Pakistans Permanent Revolution

Manto Bhai,
Spin it any way you like, my friend. The fact remains that the poor Indian Muslims, abandoned to being fifth-columnists in their own homeland, got the short end of the stick. They never voted for Pakistan and paid for it in immeasurable misery. :(

Ballu Khan/salim chauhan,

I am afraid I completely disagree with the hogwash below with all due respect. I understand why the undersigned felt it necessary to sign the said letter.... (with the exception of Zakir Hussain) these were unrepresentative opportunist Muslims from an affluent class ... For example Sir Sultan Ahmed Khan had been expelled from the Muslim League for choosing to be on the Viceroy`s War Advisory Council, despite the fact that ML`s official policy was that British ought to contact leaders of Congress and Muslim League for nomination of a representative body during the war.... the list goes on.

Look history ought to be seen in its entirety and not just a few points of view... The partition as it occured was not Muslim League`s idea... but the Congress`. Bengal was to a free state according to the League plan (it was Nehru who did not allow that to come to pass forbidding Sarat Bose to negotiate with Suhrawardy) and there was supposed to be an over all union. To first ruin the Pakistan idea and then blaming it on the very people who warned against it simply because they came up with an idea is ridiculous.

The ridiculous argument that the plight of Muslims in India has to do with the creation of Pakistan is simply making an excuse for Hindu majority`s treatment of its Muslim minority if any.

In reality ... the leaders of the Congress had actually become convinced of the idea that India was better off without large tracts of contiguous Muslim majority areas. The Congress leadership had decided ... post its own rejection of the Cabinet Mission Plan... that

1. a safe army was better than a safe border
2. 12% Muslims were better than 29% Muslims....

In a way they were right... with the exception of Kashmir, Indians have managed to carry on nicely.... India is a Hindu Majority country with every state (with the exception of disputed territory) being a Hindu Majority sate.... this is not to say that India is not a constitutional secular state... majorities and minorities are not even a consideration in a secular state.

Furthermore... partition of India was done on the express condition that minorities in both countries would be safeguarded and there would be no exchange of populations. We can go into who did what (and believe me evidence suggests that of those killed more than 70% were Muslims heading from East Punjab to West Punjab and more than 80% of the killing also took place in Punjab - the result of Congress` insistence - using cynically the very Two Nation Theory ironically which it had condemned- on division of Punjab)... but it goes without saying that there was massive exodus both ways.

In addition to this... the complete cleansing of Muslims in East Punjab and Hindus/Sikhs in West Punjab is because of two reasons:

1. First and foremost... Congress` insistence on partition of Punjab. It was wrong because if the principle had to be applied to districts and not provinces .... then according to Congress every Muslim majority district in India of today should have become a small Pakistani enclave and vice versa.

2. Even after applying the principle to districts unconstitutionally, Congress` machinations keeping the Muslim Majority district of Gurdaspur in India (and you can`t call the Ahmadi card here because law is interpretted according to the period and not the subsequent changes thereto... and besides all Ahmadis voted in Pakistan`s favor along with Christians of Gurdaspur).

3. The deliberate dragging of feet by Dominion of India`s first Governor General, Lord Louis Dickie Mountbatten, on the Boundary force ... leaving people in Punjab caught up in a disastrous situation. This was done at the behest of the Indian Prime Minister to deliver a crushing blow to the newly formed Government of Pakistan.

These are the facts gentlemen... what you`ve posted unfortunately is emotional mumbo jumbo which does not stand the test of history...

And finally the whole issue with Bengal... if these gentlemen cared so much for Bangladesh... why didn`t they ask their ``broadminded`` leader Jawaharlal Nehru why he put his foot down disallowing an Independent Bangladesh in 1947 according to the Lahore Resolution?

And how then the undoing of Nehru`s efforts of 1947 in 1971 can be termed as a failure of the idea of Pakistan.... even though we might well have preserved Pakistan had it not been for the Punjabi shortsightedness....

All in all... Pakistan idea has still worked despite the problems.. but would have worked even better for both countries had the Indian leadership not been so obsessed with smashing Pakistan and had the UP Muslim bourgeoisie not been sidelined by the Punjabi feudal-military alliance in 1958.

