A dream turned sour?

2026-03-23 - 06:00

Quaid-i-Azam and Zahid Hussain, the first Governor of the State Bank of Pakistan, entering the SBP building in Karachi. SEVERAL historians, political analysts and scholars are of the view that the Lahore Resolution of March 23, 1940 gave meaning and purpose to the freedom struggle of the Muslims in India. This assessment carries substantial weight. After experiencing the harsh rule of the Indian National Congress, which ended in 1939, the Muslims realised that there will be limited opportunities for them to sustain themselves. Thus began an organised and structured movement to force the rulers to acknowledge diversity. On October 10, 1938, Shaikh Abdul Majid tabled Resolution No.5 at the Sindh Muslim League Conference in Karachi. It was endorsed by Khan Bahadur Gurmani and championed by Sir Abdullah Haroon, Sayed Abdul Rauf Shah and Maulana Abdul Hamid Badayuni. G.M. Sayed had famously stated at this event that the Hindus and Muslims were two separate nations. “This Conference considers it absolutely essential, in the interests of unhampered cultural development, the economic and social betterment and political self-determination of the two nations, known as Hindus and Muslims, to recommend to the All-India Muslim League to review and revise the entire conception of what should be the suitable constitution for India which will secure honourable and legitimate status to them.” It may be remembered that the conversations related to the creation of a separate land for the Muslims of the subcontinent was taking place on several forums. Chaudhry Rehmat Ali, in his famous pamphlet Now or Never had provided a sketch of this homeland in 1933. Based in Cambridge, he reached out to many notable leaders, scholars and opinion makers linked to the political struggle in this region. When various political forces and stakeholders of All India Muslim League agreed to adopt the proposal for a separate homeland for the Muslims and oppressed polities, the struggle gained traction. And under the principled leadership of Jinnah and his comrades, they eventually succeeded. It is another story that the dream turned sour for many in later years. Jinnah devoted himself to evolving plans for every walk of life in the new nation, focusing on its future economic development and management. After the adoption of the Lahore Resolution in 1940, Jinnah and his comrades were mindful of the mammoth task of upgrading the lives of millions of impoverished people in what was to become the new state of Pakistan. One of the significant attempts in achieving this goal was the formulation of the Economic Planning Committee. Scholars, including Professors Sharif-ul-Mujahid and Naureen Talha, maintain that Jinnah was very concerned about his downtrodden countrymen. The visionary that he was, Jinnah applied a scientific approach to achieve reforms that the emerging state of Pakistan needed. The inauguration of State Bank of Pakistan in July 1948, less than a year after independence, was a remarkable achievement. The Quaid had entrusted the task of formulating economic strategies to concerned professionals. His idea of economic and social reforms was clear. He intended to transform Pakistan into a functioning welfare state, capable of providing employment opportunities through private enterprises in agricultural and industrial sectors. When one reviews the legacy of Jinnah — a lawyer by profession and a politician by choice — in terms of future planning, one sees a series of sincere efforts to put the economy of the new country on the right path. The visionary that he was, Jinnah applied a scientific approach to achieve reforms that the emerging state of Pakistan needed. The inauguration of State Bank of Pakistan in July 1948 – less than a year after independence – was a remarkable achievement. But barring a few sincere efforts to run the economy in a scientific manner, the situation worsened drastically after Jinnah. As we stand today, nearly eight decades on, visible disparities can be observed in our economic development, access to opportunities and education. While the advertisement campaigns showcase a country where each and every citizen has access to all the amenities of life and opportunities for progress, the reality remains grim. We have stark regional disparities. How can the fact that many tehsils in Balochistan are without a grid-based electricity system or safe drinking water be justified? This is a province that has produced natural gas and countless invaluable resources for more than seventy years, which fuel the prosperity of millions in other provinces. The historic meeting between Mountbatten, Jinnah and Nehru before the transfer of power. Ever since Pakistan came into being, the overall status of smaller communities (read minorities) declined rapidly. In 1947, over 20 per cent of the people in both the eastern and western wings of Pakistan were non-Muslims. Now the number is down to about 3pc. Those who chose to live in Pakistan trusted the AIML leadership, and in the direction given by the Quaid in numerous speeches where he has mentioned the equal status of all people. It is ironic that the religious parties which were against the creation of Pakistan began exercising their influence on the state. When the Objectives Resolution was passed in 1949, there was discontent among non-Muslim legislators. They feared that the ordinary non-Muslims will become vulnerable to bigotry. Prominent political leaders of East Pakistan, including Canteswar Barman, Peter Paul Gomez and Basanta Kumar Das — members of the second parliament of Pakistan — warned that such tendencies did not conform to the core ideas that the Quaid believed in. But the legislative process continued, and the state and society tilted towards a more conservative version of nationhood. Many leaders and members of Pakistan National Congress, a political party that represented the rights of non-Muslims in East Pakistan – were disillusioned. Many political workers had initially opposed the idea of partition. However, once it happened, they accepted it. But they struggled to achieve a respectable status for those who did not belong to the faith of the majority. Eventually, many leaders and workers of this party along with other political outfits faced the wrath of the state. Some were imprisoned while others were routinely harassed. It is disappointing that such tendencies persist. Religion often becomes a political tool for the powers that be. Two ‘religiously-inspired’ entities have haunted Pakistan in recent times – Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP) and Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, which are now proscribed. But, unfortunately, TLP played a major role in unsettling an elected government about a decade ago. Besides, thousands of innocent Pakistanis, including the members of our security forces, lost their lives to violence. And yet another crackdown, Operation Ghazab lil Haq, is ongoing to eradicate the threat from across the border. The existence of such radical groups violates Jinnah’s political path of inclusion. He stated that Islam is a way of life; a comprehensive code of democratic practice. He also cautioned that the imposition of one belief system should never be the intention. In his famous view about the future of Pakistan as a state, Jinnah emphatically rejected the idea of a theocracy. He did not subscribe to the possibility that Pakistan would ever become a place where clerics will call the shots. Jinnah was a great admirer of the idealism and progressiveness that Islam brought to mankind. It was for this reason that he was hopeful that the Constituent Assembly in Pakistan would frame a constitution that shall embody the Islamic spirit of equality, justice and fair play. As the Middle East, especially Gaza and Lebanon, face a most challenging time, an important political view that should be revisited is Jinnah’s position on the oppressed people of Palestine. One has observed that contemporary political narratives survive on a hypocrisy of sorts. While the modern world leadership continues to harp on about its commitment to economic freedom and access to equal opportunity enterprises, the opposite is practiced in reality. Imperialism has always prospered through its cruel exploitation of local resources for the benefit of colonial masters. Professors S.M. Burke and Salim Quraishi in their seminal book The British Raj in India — A Historical Review record that the trading exploits from India alone in the year 1740 accounted for more than 10 per cent of Britain’s revenue. This figure steadily grew over a period of time. But this trade imbalance, and later control of resources could only become possible because of the absolute political subordination of the local population. While visualising the future course of action for Indian Muslims and India as a whole, Jinnah was categorical about ensuring free enterprising rights based on the principles of fair play and equality. In his speech on the inauguration ceremony of the State Bank on July 1, 1948, he objectively identified the shortcomings and limitations in the emerging capitalist inclinations, which were deeply rooted in, and promoted by, the west. Instead, he proposed espousing the principles of Islamic practices in transactions that focused on attaining welfare, happiness and prosperity of mankind. Jinnah could foresee that artificially planted conflicts shall become the raison d’être for the arms and ammunition industries — a catalyst for next generation imperialism. It is not coincidental that he, without mincing his words, condemned the shoddy handling of the Palestinian issue by the United Kingdom, UN and later the US. The various resolutions adopted by All India Muslim League in support of a fair and just settlement of Palestinian matters during 1937-1947 are a testimony to this fact. Prolonged correspondence between Jinnah and Lord Linlithgow and other British officials informs us about the rigourous attempts by the Quaid to prevent Palestine from bleeding for decades. Jinnah lost no opportunity to present the case of the Palestinian people to the powerful through his statements and letters to various concerned statesmen. His correspondence with President Harry Truman of the United States is a testimony to this. The worthy compilation of Jinnah’s documents on world affairs by Professor Mehrunnisa Ali clearly elucidates the fact that he was only concerned about establishing peace through principled solutions to festering regional problems. Jinnah knew only too well that if seeds of conflict are allowed to germinate, vested interests under the influence of imperialistic powers shall be the ultimate beneficiaries. Sadly, though, his successors, that is successive governments in Pakistan, conveniently allowed themselves to be dragged into proxy wars, undesired conflicts and shortsighted adventurism. The time has come for a thorough appraisal of Jinnah’s worthy legacy to rescue his country from the quagmire it finds itself in due to a lack of foresight and vision. Our founding fathers had envisioned a nation that upheld integrity and ethical conduct in every avenue of governance. The reverse has happened. Corruption is rampant in every institution, leaving the poor with nothing to turn to. Governments in Pakistan have been removed on unproven charges of corruption, only to be replaced by equally tainted rulers. While new and innovative methods are devised to remove the curse of corruption from our lives, no one seems to talk about the elephant in the room — the outlandish lifestyles of our politicians, members of the judiciary and bureaucrats. Consider the fact that many of the BPS-18 officers, with a modest salary, have residential addresses in the most expensive neighbourhoods of Karachi South. Their families are able to enjoy their vacations in foreign lands, and their children have access to world class education. The financial equation obviously does not balance out. According to Hector Bolitho, one of Jinnah’s biographers, the Quaid’s scrupulousness and uprightness were two of the several qualities that were acknowledged even by his adversaries. Jinnah was often referred to as ‘painfully honest’. He never deviated from prescribed rules and procedures. Countless anecdotes tell us that our leader spent from his own pocket for all the political activities that he conducted. He was an extremely prudent administrator during his short stint as the Governor General. Besides, he left a sizable portion of his personal wealth in the service of several educational institutions as part of his will. He proposed the same path for the nation in his maiden speech to the Constituent Assembly in August 1947. It is, therefore, painful to see that our regimes and other pillars of society have forgotten this most vital precept emphasised by the father of the nation. Our history is replete with examples where a completely opposite course of action was chosen by the powers that be for personal gains and for the benefit of various coteries. The writer is an academic and researcher based in Karachi