If I could have a chat with Jinnah…

Published: December 18, 2012
Email

The apparent dream of Pakistan he saw in 1934, which may have led him to come to India, all the more makes one want some answers.

Like many, I often wonder what it would be like to talk to an influential historic figure. One wants to sit with them, ask questions and find out what they think about things around them, but they no longer exist to answer.

I personally wish I had a chance to interview Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah – Jinnah now. The apparent dream of Pakistan he saw in 1934, which may have led him to come to India, all the more makes one want some answers. He isn’t here to answer, but one can conjecture, right?

I wonder if Jinnah would have given the following answers if I did, in fact, interview him.

Me: “Sir, what were you thinking when you came to India to lead in 1934?”

Jinnah: “I had been alternatively lectured and cajoled to lead. Generally, I do not change my mind; then perhaps because this was on my mind, I had a powerful dream. I do not want to go into the details of the dream but it almost immediately moved me to return to India and lead the Muslim League. The objective was clear – unite and move with purpose to form a separate homeland for the Muslims. We were not sure in what form or how autonomous it would be, but it would franchise the Muslims as a separate independent authority.”

Me: “What did you think of the Muslim League leaders?”

Jinnah: “Unfortunately it is true that the followers all came from the Sardari class – Raja-this, Nawab-that, Sardar-so-and-so. But that’s all we had. The common Muslim was uneducated and struggling in vocations. They were also not conversant in English or well acquainted with the prevailing 20th century culture. To move forward, we needed the landlord class. I hoped in time our people would arise and progress. Alas! I hear they still maintain their dominance. That was not part of my plan.”

Me: “When did you decide a Muslim homeland can happen?”

Jinnah: “There was never a doubt from 1934 onwards about this in my mind. Having started this struggle and gone on this route, there was no turning back. We knew the struggle would be bitter and long.

From 1937, I was certain; then, of course, the Lahore Resolution in 1940 defined our lands, which had been unclear till then.”

Me: “Do you think we could have compromised with the Congress?”

Jinnah: “You do not realise the backwardness of the Muslims and therefore our weakness in the coalition. I had already spent 20 years working on this unity, however, to no avail. You cannot blame the Hindus alone on this. They did not have an equal partner and in politics the stronger takes the lead and leaves the other to follow.

A separate homeland allowed the Muslims within their own security, to advance and become equals. And it seemed from the passion created, that we would be able to do it. If you have a vision and a value system (and we did back then) then the lacking ingredient is dedication and passion. We seemed to have that to spare.”

Me: “How did you miss out on Kashmir? And what about the loss of Gurdaspur?”

Jinnah: “They are both interconnected. You would say that it was naive to expect that it would work out. India wanted Kashmir, Hyderabad, Junagadh and other protectorates. We should probably have expected it. But then, remember we were totally focused on Pakistan’s creation and had no other thought. Our fear was that Pakistan may be lost. We were frankly ready to take a truncated Pakistan.

I knew my health was bad and it was passion which was keeping one going. So, really, the Gurdaspur factor did not enter our minds. Nawabzada Liaquat was heading the Muslim League delegation to the Radcliffe Border Commission and some games were played with the recommendations. It was extremely unfortunate and led to a huge loss of life. I class that as our biggest miss and I wish we could turn the clock back on that one.”

Me: “Sir, what about not taking Bengali as our language along with Urdu?”

Jinnah: “That, as events have shown, later turned out to be a misjudgment. But the reasoning was straightforward. Bengal made 50% plus of the population, however it was another province. Had we allowed Bengali the same status as a national language, soon all the others Sindhi, Punjabi, Pushto and Balochi would have demanded the same. Perhaps had we left English it would be better, but then people would say ‘why achieve freedom’? So you see our problem?”

Me: “Do you still believe that Pakistan was the right thought after 65 years?”

Jinnah: “The concept is still sound. We are two different nations and ensuing 65 years have made it even more of a divide. Culture and society are further apart than ever before. The problem is that it was our fundamental belief, and so we would not have gotten a good deal in undivided India. Nothing has changed that.

Our execution post partition has been bad, but do not despair. This is just 65 years. In North American plains, the US was a wild country throughout the 19th century. It started with fighting the Mexicans and then drove out its Indians and almost exterminated them. Simultaneously it treated its black population as slaves. Then they fought a war to sort that out, and for the last three decades, the white killed the white to gain power in the Wild West.

We are nowhere as bad. We will InshaAllah grow to be a nation yet. Without belief and optimism, nothing can be accomplished. Get your belief right and then all the others will fall into place.”

Me: “Thank you, sir.”

Read more by Sarfaraz here or follow him on Twitter @sarehman

Sarfaraz Rehman

Sarfaraz Rehman

The author has worked with large scale organizations like Unilever, Pepsi and Engro Foods in his 28 year career. He has now started an education initiative and writes on various subjects. He tweets as @sarehman

The views expressed by the writer and the reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of The Express Tribune.

