'Constitutionally' Different Neighbours

Re: # 12
[...he wanted to use it as a bargaining tool only...]

That`s what YLH tells us..... I guess - congress saw an golden opportunity to get rid of the cr@p once and for all, and agreed to his formula of partition... jinnah didn`t see that coming - clever as he was, he was no match for hindu bania, it seems.... :)

Even if jinnah had lived longer - it would have been a miserable experience.... it`s one thing to deal with the good-natured and feet-on-ground hinuds, much as he despised them, but it`s another thing to deal with crazy mullahs and high-faluting feudals of pakistan..... they would have ate him for lunch..... good thing he died as soon as he could :)

he probably already knew it - he wanted to live his last days in Bombay.....

By and large I have to agree with what Sanjay has said. But maybe I would like to add two more points.

Firstly, democracy is really a middle class educated classes business and India`s middle class was rather bigger than Pakistan`s. Perhaps for the same reason Bdesh has been rather more successful with democracy. In Pakistan the tribal culture and feudal set up has been too strong and even when democracy has prevailed, it has been corrupted by these classes.

Secondly, I know this is going to raise Manto`s hackles MKG had some role to play as well. It was he (and his followers) who began the process of going to the masses (unlike MAJ pbuh) and thus in the Indian half, some rapport was built between the political class and the masses which perhaps never got to develop in the West Pak. By contrast in E Pak, there were populist politcians like Fazle Haq, Bhashani and Mujib who were able to reach out to the E Pak masses.

Regards

#6 ML


Chalo...kahin tau hum tum ko pasand aaye... Now its your turn.... aab kuch aaisey baat keh key dikhaoo ki lagey ki wah! kya baat hai !!! Try it...you can do it surely...you just need a try....

Clue :- Think something which you dont want to think..Say something which you dont want to say..

PS: A Book - Divided by Democracy- by two very eminent politician-turned-writers- one from India and Pakistan develops that entire theme that Sanjay has referred to in #2.

#4 PP


....but the reason i gave for the army being so much in control is that due to the near war conflict situation that pakistan has had with india,...

I think this was the effect and not the cause of Army taking over control in Pakistan.

Pak Army created an artificial war-like threat vis-a-vis India so that it can rule over. Though no such real threat existed earlier or exists today.

Re #7

Sanjay,

i wont argue with what you say even though i disagree, cause i aint got no eviidence to prove my point.

Sanjay ...

I`d say that is a very apt analysis and very well worded.

uba mian...

``Jinnah`s reading habits was limited strictly to 2 areas (1)indian politics (2)Law. He was practically zero in other dimensions of humanities.``

I don`t agree with this view- having read the correspondence and personal letters of Quaid-e-Azam, I can safely say Jinnah`s other reading habits included English Literature (especially Shakespeare`s plays which he had performed as a student) and British Political Philosophy (John Morley, Edmund Burke and John Bright being those who quoted most often) ... but much of what he said indicates that he read of a lot of John Locke, Thomas Jefferson and Alexandar Hamilton. Furthermore his favorite book for a very long time was H C Armstrong`s ``GreyWolf``- the biography of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.

Furthermore... evidence suggests that he followed keenly newspapers from all over the English speaking world, which were mailed to him every week ... and which he preserved in form of scrapbooks.

good points sanjay,

i always pointed to the first three you mentioned for why pakistan has been ``screwed up``, but the reason i gave for the army being so much in control is that due to the near war conflict situation that pakistan has had with india, the institutions in pakistan have been more stongly effected and have been yunable to cope with it. whereas in india due to the first tree reasons mentions, institutions were stronger and survived.

hence the pakistan army is the only institution that constantly thrived and was the primary institute and the one strong enough to challenge the politics of the country.

only in the past 5-6 years has there been any strong movement to promote constitution building.

SAVAIL, good article but you went into too much detail. chowkies are well aware of current affairs and political issues and thier legal impacts on scoiety. good effort nevertheless

Re: # 4

The Pakistani Army justifies its strength and derives its massive funding by citing the regional conflicts they are involved in/threatened by. The threat from India.. the Kashmir Question.. and now, the battle in Waziristan.

As long as Pakistan is ruled by the military and the ISI, why would they want peace with India? Or peace in Kashmir? Because their funding, powers and influence on the country will only be justified as long as there is some major conflict or threat?

There`s no way an Army regime will try to make peace with India over Kashmir.. it`s suicide.

Savial Hussain,

Is this a research paper or what (which you have submitted to some refereed journal for publication ?). Your language is the typical academic research type.

