FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Real Winners in Pakistan

by B. R. GOWANI

Undoubtedly, Pakistan is now a “democracy”, that is, the Western style democracy where the elections are held, people vote, and the people losing power accepts it without much fuss. 

One corrupt leader and party is being replaced by another corrupt leader and party. But there is a difference. The incoming party had the blessings of the Taliban, that is, they refrained from hurting their candidates. The same treatment was not accorded to the outgoing party-it was openly threated with violence. Due to this, the PPP (Pakistan Peoples Party) suffered a loss of seats and candidates. The Karachi based MQM (Muttahida Quomi Movement), and ANP (Awami National Party) were the other parties who suffered because of Taliban.

All the three parties are secular.

Secularism

The term “secularism” was coined by George Jacob Holyoake (1817-1906). Secular politics means that politicians don’t use religion in politics. Secularism can be applied to other things too, including our daily life-that is, not invoking God, gods, and goddesses, or scriptures, and other religious things during our interactions.

Mohamamad Ali Jinnah (1876-1948), the creator of Pakistan, started his political career as a secularist and a moderate who wanted to be a “Muslim Gokhale”. Gopal Krishna Gokhale (1866-1915), one of the senior leaders of the Indian National Congress Party, was considered a mentor by Jinnah. Gokhale praised Jinnah thus: “He has true stuff in him and that freedom from all sectarian prejudice which will make him the best ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity.”

But Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (1869-1948) was not so kind to Jinnah during their first encounter. Jinnah welcomed M. K. Gandhi wholeheartedly in 1915 in a welcoming ceremony arranged by the Gujar Sabha. How did Gandhi thanked him? By reminding Jinnah and all those present over there about Jinnah’s religion, “glad to find a Mahomedan not only belonging to his own region’s Sabha, but chairing it“.

Jinnah was born in a Muslim family but was not a practicing Muslim. From his lifestyle, his dressing, his looks, his name (he preferred and used his name as “M. A. Jinnah”), his consumption of alcohol, and his language (that is, he preferred to use English language), he could be mistaken for either a South Asian, an Arab, a Latin American, or a Southern European.

Jinnah was absolutely against mixing politics with religion and he tried his best to do that for a long time; but then he failed to do so against Gandhi’s mixing of religion with politics. Then he himself used religion and created Pakistan in the name of Islam but he remained a secularist till his death. Later in his political life, he used Islamic vocabulary, Indian Muslim clothing, and tried to attend prayers, but he never turned a communalist. In 1943, he had asked the reporters not to bring up the issue of Sunni, Shia, or Ahmadi Muslims. He emphasized that his party, the Indian Muslim League, was open to all , including the Ahmadis.

Contrary to popular presentation of Jinnah as a soldier of Islam, he remained a secularist who had just used Islam as a tool. If he was a soldier of Islam he wouldn’t have tried till the mid 1940′s for the unity of India. He would have grabbed, as soon as possible, whatever little territory he would have been able to get from the British to create Pakistan to spread Islam and jihad.

Pakistan’s first cabinet had Joginder Nath Mandal (a low caste Hindu) as a Law Minister and Chaudhry Sir Muhammad Zafarullah Khan (an Ahmadi Muslim) as a Foreign Minister.

Election results 

The Indian Subcontinent is made up of many nations. The outcome of the recent election in Pakistan has made that too obvious. Each nation for itself and God for herself. The Punjabis in the province of Punjab voted for a Punjabi Nawaz Sharif. Sindhi Asif Ali Zardari’s PPP is now restricted to the province of Sindh. Pashtun Imran Khan’s PTI (Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf) party won in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. (Dawn for details.)

Relations with India 

Sharif’s victory has gotten a good response in India. Sharif, who wants improved relations with India, has asked the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to attend his inauguration.

In the Province of Sindh, the two major parties (PPP and MQM) who wants better relations with India should try to pursue on their own to do so by increasing trade and other such initiatives.

Real winners 

Right now, obviously Sharif, who has been prime minister twice before, is the winner. But then the Taliban and the other Islamic militants who who were careful with his and Imran Khan’s parties are the winners too. And it can stay that way, provided, Sharif introduces more Islamic laws making the Taliban and Islamists happy but making people’s life more miserable. The chances are that it will be like that, unless Sharif has the courage and the power to go after the Taliban and the Islamists.