  • critical

    If I could have a chat with Jinnah…

    I would first thank him for his brilliant “Two nation theory” which separated the radical muslims from the peace loving muslims,so that a civil war between Hindus and muslims didnt break out in the Free India after British left….

    Looking at the current state of Pakistan and India,I’m happy that partition was really a good thing…Jinnah helped the Hindus by saving them from radical muslims and took the blame for it…His sacrifices will never be forgotten

    Though,I’m critical of Direct Day Action initiated by Jinnah which resulted in loss of millions of lives in both sides of bordercRecommend

  • Pessimist

    This piece is too optimistic for my liking. I’ll go sulk elsewhere.

    Pessimist out…..Recommend

  • Samir

    Jinnah “says”, in your piece: “…The concept is still sound. We are two different nations and ensuing 65 years have made it even more of a divide…”

    So, which “nation” do Pakistani Hindus belong to?

    With great respect to Pakistanis, I think the natural progression of humanism, tolerance, secularism and coexistence across the world means that inhuman, intolerant, anti-secular ideologies like the Two-Nation Theory have no future. So what I would respectfully “ask” Mr. Jinnah, in the format of your article, is this:

    “Mr. Jinnah, in 50 more years from now, whose basic ideology do you think will inspire more people, anywhere in the world? The ideology of Gandhi and Nehru, or the ideology of Iqbal and Jinnah?”Recommend

  • kaalchakra

    Well said, sir. Despite what Pakistan’s enemies say, Pakistan is nowhere as bad as others. Faith and optimism will still open all doors.Recommend

  • Raj

    I understand that’s your reasons (right or wrong) to defends Jinnah.

    However I would have asked Jinnah a different set of questions –
    1. Why did you oppose when your daughter married a Parsi when you yourself have married one? Do you still think we should call you secular after that?
    2. How do you explain the dichotomy when you sent an open message of encouragement to Hindus, Christians , Sikhs and Parsis of Pakistani origin but not ready to accept a Parsi son-in-law?
    3. Why did you instigate semi-literate Muslim population with violent sermons on the Direct Action Day which eventually led to the series of communal riots and bloodshed across Bengal , Bihar and Punjab of British India? (Prior to that Indian subcontinent was not familiar with such wide-scale communal riots)Recommend

  • http://London,UK aisha azeem

    Mr. Jinnah’s soul might definitely be repenting on the decision of Pakistan’s creation…
    ”Tera Pakistan Doob Gaya Aye Quaid-e-Azam :( :( :(Recommend

  • Osman

    You forgot to question him about our current leadership. Maybe he would’ve not answered it anyway.
    Super Brilliant!Recommend

  • Raj Kafir

    The writer should actually interview his grandson Mr. Nulsi Wadia, the owner of Bombay Dying in India. He also owned IPL’s Punjab King’s XI franchise as well. Recommend

  • huma

    i feel i talked to him, instead of u. Thank u. For the indians here, hindus were the majority. Its quite clear why pk was made.Recommend

  • Gratgy

    Jinnah was a true visionary, he knew that India would progress only if Pakistan was separated and fenced off.

    True son of the soil!Recommend

  • confused

    There is nothing wrong with Pakistan except for the quality of its leadership and its precarious neighbourhood. Indian intrigues in East Pakistan, Russian invasion of Afganistan are the two major reasons for Pakistan’s current state of affairs. I challenge this openly, if Afganistan would have shared a direct border with India, India too would have received the same bashing if not less, as Pakistan continues to receive to date. The only advantage India would have on us again would be leadership advantage, which still haunts Pakistan even today unfortunately. Recommend

  • Ali

    Wow, talk about a biased interview. You are letting Jinnah off the hook so easily as ifi he was George Bush and you were Bill O’Reilly. Lets face the facts, the entire movement was led by Muslim elitists who wanted to maintain their supremancy. They used the naive masses in order to achieve this result.Recommend

  • Ali

    @aisha azeem:
    Why blame him for creating a homeland for muslims?. He obviously did the right thing and trust me if we have the right people leading us today we will be sorted. Look what is happening in Kashmir. Do you want to live like those muslims or rather wait for the right people to lead us here? I am optimistic that we will eventually prevail.Recommend

  • http://na deep

    He was an ambitious man who had a mid-life crises in the 1930’s – his life was coming to nothing and this was a last ditch attempt to get into the history books – his younger colleagues like nehru were gettting ahead and more positive press and he could not stomach it.

    Pure ambition of an elitist muslim who unlike gandhi had not seen ordinary, more tolerant muslims living beside hindus and pretty much holding their own – why you had muslim musicians in our temples…unthinkable today and that is one legacy of jinnah that we indians will have forever – the distrust and schism between our communitites.

    if the educated author believes that the two nation theory is valid today — I would say Jinnah and his nazariya has triumphed and for that reason he will never be hailed by the world at large.Recommend

  • Harsh Srivastava

    my question to jinnah sahab: how could you divide man and man?

