𝗣𝗔𝗞𝗜𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗡 VS 𝗣𝗔𝗞𝗜𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗡 🇧🇩🇵🇰

 

𝗣𝗔𝗞𝗜𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗡 VS 𝗣𝗔𝗞𝗜𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗡 🇧🇩🇵🇰

East Pakistan, 1971. It was a most terrific and somber chapter in modern Muslim history serving as a grim reminder of the fact that even with the best of intentions and despite all of the hopeful promises, it can all go terribly wrong - at the most critical moment. Maulana Abdul-Kalam Azad predicted Pakistan's perilous trajectory back in April 1946, during his famous newspaper interview with the Lahore based news agency, Chattan. Here is an extract of that most ominous exchange "The confidence in East Pakistan will not erode so long as Jinnah and Liaquat Ali are Alive, but after them - any small incident will create resentment and dissatisfaction. 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...." The last sentence brings us back to yesterday's post concerning the prospect of uniting the Middle East based on Pan Arabism or Pan Islamic revivalism, it would appear that in the case of Pakistan - the Pan Islamic strategy was both impractical and unsustainable, on its own. Maulana Azad was spot on - just being Muslim was seemingly not sufficient to maintain longer term political ties and alliances, there were also cultural and social incomparabilities that had to be acknowledged, too. Ultimately, just as he had foreseen 25 years prior, the prediction came true and in 1971 when West Pakistan and East Pakistan were split up violently, resulting in the deaths of millions and the ultimate independence of Bangladesh. So it failed in Pakistan, then what is the solution? My take on this is that neither strategy (Pan Arabism vs Pan Islamism) can work on their own, there needs to be a short term alliance based entirely on "National" interests - between neighbouring nations for a specific common objective to be attained beyond which - longer term project to "Reconcile and Consolidate" the majoritarian stakeholders (because you cannot win everyone) should take precedent based on a common world view, that is where Pan Islamism takes the lead. This would mean (in the case of Palestine) first uniting the "Arab Nations" surrounding the territory based on their common interests as ARABS regardless of religious identity or sectarian divide - towards liberation Palestine, following which the Muslim nations among them (which will always be the majority in the Middle East) should work towards a longer term unification and coalition to preserve the order of peace and unity based on the common shared principles and parameters of Islam (in very broad terms i.e. the main pillars and Maqaasid). If we insist on Pan Islamic Unity from the outset, nothing will materialise - such a feat can only be achieved with a central governing body that can enforce compliance (a Khilapha basically) and will not come about from voluntary enlistment. However, a coalition among the Arab states (regardless of their religion or sect) can work in the immediate term and is perhaps most realistic, after all - aren't people asking the same question "Why don't the ARAB (not Muslim) LEADERS help Palestine??" This phrase alone is a testament that the people see a need for Arab Unity as an immediate solution before there can be talk of Unity upon any other basis. In the 6th year after Hijrah, when Prophet Muhammad ﷺ was planning his pilgrimage to Makkah from Madinah - accompanied by 1400 Muslims, however - he also invited various Arab tribes to join him, some of them were still pagan! This procession was not entirely united upon Tawheed. This is a fact to keep in mind. The strategic operations resulted in a unification based not on religion but on a common objective between all Arab tribes within the region (which was to enter Makkah peacefully). Still, when the Quraish interrupted this procession at al-Hudaybiyyah, a Treaty was signed and prophet Muhammad ﷺ advocated for the protection and safety of those Pagan Arab tribes who were with him and had entered a strategic alliance with the Muslims. He did not insist on complete and total unification in Tawheed as he planned and proceeded towards Makkah however once he entered Makkah a few years later, now victorious and in charge - no further alliances could be made except under Islam. The pagan tribes had to comply and enter Islam if they wanted ongoing support and protection. So much wisdom and foresight. We could do well to study the Seerah. As demonstrated in the case of Pakistan and Bangladesh, commonality on a religious basis is not always the solution. There is a great a deal of idealism that needs to be overcome before practical solutions can be brought forwards. "If we unite upon Creed then Palestine will be liberated tomorrow" 🤔 Might want to reconsider that narrative, no? ........... What are your views on this and why do you think the Pakistan project went wrong in 1971??