#322 and #323,
Ballu Bhai,
Thank you for this very prophetic and passionate plea from the Indian Muslims. Dr. Zakir Hussain went on to become President of India. His brother, who was the Chancellor of Karachi University, always wanted his brother to come to Pakistan. The good man`s response was ``as long as there is a single Muslim left in India, I will continue to stay here.``

The precarious position of India`s Muslims, forced upon them by the selfish acts of the ML, is further proof of the power-hungry, short-sighted, greedy, and inconsiderate leaders who imposed Pakistan on all mankind - much to everyone`s loss.

Salim Saheb,

Let me again re-emphasise the concluding and prophetic remarks of the wise Indian Muslims made in 1951 that pr-empts the 1971 events in Eastern Pakistan-

``In the event of a war, it is extremely doubtful whether it will be able to protect the Muslims of East Bengal who are completely cut off from Western Pakistan. Are the Muslims of India and Eastern Pakistan who sacrifice themselves completely to enable the 25 million Muslims in Western Pakistan to embark upon mad, self-destructive and adventures? We should, therefore, like to impress upon you with all the emphasis at our command that Pakistan`s policy towards Kashmir is fraught with the gravest peril to the 40 million Muslims of
India. If the Security Council is really interested in peace human brotherhood, and international understanding, it should heed this warning while there is still time. ``



regrds,

Re: # 320

Salim Saheb,

Let me add on to your sentiments and state clearly what majority of the Indian Muslims, who did not consider the Punjabistan as their ``home land``, always felt about Pakistani (Punjabi) adventurism.

This document is a very important statement made by Indian Muslims about Pakistani (punjabi) chauvinism -

``Text of Memorandum submitted by 14 Muslim leaders of India to Dr. Frank P. Graham, United Nations Representative 14 August, 1951

