A colonial mindset was once again reflected in Altaf Hussain’s remarks on Wednesday. There was the usual attitude of looking down upon the people of Sindh who welcomed millions of refugees with open arms in 1947 and offered them shelter and opportunities to prosper. That Altaf Hussain continues to insist on calling the newcomers Mohajirs even after sixty four years is indicative of a continuous bias against integration with the local population. The attitude is reminiscent of the British racism of the colonial era when the inferior ‘natives’ were considered intellectually and culturally backward. The white masters were supposed to bring fruits of civilisation to their uncivilised subjects while maintaining a distance from them.
The condescending attitude of the MQM and its sympathisers has naturally alienated the local Sindhis and raised walls instead of breaking them down. The attitude is considered an insulting expression of racial superiority. That the remarks by Altaf should have come at this crucial juncture when Karachi is passing through a bloodbath is highly disturbing.
Calling the pre-partition Sindhis the ‘slaves of Hindu Banias’ Altaf ranted, “We have given you independence and a free country.” He then put the rhetorical question, “Which country have you liberated with your own struggle?” Now this is falsifying history. At a time when Jinnah was badly in need of help, the Sindh assembly was the first provincial legislature to pass a resolution in support of Pakistan. The resolution provided much needed backing for All India Muslim League’s demand for a separate homeland.
To say that Sindhis did nothing for their province is yet another falsification of history. Sindhis fought bravely against the advancing British troops. Hoshu Shidi’s war cry of “Sar daysun, Sindh na daysun” (I’ll give away my head but not surrender Sindh) in the battle of Dabba fought in 1843 is duly recorded in history. Pir Sibghatullah Rashidi, the father of the present Pir Pagara, led the Hur insurgency against the Raj and was hanged for the act in 1943 by the British government. It was on account of the efforts of the Sindhi Muslim politicians that Sindh, which had been amalgamated into Bombay soon after the British takeover, achieved the status of a separate province and joined the struggle for Pakistan.
Altaf Hussain has also rebuked what he calls the “conscienceless writers” and “analysts teaching false history.” This indicates that Altaf has a tendency for amnesia. When he said on Wednesday that 20 lakh Mohajirs offered their lives for the creation of the country and left their hearths and homes, he conveniently forgot that the worst sufferers from communal riots in 1947 were the Muslims in East Punjab. Those who migrated from East Punjab as a result of the riots became integrated in the local population across the border in no time. They subsequently neither called themselves Mohajirs, nor did they make tall claims about the ‘sacrifices’ they had rendered. Let alone fighting the local population, they became an indivisible part of it.
The MQM has confined the term Mohajirs to include only those coming from provinces not contiguous with the borders of Pakistan. Thus people migrating from UP, Bihar and CP mainly are included in the term. Despite their dominant position in the civil service and a share in the armed forces jobs much above their population ratio, a narrative of their deprivation has been constructed.
Altaf has also raised the issue of quotas, accusing the Sindhis of depriving the Mohajirs of educational facilities and jobs. The qouta system is by no means confined to Sindh. Even in Punjab, quotas have existed on the basis of the rural/urban divide. Separate quotas for Muslims, he needs to be reminded, was a major demand of the Muslim community in India. This is by no mean an unusual thing in the contemporary world where proactive policies are often devised for the uplift of the neglected communities.
Two forthcoming challenges will test if the party is willing to change its narrow outlook which has led to confrontation and blood shed. The first is the Population and Housing Census scheduled for 12th-27th September this year. Unlike what the party did during the House Listing operation conducted earlier this year, it has to avoid trying to engineer results in accordance with its wishes. While there may be a need to regulate the unhindered inflow of population in Karachi from outside Sindh, all genuine residents have to be counted correctly. Any attempt to doctor the census results would further lead to the deterioration of the law and order situation.
The next test would come when the Election Commission starts delimiting the constituencies. At this stage too, no attempts have to be made to interfere in the process. The MQM needs to come out of its cocoon, shed ethnic prejudices and become a part of the Sindhi community. What is more, it needs to reconcile with the changing ethnic realities of the province.
The writer is a former academic and a political analyst.
The remarks by Altaf Hussain not only depict the colonial mind-set but are crude, disrespectful, and point the fascist tendencies. Thanks to this Chicago cabbie whose elders came from the modern day Uttar Pradesh to teach me civilization.
I did not know that I had to be civilized by the naukars and chakars of the Mughal darbars, Nawabs, and Taualkdars of Oudh. Read the history Mr. Husssain and leave us alone.
why doesn't this article have more facebook 'likes' or retweets?
