MYSTERY FOR 75 YEARS

             "PROMPT and severe steps are needed to preserve Pakistan from practically going bankrupt, but our leaders seem comfortable with relying on higher levels of foreign funding to maintain some semblance of sustained economic prosperity." It was possible to write these words yesterday. They weren't, though. They are mentioned in an editorial from the Pakistan Times commemorating the 11th anniversary of independence in 1958.

 

The same comment also contains additional laments that are still relevant today. For instance, "The political arena has been the safe haven of those cursed with limitless greed and limited talent for almost a decade. Every season has been one of interest, and every year has been one of catastrophe. A perpetual state of instability almost seems to be the only constant in our political existence.

 

One might go even earlier, to Mohammad Ali Jinnah's speech to the Constituent Assembly 75 years prior, when India was on the verge of becoming independent. This speech is well-remembered for its portrayal of the promised land's secular future.

 

However, it included a lot more, most notably the Quaid's annoyance with a variety of hereditary sins, such as bribery, corruption, black marketeering, and the faults of nepotism and "jobbery." Who hasn't been guilty of that in the years since that last word went out of style but still denotes "the practice of utilizing a public office or position of trust for one's own gain or advantage"?

The problems that Jinnah listed have grown dramatically over time. Which contributes to the explanation of the country's trajectory during the last 75 years.

 

Over the following five decades, Pakistan was governed by four generals and four governors general. The list of prime ministers and presidents who were civilians is substantially longer but not particularly impressive.

 

To its credit, India has never been ruled by a general and has only had one governor general since Lord Mountbatten (who stayed on for a short time after division). There have been times in the past when it was viewed as a possible role model for Pakistan because it is a non-aligned secular democracy. But that was a long time ago.

 

The recommendation of Pakistan's founding fathers to keep religion and state activities separate was never substantially heeded. Over time, its minority lost both population and political clout.

 

When the Objectives Resolution was up for discussion in the Constituent Assembly in the 1950s, Hindu lawmakers from the eastern part of the nation—many of whom were affiliated with the Congress—offered the most logical criticism.

 

The proprietor of the aforementioned Pakistan Times, Mian Iftikhar ud din, was the only top West Pakistani politician to complain in any way. However, the newspaper's worries did not just apply to new forms of Islamic fundamentalism. After Mahatma Gandhi was killed in 1948, New Delhi banned the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), and it expressed the expectation that the Nehru government would see this as the first step in the struggle against the forces of evil and darkness.

 

If it ended up being the only step and "after a few weeks or months the RSS, under some other name, raises its ugly head, and its allies, the Hindu Mahasabha, the Akali party, and the princes are allowed to exist and stage a comeback of their perverted ideology, then the future is dark and dismal and the Mahatma has lived and died in vain," as stated by Gandhi, "then the future is dark and dismal."

 

Although it took a while, the RSS ultimately became operational. It's unclear as to when and whether that darkness will end. The fact that India seems to have absorbed the least desirable components of Pakistan's history, rather than Pakistan learning from India in better times, maybe the most profound tragedy of the past 75 years on the subcontinent.

 

Of course, there is a third contender in the partition race, though Bangladesh rightly dates its independence from the United Kingdom from 1971 rather than from 1947. Given that Pakistan lost more than half of its population and so experienced the pain of division once again, the events of 50 years ago inexorably enter the country's narrative.

 

Given a dose of wisdom that is still elusive, the 1971 division almost could have been accomplished quietly. To say the same about 1947 is more difficult. The British have been rightfully accused of leaving the "jewel in the crown" with unspeakable haste, but would a more methodical process have done anything more than giving the horrifying bloodlust that accompanied independence more time to flourish?

 

We'll never truly understand. And although if the past is always with us for several reasons, the future is what really counts. It appears bleak in India. Even trying to imagine the future in Pakistan is difficult. Regrettably, the most likely scenario for the future is more of what has already been endured—an endless purgatory.