Guest Post by Yasser Latif Hamdani
Today being 11th August Day has a great significance in Pakistan’s history.
60 years ago, Mr. Jinnah, Pakistan’s undisputed Quaid-e-Azam, Governor General and elected President of the Constituent Assembly elaborated his vision for the future of Pakistan.
Jinnah’s vision is unambiguous.
1. The state would be completely impartial to religion of the individual.
2. The state where every citizen would be equal and there would be no distinction between citizen on the basis of faith or caste or creed.
A lot of controverey has emerged about this speech. Any student of political science would tell you that is the classic exposition of a modern secular democratic state. However, the issue of whether this constitutes a “secular” state or an “Islamic” state is besides the point. A rose by any name is after all a rose.
Here is what Mr. Jinnah said on that fateful day. It is worth reading in the full:
I know there are people who do not quite agree with the division of India and the partition of the Punjab and Bengal. Much has been said against it, but now that it has been accepted, it is the duty of every one of us to loyally abide by it and honourably act according to the agreement which is now final and binding on all. But you must remember, as I have said, that this mighty revolution that has taken place is unprecedented. One can quite understand the feeling the exists between the two communities wherever one community is in majority and the other is in minority. But the question is whether it was possible or practicable to act otherwise than has been done. A division had to take place. On both sides, in Hindustan and Pakistan, there are sections of people who may not agree with it, who may not like it, but in my judgment there was no other solution and I am sure future history will record its verdict in favour of it. And what is more it will be proved by actual experience as we go on that that was the only solution of India’s constitutional problem. Any idea of a United India could never have worked and in my judgment it would have led us to terrific disaster. May be that view is correct ; may be it is not; that remains to be seen. All the same, in this division it was impossible to avoid the question of minorities being in one Dominion or the other. Now that was unavoidable. There is no other solution. Now what shall we do? Now, if we want to make this great State of Pakistan happy and prosperous we should wholly and solely concentrate on the well-being of the people, and especially of the masses and the poor. If you will work in co-operation, forgetting the past, burying the hatchet you are bound to succeed. If you change your past and work together in a spirit that every one of you, no matter to what community he belongs, no matter what relations he had with you in the past, no matter what is his colour, caste or creed, is first, second and last a citizen of this State with equal rights, privileges and obligations, there will be no end to the progress you will make.
I cannot emphasize it too much. We should begin to work in that spirit and in course of time all these angularities of the majority and minority communities the Hindu community and the Muslim community-because even as regards Muslims you have Pathans, Punjabies, Shias, Sunnis and so on and among the Hindus you have Brahmins, Vashnvas, Khatris, also Bengalis, Madrasis, and so on-will vanish. Indeed if you ask me this has been the biggest hindrance in the way of India to attain the freedom and independence and but for this we would have been free peoples long long ago. No power can hold another nation, and specially a nation of 400 million souls in subjection ; nobody could have conquered you, and even if it had happened, nobody could have continued its hold on you for any length of time but for this. Therefore we must learn a lesson from this. You are free ; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed-that has nothing to do with the business of the State. As you know, history shows that in England conditions some time ago were much worse than those prevailing in India today. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants persecuted each other. Even now there are some State in existence where there are discriminations made and bars imposed against a particular class. Thank God we are not starting in those days. We are starting in the days when there is no discrimination, no distinction between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one state. The people of England in course of time had to face the realities of the situation and had to discharge the responsibilities and burdens placed upon them by the Government of their country and they went through that fire step by step. Today you might say with justice that Roman Catholic and Protestants do not exists ; what exists now is that every man is a citizen, an equal citizen, of Great Britain and they are all members of the Nation.
Now, I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.
Many have alleged that this was the only time he expressed such a vision. Unfortunately, these people are not very well versed with the life and work of Quaid-e-Azam Mahomed Ali Jinnah, who was after all a staunch secular Indian nationalist for most of his life and had turned to the Pakistan idea only after exhausting all the options for a United India.
Here are some of his other statements regarding what kind of Pakistan he wanted:
25th October 1947. Interview with Reuters’ Duncan Hooper note: not to be confused with his interview with Reuters’ Doon Campbell which has been quoted in detail else where.
Minorities DO NOT cease to be citizens. Minorities living in Pakistan or Hindustan do not cease to be citizens of their respective states by virtue of their belonging to particular faith, religion or race. I have repeatedly made it clear, especially in my opening speech to the constituent Assembley, that the minorities in Pakistan would be treated as our citizens and will enjoy all the rights as any other community. Pakistan SHALL pursue this policy and do all it can to create a sense of security and confidence in the Non-Muslim minorities of Pakistan. We do not prescribe any school boy tests for their loyalty. We shall not say to any Hindu citizen of Pakistan ‘if there was war would you shoot a Hindu?’
