The first dictatorship - Pakistan 1948-1958.

Kaptaan

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
749
Reaction score
1,796
Points
93
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Pakistan
Generally speaking most people regard the coup of Gen. Ayub Khan in 1958 as the first dictatorship in Pakistan's history. But is that so? To answer that question let us ask ourselves what dictatorship means.

"a form of government in which a ruler or small clique wield absolute power. Clique meaning a small close-knit group of people who do not readily allow others to join them"

The argumant I will make here is that Pakistan by definition had a form of dictatorship imposed on it after the death of Jinnah in 1948. No general elections and this is important to note, no general elections were held in the decade 1948-1958. To make my point I want to contrast this decade with India. Please refer to the infographic below.

Political dictatorship 2.png

As can be seen India effected a constitution by 1950 which still is in force. Prime Minister Nehru stood in the 1952 General Election and his Congress Party won. Exactly 5 years later in 1957 India had it's second General Election and PM Nehru won for the second time.

During this entire decade Pakistan did NOT even have one general election. A unelected political clique ran the country largely on administrative fiat. Non of the ruling clique had the elective mandate of the people. This descibes the definition of a dictatorship as given above.

TK.png

The political dictatorship over this decade avoided general elections but were involved in game of intrigue and plotted against each other for power grab. In the game of music chairs four prime ministers were appointed and removed. Rule of the country was neglected and next door in India PM Nehru joked Pakistan changes PM's more regularly then I change underpants. In 1954 President Iskander appointed Gen Ayub as his defence minister. Instead of going to the public and testing their mandate thus gaining political legitimacy the clique began using the army to sustain it's dictatorship. In any democracy instability normally leads to elections being declared so that the public can let their views expressed.

Instead the ruling clique fought out for power between itself by sacking and making alliances but assidiously avoiding the MANDATE of the Pakistani public. Thus clearly Pakistan was a dictatorship from 1948-1958. It is instructive to note that as his power ebbed President Iskander Mirza began relying more on the army. In 1958 in desperation, when he should have declared general elections and let the people decide as is norm in any democracy the President declared martial law and appointed Gen Ayub to lead it.

As we know rest is history. The Praetorian Guard had been invited to seat of power. And as we know as the martial law administrator Gen Ayub just pushed President Iskander off the chair and made himself comfortable. Pakistan had got it's SECOND dictatorship. Only this time it would be a MILITARY dictatorship. So to sum this -

  • 1948-1959 Political dictatorship by a clique
  • 1958-1969 Military dictatorship by Gen Ayub Khan

*As noted earlier it would take Pakistan full 23 years from 1947 in 1970 when it got it's FIRST general election.
 

Yankeestani

Contributor
Joined
Sep 3, 2020
Messages
650
Reaction score
843
Points
93
Website
twitter.com
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
Pakistan
I sometimes wonder what would Pakistan would look like if the 1950 Rawalpindi conspiracy actually was succesful at times I know the topic here is mostly about the ML one Party reign from 1947-1958 I say that and the Obejective Resoloutions what put Pakistan on its current path
 

Kaptaan

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
749
Reaction score
1,796
Points
93
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Pakistan
1947-1958
The thing is it is fashion now to blame everything on the army today. Apparently all evils began the day in 1958 when Gen. Ayub Khan took over as the military dictator. What this intentionally ignores is that Pakistan already had a civilian dictatorship from 1948 and full decade to 1958 when the army took over. In this time as IU contrasted India managed to enact a constitution, hold two general elections in a country vastly larger and diverse than Pakistan. Nehru was a unrivalled politician in India yet he went to the polls twice to get mandate from the people.

Yet in Pakistan during this rule by a unelected clique Pakistan was inflicted with Objectives Resolution which effectively opened the Pandoras Box of religious extremism and mullah politics. No surprises that soon after in 1951 Pakistan had Ahmedi riots. The ruling clique assidiously avoided general elections like Count Dracula avoids the sunshine. Instead the ruling elite indulged in backdoor intrigue and managed to appoint and fire 4 Prime Ministers over ten years with not one having been mandated by the people of Pakistan via a general election. The ballot boxes stayed formly locked by these so called democrats.

This clique of dicators used religion, mullahs and administrative machine to rule the people. Then when things began to get shsky they even brought the army in to butrress their illgitimate rule. They failed to even give the country a functioning constitution. Instead these power hungry autocrats foght between themselves neglecting the crucial period in Pakistan's history when nation building should have been the top agenda.

Today many people blame all that ills Pakistan on the army. What a convenient scapegoat. They ignore the period that primed Pakistan for military dicatorships. From dictatorship to military dictators is a natural progression.

But hey "it's the army, the army, the army the army" even if erection is not achieved !!!

@Saiyan0321 @VCheng @Nilgiri
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Canada Moderator
India Moderator
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
2,802
Reaction score
5,886
Points
113
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
The thing is it is fashion now to blame everything on the army today. Apparently all evils began the day in 1958 when Gen. Ayub Khan took over as the military dictator. What this intentionally ignores is that Pakistan already had a civilian dictatorship from 1948 and full decade to 1958 when the army took over. In this time as IU contrasted India managed to enact a constitution, hold two general elections in a country vastly larger and diverse than Pakistan. Nehru was a unrivalled politician in India yet he went to the polls twice to get mandate from the people.

Yet in Pakistan during this rule by a unelected clique Pakistan was inflicted with Objectives Resolution which effectively opened the Pandoras Box of religious extremism and mullah politics. No surprises that soon after in 1951 Pakistan had Ahmedi riots. The ruling clique assidiously avoided general elections like Count Dracula avoids the sunshine. Instead the ruling elite indulged in backdoor intrigue and managed to appoint and fire 4 Prime Ministers over ten years with not one having been mandated by the people of Pakistan via a general election. The ballot boxes stayed formly locked by these so called democrats.

This clique of dicators used religion, mullahs and administrative machine to rule the people. Then when things began to get shsky they even brought the army in to butrress their illgitimate rule. They failed to even give the country a functioning constitution. Instead these power hungry autocrats foght between themselves neglecting the crucial period in Pakistan's history when nation building should have been the top agenda.

Today many people blame all that ills Pakistan on the army. What a convenient scapegoat. They ignore the period that primed Pakistan for military dicatorships. From dictatorship to military dictators is a natural progression.

But hey "it's the army, the army, the army the army" even if erection is not achieved !!!

@Saiyan0321 @VCheng @Nilgiri

I agree with lot of what you said (in this initial period creating a huge amount of downstream issues still felt today).... I for one don't simply end with "its the army, army army....khaki khaki khaki" thing...they just have harnessed a bigger issue persisting....in probably the way an institution of their size/relevance/nationalist intent etc inevitably would.

It is why I always thumbs up and agree when you bring up this period when you say army-khaki is not the thing to be blamed....as you are indeed digging deeper into the "what" and "why" of it (though we may disagree where it ultimately stems from too, thats fine).

To flesh this out more (from my perspective), I will first let you guys discuss it out more.

Let me tag @Joe Shearer too, if he is interested when he is on his next round here.
 

Saiyan0321

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
Pakistan Moderator
Joined
Aug 26, 2020
Messages
995
Reaction score
1,404
Points
93
Nation of residence
Pakistan
Nation of origin
Pakistan
A very interesting article @Kaptaan.



The period between 1948-1958 has been one which I have loved to study because alot of insinuations about pakistan are linked to this period rather than to their appropriate periods and alot of insinuations which should be linked to this period are ignored.



There are two questions and an invite of discussion here.



The discussion is about what happened during the period of 1948-1958 perhaps more apt would be 1949-1958 since post kashmir war must be studied.



The two questions are



Whether the governments in power could be categorized as dictatorship?



Whether akbar khan's coup would have changed the destiny of pakistan?



Allow me to add a third one for study



Was a coup necessary or were the conditions solvable?



Be advised that these questions will gather different answers from different people. Students of history, sociology, legal studies, would all give different answers depending on whether they stand so for such answers we must try to focus on historical facts as much as possible and perhaps not answer at all and let the reader decide the answer.





I would begin with the discussion of history.



