Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah was a statesman of extra-ordinary caliber who changed the course of history of Indian Sub-continent by leading the political struggle for the establishment of Pakistan as an independent state. His leadership and political discourse attracted much attention of historians and political analysts of the pre-and post-independence period.
Beverley Nichols, an eminent British journalist, described Muhammad Ali Jinnah as "the most important man in Asia" in his book "Verdict on India" published in 1944. He argued that "India is likely to be the world's greatest problem for some years to come, and Mr Jinnah is in a position of unique strategic importance he can sway the battle this way or that as he chooses. His 100 million Muslims will march to the left, to the right, to the front, to the rear at his bidding, and at nobody else's..." (p.216). American news-magazine, Time, carried a cover-story on Jinnah's personality and politics on April 22, 1946. In the post-independence period Jinnah's biographies that make a thorough analysis of his role and career are written by, among others, M.H. Saiyid (Originally published in 1945, reprinted in Pakistan), Hector Bolitho (1954), G. Allana (1967), Saleem M.M. Qureshi (1969), Shaif al Mujahid (1981), Stanley Wolpert (1984), Ayesha Jalal (1992), Akbar S. Ahmed (1997), S. Qalb-i-Abid (1999), Qutubuddin Aziz (2001), Sikandar Hayat (2008), Jaswant Singh (2009), and Qayyum Nizami (2010).
Jinnah's Ideological Disposition Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah's most outstanding contribution to history and politics was the creation of a new nationalism what was later described as the "Two Nations Theory" that challenged the Congress Party led nationalism that projected India as "One Nation." As an alternate Pakistan nationalism, it had to have a basis different from the Congress Party nationalism. Jinnah argued that the Muslims of the Sub-continent were not a community; they were a nation with their own "outlook of life" and "outlook on life", based on their distinct religio-political and cultural identity derived primarily from Islamic teachings, civilization and history. He invoked the right of self-determination for the Muslims of British India in view of the failure of the Hindu-dominated Congress Party to appreciate the impact of Islamic identity, culture and history on the Muslim mindset and its refusal to provide constitutional and legal assurances for the protection of the Muslim identity, rights and interests in independent India.
Jinnah neither subscribed to the classical Marxist distinction between religion and politics nor did he advocate religious domination of the state. He attempted to create, what Sir Agha Khan Third described in February 1950, a unity between the conservative and the progressive elements among the Muslims. He believed that the Quaid was "essentially a modern man to bring about this Spiritual and Intellectual Unity" in these two trends. Jinnah was inspired by the principles and teachings of Islam that emphasized social justice and equality. He viewed Islam as a civilization, culture, social order and an ethical foundation of the society rather than a set of puritanical legal injunctions. Like modernist Muslims of his era he believed that Islamic teachings and principles of social justice, fair-play and equality could be combined with modern notions of democratic governance, constitutionalism, civil and political rights, rule of law and equality of all citizens irrespective of religion, caste, ethnicity or region.
Pakistan was established on the basis of the "homeland" concept to secure the future of the Muslims of British India. There is no statement by Jinnah or any resolution of the Muslim League in the pre-independence period that Pakistan was needed because Islam was in danger in British India. Rather, it was the threat of insecurity of the future of the Muslims of British India that led Jinnah and his colleague to demand a separate state.
The Quaid's statements also do not support the notion of an Islamic-ideological state enforcing Islamic injunctions on fundamentalist lines as regulative, punitive and extractive commands. The Islamic teachings and principles were to serve as the ethical basis of the society and a source of inspiration in a society where the pre-dominant majority was Muslim. In other words, the idea of the state patronizing religious orthodoxy and extremism was alien to Jinnah's thought-process.
In the post-independence period, the Islamic political parties were the first to raise the slogan of establishment of an Islamic state on traditional lines with an emphasis on literalist interpretation of the religious text. These parties argued in the post Jinnah period that the Ideology of Pakistan was the Ideology of Islam and that Pakistan was created for Islam. The demand of religious political parties for an Islamic state aimed at enabling them to stage a political comeback after refusing to support Jinnah's political struggle for the establishment of Pakistan.
The military regime of General Yahya Khan invoked the term of Ideology of Pakistan at the official level for the first time. It was the military government of General Zia-ul-Haq that invoked Islamic orthodoxy to legitimize his rule and it used the state apparatus to enforce religious orthodoxy and militancy. This policy was strengthened by the support of the United States and conservative Arab states, especially Saudi Arabia, after the Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan in the last week of December 1979.
Jinnah's references to various Islamic idioms like Islamic principles and teachings, the Holy Quran, the Sharia, Islamic history and the earliest period of Islam in his speeches and statements were re-interpreted by the Zia government and its Islamist supporters to justify the military regime's policy of 'Islamization' on orthodox and fundamentalist lines.
Most of these interpretations were out of context and did not take into account the mindset and disposition of Jinnah.
Muslim Political Demands If we return to the political struggle of the Muslims in the post 1857 period, it is clear that the main goal of their leadership was to protect and advance Muslim identity, rights and interests in the context of the modern state system the British established in India during 1857-1947. There was no change in the objective over the years but they changed their strategies keeping in view the changed political context and their collective political experience. Sir Syed Ahmad Khan and his colleagues based in Aligarh advised the Muslims to concentrate on modern education and avoid active involvement in politics. They wanted Muslim youth to acquire modern education so that they get the opportunity to advance their career and compete effectively as the British introduced competitive recruitment to government services and gradually initiated the electoral process.
A major change in the strategies of the Muslim elite took place in 1906, when they demanded separate electorate for the elections of Muslim representatives to the assemblies. They established the All India Muslim League in December 1906, as a platform for educated Muslims for presenting their collective demands to the British government for protection and advancement of their distinct Muslim cultural and political identity, rights and interests.
Jinnah first joined the Congress Party in 1906 and became a member of the Muslim League in 1913. He maintained the membership of these two parties until 1920, when he decided to quit the Congress Party and devoted fully to the cause of the Muslim community. During these years, he was known as the 'ambassador of Hindu-Muslim Unity' and worked for evolving a political formula for accommodation between the two communities by ensuring constitutional and legal guarantees for Muslim representation in the legislatures, cabinets and government jobs.
The Muslim League and the Congress Party agreed in a political arrangement in 1916, popularly known as the Lucknow Pact, 1916, to provide constitutional guarantees and safeguards for ensuring effective Muslim representation in legislative bodies. The safeguards for the Muslims included separate electorate for the Muslims to elect their representatives and reservation of one-third seats in the central legislature for the Muslims. At the provincial level, religious minorities more given slightly more seats than their number qualified them in the provincial legislative assemblies. This meant that non-Muslims got more representation in Muslim majority provinces. In return, additional representation was made available to the Muslims in Muslim minority provinces.
These measures aimed at confidence building among religious minorities, ie Muslim in non-Muslim majority provinces and non-Muslims in Muslim-majority provinces. The Muslim demands for separate electorate and one-third seats in the central legislature, were also accepted by the Congress. However, these safeguards were rejected by the Congress Party in what was titled as the Nehru Report (1928) that formulated proposals for the new constitution for India.
Jinnah, in his address to the Muslim League session in Delhi in March 1929, gave a rejoinder to the Nehru Report so far as the interests and rights of the Muslims in the future constitutional arrangements for India. He presented 14 points as the Charter of Muslim demands calling for federalism in India, separate electorate for the Muslims, reservation of one-third seats for the Muslims in central legislature, electoral weightage to religious minorities but the Muslims could not be reduced to minority in Muslim majority provinces, Sindh be separated from Bombay and established as a province, and constitutional reforms should be introduced in North West Frontier Province and Balochistan. Most of these points were repeated by the Muslim League in the Roundtable conferences (1930-32).
Until 1937-39, the Muslim League was supportive of a federal system for India with constitutional guarantees for the distinct Muslim socio-cultural identity, rights and political interests. The underlying assumption was that in a federal system the Muslims could have the governments of their choice in Muslim-majority provinces and that in Muslim minority provinces, their effective representation in the legislature would enable them to protect their rights and interests.
What changed the Muslim League approach to the problems and issues of the Muslims in British India was the dismissive attitude of the Congress Party towards the Muslim League after the 1937 provincial elections in which the Muslim League performed poorly. Another factor that made the Muslim League leadership conscious of the problems of the Muslims even in a federal system was their bitter political and economic experience in the non-Muslim majority provinces where the Congress established its provincial governments. The Muslim socio-cultural identity and their rights and interests as members of the society and aspirants for government and semi-government jobs came under heavy pressure due to the discriminatory policies of the Congress provincial ministries (1937-39).
A Homeland for the Muslims The dismissive attitude of the Congress Party towards the Muslim League and the treatment of the Muslims by the Congress provincial ministries alienated the Muslim elite and the Muslim League from the notion of federalism for the future of India; they began to explore the option of a separate homeland for the Muslims to secure their identity, rights and interests.
It was after Jinnah's return from England in 1934 and especially after 1937, when he initiated the re-organization of the Muslim League, he started using Islamic idiom and references in his political discourse. He viewed Islamic teachings and principles as relevant to national identity formation and their political mobilization.
Jinnah's statements in the post-1938 period began to describe the Muslims of British India as a nation. In 1939-40 onwards he talked of a separate homeland comprising the Muslim majority provinces like the Punjab, NWFP, Sindh, Balochistan in the northwest and Bengal in the east. While invoking Islamic teachings and principles, culture, civilization and historical experience to articulate Muslim national identity and a homeland for them as a district nation, Jinnah never suggested a religious Islamic State as advocated by Islamic political parties. His interview with Beverley Nichols in December 1943 included an interesting question-answer exchange:
Beverly Nichols: "When you say the Muslims are a nation, are you thinking in terms of religion?"
Jinnah: "Partly, but by no means exclusively. You must remember that Islam is not merely a religious doctrine but a realistic and practical Code of Conduct. I am thinking in terms of life, of everything important in life. I am thinking in terms of our history, our heroes, our art, our architecture, our music, our laws, our jurisprudence .... In all these things our outlook is not only fundamentally different but often radically antagonistic to the Hindus."
There was a strong territorial basis to the demand for a separate Pakistani state. The four Muslim majority provinces in northwest were territorially linked which made it possible for the Muslim League to demand a separate homeland. Had there been no concentration of Muslim population in these provinces, demand for separate homeland would not have materialized. Therefore, it is important to protect Pakistan's territorial identity against the pressures built by those who do not recognize Pakistan's primacy as a nation-state or do not respect its territorial boundaries.
Pakistan is a territorial state based on the homeland concept for the Muslims of South Asia. However, it was never conceived as a homeland for all Muslims of British India. Given the fact that a section of Muslim political elite opposed the establishment of Pakistan, it was recognized that the Muslims would continue to live in India who were advised by Jinnah to be loyal to the Indian state.
Non-Muslims in Pakistan Jinnah and other Muslim League leaders knew that non-Muslims would be Pakistan's citizens. The Lahore Resolution (March 1940) that formally proposed a separate homeland for the Muslims of British India, carried a clear stipulation for the protection of the religion, culture and rights of non-Muslims. The subsequent resolutions of the Muslim League repeated this assurance. The most categorical commitment of equal citizenship for all irrespective of religion and that the state would not engage in a religion-based preference while dealing with its citizens was given in Jinnah's first address to the new constituent assembly of Pakistan on August 11, 1947. He referred back to this speech in October 1947 to dissuade the non-Muslims from leaving Pakistan. Non-Muslims were given representation in the first federal cabinet of Pakistan.
If the objective was to create a religious and Sharia-based state, Jinnah and the Muslim League should not have accepted the Cabinet Mission Plan (I946). Further, the Muslim League favoured the inclusion of the whole of the Punjab and Bengal in Pakistan because these were Muslim-majority provinces. Had this proposal been accepted by the British, Pakistan would have had a large non-Muslim population. Jinnah especially invited the Sikh leadership to join Pakistan. If the Muslim League leadership and Jinnah were in favour of a large number of non-Muslims to staying-on in Pakistan, they could not think of creating a puritanical Islamic state in Pakistan.
It can be safely concluded that the major objective of the Muslim political struggle in British India was to protect and advance Muslim cultural and civilizational identity, their interests and rights. They changed the methods and strategies over time to achieve this goal that remained constant in 1857-1947. The decision in 1940 to seek a separate homeland was the result of their political experience that the Congress Party would not provide any specific constitutional guarantees and safeguards for Muslim identity, rights and interests in one federal India. The Muslims were alienated from the federal model by 1939-40 and demanded a separate and independent homeland of Pakistan. After articulating the notion of Muslim nation in British India and the need of a separate homeland for them, Jinnah and the Muslim League engaged in popular mobilization for the demand for establishing Pakistan. By 1946, the demand for Pakistan had become the most favoured slogan at the common person level. Had the Muslim League not showed its electoral support in the 1946 elections, its demand for Pakistan would not have become credible.
The founders of Pakistan conceived it as a modern, democratic, constitutional state with an emphasis on the rule of law and equal citizenship for all. However, they did not altogether reject the role of teachings and principles of Islam and Muslim historical experience as a source of inspiration for the society and the people of Pakistan, who predominantly Muslim. Other qualities of Pakistan included socio-cultural and religious pluralism and no tolerance for religious extremism and terrorism. Any attempt to turn Pakistan into a puritanical religious state and a violence afflicted society distances it from Jinnah's political ideals.
(Hasan Askari Rizvi is an Independent Political and Defence Analyst He has the Doctoral Degree from the University of Pennsylvania, USA, and is a recipient of the Presidential Award "Sitara-i-Imtiaz" for academic excellence).
Comments
Comments are closed.