Islamic Republic of Pakistan, is neither Islamic nor a republic and post-1971, not quite Pakistan
After Sir Cyril Radcliffe was given the unenviable task of carving out India and Pakistan from the Indian subcontinent within six weeks in the summer of 1947, he haphazardly sliced out the 450,000 square kilometres of the land he knew very little about. To be fair to the man, a connoisseur wouldn’t have done a prodigiously better job considering how the geographically and ethnically contiguous units had been theological blends. Had the demarcation been done on an ethnical basis, the slicing act would’ve been a relative piece of cake, but wedging out a Muslim homeland and a Hindu-majority secular state from the Hindu-Muslim hotchpotch was a telling task. The Radcliffe Line was the proverbial shot in the dark.
66 years down the line the western wing of Radcliffe’s patchwork, also known as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, has witnessed its ideological glue intermittently come off from various segments. One fragment of the Muslim-majority hodgepodge retraced its own identity in 1971, while four other portions continue to have their differences of varying proportions as they vie to rubberstamp their ethnic superiority. With ethnic and provincial identities regularly being given preference over any national or ideological commonalities, further segments like ‘Saraikistan’ being put on the table and the centre’s inability to govern the frontiers resulting in national and regional instability, proper fragmentation of Pakistan has been proposed by many an academic, along the lines of Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union as a solution to the seemingly perennial turmoil – a Balkanisation of Pakistan, if you will.
The army’s dominance in Pakistan and the ensuing Islamist militancy are normally touted as the destabilising factors in the country. And so to peddle the Pakistani Balkanisation at a time when a democratically elected government safely passed on the reins to another democratically elected government, for the first time in the history of the country, might seem a bit ill-timed. However, a look at the voting patterns in last month’s General Elections further adds impetus to the call of potential Balkanisation of Pakistan.
One province singlehandedly gave the current ruling party an overwhelming mandate in the national assembly, another stuck to its old guns, the third summoned the fifth party at the provincial helm in the past couple of decades, while the fourth didn’t really bother joining in on the voting party. The fact that Pakistan does not really have a national party says a lot about any concept of national unity that the patriots might want to peddle. In fact, if there’s any entity that is binding this country together, it is the military. When that’s the case, the realm under the militaristic control can be dubbed a quasi-empire, not a nation. And as Voltaire once said of the Holy Roman Empire, “it’s neither Holy, nor Roman nor an empire”, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, is neither Islamic nor a republic and post-1971, not quite Pakistan.
The proposed Balkanisation would see the merger of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (KPK) and FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas) with Afghanistan, officially making the Durand Line what it has been for ages: non-existent. Sindh and Balochistan would break free from the shackles of subjugation to become independent states, while Punjab would be the standalone remnant of Pakistan. Any calls for the independence of any of the provinces is obviously dubbed high-treason, but to believe that one could cogently fuse units, that don’t really want to exist in unison, for considerable length of time, is medieval thinking.
This week’s Ziarat attack was yet another reminder of the Balochistan question. A resource-rich region like Balochistan becoming a financial mess and in turn the hub of turbulence is a massive price to pay for delusions of national unity. 66 years worth of human rights abuse, ethnic cleansing, military operations and the myriad missing persons in the garb of patriotism, should suffice is throwing any inkling of Pakistani nationalism out of the Baloch windows. When one tries to comprehend the quintessence of “nationalism”, the irony that surfaces is that Balochistan’s call for independence is prodigiously stronger as compared to Pakistan’s call for independence from the Indian subcontinent. Balochistan is doing to Pakistan what Pakistan did to pre-1947 United India, albeit with more of a claim to being a nation.
Whether Pakistan’s raison d’etre was Islamic or secular consociationalism – a term that funnily enough didn’t exist at the time – its carving out was supposed to be done on a “Muslim majority” basis, which was the instruction given to Sir Cyril Radcliffe. By defining the new realm, and distinguishing a separate nation, on the basis of the religion of its inhabitants, the founders of Pakistan not only buried any modern-day claims of secularity, but also laid the foundation of similar separatist movements in Pakistan. Castigating the use of ethnicity and venerating using religious identity for a nationalist movement uses the same double-standard gauge that highlights freedom fighters of the Balochistan Liberation Army as terrorists.