So when pakistan was formed what was the constitutional structure of the country. The British empire left the subcontinent with two countries but the two countries had a rich constitutional history and an administrative structure that requires there, to be present an interim constitution and for this framework the british held that the following shall act as the constitutional setup till the two countries formed their own constitutions.



The government of India act 1935



The independence act 1947



The british also knew that post separation there would be a need for a central legislature and thus formed that the constituent assembly shall act as the federal legislature and in a centralized system, the federal legislature was very strong and this would work with the governor general.



Pakistan saw jinnah become the first governor general. Now jinnah had basically run the muslim league for more than a decade. He was the towering figure and he knew that nobody else had any capability to be a national leader. Even liaqat could not be called a national leader. India was blessed with alot of things but the most notably and underrated was the huge pool of national leaders. Pakistan only had jinnah whereas the rest were either regional leaders or simply not interested in the pakistan project.

So when jinnah took charge as the governor general, he basically ran the show which was fine since it actually allowed for some level of stability to come to the new country. His division of duties and work, visiting each and every sector of the administration and the state itself did create an air of stability within the country. Unfortunately his was to be a short one and lost his demise, the country was orphaned. Liaqat Ali, whose was both an ambitious politician and a bit above his peers, took the reins and there we begin post kashmir war.

The quest for Pakistan had united many politicians and figures across the region and these men had focused on a single goal and stood united where they saw themselves cornered however with Pakistan made, both the threat and the goal were gone. These politicians, judges, bureaucracy all immediately went back to their petty interests and focused entirely on their self-preservation. Within this self-preservation there were those that had little to no ground roots in the now region of Pakistan. This can be exemplified with the fact that In 1946– 1947, of the twenty three members of the League Working Committee, only ten belonged to areas that became part of Pakistan.

So pakistan has been formed for 1.5 years and during this period, it has fought a war. It has fought internal dissent aka faqir of ippi, it had to consolidate it's holding and deal with princely states, migrants of epic proportions and horrors of massacres, an ill equipped army, little resources and it's last pillar stability is now dead.



The anger of Kashmir war

The military was extremely angry and felt that the politicians conduct in the war was poor and absolute shambles. The military felt that the politicians had focused entirely on impeding any military initiative fearing a full scale war. When we read the notes of Shaukat Aziz, Akbar Khan and Agha Humuyun, we witness a repeated sense of disappointment amongst the military rank as all of them felt that they were held back and were not allowed to consolidate the gains made by the Azad forces and the frontier tribesmen. Ayub Khan, whilst having nothing to do in the Kashmir war, was also disappointed in the political response. This create anger amongst the military ranks

The peace initiative was met with anger and this is highlighted most notably by the following words by Liaqat

“Sher Khan we are about to get the entire Kashmir on a platter and if you lead any offensive then I will hold you accountable for the death for every soldier.”

“Sir I will hold no offensive however please tell me when in history has any territory been given on a platter.”



The above words tell us that the army felt that the politicians had not supported the military and had held them back. You must understand that the military under the british was trained to be non-political and this was a massive tradition that they will not talk about politics at all. Politics in Mess hall was not only discouraged but a soldier speaking as such would get an earful from his commanding officer yet despite this non-political attitude, the british army thought of themselves and prided themselves on discipline. They loved the fact that they were orderly and whilst they were not political, they felt that politics was a disorderly game that was beneath them and should be left to the politicians and for soldiers, is to be orderly and disciplined. Pakistan army and the indian army inherited this tradition. Now the problem was that the question of partition was such a grand question that it did bring politics into the mind of the soldier since before 1946, the focus had been on partitioning the country, but now the army must be partitioned as well and this meant that soldiers were now being involved in politics. This was going to happen since its such a grand event. The soldiers based in india and Pakistan would be kept in their respective countries but the soldiers born in the regions yet pertaining to different religion would be given a choice. So immediately a soldier who was trained to keep his mind blank shut was immediately told that he needs to pick a country. The process of politicization began there and as steps went by politics became the talk of the mess hall and by 1950, akbar Khan, displayed how much the virus had grown. An orderly army in a disorderly country, was now politicized.



Before we go further, let me highlight that Pakistani army did not get a good deal as well. Let us first see the partitioning of the army. This is very important because we are studying how the events of 1948-1958 happened.

The run-up to partition included heated debates within the corridors of power in New Delhi. Field Marshal Sir Claude Auchinleck, the commander in-chief of the British Indian Army who had a deep association with his institution, initially favoured a joint army command for the two dominions though he recognized the impracticality of this idea and ended up suggesting a division of the army into two parts. He had early in his career served as the commanding officer of the 1st Battalion of the 1st Punjab Regiment (‘First First’) and developed a deep emotional attachment to the British Indian Army. After his wife left him for the British air force chief in India, many felt that he was wedded to the Indian Army. In a paper that he presented to the viceroy, he outlined the reasons for the division and its formula, with Pakistan’s entitlement to be either on the present Muslim and non-Muslim ratio in the armed forces (30-70 per cent)—or in proportion to the total population of Pakistan areas as compared to Hindustan. The latter alternative is probably fairer.’ His strategic analysis of the defence needs and issues facing Pakistan recognized the need for a huge force in the western marches, but, as his deputy chief of general staff was to note on a separate paper on the military implications of Pakistan: ‘The main enemy of Pakistan will be Hindustan [India], but we think that a concerted attack on Pakistan, sponsored by a Hindustan government is unlikely.’ Against this backdrop of debate within the higher command of the British Indian Army, Mountbatten proceeded apace with the plans for partition of British India and its army. By July 1947, the defence department was divided into Indian and Pakistani sections and further subdivided under three categories: personnel, moveable stores and equipment, and installations. As mentioned earlier, Muslims accounted for some 30 per cent of the army, with Hindus and Sikhs comprising most of the remaining force. After the war and demobilization of the 2.5 million strong British Indian Army, the total number of active soldiers numbered only 400,000, of which some 140,000 were earmarked for Pakistan. The infantry had nearly 7 Muslim regiments out of 23 (excluding the Gurkhas). Under the rules agreed to by the Joint Defence Council for the partition of the army ‘a Muslim soldier domiciled in Pakistan and a non-Muslim domiciled in the rest of India had no option but to serve his respective dominion, or be discharged. But a Muslim from India or a non-Muslim from Pakistan could elect which dominion he would serve’ after filling out a questionnaire, ‘with a subsequent entitlement to reoption.’

The division of the army took place amidst much emotional outburst, with regiments being split and trading components. Hindu or Sikh squadrons of cavalry regiments, for example, were sent to new regiments in India while Muslim counterparts were moved to Pakistani regiments. The first native commander-in-chief to-be of the Indian Army, General Cariappa, had had serious misgivings about the British departure and its aftermath and about dividing the Indian Army. He was quoted by Lord Ismay in a letter to Mountbatten as having put forward ‘the amazing suggestion that the Indian Army, with either Nehru or Jinnah as commander-in-chief, should take over power when we left in June 1948.1 [Ismay] at once said that the proposal was not only wholly impractical, but highly dangerous, and that throughout history the rule of the army had always proved tyrannical and incompetent, and that the army must always be servants and not masters.’ Farley recounts the scene at partition poignantly: ‘Men exchanged presents, sang “Auld Lang Syne”, and swore to remain friends.’ In Delhi, the Hindu and Sikh officers gave a ‘farewell comrades’ party for their Muslim counterparts. According to General Shahid Hamid, the senior Indian officer, General Cariappa, presented a silver trophy to his Pakistani counterpart and then gave a toast, predicting that: ‘We shall meet each other frequently as the best of friends and in the same spirit of good comradeship that we have had the good fortune to enjoy all these years.’ The senior Pakistani officer, A.M. Raza, replied in kind and they all linked arms and sang ‘For they are all jolly good fellows.’ ‘Three days later, four Muslim officers who had sung that night were among the 150 Pakistani officers and officials, with their families, who were hacked to death by Sikh Jathas (armed lawless gangs) who attacked the train carrying them to Pakistan.’64 Indian General Menezes quotes then Major Agha Mohammad Yahya Khan at the ‘break up’ party at the Staff College in Quetta as saying to Colonel S.D. Varma, the chief instructor: ‘Sir! What are we celebrating? This should be a day of mourning. As a united country, we could have been a strong and powerful nation. Now we will be fighting one another.’

Since most of these fixed assets resided in what was to become India, Pakistan was at a severe disadvantage. It had to start almost from scratch: setting up a new capital in Karachi and a new military headquarter in Rawalpindi, at the site of what was till then the headquarter of the British Indian Army’s northern command from where operations in the tribal areas were directed. An interesting counterpoint to this situation on the Indian side is provided by Lt. Gen. L.P. ‘Bogey’ Sen’s view that the ‘rmy Headquarter, India, was in a very unhappy state. While Pakistan had established itself in the well-equipped Northern Command Headquarters in Rawalpindi and was able to commence functioning without impediment, its analogue in New Delhi found itself engaged in an accommodation-cum￾ location battle with Supreme Headquarters’ Additionally, Sen believed that the Muslim director of the civilian Intelligence Bureau had spirited away all valuable files to Pakistan. The road to independence for the Pakistan Army was fraught with great difficulty. It lacked officers, especially those with command experience, and was faced with the huge task of transport of personnel and assets from India. At the time of independence, the British Indian Army was still proceeding with its planned demobilization of forces after the Second World War, with the aim of reducing its strength of emergency commissioned officers from some 8,000 to around 450. A series of selection boards was constituted to assess the individual officers who had been commissioned during the Second World War to decide on who ought to be given regular commissions. Among the officers selected to head these boards was Colonel Ayub Khan. On 14 August 1947, Pakistan not only came into being as a ‘moth-eaten’ political entity, but it also came with a ‘moth-eaten’ military which was under the firm command and control of the British officers who chose to remain ostensibly under Pakistan control, (notwithstanding the secret ‘stand down order of the supreme commander). Out of the 46 training establishments that existed in pre-partition India, only 7 were in Pakistan. These included the Staff College in Quetta, the School of Military Intelligence and the Anti￾ aircraft Artillery School, both in Karachi, the Royal Indian Army Service Corps (RIASC) School in Kakul, the No. 1 RIASC Training Centre (Supplies) in Lahore, the Armament Artificer Wing of the Indian Electrical and Mechanical Engineering Corps in Chaklala (near Rawalpindi), and the Military Farms Department Training Centre in Lahore. Certainly not an adequate framework for the creation and sustenance of a fledgling army!

The Pakistan Defence Council at its second meeting on 2 and 3 October 1947 agreed to set up the Pakistan Military Academy at Kakul, which was to start operations in January 1948. The first commandant of PMA was Colonel F.H.B. Ingall of the 6th Lancers. His main deputies were Lieutenant Colonel M.A. Latif as battalion commander and Lieutenant Colonel Atiqur Rehman as chief instructor. The first trainees were from the group of Muslim officer cadets from the Indian Military Academy in Dehra Dun who were flown to Lahore in October 1947. In this group were members of the second and third post-war IMA courses. Members of the second course were immediately given commission in the Pakistan Army. The members of the third course were temporarily parked with units and then joined the PMA when it began functioning out of the former Army Service Corps School premises. By 26 February 1948, when the PMA actually began its operations, it included some 66 IMA/PMA cadets, 63 university graduates who were members of the First Special Course and 78 cadets of the First PMA Long Course.9 A key training establishment that came into Pakistan’s share at partition was the celebrated Staff College at Quetta. It was closed down in September 1947 when the non-Muslim staff members left, but it was re-opened on 2 February 1948 under the British Brigadier J.C.A. Lauder.10 Of the pre-partition instructors of the Staff College, Lt. Col. A.M. Yahya Khan remained. Others who joined him when the college re-opened were Lt. Col. Akhtar Hussain Malik and Lt. Col. Gul Mawaz Khan, the latter a highly decorated officer during the Second World War when he gained the Military Cross, and the former destined for military fame and high decorations in the 1965 Indo-Pak War. The logistical foundations of the Pakistan Army were severely short￾ changed by the division of assets at partition. The three key command workshops of the British Indian army that helped maintain armoured fighting vehicles, radar repairs, and crystal cutting, were all left in India, at Secunderabad, Kirkee, and Agra. Of the 40 ordnance depots, only 5 small retail depots were located in Pakistan. The major depots were situated on the main supply routes which were providing support to the army during the war in South East Asia, with major stocks of material kept in the major ports such as Bombay, Madras or Calcutta or in ancillary depots inland in southern India. The depots in Pakistan had a minimal stock. Similarly, there were twelve engineer stores depots in British India, of which only three small depots came to Pakistan. Even the munitions industry that was expanded during the Second World War came to reside primarily in India, with only 3 of the 17 ordnance factories located in Pakistan.12 In short, even with the greatest willpower and determination of its fighting forces, Pakistan began life with a weak logistical infrastructure and serious dependence on Indian goodwill to transfer assets to it yet despite these difficulties, the army immediately became the most orderly institution in the country and this helped built the pride the military had that they could solve problems and put the country on the right path. They saw that both politicians and military had been dealt with a bad hand but the military had handled it however the politicians were all over the place!



Liaqat came to the scene and he first appointed Khaja nazimuddin to the post of governor general, a softspoken man and moulvi tamizzuddin, another Bengali politician as the president of the constituent assembly however by 1949, the political class was fracturing and the muslim league found it very difficult to transition from a movement into a ruling party over a region where it held the weakest support. Muslim league was extremely strong in East Pakistan but in West Pakistan it was weak, yet the party focused so much in West Pakistan that by 1953, it had completely lost its own based ground. The first crisis came as Mumtaz Daulatana, khan of mamdoot and sikander hayat all started to fight and play politics. Both Daultana and hayat quite the coalition in Punjab and khan of mamdoot failed to hold together the coalition and thus Punjab assembly fell. Abdul Qayoom Khan and Bacha Khan were fighting as the autocratic and despotic style of qayoom made sure that NWFP was always lit. Frequent clashes with the khudai khidmatgars and Qayoom khan, wanting toi remove all opposition, held nothing back and his condoning of jobbery, bribery and nepotism angered jinnah as well and he cracked down on him but after his death, Qayoom was unstoppable. In Sindh the powerful and corrupt Khuhro had frequent clashes with the governor general of Sindh habitullah and this led to Jinnah removing Khuhro especially after the rising calls of nepotism, brutality and corruption and of such scale that an entire commission was made whose findings were shocking however with the death of Jinnah, khuhro found a moment and got himself elected as the muslim league president of Sindh whilst the investigation was ongoing. This led to the famous promulgation of law he Public and Representatives Offices (Disqualification) Act, or PRODA, which disqualified a person from politics if they had been found guilty of misconduct. This was the first of many such acts that subsequent governments used to eliminate troublesome opponents. But Khuhro’s departure did not mean the end of troubles in Sindh, as his successor Ilahi Bux was also removed shortly after assuming office and succeeded by Yusuf Haroon. The political sniping continued, enough to provoke governors rule in Sindh as well. Balochistan continued to be ruled from the centre, thus papering over whatever dissension lingered there.

The above would tell you the chaos the country was heading to. Jinnah was keeping a lid on it, as much as he could, but his death brought forth chaos and Liaqat did not have the skills for this. During this period the army was building itself in an orderly manner as an efficient force.

The only province that had any semblance of normal political activity was East Pakistan, though even there the rumblings of discord were being heard. Khwaja Nazimuddin had been succeeded by Nurul Amin in the province as chief minister, who was able to maintain things on an even keel though a number of major figures (Maulana Bhashani, among them) jumped into the opposition. And Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy returned from exile in Calcutta to join the ranks of the opposition not only in East Pakistan but also as part of a broader coalition that drew Mamdot and others in West Pakistan. In brief, the Muslim League was unravelling. As Muhammad Ali commented on its membership: The pillars of society, the landlords, the well-to-do lawyers, the rich businessmen, and the titled gentry, were its main support. With some exceptions, they were not men noted for their total commitment to any cause. Their willingness to sacrifice their personal interests or comfort for the sake of the nation was often in doubt, and not unjustly. Jinnah had managed to draw into the fold the masses and the middle class in the struggle for freedom but once Pakistan was achieved, the ruling cliques of the League fell back into its old ways, and factionalism ruled the day. Provincial leaders paid little heed to the needs of the nation as a whole, becoming warlords who negotiated with the central command to gain benefits for themselves and their cohorts.



In 1950, there were still major problems in the military and one of them was that there was a dearth of officers at a higher command level and to combat this, quick promotions were handed out. This meant that soldiers who had political leanings were now young, ambitious and extremely powerful with command of a strong army. Let me give you a measure. Akbar Khan was made Major General and Chief of General Staff in 1950 and he was born in 1912 and years of service were since 1934. So he was made a commander of an army at the age of 38 with a military years of 16 years and in comparison Bajwa was made major general at the age of 53 with a service record of 35 years. You see the quick pace here.



Now let’s see the first question? Would Akbar Khan been able to change the trajectory of the country if his coup was successful? Frankly no. We would have still gotten the doctrine of necessity and the Objectives resolution as well since his coup was busted in 1951 and objectives resolution came in 1949 and Akbar would have followed the same trajectory of trying to bring in new loyal politicians, write a constitution that made him king and declare democracy not for Pakistan. Akbar disliked politicians and there is no indication that he would have made Pakistan less Islamic. Ayub was not an Islamic leader. Both Liaqat and Ayub hated mullahs and held that Islam cant be given to the Mullahs. They are the pioneers of the concept that Islamic interpretation should solely remain with the state in Pakistan and both openly declared that there is no clergy in Islam and the Mullah is only here to wreak havoc. I don’t see any difference in trajectory apart from two.



By 1951, Ayub was powerful. He had the ear of Liaqat, he had built great ties with the US and was considered as the go to man for any visit to the US and his constant attempts to gain US support for the building of the army made him one of the most loved figures in the army. Couple this with the fact that Ayub was surrounding the army with his men, Akbar’s coup would have failed or would have created massive infighting or would have resulted in a counter coup by Ayub. Ayub was loved by the Army and loved by the US. Out of the three As that run the country, two are on record on favoring him. Infact such was his influence that the other military commands also followed him and later on, he would be on record stating to his officers and soldiers that they should focus on the military and leave the politics to him. This was in 1951! Liaqat loved him and he is said to be the one who told liaqat that as CGS, Akbar should be kept in GHQ and not allowed to command a division which was his prerogative as the CGS.



The manipulation of Ghulam Muhammad



In 1951, liaqat was assassinated and khawaj nazimuddin was made prime minister of Pakistan and he forwarded the appointment of Ghulam Muhammad. This is where the dictatorship had begun. The man was dictatorial by nature and by this time both Iskander Mirza and Ayub Khan were rising in power but Ghulam Muhammad, was not interested in any democracy nor did he tolerate any person taking a stand against him. His period would start from 1951 and end in 1955 and these four years were horrific for Pakistan since some of the worst political messes in the country came from this man and while Iskander and Ayub were involved with liaqat but it would be this period where they would become dictators and would truly be introduced to a political mess. So lets begin here
 

Saiyan0321

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
Pakistan Moderator
Joined
Aug 26, 2020
Messages
995
Reaction score
1,404
Points
93
Nation of residence
Pakistan
Nation of origin
Pakistan
Political plots continued to thicken around the country. Nazimuddin took on the role of president of the Muslim League a month after ascending to the prime ministership and elevated finance secretary, Ghulam Mohammad, to the rank of governor general, bringing the first of the bureaucrats to a position of political power, a move that reverberated in Pakistani history in years to come. Turmoil in the provinces continued to dominate the news: Bengali agitation in East Pakistan, corruption charges against yet another Khuhro government in Sindh, a battle over allocation of Muslim League seats in the upcoming elections between chief minister (also provincial president of the League) Qayyum Khan, and Yusuf Khattak, the secretary of the national Muslim League, and a brewing battle over the emerging constitution of Pakistan that saw the Punjab trying to ensure that it did not lose its powerful position on the national front. Adding fuel to the fire was a movement first launched by a group called the Ahrars in the Punjab against the Ahmadiyya sect which professed that its founder Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian (in India) was the returned prophet, a claim that ran counter to the orthodox Islamic view that the Prophet Muhammad (p u h ) was the last prophet. Rioting ensued and the civil authorities could not quell it. An embattled Nazimuddin, who was facing a challenge to his election as Muslim League president, suddenly found himself facing serious social and political unrest in the Punjab. He turned to the army for help and imposed martial law on 8 March 1953. Enter the army. Major General Muhammad Azam Khan, who had earlier endeared himself to the population of Lahore by using the army to fight the ravages of floods and protect Mughal emperor Jehangir’s mausoleum from the encroachment of the swollen Ravi River, was a Pathan who did not believe in half measures. Imposing a curfew that he enforced ruthlessly and showing himself all over the city, he quickly quelled the unrest and gave the government a breather, enough for it to set up a commission headed by Justice Mohammad Munir to investigate the cause of the riots. This commission’s activities resulted in an amusing spectacle of leading Muslim scholars from all branches of the faith failing to agree on the simple definition of who was a momin or true believer. It thus buried the conflict over the Ahmadis till later in the country’s history when Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in 1977 sought to buy the support of the ulema in the face of growing political opposition by declaring this sect to be non￾ Muslims. Azam Khan’s swiff actions and the army’s presence had also established the presence of the army as a new major force on the national political scene. Azam Khan personally, and the army in general, was regarded by the local population of Lahore as saviours of law and order. Slogans of ‘Jarnail Azam Khan Zindabad’(Long Live General Azam Khan) and ‘Pakistan Army ZindabacC (Long Live the Pakistan Army) were often heard at public events. Azam Khan also took the chance of running affairs in the provincial capital to sort out what he considered to be a sorry state of administration in all sectors, education included. He denigrated the religious leaders by ordering his PR people to refer to them as mullah not maulana. In this he was reflecting a view held also by Ayub that religious leaders were often not well-read and willing to mislead illiterate people with their misguided views. A clear divide was created between the civil and the military with the military taking the view that the civilians had botched affairs. To some extent this was correct. Syed Nur Ahmed, the local director of public relations (and later author of the Urdu book Martial Law Se Martial Law Tak or From Martial Law to Martial law), had been instrumental in producing inflammatory press releases, apparently at the behest of Chief Minister Mumtaz Daultana, highlighting the campaign against the Ahmadis. The army put a stop to all that. While the army gained prestige, Nazimuddin and the political leaders lost prestige. Nazimuddin was sacked by the governor general on 17 April. Despite pleading with the British high commissioner to get the Queen of England to intercede on his behalf, he was replaced by a political non-entity. The new prime minister was Muhammed Ali Bogra, another East Pakistani, who was brought back from his position as ambassador to the United States. Other moves also presaged later events. Among them, Iskander Mirza was appointed governor of East Pakistan in 1954 and later inducted into the central cabinet, positioning him to become governor general in 1955 and then the first president of the republic of Pakistan in February 1956. When Ayub Khan took over as the first Pakistan army chief in January 1951, he issued an Order of the Day that urged the army to ‘Keep out of politics.... you must avoid taking any active part in party politics and propagation of any such views... .we are the servants of Pakistan and as such servants of any party that the people put in power.’ Yet, only three years later, Ayub Khan, while on an official trip to the United Kingdom, sat down in the Dorchester Hotel and penned a fateful document that presaged his view of the future political system in Pakistan, one with a single unit in West Pakistan and another in East Pakistan and the creation of a supreme commanders position to head the joint staff. ‘In addition to other duties, he should be made the defence member and ex officio member of the cabinet. This will not only knit the services together and lead to economy in pooling things common to all services, but would put a stop to any attempt by politicians to interfere in the internal affairs of the services to promote their personal interests.’ Ayub was thinking at that time not only of the domestic situation but also about the foreign policy of Pakistan. As the domestic political edifice crumbled and headed for a fall, the army was already working towards a future in which it would control the direction of the country, at first from the sidelines and later directly. Helping them unwittingly in this quest were the political leaders of Pakistan, making and breaking short-term alliances for individual advantage, while ignoring the need of the country for a home grown constitution that would last. This continuing internecine warfare among the politicos strengthened the role of the bureaucrats and the army. Ayub found himself being invited to take over the country by Governor General Ghulam Mohammad and declined the offer, according to his memoir. Meanwhile the country stumbled its way out of a series of government changes to the dissolution of the constituent assembly and the production of a new constitution under the guidance of another bureaucrat, Chaudhry Muhammad Ali, who was elevated to prime minister. In 1956, former army man and then civil servant, once colonel but by then major general, Iskander Mirza was brought back from East Pakistan and inserted into the cabinet and then promoted to the rank of president of Pakistan. But by then Ayub and the army, clearly seeing a need to take charge of their own destiny and with it the destiny of the country, had set a new course for Pakistan’s foreign policy that had serious implications for its domestic policies and political structure. Seeking ‘friends not masters’, Ayub engineered the opening to Washington to build a relationship that he hoped would stand Pakistan and the army in good stead.



If I seem all over the place, then please forgive, my mind is filled with information that I wish to convey and all these events played an important role in the events of 1948-1958. I cannot stress the huge role Ayub played in our relationship with US and this had such a powering impact on Pakistan that both Iskander Mirza and Ghulam Muhammad tried to cater to the Us and build their own contacts and both failed. US, Pakistan Army relations is not topic of this so I wont touch there but a mention was needed but you can see how the army was gaining strength as the political vacuum continued in Pakistan.



In 1950 the constitutional working committee brought forth suggestions but it was widely rejected by East Pakistan and the major reason was the attempt to have equal seats for east and west Pakistan. Currently, the system was that there were equal seats in the center for all provinces. So the populous province of east Pakistan was made equal to Baluchistan which held the smallest population and in the working committee it was now being made equal to west Pakistan. East Pakistan saw this as an attempt to weaken their political power and population. East Pakistan also did not love the imposition of Urdu which was opposed bitterly. In 1952 another constitutional working committee brought forth report and Ghulam Muhammad interfered so as to secure the central power. It was more detailed but held the same aspects most notable being that the upper house was to have 120 seats, east and west divided equally and lower house 400 equally divided and it invoked the same response. The anger tripled and the weakened power of the upper house and the province of east Pakistan being forced to accede to a lesser populous was criticized. Punjab demanded that the upper house should be based on equal but lower should be populous since Punjab had second largest population. The draft was received favorably by other units like NWFP. The opposition by Punjab became the central reason for the delay as the constituent assembly delayed the deliberations indefinitely. The reason why Punjab must be mentioned here is because the first draft was not opposed by Punjab and was opposed by East Pakistan yet that was accepted however the second draft was immediately held back and Ghulam Muhammad himself did not want to antagonize such a crucial region and by crucial I don’t mean east Pakistan. As the riots of ahmiddiya ended, Ghulam Muhammad dismissed Khawaja and tried to gain as much control as possible and Bogra was supposed to be his puppet. This new PM was not happy at all and wanted to go back to being the ambassador to the US.



Ghulam Muhammad was not interested in democracy nor political aspects. He started to create movements within the constituent assembly, largely under the Muslim league, to break the power of the politicians there and secure his authority. These politicians made the life of the constituent assembly very difficult and as time went by, Ghulam Muhammad decided to take his hand on the bureaucracy. The bureaucracy was another institution that was trying to run the country and was more orderly than the politicians. These British trained officers were extremely high class and hung around their own. The local bureaucracy was similar to this and was now being forced to share and often work under officers of whom they called “Uttar Pardesh group” and this group was hated by the local bureaucracy. This is very important to understand because we have the army looking at everything and it had, very successfully absorbed soldiers from all over India and while Ayub did appoint many Pathans to power but his concern was less on tribes and ethnicities and more on loyalists for example General Musa, a hazara, replaced habibbullah Khan, a pathan. So army focused on loyalists but the bureaucracy was adamant on this and Ghulam Muhammad only made things worse by catering to those that were his loyal and sending anybody that didn’t agree with him to Dera ghazi Khan, the Siberian posting of Pakistan. An absolute mess and if I highlighted each and every single instance, then this would become a book.



By now the East Pakistan situation was getting bad as the Awami league and other parties the krishak party by fazl e haq were uniting and forming a united front. Hussain suharwardi was the leader of this united front as the province, tired of muslim league politics, wanted to remove them. In 1954 the election was held and whilst the muslim league campaigned relentlessly and even published a manifesto to make Bengali a national language, it was too late and the United front blew muslim league away. Out of 309 seats m,uslim league won ten and the united front won 223 where awami league won 143 of them. This election happened due to the dismissal of the previous government by Ghulam Muhammad due to the language riots. The muslim league was also divided by then as the dismissal of Khawaja nazimuddin was met with cheers from the west Pakistan front but the East Pakistan front severely criticized the decision and formed a front which would operate separately. It was this front that campaigned relentlessly but the west Pakistanis didn’t care and the east Pakistanis didn’t want to listen to Muslim league. The results shocked Ghulam Muhammad and the constituent assembly.

The united front had 21 demands most notable being there being easy visa between east and west Bengal, bangali language as national language, support for jute producers, release of political prisoners and amongst others. This would become the first non-muslim league government in East Pakistan since partition. It was also in this election that the communist party also won over 20+ seats. The non-bengalis, which had supported muslim league clashed with the Bengalis and soon riots spread everywhere as political violence spread. Some have highlighted that this was an engineered crisis to remove the United Front. Maulana Baishani, a major Bengali leader, certainly thought so and as all talks failed and rioting continued, this short lived government formed in aprilo 1954 was dismissed in 29th may 1954. The west Pakistani leadership blamed the liberals and the communists and to satisfy the western concerns as well, the communist party was banned and its leaders thrown in jail all over Pakistan. To such an extent that a police man threw a man in jail for being a communist and when his relatives and friends came telling him that he is not a communist but an anti-communist, the police man yelled that he doesn’t care what type of communist he is as long as he is a communist. The state rounded up everybody, labor unions, right activists, anybody and everybody that Ghulam Muhammad and the central establishment did not like. The new government that was formed there after this was of Muslim league but it was a puppet and false and the people simply lost any sense of union with Pakistan. Maulana baishani would make a speech in 1950s titled
“Alvida Pakistan” aka “Farewell Pakistan”.

The constituent assembly, which had met only 57 times in 6 years saw the growing power of Ghulam Muhammad and decided to curtail it. Ghulam Muhammad responded by dismissing the constituent assembly. In 1954-55 and the famous case of moulvi tamizzuddin vs Federation of Pakistan came to be which I have mentioned in the research thread.





The above is a small wall of the massive events that were happening in that period but it tells you what was happening and how messed the country was and as I said the validity of the martial law will always find its supporters and detractors but we must understand that the constitutional structure is needed for order and the failure of the assembly and the politicians created this vacuum that brought Ayub Khan. By 1951, Ghulam Muhammad, 1955 Iskander Mirza, 1958 Ayub Khan, they were a power center and they ruled as such. Iskander Mirza would continue the manipulative tactics of Ghulam Muhammad and even try to get a fast one on Ayub which failed miserably.



The history requires so much study and there is a lot of scholarly work available on that period. I agree with Kaptaan on this and have often also stated that Army is not the only element in the wheel. It may be the biggest one but it is not alone. There are others that form and sustain the wheel.



Ok 7000 words is enough I think for this on my end and i need two posts for this.

@Kaptaan @Yankeestani @VCheng @Nilgiri @Joe Shearer
 

Jackdaws

Contributor
Joined
Nov 24, 2020
Messages
484
Reaction score
264
Points
63
Nation of residence
India
Nation of origin
India
Thing is Pakistan is not an exception here. In fact what happened in Pakistan happened in pretty much all post colonial nations which gained their independence after WW2. Either one party took over, or the military or there was civil war.

India is the exception to the rule. And there is only one man to thank for it - Nehru. Stupid bhakts today don't realize how fragile our unity was given the size, diversity, poverty and illiteracy in 1947.

A pragmatist or realist would not have wasted precious resources in building a democracy. Only an idealist would. His idealism led to many problems but India owes so much to Nehru.
 

Joe Shearer

Well-known member
Professional
Joined
Aug 25, 2020
Messages
308
Reaction score
440
Points
63
Nation of residence
India
Nation of origin
India
I agree with lot of what you said (in this initial period creating a huge amount of downstream issues still felt today).... I for one don't simply end with "its the army, army army....khaki khaki khaki" thing...they just have harnessed a bigger issue persisting....in probably the way an institution of their size/relevance/nationalist intent etc inevitably would.