The summary ?
``in 1947, muslims(especially the elite) guided by the intellect of JINNAH & OTHER ELITE in india put their bet on the wrong horse``

By the way, Jinnah thought that he understood HINDOOOOO psyche very well just because he was associated for long with hinduuu congress.

But what was his understanding of the MUSLIM psyche especially of the muslim elite like the nawabs, the feudals , muslim salariat & the general muslim masses ? He always travelled 1st class in railways. why ? ......to avoid any contact with the masses !

A well known Marathi Author who had the oppurtunity to interact with Jinnah in the last 10 years a number of times has mentioned in one of his books that Jinnah`s reading habits was limited strictly to 2 areas (1)indian politics (2)Law. He was practically zero in other dimensions of humanities.

Muslims expected such a 1 Dimensional Brain of Jinnah to guide them thru the crucial years of 1940s ? Jinnah had a very clear idea as to HOW TO CARVE OUT PAKISTAN OUT OF INDIA. But practically no CLEAR IDEA AS TO HOW TO BUILD A NATION ?

Some of his post 1947 ramblings talk about seeking guidance directly from islamic faith itself !!!! completly nebulous reasoning !

Re: # 3

[Muslims expected such a 1 Dimensional Brain of Jinnah to guide them thru the crucial years of 1940s ? Jinnah had a very clear idea as to HOW TO CARVE OUT PAKISTAN OUT OF INDIA. But practically no CLEAR IDEA AS TO HOW TO BUILD A NATION]

Yet, had Jinnah been alive and in power in Pakistan until the mid-60s, just as Nehru was in India, Pakistan would be a radically different place today. No leader in Pakistan has enjoyed the virtual carte-blanche that Jinnah had in Pakistan. He had the support of the masses; and the brains. He would`ve ``cast his die`` on Pakistan`s politics, just as Nehru did in India.

Perhaps most importantly, he could`ve seized the lands of the tribal and feudal lords and turned it over to the peasants. Such an act would have had great repercussions... for today, most of Pakistan`s assembly is dominated by these very feudal types.

As to whether he was really intelligent, or a man of the people. I don`t think it would`ve mattered, really. He definately had the chutzpah to establish the foundations of his country. Moreover, being the secularist and liberal that he was, he would`ve ensured proper treatment of Pakistan`s Hindu and Christian minorities and its women.

And Pakistan wouldn`t have been hijacked by a posse of corrupt feudals and raving mullahs more concerned with implementing Sharia Law and hounding their Ahmadis than building a prosperous and progressive country.

There was no need for such a technical jargon. Simple things are simple afterall.

Both the countries started off on different planes. As pointed out by the author, the untimely death of Jinnah made things worse for Pakistan because after him there was nobody who could steer the country to any particular direction. That was not the case with India where Nehru lived for quite long and by the time he died, he had cast the die on which future India was to develop.

Secondly, Independent India arrived after a careful planning and struggle of almost half a century. The concept of Pakistan was newer and it took birth suddenly. The picture of independent India was fairly clear in the minds of the leaders much before she actually got independence. Whereas , for Pakistan, it was not sure till the end whether it will take birth at all or not. It arrived suddenly.

Thirdly, Pakistan did not inherit a strong and robust bureaucratic setup from the British the way India did. This was its major weakness. It was , is and is likely to remain a loose federation of different set of peoples, though united under one flag but disunited otherwise.

Fourthly, Pakistan had a choice between a Democratic State and an Islamic State whereas India had no such choice. It had to survive as a democratic state.

And lastly, the British controlled India through their army. Post independence, the same legacy/temptation must have continued in both the armies. Since India was very large for Indian Army to control, the Indian Army did not work on that area further. But Pakistan was smaller in size and could be controlled, Pakistani Army went ahead to control it and still continues to do so.

Re: # 2
[.... it was not sure till the end whether it will take birth at all or not. It arrived suddenly...]

yeah - congress called jinnah`s bluff and the rest, as they say, is sweet history....Thanks to my man Nehru.... he just dumped the hot potato of muslim communalism in jinnah`s hand and jinnah had no idea where to go from there - he just flipped and flopped like a fool - one day secularism, the next day islam..... the guy was completely out his elements .... :))

You took a lot of words - some long ones, too - to say something which is as simple as the follows:

The Pakistani crowds screwed up.

They got carried away by their religious prejudice and followed false messiahs like blind goats.

No matter what spin anybody puts on it - a screw-up is a screw-up.

And unless the crowds see it for what it was - they will continue to roam around dazed.