Indians and Pakistanis Must Start Anew

May I add something to this whole talk of Nationality and Religion .....

It is not just a Indo Pakistani phenomenon that religion contributes to ethnicity ....

As a follow up to the treaty of Lausanne between Ataturk`s Turkey and Greece, Britain, France and Italy, and agreement was signed between Turkey and Greece on 30th January 1923 declaring that religion was to be the basis of ethnicity ....

which led to mass migrations between the two states ... 350 000 Muslims moved from Macedonia and rest of Greece to Turkey and 1100000 EX-Ottoman residents of Orthodox Christian origin moved to Greece .... the 350000 Greek Muslims became Turks and 1100000 Turkish Christians became greeks ....

It is not a new phenomenon and it also proves that religion plays an important part in ethnicity and Nation .....

Pakistan Zindabad

Quaid e Azam Zindabad

Ataturk Zindabad

Jiye Bhutto

Imran Khan for PM

-Yasser Hamdani

Kabuliwallah

You can read Ayesha Jalal`s book but it wouldnt be any different from what Professor Hamza Alevi writes ...because she is after all a Pakistani ..

On the other hand the emphasis was not on Congressite but on the fact that the guy was anti Jinnah anti Pakistan and thought of Jinnah as the worst communalist ever ... He also much like yourself blamed Jinnah for the Murders untill he started reading objective History

So its worth reading that book ....

Yasser Hamdani

hamid, should the world trust men from cultures that allow 4 wives and worship in onion shaped domes?

Re:SameerJB#171, hamidm, RSaxena, ylh

Excellent posting Sameer. I believe that under all the superficial hostility, there has always been a tremendous reservoir of goodwill between Indians and Pakistanis that can never be destroyed. The reason for that is simple - we are basically the same people. The majority of Pakistanis are descendents of Rajputs, Jats, miscellaneous Aryan tribes etc., which is the same as other North Indians, give or take a few drops of blood. As the saying goes, blood is thicker than water. The ylhs, hamidms and RSaxenas of this world can shout till they are hoarse, but they can never change the love and hate relationship between Indians and Pakistanis. The opposite of love is not hate, but indifference. We are surely not indifferent to each other.

Our bonds show up whenever an Indian travels to Pakistan or a Pakistani travels to India. Everyone gets bowled by the warmth and friendship that they receive from the other side. Shopekeepers refuse to take money, people shower you with gifts etc. Recently Asma Jahangir was leading a group of Pakistani women on a trip to India and they stopped by in Agra. They ran into an elderly Sindhi man and during coversation it turned out that one of the Pakistani women belonged to the ancestral village of that Sindhi hindu. The Sindhi man insisted on serving dinner at his house to the entire delegation. Afterall how could he let his sisters go back just like that ? When the women could not take his invitation due to time restrictions, the man bought tons of sweets for each member of the Pakistani delegation. Where does this come from ? After so many wars, so much violence, so much isolation, this is the level of bonding among our peoples. Can you imagine the scenario if our governments actually settled the problems ?

Our bonds also show up when Indians and Pakistanis meet face to face in third countries such as USA, UK. All the hostilities are forgotten as people start embracing each other like lost brothers and sisters. Indians and Pakistanis live with each other in these countries, they actively socialize with each other, they cooperate professionally and they help each other out. Now if you want to see real hostility, look at the Israelis and Palestinians or for that matter the Serbs and Muslims. Those people really, really hate each other. They cannot stand the sight of each other, they will gladly spit in each other`s face and they will not hesitate to harm each other even in third countries. As compared to them, our hostilities are basically a farce.

SameerJB:

Looking forward to another piece of writing on the creation of the universe, role of religion, definition of life, etc from you. The last one was excellent. It`s nice to get away from this political garbage once in a while and address more intellectually satisfying and meaningful issues.

Regards,

RS

ylh and kabulliwallah,

I miss the mudslinging. Just kidding. Your political soap opera was heart wrenching :)

scout AUNTY

YLH

As you know I am not a fan of the Congress. I usually stay away from historical works done by Congresswallahs and Communists. I believe that both have an axe to grind. But that`s just me. And I know generalizations are unfair. Upon Prof. Haq`s , t`s and dL`s advice, I`ll probably be reading Ms. Jalal`s book and not Mr. Bandopadhyay`s.

