The past that wasn’t

23
199

Before Pakistan makes the cultural choice of going back to the glory of its mythical past, it must remember that that past never existed

Nationhood is a cultural artefact. It mixes political thought with literary expression to define geographical and ideological boundaries in which a people reside. With time, the factual historical content becomes irrelevant. What remains is a myth.

We celebrate March 23 as the day on which the “Pakistan Resolution” was adopted in Lahore in 1940. It is irrelevant now that the resolution was renamed and made no mention of “Pakistan”.

Textbooks are an important method of disseminating that myth. “India is our traditional enemy and we should always keep ourselves ready to defend our beloved country from Indian aggression,” 11-year-olds are taught.

The creation of Pakistan is justified with the two-nation theory – the idea that Muslims and Hindus in the subcontinent were two separate nations. India is the Other, without which there is no We. This national narrative defines a goal (security) and an enemy (India) and in doing so makes possible a meaningful co-existence of a diverse people who refer to themselves as a nation.

“As a general rule, Hindu morale would not stand more than a couple of hard blows delivered at the right time and the right place,” said a directive by president Ayub Khan to General Muhammad Musa, the commander-in-chief of the Pakistan Army, on August 29 1965 just before we began a war with India (Annexure G to GHQ Letter 4050/5/MO-1). To the utter surprise of then foreign minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who had drafted the text of the order, that turned out to be false.

By that time Pakistan had already begun Operation Gibraltar. On August 5 and 6, hundreds of poorly trained ‘mujahids’ were into the Indian-held Kashmir with no clear goals with the expectation that Muslims of Kashmir will join them and revolt against the Indian government. That would legitimise a Pakistani troop movement into Indian-held Kashmir (like a similar situation legitimised the movement of Indian troops in 1971 into what was then East Pakistan). Unfortunately for them, that did not happen. Muslims of Indian-held Kashmir did not share the same narrative as Muslims of Pakistan. It took them another 35 years of oppression to realise they needed to rebel.

India’s attack on Lahore on September 6 was therefore not a sudden act of aggression on an unaware neighbour, as Pakistani textbooks claim, but an unexpected retaliation. A plan approved by the Indian Cabinet in 1949 for such a situation, said “Indian troops in Kashmir would seek to contain the opposing forces while the main Indian field army made a determined and rapid advance towards Lahore and Sialkot.” That is exactly what they did. “The primary aim of this strategy,” according to A Wright, “was to inflict a decisive defeat on Pakistan’s field army and, along with the possible occupation of Lahore, to compel the Pakistan government to seek peace.” In the ensuing see-saw battles in and around Lahore and Sialkot, the Pakistan army did a very good job at defending its territory, but they did nothing that could even be remotely regarded as a victory.

Instead of learning lessons from tactical and strategic mistakes in the war, Pakistan responded by spiritualising its military objectives – an approach that led to the eventual goal of pan-Islamism and the belief that the Pakistani army was destined to restore Islam’s lost glory.

Muhammad bin Qasim is revered as the first Arab Muslim to arrive and conquer Sindh. Hardly anyone knows that he was called back, tortured and put in prison, according to one group of historians while the other group says he died while being transferred to Syria, wrapped in animal hides. Muslim conquerors did not arrive in the subcontinent with a common goal of propagating Islam, but got thousands of people killed in mutual battles for power.

Before Pakistan makes the cultural choice of going back to the glory of its mythical past, it must remember that that past does not exist. If we return to it, we will only serve kings and emperors who claim divine support and exterminate thousands of Muslims who do not agree with them.

The writer is a media and culture critic and works at The Friday Times. He tweets @paagalinsaan and gets email at [email protected]

23 COMMENTS

  1. I could not agree with you more. i was there on the front in the Sialkot sector. I was proud of our soldiers who did a magnificient job. later on i learnt that the pakistani army fought
    with the wrong maps in the Kasur area ?khem karan. This caused such a loss of tanks that we agreed to a caese fire. This still rattles me. Is there a precedent?
    As far as our mythical past is concerned it is fine nostalgia as long we don,t start living in it. ! am afraid this is a malaise which affects the moslem societies all over the world. We always win.!

  2. This was all over the place. We've heard the mantra before from the pseudo-intellectuals who've figured out how to write in english. If i were you, i'd look into writing lessons.

    • At one point you need to look back at what went wrong in Pakistan. Because things didn't have to be the way it is now in the country.

      Obviously there are more things to be said. Only history is the clue…

  3. damn right , face it , don't be a hypocritical society , our heroes were killers, they came to conquer non Muslim lands having other than spiritual reasons ..Till we dont teach our kids truth in our schools we will not get it right , Operation Gibrator was a stupid adventure by our so called intelligent Gernals followed by Kargil , 1965 was a retaliation of India not aggression,,,,,,, these so called Strategy divisors Generals play Golf while lower rank soldiers die in fields for their country ..

  4. Great job Harris… Wrong doses of history have totally led to our downfall and we have started believing that being a Muslim is enough… well said

  5. Just another lame effort to put the blame on army and intelligence.
    Shall i call it ignorance, stupidity or a cheap shot at the establishment.
    great nations protect their physical and intellecual integrity by strengthening and empowering their ideology and institutions especially their troops.
    If you think India is waiting to hug and kiss then i bet all of you are as ignorant as the kid who wrote this article. I am afraid lack of education and common sense has made us into a nation of morons. I agree with the writer that 1965 war was a bad idea but
    Do you really think that India is not out enemy??…even after 1971, babri mosque, atrocities in Kashmir and being best friends with Israel keeping an eye on out N program to target it. Its and opportunist nation who will befriend any one who is our enemy i.e. Russia, Afgahnistan Northern Alliance or Israel , now US. When the time comes it will leave no stone unturned to put us in utter jeopardy and chaos. With Readers like you , that time is not too far away.

  6. another Frustrated, depressed , self declared champ of Human rights,History, politics , Religion , Pakistan phobic desi liberal. writing to get American acknowledgement . I wonder why all pathetic pseudo desi liberals of Pakistan write in English newspapers.

    • I think Dr. Khan (above) have a point. Living in the mythical past will do more harm than good…

  7. I request all you mard-e-momins to read "The Murder of History" by K.K. Aziz – one of Pakistan's most renowned and respected historians ever – to really understand the arguments of why our Pak Studies b.s. past is a myth.

    Or you can keep at the whole "conspiracy" nonsense we are born and raised with.

  8. For anyone who believes that what we are taught as "Pakistan Studies" is a 'truth', I humbly request them to wash their faces and suggest them to go and read a book named:

    "The Murder of History" by Pakistan's most respected historian K.K. Aziz.

  9. As part of the two nation theory if Pakistan were to offer the choice now to Muslims in India to emigrate the results will shock them None would leave contrary to all the talk of oppression!

    • I strongly believe in your statement. Indian society is holding out together without any help from religion. Pakistani society is dividing with the help of religion.

      Conflicts in India centers around wealth distribution (major) and (Hindu) caste system (minor). Conflicts in Pakistan centers around religious intolerance (major), regional divide (major) and institutionalizing militant thoughts (major).

