Hatred in Pakistan for Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad, a leading light of India’s freedom movement and one who opposed the Partition is well known. But distorting what he had said 73 years after he did confirms and compounds that sentiment. Azad was a scholar and President of the Indian National Congress, just before the British granted independence to India and carved out Pakistan.
Federal Minister for Interior retired Brig Ijaz Shah declared in the National Assembly on June 27, 2019 that Pakistan was a “security state” and quoted Azad in justification as saying that “Pakistan will become a security state instead of a welfare state”. Seeing the prevailing security situation in Pakistan seemed that “Mr Azad had written these lines last month while sitting in one of the chambers of the assembly”.
Actually, Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad had predicted a grim future of the then proposed Muslim majority state in South Asia. He had said Pakistan could become a “failed” state.
In “India Wins Freedom”, the Maulana wrote: “It is one of the greatest frauds on the people to suggest that religious affinity can unite areas which are geographically, economically, linguistically and culturally different.” The birth of Bangladesh in 1971 confirmed Azads’ reasoning.
In his interview given to Shorish Kashmiri, editor of Lahore’s weekly ‘Chattan’ (April 1946), Azad had foreseen a military takeover and break-up of Pakistan. Both prophesies have come true in that Pakistan has seen several years of military or military-guided rule and that it broke up in 1971 when Bangladesh was born.
The Maulana had also predicted ethnic unrest and this has also come true in several parts, especially Balochistan.
Azad had said that Mohammed Ali Jinnah-led Muslim League, was dominated by feudal lords and lacked democratic roots.
The Maulana, who became independent India’s first Education Minister, had feared that the state born out of partition would be dominated by landlords, mullahs and the military. This oligarchy would make Pakistan “a security state instead of a welfare state.”
The “security state” reference was definitely to this oligarchy forming the core of the Establishment that would deny people democratic rights and facilitate a military takeover at some stage.
Before we elaborate on what Azad said, there is need to take a close look at Ijaz Shah’s credentials.
He served as the head of the civilian spy agency, Intelligence Bureau, under military dictator, Gen Pervez Musharraf.
He acted as Musharraf’s handmaiden in dealing with Benazir Bhutto and the latter, while fearing for her life on return home in 2007 to contest the elections, had in a letter to Musharraf named Shah as one of the officers. She eventually proved right in that in December 2007, she was assassinated. Musharraf was named as the one who had failed to provide her complete security, even having warned her that he could not guarantee her safety. Subsequently, evidence was contrived to show Baitullah Mehsood as the man behind Benazir’s killing.’
Critics have pointed out Shah’s background and have alluded to the role of the military in his appointment.as Prime Minister Imran Khan’s Minister for the Interior.
Some Excerpts from the 1946 Interview
On Pakistan and its creation on the basis of Islam:
“As far as I can see, the people who will hold the reins of power will cause serious damage to Islam. Their behaviour may result in the total alienation of the Pakistani youth who may become a part of non-religious movements.”
On Pakistan as an anti-India entity:
“We must remember that an entity conceived in hatred will last only as long as that hatred lasts. This hatred will overwhelm the relations between India and Pakistan. In this situation it will not be possible for India and Pakistan to become friends and live amicably unless some catastrophic event takes place. The politics of partition itself will act as a barrier between the two countries.”
On Foreign powers using Pakistan:
“Pakistan itself will be afflicted by many serious problems. The greatest danger will come from international powers who will seek to control the new country, and with the passage of time this control will become tight. India will have no problem with this outside interference as it will sense danger and hostility from Pakistan.”
“The stability of Pakistan will be under strain and the Muslim countries will be in no position to provide any worthwhile help. The assistance from other sources will not come without strings and it will force both ideological and territorial compromises.”
On Predicting East Bengal’s Separation:
“The other important point that has escaped Mr Jinnah’s attention is Bengal. He does not know that Bengal disdains outside leadership and rejects it sooner or later”
“The environment of Bengal is such that it disfavours leadership from outside and rises in revolt when it senses danger to its rights and interests.
“The confidence of East Pakistan will not erode as long as Jinnah and Liaquat Ali are alive. But after them any small incident will create resentment and disaffection. I feel that it will not be possible for East Pakistan to stay with West Pakistan for any considerable period of time. There is nothing common between the two regions except that they call themselves Muslims. But the fact of being Muslim has never created durable political unity anywhere in the world.”
On Pakistan’s problems after its break-up:
“After the separation of East Pakistan, whenever it happens, West Pakistan will become the battleground of regional contradictions and disputes.
“The assertion of sub-national identities of Punjab, Sind, Frontier and Balochistan will open the doors for outside interference. It will not be long before the international powers use the diverse elements of Pakistani political leadership to break the country on the lines of Balkan and Arab states. Maybe at that stage we will ask ourselves, what have we gained and what have we lost.”
On Economic Discrimination of Provinces:
“The real issue is economic development and progress, it certainly is not religion. Muslim business leaders have doubts about their own ability and competitive spirit. They are so used to official patronage and favours that they fear new freedom and liberty. They advocate the two-nation theory to conceal their fears and want to have a Muslim state where they have the monopoly to control the economy without any competition from competent rivals. It will be interesting to watch how long they can keep this deception alive.
On Islam as Uniting Factor of Pakistan:
“In fact, it is we Muslims and our extremist behaviour that has created an aversion among non-Muslims for Islam. If we had not allowed our selfish ambitions to soil the purity of Islam then many seekers of truth would have found comfort in the bosom of Islam. Pakistan has nothing to do with Islam; it is a political demand that is projected by Muslim League as the national goal of Indian Muslims. I feel it is not the solution to the problems Muslims are facing. In fact it is bound to create more problems.
—By Allabaksh