Kabuli

re : SameerJB# 171

I think your post is one of the most knowledgeable, and well researched I have read to date from a Pakistani. No emotion, no sentiment, just plain cold ``facts``. We all can learn from the way you write.

Interesting that you should mention the Meos or as they are called collectively, the Mewatis. I read a book, I forget its name, by a foreign author (here`s to you Yasser) about the origins of the Meos and their lineage and so on and so on. The Meos claimed descent from Krishna of the Mahabharata and their family pundits had a record of their family trees from Krishna`s time (I don`t know if these are accurate though). Most of the Meos are Muslim, but there is a small Hindu Meo population also. It is interesting that just as Hindus and Sikhs were victimized in today`s Pakistan, the Meos too (concentrated mostly in today`s Alwar of Haryana I think and Bharatpur of Rajasthan ) were victimized by the princely rulers (Jat ruler of Bharatpur and Rajput ruler of Alwar) because they owned a lot of land and cattle. The Meos had to migrate to Pakistan during partition, but came back after a while and resettled.

You are right on the money when you say that things were not clear cut and were quite fuzzy a hundred or so years before partition. ``Making of an Identity`` by Nonica Dutta (unfortunately she`s an Indian author, but good nevertheless) about the Jats shows how the Jats of `Harriana` have only recently, after coming under the influence of the Arya Samaj, become Hindus in the strict sense. Earlier their lives were a mix of all the religions of the area. Just a trivia, according to Nonica Dutta, the Bhatti Rajputs were actually Jats, but after migration took on a Rajput identity.

Only the other week I was discussing with YLH that in Waris Shah`s Hir and Ranjha, the dialogue is insterspersed with a lot of Hindu imagery (anecdotes and tales from Ramayana, Mahabharata, and so on). This indicates that in Waris Shah`s time, though the people might have proclaimed the Kalima and faith in God and His Prophet, the practical lives of the Muslims were not all that different from the Hindus and Sikhs around that area. What I mean to say is that it was not taboo to be aware of their ancestral Hindu customs. If Waris Shah, the mureed of the pir of Shakarganj was knowledgeable enough to put all the above mentioned in his poem, think of how the culture of that time must be, unlike todays religions where there is no spill over effect (There are still some brave souls, who brave the boundaries, but they are in a minority). As I have mentioned, the Jats of Haryana are Hindus today through and through and thanks to the Muslim reform movements, the Meos too are taking to Urdu and giving up their Mewati language. They are also giving up their Hindu customs and Hindu lineages. They wear Salwar Kameez instead of their traditional clothes. Boundaries, damn boundaries.

I agree with you in that communities in the subcontinet were not clear cut in the past. I don`t know about Pakistan, but there are still some tribal communities in India that are not entirely Hindu. They observe some mainstream Hindu practices but they also have their local gods and customs. Forest tribes in Andhra for example and even the practicing Hindus worship the forest deity of any particular area. I don`t know about others, but I think defining peoples in neat, straight definitions is some kind of loss. I don`t know how to say it, but I think it is some kind of a loss of Insaniyat, the human essence maybe. If I said, I am only so and so, and I have nothing to do with X and Y, not only will I be denying my heritage, but also killing a part of my soul.

It was very interesting from you, I truly enjoyed your post. I urge you to kindly contribute regularly on Chowk.

regards

Kabuli

...In a series of classified briefings on Capitol Hill, most recently on Thursday, the agencies have described how China stepped up the shipment of specialty steels, guidance systems and technical expertise to Pakistan, China`s longtime strategic ally, after India and Pakistan set off rival nuclear tests in 1998.

Chinese experts have also been sighted around Pakistan`s newest missile factory, which appears partly based on a Chinese design, and shipments to Pakistan have been continued over the past 8 to 18 months, several of the officials said...

http://www.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/asia/070200pakistan-china.html

