Death of the Raj: Subcontinent in the Third Millennium

Bullshit lilkna to koi is banday say seekhay...

Chutyas... one and all...

Living in the west complaining about the ``Quasi-Westernised elites`` of South Asia.

An interesting article... that the two-nation theory was so laughably faulty should now be beyond doubt. But seems like you are still clinging on to some vestiges of it. Your constant reference to India as `Hindustan` is a poignant indicator of that. India is not a country of `Hindus`, its a secular democracy which happens to have a Hindu majority. Would you refer to the USA as `White-anglosaxon-protestantistan`? Anyway, I digress.

When the two-nation theory died in 1971, the sub-continent was left with the `one nation` and the `many nations` theories. You have eloquently hypothesized that the later is the only feasible eventuality. But I believe there is one event that may prevent the `CIS` from coming about.

That event is the rise of a prosperous liberal Islamic force in India.

The most powerful dividing force of the sub-continent is the communal tension and miss-trust between Hindus and Muslims. This is largely due to the fact that Muslims, a minority in the sub-continent, have always felt insecure due to the pervasive hatred and discrimination it has faced from the Hindu majority. But this is changing... tangibly and visibly so!! You may point to the Babri demolition or the rise of the BJP and pooh-pooh my claim. But anybody who lives in India will agree with me.

When India becomes a true and prosperous liberal democracy and its minorities start to prosper economically....

When the religious and ethnic bigotry slowly washes away from the psyche of a `partition scarred` nation....

The Indian Muslims will emerge as a powerful `liberal Islamic` force, they will be so powerful and prosperous that the Muslims in current day Pakistan and Bangladesh will clamor for reunification. Much like the East Germans did. That day India will gain back it`s long lost brothers.

Now you probably are smirking right now... mumbling to yourself ``dream on, brother...``, well... if you are, then you severely underestimate India and its people. An underestimation that is based entirely upon a total lack of understanding of India and its components as is vividly illustrated by your article.

Why do you cluster Gujarat & Maharashtra together? I mean if the dismemberment was to happen.. you want Gujaratis and Marathis to be living in the same state and have Rajasthanis in a different one? Are you nuts?? And what`s up with Junagarh? Have you ever been to junagarh? Do you know what people there think? It`s not even funny!!

Great mind opener. Good use of language and marshalling of thoughts.

I wonder if Mother Time can put back spilt milk in the container? It would require a few centuries of educational broadening of individual horizons to entertain these ideas.

However, as the ancient Chinese saying goes. the journey of a thosand miles begins with a single step.

As I said elsewhere,more power to the Rabbanis in us.

I agree with you. However, this will be seen as India-Pakistan reunification by some and that is a non-starter. I can tell you that as a Punjabi Indian, I am proud of both these identities - an Indian identity and a Punjabi sub-identity. I would be happy with a Commonwealth of Indian States. I am not quite ready to give up my sense of Indianess. I equate Punjab and India to France and Europe. Unlike Europe which is moving from independent states to a federation, India is moving from a centralized state to a federation. So I`m happy to see an Indian federation. But I`m not ready to drop the name India from the face of this earth.

Dear Author,

Don t you see that we are a civilization in decay? We will suffer our lifetime and as you said: vanish like whiffs of smoke in the winds of history.

After reading this article, I was left feeling that its author has very little understanding of what constitutes a nation. Ultimately, it is the collective voice and aspirations of a people. Mr. Rabbani takes us through some of the history of South Asia and correctly points out that there has never been an Indian nation as such until the arrival of the British who created that masterpiece of the White Man`s Burden known as the British Raj. Although modern day India can be argued to be a remnant of this colonial creation, it never the less represents the collective psyche of the people of peninsular South Asia, especially the Gangetic plains. Pakistan represents the collective ambition of the races of the Indus Valley Region who have evolved to develop their own sense of nationhood based on the traditions of Muslim South Asia. Regardless of Mr. Rabbani`s own musings, Pakistanis are very proud of their nation, despite collective frustrations about economic setbacks, social and political difficulties and the like. It is a measure of our concern for our country that we follow events at home so critically. I am sure that Indians feel the same about their country.Returning to the topic of what constitutes a nation or its ethos, let me say again that the people of a nation ultimately guide such concerns which is why modern India is evolving towards the philosophy of Hindutva under its current BJP leadership-in other words they are returning to their roots. As a Pakistani from Sialkot let me say that Mr. Rabbani is woefully unaware of how Pakistanis see themselves. Indeed, I have never heard a native Pakistani Punjabi espouse any sentiment of union with Indian East Punjab. Simply put the people of Pakistani Punjab do not see themselves as part of a nation with Punjabis across the border despite sharing some cultural nuances. Indeed we think of the Punjab as representing a geographical region- the land of five rivers- where there is as much diversity in geography as there is in race and ethnicity. That is why Punjabi Pakistanis often claim foreign lineage be it Baluch, Pakhtoon, Arab, Jat (Scythian) or Central Asian depending upon their local.My wife who hails from the Frontier explains that Pakhtoons do not necessarily define themselves as a ethnic group or race but by adherence to the code of Pakhtooniwali. There is evidence to suggest that the lands and peoples of the Indus have formed a community of sorts for centuries. Certainly the close proximity of the lands of modern Pakistan about the Indus has been argued to be a natural geographic cluster for a nation- No doubt Mr. Rabbani is aware that from the times of early Arab traders, at least two nations were defined in South Asia: Al-Sind (Pakistan) and Al-Hind (Hindustan); perhaps the truth is there in history after all Mr. Rabbani?!Pakistan Zindabad