It is why I always thumbs up and agree when you bring up this period when you say army-khaki is not the thing to be blamed....as you are indeed digging deeper into the "what" and "why" of it (though we may disagree where it ultimately stems from too, thats fine).

To flesh this out more (from my perspective), I will first let you guys discuss it out more.

Let me tag @Joe Shearer too, if he is interested when he is on his next round here.
I would like to comment, certainly, once I return. don't wait for me as my plans are a trifle fluid at the moment.

This site is jumping. I have to get back.....
 

Kaptaan

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
749
Reaction score
1,796
Points
93
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Pakistan
Thanks for your detailed post. Yes, I am aware of the "shenanigans" of the ruling elite from 1948 to 1958. I believe in rendering outline of events and not get lost in the minutia. The facts are -

  • both armies went through the process of division and any stress that might lead to political currents contingent on making a difficult choice between Pakistan and Hindustan applied to both. Meaning Indian Army went through that process as well.

  • between 1948 and 1958 non of the ruling clique ever bothered to get mandate of the people. As I said earlier India had general elections by 1952. A constituent assmbly is provisional. Meaning t's existence has temporality attached to it. Beyond that temporality it loses it's moral authority. One, two three or four years is limit of the meaning of provisional. Meaning you can have a constituent assembly seven years later. That by definiton has become permanent and you might as well call it a tool of dictatorship.

  • the reality is you require some consensus in the ruling clique. What we had from 1948 onwards to 1958 was just a bunch of rabble, fighting and sniping each other. This was recipe for chaos and had lost any moral authority to rule. When the army took over it did not replace a democratic order but was replacing autocrats ruling as dictators.
In the next post I will explain why this clique not only laid the foundation of a conflicted political legacy, they brought in the use of religion for self gain but all lost Kashmir. Most of that blame goes to Liaquat. But I will leave that for later.

What I do find annoying about Pakistani's the lack of critical study of the historical events. Instead a air brushed, sweetened fair tale has been built up that everybody treats almost religiously. Anybody daring to question or point to some facts will recieve abuse etc.
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Canada Moderator
India Moderator
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
2,802
Reaction score
5,886
Points
113
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
Ok 7000 words is enough I think for this on my end and i need two posts for this.

Thanks for the long innings yet again, you give sunny a run for his money hehe.

Watching thread with interest, and I'll give some points later.
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Canada Moderator
India Moderator
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
2,802
Reaction score
5,886
Points
113
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
enough for it to set up a commission headed by Justice Mohammad Munir to investigate the cause of the riots. This commission’s activities resulted in an amusing spectacle of leading Muslim scholars from all branches of the faith failing to agree on the simple definition of who was a momin or true believer. It thus buried the conflict over the Ahmadis till later in the country’s history when Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in 1977 sought to buy the support of the ulema in the face of growing political opposition by declaring this sect to be non￾ Muslims.

Timestamp ~ 10.30 talks about this part, fleshes it out etc


Whole video is a good watch (might need putting aside any animus with hoodbhoy on other issues etc, and listen to whole thing, he brings up lot of good, poignant points overall)

You see if you do not set up the ideology, founding principle and constitution correctly (and with enough anchoring possible for society, NOT politics)...if you do not do that.... it inevitably will be used by politicians (of whatever stripe) for great harm to the society and ethos of proposed/established nation.

This is why I have said a number of times here and other places (but here especially since there is no typical pitchfork mob with disturbing and predictable tendencies...and worse people that supposedly know better than that mob, letting them be or encouraging/directing them even) that a religious ideology/formation was wrong.

It should have been geographic and secular...if the argument was to be made at all and then seen to completion.
The latter is just far closer to occam's razor process and a much more logical and well founded 1st principle...and there would also be a geographic name rather than one that has no equivalent on world map (and this brings its own set of issues).

Breakfast is first meal of the day, the porridge or bread etc... you have really matters in many ways...and will set what kind of hunger pangs you have for further sustenance in lunch and dinner (for those to be balanced and reasonable).

But if a bad breakfast or lack of breakfast has been had, there are corrections to be made that can be made, but that takes effort to recognise and accomplish....it is hard for most....especially if you have convinced yourself it is fine or if you benefit from it (as most of those in position of power tend to). i.e The stubborn ego of the ill-fed body.


Mind you this arabic language studying proposal for kiddos comes at PMIK admin time (just sayin)....or is his admin not responsible for it?

That too with the deterioration of relations with Arab World (given the argument being made for more well versed arabic-speaking "jobs" there by this effort).

PMIK admin has not changed the Zia textbook w.r.t bin qasim narrative on what Pakistan's historical founding even is (in such neat hand in glove way).

So what is really being changed past the big tempest and swirl that was projected by yet another political party (PTI) as being "different" + "reformed" + "insert catchphrase here" to some elder ABC-XYZ ones from before?

Are parties afforded the scope to make the call on this to begin with?...or is this some running circus cavalcade? Token expired ringmasters fleeing to London on cue...to continue bullhorning there (one's singing voice might hit platinum gold I've heard*, at least till he butchered the Indian anthem)....them being let to do so on cue....the show must go on?
Baldie ringmaster 1, hairdo lady ringmaster, baldie 2....etc etc etc, swanky london flats, courtesy of "muh hidden economy".

===================================

*Miss my buddy "newbie" he always would say vah vah vah vah best lol "vah modi-g vah!" etc.., after my earlier closer buds (one was altafbhai singing "fan" lmao) all left the place and there was paucity of creative admiration for a bit....
"Newbie" also had guts to call out some powerful types running the show behind scene, and get banned number of times for it...yep that'll fix him for sure...like it fixed me and kaptaan and others heh. You sure showed us the powah...and now we line up neatly asking for our alloted soup. Right.

You know it best, we know nothing. You seen everything, we seen nothing. You so good and we so bad.

Never seen this anywhere before, this assertion, this control dynamic....where it comes from, where it can go to....

But place sure had lot of ppl with their hearts in the right place to see all that (they always get crapped on too by you-know-who mobs or you-know-what processes), thats why I'm a believer in pakistan in another way (well distanced from ideology, politics blah blah)...not immediately apparent to a lot.

The good hearted rustic struggle is real just like anywhere else, if you know what to look for. Folks like those will be what keeps a country going and ticking, despite what mess and damage those with power inflict upon it.

"We're from little towns all around this land...." - Hank williams jr.
 

VCheng

Committed member
Think Tank Analyst
Joined
Sep 4, 2020
Messages
278
Reaction score
291
Points
63
Thanks for the long innings yet again, you give sunny a run for his money hehe.

Watching thread with interest, and I'll give some points later.

The information here is great from a historic point of view, but largely irrelevant, considering that it pertains to a country that disintegrated in 1971. The western fragment had a duly elected civilian government for the first few years of its existence, then the first dictatorship was imposed. The rest is well known, right until present day. The eastern fragment is now only just beginning to breathe for itself.
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Canada Moderator
India Moderator
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
2,802
Reaction score
5,886
Points
113
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
The information here is great from a historic point of view, but largely irrelevant, considering that it pertains to a country that disintegrated in 1971. The western fragment had a duly elected civilian government for the first few years of its existence, then the first dictatorship was imposed. The rest is well known, right until present day. The eastern fragment is now only just beginning to breathe for itself.

Well I still think its relevant in a hindsight 20/20 way.

I know its very different...but Turkey also had something of a violent turbulent partition from ottoman era to republic of turkey era (Shedding all manner of land and populations by both internal and external pressures and wars).

But their modern nationstate founder clearly saw the folly of having national identity based on anything to do with religion. (Compare this with the very raison d'etre for Pakistan and its founder)

The late 19th century and early 20th century framework of the ottoman era similarly doesnt exist anymore, but it offers a background context of comparison (and it did exist into the industrial and modern 20th century for an amount of time but found itself in a big problem as it didnt have a modern constitution and governing system). Thus I wouldn't say it (latter ottoman era) is irrelevant to understanding the new political form of the republic of Turkey altogether.

Turkey has had its fair share of military politics and a major coup tenure in the 80s even....yet it has made use of more opportunity and potential than Pakistan certainly has....because it has squared away the psyche-problem stemming from foundation-ideology and narrative (given reset it had from it since ottoman era).

