Clear vindication of Two-nation theory

The Quaid-i-Azam was authentic in 1928, when he rejected the Nehru Report for its failure to meet commitments made to undivided India's Muslims in 1916, as today Muslims are being lynched and rendered stateless in India managed. The Quaid had foreseen Muslims in India, and the bitterest winter of discontent in Occupied Kashmir bears testimony to it. For a thousand years two separate nations, Muslims and Hindus, had lived in the subcontinent, and race and geography did not neatly define them. But their "moral and spiritual attributes and the historical antecedents of the two groups were so diverse as to create an impassable barrier between their members," points out noted historian K K Aziz. "In the Orient religion sinks deep into hearts of men, because it puts before them not only a summum bonum but also a philosophy of life and a standard of conduct which would mould their thought and action to an extent which is often not realized by a Western mind". Had India and Pakistan emerged on the map as friendly neighbours the Two-nation theory would have lost its relevance. They have not; they have in fact fought three wars and should Modi's anti-Muslim pogrom continue the fourth is round the corner. The Quaid said the Hindu Mahasabha "bluntly and point-blank, say they want to establish a Hindu Raj in this sub-continent and if Mussalmans do not behave themselves they will be treated as the Jews are treated". He said it then, and now a reincarnated Hitler is after the Muslim blood. He welcomes the so-called persecuted minorities in neighboring Muslim countries and wants Muslims in India to either revert to Hinduism or leave. "Those of our brethren who are minorities in Hindustan may rest assured that we shall never neglect or forget them ... (they) were the pioneers and carried the banner aloft for the achievement of our cherished goal of Pakistan," the Quaid-i-Azam said in his message on August 15.

The Quaid-i-Azam had expected Muslim minority in India to be treated as equal citizens; and in his very first address to the Constituent Assembly on August 11 he assured the minorities equal rights in Pakistan. And that has happened to a great extent. Now when Narendra Modi has invited Hindus in Pakistan the answer he received must have saddened his heart. The Sikh community, in Pakistan and everywhere else, too, is much beholden to Pakistan over opening of Kartarpur corridor. And as for the Christens, the United States government should have thought twice before re-designating Pakistan on "countries of particular concern" in terms of religious freedom. How unfortunate it is that to mandarins in Washington have not put India on that list. Rightly then, Pakistan has called the American announcement as "detached from ground realities of Pakistan". And, it also raises questions about "credibility and transparency of the entire exercise". And, if at all those sitting in Washington are too short-sighted to see what is happening to minorities in India, they should ask their embassy in Pakistan to go around and see how the Christians are celebrating Christmas. By all accounts Pakistan is a multi-religious and pluralistic polity where people of all faiths enjoy religious freedom under constitutional protections. Didn't anybody up there know about the release of Aasia Bibi by the Supreme Court even when lower courts had found her guilty of committing blasphemy? Instead of entertaining the visiting Indian ministers to lavish dinners the minions in Washington should have sought their opinion about the life of eight million Kashmiris imprisoned in their houses for the last five months. Narendra Modi is out to create a Hindu rashtra in which Muslims have no place. The world should frustrate his design; otherwise what is happening to Muslims in India may happen to Hindus in Muslim countries. To every action there is always equal and opposite reaction, according to Issac Newton.