Independence Day, this year, in spite of the successful holding of general elections and passing of governance from one democratic setup to another, saddens one with the destruction of a place associated with the last days of the father of the nation. The destruction of the Ziarat Residency at the hands of terrorists speaks volumes about the state of affairs during the time when Jinnah chose it for his residence at the time of his illness. Today, Balochistan has become an open wound, needing immediate surgery.

The past year witnessed mayhem surpassing those of the previous years. There were over 700 victims of sectarian conflict in the country with Balochistan’s Hazara community being the worst affected. The so-called war on terror’s fallout continues unabated. The killing of mountaineers at 4200 feet above the ground, of various nationalities is a stab in the back, which will continue to hurt for several years to come.

Lahore Resolution

The Lahore Resolution was framed to achieve a nation-state comprising Muslim majority areas of the subcontinent. The need arose to save Muslims in India from cultural onslaughts of the dominant Hindu majority and assurances were given at the very outset to all the religious minority living in the proposed “Pakistan”. The leaders who drew up the points never realized that in the future, not only religious minorities but even smaller sectarian groups would be subjected to travails.

The Lahore Resolution, at the behest of Jinnah, assured effective safeguards to religious minorities in the units to be formed. Whereas the idea of proposed Muslim State(s) was a conceptual framework in 1940, the monumental struggle by the Muslim polity under the able leadership of Jinnah turned it into a solid reality in 1947. Nevertheless, even in truncated Pakistan, religious minorities comprised 14 percent of the new nation. Jinnah’s speech of 11th August 1947, giving a new dimension to two-nation theory, was highly re-assuring to the religious minorities.

However, his own party members gauging popular sentiments of those times, were not willing to display such magnanimity towards the minorities. Various Muslim groups nearing partition, had joined Muslim League which was on the verge of victory. In 1949, within months of Jinnah’s demise, the first constituent assembly passed the objective resolution. This being the preamble of the proposed constitution, it virtually sought to change the contours of the state from one constituted by Muslims of diverse backgrounds with no state interference into private lives of its citizens, to that of one adjusting their lives according to the tenets of Islam.

However, after the 1971 trauma of the break-up of Pakistan, the equation of minorities was reduced to a mere 3 percent of the population which further marginalized them. The passing of the second amendment in 1974, declaring Ahmedis a non-Muslim minority, may have been politically expedient, but it led to religious extremism now growing by leaps and bounds. Legislations during Zia years like Hudood Ordinance, Blasphemy Laws etc. besides making the Objective Resolution, a substantive part of the constitution through the 8th Constitutional Amendment of 1985, were not helpful to the cause of the minorities. The example of alleged mis-use of blasphemy laws to settle personal scores is rampant. After 9/11 Christians have become an easy target.

What the founding fathers could not visualize was the accentuation of sectarian divisions amongst the Muslims. Since the 1980s’ Pakistan has virtually turned into a battleground of proxy wars between two dominant sects of the Muslim faith. The already fragile national cohesion has been further damaged. Ethnicity, most evident in Jinnah’s birthplace, Karachi, the only metropolitan city and industrial hub, has become a smoldering cauldron. The inter-communal relations have worsened to such an extent that several thousand people from Lyari are reported to have left their abodes to escape annihilation at the hand of rivals. The cruel reality of people “voting with their feet” here, and elsewhere, reflects lack of writ of the state on its own territories.

Indian Muslims

Pakistan was not designed to become a national homeland for the Indian Muslims. However, events of Pakistan resulted in a deluge of Muslims fleeing Hindu India and Hindus leaving Muslim Pakistan. This became acceptable on grounds of support for Muslim League from Muslim minority provinces of undivided India. A strange turn of policy was experienced on this vital count about four decades after Pakistan’s creation. However, with the start of the 1980s’ so-called ‘jihad’ in Afghanistan against Soviet aggression, ruler General Zia-ul-Haq on his own decided to make Pakistan a homeland for the Ummah. Helping Afghan refugees was acceptable on purely humanitarian grounds, but, assisting them to raise lashkars from amongst them to create a ‘Vietnam’ for the Soviet Union, had its fall-out for Pakistan. The ‘heroin and kalashnikov’ culture that evolved during those times still refuses to die down.

Sometimes by design, as in the 1980s’ and as a fait accompli after 9/11, our keenness to be a frontline state has also created situations which we find impossible to handle. Terrorism continues unabated, claiming lives of innocent Pakistanis. If drone attacks impinge upon our sovereignty, the terrorist outfits comprising foreign nationals operating from, and, on our soil, also are a travesty of our sovereign status. With the exiting of the allied forces from Afghanistan in 2014, a situation similar to the one in the 1990s’ is on the cards. A balancing act of utmost vigilance from stakeholders at home will be required.

After the tragic events of 1971, political elements succeeded in forging some consensus in the shape of the 1973 Constitution, which inspite of all odds has remained the consensus law of the land till to date. The passage of the 18th amendment has sufficiently widened the sphere of regional provincial autonomy and also sanctified it.

As far as the practical aspect is concerned, it appears that old habits die hard! Politicians and bureaucrats still seem to act as per their previous norms, making a mockery of the terminology of the sacred document. Ministers and officials seem to be unaware of their new roles both at the federal and provincial level. However, it is to be hoped that with the passage of time things will change for the better.

Regional autonomy

Regional autonomy is welcomed but regionalism is a product of economic inequities that have weakened our federation. Smaller units, especially Balochistan, seem to be more perturbed. It is hoped the new set-up with a Baloch Nationalist Chief Minister will improve matters.

The repeated use of force is unwarranted and counterproductive. Devoted and sincere efforts, both at federal and provincial level, are essential to gain confidence of the masses inhabiting the largest unit in terms of area. At present, the smaller units are experiencing difficulty in gaining support for their development schemes from the all-powerful economic management by the federal authorities. The need is to allow financial independence to federating units as much as possible. These problems could be resolved through mutual cooperation and the type of sagacity displayed by our founding fathers several decades ago. The prolonged suspension of democracy as witnessed from time to time sets back the clock. Martial law, in any garb, means dominance by one province. As a result, the smaller provinces feel marginalized.

Times demand that we revisit some of the core deviations that have infiltrated into our national lives legislatively, socially and politically. We must attempt to revive the spirit and resolve which our founders displayed under guidance of Jinnah, during times of struggle. A firm commitment to follow the democratic path, would be of help to achieve our desired goals.

Autonomy to units, devolution, safeguard of life and property of the vulnerable, as well as ensuring a ‘government of laws rather than men’ may be the appropriate ingredients for our future course of action.

Let us through our deeds silence those critics who for several decades have been asking why Pakistan was created, and have now added a new question to it, ‘where is Pakistan headed’.

The writer is a political analyst and senior retired banker