June 28, 2008

An June 7-8, a two day moot on the various languages spoken in the NWFP was held in Peshawar. The conference was attended by representatives of more than 30 languages spoken in the province. The conference, though apparently a literary moot, was of great significance in the backdrop of the constitutional package recently prepared by the PPP-led coalition government that recommends Pukhtunkhwa as the new name of the NWFP.

Language has always played a crucial socio-political role in Pakistan since its inception. It has been a significant factor in promoting national cohesion or the vice versa. With the partition of the subcontinent in 1947, two things which had a great influence on determining the future course of Pakistan were the role of religion and languages in the newly-born state. The concept and ambiguity about the ideology of Pakistan has delayed the constitution-making for more than a decade while the state’s indifference to the status of languages eventually paved the way for the 1971 debacle.

These sensitive issues were not given the importance that they deserved by those responsible to run the affairs of the state whether they were military dictators or civilian rulers. The fallout of the ambiguities – linguistic and ideological – has been devastating, having empowered the ambitious military generals and their cronies, especially the clergy, to haunt the people with strange interpretations of the so-called Pakistan ideology that has always compelled the nation to move in a vicious circle, while the denial of the status of the languages led the nation to form "little boxes" of identity as the Nobel Laureate, Amartya Sen puts it. These little boxes have convinced the people to seek their identity through extreme behaviour, religious or nationalist. Instances speak loud in the NWFP and Balochistan.

Now as the cherished desire of the Pukhtuns, the majority linguistic group in the province, has been endorsed by the constitutional package, the deliberations of more than 30 languages' representatives in Peshawar should be given equally closer attention. The resolutions adopted at the summit strongly voice the smaller communities’ identity concerns.

These communities, in fact, are seeking an assurance by the state that it would preserve, promote and recognise the languages they speak. The proposed name of Pukhtunkhwa represents the identity of Pushto-speaking population of the province which some participants thought was being accepted at the expense of all others. Some of them even proposed Islamkhawa as an alternate name for the NWFP. The insistence on a name that only exhibits the ethnic aspirations of the majority was seen a biased approach at the Peshawar conference.

The learned Pukhtuns often remind the small language groups of the 'hard facts' and term their demands as unsubstantiated; they make them realise that since Pukhtuns were in greater numbers in the NWFP, their right to name (rename) the province should be accepted.

All the censuses in Pakistan have never provided a data form for the other communities living in the NWFP. There have never been separate columns in the census form for these communities and hence all of them have been declared Pukhtuns or Afghans; and these two terms usually carry the same meanings. If a land is to be named after the majority inhabiting it then is it not just to rename Pakistan as Punjabistan because Punjabis claim more than 60% of the total population?

It would be better to give a brief account of the aforesaid 30 plus languages spoken in NWFP.

It is often complained that the Pukhtun nationalists tend to deny the ethnic diversity in the NWFP. The smaller communities living in this province have usually no say in the affairs of the province, hence are neglected. In Pakistan it is not only limited to the smaller communities. Even the majority communities are also in the same status regarding their ethnic identity. The largest language of Pakistan, Punjabi, has no state status. Similar is the case of Pushto and Balochi. Sindhi’s case is different and is also the medium of instruction at primary level in Sindh.

Late Sibte Hasan has said: “In every language there is mom's lull hence every language is a language of love.” Keeping in mind this natural phenomenon it is imperative that we should give due respect to every language. To hate any language means hating knowledge. If I hate Urdu I will be deprived of Ghalib, Iqbal, Faiz and the rich literature and wisdom Urdu has; if I hate Pashto it will mean being deprived of the mystic Rehman, the lyricist Hamza and Leyvane Ghani.

In Pakistan it is believed by the establishment that one language for the whole nation builds national cohesion. In fact it is a baseless approach. The fact is contrary to that. Promotion of a single language, at the cost of others, inevitably leads to creating the little boxes that promote both hatred and violence. The state must recognise the five regional languages as national along with measures to preserve and promote the rest. The best way to do so is, at least, to provide the basic education to natives in their mother tongues with effective measures to promote literature in these languages.

We have the example of our South Asian neighbour, Nepal, which has identified 59 different ethnic groups as aadibasi/janajati (indigenous peoples/nationalities). Almost all of them have their own mother tongue which they consider to be an important element of their ethnic identity as well as a means for enhancing their development. This perception is a motivating factor for them to work for the preservation and promotion of their language.