It is a remarkable fact that, while the Security Council and its various agencies have devoted so much time to the study of the Kashmir dispute and made various suggestions for its resolution, none of them has tried to ascertain the views of the Indian Muslims nor the possible effect of any hasty step in Kashmir, however well-intentioned, on the interests and well- being of the Indian Muslims. We are convinced that no lasting solution for the problem can be found unless the position of Muslims in Indian society is clearly understood. Supporters of the idea of Pakistan, before this subcontinent was partitioned, discouraged any
attempt to define Pakistan clearly and did little to anticipate the conflicting problems which were bound to arise as a result of the advocacy of the two-nation theory. The concept of Pakistan, therefore, became an emotional slogan with little rationale content. It never occurred to the Muslim League or its leaders that if a minority was not prepared to live with a majority on the sub- continent, how could the majority be expected to tolerate the minority. It is, therefore, small wonder that the result of partition has been disastrous to Muslims. In
undivided India, their strength lay about 100 million. Partition split up the Muslim people, confining them to the three isolated regions. Thus, Muslims number 25 million in Western Pakistan, 35 million to 40 million in India, and the rest in Eastern Pakistan. A single undivided community has been broken into three fragments, each faced with its own problems.
Pakistan was not created on a religious basis. If it had been, our fate as well as the fate of other minorities would have been settled at that time. Nor would the division of the sub- continent for reasons of religion have left large minorities in India or Pakistan. This merely illustrates what we have said above, that the concept of Pakistan was vague, obscure, and never clearly defined, nor its likely consequences foreseen by the Muslim League, even when some of these should have been obvious.
When the partition took place, Muslims in India were left in the lurch by the Muslim League and its leaders. Most of them departed to Pakistan and a few who stayed behind stayed long enough to wind up their affairs and dispose of their property. Those who went over to Pakistan left a large number of relations and friends behind.
Having brought about a division of the country, Pakistan leaders proclaimed that they would convert Pakistan into a land where people would live a life according to the tenets of Islam. This created nervousness and alarm among the minorities living in Pakistan. Not satisfied with this, Pakistan went further and announced again and again their determination to protect and safeguard the interests of Muslims in India. This naturally aroused suspicion amongst the Hindus against us and our loyalty to India was questioned. Pakistan had made our position weaker by driving out Hindus from Western Pakistan in utter
disregard of the consequences of such a policy to us and our welfare. A similar process is in question in Eastern Pakistan from which Hindus are coming over to India in a large and large number. If the Hindus are not welcome in Pakistan, how can we, in all fairness, expect Muslims to be welcomed in India ? Such a policy must inevitably, as the past has already shown, result in the uprooting of Muslims in this country and their migration to Pakistan where, as it became clear last year, they are no longer welcome, lest their influx should destroy Pakistan`s economy.
Neither some of the Muslims who did migrate to Pakistan after partition, and following the widespread bloodshed and conflict on both sides of the Indo-Pakistan border in the north- west, have been able to find a happy asylum in what they had been told would be their homeland.
Consequently some of them have had to return to India, e.g Meos who are now being rehabilitated in their former areas. If we are living honorably in India today, it is certainly not due to Pakistan which, if anything, has by her policy and action weakened our pooition.
The credit goes to the broadminded leadership of India, to Mahatma Gandhi and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, to the traditions of tolerance in this country and to the Constitution which ensures equal rights to all citizens of India, irrespective of their religion caste, creed, colour or
sex. We, therefore, feel that, tragically as Muslims were misled by the Muslim League and subsquently by Pakistan and the unnecessary suffering which we and our Hindu brethren have to go through
in Pakistan and in India since partition, we must be given an opportunity to settle down to a life of tolerance and understanding to the mutual benefit of Hindus and Muslims in our country - if only
Pakistan would let us do it. To us it is a matter of no smaller onsequence.
Despite continuous provocations, first from the Muslim League and since then from Pakistan, the Hindu majority in India has not thrown us or members of other minorities out of Civil Services, Armed Forces, the judiciary, trade, commerce, business and industry. There are Muslim Ministers in the Union and State cabinets, Muslim Governors, Muslim Ambassadors, representing India in foreign countries, fully enjoying the confidence of the Indian nation, Muslim members in
Parliament and state legislatures, Muslim judges serving on the Supreme Court and High Courts, high-ranking officers in the Armed Foroes and the Civil services, including the police. Muslims have large landed estates, run big business and commercial houses in various parts of the
country, notably in Bombay and Calcutta, have their shares in industrial production and enterprise in export and import trade. Our famous sacred shrines and places of cultural interest are mostly in
