By Anish Mishra
As both India and Pakistan celebrate the joyous occasion of Independence from the British Raj, let us reflect on the great ideals that our forefathers stood for. This should be a time of retrospective thinking on our raison d’être. Have we achieved what we had set out for in 1947? Why did we have to spill the blood of our brethren, with whom we share skin colour, language, cuisine, and many cultural aspects?
Our countries have fought four wars against each other and have maintained antagonistic relations often fueled by domestic politics and vested interests. Is this how things were meant to be? Is this how our state of affairs will always be? Are there not other warring states that are now in harmony with each other?
In any aspirations for diplomatic reconciliation between India and Pakistan it is of vital importance to take the two-nation theory of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah as a starting point. It is not this doctrine that caused our conflict but it is its misinterpretation that has been the source of this ongoing artificial antagonism. In his famous two nation theory speech of 1938 Mr. Jinnah said, “Hindu India and Muslim India must be separated, because the two nations are entirely distinct and different and in some matters antagonistic to each other… we differ in our history, culture, language, architecture, music, laws, jurisprudence, calendar and our entire social fabric and code of life.”
Pakistan has maintained the narrative that its existence is dependent on the two nation theory and this by extension means a rivalry with India. It is important to understand that the Indian subcontinent before 1947 was a very different place compared to today not only in terms of borders drawn between us but based the contemporary social system of that era. Divisions between people from different religions, castes, sects, ethnic groups, languages, gender and socio-economic classes were far more severe than they are today. The British Raj deepened these differences and made no effort to foster national cohesion as it thrived on its policy of divide and rule.
The creation of multi-ethnic States of India and Pakistan presented a need for each to embark on nation building. As Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah said in his address to the Pakistan Constituent Assembly in Karachi on 11 August 1947, “Hindus will cease to be Hindus and Muslims will cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense because that is a matter of personal faith but in the political sense as equal members of the state.”
Back in 1938 it was important to prove that Hindus and Muslims were two distinct nations to justify the genesis of Pakistan. It was never the idea for this antagonism to last forever. It is therefore no surprise that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif have once said that the only difference between us is the line in between. Although this is reflects present ground realities, he had to face harsh criticism for this statement.
“Relations like Canada and USA”
In his two nation theory speech of 1938 Jinnah also said in reference to India and Pakistan, “I am confident (both) will settle down as friends and neighbours like Canada and United States and other sovereign states, both in north and South America.”
Had he European Union been present at that time, he may well have suggested that we be like sovereign states in a similar union. It is a melancholy reality that our bilateral relations today are worlds apart from those of Canada and the United States. Those countries have treaties of regional trade and co-operation such as the Northern Alliance Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) while free trade is still a farfetched thought for us.
I would strongly urge Pakistan to be the initiator of a similar agreement between India and Pakistan if it wants to be Jinnah’s Pakistan. It will also be wise for India to initiate a complete removal of non-tariff barriers for Pakistan. If India wants to project itself as a global power, it must be pragmatic enough to adopt the peace-through-trade doctrine. These steps will increase interdependence between India and Pakistan, and be instrumental in preventing hostilities. It should thus be the common prayer of the people of India and Pakistan that the dreams and vision of Quiad-E-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah be realised.
Two-Nation Theory and Bangladesh
Many prominent intellectuals in Pakistan have suggested that the two nation theory became defunct after the birth of Bangladesh. Others defend this theory by creating conflict in order to maintain what they consider to be the foundation of Pakistan. I would like both to understand that if the two-nation theory is alive anywhere it would be in Bangladesh. It’s a matter of great irony that a state that was created in rebellion against Pakistan is now the nation that has achieved the dreams of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah.
Its problems notwithstanding, Bangladesh has developed into a secular Bengali Muslim majority nation that has cordial relations with India. The legitimacy of Bangladesh has been its Muslim majority demographics which allow it to be independent despite being an India-locked state surrounded by Hindu Bengali speaking districts of India. Yet it has not pressed on Islam to secure the state because it has created a strong Bengali-Muslim nation state which is both distinct from India and Pakistan without being antagonistic to either.
If Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah was still alive today he would have been very proud of Bangladesh as this is the real two-nation theory state the he had set out to create. As long as Bangladesh is in existence the two-nation theory is alive. There is no need to create unnecessary antagonism to uphold this idea as it was meant to function naturally.
United Kingdom and France
History shows us that states once hostile to each other can develop amicable relations. Let’s take the UK and France as an example, two European powers that have been at war for centuries. The Napoleonic wars of 1803-1815 saw massive bloodshed in Europe yet in 1860 they are both able to trade freely by signing the Cobden-Chevalier treaty. France reduced its defence spending. Both were also able to boost exports to each other as a result of this treaty.
The European Union is another example of warring states that were sworn enemies in the Second World War but are now in a harmonious relationship with each other. This shows that progressive thinking leads to peace and prosperity in the region which is something that India and Pakistan should adopt.
This Independence Day should be marked with reflections of our purpose. It is evident that what we have today is clearly not what we wanted to achieve in 1947. It is now time to forget the lamentations of Partition. India and Pakistan today are both great nations in the making, with shared, diverse culture, heritage, languages, religion and philosophies.
As we progress into the 21st century the antagonism between India and Pakistan is no longer relevant. If other societies in the world are able to move on towards the path of reconciliation, why not us?
If India and Pakistan were to cooperate with each other there is nothing on earth that can’t be achieved. Together we can make the world a better place. Let us not pass this conflict down to future generations. It should not be forgotten that we can choose our friends but not our neighbours. We have to learn to accept each other’s realities, aspirations and differences.
Happy Independence Day!
Pakistan Zindabad! Hindustan Zindabad!
Anish Mishra is an independent researcher and observer of South Asian geopolitics based in Singapore.
Feel good words and articles are all fine and well however reality is much different. The author “forgot to mention the K word in his speech! Until it is resolved as well as both countries ceasing terrorist involvement in the neighbouring country there can be no peace. More then anything the subcontinent needs social and political justice to be implemented otherwise separatist movements will only grow in numbers. India already has the largest number of poor people and separatist groups in the world not because of Pakistan rather because it is unable to provide social justice.