Does two-nation theory haunt
Pakistani scholars?

Gopal Misra

Farahnaz Ispahani Farahnaz Ispahani’s book, “Purifying the Land of the Pure “, offers a unique study on the current p o l i t i c a l - s o c i a l scenario in the neighbouring Pakistan. In 1947, the present day, Pakistan and India were born as twins from the womb of a White Mother, the House of Commons, when the British Parliament enacted the India Independence Act paving the way for two countries, a secular India and a Muslim India.
The legislation was passed before the colonial power wrapped up its establishment for a smooth transfer of power in the undivided India. Her book is a well-researched document on the plight of the minorities, mostly Hindus, Sikhs and Christians, and the non-Wahabi Islamic sects, Shia, Ahmadi and Sufis. She, however, does not tell why the Sunni Muslims of Bengal and Mohajirs, were alienated from the Pakistani establishment or the ruling elite comprising the army, its intelligence wing, Inter Service Intelligence (ISI) and the aggressive Muslim clergy.
Farahnaz book offers an indepth narrative of a Muslim land dreamt by a galaxy of Muslim elites comprising members of academia, western educated professionals and land lords.
The book does not explain why only Sunni Muslims of Bengal and Mohajirs accept that the twonation theory was a mistake. The Mohajirs are openly working for united India from Britain, Canada and other places. On the other hand, the Shias, Ahmadis and Pakistani Christians continue to support the sectarian politics of the contemporary Pakistan.
Ahmadis were officially declared non-Muslims by an amendment in the Pakistani constitution in 1974. In spite of almost half-a-century of repression, they refuse to disown the philosophy of Pakistan.
In this document, the author has repeatedly stated that the founder of Pakistan Muhammed Ali Jinnah was keen to have a secular state based on the ideals of Islam. It is a self-contradictory approach. Jinnah was a nonconformist Muslim working against the concept of a secular state. In a secular state, the religion has little role in the affairs of the state, but Pakistan is an attempt to deny and bury the traditional 5000-year ancient civilization of the region under the pretext of promoting the monotheistic belief in one god that of the Wahabi denomination.

Farahnaz offers us an indepth narrative of a Muslim land dreamt by a galaxy of Muslim elites comprising members of academia, western educated professionals and land lords. She, however, does not tell why the Sunni Muslims of Bengal and Mohajirs, were alienated from the Pakistani establishment or the ruling elite comprising the army, its intelligence wing, Inter Service Intelligence (ISI) and the aggressive Muslim clergy.

The Christians before independence too were seen officially aligning with Jinnah. It was not surprising that most of the Christians were the local converts, who had changed their religion for seeking favours of the colonial masters.

Farahnaz rightly doubts about the future of Pakistan due to the rising radicalization of Pakistani society. The government officials and politicians deliberately disregard the rights of its minority populations and are also unwilling to confront the Islamist extremists.

In 1942, the All India Christian Association had supported twonation theory of Jinnah.

Farahnaz offers detailed narrative of the plight of the socalled liberal and progressive political elements, but they never officially opposed two-nation theory. She may analyze in subsequent editions that one cannot simultaneously yield before the aggressive Islam of the Muslim clergy and promote allinclusive democracy.

The Pakistan People’s Party and its founder, Z.A. Bhutto, had indulged in this “illogical” game. Since the author was elected to the Pakistan National Assembly on the ticket of People’s Party, she could not be much critical of Bhutto’s opportunistic approach to politics. But as an author and researcher, she needs to shed off her personal concerns.

Bhutto’s was a favourite of the Ayub Khan, the military dictator, and his political career blossomed under the army establishment. If he had supported Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, who had won majority in the Pakistan National Assembly, Pakistan could have survived and genocide in Bengal, where the pre-dominant Sunni army of Pakistan committed genocide killing four lakh Sunni Muslims, and raping more than three lakh women had been averted.

The author’s observation that in India democracy has flourished is partly true. The present day, India, one of the twins of the colonial regime, continues to face the issues unleashed before partition. Her democratic institutions are under pressure due to various facets of the sectarian politics.

Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Jinnah Farahnaz, a former member of the Pakistani National Assembly, is also known as an irrepressible activist.
Farahnaz’s readers await a new book from her to tell us why Muslim elite of the undivided India had joined Jinnah, a nonconformist Muslim, and debunked an Islamic scholar, Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad, who was opposed to the partition of India. The woes of India and Pakistan cannot be resolved unless intellectuals like her adopt a much more comprehensive approach.
Farahnaz rightly doubts about the future of Pakistan due to the rising radicalization of Pakistani society. The government official and politicians deliberately disregard the rights of its minority populations and are also unwilling to confront the Islamist extremists. The policy of Pakistan’s security services, mainly ISI, to use religious extremists in regional battlegrounds, such as Kashmir and Afghanistan, also contributes to their impunity.
There has also been a steady elimination of those who opposed this Islamist narrative, including Benazir Bhutto, Salmaan Taseer, Shahbaz Bhatti and others in Pakistan.