On December 25, Pakistan celebrated the 148th birth anniversary of its founder, Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Widely regarded as the father of the nation, Jinnah’s vision for Pakistan as a homeland for Muslims of the subcontinent remains a contested and complex legacy. While his political acumen and role in the creation of Pakistan are lauded within the country, the ripple effects of his demand for Partition have led to lethal consequences that continue to shape the Indian subcontinent.
Jinnah’s insistence on the creation of a separate state was rooted in his Two-Nation Theory, a conviction that Hindus and Muslims were fundamentally different and could not coexist in a single nation. This ideological foundation resulted in the traumatic Partition of 1947, marked by mass migrations, communal violence, and the loss of millions of lives. While Pakistan was ostensibly created to safeguard the interests of Muslims, the outcomes of Partition have been anything but uniform, leaving in their wake questions about identity, governance and stability across the region.
As the subcontinent shed its colonial shackles in 1947, the flames of Partition engulfed Punjab, Bengal, Sindh, the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and Balochistan. What had once been dismissed by many as an improbable scenario—the division of Mother India—became a devastating reality. The British departure redrew borders, carving ‘Akhand Bharat’ into two separate entities: the Republic of India and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Blood stained the map as a unified nation was vivisected.
The human cost of Partition is staggering to recount. Historians estimate that between 1.2 and 1.5 million people were killed, and around 15 to 18 million were displaced—figures that rival or surpass the Holocaust in their sheer scale of tragedy. The violence was unprecedented, with communal hatred spiralling into massacres and mass migrations. My own grandparents bore witness to this horror, underscoring that these numbers are more than statistics; they reflect shattered families and irretrievable losses.
Punjab bore the brunt of Partition’s chaos, exposing its stark inequities. While East Punjab, with its Hindu-Sikh majority, joined India, and Muslim-majority West Punjab went to Pakistan, the division left deep scars. Communities in regions like Lahore and Amritsar, once intertwined, were torn apart amid mob violence and devastation. Hastily drawn borders by the British boundary commission ignored ground realities, severing villages, trade routes and lives. In India, refugees revitalized cities like Ludhiana and Jalandhar, but Partition’s wounds left a lasting communal divide, still evident in its politics today.
Pakistan’s trajectory, meanwhile, was marked by the centrality of Islam as its unifying identity, a necessity in a nation born out of the Two-Nation Theory. Yet, ethnic tensions among Punjabis, Sindhis, Baloch and Pashtuns exposed the fragility of this unity, leading to fissures like the secession of East Pakistan in 1971. The skewed borders of 1947, drawn to favour religious homogeneity, did little to address linguistic and cultural diversity within the new state.
Jinnah envisioned Pakistan as a secular state where Muslims could thrive free from Hindu domination, but the reality has diverged sharply. Within Pakistan itself, disparities in governance, ethnic tensions and economic inequalities have undermined the state. East Pakistan’s secession in 1971 to become Bangladesh is the starkest example of these internal fractures. Religious minorities such as Hindus, Christians and Sikhs face systemic discrimination, while intra-Muslim sectarian conflicts further complicate the national fabric.
India, on its side of the Radcliffe Line, faced its own trials. Jinnah’s demand for a separate homeland left behind the world’s third-largest Muslim population, challenging the Two-Nation Theory. Indian Muslims have largely embraced a secular framework, enriching the nation’s multicultural ethos. Yet, Partition’s scars endure, leaving them susceptible to communal tensions and political marginalization. The rise of Hindutva politics leverages Partition’s memory to push exclusionary narratives. For Indian Muslims, Jinnah’s shadow remains, even as they forge their identity within the Republic.
Bangladesh stands as an unintended rebuttal to Jinnah’s vision. His imposition of Urdu overlooked Bengali cultural pride, planting the seeds of discord. This oversight erupted into the 1971 civil war, birthing an independent Bangladesh and exposing the flaws in the original Partition blueprint.
Perhaps the most enduring conflict stemming from Jinnah’s legacy is Kashmir. Jinnah’s ambition to annex the princely state into Pakistan remains unfulfilled. For India, Kashmir is a symbol of its secular promise, a Muslim-majority region that rejected Jinnah’s call for Pakistan. For Pakistan, it is a reminder of incomplete Partition and a rallying cry for nationalism.
While Jinnah championed the rights of minorities in his famous speech of August 11, 1947, Pakistan’s subsequent history tells a story of majoritarianism and exclusion. Jinnah’s secular leanings, often cited by his admirers, stand at odds with the Islamist tilt Pakistan has taken over the decades. His dream of a modern, progressive state has been overshadowed by military coups, political instability and the rise of extremism.
Seventy-seven years after his death, Jinnah remains a polarizing figure. In Pakistan, he is revered as Qaid-e-Azam, the Great Leader who secured a homeland. In India and Bangladesh, his legacy is fraught. The Partition of 1947 was not just territorial but deeply divisive, fragmenting dreams and identities. Its skewed outcomes stand as a cautionary tale, highlighting the cost of ideological rigidity and division over unity.
(The author is a political commentator and global affairs observer with a keen eye on South Asia’s evolving dynamics. Views personal.)
Commentaires