India.
Not that our lot is certainly happy. We wish some of the state Governments showed a little greater sympathy to us in the field of education and employment. Nevertheless, we feel we have an
honourable place in India. Under the law of the land, our religious and cultural life is protected and we shall share in the opportunities open to all citizens to ensure progress for the people of this country.
It is, therefore, clear that our interest and welfare do not coincide with Pakistan`s conception of the welfare and interests of Muslims in Pakistan.
This is clear from Pakistan`s attitude towards Kashmir. Pakistan claims Kashmir, first, on the ground of the majority of the State`s people being Muslims and, secondly, on the ground, of the state being essential to its economy and defence. To achieve its objective it has been threatening
to launch ``Jehad`` against Kashmir in India.
It is a strange commentary on political beliefs that the same Muslims of Pakistan who like the Muslims of Kashmir to join them invaded the state, in October 1947, killing and plundering Muslims in the state and dishonouring Muslim women, all in the interest of what they described as
the liberation of Muslims of the State. In its oft-proclaimed anxiety to rescue the 3 million Muslims from what it describes as the tyranny of a handful of Hindus in the State, Pakistan evidently is prepared to sacrifice the interests of 40 million Muslims in India - a strange exhibition of concern
for the welfare of fellow- Muslims. Our misguided brothers in Pakistan do not realise that if Muslims in Pakistan can wage a war against Hindus in Kashmir why should not Hindus, sooner or later, retaliate against Muslims in India. Does Pakistan seriously think that it could give us any help if such an emergency arose or that we would deserve any help thanks to its own follies ? It is incapable of providing room and livelihood to the 40 million Muslims of India, should they migrate to Pakistan. Yet its policy and action, if not changed soon, may well produce the result which it dreads. are convinced that India will never attack our interests. First of all, it would be contrary to the spirit animating the political movement in this country. Secondly, it would be opposed to the Constitution and to the sincere leadership of the Prime Minister. Thirdly, India by committing such a folly would be playing straight into the hands of Pakistan. We wish we were equally convinced of the soundness of Pakistan`s policy. So completely oblivious is it of our present problems and of our future that it is willing to sell us into slavery - if only it can secure Kashmir. It ignores the fact that Muslims in Kashmir may also have a point of view of their own, that there is a democratic movement with a democratic leadership in the State, both inspired by the progress of a broad minded, secular, democratic movement in India and both naturally being in sympathy with India. Otherwise, the Muslim raiders should have been welcomed with open arms by the Muslims of the State when the invasion took place in 1947.
Persistent propaganda about ``Jehad`` is intended, among other things, to inflame religious passions in this country. For it would, of course, be in Pakistan`s interests to promote communal rioting in India to show to Kashmiri Muslims how they can find security only in Pakistan. Such a
policy, however, can only bring untold misery and suffering to India and Pakistan generally and to Indian Muslims particularly. Pakistan never tires of asserting that it is determined to protect the interests of Muslims in Kashmir and India.
Why does not Pakistan express the same concern for Pathans who are fighting for Pakhtoonistan, an independent homeland of their own ? The freedom-loving Pathans under the leadership of Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan and Dr. Khan Sahib, both nurtured in the traditions of democratic tolerance of the Indian National Congress, are being subjected to political repression of the worst possible kind by their Muslim brethren in power in Pakistan and in the NWFP. Contradictory as Pakistan`s policy generally is, it is no surprise to us that while it insists on a fair and impartial plebiscite in Kashmir, it denies a fair and impartial plebiscite to Pathans.
Pakistan`s policy in general and her attitude towards Kashmir is particular thus tend to create conditions in this cauntry which in the long run can only bring to us Muslims widespread suffering and destruction. Its policy prevents us from settling down, from being honourable citizens of a State, free from suspicion of our fellow-countrymen and adapting ourselves to changing conditions to promote the interests and welfare of India. Its sabre-rattling interferes with its own economy and ours. It expects us to be layal to it despite its importance to give us any protection, believing at the same time that we can still claim all the rights of citizenship in a secular democracy.
In the event of a war, it is extremely doubtful whether it will be able to protect the Muslims of East Bengal who are completely cut off from Western Pakistan. Are the Muslims of India and Eastern Pakistan who sacrifice themselves completely to enable the 25 million Muslims in Western Pakistan to embark upon mad, self-destructive and adventures? We should, therefore, like to impress upon you with all the emphasis at our command that Pakistan`s policy towards Kashmir is fraught with the gravest peril to the 40 million Muslims of
India. If the Security Council is really interested in peace human brotherhood, and international understanding, it should heed this warning while there is still time.