I am not sure how things work in Pakistan. But I can atleast speak for India. In India, every state depends on the other state for survival. This could be for water, electricity, food, industry etc., etc., Moreover the differences between the people of India is not abrupt between bordering states but very gradual. Thus a malayali is similar to a tamilian is very similar to a kannadiga who is similar to a coorgi who is similar to a konkani who is similar to a marathi who is similar to a gujarati and so on. so we really don`t live in a context of dissimilarity or anarchy. Moreover India as a country is no more controlled only by the Hindi Heartland. We already follow a form of federal goverment with regional influences having their say in national matters. In the last few years we have had successive prime ministers who were from the south. The North-South divide has been waning thanks to the quality cinema from the south and the north and other areas of cultural and linguistic exchanges. Petty differences and insipid parochialisms do exist but then these would always be there wherever and however people live. The need for the hour is not further partition but to install several checkpoints in our system to take those who would misuse it for their personal aggrandisement to task. Also there needs to be a greater amount of transparency in the system to identify the process . I am not going into great depths in these as those are for another time and another discussion. However to answer the author, further seperation would only create more Indias and pakistans in the sub-continent. The prospect of a Malayali and a Tamilian hating each other and spewing venom like what is happening between Indians and Pakistanis is frightening. One must remember that even if such feelings are not in existance now , if seperated these would be fanned by vested interests . Sir, you are talking of chaos. I am not talking of unification of India and Pakistan too. What is really needed is for India and Pakistan to maintain their status quo, respect each other and carry on with their lifes with the nuclear deterrents in place. As far as Kashmir is concerned, Kashmir represents the future of all the Muslims in India (who incidentally number more than those in Pakistan) if Kashmir is made independant based on the fact that it has a muslim majority and given a muslim government, what would stop the hindus to claim majority, plunder the muslims of india and form a Hindu Rastra. All of you who talk of seperatism and independance of kashmir and partition of punjab and sindh will have to carry the cross of murder and mayhem that you have generated to your graves. Thanks god that bangladesh was far off from pakistan. Otherwise bangladesh`s independance would have created more problems than solutions. Hope your dreams remain what they are and what they are worth for.

...and lahore is a city of 7 million

Let us not analyze the subcontinent with the geographical image of just British India in mind and ignore the cultural interlinkeages of the western portions of Pakistan with Central Asia. Often the punjabi/sindhi based pakistanis with their similarities to Northern Indians, overlook the fact that those of sarhad and baluchistan have their cultural similarities tied to the West (Central Asia). Khair, this was an aside- another aside: the annual budgets of the Pakistan PM`s and President`s houses is greater than the annual budget of Lahore.

aadabarz
fraz
pakistan zindabad

Very interesting and well written article, I especially enjoyed the history lesson in the beginning.
Here are some of my comments to specific arguments/facts you presented:

1. The Bengali elite were just as eager for partition as the Indian Muslim elite for precisely the same reasons -- they did not want to be under the provincial authority of poorer Muslim Bengalis

2. Though I would like to condemn the 1947 partition on sound intellectual/ideological grounds, I wonder the alternative of being part of larger India would have been better (I know you are not suggesting that in your essay). Imagine being a Muslim woman in an increasingly Hinduized and intolerant India!

3. The reason Pakistan and India remain hostile is not so much cold war politics but an attempt byu New Dehli to consolidate regional hegemony which Pakistan is continually trying to undermine. I totally agree that this continuing hostility is a huge and unaffordable cost for these impoversihed countries.

