essay on jinnah vision of pakistan

Jinnah's Vision of Pakistan

For some years now, Quaid-e-Azam Jinnah's vision of Pakistan has been a source of controversy and conflict. Much of this has however tried to cut Jinnah to fit a predetermined image. A close look at Jinnah's long and chequered public life, encompassing some forty-four years (1904-48), helps determine the core values he was committed to throughout his political career.

This paper examines how Jinnah’s politics evolved through main phases, which, though distinct, yet merged into the next, without sudden shifts. It analyses how his liberalism underwent an apparent paradigmatic shift from 1937 onwards, and led to him advocating the charismatic goal of Pakistan, and to elucidate it primarily in Islamic terms. Finally, the Islamic strain in his post independence pronouncements and his 11 August 1947 address is discussed, and an attempt made to reconcile it with his other pronouncements.

Social sharing

Jinnah as Liberal

In the first phase of his public life (1904-20) three main influences shaped Jinnah's personality and politics:

• nineteenth century British liberalism, first absorbed during his four-years' (1892-96) stay in England as a student of law,
• the cosmopolitan atmosphere and mercantile background of metropolitan Bombay where he had established himself as an extremely successful barrister since the turn of the century, and
• his close professional and personal contact with the Parsis, who, though only a tiny community provided an example of how initiative, enterprise and hard work could overcome numerical inferiority, racial prejudice and communal barriers.

These formative influences seem to have prompted Jinnah to join the Indian National Congress. Fashioned after liberal principles and cast in their mould, the Congress was at that time pledged to take India on the road to self-government through constitutional means. Soon enough, he rose high in its echelons, high enough to be its 'spokesman' for its representation to the Secretary of State on the reform of the India Council in May 1914. Jinnah believed in moderation, gradualism, ordered progress, evolutionary politics, democratic norms, and above all, in constitutionalism. When the Congress sought to abandon these liberal principles in 1920 and opted for revolution and extra constitutional methods, he walked out of the Congress for good.

The constitutionalist in Jinnah led to him having a similar experience with the Home Rule League (HRL). He had collaborated with it since it was founded by Annie Besant, and joined it in a show of solidarity when Besant was interned in 1917. In October 1920 Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, upon being elected HRL President on Jinnah's proposals, went about changing its constitution and its aims and objects and renaming it Swarajya Sabha rather unilaterally. Gandhi ruled out Jinnah's objections that the constitution could not be changed unless supported by a three-fourths majority, and without proper notice. Jinnah, along with nineteen other members resigned, charging that the "changes in the constitution were made by adopting a procedure contrary to the rules and regulations of the (HR) League."

Throughout this period, in fact since 1897, Jinnah was active in Anjuman-I-Islam, Muslim Bombay's foremost religio-political body. In 1906 Jinnah opposed the demand for separate electorates, but before long his opposition thawed when he realized that the demand had "the mandate of the community". In 1910 he was elected to the Imperial Council on a reserved Muslim seat. From then on, he came in close contact with Nadwah, Aligarh and the All India Muslim League (AIML), and he was chosen by the AIML to sponsor a bill on Waqf alal Aulad, a problem of deep concern to Muslims since the time of Syed Ahmad Khan. Though not yet a formal member of the League, Jinnah was yet able to get the League committed to the twin ideals of self-government and Hindu-Muslim unity during the next three years, thus bringing the AIML on par with the Congress in terms of its objectives.

He joined the AIML formally in October 1913 and became its President in 1916. He utilized his pivotal position to get the Congress and the League act in concert, and work out common solutions to problems confronting the country. One result of his efforts was the Congress-League, Lucknow Pact of 1916, which settled the controversial electorate issue, at least for the time being, and paved the way towards a entente cordiale between Hindus and Muslims. Another result was the holding of Congress and League annual sessions at the same time and at the same place for seven years (1915-21).

It can be seen that there were three dominant strands in the first phase (1904-1920) of Jinnah's political career. These were a firm belief in a united Indian nationhood, with Hindus and Muslim sharing in the future Indian dispensation; a sense that Indian freedom could come through Hindu-Muslim unity, and a need for unity in Muslim ranks through strengthening the Muslim League. These strands continued in the second phase (1920-37) as well; but with the years their position came to be reversed in his scale of priorities, as the Congress's ultimate objectives underwent a radical change under the influence of Hindu extremists. Jinnah's efforts for Muslim unity became increasingly pronounced with the years, becoming a passion with him towards the closing of the second phase.

For Jinnah, while national freedom for both Hindus and Muslims continued to be the supreme goal, the means adopted to achieve it underwent a dramatic change. If it could not be achieved through Hindu Muslim unity, it must be done through Hindu-Muslim separation; if it could not be secured through a composite Hindu-Muslim nationalism, it must be done through separate Hindu and Muslim nationalisms; if not through a united India, it must be through partition. In either case, the ultimate objective was to ensure political power for Muslims.

Jinnah’s Transformation

The period after 1937 marked a paradigmatic shift. Jinnah became identified in the Muslim mind with the concept of the charismatic community, the concept which answered their psychic need for endowing and sanctifying their sense of community with a sense of power. Increasingly he became the embodiment of a Muslim national consensus, which explains why and how he had become their Quaid-i-Azam, even before the launching of the Pakistan demand in March 1940.

This shift was squarely reflected in his thinking, his posture, his platform, and in his political discourse. And of course his appearance -- for his public rallies Jinnah replaced his finely creased English Saville Row suits with achkan, tight pyjamas and, to boot, a karakuli cap. He still believed in democracy, but now felt parliamentary democracy of the Westminster type was unsuitable for India because of the existence of a permanent majority and a permanent minority, which he defined in specific terms:

Minorities means a combination of things. It may be that a minority has a different religion from the other citizens of a country. Their language may be different, their race may be different, their culture may be different, and the combination of all these various elements - religion, culture, race, language, arts, music and so forth makes the minority a separate entity in the State, and that separate entity as an entity wants safeguards.

Extending this elucidation, he occasionally called Muslims 'a nation', stressing their distinct religion, culture, language and civilization, and calling on them to "live or die as a nation". He even called the League flag 'the flag of Islam', arguing that "you cannot separate the Muslim League from Islam.

Jinnah also traveled across the other end of the political and ideological spectrum in other ways. Previously he had disdained mass politics, now he opted for mass politics. Previously he had objected to Gandhi's injection of religion into politics, now he was not averse to couch his appeals in Islamic terms and galvanising the Muslim masses by appealing to them in a cultural matrix they were familiar with. Previously he had called himself an Indian first and last, now he opted for an Islamic identity. Previously he had strived long and hard for a national consensus; now all his efforts were directed towards a Muslim consensus. Jinnah, the erstwhile "ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity" became the fiercest advocate of Hindu-Muslim separation.

Jinnah had a political basis for this paradigmatic shift, through which Muslims and Islam came to occupy the centre of his discourse. For one thing, how else could Muslims, scattered as they were unevenly throughout the subcontinent, sharing with their non-Muslim neighbours local customs, ethos, languages, and problems and subjected to local conditions (whether political, social or economic) become a 'nation' except through their affiliation with Islam? For another, since Pakistan was to be established in the Muslim majority provinces, why else should the Muslims in the minority provinces struggle for Pakistan, except for their deep concern for the fate and future of Islam in India? Above all, what linked them irretrievably with their fellow Muslims in the majority areas except this concern?

In an address to Gaya Muslim League Conference in January 1938, Jinnah begun mapping out his new world view. He said:

When we say ‘This flag is the flag of Islam’ they think we are introducing religion into politics - a fact of which we are proud. Islam gives us a complete code. It is not only religion but it contains laws, philosophy and politics, In fact, it contains everything that matters to a man from morning to night. When we talk of Islam we take it as an all embracing word. We do not mean any ill. The foundation of our Islamic code is that we stand for liberty, equality and fraternity.

Jinnah then used this to argue the case for Pakistan at two levels. First, he invoked the universally recognized principle of self-determination. But it was invoked not on the familiar territorial basis, but for the Muslim nation alone. As he stipulated in his marathon talks with Gandhi in September 1944, the constituency for the plebiscite to decide upon the Pakistan demand would comprise only the Muslims, and not the entire population of the areas concerned. Second, he spelled out his reasons for reaching out towards the 'Pakistan' goal in his Lahore (1940) address in more or less ideological terms, arguing that "Islam and Hinduism... are not religions in the strict sense of the word, but are... different and distinct social orders", that "the Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs, literature", "to two different civilizations", that they "derive their inspiration from different sources of history"... (with) different epics, different heroes and different episodes." "We wish our people", he declared, "to develop to the fullest our spiritual, cultural, economic, social and political life in a way that we think best and in consonance with our own ideals and according to the genius of our people."

Jinnah developed this into a definition of Muslim nationhood that was most cogent, the most closely argued, and the most firmly based in international law since the time of Sir Syed Ahmad Khan. "We are a nation," he wrote to Gandhi on 17 September 1944, "with our distinctive culture and civilization, language and literature, art and architecture, names and nomenclature, sense of values and proportion, legal laws and moral code, customs and calendar, history and traditions, aptitude and ambitions; in short, we have our own distinctive outlook on life and of life."

He returned to this more extensively in his Id message in September 1945, saying:

"Everyone, except those who are ignorant, knows that the Quran is the general code of the Muslims. A religious, social, civil, commercial, military, judicial, criminal, penal code, it regulates everything from the ceremonies of religion to those of daily life; from the salvation of the soul to the health of the body; from the rights of all to those of each individual; from morality to crime, from punishment here to that in the life to come, and our Prophet has enjoined on us that every Musalman should possess a copy of the Quran and be his own priest. Therefore Islam is not merely confined to the spiritual tenets and doctrines or rituals and ceremonies. It is a complete code regulating the whole Muslim society, every department of life, collective[ly] and individually."

Jinnah’s Realisation

After independence, as head of the state he had founded, Jinnah talked in the same strain. He talked of securing "liberty, fraternity and equality as enjoined upon us by Islam" (25 August 1947); of "Islamic democracy, Islamic social justice and the equality of manhood" (21 February 1948); of raising Pakistan on "sure foundations of social justice and Islamic socialism which emphasized equality and brotherhood of man" (26 March 1948); of laying "the foundations of our democracy on the basis of true Islamic ideals and principles" (14 August 1948); and "the onward march of renaissance of Islamic culture and ideals" (18 August 1947). He called upon the mammoth Lahore audience to build up "Pakistan as a bulwark of Islam", to "live up to your traditions and add to it another chapter of glory", adding, "If we take our inspiration and guidance from the Holy Quran, the final victory, I once again say, will be ours" (30 October 1947).

As for the specific institutions of the new state, he exhorted the armed forces to uphold "the high traditions of Islam and our National Banner" (8 November 1947); and commended the State Bank research organization to evolve "banking practices compatible with Islamic ideals of social and economic life" and to "work our destiny in our own way and present to the world an economic system based on true Islamic concept of equality of manhood and social justice" (1 July 1948).

For Jinnah, "the creation of a State of our own was a means to an end and not the end in itself. The idea was that we should have a State in which we could live and breathe as free men and which we could develop according to our own lights and culture and where principles of Islamic social justice could find free play" (11 October 1947). He told Edwards College students that "this mighty land has now been brought under a rule, which is Islamic, Muslim rule, as a sovereign independent State" (18 April 1948). He even described Pakistan as "the premier Islamic State" (February 1948).

Jinnah's broadcast to the people of the United States (February 1948) is in a similar vein:

I do not know what the ultimate shape of this constitution is going to be, but I am sure that it will be of a democratic type, embodying the essential principles of Islam. Today, they are as applicable in actual life as they were 1300 years ago. Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. It has taught equality of men, justice and fairly play to everybody. We are the inheritors of these glorious traditions and are fully alive to our responsibilities and obligations as framers of the future constitution of Pakistan. In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic State -- to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non- Muslims -- Hindus, Christians, and Parsis -- but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan.

In this broadcast, Jinnah, the constitutionalist that he was, refused to forestall the shape of the constitution, in order not to fetter the Pakistan Constituent Assembly from taking decisions it deemed fit. While he laid a good deal of stress on Islamic ideals and principles, he ruled out theocracy, saying "Pakistan is not a theocracy or anything like it. Islam demands from us the tolerance of other creeds."

Technically speaking, theocracy means a government "by ordained priests, who wield authority as being specially appointed by those who claim to derive their rights from their sacerdotal position." Unlike Catholicism, there is no established church in Islam; (in fact, it decries such a church). Moreover, since Islam admits of no priestcraft, since it discountenances a sacerdotal class as the bearer of an infallible authority, and since it concedes the right of ijtihad to "men of common sense", the concept of theocracy is absolutely foreign to Islam. Hence, during the debate on the Objectives Resolution (March 1947), Mian Iftikharuddin refuted the Congress members fears about the sovereignty clause, saying that "the wording of the Preamble does not in any way make the Objectives Resolution any the more theocratic, any the more religious than the Resolution or statement of fundamental principles of some of the modern countries of the world" (10 March 1949). Thus neither Iqbal, nor Jinnah, nor any of the independence leaders (including Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani) stood for a theocratic state.

Of all Jinnah's pronouncements it is his 11 August address that has received the greatest attention since the birth of Pakistan, and spawned a good deal of controversy. Although made somewhat off-the-cuff -- he said that "I cannot make any well-considered pronouncement, but I shall say a few things as they occur to me" -- it is considered a policy statement. He said:

... If you change your past and work together in a spirit that everyone of you, no matter to what community he belongs, ... is first, second and last a citizen of this State with equal rights, privileges and obligations, there will be no end to the progress you will make. ...we must learn a lesson from this [our past experience]. You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed - that has nothing to do with the business of the state ... we are starting in the days when there is no discrimination between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste, or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State.... I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the state.

Not surprisingly, it has elicited varied comments from scholars and contemporary journalists. One scholar has put it down to "loose thinking and imprecise wording" and a departure from Jinnah's erstwhile position. Another calls it "a remarkable reversal" and asks "was he [Jinnah] pleading for a united India - on the eve of Pakistan?"

In dissecting this statement, there is, however, little that could lend itself to disputation. There is no problems with the dictum that every one, no matter what community he belongs to, would be entitled to full fledged citizenship, with equal rights, privileges and obligations, that there would no discrimination between one community and another, and that all of them would be citizens and equal citizens of one state. These principles Jinnah had reiterated time and again during the struggle period, though not in the same words.

It is, however, not usually recognized that political equality in general terms (because absolutism was the rule at the time of the advent of Islam) and equality before law in more specific terms are attributes Islam had recognized long before the world discovered them as secular values. They were exemplified in the Misaq-i-Madinah, the pact between the Prophet (PBUH) and Aus and Khazraj, and in his letter to Abul Hairs, Christian priest and the accredited representative of the Christians of Najran, and in the conduct of the Khulfa-i-Rashidun. This covenant, comprising 47 clauses, lays down, inter alia, that the Quraishite Muslim, the Medinites and the Jews of Banu Auf from one community apart from other people, that the Jews shall have their religion and the Muslims their own, that they shall help each other against one who fights with the people of the covenant. Now, how could these disparate tribes characterised by differing religious affiliations from one political community unless their entitlement to equal rights, privileges and obligations are conceded in the first place. A community postulates such entitlement, and it may be conjectured that Jinnah believed that Islam concedes equal citizenship to one and all, without reference to creed, colour or race.

Finally one crucial question. If it is still contended that Jinnah had envisaged a 'secular' state, does one pronouncement prevail over a plethora of pronouncements made before and after the establishment of Pakistan. Does one morsel make a dinner? Does one swallow make a summer? A close study all of Jinnah's pronouncements during 1934-48, and most of his pronouncement during the pre-1934 period, shows that the word, 'secular' (signifying an ideology) does not find a mention in any of them. Even when confronted with the question, he evaded it -- as the following extracts from his 17 July 1947 press conference indicates:

Question: "Will Pakistan be a secular or theocratic state?"

Mr. M.A. Jinnah: "You are asking me a question that is absurd. I do not know what a theocratic state means."

A correspondent suggested that a theocratic State meant a State where only people of a particular religion, for example, Muslims, could be full citizens and Non-Muslims would not be full citizens.

Mr. M.A. Jinnah: "Then it seems to me that what I have already said is like throwing water on duck's back (laughter). When you talk of democracy, I am afraid you have not studied Islam. We learned democracy thirteen centuries ago."

It is well to recall the ideological environment of the period in which the pronouncements we are trying to dissect, analyse and interpret today were made. It was already a bipolar world, smitten by the gathering cold war. The great ideological divide had warped simple and long familiar words such as freedom, liberty, equality, democracy, state, sovereignty, justice, and tyranny with ideological overtones. Hence these concepts had to be qualified to mean what they actually stand for. Hence when Jinnah talks of the concept of a democratic type embodying the essential principles of Islam, he was giving notice that he did not mean the standard Western type or the Soviet brand of people's democracy, but a sort of 'Islamic democracy' which, while retaining the institutional appurtenances of a democratic structure, is congruent with Muslims' ethos, aspirations and code of morality. And, as Mian Iftikharuddin argued, "no one need object to the word 'Islamic.' If we can use the words, 'Roman Law' or the 'British Parliamentary system' and so many other terms without shame or stint, then why not 'Islamic'?"

Jinnah was the most Westernised political leader in all the annals of Indian Islam; no other Muslim political leader could match him in terms of modernity and a modern outlook. He was completely at home with the milieu in cosmopolitan Bombay and metropolitan London. He also married a Parsi girl, so unconventional for a Muslim leader at that time, though after getting her converted to Islam. During his chequered career, Jinnah came in contact with an exceedingly large number of non-Muslim leading personalities and a host of British officials, more than any other Muslim leader and had interacted with them for some four decades -- before he underwent a paradigmatic shift. Jinnah was also a man who minced no words, stood no humbug, and called a spade a spade. He held political rhetoric in high disdain; he preferred political wilderness to playing to the gallery. Such a man could not possibly have gone in for an Islamic orientated discourse unless he felt that the Islamic values he was commending were at home with the values underlying modernity, that Islam was in consonance with progress and modernity. During the debate on Islam and secularism, this is a point that has lain ignored.

Article: Newsletter banner

Do you want to stay informed.

Sign up for the newsletter to receive monthly updates on TNI’s research, events, and publications.

Newsletter Subscribe to our newsletter

Ideas into movement

Boost tni's work.

50 years. Hundreds of social struggles. Countless ideas turned into movement. 

Support us as we celebrate our 50th anniversary in 2024.

Make a donation

• Pakistan Today
• Profit Magazine
• Paperazzi Magazine

Rhetorical Reality

Why bangladesh keeps on sheltering myanmar’s army and bgps, the politics of implausible deniability, getting ready for the imf, not talking to anyone, who was killed in fresno, pha initiates work on maiden ‘public sculpture garden’ at nasser bagh, centenarians and an sho’s powers, severe geomagnetic storm hitting earth could knock out power, electronics worldwide, china-made driverless minibus to hit road in italy, man behind viral dress that broke internet admits he strangled wife, israel pushes back into northern gaza, ups military pressure on rafah, britain’s fm rejects rafah offensive without plan to save lives, t20 world cup: usa may give tough time to pakistan: ramiz…, pcb chairman urges pak squad to embrace modern t20i techniques to…, japan beat pakistan in closely contested sultan azlan shah cup final, amir won’t play first t20i against ireland despite joining team in…, pakistan and ireland set to clash in debut t20i series today, a closer look at jinnah’s vision of pakistan.

This year we are celebrating 75 th birthday anniversary of Pakistan, but what Jinnah envisioned for Pakistan as a state remains a distant dream. The debate about the nature and character of the Pakistani state has never been more intense than it is today. Some still voice the demand for a theocratic state while others argue that religion has nothing to do with the business of state. Since Jinnah did not write a book or monograph, the main clues to his thinking are to be found in his speeches. Let us clear some fog about Jinnah’s vision of Pakistan through his speeches.

The first speech was delivered on 11 th August 1947 when the first Constituent Assembly elected him as their first President and the second on 14 th August, which is now celebrated as Independence Day in Pakistan.  If we put together these two of Jinnah’s speeches in crucial month of August 1947 we can glimpse his vision for the state he had created. The most significant and most moving speech was the one given on 11 th August as it was outpouring of ideas on the state and the nature of society. On 11 th August Jinnah said to his people “you are free: you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed, that has nothing to do with the fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one state; Now I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time, Hindus would cease to be Hindus, and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in religious sense because that is the personal faith of each individual but in the political sense as the citizen of the state”.

From this powerful passage comes a vision of a brave new world. The words were Jinnah’s: the thought and belief were an inheritance from the Prophet (SAW) who said thirteen centuries before that “all men are equal in the eyes of God and your lives and properties are all scared and in case you should attack each other’s life and property. Today I trample under my feet all distinctions of caste, color and nationality”.  This is the vision of an Islamic society which would be equitable, compassionate, and tolerant, and from which the poison of corruption, nepotism, mismanagement and inefficiency would be eradicated.  If Pakistanis could follow these ideals, Jinnah would be confident of the future.

Jinnah specifically did not want a theocratic state run by mullahs. Jinnah made his position clear in a broadcast to the people of the United States of America recorded in February, 1948 : In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by  priest with a divine mission. We have non- Muslims- Hindus, Christians and Parsee- but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizen and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan.  Acceptance of minorities in the statements of Jinnah is also very significant as he had regularly reminded his Muslim audience of what Islam maintains. He said, ‘our own history and our Prophet have given the clearest proof that non- Muslims have been treated not only justly and fairly but generously’.

Unfortunately, in today’s Pakistan there is an extreme discrimination on the basis of religion and there are certain laws which are instrumentalised by the religious lot and by sectarian and violent groups. There are centers of intolerance against minorities. Therefore, we need to keep our Quaid’s legacy alive and endeavor to achieve a state of affairs consistent with his ideals, principles and vision that constitutes Jinnah’s Pakistan.

RELATED ARTICLES

Tackling poverty, empress reborn, initiative launched to combat heatwave, “road to makkah” formally launched at karachi airport, pm approves rs23 billion grant for ajk amid protests, pm envisions mobile app as solution for transparent wheat procurement.

• Privacy policy

Today's Paper | May 13, 2024

Jinnah`s vision of pakistan.

AT a time when democracy and constitutionalism are struggling to take root and the country is facing the twin menaces of religious extremism and ethnic strife, a pertinent question on the eve of the Independence Day is what kind of Pakistan its founder Mohammad Ali Jinnah had in mind.

India was bifurcated on the basis of religion and Muslim nationalism lay at the bottom of the demand for Pakistan. But what was meant to be the relationship between the state and religion? Was the state to be an instrument of religion? Or were the state and religion meant to be independent of each other?

The struggle for Pakistan may be divided into two phases. In the initial phase, before the Pakistan resolution (at that time it was called the Lahore resolution) was passed on March 23, 1940, Mr Jinnah and the party he headed, the All India Muslim League, sought to protect the interests of Indian Muslims through the mechanism of separate electorates. Under that system, seats were reserved for Muslims for elections to legislative assemblies. Though in the beginning of his political career, Jinnah was opposed to separate electorates, subsequent political developments made him change his mind.

The Congress ministries that came into being in different provinces in the wake of 1937 elections made Jinnah realise that even separate electorates were not sufficient to safeguard the interests of Muslims as they would invariably bring to power Hindus being the dominant community or nation. Hence, the Pakistan resolution of 1940 went beyond separate electorates to demand an independent homeland for the Muslims of India.

Various statements of Jinnah suggest that though Pakistan was created in the name of Islam, the purpose was not to create a theocratic, monolithic state but to safeguard the social, economic and political rights of Indian Muslims. And once Pakistan was created, the rights of even non-Muslims were to be protected as equal citizens. In his historic address to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan on August 11, 1947, Jinnah said “You are free, you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place of worship in the State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed, that has nothing to do with the business of the state....Now, I think that we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time. Hindus will cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual but in the political sense as citizens of the state.”

In February 1948, he said “In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non-Muslims — Hindus, Christians and Parsis — but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizen and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan."

The vision of Pakistan as outlined by its founder in the above excerpts was that of a pluralistic society in which full religious freedom would be granted to all communities, where the state would not discriminate on the basis of caste or creed and where cultural diversity would be reconciled with national unity. Being a statesman, Mr Jinnah knew well that in a multicultural society like Pakistan discrimination on the basis of religion could prove disastrous as it would play havoc with the very fabric of society.

Unfortunately, his message has not been heeded to and people have been discriminated against on the basis of faith or culture, giving rise to the twin scourges of ethnicism and religious intolerance. The state of Pakistan which came into being in 1947 consisted of two wings the eastern wing and the western wing. In the interest of the integrity of the federation, it was imperative that its federating units were given adequate representation in the state apparatus and shared in economic development, and that its various ethnic nationalities were welded together.

To ensure adequate representation to the units, it was necessary to hold elections and transfer power to the elected representatives of the people and grant sufficient autonomy to the provinces. As for integrating various ethnic groups, the country needed a strong and stable political party with an across-the-nation base, which could represent various nationalities. However, both these requirements remained unfulfilled.

The ensuing sense of deprivation and discontent gradually built up as successive regimes denied East Pakistanis due share in political and economic power. This eventually crystallised into the famous six-points of the Awami League, the premier political force in East Pakistan. These points, inter alia, called for separate military and currency for both the wings and a very weak centre in a federal form of government — obviously a reaction to a very strong centre that had existed. It was on the basis of these six points that the Awami League contested Pakistan's first general elections held in 1970, and won all but two seats in the eastern wing.

The essential message of the elections was ethnic. No party from the western wing could secure a single seat in the eastern wing; no party from the eastern wing won a single seat in the western wing. Ethnicism could have been dampened by transferring power to the majority party, which happened to be the Awami League. But since our democracy had not come of age, monopolising, rather than sharing, power was emphasised and power was not transferred to the largest party. In other words, pluralism was disregarded. The result was nothing short of a catastrophe — dismemberment of Pakistan.

The ethnic problem did not die with the separation of East Pakistan and has persisted to date in one form or another — Baloch nationalism, Pukhtunistan, Sindhi nationalism and Mohajir nationalism. Underlying these ethnic problems is the perception of political, economic and cultural deprivation and exploitation.

The best way to deal with ethnicism is to ensure equitable share to all ethnic groups in political power, which will also protect their economic and cultural rights. This of course requires smooth functioning of parliamentary democracy as well as full provincial autonomy

The pluralistic vision of Pakistan also meant that religion should not be used for political purposes, because it invariably promotes one community at the expense of the rest, with the result that the communities discriminated against feel increasingly alienated from the mainstream. However, the pitfall of religionising politics has not been avoided. Religion has been used as an instrument of capturing, perpetuating and legitimising power. It is such an erroneous view of Islam that lies behind religious extremism in Pakistan, which has expressed itself in sectarian violence, suicide blasts, burning of schools and video shops, and recently the killings of Christians in Gojra. No doubt, growing injustices in society, poverty and illiteracy have also contributed to terrorism. But one needs to be mindful of the fact that terrorism also has an ideological basis and in case of Pakistan the ideological basis is provided by the monolithic-cum-militant view of Islam.

[email protected]

کون سے ممالک اسرائیل کو ہتھیار فراہم کرتے ہیں؟

بھارتی انتخابات: سیاسی قوتیں سینما کو کس طرح استعمال کرتی ہیں؟

کراچی کا سابق اسٹریٹ کرمنل، ایف بی آئی ایجنٹ کامران فریدی امریکی قید سے رہا

India’s Election Enters Fourth Phase

What On Earth Does The Government Want From Us?

Explained: PIA Privatisation

Lawyer Sacked For Exposing Israel’s AI-Assisted Genocide In Gaze

Weekly Economic Roundup: PSX, SBP Reserves, PKR

US Report Flags Possible Israeli International Law Breaches in Gaza

Is PTI Ready to Apologise for May 9th?

How Israel’s Killer Robots In Gaza Are Redefining Automated Warfare?

Dear visitor, the comments section is undergoing an overhaul and will return soon.

Latest Stories

In fiery NA address, Omar Ayub calls for return of security agencies to constitutional bounds

India inks 10-year deal to operate Iran’s Chabahar port

ECP suspends victory notifications of 75 returned lawmakers on reserved seats

PM Shehbaz resigns as PML-N president for Nawaz to retake ‘rightful place’

PM Shehbaz approves immediate provision of Rs23bn to AJK

IMF has asked Pakistan to cut subsidies, not hike energy prices: Senator Mandviwalla

India’s Arif Zakaria to depict Jinnah as ‘flawed and complicated human’ in an upcoming drama based on Partition

Meet the star-makers: Pakistani celebs put the spotlight on their moms this Mother’s Day

Farah Talib Aziz and Maliha Aziz — the mother-daughter duo behind one of Pakistan’s most coveted bridal brands

Most popular.

1 police officer dead, over 90 injured in AJK clashes

First ‘extreme’ solar storm in 20 years strikes earth, brings spectacular auroras

UAE hits out at Netanyahu for saying it may help run Gaza

Sultan Azlan Shah Cup: Pakistan fall as ‘dead sport’ recaptures audience once again

PIA staff forgets to put boy’s body on plane

Govt hints at raising wheat purchase target

Pakistan’s iCube-Qamar beams back first images from moon’s orbit

Seven security personnel martyred in North Waziristan

Indian elections

Editorial: Consistent PSDP contraction is a sign of Pakistan’s lingering financial and economic crisis

India’s illiberal election

Can Pakistan’s judiciary be truly independent?

The battle over reserved seats

Focusing on short-term respite remains top priority instead of long-term, sustainable solutions

Political capitalism

A lost future

Shadow of the moon

Who can rock the hybrid boat?

Spending restrictions

Climate authority, vending organs.

A turbulent 2023

A moral victory, hope after defeat, nab prosecution admits oversight in £190m corruption case.

At 75, Pakistan has moved far from the secular and democratic vision of its founder, Mohammad Ali Jinnah

Senior Lecturer, University of Pennsylvania

Disclosure statement

Farah N. Jan has received funding from Perry World House at the University of Pennsylvania. Thanks to Leili Kashani for contributing ideas and edits to this piece.

View all partners

This month marks the 75th anniversary of Pakistan’s independence and of its Partition from British India in a devastating process that uprooted more than 15 million people and resulted in 1 million to 2 million dead. Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs – communities that had coexisted for hundreds of years – all participated in the sectarian violence. Countless people have borne the scars from these events over multiple generations.

Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, sought to create a democratic, egalitarian and secular country where the Muslims of the subcontinent, who constituted about 25% of the population, could enjoy full equality. For most of his life, he sought to achieve this equality within an undivided Hindu-majority India. Later he became convinced that a separate homeland was necessary to realize such equality.

Today, widespread and escalating violence against Indian Muslims under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s right-wing, Hindu-nationalist rule seems to confirm Jinnah’s fears.

Jinnah died just a year after Pakistan was born. As a scholar of South Asia , I know that in the years that followed, the military and the business elite consolidated their power and helped shape a country that bears little resemblance to his vision – although many continue to fight for it.

Pakistan today

Ideology and religion are divisive forces in Pakistan today – from sectarian violence against Shia Muslims to the state’s blasphemy laws that authorize a death sentence for anyone who insults Islam. Religion, as interpreted by the state, plays a significant role in politics and governance. An example of its harmful role can be seen in the deterioration of the rights of Ahmadis , members of a religious minority targeted by the state.

Other religious minorities also face discrimination, with Christians subject to particularly harsh treatment. According to Pew Research statistics, 75% of Pakistanis say blasphemy laws are necessary to protect Islam, while only 6% say blasphemy laws unfairly target minorities.

Pakistan also remains on a turbulent political and economic trajectory. The army has been in direct control of the state for most of its existence, with four military coups and decades of military rule since 1958. The military and notorious intelligence services remain in direct control of domestic and foreign policy , making decisions to protect their power and economic interests, including vast commercial holdings .

Economically, Pakistan has lagged behind other developing countries, with debt as high as 71.3% of its GDP. Inequality is high , with the top 10% of households owning 60% of the national wealth, and the bottom 60% owning just 10%.

The elite evade taxes on a massive scale, contributing to the country’s economic instability. While millions live in dire poverty and hunger , the government’s spending to mitigate poverty is among the lowest in the region. Dissidents, human rights activists and journalists face censorship and repression .

Jinnah had hoped for much better.

Jinnah: An advocate for Muslims in British India

Born in Karachi in 1876 to a Muslim family, Jinnah was first educated at a local Muslim school and later at Karachi’s Christian Missionary Society High School.

At 16, Jinnah was sent to London, where he decided to study law. After returning to India, he established himself in Bombay as a successful and eloquent lawyer.

Jinnah joined the Indian National Congress in 1906, becoming part of the largest Indian political party organizing for independence from British colonial rule. At this time, he was the foremost proponent of Hindu-Muslim harmony in India and pursued a strategy of a unified front against the British.

He considered himself “ a staunch Congressman ” and rejected political organizing that separated Muslims and Hindus in India. Accordingly, Jinnah delayed joining the All-India Muslim League, the political party formed to represent the rights and concerns of the Muslims of British India, until 1913. For years he remained a member of both parties.

Jinnah’s concerns over Hindu nationalism

Jinnah’s faith in the Congress party would wane, and he resigned in 1920. He was increasingly concerned with Congress’ growing emphasis on India’s Hindu identity and the lack of political representation for the country’s Muslim minority.

Jinnah was also deeply disturbed by the emergence of right-wing Hindu nationalist groups like the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, or RSS , a violent paramilitary group that drew inspiration from European fascist parties , opposed Muslim-Hindu unity and increasingly sought to force Muslims to convert or leave India.

In 1934, Jinnah was unanimously elected as the president of the Muslim League, and he continued to advocate for the rights of Muslims in a unified India. He did not embrace dividing the Indian subcontinent into separate Muslim-majority and Hindu-majority areas until the 1940s .

In this period, escalating sectarian violence stoked by both Hindu and Muslim right-wing groups, and Congress’ refusal to accept a federation in which Muslim-majority regions enjoyed greater political representation, contributed to foreclosing an alternative to partition. During this period, Jinnah stressed that Muslims would never enjoy security and full equality in the Hindu-majority nation.

Jinnah eventually led the Muslims of India to form a nation of their own with the creation of Pakistan in 1947. He insisted that this new nation be a secular democratic country with equal rights for all who resided there.

Jinnah’s vision for a secular Pakistan

Jinnah emphasized the necessity of secular education to improve social and economic conditions in the Muslim community, argued for equality between the sexes and advocated for the discarding of the parda, or veil.

Jinnah did not write a book or memoir, but his speeches give an insight into his vision for Pakistan. Notably, his speech a few days before becoming Pakistan’s first president, delivered on Aug. 11, 1947, expressed his secular aspirations for the newly formed country. In it he stressed : “You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed – that has nothing to do with the business of the state.”

Four days later, on Aug. 14, 1947, British India was divided into the independent nations of Pakistan and India. As the first president of Pakistan, Jinnah again emphasized his secular vision for the new country, saying , “We are starting in the days where there is no discrimination, no distinction between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. … We are all citizens and equal citizens of one State.”

Jinnah’s dream unrealized

Jinnah’s achievement remains a significant milestone of the 20th century. But 75 years later, Pakistan is far from the country he envisioned.

People from the region, nostalgic for a unified country and cognizant of the suffering during Partition and beyond, sometimes express that it might have been better if they had not been divided based on their religious identity but had instead continued the struggle for a pluralistic society with equal rights for all. Others maintain that Jinnah was right to conclude that Muslims in India were bound to face continued violence and be treated as second-class citizens in a Hindu-majority country.

What is certain is that Jinnah’s dream of a compassionate homeland for the minorities of the subcontinent remains unrealized. But glimmers of it have lived on in movements and people who have gone on to dream of a more equitable, inclusive and just Pakistan.

For example, Christian and Muslim landless farmers in the Peasant Movement , one of the largest and most successful land rights movements in South Asia, have resisted violent efforts to quash their demands for a more equitable society. Some 80,000 lawyers were part of the Lawyers Movement , which challenged the power of the military and fought for a free and independent judiciary. And individuals such as human rights activist Sabeen Mahmud have paid with their lives for their dream of a just and pluralist Pakistan.

And while today’s Pakistan is far from Jinnah’s vision, the work of these people and movements reflects the famous words of Pakistan’s most celebrated revolutionary poet , Faiz Ahmed Faiz: “We must [continue to] search for that promised Dawn.”

• Narendra Modi
• Muhammad Ali Jinnah
• Lord Mountbatten
• British Colonial rule
• Partition of India
• Religion and society
• Christian missions
• Partition75
• India Pakistan 75
• IndiaandPakistan75

Lecturer / Senior Lecturer - Marketing

Communications and Engagement Officer, Corporate Finance Property and Sustainability

Assistant Editor - 1 year cadetship

Executive Dean, Faculty of Health

Lecturer/Senior Lecturer, Earth System Science (School of Science)

• nawaiwaqt group
• Roznama Nawaiwaqt
• Waqt News TV
• Sunday Magazine
• Family Magazine
• Nidai Millat
• Mahnama Phool
• Today's Paper
• Newspaper Picks
• Top Stories
• Lifestyle & Entertainment
• International
• Editor's Picks
• News In Pictures
• Write for Us

Understanding Jinnah’s vision for Pakistan

Pakistan could not have won freedom without the untiring efforts of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Today we are celebrating 141st birth anniversary of father of the nation. People often talk about Jinnah vision of Pakistan. The debate has been raging for seven decades but no one has completely agreed on what was that vision that made him fight for rights of Muslims and other minorities.

If one sneaks a peek into history pre General Ziaul Haq era, one would find Pakistan to be relatively an open society, despite our objective resolution that was based on the lines of Islam. But during Zia’s period the society evolved into an extreme Islamic state and lost the essence of Jinnah’s vision.

Even though Jinnah had clearly said a number of things in his speeches which reflected what Pakistan would be like, but we have not been able to fulfill his vision as yet.

PM Shehbaz Sharif to discuss new loan deal with IMF mission

The Nation spoke to a number of people, from different walks of life and schools of thought, who shared their thoughts on Jinnah’s vision for Pakistan.  

Justice Nassera Iqbal, Allama Iqbal’s daughter-in-law and lawyer believes, “Jinnah’s vision was that Muslims should have an independent state where they can practice their religion freely and live peacefully. Hindu and Muslims were not able to live together in the subcontinent. Along with that he also believed that the state has no business of interfering in personal matters of the citizens, everyone should be allowed to practice their beliefs. His concept of Pakistan was widely appreciated by men and women of that time. But unfortunately Jinnah’s vision was lost after his death.”

Kalyan Singh, professor at Government College University, said Jinnah was dreaming of a country where religion would not be the foundation and it is can be seen in his 11th August speech. But since the past 70 years the minorities of Pakistan are suffering. Minorities don’t have their family laws. They are not given high standard jobs nor can they become the president of Pakistan. These discriminations have made the generations of minorities psycho patients. This was not what Jinnah’s Pakistan was like. State is like a mother who treats all its children equally but Pakistan has not done that.”

Chinese firm brings 200MW Solar Energy to Pakistan, cutting thermal power dependence

Kapil Dev, a human rights, activist shared his thoughts regarding Jinnah’s Pakistan by saying, “His 11th august speech is evident that he wanted a secular state. He knew how important rights for minorities were. When Pakistan was created Jinnah created a human rights ministry which was under him. It shows that he took minority affairs very seriously. Pakistan’s first law minister was Jogindranath Mandal. The first entry for the national anthem and it was approved too was from Jagatnath Azaad, such steps show what kind of Pakistan Jinnah wanted. But it’s unfortunate that after his death the vision was lost. We should also not forget that this country was made on the basis of religion so it’s influence would played a major role in bringing Pakistan to this condition.”

Bishop Alexander John Malik said Quaid e Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah envisioned an open liberal democratic welfare Islamic state. “A state where all irrespective of their class or creed were supposed to be equal and where religion would not play a determining factor in the business of the state. Unfortunately we have drifted very far away from Jinnah’s vision and its time we mend our ways otherwise it would be too late.

Anwarul Haq Kakar dismisses allegations in wheat import scandal

Maulana Tahir Ashrafi said that Jinnah’s vision for Pakistan was based on the teachings of Quran and Sunnah which were set 1400 years ago. “It was to be a state that did not discriminate between individuals and provided justice, health and education to all. But it’s unfortunate that in the past 70 years we did not create the Jinnah’s Pakistan,” he said.  

Ateef ur Rehman Yousafzai, a researcher and faculty member of Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad said that Jinnah wanted a modern Islamic state where people will have equality, justice and democracy. “All departments would play their own roles instead of interfering in each other’s domains. But unfortunately it did not happen as Jinnah died early due to which things did not turn out as they were supposed to happen as the team he had around him was not very supportive,” Yousafzai said.

PM directs to use technology for making wheat procurement process transparent

Allama Raza-e-Mustafa, a religious scholar said that Quaid-e-Azam R.A was not a liberal person rather he was a true Muslim and knew how damaging the teachings of the British were. “Allama Iqbal also guided him and helped him pave way for partition. Quaid-e-Azam was not of the mindset that he had to make properties or money like our politicians today,” he said.

Prof Pervez Hoodhbhoy said Mr Jinnah was a pragmatic political leader of great acumen. The absence of substantive writings by him this has resulted in his many speeches – which were tailored for specific audiences – being freely cherry-picked to justify mutually contradictory positions. Some find therein a liberal and secular voice, others an articulation of Islamic values. He definitely did not gift to Pakistan the kind of clear secular vision that Jawaharlal Nehru gave to India.

‘Big relief’ in petrol price expected from May 16

In front of him were a host of dedicated opponents who did not want to see the division of India. Even Muslims who wanted a separate state often fiercely differed from each other. Would the jagirdari system be eliminated? What would be the relationship of the provinces with the centre? Today Pakistanis have to confront the reality that Pakistan was born with just the Two-Nation Theory , i.e. the premise that Muslims and Hindus should not live together.”

Ejaz Anwar an activist and environmentalist said Jinnah’s Pakistan was totally different from what Pakistan is today. “He wanted a progressive and enlightened country with equal opportunities for everyone even the females. People don’t understand what secular means. It has nothing to do with ‘la deeniyat’. A secular state is what Jinnah wanted where the state had no business in the personal affairs of the citizens,” he said.

Hassan Askari Rizvi, a political and defence analyst, said Jinnah’s Pakistan’s major attributes is constitutionalism, democracy, rule of law, equality of all citizens with ethical and moral basis being derived from the teachings and principles of Islam.”He was not in favour of a religious or plutonic Islamic state where the emphasis would be on regulative and punitive act. He was convinced that the modern notions of nation state, governance, political participation could be combined with the social justice and equality as annunciated in Islam,” he explained.

Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed, Professor Emeritus of Political Science and an author of various books, said Jinnah's Pakistan is not an easy idea, concept or vision to present or describe. “What one can say safely is that since Pakistan was claimed in the name of Muslims on the basis of the two-nation theory it was premised firmly on religious nationalism in contrast to territorial nationalism. The idea of Pakistan was diametrically opposed to secularism. “Therefore to say that Jinnah's Pakistan was meant to be a secular state is a contradiction in terms.

Having said that, it is equally true that he by no means had a preference for a theocracy or a state in which the ulema would enjoy veto rights as they do in Ayatollah Khomeini's Iran. He wanted Pakistan to be a state for Muslims. A modern but Muslim democracy in which the Shariah would be the source and inspiration for law and constitution. He perhaps believed that such a state could treat its minorities generously and fairly. The only time it seems he meant equal rights is the 11th August 1947 speech but it is acknowledged by all serious and responsible people that saying that did not mean a secular state. He never ever used the word secular in any of his pronouncements on Pakistan.

“What one can deduce from his prolific speeches, statements and messages is that he was thinking in terms of some kind of a Muslim democracy. The idea of a Muslim democracy has since then been translated into constitutional formulae thrice at least: in 1956, 1962 and 1973. The whole question of what a Muslim democracy has been complicated by the core question: who is a Muslim? Such an inference is inescapable because as long as Pakistan had not come into being Jinnah had to accept that all those included in the census records as Muslims were Muslims in so far as they could claim the right to vote in separate reserved seats for Muslims. For Jinnah each vote was important to win the election of 1946.

“Once Pakistan came into being the census criteria came into conflict with the legacy of doctrinal disputes which had plagued Muslim society during British colonial rule. “If Pakistan was a state won for Muslims then Muslims were its primary nation while the minorities were its sacred trust. “Whatever way the term Muslim was used it meant the community believing in Islam. Inevitably defining a Muslim meant some sort of confessional criteria, which has to be agreed upon. Jinnah himself did not have anything to say on that, or at least not something which was unequivocal, incontrovertible and categorical. He left it vague. Therein lies the problem in giving concrete form and shape to his idea of Pakistan.

Yasser Latif Hamdani, a lawyer and author of Jinnah: Myth or reality, says Jinnah’s idea of Pakistan was of an inclusive democratic state, which would be completely be impartial to an individual citizen’s faith and which would promise equality of citizenship to all its citizens regardless of gender, ethnicity, religion or sect. “It is not just the 11th August speech, which seems to bother a lot of people in Pakistan, but many pronouncements of the Quaid-e-Azam, which make it absolutely clear what kind of Pakistan he wanted.

“Throughout the Pakistan Movement, which was an attempt to arrive at an equitable settlement between Hindus and Muslims in the subcontinent, Jinnah was adamant that he was not fighting for a theocracy. It was a consistent position from which Jinnah never retreated from at any point. Jinnah envisaged a modern state, which would not just be a leader in the Muslim world but the world at large in economy, science, technology and education. Unfortunately in Pakistan we have been too hung up about the terminology: Was Pakistan supposed to be a secular state or an Islamic state? This is a pointless futile debate because the two ideas in my opinion are not binary opposites. Jinnah’s interpretation of Islam was enlightened and progressive, embodying the noblest principles of the great faith which once inspired a great civilization that counted amongst its citizens not just Muslims but people of all faiths who lived side by side enjoying full equality and religious freedom. Long before secularism emerged as an idea in the West, the Muslim World was home to great Jewish philosophers and polymaths like Maimonides. This was at a time when Jews all over Europe were being persecuted and driven out of their homes.  Jinnah’s secularism was therefore as much a product of the pluralistic spirit of Islam embodied by Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)’s covenant with St Catherine’s Monastery as it was British liberalism, which Jinnah imbibed from his education in England as Barrister.  So the answer to the aforesaid question is that Pakistan was envisaged by Jinnah as a secular democratic state because in Jinnah’s modernist and progressive conception of Islam there was no room for theocracy or state sponsored bigotry.

“His idea of Islam was radically different from the one promoted by religious clerics and fundamentalists who saw Islam as a closed system. Jinnah drove home the point that Pakistan would be an inclusive secular state by appointing a Hindu law minister.  “Even in terms of Muslim sects, he maintained a clear policy that anyone who professes to be a Muslim is a Muslim. This is why Sir Zafrullah Khan, who was an Ahmadi, was so instrumental in Pakistan’s creation, pleading Pakistan’s case before the boundary commission and later becoming Pakistan’s first foreign minister. We must remember that Jinnah is the only politician to be called the best Ambassador of Hindu Muslim Unity in the subcontinent. At no point did he abandon his long held belief in religious freedom and equality of citizenship, which were cornerstones of his ideology.

“After 70 years we are still not very clear what Jinnah wanted may be if he had survived a few more years things would have been different, But it’s not hard to understand from all the content that is found in his speeches that he wanted a land where all could live peacefully and with equality,” he said.  

R Umaima Ahmed

Umaima Ahmed is a member  of staff

Israel pushes back into northern Gaza, ups military pressure on ...

Israel pushes back into northern gaza, ups military pressure on rafah, pakistan, iraq sign land mark defense deal, opposition alliance to kick start nationwide protest movement, palestinian death toll in gaza nears 35,000, one policeman dies, 90 injured in ajk clashes, imran has rejected many offers, claims alvi, autopsy fails to determine cause of housemaid’s death in karachi, chinese engineer rescued from river jhelum peril, islamabad to have new electricity substation by aug 2026, teachers panel sweeps asa election at iiui, climate change and gender equality, after imran’s failed coup, iran and pakistan, the evolution of museums, a framework for middle east peace.

The devolution of party power: A pathway for ...

The devolution of party power: a pathway for women, a peek behind the curtain at pidw: revealing ..., a peek behind the curtain at pidw: revealing the voices for ..., pakistan international disputes weekend: ..., pakistan international disputes weekend: impact on ..., the breadwinner, empowering women: the vision of maryam nawaz ..., empowering women: the vision of maryam nawaz sharif, indigenous armaments, the path ahead, bridging divides, a global problem, symbolic victories, climate awakening, tourism conundrum, hockey despair, public policy issues, epaper - nawaiwaqt, newsletter subscription, advertisement.

NIPCO House, 4 - Shaharah e Fatima Jinnah,

Lahore, Pakistan

Tel: +92 42 36367580    |     Fax : +92 42 36367005

• Advertise With Us
• Privacy Policy

Nawaiwaqt Group | Copyright © 2024

Jinnahs Vision of Pakistans Foreign Policy: Where Did We Go Wrong?

• February 11, 2021 |

Zarmina Khan ,

• Image Credit: The News

Pakistan has come to exist for ever were the words of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah once he was sworn in as the first Governor-General of the newly born state of Pakistan on the 14 th of August 1947. The emergence of this state was nothing short of a miracle as a congregation of people worked tirelessly to give practical meaning to their ideology which was shared by a fraction of Indians living in the united subcontinent. Being a new state, Pakistan had to find its place in the world, develop relations with various neighbours, which on the surface seemed to be potential friends, and formulate specific policies for the forces that threatened to undermine its existence. In that regard, Jinnahs vision was very clear which could be gauged from a broadcast talk to the people of the United States (US) in February 1948: Our foreign policy is one of friendliness and goodwill towards all the nations of the world.

One of the first foreign policy decisions taken by the emergent state was the Quaids effort to procure the membership of the United Nations (UN) in September 1947 so that Pakistan could gain recognition and support from other countries of the world. The decision came as a prelude to the larger role which Pakistan was destined to play in the organisation for the promotion of peace and prosperity among the nations of the world as intended by Jinnah.

In his position as the Governor-General of Pakistan, Jinnah provided his unflinching support to the Palestinian cause and vehemently opposed the French occupation of the North African Arab territories. Likewise, he expressed his opposition for the Dutch attack on Indonesia by refusing transit facilities to the Dutch military planes and ships and promised to provide all diplomatic and material assistance to the freedom movements of other Muslim states such as Algeria, Libya, Nigeria, Malaya and Morocco.

Even in the case of India which threatened to overrun Pakistan, Jinnah proposed a joint defence plan in a bid to maintain cordial relations with its neighbours and the world at large. The aforesaid examples were just a practical manifestation of Quaids larger ideology of peace within and peace without.

More recently, in line with Quaids enmity with none, and peace with all principle, Pakistan refrained from choosing sides during the Yemen conflict and offered to deescalate tensions between Iran and the US over the killing of top Iranian General Qassem Soleimani . Echoing the Quaids vision, Prime Minister Imran Khan said that Pakistan will become a country which will make peace among states.

Similarly, Pakistans role in easing the start of reconciliation talks between the Taliban insurgent group and the Kabul government to reach a political settlement to end the four decades of hostilities in its troublesome neighbour Afghanistan is noteworthy. Islamabads part in this regard was also appreciated by the government in Washington.

In addition, Pakistans firm belief in the protection of universal human rights and goodwill towards other nations of the world is further reaffirmed by the provision of more than 6000 military and police officers to the UN peacekeeping missions throughout the world making it one of the largest contributors. Pakistan also continues to highlight the plight of oppressed human beings whether they be in Kashmir, Palestine, or Myanmar on international and regional forums alike, calling all oppressors to put an end to such atrocities.

On the Indian front, incidents like the swift return of Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman in the aftermath of the Pulwama debacle and the opening of the Kartarpur Corridor to facilitate the arrival of Sikh pilgrims in the country can be termed as peaceful gestures in line with the founding fathers dream.

The countrys history has been chequered with instances where the Quaids vision has been strictly adhered to and others, where his ideals have been conveniently side-stepped in the name of national security and the broader national interest.

As evident from all the examples above, the desire for peace resonates in Quaids speeches and Pakistan in recent years has tried to uphold this ideal. However, it has been largely unsuccessful on multiple fronts as well. For instance, instead of being known as a peace-loving country, Pakistan is labelled as the mothership of terrorism. Its placement in the Financial Action Task Forces grey list has further destroyed its credibility globally.

Moreover, the countrys silence on matters such as the treatment of the Uighur Muslims in the Chinese Xinjiang region and the decision to cancel a scheduled trip to the Kuala Lumpur Summit invited rampant criticism from the masses. It also showed how Pakistan had diverged from the Quaids vision of always standing up for the downtrodden and playing a uniting role within the Muslim countries of the world.

Historically, instead of opting for a neutral stance and diffusing tensions between the two superpowers during the Cold War, Pakistan hurtled towards the US. When such an opportunity presented itself again in the form of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Pakistan, once again, became a frontline state in opposing the big red menace thereby promoting more violence and bloodshed throughout the region. Pakistan had once more, very conveniently abandoned Jinnahs ideology in pursuit of its national security interests.

Similarly, after the 9/11 incident, Pakistan took a swift U-turn to pursue a policy of full cooperation with the US thereby completely abandoning the Taliban in Afghanistan and becoming crippled by terrorism in the aftermath. Additionally, Pakistan fought three full-scale wars with India instead of resorting to diplomatic channels for a peaceful resolution of disputes and refused to recognise the newly independent state of Bangladesh.

Considering the discussion above it can be concluded that 73 years later, the countrys history has been chequered with instances where the Quaids vision has been strictly adhered to and others, where his ideals have been conveniently side-stepped in the name of national security and the broader national interest. Today, politicians, bureaucrats, armed personnel, and other important stakeholders quote separate rubrics from Jinnahs speeches to further their own perceived ideologies. This exactly is where we have gone wrong.

One can argue that the challenges faced by Pakistan during Jinnahs tenure as the Governor-General were quite different from what it faces today. However, many of the old conflicts have either taken a new shape (US tussle with China for global supremacy as opposed to the Soviet Union) or have not been resolved till now (Palestinian question).

Regardless, one wonders, what would Jinnah have done had he been alive in the contemporary political scenario? Would he have adhered to his own ideals of peaceful coexistence and friendly relations with all even in the face of the larger Saudi-Iranian rivalry or Indian atrocities in Kashmir? It seems that the need of the hour is to go back to the drawing board first to understand Jinnahs foreign policy vision objectively and then formulate relevant policies in light of that concept.

Zarmina Khan

Zarmina Khan is a Research Associate at the Strategic Studies Institute, Islamabad (SSII). She has also served as a Visiting Faculty Member at the National Defence University and Quaid-i-Azam University Islamabad. Her research interests include political ecology, conflict resolution, politics of Asia Pacific and foreign policy analysis.

• Human Rights

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Welcome! Login in to your account

Lost Password

Back to Login

• EXPRESS NEWS
• URDU E-PAPER
• ENGLISH E-PAPER
• SINDHI E-PAPER
• CRICKET PAKISTAN
• EXPRESS LIVE
• CAMPUS GURU
• EXPRESS ENTERTAINMENT
• FOOD TRIBUNE

The vision of Pakistan

Jinnah visualised neutrality of the state in religious matters, a concept essential for internal stability

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ

Allison Pearson: ‘We could be looking at the gradual Islamification of our country’ | Breaking News

Israel's Rafah Air Strikes: UN Warns of Epic Disaster Amid Rising Civilian Toll | Breaking News

U.S. Defends Biden’s Decision to Pause Bomb Shipment to Israel | Breaking News

Erdogan Slams US, Europe for Weak Response to Gaza Crisis | Latest News

Bassem Youssef and Mehdi Hasan Discuss the Israel-Palestine Issue | Breaking News

Israel Claims They Prevented Hamas from Rebuilding Military Capabilities in Jabalia | Breaking News

Bigg Boss 16 Star Abdu Rozik Gets Engaged | Breaking News

Israeli Police Clash with Anti-Government Protesters Demanding Ceasefire | Breaking News

What is a Solar Storm? | Why Northern Lights Happen | Breaking News

Flash Floods Leave Hundreds Dead in Northern Afghanistan | Afghanistan Floods | Breaking News

From sci-fi dreams to everyday realities: the impact of AI

Women and youth support Modi and the BJP

Modi’s Pakistan doctrine

PTMs and parental involvement

Power of listening

The rise and fall of Medici Bank

No strategic SOEs, minister pushes for privatization

‘Normal country’ doesn’t need IMF

Pakistan delegation visit to Kandahar ‘cancelled’ by Taliban

Alternative world order: better for Pakistan?

Cop dies in AJK clashes over high power tariff

MMA Icon Khabib’s accounts frozen due to $3 million tax debt

• Life & Style
• Prayer Timing Pakistan
• Ramazan Calendar Pakistan
• Weather Forecast Pakistan
• Online Advertising
• Subscribe to the Paper
• Style Guide
• Privacy Policy
• Code of ethics

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, redistributed or derived from. Unless otherwise stated, all content is copyrighted © 2024 The Express Tribune.

Jinnah’s Vision of Pakistan – Notes

• Publications
• Picture Gallery
• News-Events
• News Bulletin

Content on this page requires a newer version of Adobe Flash Player.

• Chairman's Message
• Introduction of Nazaria-i-Pakistan Trust
• Board Of Governors
• Members of General Council
• Members of Advisory Council
• Team Members
• Quaid-e-Azam
• Allama Iqbal
• Madar-i-Millat
• Latest News
• Research Corner
• Current Affairs
• Pakistan Essentials
• Environment
• Famous Pakistanis
• Women in Pakistan
• Summer School

Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah’s Vision of Pakistan

Mrs. iram khalid, introduction.

            The history of mankind shows that the people who change the course of events by shaping the destiny of their nation are taken as heroes and leaders. One can therefore define “national political leadership as the power exercised by an individual to push members of the polity towards action in a particular direction.”1 Haiman explains leadership as an effort on the part of a leader to direct the behaviour of others towards a particular end. He further adds: “the qualities, characteristics and skills required in a leader are determined to a large extent by the demands of the situation in which he is to function as a leader.”2

            Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah excels the criterion of a national hero and leader by dint of his intellectual capacity, a deep understanding of the political situation in the then British India and his excellent leadership qualities, which enabled him to lead a movement that transformed the Muslim Community of South Asia into a Pakistani nation. He was truly a leader of stature who left a strong imprint on the course of history. One can identify three distinct phases of his leadership career. The first phase was conterminous with period of his association with the Congress i.e. from 1906 to 1920. The second phase, which ended in 1937 and marked the beginning of his confrontation with Congress, was the main feature. The third phase, the epoch-making one, had changed the destiny of the nation, lasted from 1937 to 1947.

            In the first phase, Jinnah worked for the national freedom through Hindu-Muslim unity, with the belief that the two major communities would share the power after freedom. The nationalist Jinnah with firm Muslim identity was the main feature of this phase. The second phase comprises of two main features, the rights and interests for self determination, and getting recognition from Hindus of the Muslim entity and individuality in Indian politics. His quest for Hindu-Muslim unity, through a national pact continued all through the second phase and even in the beginning of the third one, it ended finally in about 1937-38.3 Freedom still remained the core aim but there was a dramatic change in the perception. Now the struggle was based on the idea of a separate nationalism and the partition of India. His success can be explained in terms of the combination of his drive and authority, his integrity and ability to inspire loyalty in the lieutenants, with exhilaration of the call for Pakistan.4 However in seeking power for Muslims and taking up the demand for Pakistan he took up a charismatic goal--a goal which had not only lying close to their (Muslims) hearts, ever since they had lost political power to the British, but had also haunted them.5

            Iqbal projected the vision of a ‘New World’, for the Muslims of Indo-Pakistan sub-continent. He was the pioneer to see the vision of separate homeland for the Muslims-Pakistan. It was he who convinced the Quaid to do his best for the Muslims. Jinnah, however, with his own political genius and his expert views on politics, partition issues, on economics, industry, and on the manifold problems of state carried the torch of wisdom to the culmination of this great vision. He himself was Pakistan and he put his heart and brain into the ideology.6

            He had a complete programme for his nation and visualized the basic issues and expressed his thoughts which are discussed here under:

DEMOCRACY AND ISLAM

            What was Jinnah’s vision of Pakistan? Would Pakistan be a modern democracy or a closed theocracy? Would non-Muslims be safe in it? These are some of the questions which have been asked more often than not. Since he did not write a book, the main sources of his thinking are his speeches and statements. By keeping them in mind we may be able to grasp his vision for the state he had created.

            All through the struggle, the Quaid manifested a great and firm belief in the democratic principles. A democratic journey started with the resolution of Sindh Assembly7 demanding the separation of Muslims areas from Hindu majority areas. After passing through long and many hurdles, Quaid gave it a practicle shape in 1947. All his decisions were the reflection of the party decisions. His firm belief in Islam and democratic system was evident. The main sources of his inspiration and guidance for the national effort were Islam and the Holy Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon Him). About Islam the Quaid said:

            “It is not only a religion but it contains law, philosophy and politics. In fact, it contains everything that matters to a man from morning to night. When we talk of Islam we take it as an all-embracing word. We do not mean any ill will. The foundation of our Islamic code is that we stand for liberty, equality and fraternity.”8

            In his message on the occasion of ‘Id-ul-Fitr in October 1941, he explained:

            “Islam lays great emphasis on the social side of things. Every day, the rich and the poor, the great and the small living in a locality are brought five times in a day in the mosque in the terms of perfect equality of mankind and thereby the foundation of a healthy social relationship is laid and established through prayer. At the end of Ramazan comes the new moon, the crescent as a signal for a mass gathering on the ‘Id day again in perfect equality of mankind which effects the entire Muslim world.”9

            In an ‘Id message in September 1945, the Quaid-i-Azam pointed out; The Quran is the general code for the Muslims, a religious, social, civil, commercial, military, judicial, criminal and penal code. It regulates every thing, from the ceremonies of religion to those of daily life, from the salvation of the soul to the health of the body, from the rights of all to those of each individual from morality to crime; from punishment here to that in the life to come, and our Holy Prophet Mohammad (Peace by upon Him) has enjoined on us that every Musalman should posses a copy of the Quran and be his own priest. Therefore, Islam is not merely confined to the spiritual tenets and doctrines or ritual and ceremonies. It is a complete code regulating the whole Muslim society, every department of life, collective and individual.10

            The Quaid while addressing the Bar Association of Karachi on the Holy Prophet’s birthday on 25th January 1948, said:

“Islamic principles today are as applicable to life as they were 1300 years ago….Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. Islam has taught equality, justice and fair play for every body……..let us make it (the future Constitution of Pakistan). The Prophet was a great teacher. He was a great lawgiver. He was a great statesman and he was great sovereign who ruled.”11

            The Holy Prophet Mohammad (Peace be upon Him) was successful in everything that he put his hand to from businessman to ruler. He was the greatest man that the world has ever seen. Thirteen hundred years ago he laid the foundations of democracy. With regard to the form of government in Pakistan, the Quaid said:

            “It is my belief that our salvation lies in following the golden rules of contract set for us by our own great lawgiver, the Prophet of Islam. Let us lay the foundation of our democracy on the basis of truly Islamic ideas and principles. Our Almighty has taught us that discussions and consultations shall guide our decisions in the affairs of state.”12

            Millat and the people can only frame the Constitution of Pakistan. The constitution and government will be what the people will decide.13 The Quaid was great believer of democracy. Addressing at the Session of All-India Muslim League, Delhi, 24th April, 1943, he said: “I am sure that democracy is in our blood. It is in our marrows. Only centuries of adverse circumstances have made circulation of that blood cold? But now the situation has changed.”14

            Pakistan was not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a Divine mission. There were many non-Muslims--Hindus, Christians and Parsees in Pakistan, but they were all Pakistanis and would enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizen and would play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan.15

            Another issue of great concern was to define the status of minorities in Pakistan, because in the absence of constitution, there was unrest and propaganda about the issue. But the Quaid had no confusion about this. He appointed J.N. Mandal as the Minister for Law and Labour.16

            In his Presidential Address to the Constituent Assembly he remarked:

            “You are free, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed; that has noting to do with the business of the State…….We are starting with the fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State……Now, I think that we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Mulsims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.”17

            To provide safeguards to the minorities was another important point of his great consideration. As he said, “I am going to constitute my self the protector-general of the Hindu minority in Pakistan.”18 He joined the Christmas celebrations as a guest in 1947. He met the Hindu and Parsee delegations at Karachi and Quetta respectively, and assured them of his intention to safeguard their interest.19

            Mountbatten made an interesting point in his formal speech to the Constituent Assembly on 14th August, 1947. He quoted the example of Akbar, the Great Mughal, as the model of a tolerant Muslim ruler. The Quaid, while replying, presented the more inspiring model to follow; it was that of the Holy Prophet Mohammad (Peace be upon Him). The Quaid said that the tolerance and goodwill that great emperor Akbar showed to all the non-Muslims was not of recent origin. It dated back to thirteen centuries ago when our Holy Prophet not only by words but also by deeds treated the Jews and Christians after he had conquered them, with the utmost tolerance and regard and respect for their faith and beliefs. The whole history of Muslims is replete with those human and great principles which should be followed and practiced.20

            This is vision of an Islamic society which would be equitable, compassionate and tolerant and from which the ‘cancer’ of corruption, nepotism, mismanagement and inefficiency would be eradicated. Although the Quaid had pointed out the flaws in Western style democracy, yet he always admired mutual consultation and public opinion. He never liked the title like ‘Moulana Jinnah’ or ‘Shahinshah-i-Pakistan’.

            He often called for counsel, advice and even criticism. I want you to criticize it (the Muslim League) openly as its friends, in fact, as one whose heart in beating with Muslim nation.21 He was a true democrat because he never was anything else.

NATURE OF POLITY

            The Movement of Pakistan was a peoples’ movement, involving mass participation. Yet, if the creation of Pakistan, as it is rightly insisted, was made possible by the mass support of the Muslims of the sub-continent and was the product of historical forces, it is nevertheless a fact that the battle for Pakistan was fought almost single handedly by Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the Quaid. The order of the Quaid’s mission compelled a blind following of people and his integrity was their total trust.22

            Notwithstanding anything else, the most important and difficult task faced by the hastened state of Pakistan was to define its exact character. Although the struggle had created basic unity among different groups, yet such questions as the form of federation, form of government and status of minorities, etc. remained unanswered. Here the Quaid’s statements, became our guiding principles.

            The Federating Principles: In an interview given to the representative of the Associated Press of America on 8th November 1945, the Quaid said that the theory of Pakistan guaranteed that the federated units of the national government would have all the autonomy that you will find in the Constitutions of the United States of America, Canada and Australia. But certain vital powers will remain vested in the Central Government.23

            Although the Quaid firmly believed in a strong centre, yet according to him, the actual source of strength was the will of people.24 According to Quaid the will of the people could be ascertained only through the system of direct elections as a reused of which the appropriate man could be taken as the representative of the people.25

            Another important feature, which he discussed, was the establishment of political parties. He was neither in favour of one party government, nor a partyless system. He visualized a system of competing political parties working within the constitution and democratic framework.26

            Provincialism was a great curse. The Quaid had a clear perception over this issue. He said, “Islam has taught us this and I think you will agree with me that whatever else you may be and whatever you are, you are a Muslim. You belong to a nation now; you have now carved out a territory, a vast territory, it is all yours, it does not belong to a Punjabi or a Sindhi or a Pathan, or a Bengali, it is yours.”27 The Quaid always remained impartial. He himself was neither a Punjabi nor a Sindhi.

            Fundamental rights to all, was another important matter of concern near the Quaid. It was generally said that it was the US Constitution which gives the basic fundamental written rights to citizens but the Quaid believed that it is the Quran where one could find all the details of human rights. According to Quaid-i-Azam the demand and struggle for Pakistan had proved mainly that there was a danger of denial of these fundamental human rights in the Indian sub-continent.28

            Independent judiciary was the basic need of time as it was the only platform to judge the status of common man, because it alone could protect and enforce all the rights. Throughout his life, the Quaid believed that the law courts alone should decide the question of citizen’s right.29

On 6th February, 1919 while taking part in discussion in the Legislative Council, Jinnah said, “I am a firm believer that no man’s liberty should be taken away for a single minute without a proper inquiry.”30 On 28th January, 1925 speaking in the Central Legislative Council he said, “my liberty, should not be taken away without a judicial trial in proper court where I have all the rights to defend my self.”31

            Commitment to democracy was the basic spirit behind Quaid’s whole life. Discussions, debates, dialogues, arguments and logic were the weapons that he used in convincing his political opponents and the foreign power that the British should go honourably from the sub-continent. His long parliamentary career with the principled experience as a lawyer made him to believe that it was the legislative supremacy that could safeguard the future of democracy.

CONSTITUTIONALISM

            The term has two related meanings. One, concerning Constitutionalism as practice, and the other as the positive valuation of practice.32 Constitutionalism as practice is the ordering of political processes and institutions on the basis of a constitution. The term valuation refers to the idea of those who wish to preserve or introduce the political supremacy of a constitution within a particular state. stress is laid on the ‘Rule of Law’ as a fundamental concept from, which Constitutionalism is derived.33

            Constitutionalism is the product of the European political experience, which recognizes the principle that governments are derived from the will of people organized the principle into societies which are mindful of their rights as well as obligations.34 Quaid’s aim was to build Pakistan into a constitutional democracy. He believed that there was no contradiction between an Islamic State and a polity governed according to modern democratic principles. Constitutionalism is at the very heart of Islamic teachings. Fairness, justice, compassion and honesty are all tenets of Islam.

            The Muslims, it is worth which to remember, had all along been taken for granted as a peaceful community because they had, except during the Khilafat Movement, restricted themselves to Constitutionalism and had never taken to streets or even threatened the British with a revolutionary movement.35

            To build a new country, to establish a stable government and to have a programme for development…was the ambition. But Pakistan faced civil strife, the struggle with India in Kashmir, the influx of millions of terrified refugees, the lack of experienced administration, an empty treasury and almost no material resources; the task was indeed difficult.36

            Quaid was the strong believer of ‘Rule of Law’. His firm stand on the Rowlet Act. 191937 and winning the objective without any bloodshed offer a unique example watched by history. He being the lawyer had a clear mind and firm belief in constitutional measures. Time only proved his style for struggle.

            In April (1947) Lord Mountbatten issued a Peace Appeal; Gandhi and Quaid-i-Azam signed it. It was broadcast from Delhi. But the Sikhs raised funds to get arms and ammunition in order to do away with the Muslims. Muslims also appealed to the Quaid-i-Azam, to allow them to react. But the Quaid remarked;

            “I cannot be a hypocrite. I have just signed the Peace Apeal and I expect Muslims to observe the spirit of the appeal.”38

The Redcliff Award also showed Quaid’s firm stand on the performance. Their negative attitude and action forced the Muslims to try to convince the Quaid to show any reaction or protest against the violation, but he said, “No, we agreed to arbitration, we must abide by that arbitration.”39

            So throughout his struggle, he believed in positive and constitutional approach. He always demanded for reforms to change the ruling pattern of British Government. Participation of local people in the power structure, and the laws, which may provide some safeguards to the separate identity of Muslims, were the themes of his struggle.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC JUSTICE

            Pakistan was to be a state with liberal Muslim posture having strong belief in democratic values. The spirit behind the theme was to provide socio-economic justice to the Muslims who faced the crucial moments of Hindu exploitation under British rule. The Quaid was fully aware of these circumstances. He had always, strongly believed to enforce the basic principle of Islamic economic system in Pakistan. It was closer in its spirit to modern concept of welfare state. It base was to opt the moderate way, just to avoid the excessiveness of uncontrolled economy and that of socialist doctrine. The Quaid believed that economic development and economic power were the most important of all the departments of life.

            His vision was based on the geo-economic importance of Pakistan. If Pakistan wished to play its proper role in the world, it must develop its industrial potential side by side with its agriculture he believed.40

            On the occasion of laying the foundation stone of the building of the Valika Textile Mills Ltd, he expressed:

            “…….I thought that in planning your factory, you have provided for proper residential accommodation and other amenities for the workers, for no industry can thrive without contented labour.”41

            Speaking at a public reception at Chittagong; the Quaid said: “Pakistan should be based on sure foundations of social justice and Islamic socialism which emphasis equality and brotherhood of man….These are the basic points of our religion, culture and civilization.”

            He further said:

“The people of Pakistan will not mind making sacrifices in order to make our state in the future a really strong and stable state so that we can handle more effectively and with ease our programme, specially for the uplift of the masses.”42

            The Quaid-i-Azam had strong reservations about Western capitalist model of economy. He remarked that:

            “The economic system of the West has created almost insolvable problems for humanity…..The adoption of Western economic theory and practice will not help us in achieving our goal of creating a happy and contented people. We must work our destiny in our way and present the world an economic system, based on true Islamic concept of equality and social justice.”43

            The paramount objective of Pakistan’s economic policy was to do a lot for the poor. The Quaid envisaged; “The Muslims were asking for Pakistan. If the government did not mean the equality of manhood, what would be the use of it? The purpose of whole struggle was that we want to do everything that is possible for the poor.”44

FOREIGN POLICY

            At the time of independence there were two factors in Pakistan’s foreign policy. Firstly, her geographical position, especially her contiguity to India; secondly, her feeling of kinship with other Muslim countries.45 Pakistan, though a new country, has stepped naturally into international life with the confidence derived from the enjoyment of a great Islamic heritage of practical experience.46

            The original pattern of external relations given by Quaid-i-Azam is still valid today. Pakistan joined the United Nations in September 1947, as a new member. Pakistani leadership was emphasizing friendship with all, promotion of peace and harmony, support to the oppressed people of the world, and a strict observance of the principles of international conduct, as enshrined in the UN Charter. The Quaid expressed a strong desire to develop friendly relations with other states on the eve of his meeting with the special representative of the King of Afghanistan in December 1947. Similar views were reiterated when the first ambassadors of Burma (January 1948), France (January 1948), the US (February 1948), and Turkey (March 1948) presented their credentials.47 Outlining the goals of foreign policy, he declared:

            “Our foreign policy is one of the friendliness and goodwill towards the nations of the world. We do not cherish aggressive designs against any country or nation. We believe in the principle of honesty and fairplay in national and international dealings and are prepared to make our utmost contribution to the promotion of peace and prosperity among the nations of the world. Pakistan will never be found lacking in extending its material and moral support to the oppressed and suppressed people of the world, and in upholding the principles of the United Nations Charter.”48

            The Quaid had an unflinching faith in the earnest human effort. He had great faith in Muslims and their sheer dedication, desiring no aid or assistance from the outsiders. After Pakistan came into being, he said in reply to the speech of the American Ambassador, “The people of Pakistan desire nothing that is not their own, nothing more than the goodwill and friendship of all the free nations of the World.”49

            The Quaid also emphasized the need for harmony, unity of purpose and complete understanding among all the people of Asia, particularly of the Muslims, as that would be a great contribution to the peace and prosperity of the World.50

            In his message to the nation on the occasion of the inauguration of the Pakistan Broadcasting Service on August 15, 1947, he said:

            “Our object should be peace within and peace without. We want to live peacefully and maintain cordial and friendly relations with our immediate neighbors and with the World at large. We have no aggressive designs against any one. We stand by the United Nations Charter and will gladly make our full contribution to the peace and prosperity of the World.”51

            The Quaid, in an interview given to a Swiss journalist, on March 11, 1948, in answer to the question whether there is any hope of India and Pakistan coming to a peaceful settlement of their own with regard to their differences, he said:

            “Yes, provided the Indian Government will shed the superiority complex and will deal with Pakistan on an equal footing and fully appreciate the realities.”52

            He was the great supporter of the cause of self – determination and the movement for liberation whether it might be in Palestine, Indonesia or Kashmir.

DEFENCE POLICY

            Although Pakistan’s foreign policy was based on full support of peace and adherence to the U.N. Charter, yet in the presence of an aggressive and hostile neighbour, it could not afford to neglect its defence. A weak and defenceless country in this imperfect World invites aggression from others. The best way to remove the temptation from those who thought that Pakistan was weak and they could bully and attack her was and indeed still is to build a strong deterrent force.53

            On January 23, 1948, while addressing the establishment of H.M.P.S ‘Dilawar’, the Quaid said:

            “It was the need of the time to be fully prepared against the aggressive designs. Nature’s inexorable law is the survival of the fittest. Pakistan’s armed forces, were the custodians of the life, property and honour of the people of Pakistan: they were the most vital of all Pakistan’s services.”54

CIVIL SERVICES

            It was the normal practice of the colonial power (the British) to use the administration to control the people in order to prolong their stay. They did it very positively. They organized civil services not only to frame the policies but to implement them also. Quaid’s aim was to change the mind-set of this institution. For that purpose he suggested:

            “Are we going to allow ourselves to be overwhelmed by the immensity of the task that is confronting us and let our new-born state founder under the cruel and dastardly blows stuck by our enemies?

            This is challenge to our very existence and if we are to survive as a nation and are to translate our dreams about Pakistan into reality we shall have to grapple with the problems facing us with redoubled zeal and energy.”55

            Giving guidelines to the civil servants, the Quaid advised thus:

            “Whatever community, cast or creed you belong to, you are now the servants of Pakistan. The days have gone when the country was ruled by the bureaucracy. It is people’s government, responsible to the people more or less on democratic lines and parliamentary practice.” He made some basic points that: “You have to do your duty as servants; you are not concerned with this political or that political party, that is not your business.”

            “The other important thing was that of your conduct and dealing with the people in various departments in which you may be; wipe off the past reputation; you are not rulers. You do not belong to the ruling class; you are their servants and friends, maintain the highest standard of honour, integrity, justice and fair play.”56

            It is obvious from his point of view that he believed in the supremacy of common man. He was focusing the point that this institution may serve the common people in spite of serving the elite.

            Education is not only an important pillar for development but also the basic condition for the success of democracy. The Muslims are religiously bound to get education. This is necessary in order to lay sound basis for political culture, political socialization and recruitment of political system of the country. Quaid had complete belief in students throughout the movement for independence.

            Pakistan’s educational policy, therefore, aim at must not only distributing of degrees but it must have its emphasis on development projects. Pakistani students could learn banking, commerce, trade, etc. New industries and commercial firms could provide new chance to the young. The need was for mobilizing the people and building up the character of future generations. There was an urgent need for training the people in scientific and technical education in order to build up the economic life of the country. The Quaid focused that it should not be forgotten that Pakistan had to compete with the world which was moving very fast in that direction.58

            While delivering a speech at a public meeting, at Dacca on 21st March, 1948, he advised the students in these words:

            “I look forward to you as the makers of Pakistan, do not be exploited and do not be misled. Create amongst yourself complete unity and solidarity,…..Your main occupation should be….in fairness to yourself, in fairness to your parents, in fairness to the State…..to devote your attention to your studies.59

            While giving the guidelines for future he expressed: (Reply to address presented by the students of Islamia College on 12th April, 1948.)

            “You must learn to distinguish between your love for your Province and your love and duty to the State as a whole. Our duty to the State takes us a stage beyond provincialism. It demands a broader sense of vision, and greater sense of patriotism. Our duty to the State often demands that we must be ready to submerge our individual or provincial interests unto the common cause for common good. Our duty to the State comes first; our duty to our Province, to our district, to our town and to our village and ourselves comes next. Remember we are building up a State, which is going to play its full part in the destinies of the whole Islamic World….We must develop a sense of patriotism, which should galvanize and weld us all into one strong nation.”60

            He exhorted the students to keep away from politics during their studies. After completing it, however, they had to play an important role in nation building activities.

STATUS OF WOMEN

            Quaid-i-Azam championed the cause of womanhood and advocated for women an equal share with men in social and national life. The following quotation throws ample light on the views of the father of the Nation:

            “In the great task of building the nation and to maintain its solidarity, women have a most valuable part to play. They are the prime architects of the character of the youth who constitute the backbone of the State. I know that in the long struggle for the achievement of Pakistan, Muslim women have stood solidly behind their men. In the bigger struggle for the building up of Pakistan that now lies ahead let it not be said that the women of Pakistan had lagged behind or failed in their duty.”61

            He always appreciated the role of women in Pakistan Movement. He always took his sister, Miss Fatimah Jinnah, everywhere he had to go. He did so because he believed that an ignorant women could not bring up the child properly. If Muslims wanted to do some thing then they must give proper status to the women.

            The Quaid’s personality is a reflection of a leader with strong ideas and firm beliefs in struggle through constitutional reforms. His vision and leadership changed the destiny of his nation, geography of the sub-continent had introduced new trends to get independence without using destructive measures as bloodshed or going to the jail.

            He emphasized a liberal and tolerant Islam, socio-economic justice, a participatory and democratic polity, constitutionalism, rule of law, equality of opportunities irrespective of caste, creed, religion or sex, and opportunities for education and development of natural and inherent qualities of the people. The people should think and act as Pakistanis and the State must have a sound foreign and defence policy, he mentioned.

Search for national identity and integration is the main problem in the way of political development. Scholars have traced several distinguished trends which appear to be associated with the process of political development, such as, increased complexity, specialization of political role, institution, the enlargement of an educated political elite and the increased politicization of the population through mass parties. So, the emergence of national, rather than parochial, political issues and of interests concerned with these issues, urbanization, economic growth and the increasing interrelationship of the political, social and economic spheres of society are some of the aspects which might develop our country into a strong and modern Islamic state.

            The Quaid emphasized on the following three workable principles to meet with such complex situations:

UNITY, FAITH AND DISCIPLINE

            Unity can solve the problem of fragmentation in Pakistani society. The curse of provincialism, parochialism and ethnicity can be solved only through the promotion of unity. A strong Faith and strict discipline can inculcate and promote the feelings of nationhood in the citizens.

            Islam has given the basic guidelines for every sphere of life. Being the true follower of these guidelines, the Quaid visualized Pakistan as a liberal Islamic democratic polity with socio-economic justice. Political participation, interest articulation and interest aggregation must be performed through constitutional institutions and processes. The State should perform the function of political communication by giving the full rights of criticism and opposition to all its citizens.

            Rule of Law must be manifested through all activities performed by the government. Status of minorities and women must be safeguarded by the State.

            For the future the Quaid said:

“Nature has given you everything. You have got unlimited resources. The foundations of your State have been laid, and it is now for you to build, and build as quickly as you can. So go ahead I wish you God Speed.”62

Reference:     Pakistan Vision (Quaid-i-Azam Number) Vol. II, Nos. 1 & 2,Jan-Jul 2001 Publisher:       Pakistan Study Centre, University of the Punjab, Lahore. 2001

Notes and References

• Jean Blondel, Comparative Government : An Introduction, London: Prentice Hall, 1995, p. 29.
• Haiman, Group, Leadership and Democratic Action, USA: Hougton Mifflin Company, 1951, pp. 5-6.
• Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah, Studies in Interpretation, Karachi: Quaid-i-Azam Academy, 1981, pp. 837-39.
• Ibid., p, 42.
• Ibid., p, 44.
• Jamil-ud-din Ahmed, The Final Phase of Struggle for Pakistan, Lahore: Publishers United Ltd., 1975, p. 138
• Muhammad Ali Sheikh, (ed.), Role of Sindh in Creation of Pakistan, Karachi: Ministry of Education, Government of Pakistan, 1998, pp.15-16.
• S.M. Burke, and Salim Al-Din Qureshi, Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah His personality and His Politics, Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1967, p. 367.
• Jamil-ud-Din Ahmed, Speeches and Statements of Mr. Jinnah, Lahore M. Ashraf, 1968, pp. 208-209.
• Mr. Rafique Afzal, Speeches and Statements of the Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Lahore: Research Society of Pakistan, 1966, pp. 455-56.
• S.M. Burke, op. cit; p. 369.
• Rizwan Ahmed, Sayings of Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Karachi; Royal Book Company, 1986, p. 100.
• Akbar S. Ahmed, Jinnah, Pakistan and Islamic Identity, Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1997, pp. 175-76.
• Salahuddin Khan, Had There Been No Jinnah, Islamabad, Pan Graphics, 1989, p. 108.
• Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Speeches and Statements as Governor General of Pakistan, 1947-48, Islamabad: Government of Pakistan, 1989, p.42.
• Akbar S.M. op, cit., p. 174.
• Khalid Bin Saeed, Pakistan, The Formative Phase, 1857-1948, Lahore: Oxford University Press, 1969, p. 276.
• Akbar S.M. op, cit., p. 176.
• Sharif-ul-Majahid, op, cit., P. 153.
• Hamid Yousaf, Pakistan, A Study of Political Development 1947-97, Lahore: Maktaba Jadeed press, 1998, p. 167.
• Akram Azam, Pakistan’s Ideology and Ideologies, Lahore: Progressive Publishers, 1982, p. 167.
• Mehmood Ali Shah and Naudir Bakht, “Quaid’s Views on the System of Government for Pakistan,” The Journal of Political Science, Vol. IX, Nos. 1-2, 1986.
• Interview to the APA, 8th November, 1945, Quaid-i-Azam, A Chronology, Karachi: Quaid-i-Azam Academy, 1981, p. 113.
• Rizwan Ahmed, op, cit., p 93
• Prof. Muhammad Muzaffar Mirza, The Great Quaid, Lahore: Feroz Sons Pvt. Ltd., 1995, pp. 218, 219.
• Ibid., p. 219
• Ibid., p 230
• Mushtaq Ahmed, Jinnah and After, Karachi: Royal Book Company, 1994, p. 16.
• Muhammad Muzaffar, op, cit., p. 230.
• Geoffrey, K Roberts, A Dictionary of Political Analysis, Bucks: Hazell Watson, 1971, p. 49.
• Lawrence Ziring, Pakistan the Enigma of Political Development, England: Dawson Westview, 1980, pp. 34-35.
• Sharif-ul-Majahid, op, cit., p. 154.
• Ahmed Hussain, Pakistan Political Development, Nigeria: 1979, p. 120.
• Riaz Ahmed, Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah, Karachi: 1981, p. 13.
• Kh. A Haye, ‘The Quaid-i-Azam Jinnah as a Constitutionalist; Essays on Quaid-i-Azam” M.H Siddiqui, (ed.) Lahore; Shahzad Publishers, 1976, p. 37.
• S.M. Burke, op, cit., p. 370
• Speeches by Quaid-i-Azam, op. cit., p. 2.3
• Speeches as Governor General, op. cit, pp. 160-161
• S.M Burke, op. cit., p.370.
• Richard Symonds, The making of Pakistan, Islamabad: Ministry of Education, Government of Pakistan,. 1967, p. 170.
• L.F. Rushbrook Williams, The State of Pakistan, London: Faber and Faber, 1962, p. 115.
• Hasan Askari Rizvi, “Major Phases of Pakistan’s Foreign Policy” Pakistan Journal of History and Culture, Vol. XIII, No. 1, January – June 1992, pp, 74-75.
• Quaid-i-Azam, Speeches as Governor General, op, cit., p. 65.
• Safdar Mahmood and Javid Zafar, Founders of Pakistan, Lahore; Progressive Publishers, 1968, p. 248.
• Selected Speeches and Statements of the Quaid, 1911-34 and 1947-1948,
• Speeches by Quaid-i-Azam, op. cit., p. 55.
• Speeches as Governor General. Op. cit., p. 163.
• S.M. Burke, op, cit; p. 372.
• Speeches as Governor General, op. cit., p. 123.
• Ibid., pop. 223-224
• Stanley Wolpert, Jinnah of Pakistan, Lahore: Oxford University Press, 1993, p. 361.
• Mukhtar Zaman, Student’s Role in the Pakistan Movement, Karachi, M.A. Arff Printers, 1978, pp. 17-18
• S.M. Burke, op, cit., 370.
• Rizwan Ahmed. Op, cit., p. 100
• Sheila Mc. Donough, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, America; D.C. Health and Company, 1970, p. 17.
• M.H. Saiyid, Muhammad Ali Jinnah: A Political Study, Karachi: Elite Publishers Ltd., 1970, p. 328.

Social Media Profiles

• Pakistan Movement
• Quaid-i-Azam
• Our Pakistan
• Qaumi Tarana
• Pictures Gallery

What you want to ask?