With Pakistan’s own born and bred militant groups becoming more of a threat to the national security than any foreign state that you might want to point your finger at, Balkanisation is a solution to the turbulence in the country and a possible answer to regional stability. The breakup of Yugoslavia is a classic example of achieving relative stability in regions with ethnic turmoil, and South Asia is undoubtedly the Balkans of the 21st century. Even so, in addition to possible regional stability, separation of provinces and the dissolution of united Pakistan would mirror the country’s own birth and its preceding movement, and in turn provide the answers to many scathing questions that we have been dodging for the past 66 years. The concept of unity was lost on founders of Pakistan, and the irony that we expect the Baloch nationalists to adhere to that concept, seems to be lost on the modern-day Pakistanis.
Through the general elections, the masses might have inadvertently balloted for Balkanisation. Whether for regional security or to collectively drag itself out of an identity crisis, Pakistan might have to cease its existence as a security state where the constituent units have been woven together through theocratic and militaristic filaments. And just like the Austrian Empire of 1815, the Pakistan of 2013 is akin to a “worm-eaten house”, if one of its parts is removed, no one can tell how much of it will fall.
The writer is a financial journalist and a cultural critic. Email: [email protected], Twitter: @khuldune
Honest and brave piece of writing….
Best conclusion about Pakistan "the Pakistan of 2013 is akin to a 'worm-eaten house', if one of its parts is removed, no one can tell how much of it will fall"
F..k you
Another sponsored writer from those who recently voted in the UN for some brother of Altaf in London.You see this is typical of US and Britain and these days market is full of surrogate writers who pick a name and then expect it to considered for few dollars.True to their mean streak Indians won't miss an oppertunity and would come forward with tail waging which otherwise stays between their legs.
Please, let us have your comment on my post below. Thanks!
Ohh yes we know who had their tails between their legs when they issued stamps for their 100000 soldiers and who deffered from accepting their dead soldiers. These kind of coward and shameless people should kill themselves.
We are not only repeating Baluchistan, but also East Pakistan. A deeper thought about our conduct and history reveals where we are headed. Baluchistan is almost certainly going to do a Bangladesh despite our conspiracy theories blaming India; Sindh seems likely to declare independence with Altaf doing a Mujibur Rehman, and FATA and KP likely to join Afghanistan thanks to the Taliban of all hues. Punjab, which in any case belongs to the Army, will then be the NEW land-of-the-pure ruled perpetually by the Army, and continuing the Jihad against Hindu India to get Kashmir.
Not a bad deal after all, seriously!
Freedom to write such articles means that Pakistan will remain as country on the map of the world. Yes, over time provinces, divisions and districts may get and perhaps should get more power but the country will remain. Freedom will do that!
.
Convince a Balouch that they have freedom under Pakistan as a starter …
Otherwise, everything else is an illusion …
.
the only way out this problem to create, at least 16 provinces not having more then 7 Districts and free hand on local issues like the united stats. then we can be united country, otherwise today 66% of Punjab Population is ruling Pakistan's rest of the provinces. 90 percent of Minters are from Punjab in National assemblies which has the cost to be paid at the price of Pakistan.
As a lawyer from Australia it gives me comfort that I can hear a moderate and progressive voice from an Islamic country. They are unfortunately few and far between.
Euthanasia of the state must be considered an option to save the people living on this side of the bloody line !
LAFAFA WRITER
Khuldune Shahid is a bold writer open to self criticism. Unfortunately, many Pakistanis like Singlenational issue certificates of treason and surrogate writers without realizing that your own ass is on fire. Typical Punjabi arrogance.
Typical indian catamite who misses Punjabis. Nobody asked you to comment but the urge in your behind compelled you to bend and offer.This is for virkaul.
Its interesting that Indians give so much attention to whats going on in Pak when 1/3 of the country itself is fighting against the state in the form of naxalism. North east, Kashmir and Punjab are always bubbling point under the surface however much they deny it. Its sad that India doesnt have great writers like yourself and Indians have become ultra nationalistic that any voice of disagreement is silenced right away by shouting of majority. No wonder there is a lady in the north east on hunger strike for over a decade and you will never hear an Indian mentioning her name. Why can't India be balakanised if Pak can? Why should rich states like Goa, Gujrat, Maharastra, Punjab need to suffer forever because of poor states like Bihar, UP who do nothing but keep on increasing population? And yet nobody can say these things as they will brand the person terrorist, agent, traitor and so forth.
agree. blatant truth indeed/
Good article, logical, factual n brave… And for being so brave, Kunwar Khuldune Shahid should write weekly comment here to inform readers that he has not yet been killed by ISI or the army or the most probable, the non-state actors… #darkhumor
Comments are closed.