    2) if you were so miffed with congress..which you thought was a hindu party.. why didn’t you join hands with bose and others to create SECULAR party? why muslim league?Recommend

  • I.

    Spot off stuff from you,as always.
    Nevertheless,Get ready for the hundreds of comments under this blog..withh people literally fighting ..Recommend

  • Nazoo

    Idea needs to be appreciated, as its time to develop positivity and team spirit once again. However, Another blog could be written as part 2 of the interview with the interesting questions in the comments, will invite a lot of controversies thoughRecommend

  • Parvez

    Nicely put.
    Right in the beginning you correctly say that the ‘ objective was clear – unite and move forwards to form a separate homeland for the Muslims. It is this very objective that we have lost sight of or rather this objective has been higjacked by the religious right.
    When the country was formed it was simply called Pakistan. Today its founders vision along with its original name is no more and we are all the more poorer for this.Recommend

  • Komal S

    I understand this piece is done to present an optimistic picture. But Jinnah, if he arrives in pakistan today has to ponder a lot on where it is today:

    Creation of bangladesh, why Muslims under one country miserably failed
    Significant reduction of minorities in Pakistan. Increase in minority population in India.
    India having almost as many muslims as in pakistan and does it negate his idea of seperate homeland for muslims
    # violent incidents in Pakistan against Muslims due to their belief vs # of incidents against muslims in India due to their belief
    Amount of energy/resource spent by the state to hold the country together in Muslim pakistan vs Secular India
    Recommend

  • Gratgy

    @confused
    Indian intrigues in East Pakistan, Russian invasion of Afganistan are the two major reasons for Pakistan’s current state of affairs.

    It is now 30 years since the Russian invasion and 40 years since Pakistani army’s genocide in Bangladesh. One generation has gone

    Its time to wake up now and smell the coffeeRecommend

  • s

    The two countries should never have split in the first place. Divided we fall…Recommend

  • Queen

    If Pakistan would not have gained independence from India, we would be facing the same massacre which Muslims of Gujarat and Kashmir are facing. The fact is that India finds it difficult to except Pakistan’s existence. If I would have talked to Qaid-e-Azam, I would have thanked him for giving me a separate identity as Pakistani citizen; an identity of which I am proud of.

    Indians, before you talk about the state of affairs in Pakistan, and the Qaid-e-Azam’s views on religious minorities, just read Qaid’s speech delivered to the constituent assembly on 11 August, 1947.

    Again, I am proud to be born in a state which has been created by a visionary leader like Qaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Recommend

  • politically incorrect

    @Queen

    The greatest thing about Jinnah’s legacy is that, he could snatch away a country from the colonial British, without ever serving prison terms during the independence movement. He just required a typewriter and Suhrawardy.Recommend

  • Kaalchakra

    Huma, I felt the same way. It was such an emotionally uplifting experience, as if one was face to face with the Great Quaid!

    What Hindus never seem to understand is that Muslims did not want to live in a HINDU-MAJORITY democracy. As has been proven by the destruction of Babri Masjid, totally unprovoked massacres of Muslims, countless discriminations faced by Muslims in India, Hindus cannot be trusted when they are in a majority. Once Hindus were reduced to a situation where they did not have power to do their mischief, they could be allowed to live on. That is all dear Great Quaid was focused on. Recommend

  • http://peddarowdy.wordpress.com Anoop

    I LOVE to burst bubbles.

    Imagine this:

    Jinnah is on his deathbed. He asks Liaquat Ali Khan to come near him. He says to him,”Pakistan has been the biggest mistake of my life”.

    Stop imagining.

    Time Magazine quotes Jinnah thus and this news spreads like wild fire. Later on Jinnah’s personal Physician, who had also served Allama Iqbal, writes a book where he again quotes Jinnah on his death-bed. He was there in the room when Jinnah admits Pakistan was his “biggest mistake”.

    If you want the book, you can order it on Amazon.

    http://www.amazon.com/Quaid-i-Azam-during-his-Last-Days/dp/0195477103/ref=laB007IV91CM1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1355837750&sr=1-1

    “Pakistan has been the biggest mistake
    of my life”

    Now, let us come back to the blog.

    Was Jinnah wrong? No. But, his Two Nation Theory was correct. But, you don’t make a nation on such ideas of division.

    TNT was correct, but Pakistan was still a mistake. Its clear why such things were never published in Pakistan. Sometimes its better to allow the people to live in perpetual lie, than make their life miserable by pointing out how the Nation’s founder had realised his mistake or admitted his realisation just before he died.

    If India had not experienced Partition, there would be 40% Muslims in undivided India today. That would be disastrous! There would be calls for Sharia(Like in Malaysia), there would be no concept of Indian-ness. Riots would have destroyed it long back.

    There would be no Shahrukh Khan or Javed Akhtar or Abdul Kalam – People who believe in the idea of India. The whole scene would be corrupted with Religious sentiments.

    Jinnah gave shape to that feeling. If it wasn’t for him, then some one else in the 50s or 60s. As we have seen the world over, Islam is a very politically active Religion. Be it Ethiopia, Pakistan, Malaysia and now Egypt.. If Muslims are in a majority, the call is for a Muslim state, if in numbers less than majority, then its the call for Sharia.

    Jinnah was right. But, you are not.Recommend

  • http://peddarowdy.wordpress.com Anoop

    @Queen:

    Number of muslims of who died in Gujrat a decade ago – 900.

    Number of Kashmiris who have died in a 2 decade long insurgency – 90,000.

    Number of Muslims who died in Karachi THIS year (2012) – 2000

    Number of Muslims who have died in a decade long insurgency in Pakistan since 9/11- 40,000.

    Number of Muslims who died in Bengal 4 decades ago in just 9 short months between 25 March 1971 to 16 Dec 1971 – 3 Million. That is 30,00,000. Roughly 33,33,00 people were slay-ed in a single month.

    Look at it anyway you like, lot less Muslims have died in India, a county 8 times the size of Pakistan, than in Pakistan, a country made to be a haven for Muslims.

    “Indians, before you talk about the state of affairs in Pakistan, and the Qaid-e-Azam’s views on religious minorities, just read Qaid’s speech delivered to the constituent assembly on 11 August, 1947.”

    If my comment gets approved, I’ve talked about how Jinnah on his deathbed told Liaquat Ali Khan what a big “mistake” Pakistan was. Time Magazine quotes Jinnah which goes viral and then Ilahi Bakshi, Jinnah’s Physician(who has also served Allama Iqbal), who was in the same room when Jinnah whispered this to Liaquat, wrote a book about it where he quotes Jinnah.

    Your whole ideology, that you are so proud of, turns out even your Nation’s founder, your hero stopped believing. I can go on and prove it to you how ridiculous that idea is, but why strain myself when I can just quote Jinnah?

    “Pakistan has been the biggest mistake
    of my life”

    Read all about it in his book.

    http://www.amazon.com/Quaid-i-Azam-during-his-Last-Days/dp/0195477103/ref=laB007IV91CM1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1355837750&sr=1-1Recommend

  • Critical

    @Queen:
    Actions speak louder than words….The August 11 Speech doesnt hold ground if the same person ordered the Direct Action Day…Read it from a neutral source about Jinnah’s plan to “Divide India or Destroy India”

    Thankfully if Pakistan wasnt formed,we would have faced 26/11 everyday from your brethren…..What current Pakistan is witnessing is what was sowed in their minds by Jinnah..

    Stop getting on the moral high horse…There are lots of critics for M.K.Gandhi including me and my country gives me the fundamental right to do that too….Jinnah was a flawed human just like everyone else and unlike Malcolm X,he never got a chance to look back and repent his flawed ideologyRecommend

  • Ajay

    @confused: These are not the reasons for Pakistan problems. Poor leadership is due to constant political machinations using Islam as a pretext and denying capable non- Muslms citizens a chance at pOlitical leadership. Your feudal lords went into power because of weak democracy and lack of true democratic principles otherwise Pakistan would have abolished Zardari system much sooner. India would have favored much better with Afghanistan or for that matter even unfriendly countries due to it’s forward looking policies of engagement, friendliness, true non-alignment and lack if Pakistan style duplicity.Recommend

  • Happens

    My question would have been different .

    Q-Will history forgive you for the mass killing of people initiated by direct action , be it Hindu or Muslim or Sikh ?
    A- Good things need sacrifice .

    Q- Then sacrifice of Bengalis was also good ?
    A-No Comments.

    Q-Why didn’t you spend much time behind bars unlike any congress leaders ?
    A-They were fools , from the beginning my aim was to create a separate a country for muslims, so I helped british in implementing divide and rule law and achieved.Recommend

  • muhammadkashifkhan

    Here is a really nice quote about mr jinnah

    Muhammad Ali Jinnah was the greatest benefactor of Hindus in modern times, if he was not a Hindu in disguise.

    i would have loved to ask his reaction on this Recommend

  • gp65

    @Queen:’If Pakistan would not have gained independence from India, we would be facing the same massacre which Muslims of Gujarat and Kashmir are facing.

    KAshmir problem exists because Pakistan keeps sending terrorists there. If there had been no partition, there would have been no Kashmir probblem. Secondly the Gujarat issue that you refer to – 790 Muslims and 250 JHindus died – almost 11years back in riots which are essentially tit for tat violence when the Muslims burnt 60 Hindu pilgrims. Very unfortunate and sad but since then no riots have ioccurred. 33 Hindus involved in riots have already been convicted,. More Muslims are killed in tit for tat violence in Karachi every single year with no sign of stopping and none of the people responsible are convicted. Also situation of Hazara Shias and Gilgit Shia situation we know of. Unlike Pakistan no-one died in India during Moharram processions. So you are certainly welcome to your country. But to say that Muslims are safer from riots and violence than India is simply not factually correct.

    “The fact is that India finds it difficult to except Pakistan’s existence”.
    What you quoted are Zaid Hamid facts. The truth is different. Atal Bihari Vajpayee who was a BJP prime minister went to Minar-e-Pakistan. India has ane embbassy in Pakistan and Pakistan has an embassy in India. Indians may say they were saddened by partition and by that they refer to how many people died during that. Except for some fringe – no -one in India wants to reunite with Pakistan. If such were the intention, India would have tried to annex what was then East Pakistan in 1971 but not such attempt was made.

    “Indians, before you talk about the state of affairs in Pakistan, and the Qaid-e-Azam’s views on religious minorities, just read Qaid’s speech delivered to the constituent assembly on 11 August, 1947”.
    Every one knows about the August 11 speech. Every one also knows of the call for Direct Action. Everyone also knows the type of divisive speeches that were made for 10 years turning neighbour against neighbour. It is because of the deliberate hate mongering that so many people were killed during partition not by an enemy but by their own neighbours – on both sides.

    “Again, I am proud to be born in a state which has been created by a visionary leader like Qaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah.”
    Good for you. By the way 3 Churches in Sind, 1 in Mardan and 1 in Faisalabad were attacked n 2012. One Hindu temple was vandalized and another 100 years temple which existed before formation of Pakistan was razed to ground despite court stay order on the specious ground that it was an encroachment. Ahmedi minarets were destroyed by Punjab police itself – in a worship place taht was built before 1974 law. All this informatuion is available on a separate news item onf RT itself titled ‘Minority Rights Day: 2012 saw rise in attacks on places of worship’. You probably also remember that 100 Ahmadi graves were desecrated. If you are proud of this state of affairs and think this is what was envisioned by Jinnah – well you are certainly entitled to your opinion.
    . Recommend

  • JAHANDAD

    THE whole philosphy behind PAKISTAN CREATION is still not understood in PAKISTAN ,,,,,,,NO1,,,IF it was supposed to be a free secular and westeren liberalism matching state ,then the very first question of division and two state plus two nation plus immigration in name of religion is very tough to be understood ,,,,,NO 2,if a state was based on religion then again ,one cannot understant why we could not establish religion as base model in this new state right from 1947,,NO 3, if only a seperate homeland was supposed then there was no need of massive immigration on both sides,,,,,,,BECAUSE WHAT MAKES PAKISTAN AS A COUNTRY IS ONLY RELIGION ,,,,IF YOU TAKE THAT AWAY , THEN YOU HAVE MANY STATES WITHIN IT ,,,,,PUSHTOONS ARE DIFFERENET FROM,, PUNJABIS AND VISE VERSA PLUS SINDHI AND BALOCH ,,,,,,,,,,ONLY ISLAM COMBINES THEM,,,,,,,,NO 3, MINORITIES WERE SAFE IN MUSLIM MAJORITY AREAS BEFOR PARTION AS WELL ,,,,HINDUS IN KPK BEFOR 1947 WERE AS SAFE AS THEY WERE IN UP AND DELHI,,AND SAME WAS THE CASE IN SINDH AND PUNJAB,,,,,WHAT WERE THE MOTIVES BEHIND PARTION ?? ,,,,,,BECAUSE PAKISTAN IS MADE OF KPK WHICH WAS FREE FROM BEGINING AND THERE WAS NO NEED FOR THE STRUGLE OF ITS INDEPENDENCE ,,,PUNJAB WAS MORE THAN 70 % MUSLIMS ,,,SINDH MORE THAN 65% MUSLIMS PLUS BALUCHISTAN WITH MORE THAN 98 % AND KPK MORE THAN98%,,,,,,,THESE AREAS WERE AUTOMATICALLY FREE IN 1947 ,,,,,,,,SO WHAT WAS THE REAL GAIN OR REAL DIVISION????,,,,,,,the people who immigrated to pakistan ,today majority of them call themselves secular,,very strange,,,,and there political representatives [mqm] calls pakistans creation as the biggest blunder of history[altaf hussain new delhi],,,,,,,,,its all so mixed that common people are confused ,,,,,,,,,in karachi and hyderabad[pakistan] less than 5 % people pray salat[nimaz]and more than 95% not,,,,,why??????because they are calling themselves secular ,,,,,and those with beard and perform prayers 5 Times are called extremists ,,,,,,,,,, ,…how can such people immigrate in name of religion then,,,,,,,,,,ANSWER IN MY OPINION ,,,,,,,,,,.,<><><<></////??????SO WE CAN FIND THE ANSWER ,,,,,,,,,,,,FINALLY ,,,,NOW ITS OUR BELOVED COUNTRY ,AND WE MUST THROW OUR ENERGIES FOR ITS SUCCSESS,,,,,,,,,AND BE READY TO SACRIFICE OUR LIVES FOR ITS PROTECTION ,,,,,BECAUSE ITS OUR HOMELAND,,,,,,Recommend

  • Loksakthi

    What is this Pakistan……………….?Recommend

  • Hella

    “The objective was clear – unite and move with purpose to form a separate homeland for the Muslims”. Queer really. Jinnah was chiefly responsible for dividing the sub-continent’s Muslims into 3 separate countries, with not much love lost for each other. His actions resulted in 1/3 of Muslims being left behind at the mercy of a brute non-Muslim majority in India. He laid the foundations of Bangladesh by insisting that Urdu would be imposed on Bengalis. Not exactly a recipe for unity. All non-Muslims consolidated in one powerful country. Jinnah was at best outwitted by his rivals and at worst was really an agent of the non-Muslims of India, whose aim was to politically weaken Muslims of the sub-continent. This he did by creating a fear of non-Muslims amongst Muslims, and destroying the confidence of Muslims.Recommend

  • v

    @Queen: Hilarious. I have a bridge to sell you.Recommend

  • Raj

    @Kaalchakra: @Queen

    Two of the biggest groups that played active role in creating Pakistan are the Bengali Muslims in the east and Ahmediya muslims in the west. Do you want me to educate both of you how you and your kin have treated these two groups?

    Once Hindus were reduced to a situation where they did not have power to do their mischief, they could be allowed to live on. That is all dear Great Quaid was focused on.

    Yes, he and you are almost there. The remaining hindus in Pakistan are getting raped and converted on a daily basis. A few more years and your dream will be a reality. Recommend

  • GhostRider

    @Dear Indians
    why does it hurt you that we got our homeland…you got a problem with that go read your damn newspapers…Recommend

  • Gratgy

    @Dear GhostRider
    why does it hurt you that we got our homeland

    You grossly misunderstand. We Indians are extremely happy that you have your own country. We will fight to keep the borders intact and the fences raised.Recommend

  • ethicalman

    Before this interview would have started some sunni lover of shias would have killed Jinnah..that’s the story of Pakistan !!Recommend

  • http://India vasan

    Both Pakistanis and Indians are happy. Pakistanis are happy that they got a separate land for practicing their customs, whatever it may be , be it religion, terrorism, forced conversions, etc etc, Indians are also happy that those who want to practice the above are bottled in Pakistan. Indians are not happy only on one count that sometimes these “cultural imports” from Pakistan are not liked by us. So Jinnaji; my thanks to you and from my fellow countrymen.Recommend

  • Rang de Basanti

    @huma:
    Going by that logic, it would be ok for Pakistani minorities to demand and get a country of their own – it is very clear to the world now, why that would be needed. Also, if that logic holds, would love to see the nearly 200 million Muslims left in India (strength equal to the present day population of Pakistan) migrate to their promised land and if any are left behind, their numbers shouldn’t be more, in percentage terms, that those of Hindus in Pakistan – that would justify that logic somewhat, in the eyes of many……..as things stand today, I feel my grandparents had to get killed for nothing in West Punjab in 1947 and my parents lived a very hard life as paupers and orphans, as I live in India in a neighborhood full of Muslims ready to pull their crap at any perceived ‘offense’ ready to build illegally constructed mosques on pavement, road crossings, over razed temples, anywhere, ready to kill at the slightest perceived ‘provocation’ and God alone knows what all can provoke a Muslim…even Hindus praying in their own country offends Muslims…..Muslims will never be questioned about anything in India, after all they are a ‘minority’…..Recommend

  • Rang de Basanti

    @Queen:
    Good luck with that identity… see scores of Pakistani Muslims ready to disown that identity when it suits them, at the drop of hat in the Western world…….Recommend

  • Rang de Basanti

    @Ali: Whatever you do, please convince Indian Muslims to join you….seriously, we can do without their madness and totally unreasonable behavior…… if it weren’t for this huge mass of people always holding back progressive decisions, India would we way ahead of where she is today.Recommend

  • roadkashehzada

    @Rang de Basanti:
    and havent u seen those guys wearing green shirts and supporting disowned identity of their forefathers over their adopted home? Recommend

  • konvict

    Ridiculoussssssssss and again very conservative!!!!!!Recommend

  • http://SA SA

    The idea conceived by Sarfraz Saheb in this piece is priceless. Much needed optimism for Pakistanis. I would like to see what Sarfraz saheb has to comment on the heated discussions following his commendable blog.Recommend

  • logic lol

    If i could only make one comment on jinnah if he was alive .. i would ask him what a disaster you have brought to the people in this region and i sincerely hope future jinnahs have realized this Recommend

  • ayaz munir

    @Raj:
    Firstly, Jinnahs wife had accepted Islam 2 months before their marriage
    Secondly, he loved all religions but that doesnt mean he should do something that is not allowed in islam, Islam allows women to only marry Muslim men , so thats why he objected. He was secular but not unislamic
    Lastly, he never said violent things against hindus , sikhs etc. he criticized congress, he tried a lot and finally when there was no emans he left he protested, they were the people who went violent but jinnah never said them to do so, moreover the violence was from both the sides, dont forget that 5000 plus muslims died in Bihar tooRecommend

  • http://peddarowdy.wordpress.com Anoop

    @ayaz munir:

    He did that, he did this.. What about his admission of Pakistan being his biggest mistake? Oh, wait, that would mean admitting he was wrong the whole time of which you would like to talk..