Pardesi, tahmad321, Kabuliwalla and the rest: Here is my “aik ruppia” (one rupee = two cents) worth on the topic of Jinnah and the migration/ murder of large number of people due to the creation of India and Pakistan. Since Jinnah is the most visible figure and the father of nation for Pakistanis, it is not difficult to understand the opinion of Hindus and Sikhs who were uprooted and forced to migrate with plenty of bloodshed. On the other hand Pakistanis have every reason to be thankful for his dominating role in the creation of Pakistan. It would be merely a guess work to imagine what kind of life would have been for Muslims of the areas constituting present day Pakistan if there was no partition. Most people including myself believe that we would have been worse off. Before partition, Sikhs owned more land than Muslims or Hindus in Central Punjab, Hindus were dominant in business and education. Even in Lahore, with Muslim majority, the economic power of them was markedly lower than Hindus. Now, of course, education, economy and land owners are all Muslims, though it came it the expanse of heavy price for Hindus and Sikhs. Was it fair?-no it was not. Did Muslim benefit?-yes they did. The success of Karachi as business powerhouse, the creation of Islamabad and large number of educated people as well as most Pakistani-Americans owe it to the creation of Pakistan. Just imagine if it was a united India and some Muslim fundamentalists were holed up in Lahore’s Badshahi Mosque in 1984. Believe me there would have been another Operation Blue Star. With the kowtoeing nature of Muslim feudals and elite, in bed with predominently Hindu central government, would have been terrible for Sikhs.

Now I come to the most important question raised during the last several postings on this thread. Can Jinnah solely be credited for the creation of Pakistan as well as the roiting and migration/ murder that followed. The answer is no. Yet I do not blame migrant Hindus and Sikhs for disliking him. It is because Jinnah symbolizes the partition and most people do not study the history in detail. In my opinion, the seeds of partition were sown during the past seventy years, prior to partition (from 1880 on ward). The partition was an indirect consequence of British rule over India.

The boudaries between Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs were very fuzzy prior to 1870-1880 in both religious and social terms. They were different but not distinctly seperated. There were nominal Muslims like Malkana Rajputs of southeastern Punjab and Meo Muslims of Haryana ( with strong Hinduism influences), there were Sultani Hindus of Haryana (with strong Muslim influence. They followed a pir named Sultan? somewhere near present day Multan) and there are still some small tribes in southeast Punjab, in Cholistan desert of Bahawalpur, named Mengho-wall and Bawara who consider themselves Hindus but believe in Guru Nanak as their seer or prophet. Many a times Muslims supported Sikhs or Hindus during Punjabi darbar (for example Legharis of Dera Ghazi Khan supported Multan darbar whereas their arch enemies, Khosa supported British during Anglo-Multan war) and Hindu Khatris of Lahore financed the wahabi-style Muslim movement of Syed Ahmad Barelvi against Sikhs.

The British, Orientalists and the west in general believed in idealism. They could not stand for fuzziness. As in Europe, the boundaries of different groups have to be clearly defined in the areas of religion, social, ethnic and nationalism. It was the development and better means of communication coupled with record keeping, census and general documentation of people which started to clearly distinguish people into separate categories. The three major religious communities in Punjab were no longer just different--they were now distinctly separate communities. Better means of communication, development of urban centers and reasonable prosperity led to the creation of Muslim Anjumans/ Tehriks, Hindu Arya Samaj and Sikhs Singh Sabhas, each publishing a number of newspapers/ magazines/ pamphlets etc. Hindu Arya Samaj strted shuddhi movement to reconvert Malkana Rajputs and Sialkot chamars whereas Muslim Anjumans tried to “purify” nominal Muslims inclding Meo of Haryana. Ocasionally there were heated arguments and even small scale rioting between these communities. Fortunately Raj was powerful enough to not let it go out of control. The situation was not much different in other parts of India. The reform movement of Swami Vivekananda resulted in increased interest in education among Hindus which created a new sense of pride among them. Not only they would not accept any ridiculing of their religion, they would openly use symbols from Hindu religion during freedom movement ( I am not critical of it). The Maharashtran leader B. G. Tilak, for example, instituted a public festival in honor of Ganesha, celebrating popular Hindu culture as a mean of regaining “self-rule”. In Bengal, Kali lent her fierce energy to the freedom struggle and “Bharat Mata” was modeled after Laxmi. There is every reason for a majority to celebrate and use religious symbols for gaining independence but a large number of minorities percieved it as a prototype of thing to come after independence.

Next question is about rioting. The Muslim League wanted to force Lord Mounbatten into dividing Punjab. They created a situation of anarchy in west Punjab by agitation and bringing down Khizr Hayat Tiwana government. Sikhs were very bitter, because Muslims were getting Pakistan and part of Punjab where Sikhs owned more land than Muslims. In this charged up atmosphere, many Muslims saw a benefit of acquiring Hindus and Sikh properties, if they could be forced out. They conspired with people from Anjumans and Tehriks to call it a jehad. I am sure similar thing happened in east Punjab. I do not believe that Jinnah was somehow behind this mess. He was not extremely popular in Punjab and could not have started/ stopped it. Even in India, it took popular figure like Gandhi to fast until death, just to stop rioting in one city. In Punjab, it only needed a spark which was amply provided by criminal elements from all three religious communities.