30th October 1947. To a Mass Rally at University Stadium Lahore.
The tenets of Islam enjoin on every Musalman to give protection to his neighbours and to the Minorities regardless of caste and creed. We must make it a matter of our honor and prestige to create sense of security amongst them.
Same Day. On Radio Pakistan.
Protection of Minorities is a sacred undertaking. (On Partition Massacres) Humanity cries out loud against this shameful conduct and deeds. The civilized world is looking upon these doings and happenings with horror and the fair name of the communities concerned stands blackened. Put an end to this ruthlessly and with an Iron hand.
9th January 1948. Tour of Riot affected areas of Karachi.
Muslims! Protect your Hindu Neighbours. Cooperate with the Government and the officials in protecting your Hindu Neighbours against these lawless elements, fifth columnists and cliques. Pakistan must be governed through the properly constituted Government and not by cliques or fifth columnists or Mobs.
25th January. Address to the Karachi Bar association on the occasion of Eid Milad un Nabi.
I would like to tell those who are misled by propaganda that not only the Muslims but Non Muslims have nothing to fear. Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. Islam has taught Equality, Justice and fairplay to everybody. What reason is there for anyone to fear. Democracy, equality, freedom on the highest sense of integrity and on the basis of fairplay and justice for everyone. Let us make the constitution of Pakistan. We will make it and we will show it to the world.
3rd February 1948. Address to the Parsi Community of Sindh.
I assure you Pakistan means to stand by its oft repeated promises of according equal rights to all its nationals irrespective of their caste or creed. Pakistan which symbolizes the aspirations of a nation that found it self to be a minority in the Indian subcontinent cannot be UNMINDFUL of minorities within its own borders. It is a pity that the fairname of Karachi was sullied by the sudden outburst of communal frenzy last month and I can’t find words strong enough to condemn the action of those who are responsible.
21st March 1948. Mass Rally at Dacca.
Let me take this opportunity of repeating what I have already said: We shall treat the minorities in Pakistan fairly and justly. We shall maintain peace, law and order and protect and safeguard every citizen of Pakistan without any distinction of caste, creed or community.
22nd March 1948. Meeting with Hindu Legislators.
We guarantee equal rights to all citizens of Pakistan. Hindus should in spirit and action wholeheartedly co-operate with the Government and its various branches as Pakistanis.
23rd March 1948. Meeting with the ‘Scheduled Caste Federation’.
We stand by our declarations that members of every community will be treated as citizens of Pakistan with equal rights and privileges and obligations and that Minorities will be safeguarded and protected.
13 June 1948. Speaking to Quetta Parsis.
Although you have not struck the note of your needs and requirements as a community but it is the policy of my Government and myself that every member of every community irrespective of caste color, creed or race shall be fully protected with regard to his life, property and honor. I reiterate to you that you like all minorities will be treated as equal citizens with your rights and obligations provided you are loyal to Pakistan.
Jinnah’s address to the people of the US in Feb 1948.
In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic State — to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non- Muslims — Hindus, Christians, and Parsis — but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan.
He stood for justice and fair play for every one regardless of religion caste or creed. Let us make a solemn promise to ourselves on this 11th August Day (or the day I like to call Jinnah’s Pakistan Day) that we shall honor this vision of Pakistan as a pluralist, inclusive and progressive democratic state.
YLH:
“You sound like a raving lunatic who wanted to derail the board into an India-Pakistan shouting match and is now bitter that it did not come to pass. ”
What? Because you exhumed Jinnah and I was putting him into context? How on earth do you expect someone to discuss Jinnah and his ideas without talking about the time period he was speaking from? You say that his values and ideas should be adhered to today, and then you turn around and say that events from that era are irrevelant. You do realize that his values and ideas were formed and conditioned by his time? And that if someone brings up the past because YOU did, you can’t turn around and accuse them of irrevelantly bringing up the past?
There’s absolutely nothing India vs. Pakistan about my comments. Show me where I ever insinuated such a thing. I went out of my way to state very clearly in my first post that everything that I was saying about my reactions to the things you quoted was entirely applicable to India. What kind of lawyer are you if you can’t even read and you miss the logic (which was explicitly explained) of the person with whom you are arguing?
“I thank the Gujju who freed us from those who speak with a forked tongue.”
I have no idea what the hell you are trying to say here, but if it’s something racist and self congratulatory and veering into India vs. Pakistan and respectively those who are fork tongued and not, then I have absolutely nothing to say to you.
“I can’t help you with your blinkers.”
Tell you what- why don’t you take off your blinkers, and stop putting blinkers on others. Your post is a classic example of nationalist hogwash: harking back to sanctified historical heroes when Independence Day rolls around to obfuscate the real problems that are going on today. Was it too hard to do some research and write something substantiative about current problems that most Pakistanis face?It’s so easy to pull up quotes from speeches. If you can somehow link Jinnah’s speech from 1947 to the current problems that I briefly mentioned in my earlier comment, I’ll consider your argument. If not, you’ve only written this post to give yourself some airtime and have people say, “Oh, YLH, you are so very intelligent. Thank you for the timely post. I will most definately consider Mr. Jinnah’s words.”
“My friend, your assertions are entirely yours.”
Indeed, my assertions are entirely mine. And your baqwaas comment above is entirely yours.
***
Adnan:
“I would really like to read some Indian blog regarding their 15th august that who’s considered HERO for them for nation building or independence, is it Gandhi or Nehru? I mean are Indian thankful for any of them or one of them because I think Gandhi isn’t like much because he’s blamed for partition.”
If you want my personal opinion as to who’s considered the hero, who cares?
I have a problem with trudging up historical figures in the first place, and this mindless evoking and praising of people who were 1) human and as such, flawed and imperfect like you and me and 2) are long gone. The problem is that we need to deal with today and the figures that dominate today. Unless Gandhi and Nehru can come back from the dead and fix the real problems that plague India today, then I’ll consider whether they are heroes or not and whether they are relevant.
But to answer your question briefly, both Gandhi and Nehru are considered the heroes of Independence. Nehru is continuously referenced by the intelligentsia, bourgeousis, etc. for his visions of India. And no, most Indians don’t hold Gandhi responsible for Partition; the fundies do, though.
You can e-mail me to carry on this discussion, if you’d like.
jinnah lived little bit more than a year after the creation of pak. during this time he had absolute sway over pakistan. did he in this period take any steps which indicated that he favoured a creation of saudi or iranian style theocracy? no he did not. he did not appoint a group of religious scholars which would have veto power over law passed by the government. he did not appoint a saudi or iranian style religious police which would ensure that citizens would live their lives in a manner demanded by the mullah. consumption of alcohol was legal when jinnah was alive and remained so until the dying days of zab regime.
so was jinnah a hypocrite for creating a country for muslims in which muslims would not live their lives according to that prescribed by the mullahs? no he was not. jinnah realised that despite protestations to the contrary by congress, neither would muslim interest be protected in a united india, nor would muslim’s be free from discrimination. jinnah and his saathis realised that while congress claimed to be a secular organisation, reality of south asia was such that religion would be the most important factor in determining the relationship between majority and minority community. congress track record in running state governments under british indicated to muslims that without any checks and balances, muslims would get a raw deal at the hands of majority community.
the other and equally important reason for demand for pakistan was that jinnah believed that muslims of south asia possessed a unique identity which had something positive to offer for the rest of the world. jinnah’s experience of dealing with congress made him realise that independent muslim state would be the best vehicle through which muslim of south asia could meet their aspirations. jinnah genuinely believed supremacy of system rooted in islam over other belief systems such as secularism, socialism or communism. however, jinnah not being blind, realised that muslims had been losing to the west for two hundred years and he was smart enough to identify what those reasons were that caused west to gain supremacy over islamic world. essentially jinnah wanted to pakistan to be a modern muslim state which had incorporated in its fold those ideas through the west gained supremacy. jinnah believed, and history has proved him right, that only that state would be successful which did not discriminate against basis, caste, creed, origin as taught by islam. jinnah also realised that even within muslims, there are all types and it was not the job of government to make people live in a particular way.
in my opinion, among all the current muslim countries, malaysia would be the country that would be closest to the country jinnah wanted paksitan to be. too bad we have our founding father, one of the foremost muslim leaders produced by modern islamic world. too bad we are too dumb to understand his vision.
@YLH:
Here is the relevant quote from Stanley Wolpert book: Jinnah himself was dying of lung cancer and tuberculosis by the time he returned to Karachi as Pakistan’s first governor-general. What little he said about the constitution he envisaged for his nation indicates that he hoped it might be “democratic, based on Islamic foundations of social justice … equality and brotherhood of man.” Such inspirational generalizations were all he ever articulated, through his first address to the new Constituent Assembly on 11 August 1947 – shortly before he died – was his longest constitutional legacy, and the closest Jinnah ever came to explaining how he hoped the Pakistan of his dream might one day function:
“The first duty of a Government is to maintain law and order, so that the life and property and religious beliefs of its subjects are fully protected … The second thing … is bribery and corruption. That really is a poison. We must put down with an iron hand …Black-marketing is another curse … The next thing is … the evil of nepotism and jobbery. This evil must be crushed relentlessly … If we take our inspiration and guidance from the Holy Quran, the final victory … will be ours …[B]e prepared to sacrifice … all, if necessary, in building Pakistan as a bulwark of Islam and as one of the greatest nations whose ideal is peace …”
(M.A.Jinnah, speech in Karachi Club, 9 August 1947, in Speeches of Quaid-I-Azam, Mohammad Ali Jinnah as Governor General of Pakistan (Karachi: Sind Observer Press, 1948)
The point of contention here is (1) secular state of Bangladesh in fact brings out more anti-Hindu feelings than was the case when it was part of the “Islamic State” of Pakistan. And (2) Jinnah’s above quotes debunk the conjecture some are trying to superimpose on Pakistan today – with their “secularist-fundamentalist” agenda and “Islamic bogeymen” syndrome. Thus the use or rather misuse of such mumbo-jumbo terms is primarily a weak strategy that defeats the very purpose of our faith and nation.
Dear Desi Italiana,
I can’t help you with your blinkers. Only you can :). You sound like a raving lunatic who wanted to derail the board into an India-Pakistan shouting match and is now bitter that it did not come to pass. I’ll be honest: I was suspicious of you from the first post and it is quite clear that I was right. I thank the Gujju who freed us from those who speak with a forked tongue.
My friend, your assertions are entirely yours. As I have explained in my articles, this vision-outlined in the above article- was the logical outcome of Jinnah’s entire life … where he had championed justice and fairplay whether as an Indian nationalist or as the lawyer for the Muslim people(s).
kem chay- this is the only thing I know about gujrati. I also know chay is a verb means “is”.. Oh the other is “Samborh” means ‘to listen’.
this is off topic but since few Indians are participating here, I would really like to read some Indian blog regarding their 15th august that who’s considered HERO for them for nation building or independence, is it Gandhi or Nehru? I mean are Indian thankful for any of them or one of them because I think Gandhi isn’t like much because he’s blamed for partition.
This is nonsense. Anyone who has taken even an introductory class in high school political science knows that secular means that affairs of state are separate from affairs of religion.
that’s the problem with people like you who are still living in era of childhood hence still in school. The practical definition of secularism is entirely different that what you learnt in papers. Just look around, the events happening actually exposing the true meaning of secularism. Secularism in India means violence against Muslims and other minorities. Same goes in US and Turkey. No matter how much these countries do propaganda about their so called Secular state, ground realities reflect something else.
YLH:
“My humble suggestion once more is that you search my name “Yasser Latif Hamdani” on google and you will find many discussions”
The problem is that I never know who is who when I read their writings (ie I opined that Prof. Najam was a journalist when I later found out he is a…well… a professor). I did google your name, and I would like to be very, very honest: I wish you hadn’t told me that, because after having read a few of your articles, it now causes me to look harder and even be a bit suspicious of your assertions, whether in your articles or on this post.
Anyway, I will no longer sully a thread that talks about Jinnah and looks to him as a model and solution to today’s ills without taking into account the context of his time in which he beliefs, ideas, and visions were rooted. You’re right- the post is about Jinnah the figure. It doesn’t matter where he was located temporally, socially, economically, and politically.
I also think quoting Jinnah’s speeches will definately instill a civic responsability to all Pakistanis the world over and provoke them into thinking about that huge question of nationalism and patriotism anchored in religion (well, the ones who can read the speeches anyway, which at this point is the minority, according to the latest literacy figures). Hopefully, this patriotism, nationalism, and secularism built upon Islam will help the Pakistani literati think about the smaller questions like human rights abuses, lack of sanitation and water, abysmal funding in education ( but perhaps well off emigres can step in and fill that void of the state??), unequal and unjust treatment of women, abject poverty, ruthless landlords, an endless “war on terror,” persecution of religious minorities, inconsistant application of the civil code, extrajudicial killings, forced disappearances, severe socio-economic disparity, the number of AIDS cases starting to increase, the drug problem, and so on.
I think that especially these two nuggets are going to remedy the ills that afflict Pakistan:
” You are free ; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed-that has nothing to do with the business of the State. ”
“Now, I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.”
Yes, you see? Once everyone understands and internalizes this, the Chaudhry landlords will stop terrorizing their impoverished tenants. Once Pakistanis hear these two gems, women will be given equal rights in practice. Once they hear Jinnah’s pearls of wisdom above, soon every Pakistani will have roti in their bellies. And etc.
And now, I will slip out of the room- before I get told, “This is not the place to talk about these problems. The post is on Jinnah.” Carry on.
(PS. As a Gujarati, I would like to point out that Mr. Jinnah was also Gujarati. Think about that.)
The most pertinent thing today is that Jinnah saw no role of army in politics. That’s enough for now.