    Read my above comment for more details..Recommend

  • http://peddarowdy.wordpress.com Anoop

    Author, you are quiet.

    I want someone to address the idea of Pakistan in the light of Jinnah’s admission of Pakistan as a “mistake”. Don’t you think its best you rethink the idea of the blog and its content?Recommend

  • Human

    @Pessimist:
    Where are you pal ? All are Missing you
    no comments since three days Recommend

  • PakObserver

    @gp65: Gp, thank you for your in depth analysis & understanding of the issues.Recommend

  • Urfi

    For all the ignorant indians, first atleast read history written by ur own writers. Atleast read book written by Jaswant Singh and then post any comment. PAKISTAN ZINDABAD Recommend

  • kaalchakra

    ayaz munir

    couldn’t agree more. The great quaid is accused of personal bigotry. There was nothing personal about it. He was merely following his religion.Recommend

  • Sarfaraz

    To all of you thank you for your thoughts. Unfortunatly, i was caught up in Board Meetings all the last 3 days and therefore unable to follow the blog. now there are just too many replies and too late in the day. So I will try and summarise my thoughts.

    All that I have written in the blog is factual…ie historical fact. Even my inference drawn out of how US history shaped is also very much part of history. I do not judge, simply because I am in no position to judge. History over millennia has produced many great figures and the Quaid was just another one. I do not find I have the stature to judge such people.

    One of the problems is that people judge historical figures laterally …infact they need to be judged in their time and circumstance. So Napolean is a great figure. he might have laid France and Europe waste, but he stands as one of the greats of all time. Jesse Owen was a great athelete. Perhaps the greatest. But if Owen were to run or jump in the 2012 Olympics, he would not make it to any of the finals. but Owen was great. So it is with Jinnah also, Judge him within his time. He tried his level best for 20 years to bring the Hindu/Muslim platform together, but had no joy out of it. Along the way he was convinced that separation was the best way and so he achieved what seemed impossible. He was totally sincere in what he was doing, even walked away from an offer of being the Leader of India, based on his belief.

    As far as how history will judge him. Does it matter to them? Napolean, Nehru, Gandhi, Jinnah all have gone beyond the pale into another dimension and frankly it is highly unlikely they care about what we think of them. And as far as history is concerned it moves long and moves in circles. Only 3 times in 2500 years has this land been one. So historically Jinnah understood that what he was doing was also part of history. My own thoughts are that this is not the end game. Development will occur on both sides of the border and this might be a very strange place in a century. If history repeats itself, then definitely. If anyone is interested on my thoughts on that, please read my blog Kallar Kahar on http://www.borderlinegreen.com.

    Thank you once again.Recommend

  • Meher Jabeen

    Well the author of this blogger.
    I wish you interview Gandhi ji and Nehru as well. It is said that, “Taali ek hath se nae bajti”, and this is true in India and Pakistan case, Muslims when demanded for few seats in the congress that time Gandhi and other Hindu leaders refused those proposals. If at that time the people leading congress would have listened to those points and accepted those, I am sure it would have never happened. Today what Pakistan is going through is not good, and in many cases India is responsible for that. It was not only Muslim leaders mistake, mistake came up from both sides.
    Sometimes, I think if India and Pakistan were together then the country would have left behind every other countries. Pakistan and India are spending too much money on army for their defense from each other. what if that money will be spent for some development purposes? What if both the countries will stop having rivalries and move ahead peacefully? I have observed one thing when we are in our countries we call each other enemies and bla bla, but when we go to any other country we start drinking water in each other’s mouth. We start calling each others brothers and sisters. Yar, there is nothing in religion. If one is a good human that is beyond everything.
    I am a Pakistani and I love humanity and then religion comes for me. One thing we all need to understand is, Hate will never remove hate but love will remove hate.
    Please, greet each other, love each other, and move ahead. If we cannot live under the same flag but we can live under the flag of humanity. At this point it is very necessary for both the countries that humanity is the best thing and the discrimination has entered our blood from the politicians. Even though we hate our governments because they are not loyal too us, still we hate each other. Our politicians have made us hate each other, and we too hate them. Still we hate each others. :( :( That makes me upset. Recommend

  • http://peddarowdy.wordpress.com Anoop

    @Meher Jabeen:

    I will not allow anyone to spread canards about Gandhi-Nehru.

    “Muslims when demanded for few seats in the congress that time Gandhi and other Hindu leaders refused those proposals.”

    Jinnah demanded the division of India into 3 parts, which had the right to succeed after 10 short years. According to the agreement princely states too had the right to go independent. This would have made sure there would’nt be one but several Indias. The whole Nation would be held to ransom to the wishes of a few landlords, princes and Religious thugs.