  10. Yuor brilliant, well thought article has touched a nerve in me. It usually does wirh your articles too.
    The price of living in denial is defeat again and again. You conveniently or intenionally forgot to mention the prelude to the wars between India and Pakisten i.e Rann of kutch skirmish. It was a brief adventure where pakistani army did itelf proud over a bit of marshland. The great generals were give medals and the towering pictures of Field Marshall Ayub standing over PM Shastri gave strength to the myth of a superior race.
    The pakistani army was worshipped as heroes.
    So came the 1965 war and the famous speech of President Ayub. We were moved to tears. If speeches could win wars–we had won. But the facts were different! India attacked us to capture Lahore. Gen Akhtar was ?relieved of his command and whisky drinking Sandhurst trained Yahya was given the task of protecting us. COAS Musa did not know about the attck when ayub contacted him but BBC knew about it .Yes our President was in Abbatabad playing Golf. Our junior officers and soldiers dashed to the front in their pyjamas to fight and blew up bridges to save Laore. Pakistan had learnt the wrong lessons from the Rann of Kutch adventure.!
    Again we were misled by tha Taskent Pact. Shastri could not beleive his eyes at Ayub,s navity and a cardiac arrest. We still lived in denial atleast most of us.
    What happened in the Bagladesh War. The Tiger Gen Niazi wanted to establish a corridor of a 1000 miles fron Dacca to Pakistan to teach the Hindus a lesson. He surrendered without a fight .We did not loose, it was india who stabbed us in the back!
    Our doctrine of defence of Esat Pakistan from the western front lay in ruins.
    Then our grate ZAB gave a sterling speech inUNO. If speeches could win wars we had won it but unfortunately depite tearing the resolution ZAB became the first poitician to accept the ground realities and signed the Simla Pact.NO NO we had not lost .Wait until next time.
    So came Kargill. We did not lose .Only the PM who maintains he was not informed became a coward and Musharraf became the Hero of Kargill and rewarded himelf by becoming everything.
    Living indenial is a national pastime inPakistan. The day we face facts and accept them Pakistan would become peaceful,prosperous and peace with itself. Amen.
    Today as i approach the end of a begynning i reflect on the begynning of the end.

  11. A very well written article which should be made a compulsory reading for all students above Std.X. We must len from our failures for our own sake. We feel ashamed to accept our failures whereas we should be ashamed of falsehood that we accept as truth.

  12. Well written article Mr Harris bin Munawar. I have a couple of questions! You have mentioned the attack of Mohammad Bin Qasim on India as a mean to gain power and not to spread Islam. What would be your comment about the attack of Muslims (during the caliphate of Hazrat Umar Farooq (RA)) on Egypt, Iran, Syria and Bait ul Maqdas? What would you comment about the battle of Mutah?? Were those too, according to you, means to gain power and not to spread Islam?

    • Here we go again! There are three types of histories! Recent, Past, and Calcified.Now we have started with the last one. Do Muslims always Attack? How many battles did really our great Prophet (BPH) fight?. I apologize for being ignorant.

      • Do we need to go to war to spread Islam? If we attack a country without any provocation, what shall be the justification — gain power and land, spread religion, looking for WMD, chasing OBL & his sympathizers? History is nothing but a chronological record of one country or group attacking on the other, very rarely read that Christians, Buddhists, Jews, Hindus attacked other countries for spread of their respective religions (crusades were not to spread religion but to get back their sacred sites, again that was a ploy by church and emperors to fool the youth Christians).

  13. I'm surprised to see the looks of this "ill informed" toddler of politics, history and religion. I can't understand how narcissistic children like Harris Bin Munawar are being produced in a factory farming method by "non Pakistani" forces.

    I want to create an O Level essay like the one created above with the help of some desi Indians and swashbucklers soon and post it here.

    0% credibility in this 700 waste of time article.

    • "ill informed", "toddler of politics", "narcissistic children", "factory farming", "non Pakistani", "desi Indians and swashbucklers" …

      That's a lot of characterization! But where is your substance/argument?

      Please have some mercy on rest of the world. Do not create that essay.

      • An article written by (characterizations made above already) doesn't deserve arguments. The facts are like the birth certificate of your, anyone's great, great, great grand father —- which cannot be changed by a punk down the line since he's been ill informed by (characterizations made above already)…..Thank you

  14. History is like a mirror for people to critically watch their past in it and devise such policies that help in future. But our history textbooks are simply a heap of lie.

Comments are closed.