All this, including partition, were not the making of Jinnah alone. He did not initiate it and Gandhi and Nehru could not have stopped it. The partition was in the cards. Jinnah being a dedicated and sharp lawyer took up the case on behalf of his clients (Muslim League) and gave his best shot finally winning the case for his clients.

I am not suggesting that British did distinctly seperated communities for some evil motives. It was clearly the result of imposition of western idealism over desi paradigm. Western values and system are great provided proper ground work for ethics have been carried out. There need to be widespread liberal education and respect for rule of laws for western idealism to succeed. Jinnah, Gandhi and Nehru were British trained lawyers who believed in western idealism of nationalism. They went about building nations based on western idealism hoping that desi paradigm is nothing more than scaffolding which in time will disappear. So far, it has not. This is the main reason we still have trouble in clearly defining our identity. Is it Islamic only? That did not work in case of Bangla Desh. Is is the sum of ethnicities? That is fine only if there is general respect for Laws of the state and ethnicities are not detrimental to the nation state.

The truth is that all the differences and troubles between religions of sub-continent are the making of last 120-130 years and the differences of nation states are merely 53 years old. We can not undo all the problems quickly but it is not impossible to have a relationship once again based on mutual respect, equality and above all, it is mutually beneficial. The reason I strongly support is because I see this path beneficial for Pakistanis. We need to have our resources spent on education and the well being of our people. A peaceful and friendlier environment is also conducive to foreign investment. It is not possible to keep spending our resources on non-productive areas and yet hoping to have a prosperous Pakistan. We can not become developed in western terms (industrialized, high tech and IT) without laying the ground work of education and peace. This pragmatic thinking has nothing to do with any desire for dosa or idli and less to do (in my case) with the desire to communicate with Punjabi Indians--it is primarily for the betterment of Pakistanis and Pakistan.

ylh and friend

Jiyo

tahmed321 # 164

You are right tahmed321 .. I should have said let’s not only blame peasants ....

Regards.

I totally agree with Kabuliwallah

We have to keep an open mind to other opinions ..

:)

So are you taking a trip down to Douglass library then ... to get the book?

Yasser

Pardesi #162 writes ``Let’s not blame peasants on both sides for killing each other``. An individual who conducts a killing is a murderer. His religion, social status and so forth do not take away the fact that he killed and deserves the same punishment as any other killer. The sooner we get this through our heads, the sooner we will get rid of communal and other violence.

hamidm #163 Please try to grow up.

re: RSaxena # 160 and the rest of Chowkwallas

I owe the chowk community another apology in that I myself asked YLH to apologise to me on chowk and bring this whole thing to a close at the same place where it started. I knew our friendship was too strong to be shaken by petty differences. A temporary lapse of judgement caused this whole thing and now its all been squared away.

I guess if there is anything that has come out of this episode, it is that people have varied opinions and ideologies. And it is okay to have them. But instead of closing our minds to different voices, we might try to listen to what others are saying, to listen to their point of view and thus broaden our vistas. We don`t have to agree with them, but it doesn`t hurt to listen.

Regards,

Kabuli

My point is to both Pardesi and Kabuliwallah that

equating Jinnah with Hitler etc is out of line... it might show your prejudice but it is not reflective of Historical facts ....

Jinnah is not responsible for the massacres and that is an eternal position held not only by Pakistanis but also by Indians who read History objectively ...

May I suggest to you to Mr Pardesi ...

a Book by a Indian Congressite worker who participated in the Independence Movement and was a very vocal opponent of Jinnah ....

Quaid e Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah and the creation of Pakistan

by

Sailesh Kumar Bandopadhya

sterling publishers private ltd 1991

Time we left prejudices aside and read History for what it is ...

And let me finish with the immortal words of Ataturk

``Bloody Revolutions are permanent, bloodless revolutions are not, West what have you done to me

I have not forgiven, I am a Turk and a Muslim to the last man... so let us strive till our hearts no longer wish revenge upon you``

It is indeed a sad sad day when History is re written the way Indians write it ...