    All is well that ended well. India is a huge block of a country which has been practicing Democracy, the Nehru was for 66 years. Nehru was right, like always.. He didn’t spend 9 years in British Jails for nothing.. His blood and sweat made sure India got a solid foundation.

    Quoting Ayaz Amir from yesterday’s News.

    http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=149638&Cat=9

    “Small wonder then that, compared to
    the Muslim League, the Indian National
    Congress was the more progressive
    organisation. The Congress fought the
    British. The Muslim League fought the
    Congress… India had a better start,
    not because it was the larger country
    but because its post-independence
    leaders – not just Nehru but so many
    others – had seen the inside of
    British jails and acquired experience
    through bitter struggle. ”

    Recommend

  • Deb

    @Anoop

    It is of some comfort to see some one standing for Nehru, or for that matter what he did for India, particulary at a time when Nehru (and Gandhi) bashing has become quite fashionable among India’s upwardly mobile young middle class.

    Thanks for the link too. Recommend

  • http://peddarowdy.wordpress.com Anoop

    @Deb,

    You are so right! Nehru and, to very lesser extent, Gandhi, are ridiculed. There are so many “jokes” about Gandhi that just annoys me.

    I have had several fights with misinformed people, young and old alike, about Gandhi and Nehru.

    Its phenomenal and embarrassing how less the people of all ages know about the sacrifices of the giants. They have never tried going on a indefinite hunger strike onto death to stop the killing of innocent, be it Muslim or Hindu.

    I’ve not only irritated Pakistanis, but also many Indians who have dared to speak ill of Gandhi-Nehru in front of me. My method is non-violence, though. It helps that the opposing team barely know its own History.

    The world cried when Gandhi died. The intellectuals all over the world wept when Nehru fell after steering 1/6th of the world’s population to the shores of Democracy and Secularism, with a strong Constitution. Nehru also tried to steer the world towards harmony but the burden was too great and so was his age.

    Its sad they have become caricatures in the lands these great men have spawned.Recommend

  • Sarfaraz

    Thanks for your further comments. I am glad some Indians are answering for Nehru and Gandhi, as personally I do not feel qualified to do such an interview. Also it would only create fitna, as whatever might seem lacking in praise would look biased…so better left to indians to manage that…..Recommend

  • jahandad

    i donot why indians are ready for writing poisonous views on express tribune ,,,,i think indian media does not allow them free speach , thats why they wait for any new writings here and just rush on it for their hate filled hearts and mind ,they cannot accept facts and will never accept facts in 1000 years,so let them be deaf and blind,,and fly in their illusions,,,Recommend

  • jahandad

    @Rang de Basanti:
    ok muslims in india are more than 300million ,and they will snatch some 1.5 million square killometer of land from india as well,,,and will unite with pakistan ,and at the same time will spitt on haters like you,,Recommend

  • Sarfaraz

    Thank you all for your further notes. I think someone else should write historical notes on Nehru etc.i am not culturally or knowledge wise able to do it..Recommend

  • kinza

    I would have asked why include Bengal as a province??? ANYBODY could have predicted the separation given the geographical and cultural divide. Theres a huge India and an Indian ocean in between! How could we be west and east Pakistan???Recommend

  • http://[email protected] Burjor

    The Pakistan state cannot control of what is Pakistan, right now, so why does the state wish to have anything do with Kashmir. Pakistan state is a failed state. With shear lawlessness, no securtiy for life or property, how many people have been killed since the birth of Pakistan, thru shear lawlessness and continue to lose their lives. Pakistan state does know what it can control , what it cannot, it does not even know where the writ of the state exists and where it does not. It does not know its people, its land. Their thinking is so skewed, so inept, it has no clue how Pakistan should be governed, for that matter no one really does, since 65 years its been a hit and try scenario, there are no markers on what is a success, what is a failure. Pakistan society is divided in so many different ways, and is being divided further by politics, religion, regions, languages, cultures, ethnicity, allegiances, that no political party has any clue. Very very sorry state. Recommend

  • Muhammad

    The article is boring, the writer is trying to give weight to his opinion by putting his words in the mouth of Jinnah Sahib the Great.

    The writer must note some corrections for his record:

    1- Jinnah returned from London to India in 1934 not after seeing some dream or some reveleation. It was the Imam of london Mosque, Molana Abdu Rahim Dard who persuaded him to return to India and re-take the leadership of Muslim League. In his own words speach at the premises of The London Mosque he said “The eloquent persuation of Imam Sahib left me no option”. Jinnah Sahib was no day dreamer he was a realistic leader.

    2- On Gordaspur…:Nawab Liaqut was leading Muslim league in RedCliff commission, wrong, it was Sir. Muhammad ZafarUllah Khan representing Pakistan.Recommend

  • Alee Sid

    Sir one point you missed why Jinnah left firstly from Muslim League ( congress) and who asked him to come back and fight for Muslims in South Asia.

    Also the philosopher behind his theory is Allama Iqbal, everyone forgot that the ideology of Pakistan was not from Jinnah it was from Allama Iqbal, Jinnah was just driving force.Recommend