I must congratulate Pakistan Today to give space to the articles which other so called independent print media would hesitate to allow forthright and honest analyses not to upset MQM supremo and possible repercussions on them, Such coward media has been wittingly or unwittingly aiding self styled statesman like Altaf Hussain.
The author of this article deserved full praise on his brilliant analysis post Altaf Hussain's foul language. Before advent of this 'brave' leader of MQM there waa peace and harmony in SIndh barring few ethnic disturbances previously. Moron Zia created this monster known as Altaf Hussain whose message from the day one was to create a barrier between native Sindhis and migrant mohajirs. Gun culture was introduced by MQM. Murdering opponents and extortion of money became the norm.
Musharraf gave total support to this thug, Living in London under the protection of the British government he has been pulling strings and destroying peace in Karachi, He considered himself as Khomeini of Sindh and gave a clarion call of insurrection but being rapped his knuckles by the British government he quickly changed his stance and his speeches mellowed down, This obviously explains that this man has no substance and is a pawn in the hands of vested western powers. If there was a real rule of law in the country, which appears to be impossible in the supine government of Asif Zardari, Karachi situation would not be as bad as it is today.
Besides, it is vitally important that the British and the United States governments should reign in their poodle for the sake of peace in Sindh in general and Karachi in particular.
why no hue and cry was raised in punjab when wasim akhtar declared that there is a mujra in every house of punjab? why all the death and detruction in karachi after mirza’s statement but nothing in lahore after wasim’s statement? why are the punjabi people so tolerant of abuse hurled their way from the mqm?
@ saad,it is because the punjabis are not proud of being punajbi,i live in lahore and no one over hear speaks punjabi everyone speaks urdu,they read urdu newspapers and watch urdu channels.there are only 3 punjabi channels whereas punjab’s population is the highest,there are no punjabi language newspapers in pakistan whereas their are dozens of sindhi newspapers in sindh.
Is there any country in the world which has a political party with its head and headquarters in a different country unless of course its a rebel party? Altaf Hussain is so dear to MI 5 that the London Metropolitin Police has not moved on the murder of Dr.Imran Farooq. Altaf Hussain is at the same level mentally as Zardari and his PM. The sudden halt to killings after the PPP – MQM settlement clearly shows who were doing this .
This writer goes off on tangents and ignores what Altaf Hussain said in his speech. He was targetting those who insult a whole race of people and calling them out. What he called as 'slaves to Hindus' were the same Jageerdars who have Sindh hostage all of its history. The writer fails to point out that Altaf Hussain mentioned the migrants from East Punjab and the sacrifices they made. He also fails to say how Altaf Husain repeatedly called himself a Sindhi and spoke in the Sindhi language.
Perhaps the writer should look at his own inherent racism before pointing the finger at others.
this writer is a racist idiot.
So finally rabitaa committee caught up with this article and have responded in their typical gangster language.
Yes believe that. My language was far better than what you used, neither am I a MQM supporter or voter. Unlike you I am not a racist.
There is a need to understand what Altaf Hussain said. Political rhetoric aside what he essentially meant was that the idea of Pakistan emerged from the areas where Muslims were in minority not in majority. The reference to Hindu bunyia is more relevant in the conceptualization of political/economic forces in UP/CP etc. Muslims in those areas were more insecure under majoritarion democracy which showed a murky face during a short congress rule.
K.K. Aziz a renowned historian can be cited here. On page 205 of his famous book 'The Making of Pakistan – A study in Nationalism' he writes that Punjab under unionist did not officially demand Pakistan till 1945, Sind did not take kindly to the Muslism League till 1946, and NWFP had Red Shirts in power till the day of independence. Only Bengal was for Pakistan but not after Jinnah's Muslim League. However, Muslims of Hindu-majority provinces remained loyal to Jinnah and the idea of Pakistan. I hope, it clarifies some thoughts.
There is a need to understand what Altaf Hussain said. Political rhetoric aside what he essentially meant was that the idea of Pakistan emerged from the areas where Muslims were in minority not in majority. The reference to Hindu bunyia is more relevant in the conceptualization of political/economic forces in UP/CP etc. Muslims in those areas were more insecure under majoritarion democracy which showed a murky face during a short congress rule.
K.K. Aziz a renowned historian can be cited here. On page 205 of his famous book ‘The Making of Pakistan – A study in Nationalism’ he writes that Punjab under unionist did not officially demand Pakistan till 1945, Sind did not take kindly to the Muslism League till 1946, and NWFP had Red Shirts in power till the day of independence. Only Bengal was for Pakistan but not after Jinnah’s Muslim League. However, Muslims of Hindu-majority provinces remained loyal to Jinnah and the idea of Pakistan. I hope, it clarifies some thoughts.
Comments are closed.