I see a very strong counter-force to AKP and Erdogan for example from huge proportion of Turkey (having chatted at length with number of turks just here)....and the argued/perceived excesses of AKP/Erdogan are nowhere near to what has set inside Pakistan...as Pakistan simply never set itself up correctly to be able to manage later inevitable headwinds....be they population diversity (which came to final consequence in eastern wing) or despots, scheming lackeys or all manner of radicals with pulpits....who find great sustenance in the void posing as energetic matter.
 

VCheng

Committed member
Think Tank Analyst
Joined
Sep 4, 2020
Messages
278
Reaction score
291
Points
63
Well I still think its relevant in a hindsight 20/20 way.

I know its very different...but Turkey also had something of a violent turbulent partition from ottoman era to republic of turkey era (Shedding all manner of land and populations by both internal and external pressures and wars).

But their modern nationstate founder clearly saw the folly of having national identity based on anything to do with religion. (Compare this with the very raison d'etre for Pakistan and its founder)

The late 19th century and early 20th century framework of the ottoman era similarly doesnt exist anymore, but it offers a background context of comparison (and it did exist into the industrial and modern 20th century for an amount of time but found itself in a big problem as it didnt have a modern constitution and governing system). Thus I wouldn't say it (latter ottoman era) is irrelevant to understanding the new political form of the republic of Turkey altogether.

Turkey has had its fair share of military politics and a major coup tenure in the 80s even....yet it has made use of more opportunity and potential than Pakistan certainly has....because it has squared away the psyche-problem stemming from foundation-ideology and narrative (given reset it had from it since ottoman era).

I see a very strong counter-force to AKP and Erdogan for example from huge proportion of Turkey (having chatted at length with number of turks just here)....and the argued/perceived excesses of AKP/Erdogan are nowhere near to what has set inside Pakistan...as Pakistan simply never set itself up correctly to be able to manage later inevitable headwinds....be they population diversity (which came to final consequence in eastern wing) or despots, scheming lackeys or all manner of radicals with pulpits....who find great sustenance in the void posing as energetic matter.

Turkey (and Iran) are not good examples in this regard. Neither was ever colonized. Both had expansive empires themselves.
 

Saiyan0321

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
Pakistan Moderator
Joined
Aug 26, 2020
Messages
995
Reaction score
1,404
Points
93
Nation of residence
Pakistan
Nation of origin
Pakistan
Timestamp ~ 10.30 talks about this part, fleshes it out etc


Whole video is a good watch (might need putting aside any animus with hoodbhoy on other issues etc, and listen to whole thing, he brings up lot of good, poignant points overall)

You see if you do not set up the ideology, founding principle and constitution correctly (and with enough anchoring possible for society, NOT politics)...if you do not do that.... it inevitably will be used by politicians (of whatever stripe) for great harm to the society and ethos of proposed/established nation.

This is why I have said a number of times here and other places (but here especially since there is no typical pitchfork mob with disturbing and predictable tendencies...and worse people that supposedly know better than that mob, letting them be or encouraging/directing them even) that a religious ideology/formation was wrong.

It should have been geographic and secular...if the argument was to be made at all and then seen to completion.
The latter is just far closer to occam's razor process and a much more logical and well founded 1st principle...and there would also be a geographic name rather than one that has no equivalent on world map (and this brings its own set of issues).

Breakfast is first meal of the day, the porridge or bread etc... you have really matters in many ways...and will set what kind of hunger pangs you have for further sustenance in lunch and dinner (for those to be balanced and reasonable).

But if a bad breakfast or lack of breakfast has been had, there are corrections to be made that can be made, but that takes effort to recognise and accomplish....it is hard for most....especially if you have convinced yourself it is fine or if you benefit from it (as most of those in position of power tend to). i.e The stubborn ego of the ill-fed body.


Mind you this arabic language studying proposal for kiddos comes at PMIK admin time (just sayin)....or is his admin not responsible for it?

That too with the deterioration of relations with Arab World (given the argument being made for more well versed arabic-speaking "jobs" there by this effort).

PMIK admin has not changed the Zia textbook w.r.t bin qasim narrative on what Pakistan's historical founding even is (in such neat hand in glove way).

So what is really being changed past the big tempest and swirl that was projected by yet another political party (PTI) as being "different" + "reformed" + "insert catchphrase here" to some elder ABC-XYZ ones from before?

Are parties afforded the scope to make the call on this to begin with?...or is this some running circus cavalcade? Token expired ringmasters fleeing to London on cue...to continue bullhorning there (one's singing voice might hit platinum gold I've heard*, at least till he butchered the Indian anthem)....them being let to do so on cue....the show must go on?
Baldie ringmaster 1, hairdo lady ringmaster, baldie 2....etc etc etc, swanky london flats, courtesy of "muh hidden economy".

===================================

*Miss my buddy "newbie" he always would say vah vah vah vah best lol "vah modi-g vah!" etc.., after my earlier closer buds (one was altafbhai singing "fan" lmao) all left the place and there was paucity of creative admiration for a bit....
"Newbie" also had guts to call out some powerful types running the show behind scene, and get banned number of times for it...yep that'll fix him for sure...like it fixed me and kaptaan and others heh. You sure showed us the powah...and now we line up neatly asking for our alloted soup. Right.

You know it best, we know nothing. You seen everything, we seen nothing. You so good and we so bad.

Never seen this anywhere before, this assertion, this control dynamic....where it comes from, where it can go to....

But place sure had lot of ppl with their hearts in the right place to see all that (they always get crapped on too by you-know-who mobs or you-know-what processes), thats why I'm a believer in pakistan in another way (well distanced from ideology, politics blah blah)...not immediately apparent to a lot.

The good hearted rustic struggle is real just like anywhere else, if you know what to look for. Folks like those will be what keeps a country going and ticking, despite what mess and damage those with power inflict upon it.

"We're from little towns all around this land...." - Hank williams jr.


I like him. He makes excellent points and to the arrow straight. More than ideology, it was constitutional stability that was needed at the start and if we had that, then a geographic ideology could have been formed. Nations change names, forms, thoughts, even structures but it was stability that was needed. Constitutional governance. An iota of it and the start would not have been so rough and many of the mistakes we made, would not have been made. While Islam was the ideology for the nation, I see early figureheads to be less enthusiastic about the religion. What was to be was constitutional stability.


I think even the lawmaker himself had no clue on what was he doing. He passed the bill and in it he wrote that it's for job opportunities, but when media questioned him, he panicked and said that he wants the generations of Pakistan to learn all languages to compete everywhere russian, Chinese, Japanese, French, Spanish etc.

The senate is under the opposition control. Imran really doesn't have much control there which is why he has been bypassing the national assembly altogether and relying on presidential ordinances for lawmaking. The parliament is in a state of disarray white frankly. So yeah legislative is different and he doesn't have administration over there and education is provincial subject so the senate and national assembly can't really pass such laws for all of Pakistan. It was Islamabad only since Islamabad is the federal Territory.

On Qasim, let me tell you some fun stories. I love studying and researching and in that I found that the founding fathers never used Qasim at all. Not a single instance. Infact the people of the region weren't really familiar with him. The Sindhis named their children dahir and for them, he was an Arab conqueror. Nothing more and nothing less. They never attributed conversion or bringing to him. They did that to the Sufis for which Sindh is very famous. Infact even the mosque he had made is now broken stones which means that the local populace was not interested in it. The first time Qasim was used, and this is the funny part was in 1953 in pamphlet by jamat e islami, aka Mr maududi who was against Pakistan, and in that pamphlet were the concept on how Qasim was the bringer of Islam and the first Muslim and how he was the first Pakistani. With the suppression of JI and general Azam, this got buried until 1972 when Bhutto, trying to keep the country together decided to utilize Islamization and his first step was to use Qasim was the first Pakistani. Post that Qasim became a regular feature in Pakistani textbooks and again this was Bhutto not Zia. Infact the earlier Pakistan actually extensively used the Indus links to promote tourism and they also issues pamphlets which talked about ancient heritage. Bhutto started this cut of history based on the idea by JI. This is extremely funny considering the fact that if Islam in conterminous Pakistan is to be studied then we have records of Islamic armies in makran during the reign of Hazrat Umer RA and there being the governorship in Peshawar and a governor house in Peshawar during the reign of Mauwiya I think. Decades before Qasim. Qasim was fantasized by JI and picked up by Bhutto. It's a fun info I thought I would share.

