesis of the two nation theory because by all the objective tests applied by TNT Ahmadis are Muslims. The declaration of Ahmadis as Non Muslims is the consequence of majoritarianism against which the TNT was a rebellion.

    Modi has been able to accomplish what he is doing because of majoritarian democracy. Had the subcontinent followed the Consociational model based on consensus between communities that it would have stayed united and would have avoided Modi type characters. Modi therefore is directly related to Congress’ refusal to accommodate a more consociational form of government that Jinnah had wanted.

  • timer

    to ylh


    The question was about Jinnah’s performance AFTER the 14. August 1947.
    But you sink back into eulogies about him before that time.

    Making grand speeches and drafting sly documents (when one is still not in a position of power) is one thing – but to be THE Governor General of one’s dreamland and then end up leaving a mess behind – what of that?

    You refuse to come to terms with the fact that Jinnah after 14.08.47 was a big failure, and that is not surprising since he was lying and grandiosing all the while before that. He was using his intelligence to make everyone else (even those muslims who disagreed with him) look like fools or duds. As a typical lawyer that was his daily “metier”.

    But once the harness of power fell on his shoulders he went down the drain with all his supposed smartness polished up with “brilliant” lies.

    Muslims can perform well when they remain a minority under non-islamic circumstances and relations.
    When they become the majority then their old backward arrogant book-and-tales pull them down into fascism.

    But I am averse to blaming those who are dead.
    What of NOW?
    Why isn’t your Jinnah rhapsody not bringing Pakistan to become the land of milk and honey?

    Jinnah’s Muslim League fell apart because of the internal contradictions and lies. And Jinnah carries the biggest guilt for it.

    Jinnah wants to be reborn as a hindu and undo what he did as a muslim quisling of islamic arabic imperialism.