B. R. Gowani can be reached at brgowani@hotmail.com

B. R. Gowani can be reached at brgowani@hotmail.com

More articles by:
June 30, 2016
Richard Moser
Clinton and Trump, Fear and Fascism
Pepe Escobar
The Three Harpies are Back!
Ramzy Baroud
Searching for a ‘Responsible Adult’: ‘Is Brexit Good for Israel?’
Dave Lindorff
What is Bernie Up To?
Thomas Barker
Saving Labour From Blairism: the Dangers of Confining the Debate to Existing Members
Jan Oberg
Why is NATO So Irrational Today?
John Stauber
The Debate We Need: Gary Johnson vs Jill Stein
Steve Horn
Obama Administration Approved Over 1,500 Offshore Fracking Permits
Rob Hager
Supreme Court Legalizes Influence Peddling: McDonnell v. United States
Norman Pollack
Economic Nationalism vs. Globalization: Janus-Faced Monopoly Capital
Binoy Kampmark
Railroaded by the Supreme Court: the US Problem with Immigration
Howard Lisnoff
Of Kiddie Crusades and Disregarding the First Amendment in a Public Space
Vijay Prashad
Economic Liberalization Ignores India’s Rural Misery
Caroline Hurley
We Are All Syrians
June 29, 2016
Diana Johnstone
European Unification Divides Europeans: How Forcing People Together Tears Them Apart
Andrew Smolski
To My Less-Evilism Haters: A Rejoinder to Halle and Chomsky
Jeffrey St. Clair
Noam Chomsky, John Halle and a Confederacy of Lampreys: a Note on Lesser Evil Voting
David Rosen
Birth-Control Wars: Two Centuries of Struggle
Sheldon Richman
Brexit: What Kind of Dependence Now?
Yves Engler
“Canadian” Corporate Capitalism
Lawrence Davidson
Return to the Gilded Age: Paul Ryan’s Deregulated Dystopia
Priti Gulati Cox
All That Glitters is Feardom: Whatever Happens, Don’t Blame Jill Stein
Franklin Lamb
About the Accusation that Syrian and Russian Troops are Looting Palmyra
Binoy Kampmark
Texas, Abortion and the US Supreme Court
Anhvinh Doanvo
Justice Thomas’s Abortion Dissent Tolerates Discrimination
Victor Grossman
Brexit Pro and Con: the View From Germany
Manuel E. Yepe
Brazil: the Southern Giant Will Have to Fight
Rivera Sun
The Nonviolent History of American Independence
Adjoa Agyeiwaa
Is Western Aid Destroying Nigeria’s Future?
Jesse Jackson
What Clinton Should Learn From Brexit
Mel Gurtov
Is Brexit the End of the World?
June 28, 2016
Jonathan Cook
The Neoliberal Prison: Brexit Hysteria and the Liberal Mind
Paul Street
Bernie, Bakken, and Electoral Delusion: Letting Rich Guys Ruin Iowa and the World
Anthony DiMaggio
Fatally Flawed: the Bi-Partisan Travesty of American Health Care Reform
Mike King
The “Free State of Jones” in Trump’s America: Freedom Beyond White Imagination
Antonis Vradis
Stop Shedding Tears for the EU Monster: Brexit, the View From the Peloponnese
Omar Kassem
The End of the Atlantic Project: Slamming the Brakes on the Neoliberal Order
Binoy Kampmark
Brexit and the Neoliberal Revolt Against Jeremy Corbyn
Doug Johnson Hatlem
Alabama Democratic Primary Proves New York Times’ Nate Cohn Wrong about Exit Polling
Ruth Hopkins
Save Bear Butte: Mecca of the Lakota
Celestino Gusmao
Time to End Impunity for Suharto’’s Crimes in Indonesia and Timor-Leste
Thomas Knapp
SCOTUS: Amply Serving Law Enforcement’s Interests versus Society’s
Manuel E. Yepe
Capitalism is the Opposite of Democracy
Winslow Myers
Up Against the Wall
Chris Ernesto
Bernie’s “Political Revolution” = Vote for Clinton and the Neocons
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail