BAHRIA UNIVERSITY

ISLAMABAD CAMPUS

Subject: ‘Pakistan and Geo-

Political Studies’

An Assignment on

‘Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s speech on 11th

August 1947’

Name : Muhammad Arsam

Enrollment no : 01-111181-070

Class: BBA 7A

ANALYSIS:
How we all have let down Jinnah :

Hopes were high when Jinnah presided over the Constituent Assembly in 1947 and declared
without doubt that freedom of speech to be respected. It was his wish to lift up the economic
and politically deprived Muslims from their backwardness that led to the support of many non-
Muslim minority activists as well, notably Christians. In a time where major Muslim political
groupings allied themselves with the Indian National Congress, the Christians in their legislation
secured Jinnah the desired support the All India Muslim League needed.
His close friends and those amongst the founding fathers of Pakistan also belonged to minority
groups. The first Law Minister Jogendra Nath Mandal is a Hindu from Bengal; his secretary and
later the Chief Justice of Pakistan Alvin Robert Cornelius belonged to the Catholic Church. The
long time, highly admired Foreign Minister Mr Muhammad Zafrullah Khan belonged to the
Ahmadi sect. In addition, Jinnah himself belonged to the Shia denomination and many of the
top leaders of the Pakistan movement were from the Shia, Ismaili and Ahmadi camps.

Each nation suffers from religious, ethnic and communal violence. But handled properly, the
culprits are caught and punished. Authorities make examples of such wrongdoers and reduce
the risk of such acts taking place again. But when the state fails to bring justice and punishment
through its legislation, and the judiciary which acquits 3 in 4 cases of sectarian terrorism, then
there is little hope for help.

There are many theories on what the ideology of Pakistan is; the most popular theory, which
was quite unknown as long as Jinnah was alive, is that the country was created and destined to
be an Islamic state. The ground reality, although that was the driving force, behind the Pakistan
movement was the fight for the rights of minorities.

Jinnah believed in Hindu-Muslim unity, but was disaffected when the Nehru dominated camp in
the Indian National Congress refused to agree on separate electorates for minorities. One thing
led to the other, and we had an outcome which divided the subcontinent.

The main essence is that Pakistan was created to protect the minorities of India. And hence,
the ideology of Pakistan is to protect its minorities in order to prove its existence. Our mere
existence on the map is not to be the eternal enemy of India, or to have influence in Kabul, it is
merely to protect our minorities. If they are well, all is well. If they are threatened, then we
have failed. And at our current standing, we have failed Jinnah and Pakistan miserably.

Did Pakistan's founder Jinnah want to create an Islamic or a secular state? The question divides
Pakistanis even after 66 years of their country's independence. Some say Jinnah was not very
clear about it himself

Pakistan was probably never as divided as it is today between Islamists and liberals. What kind
of state should Pakistan be? Should it be secular or Islamic? Did its founder Muhammad Ali
Jinnah - whose 137th birthday was on December 25 - want to establish an Islamic state or a
majority-Muslim country where religious minorities and non-believers also enjoyed equal
rights? It seems that even after 66 years of their independence from the British colonial rule,
Pakistanis are still unclear about how their country should be.

Even many people who do not want Taliban-style Islamist rule in their country, want to see
their state ruled by Islamic laws to some extent. These people oppose secularism and the
Western way of life in Pakistan and make up the majority of Pakistanis. They claim that Jinnah
and his All-India Muslim League party envisioned a purely theocratic state, a separate country
for Indian Muslims governed by shariah law. For six decades, Pakistan's rulers have been
endorsing and propagating this narrative in one form or another.

Liberal Pakistanis believe the idea that Pakistan should be a theocratic state is dangerous and
has been responsible for the rise of umpteen militant Islamist movements in the country. They
say that Jinnah was a whisky-swigging, Western-educated liberal and had no desire to create an
intolerant Islamic state. Progressive - mostly urbanite and educated - Pakistanis see their space
further shrinking in the country, and the rise of Islamism in the country worries them
tremendously.

Since the independence of Pakistan, people have always been a victim of that favouritism and
nepotism. Where relatives of a powerful figure ascend to similar power. Moreover, Politics had
been used for personal interest rather than the country’s benefit and development. If one has a
glance on the history of Pakistan, in the era of Sikander Mirza who was the governor-general of
Pakistan at that time. He dismissed five prime ministers within the span of three years from
1955 to 1958 and made premiership a joke. His first target was Mohammad Ali Bogra who was
replaced by Chaudhry Muhammad Ali but within one year he was also replaced by Hussain
Shaheed Suharwardi then he was replaced by Ibrahim Ismail Chandigarh. After two months, he
was also dismissed and on his place, Malik Feroz Noon became the prime minister of Pakistan.
This incident was a shame for our country’s democracy. On this, Prime Minister of India Nehru
ironically commented that “I don’t change Dhooti as fast as Pakistan changes its Prime
Ministers”. He didn’t concern about Country’s image but only cares for his interest and left a
stain on the history of Pakistan.

In Pakistan social injustice is a prevalent feature. Citizens of Pakistan are unaware of social
justice concept and its effects on society. Pakistan’s civil and military rulers and elite class have
been plundering this country since independence. They have always been claiming that they
are pious and others are corrupt. Military rulers in their own way are not playing their decisive
role which they are destined to be. The desire for power turns them to jump in the shoes of
politicians. Most of the wealth of Pakistan is in the hands of a few feudal-cum-politicians, who
maintained their feudal power by entering into politics. The dynastic politics also creates
disparity in power sharing where the power rests in a few families even the political parties are
more personified than knowing for having particular manifesto.

Today, Pakistan is standing at the brink of collapse where there is a notion developing among
the common Pakistanis that the country might vanish from the map of the world if reviving
measures would not taken before time. The unkind fact is that poorer is getting poorer and
richer is getting richer, the poverty line is stretching, rich-poor divide is widening but
policymakers are firm at their point. All governments of Pakistan have always played with the
statistics and tell the nation that we are better off under their regime than the previous ones.
Even falsified statistics were used to prove their point. Instead of providing justice, improving
economic conditions of the masses and decreasing the class difference in society, they are busy
in finding legs to stand upon their lies as truth.