Lolzzz well there are guys like me here in Pakistan so have some faith and as for PDF fixing people. They can control a website but they can't control views. That is beyond control.
 

Saiyan0321

Contributor
Moderator
Think Tank Analyst
Pakistan Moderator
Joined
Aug 26, 2020
Messages
995
Reaction score
1,404
Points
93
Nation of residence
Pakistan
Nation of origin
Pakistan
The information here is great from a historic point of view, but largely irrelevant, considering that it pertains to a country that disintegrated in 1971. The western fragment had a duly elected civilian government for the first few years of its existence, then the first dictatorship was imposed. The rest is well known, right until present day. The eastern fragment is now only just beginning to breathe for itself.

Tell that to Pakistan studies exam paper where we have to rewrite the entire 14 points and remember their date. :)
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Canada Moderator
India Moderator
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
2,802
Reaction score
5,886
Points
113
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
Turkey (and Iran) are not good examples in this regard. Neither was ever colonized. Both had expansive empires themselves.

I understand...thats why I said there is large difference (and hindsight is 20/20)....but still there is stuff to take on board.

What exactly prevented Pakistan from going secular route even after partitioning on islamic-majoritarianism principle?

Jinnah himself had noted secular credentials and ideology....yet the govt (or "first dictatorship") entered the business of defining who and what is a Muslim. What a monumental error along with the rush to incorporate Kashmir and some push for Urdu and chauvinist supremacy in a totally different part of the country.

What would have happened to Turkey if it went same way in some alternate history?...say instead of Ataturk you had some religion-ideology driven guy (as first thing above all). Not good things thats for sure. The one thing that they struggle with is the urdu parallel they have with turkish (for very long time) w.r.t Kurd minority.
 

VCheng

Committed member
Think Tank Analyst
Joined
Sep 4, 2020
Messages
278
Reaction score
291
Points
63
Tell that to Pakistan studies exam paper where we have to rewrite the entire 14 points and remember their date. :)

LOL. Right, the schizophrenia of claiming thousands of years of history, but then starting the indoctrination from MBQ's invasion is quite amusing. :D
 

VCheng

Committed member
Think Tank Analyst
Joined
Sep 4, 2020
Messages
278
Reaction score
291
Points
63
I understand...thats why I said there is large difference (and hindsight is 20/20)....but still there is stuff to take on board.

What exactly prevented Pakistan from going secular route even after partitioning on islamic-majoritarianism principle?

Jinnah himself had noted secular credentials and ideology....yet the govt (or "first dictatorship") entered the business of defining who and what is a Muslim. What a monumental error along with the rush to incorporate Kashmir and some push for Urdu and chauvinist supremacy in a totally different part of the country.

What would have happened to Turkey if it went same way in some alternate history?...say instead of Ataturk you had some religion-ideology driven guy (as first thing above all). Not good things thats for sure. The one thing that they struggle with is the urdu parallel they have with turkish (for very long time) w.r.t Kurd minority.

Good questions, but my answers would not be palatable to many here (and elsewhere). :D
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Canada Moderator
India Moderator
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
2,802
Reaction score
5,886
Points
113
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
While Islam was the ideology for the nation, I see early figureheads to be less enthusiastic about the religion. What was to be was constitutional stability.
Well you have to remember they are upstream folks. They had lived most of their lives in a system where there was no state founded on religious-majoritarianism + partition.

I made good friend with a Lahori during my earlier tenure in PDF....and I could see he still have huge amount of the earlier cosmopolitan +diverse + tolerant nature the place had (and still have to large relative degree I am told, and it is often stereotyped in PDF itself).

But the systematic downstream has taken its effect, generations of people have been born into it...and only some really surface above to see bigger picture and context and not just be part of the currents and churn that have now established as thick default....unless you have the inherent nature to be somewhat naturally contrarian (and questioning of authority) like my buddy.

I do lot of upstream and downstream modelling in my line of work, so I see this in a more representative form in another way (and just how different something can be that is/was effectively the same particle/individual/force in question)...human society is probably the largest macro scale thing we have that we see up close daily.

he wants the generations of Pakistan to learn all languages to compete everywhere russian, Chinese, Japanese, French, Spanish etc.
Ever notice these people are the last to practice what they preach? Do as we say, not as we do.


The senate is under the opposition control. Imran really doesn't have much control there which is why he has been bypassing the national assembly altogether and relying on presidential ordinances for lawmaking. The parliament is in a state of disarray white frankly. So yeah legislative is different and he doesn't have administration over there and education is provincial subject so the senate and national assembly can't really pass such laws for all of Pakistan. It was Islamabad only since Islamabad is the federal Territory.
More pantomime and theatrics. I have too much already to focus in on other countries....Pakistan seems to have extra bad case of it, i've been giving it a skip and defer to you for some updates in your newsreel heh.

Out of interest, was this compulsory arabic thing proposed in senate by opposition or its PMIK driven bill from lower house?


On Qasim, let me tell you some fun stories. I love studying and researching and in that I found that the founding fathers never used Qasim at all. Not a single instance. Infact the people of the region weren't really familiar with him. The Sindhis named their children dahir and for them, he was an Arab conqueror. Nothing more and nothing less. They never attributed conversion or bringing to him. They did that to the Sufis for which Sindh is very famous. Infact even the mosque he had made is now broken stones which means that the local populace was not interested in it. The first time Qasim was used, and this is the funny part was in 1953 in pamphlet by jamat e islami, aka Mr maududi who was against Pakistan, and in that pamphlet were the concept on how Qasim was the bringer of Islam and the first Muslim and how he was the first Pakistani. With the suppression of JI and general Azam, this got buried until 1972 when Bhutto, trying to keep the country together decided to utilize Islamization and his first step was to use Qasim was the first Pakistani. Post that Qasim became a regular feature in Pakistani textbooks and again this was Bhutto not Zia. Infact the earlier Pakistan actually extensively used the Indus links to promote tourism and they also issues pamphlets which talked about ancient heritage. Bhutto started this cut of history based on the idea by JI. This is extremely funny considering the fact that if Islam in conterminous Pakistan is to be studied then we have records of Islamic armies in makran during the reign of Hazrat Umer RA and there being the governorship in Peshawar and a governor house in Peshawar during the reign of Mauwiya I think. Decades before Qasim. Qasim was fantasized by JI and picked up by Bhutto. It's a fun info I thought I would share.

Like I said its the downstream. I see lot of it in how Joe bristles against all kind of downstream-twerps in our case...as Joe has lot more direct heady reference of the upstream.

People just get born into something and get manipulated by whomever has wielded the biggest stick some years before (or they go along with it at the time)....and they just lazy (or worse) to try see if things were always that way.

I don't judge those that have no time and just have to live/survive ofc....but those that have been afforded so much more than to do just the minimum...really have flubbed in great enough number.


Lolzzz well there are guys like me here in Pakistan so have some faith and as for PDF fixing people. They can control a website but they can't control views. That is beyond control.

There will be good people like you always. I mention my other buddies and worthies from time to time. I know bunch more here in Canada personally. What % of population you lot are is small but you are there nonetheless waiting for the correct impetus moment to help flourish.

PDF is a microcosm, how relevant or not it actually is another matter....but I think at one point it did have a good selection of points and counterpoints being brought up and debated....but even with that,, I could sense a real trouble underneath that is relevant and always will be relevant to Pakistan.

Thing is some fundamental numbers have to change today....in fact they needed to change 10 years ago as they take 10 years to take effect at minimum. Instead a whole bunch of utter garbage is being doubled and tripled down upon by powerful people that know what they do is wrong, but no one to call them out....and its solidified by the psychology-ideology thing now having come to fruition.

It would be wrong to give up hope, hope springs eternal...but something is entrenched really big way....and I don't know best way to describe what that is.....other than its from too much time spent on stuff other countries never needed spending that much time and effort on (among their people with power and means).
 
Top Bottom