Dr. Zakir Hussain
(Vice Chancellor Aligarh University)
Sir Sultan Ahmed
(Former Member of Governor General`s Executive Council)
Sir Mohd. Ahmed Syed Khan
(Nawab of Chhatari, former acting
Governor of United Provinces and
Prime Minister of Hyderabad)
Sir Mohd. Usman
(Former member of Governor
General`s Executive council and
acting Governor of Madras)
Sir Iqbal Ahmed
(Former Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court)
Sir Fazal Rahimtoola
(Former Sheriff of Bombay)
Maulana Hafz-ur-Rehman M.P.
Col. B.H. Zaidi M.P.
Nawab Zain Yar Jung
(Minister Gcvernment of Hyderabad)
A.K. Kawaja
(Former President of Muslim Majlis)
T.M. Zarif
(General Secretary West Bengal Bohra Community)``

#319 by majumdar on April 3, 2007 9:48pm PT


But if I am not mistaken, the 1965 war was started by Pakistan as it expected to win and wrest J&K


Whoa....you`re going against the prophet tahmed(pbuhsrr) approved version of history? you must be a hateful Indian....

#317 PewResearch {``This foolish adventure persuaded Mujibur Rehman for a greater need for regional autonomy because he correctly recognized that the Bengali had little stake in Kashmir, but the Punjabi masters would not let go of their wet dreams and would continue to drag the `nation` in an endless conflict``}

Dear PewResearch,
Very good point and clearly and succinctly stated. This is the problem that most Pakistanis fail to admit.

Tahmed sahib,

(majumdar: you my friend are stuck with the Indian disease of thinking you know something when in fact all you are doing is making emotionally satisfying assumptions.)

I am surprised that a veteran chowkie should be surprised with such behaviour on my part, when such behaviour is rampant on chowk and hardly exclusive to Indians.

(You have probably never been to Pakistan, and were probably not even born in 1965.)

Right on both counts. But then Manto mian was not born when MAJ (pbuh) was delivering his world famous Aug 11, 1947 speech, Harishbhai was not around when MKG was practising brahmacharya with his nieces. Heck, even Maulana Urstruly wasn`t around when the Koran was being composed.

(how elated I as a Pakistani felt at the magnificent manner the country came together as one.)

So, I believe it was. But if I am not mistaken, the 1965 war was started by Pakistan as it expected to win and wrest J&K. In that war it was Pak which it had a clear strategic objective- to capture J&K, India was merely trying to defend what it had. And the best that can be said about Pak`s performance was that it was on the worst end of a drawn match. Which got reflected in Tashkent, where Pak got nothing.

And that`s what started the rot. The Pak public/establishment got disillusioned with Ayub and in due course he was eased out. Do you think if Ayub had WON the war and got J&K as he expected to, he would have been thrown out in 1969?

Regards

HAHAHA....manto`s dream of a secular revolution in the land of the pure meets reality..

Seminaries plan ‘Islamic revolution’



By Inamullah Khattak


ISLAMABAD, April 2: Two religious seminaries, Jamia Faridia and Jamia Hafsa, are adamant to enforce “Shariat” in Islamabad and across the country and said they will announce their movement in the Lal Masjid on Friday.

They warned the government of serious consequences if it tried to create hurdles in implementing the “Islamic law”.

“We will start our Islamic revolution in Islamabad on Friday by launching a crackdown on CDs, DVDs and other secular activities in the G-6 sector. The exercise will be extended to the NWFP and other areas at later stages. We have full support of madressahs in various cities,” Jamia Faridia and Jamia Hafsa in-charge Maulana Abdul Aziz told Dawn on Monday.

Re: # 316 Tauheed
``...how elated I as a Pakistani felt at the magnificent manner the country came together as one....``
Your attitude sums up the West Pakistani (aka Punjabi) sentiment, and not the `national` feeling - the impact that it had on Bengali separatism eludes you to this day. Your `nation` clearly did not consider the Bengalis as part of that `nation`, as your post so eloquently demonstrates. Many Pakistani Punjabis to this day do not recognize how vulnerable East Pakistan felt at the time, and how the reckless adventure by Ayub left them completely defenseless in yet another `magnificent` example of GHQ (Rawalpindi) of `strategic, bold` thinking and that `the defence of the East lay in the West` (the precursor to the `strategic depth` theory now in vogue). You see, all of East Pakistan was defended by a grand total of a two-infantry brigade division (14 Division) without any tank support. This foolish adventure persuaded Mujibur Rehman for a greater need for regional autonomy because he correctly recognized that the Bengali had little stake in Kashmir, but the Punjabi masters would not let go of their wet dreams and would continue to drag the `nation` in an endless conflict.

``...I on the other hand was living in Pakistan at the time...``
Did you ever visit Dhaka to gauge the Bengali feeling?
CIAO

majumdar: you my friend are stuck with the Indian disease of thinking you know something when in fact all you are doing is making emotionally satisfying assumptions. Thus, you only find it emotionally satisfying to think that 1965 was seen as a defeat by pakistanis and/or it caused turmoil against Ayub Khan. You have probably never been to Pakistan, and were probably not even born in 1965. I on the other hand was living in Pakistan at the time of the 1965 war, and had the additional benefit of reading not just newspapers but also knowing how elated I as a Pakistani felt at the magnificent manner the country came together as one.