4. I am not convinced that the European Union is an appropriate model for smaller south asian states.

5. Ideally, yes it would be best if strong central governments were displaced by loosely confederated structures where smaller communities were able to take control over their resources and decision-making. But, as long as there are bigger and better armed neighbours, these communities (if they only cooperate at an economic level) would be vulnerable and some large NATO-esque military industrial complex would be required. (Which might also mean a large bully like the US). In addition to that, I wonder how easy it would be to dismantle the suspicion and hostility of the Punjabis and the Bengalis, for example, after 50 years of isolation and propaganda -- not to mention the blood bath during 1947.

6. Finally, even though I do feel that Balochistan is treated like an ugly step-child in Pakistan, I am not sure it`s people would feel completely comfortable being tossed out to fend for themselves or become part of Afghanistan (?).

Thanks for your thoughts and for making everyone else think.

Dr. Rabbani, a recent development in China lends more credibility to your prediction of
a confederation or a ``Union of Central Asian Republics``, from the Oxus to the Indus. Wei
Jingsheng, of the Tinnamen Square massacre
fame, was escorted out of Beijing last week
and onto the JFK airport. If history repeats
itself, the beginning of the end of breakup of the Soviet Union started when Solzhynitsen
was escorted out of Moscow in the 1970s and
onto the JFK airport. He gained internatinal
notoriety and became a rallying cry for the forces of ``freedom`` within and without the former Soviet Union. The release of Wei
Jensheng is a harbinger of things to come for the breakup of the Peoples Republic of China.
It may take a few years for the caesarean
birth of a septulets of ``stans``, but a seed has been planted and conception may take a
decade or so. Right on schedule for the year
2025!

The idea of a confederation of states of India is not new. It was proposed but turned down at the time the great division was made. in some form tho. it is already present.
The point though is that a system which elicits greater paricipation of the electorate will be somehow better than one that does not. I must concede that it is RARE for large tracts of land to form a peaceful and directed whole with perhaps America and China the exceptions. (Interestingly, their economic models/ideologies have nothing in common). On the same theme though and I agree with one of the replies here, that making smaller pieces of the sub-continent is not a solution for its immense ideological conflicts. Viewing it on a still larger canvas, assuming that the Earth is progressing towards a global unity, we still have seperate countries constantly fighting... And I don`t think that will change in a hurry. Also, whether a country is a sum of its parts or one political entity on paper is very different from its real collective role. Becoming lots of small states is a failure of the U.S.S.R`s political method not a natural result of its history. What u say will probably happen, but I dont think it will appear that way to the people of those times, much like the division of Russia seems like a victory of democracy and the failure of socialism..whereas what I think happened was that their political organization failed to motivate people..that the socialist ideal was not IMPLEMENTED. It is not just a political method but its implementation in spirit and word which change the fates of nations. That it is the sincerity with which an ideology is implemented. Which in turn depends on how much sense it makes to the people who will use it, i.e., its relevance to The People.

Thank you for a thought provoking article. Shocking though in the amount of emotion it provoked! there seems to be hope yet for the post raja, bored, malaise riden, conformist non-thinkers that we seem to have become.

RESPONSE TO WAQAS KHAN`s RESPONSE to My RESPONSE to his initial comments:

Khanjee, manna from heaven is always good. One must never scoff at it.

I couldn`t agree more that ONE of the major curses faced by that whole region is the ultra rightist fervor (of all denominations), which ultimately stems from ignorance. The cause of ignorance is poverty and lack of education. Those in turn are being sustained by the existing set-up which has no room for such luxuaries because all energy is directed towards keeping a colonial style empire alive.

When the religious right is acknowledged as legitimate and endorsed by the powers that be naturally the cancer is going to grow (Remember the Zia years and how that monster unbottled the genie of fundamentalism). Now it has wide spread matastasis and the condition is terminal.

In case of Pakistan (and it is beginning in Hindustan also) the state itself makes loud ideological claims at the expense of growth and progress. How do you think that has effected the growth of this cancer of the militant mullahs? If the present model did not exist, these tendencies would perhaps still be there (they were there before 47) but we may not have seen the extreme that we see today.

Ultimately, if and when the economic growth reaches a critical point (which it CANNOT under the present colonial style set-up)prosperity and education will begin to take root and hopefully some day the present problems will be curtailed.

But you know what? I wouldn`t bet the farm on it.

FYI: ``...a fool`s dream`` was what Mohammad Ali Jinnah called the idea of a separate muslim homeland when he was first introduced to it my Chaudhry Rehmat Ali at a black tie dinner at London`s Waldorf Hotel in April, 1937.