Manto mian,

It is quite interesting that neither the founders of Pakistan (ML/MAJ (pbuh)) or the founders of Israel (Zionists) were particularly religious sort, in fact to some extent Orthodox Jews as well as Deobandis often kept distance from the Isreal/Pak movement.

Regards

Majumdar,

No that is not my point of view. My point of view is simply that Gandhi`s mobilisation in the name of religion both Islam and Hinduism ... brought into politics fundamentalist elements especially Deobandis and gave them a platform The inability to rein in these freaks of the Pakistan government at first and then the Pakistan government`s encouragement in the 1980s of the same elements is what has brought us to this point.

I only bring up Gandhi in this issue, when some ignorant fools from your side try and trace this back to Pakistan movement which had nothing to do with Deobandis, which was almost entirely in the Congress pocket with the exception of one small breakaway group. Even the sunni religious group that Muslim League leaned on in Punjab in 1945-1946 was the Barelvi low church... the sort that celebrate Eid Milad un Nabi and accept Qawali and mazars and pirs as an integral part of Islam..... not the straitjacket variety you see...

That said... it was the Pakistani establishment during the Afghan War that made the straitjacket deobandi sect a hanging sword for us.

Arjunbhai,

Re: #312

(wonder how he`ll blame this on racist fascist gandhi... )

According to Manto mian, fundamentalism/religious idiocy of any kind was completely unknown to the blessed subscontinent especially the North-Western quarter of it. It was introduced there by MKG and his followers- Deobdandis, Murdoodi etc.

Manto/Tahmed,

While it is true that it was a mass movement that had removed Ayub, that mass movement would have never got any momentum nor Ayub felt sufficiently unnnerved had the unsuccessful 1965 war never happened. The unfortunate part was that power got transferred not to people but to another General Yahya. And when he did do the right thing, hold elections he failed to transfer power to the victors cuaisng the even greater tragedy of 1970-71.

Regards

wonder what manto thinks about the talibanization of the land of the pure..wonder how he`ll blame this on racist fascist gandhi...

Video shops in fear of attacks in Islamabad

By Imran Naeem Ahmad

ISLAMABAD: Shopkeepers selling CDs and DVDs in the city fear religious extremists will force them to close.

Groups of madrassa students have been going around markets, especially Aabpara Market, in recent days warning shops to shut down because they were “corrupting society”. Shaikh Adnan, who runs a shop in Aabpara Market, told Daily Times that some 10 to 15 male students from a local madrassa had asked him to shut down his business and take up something else.

“They came here a few days ago and told me quite politely to get into some other business,” he said. He in turn asked them for financial assistance. “They directed me to go see the head of the madrassa in this regard but I have not had the time to do so,” he said.

Most shop owners were reluctant to talk about the threat from madrassa students. One shop owner, asking to remain anonymous, said he had been sent a written notice by madrassa students telling him to close his business. “They have given me a one-month deadline,” he said.

He said this was the first time he had received such a threat in 25 years in the business. “I have invested about Rs 1,200,000 and I fail to understand where I can go if I have to do some other thing,” he said. A salesman at one of Islamabad’s leading CD and DVD centers also reported that three religious students had come to his shop. “They told us that this was not an appropriate business,” he said and added that the police came in shortly after they left.

Other shop owners termed the police “mere spectators”. “They came in long after the rounds of the vigilantes,” one businessman said. They said that men from the intelligence agencies also visited them.

Students of Jamia Hafsa and Jamia Fareedia recently took the law into their hands in an “anti-vice drive”, raiding an alleged brothel and kidnapping three women.

The principal of Jamia Hafsa, Umme Hassan, said on Monday that seminary students had no plans to force closures of such businesses. “No action is going to be taken against them, it is just that we are advising them to stop selling porno movies and stuff,” she told journalists. She dismissed the notion that girl students of Jamia Hafsa had threatened the traders. “This is not true, rather burqa-clad personnel from secret agencies have been going round the markets to taint our image,” she claimed. The principal said that a group of traders had been told that no action would be taken against any business.

#310 stuka can put away an entire steak while sardar dullabhatti is still struggling to swallow the first bite.