Thank you for the geopolitical enlightenment and explaination of what and where Maastricht is. Otherwise I may have thought you were naming a famous Dutch dyke !! At the risk of being labelled politically incorrect, I daresay that the Dutch love their dykes.

I think its my time for something MUCH stronger than tylenol...cheers!

...SR

REPLY TO WAQAS KHAN (Message below this):

Khan Saheb, you get very emotional quickly. All you see is the ``absurdity`` of
my ``solution``, i.e., to break the two federal states of Islamabad and New Delhi.
I need to clarify that these are not so much solutions, as they are ``predictions``.
The main theme of my argument is two fold. (i) The Cold-War model in the region
needs to be abolished. This means DEMILITARIZATION. That seems highly unlikely
in the present two-state set-up with their entrenched elites and deep rooted
interests. The common man gains nothing from this set-up. He only suffers. My
loyalty being more to the ``people`` than to any figment of the elite`s imagination
such as the ``state`` (symbolized by the flag), naturally makes me lean in the
direction of hoping for the state`s demise rather than an indefinite period of
exploitation and usurpation of the dreams and desires of the populace.

The second (ii) point is that the state, as it is, has lost all claim of legitimacy,
both in Islamabad AND New Delhi. In fact, it NEVER was legitimate. It was, in the
words of a very wise man, ``...the dream of a fool.`` The two federal states are
the biggest form of mafia that has no purpose other than to be self-serving.
They are based on the model of the East India Company and they need to be sent
the way of that Company.

What could repalce it? We don`t really know, but there I speculate that the
historical model suggests that ``regional autonomy`` may work out better. I go
so far as to say that almost ANY outcome would be better so long as it was
not based on ideology, but was based on ethno-linguistic and ECONOMIC
interests.

A moth whose whole life-span is five days comes to think of the tree as a
permanent and unchangable entity. The poor moth has no concept of the
changing seasons and their effect on the tree`s bark which he considers
his immutable ``home``.

The world climate has changed, and rant or rave as you will, the writing
is on the wall. THIS CANNOT LAST. THIS MUST NOT LAST. THIS SHALL NOT
LAST...!!! United Punjab Zindabad, Greater Bengal Piandabad.

O, by the way, two asprins will irritate my gastric mucosa. With your
permission may I switch to Tylenol?

Re: Afzal, Your sentiments are sincere and
very worthy. There were (and still are) many
in the former USSR and former Yougoslavia who
also felt thus when presented with possibilities
which they could not stomach, but which time
proved inevitable. It is very natural that
you feel this way. When my father was on his
death-bed, I too, was utterly imaptient with
anyone who suggested that his time may be
approaching.

Re: Khan,

I really enjoyed reading your comments, especially
the ``Nero-esque touch``. Heaven foirbid, I never
suggested that this is an excutable ``plan``. I
merely list possibilities. As for bloodshed,
that is already a daily reality. All in all
I absolutely agree with one of your concluding
remarks that there are ``precious few`` solutions
to Islamabad Republic`s present prblems. Only
I like to say the same about the New Delhi
Republic also.

Let`s not get too fixated with our concept of
nationhood. Lets not forget that the
Prussians and Austro-Hungarians were no less
patriotic than us. As we look up from the
bottom of the well we see only a round blue
disc. Let`s not conclude that we see the
whole sky.

Incredible, how after all the self-consciously erudite posturings, the article ends with an incredibly asinine solution.

How you actually intend to execute this plan except with a bloody revolution is beyond me. How do you take a corrupt, fatigued country and break it into several pieces and populate it with sincere, hardworking ``punchaiyats`` who will improve the civic and economic fates of the masses is more incredible still.

Nice of you to throw away the obvious problems to your ``decentralization`` (or is it Sindhu-desh) theory - our fellow countrymen in Sarhad and Balochistan. How could they support an independent national economy given the flourishing infrastructure and industry?

The ``drab`` green flag, as you put it, can symbolize anything you wish it to symbolize. At present you sit in the great foreign land and fart intellectually-garnished theories of prosperity under ``decentralization`` on your Nero-isque flute while others rape the country. The only thing that the country therefore manifests is oppression. That is the only thing that the poor flag therefore symbolizes. Painting it red, white, blue, and yellow (multicolored) may brighten a cold, detached political argument but it cannot possibly penetrate the heart of the darkness.


Aisee Tareekian Aankhon mein basee hain keh Faraz

Raat to raat hai, Hum Din ko jalatay hain Charagh.


There may be precious few solutions to Pakistan`s present. Yours is not one.

Sadly, this piece is a well-disguised argument for the liberation of Sindh at best, or a declaration of a sense of personal loss at the splitting of the subcontinent in 1947 at worst.